IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v12y2024i3p43-d1347628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate Change-Related Disaster Risk Mitigation through Innovative Insurance Mechanism: A System Dynamics Model Application for a Case Study in Latvia

Author

Listed:
  • Maksims Feofilovs

    (Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes iela 12/1, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia)

  • Andrea Jonathan Pagano

    (Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes iela 12/1, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia)

  • Emanuele Vannucci

    (Department of Business and Management, Pisa University, Cosimo Ridolfi Street 10, 56124 Pisa, Italy)

  • Marina Spiotta

    (Department of Business and Management, University of Piemonte Orientale, Ettore Perrone Street 18, 28100 Novara, Italy)

  • Francesco Romagnoli

    (Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes iela 12/1, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia)

Abstract

This study explores how the System Dynamics modeling approach can help deal with the problem of conventional insurance mechanisms by studying the feedback loops governing complex systems connected to the disaster insurance mechanism. Instead of addressing the disaster’s underlying risk, the traditional disaster insurance strategy largely focuses on providing financial security for asset recovery after a disaster. This constraint becomes especially concerning as the threat of climate-related disasters grows since it may result in rising long-term damage expenditures. A new insurance mechanism is suggested as a solution to this problem to lower damage costs while safeguarding insured assets and luring new assets to be protected. A local case study utilizing a System Dynamics stock and flow model is created and validated by examining the model’s structure, sensitivity analysis, and extreme value test. The results of the case study performed on a city in Latvia highlight the significance of effective disaster risk reduction strategies applied within the innovative insurance mechanism in lowering overall disaster costs. The logical coherence seen throughout the analysis of simulated scenario results strengthens the established model’s plausibility. The case study’s findings support the innovative insurance mechanism’s dynamic hypothesis and show the main influencing factors on the dynamics within the proposed innovative insurance mechanism. The information this study can help insurance firms, policy planners, and disaster risk managers make decisions that will benefit local communities and other stakeholders regarding climate-related disaster risk mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Maksims Feofilovs & Andrea Jonathan Pagano & Emanuele Vannucci & Marina Spiotta & Francesco Romagnoli, 2024. "Climate Change-Related Disaster Risk Mitigation through Innovative Insurance Mechanism: A System Dynamics Model Application for a Case Study in Latvia," Risks, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:12:y:2024:i:3:p:43-:d:1347628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/12/3/43/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/12/3/43/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margot Hill Clarvis & Erin Bohensky & Masaru Yarime, 2015. "Can Resilience Thinking Inform Resilience Investments? Learning from Resilience Principles for Disaster Risk Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Sterman, John., 1994. "Learning in and about complex systems," Working papers 3660-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu, Jinfeng & Dimov, Dimo, 2023. "A system dynamics modelling of entrepreneurship and growth within firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3).
    2. Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Amadou Sidibé, 2023. "Observations from a system dynamics modeling field school in Mali," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(1), pages 80-94, January.
    3. Day Yang Liu & Wen Chun Tsai & Pei Leen Liu & Chung Yi Fang, 2021. "Determinants of sales revenue in innovation diffusion effects of Taiwan sports lottery during the FIFA World Cup 2018," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(4), pages 43-58, June.
    4. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    5. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    6. Katarzyna Tworek & Katarzyna Walecka-Jankowska & Anna Zgrzywa-Ziemak, 2019. "The role of information systems in shaping integrative logic for business sustainability," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 29(4), pages 125-146.
    7. Marta de la Cuesta-González & Cristina Ruza & José M. Rodríguez-Fernández, 2020. "Rethinking the Income Inequality and Financial Development Nexus. A Study of Nine OECD Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Natalia Ciobanu & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2021. "Using social–ecological inventory and group model building for resilience assessment to climate change in a network governance setting: a case study from Ikel watershed in Moldova," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1065-1085, January.
    9. Rafael Marcos-Sánchez & Daniel Ferrández & Carlos Morón, 2022. "Systems Thinking for Sustainability Education in Building and Business Administration and Management Degrees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Meri Duryan & Dragan Nikolik & Godefridus Merode & Leopold M. G. Curfs, 2015. "Reflecting on the efficacy of cognitive mapping for decision-making in intellectual disability care: a case study," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 127-144, April.
    11. Florian Kapmeier, 2020. "Reflections on developing a simulation model on sustainable and healthy diets for decision makers: Comment on the paper by Kopainsky," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 928-935, November.
    12. Sarah Cechvala & Brian Ganson, 2024. "Systems Perspectives on Business and Peace: The Contingent Nature of Business-Related Action with Respect to Peace Positive Impacts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 194(3), pages 523-544, October.
    13. Biskup, Dirk, 2008. "A state-of-the-art review on scheduling with learning effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 315-329, July.
    14. Lorenzo Bruno Prataviera & Alessandro Creazza & Marco Melacini & Fabrizio Dallari, 2022. "Heading for Tomorrow: Resilience Strategies for Post-COVID-19 Grocery Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Gibson, Faison P., 2000. "Feedback Delays: How Can Decision Makers Learn Not to Buy a New Car Every Time the Garage Is Empty?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 141-166, September.
    16. Erik Pruyt & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2014. "Radicalization under deep uncertainty: a multi-model exploration of activism, extremism, and terrorism," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(1-2), pages 1-28, January.
    17. Sarah Gerritsen & Sophia Harré & David Rees & Ana Renker-Darby & Ann E. Bartos & Wilma E. Waterlander & Boyd Swinburn, 2020. "Community Group Model Building as a Method for Engaging Participants and Mobilising Action in Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, May.
    18. David C. Lane, 2012. "What Is a ‘Policy Insight’?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 590-595, November.
    19. Hakan Yasarcan, 2023. "The four main elements of dynamic complexity," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(2), pages 171-179, April.
    20. Iván Barreda-Tarrazona & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Constantine Manasakis & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2012. "Managerial compensation contracts in quantity-setting duopoly," Working Papers 2012/17, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:12:y:2024:i:3:p:43-:d:1347628. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.