Italy’s New Nat Cat Insurance Rules: What Risk & Insurance Managers need to do now
– by BELFOR Italy, first published in RMNews magazine, December 2025
Insuring against natural disasters is now an obligation, but also an opportunity. But a policy alone is not enough, immediate action is key. BELFOR’s P.I.A.® and RED ALERT® programs help companies prepare in a structured way, ensuring a rapid and effective response to emergencies.
The climate is changing, and with it the exposure of businesses to catastrophic risks. Italy is experiencing an escalation of extreme events: in 2024 alone, 351 were recorded, almost six times more than in 2015, an increase of +485% (legambiente.it).
This trend confirms that natural disasters are no longer extraordinary events, but recurring phenomena that cause major damage and long recovery times. For a company, the consequences go beyond the loss of physical assets: production shutdowns, higher costs, loss of market share, and in the worst cases, permanent closure. A domino effect that impacts employees, families, and the entire economic fabric of a territory. Addressing NatCat risk management is therefore not a theoretical exercise, but a strategic necessity.
In this context, the Risk Manager assumes a central role: guiding companies to transition from a reactive approach (rebuild after) to a proactive one (prevent). In doing so, risk management moves beyond mere regulatory compliance to become a strategic lever for enhancing business competitiveness.
Consider that today, post-disaster interventions are vastly more expensive than investments in prevention: for every unit invested in prevention, emergency response costs are roughly seven times higher and restoring buildings, services, and productive activities can be at least ten times more costly. This was stated by Filippo Emanuelli, CEO of BELFOR Italy, in an interview with Chiara Garbin, a public official and Civil Protection expert.
Risk, Perception and Preparedness
In the collective imagination, risk is often seen as something unpredictable. In reality, it is a probabilistic concept: the probability that an event will occur and cause damage to people and assets.
This awareness carries a fundamental truth: even if risk can never be completely eliminated, it can be managed and reduced through training and preparedness.
However, even today, many companies approach risk reactively. As Emanuelli emphasizes in his interview, “The perception of risk — and the ability to define and manage it — is not a topic that is widely addressed. For this reason, at BELFOR, in our dialogue with Public Administrations and with companies, we try to focus attention on preparedness understood not only as the adoption of emergency plans, but also as continuous training, practical simulations and the spread of a true risk-aware culture.”
Public and Private: the challenge of Integrated Risk Management
Beyond individual awareness of risk and the need for preparedness, another fundamental dimension immediately emerges: effective management of natural disasters cannot be limited to a single entity or company alone. It requires structured cooperation between the public and private sectors, where plans, protocols and responsibilities are interconnected to protect people, assets and the territory.
“Every company must consider itself as a potential source of pollution following a flood event, just as it can itself be affected by other entities.”
When asked why it is necessary to involve public administrations in risk prevention policies, Emanuelli replied: “Every company must consider itself as a potential source of pollution following a flood event, just as it can itself be affected by other entities. Sharing the analysis of its own risks —for example, the release of chemical products — and risk mitigation strategies with the municipal administration can lead to greater synergy and efficiency in post-disaster crisis management.” He further added: “Risk analysis carried out by individual companies must be combined with the territory management and maintenance actions implemented by the Administration. The PPR (Risk Protection Plan) of a given area must take into account the risks associated with local businesses, which could potentially also damage community infrastructure and assets.”
On this point, Chiara Garbin noted: “Since 2016 there has been a memorandum of understanding between the Civil Protection Department, the Italian business system and Confindustria, which led to the creation of the Emergency Management Program (PGE). The goal is to spread a culture of risk prevention and management in SMEs and local institutions, supporting businesses and communities in dealing with emergencies following a natural disaster.”
Regarding public-private coordination in NatCat prevention and management, Emanuelli added: “In general, I believe that an ideal organization of emergency management requires cooperation, in the preventive phase, between Civil Protection, the Fire Brigade, and local companies, with clear coordination and the establishment of protocols ‘in peacetime.’ Only in this way can interventions during an emergency be synergistic and complementary, based on a shared strategy. Yet, even today, in many cases we face a complete lack of knowledge of the risk scenarios to be addressed and of the roles that the various institutions play when the disastrous event occurs.”
Finally, Emanuelli emphasized the need for more structured planning: “Over time, the possibility of creating a municipal-level pollution risk mapping, including public and private assets in the area, would help define in advance the capital needed to fund specific emergency expenditure items and, why not, improve the transfer of these sums to insurance, where possible, thus improving the financial coverage of rescue operations.”
NatCat Insurance: between obligation and opportunity
The recent introduction of mandatory insurance coverage against NatCat risks is changing the landscape, strengthening the role of the Risk Manager. For businesses, obtaining NatCat coverage is not merely a regulatory requirement, but also an opportunity to adopt a proactive approach to risk management.
Insurance thus becomes a crucial issue. “The requirement for companies to insure against NatCat,” explains Garbin, “was designed specifically to help Italian businesses respond more effectively to extreme natural events, emphasizing the importance of prevention. This shifts the focus from merely repairing damage after a disaster to proactive preparedness, encouraging companies to implement appropriate protective measures. In my view, it would even be interesting to reward companies that have conducted risk analyses and implemented preventive actions — including staff training — to prepare for and manage incidents and disasters as effectively as possible.”
In this context, BELFOR provides programs for preparedness, training and preventive assistance, designed to support companies in managing risks.
“Mandatory insurance against NatCat represents a tangible opportunity for businesses,” explains Emanuelli. “It is not just about complying with a regulation, but about providing training to those — such as a company’s emergency teams — who are called upon to respond. Programs like BELFOR’s P.I.A.® and RED ALERT® allow companies to benefit from dedicated training courses for internal teams, plan customized incident response plans and define the immediate actions to be taken in case of an emergency.”
In summary, addressing NatCat today means proactively combining internal preparedness, cooperation with public authorities and insurance instruments. Only in this way can companies, territories and communities turn risk into a tangible opportunity, protecting people, assets and economic activities.
For more information: https://www.belfor.com/it/it/servizi/servizi-pre-sinistro/
