Polar bears as an insured event.
Today’s podcast plays with geopolitical mind games and shows how even supposedly absurd scenarios raise serious questions for the insurance industry between climate risks, infrastructure and creative cover concepts.
Insurance is a serious business and occasionally one with a subtle sense of humor. In a recent episode of the Paul the Insurer podcast, a provocative political idea serves as the starting point for a journey of thought on insurance economics: former US President Donald Trump’s – hopefully not entirely serious – consideration of closer economic ties between Greenland and the USA. The term “joint venture” is used deliberately to avoid political controversy. For an insurer, however, the choice of words is less important than the consequences: every change creates new risks and therefore new markets.
Investments change risk landscapes
Should the USA actually increase its presence, massive investment in infrastructure would be the logical consequence. Ports, transportation routes, energy supply, telecommunications and military facilities would significantly increase the stock of insurable assets. At the same time, new jobs would be created, incomes would rise and migration would begin: In other words, factors that would fundamentally change the social and economic risk profile.
For insurers, such a scenario raises the classic strategic question: build up a presence early on or wait for political clarity? Entering the market would hardly be profitable yet, but geopolitical interests could shift quickly, especially if Russia or China were to show an interest in the Arctic that goes beyond mere planning.
Between parametrics and ironic exaggeration
At this point, the podcast allows itself a deliberate change of perspective. While soberly arguing voices refer to parametric insurance against flooding and extreme weather, ironic suggestions such as animal health insurance for polar bears, including possible offspring from encounters with grizzlies, appear at the same time. However, the tongue-in-cheek tone does not hide the fact that the core is meant seriously: insurance products must reflect local realities, even if these initially appear unusual.
New divisions for a changed Arctic
The analysis becomes particularly interesting when traditional coverages are expanded. In the podcast, it is openly admitted that a conversation with ChatGPT also served as a source of inspiration. Among other things, insurance for financing climate adaptation, for example for retrofitting infrastructure against thawing permafrost and changing environmental conditions, is mentioned. Equally relevant is cover for telecommunications infrastructure, which is essential for security, the economy and government presence in remote regions.
The growing adventure and ecotourism in the Arctic is also coming into focus. Expeditions, Arctic safaris and ice climbing bring with them new liability and accident risks. Finally, the protection of cultural heritage is also being addressed, for example insurance policies that protect indigenous traditions, artifacts and cultural practices against loss or damage. This brings insurance into focus as an instrument for preserving identity and social cohesion.
Serious industry with a creative perspective
The end result is the realization that insurance is much more than a purely technical discipline. The podcast advocates not only calculating risks, but also understanding them in a social, cultural and political context, leaving room for irony and creativity. Especially in a world of increasing uncertainty, this perspective can help us to think of new solutions.
Or to put it another way: Insurance is not just a profession, but a means of actively shaping the future, even where polar bears still roam seemingly insurance-free landscapes today.
Binci Heeb
Subscribe to the “Paul the Insurer” newsletter here.
Read also: The actuary as storyteller: When figures open up perspectives
