Abstract
Part I of this book began with an examination of the three principal ways that our nation manages societal risk, namely through: (1) government benefit programs, (2) the legal system, and (3) private insurance. Each risk transfer method has its own set of characteristics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, “UST Fund Overwhelmed by Payment Claims,” The LUST Release, State of Illinois, Fall 1995, p. 4 (back cover).
Priest, George L., “The Government, the Market and the Problem of Catastrophic Loss,” Conference on Social Treatment of Catastrophic Risk: Stanford University — Lucas Conference Center, October 21, 1994, pp. 29–32.
The one exception is if there is uncertainty as to when a payment will be made for an event that has already occurred. For example, insurance was provided after the MGM Grand Fire occurred on how long it would take to settle the claim.
“Environmental Liability and Financial Security,” Position Paper: Adopted in October 1993, International Chamber of Commerce, Commission on Insurance, October 1993, p. 4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Freeman, P.K., Kunreuther, H. (1997). Summary and Conclusions. In: Managing Environmental Risk Through Insurance. Studies in Risk and Uncertainty, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5360-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5360-7_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6253-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-5360-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive