Please find below the
We would like to thank you for addressing the questions.It still seems that there would not be much impact in developing world. Targeting insurance companies in rich world. Relatively good presentation, but don't see proponents addressing social and ecological barriers.
Very important to bring private sector into adaptation. We need to make them better equipped. Mitigation may take more time. We need to have science-based, robust data which will help us to make better decisions. IUCN, we and others have taken this information to influence and inform policy-makers. Insurance companies an integral part. If we can address relevance questions, this would be a good tool to help the private sector engage.
Congratulations! Your proposal, Management via Measurement: Translating Climate Projections into Actionable Data, in the Adaptation contest, has been selected to advance as a Semi-Finalist. Thank you for your work on this very important issue. We're proud of your proposal, and we hope that you are too. Again, congratulations!
Please see below the following comments to enhance your proposal:
This is a very well-written proposal that addresses the need for the translation of climate projections into data formats useful for insurance risk models and other decision-making processes. Given that I do not have specific modelling expertise I find it challenging to assess the quality of the statistical process itself, but I see that this tool will fill an important gap. I see a gap in the development of the data inputs and the actual uptake of the data by insurance companies and others - as we have seen in the past, provision of data is not sufficient to trigger behaviour change. While interesting, I don't think that this proposal is exceptionally novel or ground-breaking, so I don't think it should go on to the next round.
This proposal could possibly be interesting to some insurance companies with a goal of setting premiums properly for high value infrastructure in the developed world. If it indeed is, I'm sire those insurance companies can and will pay for this. On the ground in the developing world, where most of the adaptation challenges are, this approach is not likely to add much value. Most of the developing world (indeed much of the developed to) are already highly vulnerable to existing extreme events, and almost nothing is insured. Their priority is developing resilience to these extreme events, not gaining slightly nuanced (I know modelers may not like this turn of phrase for their work) improvements on forecasts. I find this proposal a bit too ivory tower to work in the real world, except possibly for relatively sophisticated users such as the insurance companies the authors mention.
There was a discussion about this proposal. In sum, while the scientific merit is established, the usefulness to regions outside the US/Europe is unclear. If that part is strengthened and better explained, this could be a strong proposal.
All the best,
The 2016 Climate CoLab Judges
Jun 15, 2016
Thank you for your feedback, many of the issues you've mentioned are things we've come across as we've talked with our partners in the insurance and other industries. Please see our responses and we'd love to get more feedback.
What is the difference between what risQ is doing and current methodology? Is there a practical difference?
Why target the insurance industry?
How would this impact the developing world?
What else can be done with this data?