Artículos de revistas
Review of ECLAC damage and loss assessments in the Caribbean
.--Executive Summary.--I. Introduction.--II. Post-disaster assessments methodologies.--III. Accuracy of ECLAC DaLA assessments in the Caribbean.--IV. Insurance coverage in the Caribbean.--V. Challenges affecting recovery activities and possible solutions.--The objective of this study is to determine whether the assessments carried out by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) on the impact of disasters over the past decade accurately captured the extent of the damage experienced by caibbean states during this period, by comparing these estimates to actual recovery costs incurred by country. The study also seeks to determine the extent to which recovery efforts have closed the damage and loss gaps estimated by ECLAC. The study was undertaken at the request of the Caribbean Catastrophic Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF), with the expectation that the results would inform any required adjustments to the premium payments calculations conducted by CCRIF, and would make recommendations to regional governments regarding insurance packages and premiums. The approach to the study involved extensive literature review of damage assessment methodologies, comparing their results with the outcome of ECLAC’s damage and loss methodology when applied to several natural events in the Caribbean. The study also reviewed the regime of insurance provisions in the Caribbean in order to better inform risk coverage for natural hazards in the subregion. Among the key methodologies reviewed were the Hazus-MH Hybrid assessment model used by the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); the Australian Socioeconomic Impact Model (SEIA); and the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment Model (PDNA) as applied by the World Bank. Other approaches such as specialized Input-Output models as well as Econometric Models were also reviewed. Comparisons of ECLAC’s damage and loss assessments were then made for Hurricane Ivan 2004, Hurricane Dean 2007, Hurricane Tomas 2010, and the Haiti Earthquake 2010. The study showed ECLAC estimates to vary between 10 per cent and 22 per cent for these disaster events reflecting differences with respect to various methodological aspects of the analysis. Some methodologies were however not directly comparable given variations in data needs for the analyses. With respect to insurance coverage for the Caribbean, the study revealed several deficiencies in the development of the regional insurance market, which have led to high insurance costs, as well as an insufficient level of subscription in order to cover catastrophic risks. Because of this, the report concludes that for the most part, only insured losses are covered by insurance providers. The economic losses and secondary effects that are typically accounted for in damage assessments are rarely compensated.