Contents
Insurers have a major impact on climate and biodiversity, for example when they decide to only insure climate-friendly companies – and they are also directly affected by climate change. Because if there are more storms, the costs for the insurers increase.
Because the influence of the insurers is great, they want to do more for the climate. The world’s largest insurers have therefore joined forces to form the “Net-Zero Insurance Alliance”, the NZIA. All the important players in the market from Europe and Asia will be there, such as Axa, Allianz and Generali.
Legend:
But now this alliance is crumbling: last week Munich Re announced its exit, this week Zurich, by far the largest insurer in Switzerland – under pressure from the oil and gas lobby.
IMAGO/Archive/Jan Huebner
Munich Re gave “antitrust risks” as the reason for leaving the NZIA. Because in the USA, Republican politicians are lobbying for the antitrust authorities to take legal action against members of the NZIA because they discriminate against oil and gas companies. That violates competition law, so the argument goes. Munich Re did not want to expose itself to this risk.
Now Zurich Insurance follows. At the request of SRF, the insurer does not want to deny or confirm an antitrust reason, and writes more technically: “Zurich has decided to withdraw from the Net-Zero Insurance Alliance. Having established a standardized methodology for measuring and disclosing greenhouse gas emissions associated with insurance and reinsurance portfolios, we intend to focus our resources on supporting our clients in their transition.”
WWF: It’s more important what you do on a daily basis
So no turning away from the net zero goal, but no longer part of Allianz – what do the environmental organizations say about this? The WWF is not particularly impressed – Regula Hess, responsible for financial issues at the environmental organization, says: “Whether Zurich Insurance is now setting these climate targets within the framework of the NZIA or outside it seems a little less relevant to us, because this alliance is not particularly credible and also does not ensure that these climate targets are scientifically sound.”
However, it is much more important for the WWF that Zurich does something for the climate in its day-to-day business. But here the largest Swiss insurer disappoints. “Zurich continues to insure new oil and gas projects and that is not compatible with the climate goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees,” Hess continues.
Actions are more important than words
Other insurers are further along. Allianz, Swiss Re and Munich Re no longer insure new projects to develop oil and gas deposits.
At the WWF, they generally don’t think too much of industry agreements, clear rules from the legislature are more effective. And it is even more important that insurers are congruent in their actions – insurers also invest and can thus influence where their capital goes.
In summary, actions speak louder than words. And if Zurich Insurance, which incidentally is also involved in other climate alliances, leaves the Net Zero alliance of insurers, that is not decisive, but how an insurance company acts day by day. And it obviously helps if insurers no longer work with climate-damaging companies. Because otherwise politicians and lobbyists in the US would not bother the antitrust authorities.