In complement to the blog that we are publishing on our website this week, I want to ask the question here:
Do you think microinsurance can (1) be sustainable at scale and (2) reach breakeven of total investments in a reasonable time, and if so, (3) why are there still so few companies and investors interested in this?
Why am I asking this?
Last year in May, I had the honor to talk about the business case for microinsurance and low income women at a conference in Cairo. I presented the Egyptian scheme we share with Lead Foundation that has reached more than 120,000 clients in the meantime. A sustainable case we are proud of. One specific question I received was about the role of regulators and donors and how these can create a business friendly environment. Leaving aside regulators for a second, I found it indeed an interesting stand point to assume that donors have a role to play if a business case generates profit. In a normal economy companies invest and take a risk to get a return. The higher the risk, the higher the expected return. Simple. As I pointed out, I do believe there is a sustainable business case for microinsurance but the investment mechanism cannot not exactly be the same because the risk premium would kill the investment. A longer perspective is needed.
Please share your thoughts here or on twitter.
Category: Funding longer lives: Health/medicine, Long-term care, Pension/retirement, Food security: Farming, Food waste, Livestock, Climate/natural disasters: Disaster risk, Other