Travel Insurance Market Dynamics

🚨 A big UN report just launched: A powerful global resource for insurers, reinsurers & brokers navigating the net-zero transition. “Underwriting the Transition” is the first-ever guide specifically tailored to help insurance and reinsurance companies develop and disclose credible transition plans for their underwriting portfolios. Why it matters: While insurers have made climate commitments, clear frameworks for underwriting strategies have been lacking. This guide provides that. What’s inside: - A structured framework for transition planning - A checklist to assess credibility - Real-world examples from insurers, reinsurers & brokers - Practical insights on disclosure, strategy, and implementation By moving from ambition to action, this report helps the insurance sector lead the way in building a resilient, inclusive, and net-zero economy reaffirming its role as society’s risk manager. 🌍 This is the second deliverable in United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI)'s FIT Transition Plan Project — following “Closing the Gap” launched at COP29 and it lays the groundwork for the next report on total balance sheet guidance linking underwriting and investment strategies, to be launched at COP30. Let's make COP30 a defining moment for insurance climate leadership. #TransitionPlan #Insurance #Reinsurance #Sustainability #NetZero #FIT #UNEP #EIOPA #JustTransition #Underwriting

A VC perspective on AI InsurTech. Amir Kabir explored the state of artificial intelligence in the insurance industry. This essay is part of a broader series on the state and future of insurance innovation. As AI is probably the hottest topic in the market right now, it makes sense to dedicate an article to that specific technology. It starts with a reminder of AI technologies: its history, different trends this single word covers and major trends at work across industries. Then it deep dives into the insurance value chain by highlighting where machine learning models and technics are already leveraged, listing their strengths and weaknesses. It also details where the most value-added could be expected from adopting AI technologies. Ultimately, it highlights several use-cases already in place in the market on both incumbent and startup sides. ✨ Based on our own market watch in the European InsurTech ecosystem, I'd say that claim is probably where use-cases are the most advanced, while we currently see initiatives kicking off around distribution & customer relationship. Pricing is still in its early days - with limited number of players - while we expect a lot to happen around (emerging) risks ! #insurance #insurtech #artificialintelligence (BestOfH2)

But what if insurance worked more like Netflix? Netflix tracks your viewing behavior and adapts recommendations instantly. If insurance products adapting the same way, premiums adjusting dynamically to fitness levels, coverage expanding with life stages, benefits rebalancing as goals evolve. McKinsey estimates AI-led personalization could lift insurer revenues by 10–15%, while lowering claims costs through early risk detection. And The technology already exists. Wearables generate 250+ daily data points per user around heart rate, sleep, activity. PwC reports 63% of consumers are willing to share health data if it results in cheaper or more personalized premiums. And Personlaized premiums is not a distant reality. It can be achieved by: 𝟏. 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐩𝐢𝐩𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 that allow secure ingestion of health and behavioral data at scale. 𝟐. 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐛𝐨𝐱𝐞𝐬 that encourage innovation while protecting privacy. 𝟑. 𝐀𝐈 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 to ensure transparent pricing and avoid hidden bias. 𝟒. 𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐬 with health-tech, fintech, and wellness players to broaden value delivery. Insurance is likely evolve from a once-in-a-decade purchase to a living product. #DigitalIndia #Fintech #AI #technology #Fintech #AI #technology

THE COMPLEX GEOPOLITICS OF DIGITAL REGULATION: THE THREE BODY PROBLEM. Digital regulation is becoming a critical vector of geopolitical competition, with far-reaching implications for international economic law and global digital governance. This paper with my colleague and friend, Vanessa Zhang, explores the complex geopolitics of digital regulation by analyzing how divergent regulatory models in major jurisdictions – namely the European Union, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, and others – are reshaping global economic governance and digital trade. The paper examines how digital regulation increasingly functions as a Behind-the-border Trade Barrier (BTB), complicating cross-border data flows, market access, and competition. Special attention is given to the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and its extraterritorial reach through the so-called “Brussels Effect”, which has generated significant friction with the US and raised questions about digital sovereignty and regulatory hegemony. The analysis is situated within the broader context of the US– China technology rivalry, showing how regulatory asymmetries disproportionately affect firms from these two countries while offering middle powers, like the EU, leverage through norm-setting. The paper explores the potential escalation of regulatory disputes into trade conflicts, discussing the limits of existing trade agreements and the increasing use of retaliatory tariffs. The paper can be found at https://lnkd.in/djkZRyz8

I am happy to co-author this article with Beatrice WEDER DI MAURO, President of the CEPR - Centre for Economic Policy Research, reflecting on the urgent need to engage in collective thinking and action to adapt our response to the challenge of insurability in the face of escalating climate risks. This article, which captures key convictions from our joint workshop hosted at Collège de France by the AXA Research Fund and CEPR - Centre for Economic Policy Research, couldn't have been more timely.   Devastating floods in Valencia, the wildfires in Los Angeles, the typhoons in Mayotte and La Réunion... These recent climate catastrophes show a clear reality: climate risks are intensifying and the protection gap for local communities and economies are becoming evident. Global economic losses from extreme weather events reached $320 billion in 2024, while in Europe, only 25% of economic losses were insured - leaving individuals, businesses, and communities vulnerable.    To address this, we need to enhance risk-sharing mechanisms and promote partnerships between public institutions and private companies.   Ensuring insurance accessibility and effectiveness is crucial. This can be done through: ➡️ Hybrid models, combining market mechanisms with public-private partnerships, to help ensure broad coverage and affordability. France’s CatNat regime and Switzerland’s hybrid model offer valuable insights. These models can be adapted to regions facing extreme exposure, such as sea level risks. ➡️ Greater investment in prevention and risk-sharing mechanisms. Initiatives like local municipal risk assessments can help small municipalities assess and mitigate local climate risks. ➡️ Impact underwriting, where insurers incentivize policyholders to adopt risk-reducing measures in exchange for lower premiums. ➡️ Public education on climate risks and stronger coordination between insurers, governments, and consumers to ensure preventive measures are taken seriously.   As we move forward, it's clear that policymakers, insurers, and society must work together to strike a sustainable balance between affordability and fiscal viability. This is not just about who pays the bill. It is about how we manage risk in an increasingly uncertain climate landscape. Let's continue to foster collaboration and innovation to close the protection gap and build a resilient future. 👇 https://lnkd.in/er6BkrtZ

Your crisis communication plan is useless if you built it backwards. Most organizations start with what THEY want to say. Big mistake. Real crisis communication starts with a simple question: “Who needs to know what, when, and how?” Not your board. Not your PR team. Not your CEO. The people whose lives hang in the balance. Here’s what nobody wants to admit: There’s no such thing as “the general public.” That phrase is lazy thinking disguised as strategy. The “general public” is actually: → Parents picking up kids from school → Shift workers who missed the morning briefing → Elderly residents without smartphones → Non-native speakers in your community → People with disabilities who need different formats → Night-shift nurses just waking up Each group needs different information. Different timing. Different channels. I’ve watched crisis responses crash and burn because communicators got trapped in corporate-speak while families waited for answers. While employees wondered if they still had jobs. While communities needed to know if they were safe. Your audience isn’t a demographic. They’re real people facing real fear. They don’t care about your brand reputation right now. They care about their kids getting home safely. Their mortgage getting paid. Their neighborhood staying intact. The best crisis communicators I know? They can name their audiences. They know where Mrs. Chen gets her news. They get that teenagers won’t check email. They remember that third-shift workers are asleep during your 2 PM press conference. Three questions that should drive every crisis message: → What do they need to survive this moment? → What do they need to make the next decision? → What do they need to rebuild trust? Start with your audience. End with your audience. All of them - specifically. What’s the biggest mistake you’ve seen in crisis communication? Share your story below and let’s learn from each other’s experiences. 👇 The best crisis communicators I know never forget: we’re not managing messages. We’re serving people.

On this National Insurance Awareness Day, the conversation goes beyond protection. The bigger question today is: what is the true cost of exposure? The EY Global Insurance Outlook 2025 outlines how insurers are responding to a convergence of complex forces like geopolitical tensions, capital reallocation, protectionist policy shifts, and rising regulatory divergence across regions. For many businesses, these developments do not just increase risk. They reshape how risk behaves. Lower global trade, retreating multinationals, and restricted access to technology are already impacting demand for traditional insurance products and exposing gaps in existing portfolios. At the same time, macroeconomic imbalances from stagnant wages to widening retirement savings gaps are pushing insurers to rethink product accessibility and affordability, especially in life and pension segments. This is where the concept of Total Cost of Risk (TCOR), something I’ve been advocating in conversations with clients, becomes relevant. TCOR refers to the combined financial impact of all risks a business faces not just insured losses, but also indirect costs like reputational setbacks, compliance burdens, and operational disruptions. It reframes insurance from a cost center to a strategic function, accounting not only for premiums and claims but also for hidden exposures such as operational delays, reputational damage, compliance complexity, and missed capital productivity. As the EY report points out, 98 percent of CEOs expect to revise their investment strategies in response to geopolitical developments. Risk is not a backdrop anymore, it is a core variable in performance and planning. The question is no longer: What do we insure against? It is: What do we systematically underestimate? #NationalInsuranceAwarenessDay #TotalCostOfRisk #RiskAndResilience #GeopoliticalRisk #FutureOfInsurance

🇪🇺 Cybersecurity regulations reshaping Europe's digital landscape Imagine a world where every digital interaction is secure... Europe's cybersecurity framework is evolving rapidly, with three key regulations taking center stage: ↳ DORA: Enhancing financial sector resilience ↳ NIS2: Protecting critical infrastructure across 18 sectors ↳ CRA: Ensuring security in products with digital elements Why should you care? ↳ These regulations impact businesses of all sizes, from tech giants to SMEs ↳ Your personal data and financial transactions will be better protected ↳ The digital products you use daily will have enhanced security features Key actions for businesses: ↳ Conduct thorough risk assessments and implement robust security measures ↳ Prepare for stricter incident reporting requirements and shorter deadlines ↳ Invest in cybersecurity training and consider appointing a CISO ↳ Stay informed about compliance deadlines and certification processes ||| DORA (DIGITAL OPERATIONAL RESILIENCE ACT) Effective since January 17, 2025, DORA aims to: ↳ Harmonize regulations across the financial sector ↳ Strengthen risk management frameworks ↳ Enhance oversight of ICT providers supporting essential services ||| NIS2 (NETWORK AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS DIRECTIVE) Currently in the transposition phase: ↳ Expands cybersecurity requirements to 18 critical sectors ↳ Introduces stricter supply chain security measures ↳ Mandates updates to national cybersecurity strategies ||| CRA (CYBER RESILIENCE ACT) Came into force on December 10, 2024, with main obligations applying from December 11, 2027: ↳ Focuses on cybersecurity of products with digital elements ↳ Introduces "security by design" concept ↳ Establishes new responsibilities for manufacturers, importers, and distributors The implementation of these regulations presents challenges, including: ↳ Regulatory complexity and the need for simplification ↳ Coordination between different authorities and sectors ↳ Resource allocation for compliance and certification As we navigate this evolving landscape, businesses must adapt quickly to meet new requirements and leverage experienced organizations for support. ♻️ Share this post with your network to keep them informed about these crucial cybersecurity developments! P.S. Which of these regulations do you think will have the biggest impact on your industry? Drop your thoughts below!

Too many sellers inadvertently lower their status in their attempts to "build rapport" with prospects.  Here's how you gain your prospect's RESPECT in the first 90 seconds of a call: First, let's look at how 90% of sellers try to build rapport: "𝘚𝘰 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘢 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮?" "𝘛𝘰𝘰 𝘣𝘢𝘥 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘴, 𝘩𝘶𝘩? 𝘕𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳!" "𝘏𝘰𝘸'𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘓𝘈 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺?" ^Sports/Weather/Location based rapport isn't really rapport. It's schmoozing, and your prospect can see through that BS. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂'𝗿𝗲 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗿𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝘂𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 '𝗲𝗺 𝘂𝗽 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲, just like every other seller who talks about the exact same stuff! If you're OK being treated like a run of the mill salesperson, by all means continue to schmooze. For those of us who'd like different results, read on. --- The easiest way to build rapport is to show you respect your prospect's time + know something about their business. You can do this by following the 90 second rule: 𝗦𝗮𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴/𝗗𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝟭.𝟱 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝘂𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀. Examples: 1. For health insurance, we might comment on a new location opening: "𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘚𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘯. 𝘐𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 3𝘳𝘥 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳?" ^New office = more employees who are going to need insurance. -- 2. For our Club Pass sales training program, we'll might comment on something we read on a job posting for an AE: "𝘋𝘢𝘯, 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯 𝘑𝘋 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘕𝘛 𝘈𝘌 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘳 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴. 𝘏𝘰𝘸'𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨?" ___ To be clear, there's nothing wrong with bonding over a shared love of the Buffalo Bills, but let that be the cherry on top to your demonstration of prep + respect for their time, not the only way you build rapport. 

𝗔 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗰𝘆𝗯𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲. Obviously, compliance is a baseline—you have to meet your legal obligations. But how you comply and the approach you take can define your business’s future. The right legal strategy can mean the difference between emerging stronger, with reinforced stakeholder trust, or coming out battered and bruised. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝘁𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳. Cyber incidents happen—even to the best-prepared businesses. Regulators, customers, and stakeholders judge you on your response. If you act efficiently, effectively, and strategically, you can not only protect your brand but actually reduce regulatory scrutiny. Being overly defensive and combative might help you avoid court, but if it destroys trust, the long-term damage could far outweigh any short-term legal cost (not to say there are not times when this approach is warranted!). 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘆, 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 often leads to better outcomes. So, what makes a 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 in an incident scenario? 🔹 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗯𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸—𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝘁𝗼𝗼. Regulators and stakeholders don’t just judge you on compliance. They judge you on how you handle the situation. A legal strategy that aligns with your business’s values and long-term interests is key. 🔹 𝗕𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁-𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺 𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴-𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲. In the heat of an incident, it’s easy to focus on immediate containment. But a strong legal response also protects your business’s future—customer trust and regulatory relationships depend on it. This includes ensuring that you act in a way that allows you to retain the evidence required to appropriately investigate the incident. 🔹 𝗗𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗰 𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀—𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲. A great incident response lawyer doesn’t just help you react—they help you navigate the chaos with clarity. They cut through the noise, help manage competing interests, and ensure today’s response doesn’t create bigger problems tomorrow. At the end of the day, your response defines your reputation—not just the incident itself. #CyberSecurity #IncidentResponse #LegalStrategy #DataBreach #PrivacyLaw #RiskManagement #CrisisManagement #privacy