Given the ongoing climate crisis, the frequency and severity of natural disasters are increasing. These events result in enormous reconstruction costs, pose a high burden on state budgets, and potentially drive homeowners into private insolvency. One policy instrument for collectively covering such costs is a compulsory insurance scheme for natural hazards. As the impact of natural disasters is uneven, introducing mandatory insurance regulation has a range of social and financial implications. While some European countries have introduced compulsory schemes, others have adopted different policy responses. Taking this variation as the main puzzle, I consider what factors can explain the introduction of compulsory insurance for natural hazards. Building on public risk and quiet politics literature, I identify several factors and test these against three empirical cases: Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. This analysis finds that focusing events are necessary for policy change, but the position and power of interest groups, as well as exogenous shocks within the EU context, were also crucial to explaining the introduction, rejection, and even termination of compulsory insurance schemes for natural hazards.

中文翻译：

---

认真对待生态社会风险：自然灾害强制保险的引入解释


鉴于持续的气候危机，自然灾害的频率和严重性正在增加。这些事件导致巨大的重建成本，给国家预算带来沉重的负担，并可能使房主陷入私人破产。共同支付此类费用的一种政策工具是自然灾害强制保险计划。由于自然灾害的影响不均衡，引入强制性保险法规具有一系列社会和财务影响。虽然一些欧洲国家已经引入了强制性计划，但其他国家采取了不同的政策应对措施。以这种变化为主要谜题，我考虑了哪些因素可以解释引入自然灾害强制保险。在公共风险和安静政治文献的基础上，我确定了几个因素，并根据三个实证案例对其进行了检验：德国、奥地利和瑞士。该分析发现，聚焦事件对于政策变化是必要的，但利益集团的地位和权力，以及欧盟背景下的外生冲击，对于解释自然灾害强制保险计划的引入、拒绝甚至终止也至关重要。