Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Home | Support RFF | Join E-mail List | Contact
RFF Logo
Skip navigation links


Join E-mail List
Please provide your e-mail address to receive periodic newsletters and invitations to public events
Carolyn Kousky
Kousky describes her research on how risk is managed in natural catastrophes and other extreme events.
Watch this video
Managing the Risk of Extreme Weather Events in a Changing Climate
First Wednesday Seminar
February 3, 2010
Are Catastrophes Insurable?
Roger M. Cooke, Carolyn Kousky
RFF Resources Article
Improving Flood Insurance and Flood Risk Management: Insights from St. Louis, Missouri
Carolyn Kousky, Howard Kunreuther
RFF Discussion Paper

Reforming the National Flood Insurance Program
RFF Feature
February 22, 2010

Reforming the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has offered insurance to homeowners in flood-prone areas of the United States for more than 40 years but many observers agree that the time has come to substantially reform the program.

The Need for Reform

A central weakness of the NFIP is that premiums are designed to cover the “average historical loss year”—not catastrophic loss years. In other words, when a catastrophic event does occur, there isn’t enough money to cover losses.

As of October 2009, there were over 5.5 million active policies nationwide with over $1 trillion in exposure. The 2005 flood season, headlined by Hurricane Katrina, drove a rising tide of debt to its current level around $19 billion.

In a new issue brief (10-01), “Reforming the National Flood Insurance Program,” RFF Fellow Carolyn Kousky presents four broad potential reforms to the program along with a discussion of whether to forgive the NFIP’s debt and whether the program should cover damages from wind in addition to water.

What are the Options? 

1. Raise capital by purchasing reinsurance and offering catastrophe bonds to investors.

Higher rates would help build a reserve fund, but could be politically difficult and better options may exist. The program could purchase private reinsurance, as previously done through a California program that insures homeowners in that state against earthquakes. Alternatively, NFIP could offer catastrophe bonds to investors, awarding them with returns and a portion of premiums.

2. Replace subsidies with rebates for low‐income households.

Subsidies within the NFIP apply to more than 22 percent of policies. The largest portion was designed to avoid punishing homeowners with properties in place before flood maps existed. Replacing these with need-based rebates could financially stabilize the program and make full flood risk more apparent to residents.


 Reforming the National Flood Insurance Program - Carolyn Kousky
Reforming the National Flood Insurance Program
Carolyn Kousky
Issue Brief

3. Insure communities instead of individuals.

Despite rules mandating the purchase of flood insurance in some areas, participation rates in NFIP are still quite low. Insuring all property owners in an area would reduce the need for enforcement and account for all flood risk there.

4. Offer reinsurance for flood claims instead of primary insurance.

Reinsurance from the federal government would be cheaper than from private reinsurers because the federal government does not seek a profit and can spread losses over time. Flood coverage would be mandated as part of traditional homeowner’s coverage, ensuring flood coverage for all insured homes and full (wind and water) coverage against hurricane losses in one policy.

RFF Home | RFF Press: An Imprint of Routledge Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Notice
1616 P St. NW, Washington, DC 20036 · 202.328.5000 Feedback | Contact Us