AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

“Society 5.0” and parametric insurance clearing a path to “risk transfer” forcatastrophic disasters
Kazuya Hattori, Executive Fellow, AIG Institute
NOTICE: This represents an English translation of an original report released in Japanese by the AIG Institute on
September 28, 2018. In the event that there are any inconsistencies between the Japanese version and the English
one, the Japanese version shall control and supersede the substance of the English translated version.

Parametric insurance is highlighted outside Japan in relation to the sophistication of
micro-insurance or advanced risk models in developing countries as a part of the United
Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). By reviewing this insurance from theperspectives of “Society 5.0”, an initiative run by the Japanese Government, and “risktransfer” categorized based on the financial regulation structure by function or bycross-function described in the interim report of the Financial Service Agency’s
Financial System Council (June, 2018), a new path of risk transfer to help ourselves tobe prepared for catastrophic disasters such as the Nankai Trough earthquake or the
Tokyo near-field earthquake will become more visible.
(See https://ig.ft.com/sites/japan-tsunami/ for the Nankai Trough earthquake)
Ⅰ Overview and trend of parametric insurance
In parametric insurance, claims will be paid based on indexes such as rainfall or seismic
intensity measured by independent organizations. This insurance schema does notdirectly aim at compensation for losses which is a function of the traditional generalinsurance business. There is a strong resemblance between this insurance and weather
derivatives developed in the 1990s. The table below shows a comparison between
parametric insurance and conventional insurance, referring to agricultural insurance
as an example.
Parametric insurance does not require an onsite loss assessment, which can largely
reduce the length of time required for the claim payment to be made. This is also
regarded as a contribution to the resolution of common challenges around insurance
such as moral hazard, asymmetry of information, and adverse selection, for example.
For the claim payment process, concerns with non-payment of claims payable can be
drastically mitigated. Therefore, transparency between insurance companies and theirpolicyholders can be enhanced.

1

AIG Institute Insight

Covered risks

Underwriting
information

Criteria for claim
payment
Adverse selection

September, 2018

Conventional insurance

Parametric insurance

Multiple perils such as hail,storm, etc.
(except for excluded perils)
Crop loss history, locations,planted area

Only risks specified ininsurance policy

Actual loss amount

Historical weather data / crop
loss history / production,observation stations for datacollection
Weather data

High

Low

High

Low

Nothing to low

Mid to highRisks underwritten by
insurance companies must be
understood.

Risks are easily understood due
to high transparency andobjectivity

Moral hazard
Basis risk
Transparency of risk
from perspectives ofinvestors such as
shareholders

Fig. 1 Comparison between conventional insurance and parametric insurance1※“Parametric insurance” is referred to as a general name, but it is not intended to be positioned as insurance
products domestically offered by insurance companies.

Also, due to the uniqueness of this insurance, the possibility of leveraging the payment
for disaster-preparedness or loss prevention has been suggested lately. However, inparametric insurance, a claim will be paid based on criteria such as rainfall or seismic
intensity, and therefore, gaps will be formed between actual loss amounts and paid
amounts. This gap is called a basis risk, and either overpayment or underpayment
would be possible. Considering this, the interrelation between the index and losses
should be examined to design better insurance with lowered basis risk. This point will
be a significant challenge from the viewpoint of policyholder protection, and the basis
risk should be fully explained to policyholders in order to obtain their agreement. In theparticular case of potential underpayment of a claim, it will be another important point
to propose methodologies for risk mitigation/business continuity and to encourage
policyholders to engage themselves.
The International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS) published a report onparametric insurance in June, 20182. The report identifies challenges for an insurance
supervising organization to protect consumers and considerations for pilot projects
based on differences of functions and roles between parametric insurance andconventional insurance. In the same month, the Association of Insurance and Risk
Managers in Industry and Commerce (AIRMIC) also released a report for risk
managers in enterprises3. Insurance companies are very active in developing products.
For example, Syndicates or Coverholders (companies or partnerships authorized by a2

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

Managing Agent to enter into insurance contracts to be underwritten by the members ofa syndicate) of Lloyd’s of London started offering parametric insurance to cover damage
caused by unusual weather. In the United States, it has been reported that sales ofparametric insurance started in Florida. According to an article about the Southeast
Asia Disaster Risk Insurance Facility (SEADRIF) reported by Nikkei Newspaper in
May this year, it is implied that parametric type of financing for initiatives to provide
funds for disaster recovery is under review.4
With this as a background, I now would like to share my view on parametric insurance
from the perspective of “reinforced functions for resilient disaster prevention andmitigation” as indicated in the Cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion
Program (SIP) by the Japanese Government advocating “Society 5.0” for anti-disaster
preparation.
Ⅱ “Society 5.0” and earthquake risk in Japan
In the initiative for “Reinforced functions for resilient disaster prevention andmitigation”, a framework to share estimated damage caused by earthquakes with bothpublic and private sectors in real-time is under development. The estimation will bemade on a level of individual streets and buildings, and it is targeted to be completed by
the end of 2018. The Real-time Earthquake and Disaster Information Consortium hasorganized the Hazard Risk Experiment Consortium to reflect the achievement in publicuse.
Summary of data forseismic
observation
ownedbyNational
Research Institute for
Earth
ScienceandDisaster Resilience andJapan Meteorological
AgencyThree types of data being

Seismic

offered as a test

information

Building model

Ground motion distribution

Population

NIED

model

Volume of building damage

Underground

JMA, local
government

structure modelCasualties

Fig 2. Initiative by Hazard Risk Experiment Consortium

A network of around 1,700 observation sites that the National Research Institute for
Earth Science and Disaster Resilience (NIED) has all over Japan, and the observation
networks of the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) and local governments are utilized
for seismic observation, and the consortium provides detailed data on thecity/town/village level or by 250 square meters to companies that participate in the3

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

proof-of-concept test so that they
can understand seismic motion
distribution, damage to buildings,
casualties, and so on.
At 07:58 a.m. on June 18, 2018, an
earthquake

occurredinthenorthern area of Osaka prefecture,
and at 08:10 a.m., twelve minutes
after

the

earthquake,theestimated damage was reported tothe consortium. Fig. 3 shows theestimated seismic intensity map
which was provided at that time.
Fig. 4 compares the number ofFig. 3 Seismic intensity map of Northern Osaka Earthquake5

buildings fully- and half-destroyed
as indicated by one of the damage
functions

and

the

numberofdamaged buildings announced by
Osaka prefecture on August 8. In

Takatsuki

were used, and the estimates were150

significantly

100

function to function. Fig. 4, again,
shows a comparison between thedata of a function that estimatedthe damage closest to the actual
results

andthenumberofIbaraki

250
200

from

Reported by Osaka
prefecture
Estimated damage

300

the SIP, eight damage functions
different

Total ofhalf
demage

350

50

Half
damageTotal of fulldamageFulldamageToyonakaHalfdamageFulldamageFull Halfdamagedamage0Fig. 4 Comparison between estimated damage and actual damage
announced by Osakadamaged buildings published so far. The SIP is trying to break down their damage
estimation into the building level, and if this data can be incorporated into parametricinsurance, then, as stated in the section I, basis risk can be mitigated.
Ⅲ Mitigation of basis risk in parametric insurance, acceleration of restoration
Thus far, a parametric-type of earthquake risk transfer has been focusing on cases withtriggers of the magnitude or the seismic intensity only. In the case of a CAT bond for
Oriental Land Co., Ltd. that operates and manages the Tokyo Disney Resort (Fig. 5),
which is categorized as an EQ derivative, the magnitude is defined as a trigger, and the4

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

distance from Tokyo Disneyland to the epicenter as well as the magnitude were used to
set the rate of fall below par. The objective of a CAT bond is to compensate revenue lost
due to an earthquake, but, therein lies a basis risk in the difference between theprincipal loss and the actual revenue loss. Enterprises like Oriental Land could toleratea certain level of basis risk, but, it would be hard for individuals to follow the same
approach.
The current residential earthquake insurance categorizes losses as complete
destruction (up to 50% of the fair value of damaged properties to indemnify), major
destruction (do. up to 30%), minor destruction (do. up to 15%), and partial destruction(do. up to 2.5%), and based on onsite loss assessment, the claims are paid in accordancewith the level of damage. Therefore, a basis risk already exists between the actual
damage and a claim amount to be paid. If you leverage the deliverable from the SIP, youwill be able to estimate damages on more granular level than when you use the current
four categories, and a basis risk for the residential earthquake insurance will
potentially be further reduced.
Rate of fall below par is set based on the matrix of the distance from Tokyo
Disneyland and the magnitude.
Ex. ① Mag. of 7.0 with the epicentric within the radius of 10km
Fall below par: 62.5%
Ex. ② Mag. of 7.7 with the epicentric within the radius of 50 to 75km
Fall below par: 50.0%

Fig. 5 CAT bond for Oriental Land7
Furthermore, another advantage of parametric insurance is that no loss assessment
would be required, which enables timely claim payment. When a large-scale earthquake
occurs, it is anticipated that a few or several months would be required for the loss
assessment, resulting in delayed claim payments, which may hinder recovery fromdisasters. With parametric insurance, immediate claim payment would be possible, andrestoration could be initiated on the following date after an earthquake.
Ⅳ. Feasibility to enhance resilience and mitigate burden to the suffered
According to the Cabinet Office, it is estimated as the worst-case scenario that 2.4
million residential buildings would be fully damaged (including burned-down) in the
Nankai Trough earthquake and 610 thousand would be fully damaged in the Tokyo
5

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

near-field earthquake. Adding half- or partially-damaged ones would require a huge
number of buildings to get assessed on site. If parametric insurance utilizing thedeliverable from the SIP is introduced instead of the onsite assessment of such a huge
number of afflicted buildings, smooth and extremely timely claim payment will bepossible with the secondary disaster being avoided, and it is expected that the resilienceof the Japanese economy can be reinforced through the reconstruction of the lives of
those impacted. The report released in June, 2015 by “the project team for theearthquake insurance program” operated by the Ministry of Finance includes
discussions around “simplified loss assessment” assuming the Nankai Troughearthquake or the Tokyo near-field earthquake and concludes that the acceleration ofloss assessment with technological innovation should be reviewed as a solution to thechallenge in the future.
Also, in order to issue a disaster victim certificate which is required for requesting
payment of support grants for reconstructing the livelihoods of disaster victims, theirdisaster situations need to be confirmed, which inflicts procedural burdens on thoseaffected. Utilization of the derivable from the SIP can mitigate such burdens, which
could result in a socially significant impact.
Ⅴ. Necessary resilient disaster risk financeAt the AIG Institute forum, “Preparation for the Nankai Trough Earthquake - Disaster
Management from a fiscal risk perspective" in January, 2018, subject-matter experts
discussed various approaches for disaster prevention with consideration of financial
risks.（http://www-154.aig.com/about-us/event-report/event-report-archive/20180312）
Financial risks are also addressed in the report, “Recommendations for restoration”
which was released by the Reconstruction Design Council in response to the Great East
Japan Earthquake, and initiatives to enhance self-support with awareness of financial
risks have been discussed in many occasions. In this section, the limitation of insurance
and risk transfer with the use of the capital market as a tool to supplement such
shortcomings will be explained.
1. Limit of rescue and assistance by public bodies; necessary reinforcement ofself-support“The panel for promotion of disaster-preparation by insurance/mutual aid” organized by
the Cabinet Office, discussed disaster risk finance for the Nankai Trough earthquake
and the Tokyo near-field earthquake, noting that the public assistance would be limited
at the time of a catastrophic disaster. 8 Likewise, in the discussions by the Japanese
government about support grants for reconstructing the livelihoods of disaster victims,
6

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

it was stated that an extremely difficult situation could be predicted for the government
to bear the financial burden since a huge effort would be required to reconstructinfrastructure after catastrophic disasters9.
If public support is limited, then self-help should be enhanced. According to researchcomparing gaps between an economic loss caused by earthquakes and recovery byinsurance (Protection Gap as it is called in some cases) across multiple nations10, Japanshows a lower rate of compensation. Compared to other nations, in Japan, self-help suchas deposits and savings, mutual aid such as donations, and more pubic support
including support grants for reconstructing livelihoods of disaster victims are appliedinstead of insurance claims payment.
2. Raising attachment rate of earthquake insurance
According to Article 1 of the Earthquake Insurance Act, earthquake insurance isdefined as expense insurance to supply funds for the “contribution to stable living of
those affected”; it is not aimed at the restoration of residential houses. It is impossible tostate the “contribution to the restoration of residential houses” presumably because of abasis risk deriving from the claim payment only made in accordance with theabove-mentioned four categories and of the fact that the maximum attachment ratio(coverage ratio for a loss) is limited to 50%. Considering the limit of public assistance forcatastrophic disasters, more effort has to be made to educate people about theimportance of earthquake insurance, and moreover, ways to raise the current
attachment rate hovering at 50% should be reviewed11.
3. Limit of insurance – limit of insurance market size and limit of risk pooling
The Cabinet Office released materials comparing the estimated damage by the Nankai
Trough earthquake and the size of the insurance market, and Fig. 6 shows an excerpt 12.
While the estimated maximum amount of damage is 215 trillion yen, theearthquake/storm/flood insurance market size in Japan is just 3.7 trillion yen, whichindicates extreme vulnerability. The arrangement of reinsurance for earthquake
insurance only engages the Japanese Government, and no commercial reinsurance
market has been utilized. Considering the limit of public support, it would bemeaningful to discuss how to raise the attachment rate of earthquake insurance
through leveraging commercial reinsurance, but, looking at 60.3 trillion yen as the total
capital of global reinsurers, the current reinsurance market size cannot be recognized
as a way of offering enough security. The estimated amount of damage caused by the
Nankai Trough earthquake in Fig. 6 includes 75.6 trillion yen as the estimated7

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

maximum amount of damage caused to residential houses13. If all houses are renovatedfor 100% earthquake resistance, it is estimated that 80% of the houses will not collapse.
Therefore, if the residual risk is targeted after that 100% resistance rate is achieved ,then more practical discussions around how to raise the attachment rate can be
invoked14.
On the other hand, for regionally concentrated earthquakes or floods, some experts
consider that risk pooling available in insurance will not function. This implies the limit
of using the insurance market for catastrophic disasters. From such a perspective as
well, it has been said that risk transfer with the use of a larger capital market will be
required for catastrophic disasters. Fig. 6 shows 3,780 trillion yen as the size of thecapital market.
3,780 trillion yen: Total pension funds managed in the major 19 nations
215 trillion yen: Estimated maximum amount of damage by the Nankai Trough earthquake

60.3 trillion yen: Total capital of the global reinsurers
3.7 trillion yen: Estimated fund by reinsurance for earthquake/storm/flood in JapanFig 6. Capital market, Nankai Trough earthquake, Insurance market

In 2011, the OECD released a report, “Risk Awareness, Capital Markets andCatastrophic Risks”. In the time when a risk transfer utilizing the capital market
started emerging, the report addressed such a trend and identified challenges forgovernments to develop risk transfer function in the capital market. This report also
pointed out the limit of risk pooling by way of insurance.
4. Catastrophic disaster risk
transfer with use of capital
marketAs a way of risk transfer withthe capital market, a CAT bondor(Insurance

400

200

ART (Alternative Risk Transfer)100

in the broad sense. Even before

0

theactivation and expansion of the
ILSmarket

was

ART

500

Securities) is mainly used ascrisis,reinsurance

600

300

financial

101.9％

USD billion
700
Conventional

LinkedtheILS

Ave. increase ratio

461

490

511

493

516

514

515

Ave. increase ratio
113.9％

44

50

64

72

81

89

95

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 7 Comparison between conventional reinsurance and ART 15

perceived.
8

AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

Investors show their strong interest because of the high dividend and the diversifiable
portfolio derived from less correlation with other investment products.
One of the recently debated topics around the ILS market is about the increased inflow
of capital. Last year in the United States, multiple large-scale hurricanes caused arecordclaim

payment,

but,

because of the inflow of funds
from the capital market to therisk transfer market, it is said
that the reinsurance premium
rate was not increased. Fig. 7
shows a comparison of the capitalamountbetweeninthe

USD billion
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Annual issue

2013

Balanceconventional reinsurance market

2012

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

and in the ART market. Also, Fig.

Fig. 8 Annual issue and balance of CAT bond 16

8 shows the annual issue and theoutstanding balance of the CAT bond. Both are increasing linearly. Recent news hasreported that the National Flood Insurance Program (U.S.A.) transferred a risk ofaround 50 billion yen to the capital market. Also, earthquake insurance in California,
storm insurance in Florida, fire insurance run by Louisiana and Massachusetts have all
started to leverage the capital market.
Risk transfer to the capital market has been more activated in other nations. In
February, 2018, the World Bank formulated a CAT bond with the participation ofseveral nations in Latin America, and its record-breaking amount exceeded 1 billion
USD at face value. In Japan, the National Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural
Cooperatives (JA Kyosai) represents one of the largest CAT bond sponsors in the world17.
The JA Kyosai arranged the CAT bond as self-help because its earthquake insurance is
not incorporated into the government-operated earthquake reinsurance program.
On the other hand, the earthquake reinsurance is arranged by the Japanese
Government only without leveraging any commercial reinsurance market or capital
market. The government-operated earthquake reinsurance program is to make claim
payments up to 11.3 trillion yen per earthquake, while it held a reserve fund of 1.66
trillion yen as of the end of March, 201718. If a catastrophic disaster occurred now, thegap of around 10 trillion yen would be likely to be filled by a public fund for a
post-disaster reconstruction. As for The Great East Japan Earthquake, a special
national income tax and a local residential tax are to be collected for twenty-five years
and for ten years, respectively to secure the fund of 8.1 trillion yen. To secure the funds
9AIG Institute Insight

September, 2018

for earthquake insurance, an equally large amount of tax income revenue would be
required, which also implies the limit of public support.
With reference to recent case studies about risk transfer in other nations or the trend of
the ILS market, more resilient self-help—considering the limit of public-support, as
well as the increased attachment ratio of residential earthquake insurance based onleverage of the commercial reinsurance market and the capital market—should be
immediately reviewed and discussed.
Ⅵ Parametric insurance as a tool to attract capital
When investors invest in insurance risks, on top of their investment in insurers, they
can also invest in the risk transfer market through the ILS as mentioned in theprevious section. As addressed in Fig. 1, the parametric insurance allows investors toeasily enter the risk transfer market because of its high transparency.
1. Objectivity and transparency of parametric insurance
The previously mentioned OECD, “Risk Awareness, Capital Markets and Catastrophic
Risks”, identifies prerequisites, driving forces, and hurdles related to the expansion of
the ILS market. It also suggests that the parametric insurance using indexes such as
seismic intensity will contribute to the driving force, referring to an example ofindex-type products that had led the expansion of the credit risk securitization market.
This is because the underwritten risks and the structure of parametric insurance are so
objective and transparent that investors can easily understand them. In regularinsurance, risks are taken on based on underwriting information, but, the informationis largely asymmetric and a claim payment depends on terms of liability/non-liability or
deductible, and loss assessment criteria, which make the investment target unclear forinvestors.
2. Integration of capital market and insurance market
In the 1990s, when the securitization of insurance risks was initiated, an integration of
the capital market and the insurance market also started getting attention. Since theinsurance market needs further diversification of risks because of the larger impact
from recent natural disasters, such an integration is further accelerated in anenvironment marked by advanced risk models using IT and increased need fordiversified investment under the lower global interest rates.
The World Economic Forum released a report, ‘The Future of Financial Services 2015”,
and predicted the impact that innovation would have on financial functions. According
tothereport,financialservicesare10

categorized

into

six

functionssuchAIG Institute Insight

September, 2018as ”Payment”, ”Insurance” and others. For ”Insurance”, it shares a view that the ILS
would be leveraged for hedge funds or investment banks to actively drive themselves
into insurance risks. Also, it suggests that big data or risk models utilizing IT enables asecuritization of insurance to offer new markets to investors.
In the UK and Singapore, the governments have launched initiatives to expand the ILS
market. The British government enforced regulations to enable the domestic issuance of
ILS at the end of last year19. The Government of the Republic of Singapore announced
that they would use government grants to expand the ILS market, and it was reported
that they were having discussions with a Chinese reinsurance public corporation20.
In FSA, the Financial System Council’s “Study Group on the financial system”
discussed how financial guidance should be for the next generation’s individual
financial functions21, including “Settlement”, “Financing”, “Asset Management”, and“Risk Transfer”. Like the World Economic Forum, the Council categorizes the financial
domain by function, and mainly discusses the impacts of IT on the financial businessand how it should be supervised. For “Risk Transfer”, the ILS was not addressed, but
discussions focusing not on business types, but on functions suggest the possible andinevitable integration of individual businesses in “Risk Transfer” without borders
among banks, securities, and insurance. Discussions around the integration of
insurance and other financial businesses have started from this perspective, as well.
Discussions around the utilization of parametric insurance match Society 5.0 led by theJapanese Government. They address the future of the insurance industry in Japan forrisk transfer, and at the same time, they offer opportunities to prepare risk finance forunprecedented catastrophic disasters, which can be evaluated as significantly
meaningful actions for the Japanese society. It is expected to see more activateddiscussions, including a review of accounting or legal frameworks across the borders ofindustries, government, and schools.
Note
1

2
3
4

5
6

Excerpted from World Banks’ “Risk Modeling for Appraising Named Peril Index Insurance
Products”“Issues Paper on Index Based Insurances, Particularly in Inclusive Insurance Markets”“Whitepaper: Parametric solutions”
Nikkei Newspaper: “CAT insurance in South East Asia: Japan-ASEAN framework for timely
funding for restoration”, April 27, 2018
Quoted from J-RiSQ Earthquake Newsflash www.j-risq.bosai.go.jp/report/
Created based on data for individual damage functions provided by the Real-time Earthquake andDisaster Information Consortium. In SIP, eight types of damage functions are used as a trial, andthe assumed information shows differences because of the attributes of the individual damage
functions. For the Osaka Earthquake, the number of fully damaged buildings varies from 0 to 1,494,

11

AIG Institute Insight

7

8
9

10

11

12

13

14

15
16
17

18

19
20
21

September, 2018

and the number of half-damaged buildings varies from 329 to 16,426. In this report, the damage
function, M7, is referred to. (Mr. Midorikawa and others, 2011). Also, only cities such as Takatsuki,
Ibaraki, and Toyonaka with fully damaged buildings are addressed in this report. No other cities
with half-damaged buildings are addressed.
Created based on “Insurance derivative: Challenge of new risk hedge solution” authored by Kaoru
Tsuchikata
Report from the same council (March, 2017)
Intermediate report from “the Review meeting about best assistance offered by the Japanese
Government to those affected” organized by the Cabinet Office: “In principle, support grants forreconstructing livelihoods of disaster victims should be offered by mutual aid of prefectures, whilemore support from the government should be considered for catastrophic disasters, but it is also
predicted that additional grants from the national treasury could be extremely difficult.”
According to a publication from the World Bank, “Learning from Megadisaster”, a comparison ofcoverage by insurance to compensate economic damage from earthquakes is conducted among The
Great East Japan Earthquake, and damages caused by the earthquakes in New Zealand and Chile.
The insurance coverage rate is 16% in Japan, 80% in New Zealand, and 40% in Chile.
The reason why the earthquake insurance attachment ratio is suppressed up to 50% is for stable
management of such an insurance program, but, according to the publication from the World Bank,“Learning from Megadisaster”, it is proposed that forced insurance or increased insurance
attachment ratio should be considered for increasing the number of insurance policyholders.
Quoted from the second review meeting, “Current state and challenges of disaster risk
underwriting market” of the “Risk Finance Committee about more devastating catastrophic
natural disasters” hosted by the Cabinet Office
The secondary report of the Nankai Trough Large Earthquake Countermeasure Review Working
Group of the Central Disaster Prevention Conference organized by the Cabinet Office (March,
2013)
Estimated damages of Nankai Trough Large Earthquake (primary report) (released on August 29,
2012)
Aon Benfield ”Reinsurance Market Outlook” June and July 2018
Artemis Deal Directory (As of August, 2018)
According to ”Catastrophe bonds & ILS outstanding by sponsor or cedant” of Artemis, theoutstanding balance of CAT bond issue amount exceeded 200 billion yen as of August 10, which was
ranked as the second by sponsor.
www.artemis.bm/deal_directory/cat_bonds_ils_by_sponsor.html“Earthquake
Reinsurance
Business”
fromMinistryofFinancewww.mof.go.jp/about_mof/mof_budget/review/2017/280053shiryo.pdf
Risk Transformation Regulations 2017 and Risk Transformation (Tax) Regulations 2017

Artemis’s “China Re & Singapore discuss ILS and cat bond cooperation”, June 12, 2018
Intermediate report, “For functional and comprehensive financial statutory structure”, of the
Financial System Council’s “Study Group on the financial system”* This document is not intended to sell or recommend any insurance or other financial products. Also, it does notpropose any specific and concreate transactions nor guarantee their feasibility.
* AIG Institute (hereinafter referred to as AIG) shall not represent nor guarantee the accuracy, granularity, or
reliability as to use or the result of use of this document nor being responsible for the use of the document. AIG
shall not represent that this document is always appropriate and being able to be used in any locations. AIG has
made practical efforts to provide accurate and latest information through this document, but, errors or omissions
may not be avoided.
* AIG or any parties engaged in panning, developing, or providing this document shall not be held responsibility fordirect, coincidental, consequential, indirect, or punitive damages attributable to use or non-use of this document
by our customers.
* The copyright of the contents included this document shall belong to AIG or the copyright holder AIG acquired alicense for. Unauthorized copy, reproduction, or change is prohibited.

12