From ReFocus 2010, held on February 28-March 3, 2010, in Lake Las Vegas, NV. This session provides an update on Solvency II including the Solvency II Level 2 Consultation paper, the current financial market environment, Systemic risk –Banks vs. insurance companies, and Capital management

Slides from session number 27PD at the 2007 Valuation Actuary Symposium, held September 17-18 in Austin, Texas. The panelists present an overview of the Solvency II regime in the European Union, and discuss the three “pillars” - capital requirements, supervisory review, and disclosure. A “non- actuarial” perspective is also provided, noting that Solvency II is more than about capital, emphasizing the importance in managing a company. The potential impact on U.S. insurers is also discussed.

Rapidly evolving global regulatory and industry developments have an important influence on both enterprise risk management [ERM] and capital management practices. This presentation from Session 61 PD of the SOA 2011 Annual Meeting & Exhibit addresses the following issues: the ERM system and its global implication, risk management and capital management, and how global ERM practices evolved as a result of imminent changes in insurance regulation and solvency assessment.

The credit market turmoil has changed the availability and structure of capital markets solutions for both insurers and reinsurers. How have the changes affected the development, pricing and structure of life insurance products? From Life 2009 Spring Meeting, session 63 PD.

Discussion of the economics of a possible H5N1 pandemic, and its impact on Life, Health, and Property and Casualty insurers, in terms of areas of risk, especially underwritng risk, operations risk, and market risk.

Slides from a presentation at the Society of Actuaries Insurance Seminar on Economic Capital, held on December 6–7, 2007 in Chicago, IL. This document contains the slides from one of the presenter's slides from a 2 presenter session with the same title. This presenter discusses an approach for more efficiently running stochastic models supporting economic capital needs, including the development of a 'Risk dash board' technique which would: 1. Be accessible to management, not just actuaries 2. Consider the key risks 3. Be timely and up to date 4. Be accurate 5. Not introduce significant overhead expense. ?? It is accurate ?? …and does not introduce significant overheads

This paper expands upon current capital analysis by introducing a practical approach that considers the objectives of all stakeholders of an insurance company in setting appropriate capital targets. In addition, the paper introduces a technique for estimating capital adequacy that is based on mapping stochastic distributions of regulatory and rating agency capital measures to observable financial rating transition matrices.

The authors introduce an alternative to Tail Contribution Analysis TCA for analyzing business segments and strategies called Economic Profit Analysis EPA. They discuss EPA’s key feature, “volatility replication,” an intuitively appealing process of building investor expectations and capital market information into the risk-and-return measurements used to evaluate strategic decisions. Finally, they illustrate the benefit of using EPA in overcoming the problems of TCA and thereby providing concise reliable information for business decision making.

The credit market turmoil has changed the availability and structure of capital markets solutions for both insurers and reinsurers. How have the changes affected the development, pricing and structure of life insurance products? From Life 2009 Spring Meeting, session 63 PD.

This paper examines properties of risk measures that can be considered to be in line with some “best practice” rules in insurance, based on solvency margins. We show that so-called coherent risk measures lead to problems. In particular we consider an exponential risk measure related to a discrete ruin model, depending on the initial surplus, the desired ruin probability, and the risk distribution. There is a discussion of this paper between author and Eddy Van den Borre. From NAAJ, April 2003, Volume 7, Number 2.