What initially attracted Arch Insurance to join CERCat, and why was it important for the organization to be involved?
What initially attracted Arch Insurance to CERCat was its clear and deliberate focus on both hazard and vulnerability research. Many research consortia tend to emphasize one over the other, but CERCat’s emphasis on vulnerability was notable. Vulnerability is often the most uncertain component of catastrophe models. In contrast to hazard, which benefits from extensive publicly available data and research, robust and defensible vulnerability research remains limited. Addressing this gap is critical for improving overall model accuracy and model reliability.
Another aspect that stood out was the intent behind the research proposals. It was clear that the researchers had given significant thought to the challenges facing the (re)insurance industry and were proactively tailoring their research to address those needs. That alignment between academic rigor and practical application made it important for Arch to be involved, as it ensures the research outcomes are not only scientifically sound but also meaningful and actionable for the (re)insurance market.
What inspired you personally to serve as the inaugural chair of the Industry Advisory Board?
The clarity and ambition of what CERCat set out to offer. The consortium has a strong and intentional focus on both hazard and vulnerability, while also addressing challenges across multiple perils. It is common for research consortia to focus on a single peril, but CERCat took a broader approach from the outset, with first-year projects spanning hurricanes, wildfire, flooding and severe convective storms.
Given that scope and vision, I felt it was an opportunity not only for Arch Insurance to be involved, but also for me to contribute more directly to help the consortium succeed. Serving as chair allows me to offer guidance from an industry perspective, help align research efforts with real-world needs, and support the translation of scientific advances into meaningful outcomes. I strongly believe CERCat has a bright future and will play an important role in advancing catastrophe modeling science, and I am glad to be able to contribute, even in a small way, to that process.
From your perspective, how does collaboration between academia and industry strengthen catastrophe modeling and global resilience efforts?
Catastrophe modeling has been developed and advanced within the private sector for decades, playing a critical role in quantifying extreme events not seen in the historical record. While these models are already highly sophisticated, they continue to evolve as new data, scientific understanding, and methodologies emerge.
Collaboration with academia is essential to that evolution, and the Industry Advisory Board plays a key role in shaping this partnership to ensure the research is meaningful. Academic researchers contribute deep technical expertise, novel modeling approaches, and independent validation, while industry helps define the practical questions, constraints and use cases that ensure the research remains relevant. In my role, much of my focus centers on model validation, where independent academic insights help build confidence and credibility in catastrophe models.
By aligning academic innovation with industry priorities, catastrophe models become more accurate and actionable. This enables better risk management and preparedness across the (re)insurance market, reducing adverse outcomes following extreme events. For example, improved modeling helps lower the risk of (re)insurer insolvency, supports financial stability in insurance markets and enables faster recovery for communities after disasters. In this way, active collaboration between academia and industry directly strengthens global resilience.
How did your academic background prepare you for your current role, and what advice would you offer to students interested in catastrophe risk and modeling?
My academic background is in meteorology, which provided a strong foundation in understanding key catastrophe perils such as hurricanes, severe convective storms and winter storms. While this scientific grounding is critical, it only represents one component of a catastrophe model. Over time, I learned that catastrophe modeling requires integrating knowledge across multiple disciplines, including engineering, actuarial science, GIS, data science, machine learning and AI, and insurance.
This interdisciplinary perspective is central to my role on the Industry Advisory Board. It allows me to help bridge academic research with industry needs by evaluating how scientific advances can be translated into practical modeling improvements and decision-ready tools. For students interested in catastrophe modeling, my advice is to remain curious and be willing to learn beyond your core discipline. Developing familiarity with complementary fields not only broadens your perspective, but also equips you to contribute to research and solutions that have real-world impact in catastrophe management.
