A report saying that insurers and reinsurers need to do more to mitigate the effects of extreme weather and climate-related risks has drawn praise from a somewhat unusual source.

In fact, the R Street Institute said the report, issued last week by Boston-based Ceres, could be an impetus to reduce government subsidies for catastrophe-exposed property insurance.

The report by Ceres — a coalition of investors, environmental groups and other organizations that works with businesses to address sustainability challenges, including climate change — said insurers have taken some steps to deal with weather and climate-related issues.

“We have seen excellent examples of insurer-sector leadership in addressing climate risks, but industrywide engagement and action in this regard is nowhere near its potential,” said the report, “Stormy Future for U.S. Property/Casualty Insurers: The Growing Costs and Risks of Extreme Weather Events.”

“Insurers have much to offer, and much at stake, in helping governments and private markets to further understand and develop solutions to better predict and prevent losses from extreme weather events,” according to the report. “For instance, stronger resiliency to extreme weather is of great importance to the insurance sector, as it reduces property risks and promotes future insurability.”

Among other things, the report recommends that insurers and reinsurers update pricing and underwriting to reflect changes in extreme weather and promote the reduction of carbon emissions. It calls on rating agencies to analyze insurers' exposures and management responses to extreme weather risks, and urges regulators to strengthen mandatory climate risk disclosures by insurers.

%%BREAK%%

A pro-free enterprise nonprofit group hailed the report.

“We think this is an important report, whose findings must be taken seriously by lawmakers, regulators and industry alike,” said R.J. Lehmann, senior fellow at the R Street Institute in Washington.

“Among the most important conclusions that we at R Street draw from this report is that there should be an immediate commitment to cease politically motivated rate suppression for property insurance, particularly in sensitive coastal areas whose long-term future remains uncertain,” he said. “The federal government and state governments also need to cease subsidies to programs like the National Flood Insurance Program and Federal Crop Insurance Program, and to state-sponsored residual market entities that serve primarily to put more people and businesses in harm's way.”

Previous attempts to eliminate such programs, including NFIP, have failed.

The American Insurance Association is reviewing the Ceres report and its recommendations, a spokesman for the Washington-based insurer group said.

“Whether it's reducing their own carbon footprints or meeting consumer demand by offering "green' products, insurers have a strong public record on this issue,” the AIA spokesman said. “The insurance sector remains well-capitalized, financially stable and ready to respond to policyholders' natural catastrophe claims.”