Description: In this issue, we’re pleased to share with our members some recent nice activities and initiatives of AFIR- ERM on the risk management space. Please fi nd useful information in the article below from Michael Sherris, Chairman of AFIR- ERM Section.

Description: European insurance regulation pretends to capture and rely on the 1-year 1-in-200 VaR. But there cannot exist any scientific calibration of such measure. Why?

Description: Highlight of the ERM Symposium

Description: Information on the JRMS e-Library.

Description: We can do a better job of communicating the degree of "riskiness" that is inherent in our models of risk. The "Coefficient of Risk" is one way to present fatness of model tails in simple terms using widely understood basic concepts.

Description: ERM may exist in name only without a risk-aware culture. The article uses battle-tested approaches & behavioral insights to drive change and embed risk culture.

Description: Global financial crises like the one recently experienced, affected both large and small institutions.Today, when there is heightened need for enhanced risk management tools, some entities are unable to employ sophisticated mechanisms due to limited data availability. Moreover, from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s point of view via Basel II and Basel III, the internal ratings- based (IRB) approach requires that institutions have some reliable estimates of default probabilities of default for each rating grade. Taking the work of previous researches a step further, this paper intends to propose a new dynamic mechanism to for the risk management industry for to calculateing probabilities of default (PD). Through these estimates for the core model, we generate implied probability of default (PD) through actuarial estimation tools and different probability distributions. This mechanism is specialized to work best for low- defa ult portfolios (LDPs). Furthermore, scenario testing is adopted to validate the model against any model- specific bias

Description: Reinsurance reduces the required capital of the primary insurer but increases that of the reinsurer. Capital is costly. All capital costs, including that of the insurer and the reinsurer, are ultimately borne by primary policyholders. Reducing the total capital of insurers and reinsurers brings down the total capital cost and the total primary policy premium. A reinsurance arrangement is considered optimal—if it minimizes the total required capital. This optimal reinsurance is an attracting equilibrium under price competition. Evidence suggests an inverse relationship between the total required capital and the correlation between the losses held by different insurers and reinsurers. Examples are constructed to examine this and other properties of the optimal reinsurance.

Description: Optimization of the liabilities to minimize the required capital, enhance the enterprise risk management and maximizing the shareholder value.

Description: Update on issues, priorities and key messages from the Joint CAS / CIA / SOA Risk Management Section Council.