We are excited to announce that the Forum dates are now set! The Welcome Cocktail will take place on the evening of the second of June 2026, and the Forum will run from that evening to the 5th of June, 2026. Please see all other information here.

Juan Lopez Santini and Alex Guillamont recently celebrated with tremendous market support the 10th anniversary of our Miami Latin American Claims (Re)Insurance Forum. The event brought together an impressive concentration of talent, expertise, and industry insight. Thought-provoking discussions led by respected leaders touched on emerging risks, evolving policy structures, the impact of new technologies, and a myriad of topics discussed during three days over ten panels (see the 2025 Forum Program here.)

We’re deeply grateful to our sponsors, whose support made this milestone event possible: Advanta, Charles Taylor, Crawford, Electromec, McLarens, R&G Espinosa, RTS, and Quorum for making the Welcome Cocktail possible.

With over 220 participants in attendance, the Forum served as a dynamic platform for cross-sector and international dialogue.

Expertly curated panels explored a wide range of topics from developing solutions to the most pressing challenges facing the (re)insurance industry, to sharing personal insights on the transformation of key market sectors. The event was a testament to the power of collaboration and the shared commitment to shaping the future of our industry.

Our panel on market leader’s outlook, moderated by Angel Torres of AIG, was led by Alain Bizet of Helvetia, Matthias Meyer of Munich Re, Kaspar Muller of Swiss Re, Fernando Garrido of Fidelitas Global Lloyd’s, Alfonso de Mares of QBE, and Luisa Robayo of Allianz.

“This panel showcases the depth of talent within our industry and reminds us that we have the capability to address these challenges within our own organizations. Opportunities like this, where we come together to share insights and experiences, not only reaffirms our relevance, but also highlights our collective power to drive meaningful solutions.” – Panelist

These market leaders went over how the next generation is impacting the evolution of insurance in Latin America and beyond. From regulation to AI and natural disasters to social responsibility, one theme remained clear: attracting, developing, and retaining young talent is not just important- it’s essential. 

Panelists recognized the ongoing image challenge faced by the insurance industry. It was noted that few young graduates aspire to enter the field, pointing to a need for rebranding and outreach. The conversation emphasized the importance of evolving talent development strategies to keep pace with AI and technological transformation. Another key concern was the loss of young professionals who train abroad and choose not to return to their local markets. While early career programs are investing in nurturing talent, many participants tend to leave the industry or relocate within a few years, raising questions about long-term retention.

From the audience, the Brickell (Re)insurance Institute shared their approach to addressing the industry’s talent gap by engaging with the next generation early. Their strategy focuses on introducing college students to insurance careers through local outreach:

“We’ve started hosting introductory sessions at various universities across Miami,” they explained. “Most recently, we organized our Meet the Market event, where students had the chance to connect with industry professionals through rapid one-on-one conversations. This is similar to speed networking, which allows for meaningful, face-to-face engagement in a short time.”

The panelists then shifted their attention towards the challenges of regulation and regional disparities. Regulatory environments across Latin America vary greatly. Robayo explained that regulation in Colombia is slow but valuable, especially with outside support tailored to local needs. Garrido warned that regulators often underestimate the industry’s complexity and impact. Audience members emphasized the need for ongoing education as a solution for both industry professionals and regulators.

In the face of increased natural disaster incidents the panelists discussed the rise of extreme weather events and the widening gap in home insurance, especially in countries like Brazil, which is not known for these natural disasters but has recently begun experiencing them. Many homeowners are uninsured, leaving them vulnerable. They called for more financial education and risk awareness. The audience asked how we can reach people who can’t afford food, and let alone insurance, urging the industry to innovate in product delivery and messaging. A powerful comment from the audience reframed the role of insurance:

“Claims are not the product: it’s the promise of stability.”

Our panel on Emerging Risks, ESG, Greenwashing moderated by Lorena Avila of Kennedys, was led by Maria Amalia Cruz of QBE, Alejandro Mclean of Bisa Seguro y Reaseguros S.A, Lope Garcia of Everest, and Viviane Mardirossian of IRB(Re). 

Key takeaways included the urgent need for stronger ESG frameworks, cautious integration of AI, and updated policies to handle new and increasingly complex risks.

The discussion began with the audience identifying top emerging risks: cyber threats, social unrest, AI, climate change, political instability, hurricanes, and more.

Bolivia’s growing vulnerability due to weakened institutions, outdated regulations (unchanged since 2002), and increasing dependency on international reinsurance was emphasized. Panellists warned of high legal risk in rejecting state claims, which can lead to criminal charges and uncertainty in the insurance market.

The panel highlighted the industry’s struggle with SAM (Sexual Assault and Molestation) claims, citing major U.S. cases involving the Boy Scouts, the Catholic Church, and USA Gymnastics. Current policies often fail to address institutional negligence like poor hiring practices, lack of supervision, and failure to report incidents.

The rise of AI as a top-ranked global risk was brought up. The panel noted AI’s increasing role in medical claim denials and emphasized the need for human oversight. “AI should be your co-pilot, not the pilot” a panelist said, calling for a balance between automation and judgment.

Panelist

The panel warned about the hidden costs of ultra-processed foods and chemicals in consumer products. These are driving long-tail claims linked to diseases like Type 2 diabetes and NAFLD, especially in vulnerable populations. They stressed the importance of adapting insurance policies to spell out whether cover is intended for these evolving exposures.

The next panel of the day delved into the evolving dynamics of risk, regulation, and product development in Latin America’s insurance and reinsurance market. Moderated by Jose Franciso Vergara (RTS) and led by Catarina Malafaia (Chubb), Andres Navas (AIG), Fernando Garrido (Fidelitas at Lloyd’s), Najib Bousakr (Beazley), and Alejandra Navarro (Swiss Re). Speakers examined how the industry must adapt technologically, structurally, and culturally.

The panel opened the discussion by pointing to global volatility, U.S. insolvencies, and ESG-driven lawsuits, noting that while these have not yet generated claims in LATAM, natural disasters are a growing concern. The role of AI and the need to embrace technological innovation was emphasized, as well as Brazil’s legislative changes and their effect on investment-related claims.

They called attention to legacy insurance contracts that haven’t kept pace with technological change. Language, clauses, and definitions are decades old, leaving gaps in coverage for new risks like AI or social engineering. Speakers debated the difficulty of updating policy language. A panelist highlighted the growing control brokers seek, warning underwriters need to stay proactive to avoid being sidelined. Insurers can lead change themselves by offering more relevant and responsive coverage.

Real-world examples where traditional policies failed to respond to tech-driven events were mentioned. Overlapping claims across BBB and cyber policies raised the need to revisit coverage definitions. The panel outlined new fraud schemes affecting banks across Guatemala, Ecuador, Canada, and the Middle East. These involve fictitious clients and losses not immediately detected. Whether coverage applies often depends on how modern the wording is. A panelist described a case where a bank met ISO standards, but missed a specific question and yet the claim was still paid, revealing ambiguity in underwriting practices.

The panel called for collective industry education through formal curricula. A speaker emphasized that real claims are the best learning tools, though their frequency has dropped post-COVID. The panel also discussed how BBB policies often exclude cash losses but may cover valuables like art or jewelry, where valuation can be subjective. The panel concluded that each client has unique risk characteristics and standardized solutions won’t suffice.

Our next panel on AI and Cyber was Moderated by Javier Vijil of Kennedys. This panel brought together Belén Navarro (Zurich), Daniel Santos (ChubbREVISAR), Alejandro Guevara G. (Liberty), Armando Nieto (Divina Pastora), Julieth Cano (R&G Espinosa), Alejandra Navarro (Swiss Re), and Hilario Itriago (BOXX Insurance).

Key takeaways were that prevention trump’s reaction, cyber threats are becoming more personal and violent, and building strong internal protocols is just as critical as having the right insurance.

The panel opened with a chilling real-world cyberattack. A company was targeted by hackers who spent months infiltrating internal systems. With just one compromised password from a healthcare provider, attackers accessed massive databases, threatening to release or destroy sensitive data unless ransom was paid. Beyond data theft, hackers used personal information to send threats of violence, exposing how cyber risks now extend far beyond business disruption.

A panelist stressed the need for constant monitoring and internal protocols: “Cyber insurance alone is not enough.” Instead, companies must have clear crisis response plans and proactive risk management. As others noted, even the best systems can be breached. Knowing your critical systems, maintaining off-site backups, and having team roles clearly defined in a crisis are essential.The panel agreed that cyberattacks are now a professionalized global industry, often more advanced than the companies they target.

“Hackers are businesses. They are structured, strategic, and financially motivated.”

Cyber policies today offer more tailored protection, covering extortion costs and business interruption, but the panel emphasized prevention as the true value. AI can help improve threat detection and claim resolution speed, if used wisely. However, poor data and lack of consistent metrics remain key challenges.

On day two, the first panelists to take the floor were moderated by Matt Kelly (TransRe) and led by Emmanuel Munoz (Chubb), Teresa Yanez (GMX),Hilton Gomes Dos Santos (Swiss Re), Eduardo Ribeiro (Crawford Brazil), and Esther Rodriguez (Everest Re).

These visionary and influential speakers explored the growing complexities of professional civil liability in the insurance and reinsurance industry. The conversation focused on legal frameworks, claim trends, product development, and cross-border challenges, with particular attention to the roles of direct action, regulatory shifts, and judicial behavior in the region.

The expansion of “acción directa” (direct action claim) in markets like Mexico and Puerto Rico featured, where third-party claimants can sue insurers directly without involving the insured. While this expedites legal action, it also increases risk exposure for insurers. In Puerto Rico, claims may end in court or be settled, with a need to approach these cases empathetically and strategically to minimize legal and reputational damage.

The audience raised concerns about outdated or overly generic policy wordings, especially in countries like Argentina, where inflation and evolving risks make it difficult for policies to remain adequate. The panel explained how in Argentina, the legal system often allows judgments that exceed coverage limits, creating exposure for both insureds and insurers. The group stressed the importance of updating policy language and anticipating how judges may interpret unclear or outdated clauses.

The panel detailed recent changes in Brazil’s insurance legislation, which now more explicitly defines obligations and responsibilities in claims handling. These changes bring new challenges but also opportunities for clarity and modernization. The panel pointed out the operational benefits of fixed reporting deadlines and the trend toward insuring third parties more explicitly to mitigate liability.

The panel delved into how liability plays out in construction projects, where multiple overlapping policies (claims-made, occurrence-based, project-specific) create ambiguity. A speaker emphasized that the policy with the most specific language usually applies, and adjusters must now be more technically informed to resolve these layered claims effectively.

Several panelists noted the rise in social inflation, where public perception, media, and social factors influence claim values, and how this is transforming the litigation environment. Courts are awarding higher moral damages, often driven by sensational media coverage or shifts in public opinion. In response, panelists highlighted the importance of proactive claims management and early intervention to avoid drawn-out litigation.

The panel also explored the roles of brokers and the importance of risk education. A panelist noted that clients often rely heavily on brokers, who may lack deep technical understanding. Audience members commented on the difficulty of communicating cancellations or policy limits post-event. The panel agreed that closer collaboration between insurers, brokers, and insureds is essential to navigate complex claim scenarios, especially in high-stakes industries like healthcare and construction.

Moderated by Marcos R. López (QLDG), the next session brought sharp insight from José Miguel Varela (Advanta), Ricardo Espinosa (R&G Espinosa), Fernando Bustos (Crawford Mexico), Juan Guillermo Uribe (RTS), Angelo Hettich (McLarens Chile), and Luis Herrera (Charles Taylor), who tackled the evolving complexities of BI in Latin America’s energy and industrial sectors.

“The brilliance of Juan and Alex creating this space ten years ago deserves recognition.”

Panelist

Some key takeaways were that as risks grow more interconnected and recovery periods stretch longer, insurers and insureds alike must revisit old policy assumptions, because traditional BI coverage may no longer be enough.

A major focus was on the unique challenges facing power producers in the region. From forced pipeline ruptures to shifting supply priorities due to climate change, the speakers explored how Latin American energy companies are paid not just for energy produced, but also for their power availability, creating complications when that availability disappears. One of the biggest issues arises when energy is pre-sold at favorable rates, but failure to deliver leads to expensive buybacks and major losses.

The two usual types of policies were discussed: English and American form. Both can fall short when recovery periods extend far beyond two years, or when policy definitions aren’t clearly stated. Panelists emphasized the need for more precise wording around deductibles, especially when the impact of early downtime ripples well into future months.

Extraordinary expenses were also a hot topic. What happens when one damaged production line affects the sales of interconnected products? How far can mitigation costs go before they exceed policy limits or even create new losses? The panel discussed where to draw the line between reasonable risk and unnecessary exposure, especially when fast decisions must be made to retain customers or avoid a chain reaction of logistical issues.

Mining claims added another layer of complexity. A case was shared where an earthquake flooded leaching ponds, halting operations even though mineral extraction continued. The question arose: who absorbs losses when material is extracted but not yet refined? The session concluded with a deeper dive into policy gaps around fixed operational costs, vague deductible definitions, and the need for more flexible, context-aware clauses.

Panelists Christian Hanna (Advanta Global), R. Eduardo Machuca (Swiss Re Corporate Solutions), Mariano Sidoti (Chubb) and Moderator Juan López-Santini (QLDG) explored the evolving landscape of renewable energy in Latin America, highlighting both its immense potential and the technical, environmental, and insurance challenges that accompany it. The discussion offered a comprehensive overview of various renewable energy sources, operational risks, and coverage gaps that insurers and reinsurers are facing as the region rapidly transitions toward cleaner energy alternatives.

The panel opened by noting the strong growth of renewable energy across Latin America. They emphasized that the Caribbean still relies heavily on thermal sources, even as the broader region accelerates the adoption of hydro, solar, and wind technologies. The transition to more nonconventional renewable energy is expected to increase and stabilize overall prices across the region.

A panelist outlined key technical challenges with solar energy. While countries like Mexico benefit from high solar exposure, the installation and maintenance of photovoltaic systems are hindered by harsh environments, which degrade equipment quickly. He explained the components of solar systems and how exposure to heat, sand, and hail introduces significant risk. The panel added that despite being a “clean” energy, solar infrastructure still affects ecosystems and wildlife, particularly where mirrors and lenses concentrate light and heat.

Hydroelectricity remains a major energy source, though panelists pointed out the increasing risks from drought. Wind energy was discussed as more efficient than solar in some contexts, but difficult to recycle after its lifecycle and disruptive to wildlife. A speaker emphasized that offshore wind farms present additional challenges due to complex logistics and repair timelines. The panel added that new storage technologies, such as battery systems (BESS), are promising but prone to fire hazards, complicating their insurability.

The panel also addressed complex claims scenarios. A speaker explained that upgrades following a loss (e.g., installing a newer part) can raise questions about cost allocation. The panel referenced a case in Mexico involving a hybrid energy system on an island that caught fire, highlighting issues of compatibility and the lack of insurance. Across all technologies, delays in repair and resource unavailability significantly increase losses and create complications for adjusters.

​​The role of manufacturers was also a concern. It was noted that insurers are often locked into the conditions set by technology providers, which makes it difficult to challenge or renegotiate terms. The panel warned about manufacturers releasing products that are not yet fully tested or certified. These gaps can lead to unforeseen breakdowns, liability disputes, and coverage disputes, particularly as many technologies are still in early adoption phases.

The discussion concluded with growing concerns around policy wording, fraud, and geopolitical influence in claims processes. Audience members described how homeowner policies and commercial property claims often fall into gray areas due to ambiguous language and technological limitations. Several panelists emphasized the importance of updating policy definitions to match the realities of new risks.

In closing remarks, the panel urged insurers and reinsurers to prepare for increasing instability in energy infrastructure across Latin America. The importance of learning from recent cases and staying ahead of emerging risks such as blackout scenarios and equipment theft was underscored. The panel called for improved collaboration, clearer contracts, and better understanding of evolving technologies in order to mitigate losses and strengthen coverage solutions.

Session 8 on Natural Risks was moderated by Felipe Ramírez (McLarens Latin America). This high-stakes session brought together key voices from across the re/insurance ecosystem: Pablo González (Swiss Re), Daniel Cunha (Chubb Brazil), Cristiane Abdala (Zurich), Oscar Rueda (Munich Re), and Daniel Curi (Hannover Re).Together they examined the growing impact of natural catastrophes across Latin America and the urgent need to close the region’s massive protection gap.

Speakers began with sobering numbers: from 2005 to 2024, Latin America suffered $369.1 billion in total losses from natural disasters, but only $96.7 billion was insured. That 74% protection gap underscores a structural vulnerability. With CAT events increasing in intensity and frequency, the panel focused on how both public and private actors can move from reaction to resilience.

The conversation centered on four emblematic events, beginning with Hurricane Otis, which struck Acapulco as a Category 5 storm with devastating speed and intensity. Speakers discussed how the storm revealed deep issues in residential coverage. Some condo buildings had policies at the building level, others at the individual unit level, and many had none at all. Without prior inspections or clear geolocation data, it became nearly impossible to determine pre-loss conditions or accurately assess repair scopes which fueled disputes and delays.

Although there was poor preparation (public alert systems and strategies) for the flooding in Valencia, Spain, they were cited as a good example for effective public-private cooperation in the aftermath. The CCS reported receiving more than 138,000 claims from the flood event, spanning multiple lines of business. They estimated that they would cover 90-95% of the claims in the region, amounting to approximately €3.5 billion. The panel highlighted how this approach offers a roadmap for Latin America, especially when contrasted with recent failures in widespread insurance coverage after catastrophic events.

From there, discussion shifted to Brazil’s historic floods in Rio Grande do Sul. This was the largest CAT loss in the country’s history, affecting 94% of the region and generating $17.5 billion in damage, yet only 10% of losses were insured. The panel noted that just one of five floodgates was opened during the event, demonstrating once again how lack of coordination between insurers and public authorities worsens outcomes. Despite the scale of destruction, the market has moved quickly: $1 billion USD in indemnities has already been paid, and insurers acted proactively. They have called brokers, evaluated satellite images, and launched war rooms to address claims without waiting for lawsuits or government directives.

The wildfire situation in California and its parallels in Latin America added a stark warning. In 2025 alone, Los Angeles County saw over 16,000 affected structures and more than 57,000 acres burned. A level of destruction unmatched in recent memory. These events raise tough questions about extended extra expenditures, code upgrades, and damage separation, particularly when loss adjusters face blocked access and severe logistical hurdles.

In every case, the panel pointed to underestimation of risk, inflation, and of recovery complexity. Governments lacked preparation and communication. Insurers underestimated the concentration of value and the rising costs tied to both social and economic inflation. The consensus? Saying a scenario is “uninsurable” is no longer acceptable. Instead, the challenge is to innovate. To collaborate across public and private sectors, recalibrate risk models, and evolve coverage to meet the moment.

One speaker summarized it best:

“The goal is not just to make money. It’s to help society recover. And that starts with refusing to be afraid of the next catastrophe.”

The third day was focused on different aspects of construction-related programs. Moderator Juan López-Santini (QLDG) and panelists Roberto Quintana (QLDG), Iain Corbett (Kennedys), Álvaro Trueba(Chubb), and Leonardo Maksimyuk (Starr Re) focused on the complexities of Construction All Risks (CAR) and Advanced Loss of Profits (ALOP) insurance in Latin America.

The discussion explored how infrastructure projects are increasingly exposed to social, environmental, financial, and legal risks and how insurers are navigating evolving challenges in underwriting, policy wording, and claims handling.

The panel emphasized the necessity of CAR insurance in protecting large-scale public and private infrastructure investments, particularly in a region like Latin America where political instability, environmental threats, and fluctuating tariffs can jeopardize timelines and budgets. A speaker explained that CAR covers physical damage risks as well as those related to design and technology. However, coverage relies heavily on accurate information and clear understanding of project scope.

The panel discussed the importance of trial phases in large projects such as energy and pulp plants, noting that true risk exposure often emerges during testing. Social risks can also significantly delay construction by blocking access to labor or materials. These disruptions, though indirect, often aren’t accounted for in traditional critical path evaluations.

The panel addressed frequent exclusions in CAR policies: defective design or materials, terrorism, strikes, and intentional acts. Notably, only consequences of defects, not the defects themselves, are typically covered. A speaker added that negligence must rise to gross negligence (e.g., ignoring an engineer’s warnings) to qualify for certain exclusions. A speaker highlighted ongoing debates over how “damage” is defined in policy wording. Without a clear definition, legal interpretations vary widely, leading to inconsistent claims outcomes.

The distinction between Delay in Start-Up (DSU) and ALOP was examined. These coverages go beyond lost profits and may include debt service, guaranteed costs, and penalties. The challenge lies in linking losses directly to a covered event and in gathering sufficient documentation, such as project timelines, financial records, and delay analysis, to support the claim. As a panelist noted, sometimes decisions must be made in the absence of complete facts.

The panel detailed what underwriters assess in complex projects: contractor experience, supplier reliability, route criticality, guarantees, and penalty clauses. Red flags include missing geological data, unclear project alignment, or inexperienced contractors. In such cases, underwriters may request draft contracts or additional documentation before proceeding.

Panelists agreed that pressure to reserve early for large losses often clashes with the slow pace of fact-finding. Moreover, translation issues in policy wording and lack of standardized definitions across jurisdictions further complicate claims. A speaker noted that courts are now widening the interpretation of “damage,” which can both help and hinder insurers.

Moderated by Juan López-Santini (QLDG), the final session featured industry leaders Joaquín Buján (Chubb),Javier Guardia (Liberty International), Juan Sebastian Mejía (Munich Re), Alberto Faraggi (Charles Taylor), and Pablo Gonzalez (Swiss Re), who explored the complex interplay between hydro and thermal power generation and Business Interruption (BI) coverage across Latin America and the Caribbean.

The conversation began with a regional energy snapshot: hydropower plays a dominant role in South America (72% renewable), while Mexico and Central America reach 47%, and the Caribbean lags behind at 21%. The panel highlighted emerging innovations like HD hydro tech and floating solar hybrids. On the thermal side, technologies like geothermal, biomass, and solar thermal were noted.

Common risk factors across both sectors include insured value discrimination, seasonality, price volatility, regulatory shifts, latent defects, and high interdependence among systems and contracts. Panelists outlined the three main revenue streams for energy producers: energy dispatch, capacity payments (potencia), and auxiliary services (like frequency regulation and spinning reserves). When any of these are interrupted due to natural disasters, structural failures, operational errors, or design flaws, BI losses can be severe and difficult to measure.

One illustrative case study involved a theoretical company and insurance scenario where torrential rains caused equipment-wide damage, leading to a 48-month interruption and $20M in losses. Energy prices skyrocketed 400%, and temporary replacements using gas turbines introduced further complexity. The policy in question included gross earnings and a volatility clause, but gaps remained around interim payments, market price impacts, and defining coverage scope for downstream effects.

The speakers stressed the murky lines around contingent BI, especially in cases where a third-party becomes a de facto supplier due to environmental flow obligations. Policy interpretation often determines whether claims are paid or denied. However vague wording about “suppliers” or “service disruptions” can either protect the insurer or open a path to resolution, depending on how the conversation is framed.

Casualty insights added another layer: insurance must account for unregistered or informal communities affected by energy projects. Insurers may legally limit liability, but governments often intervene in defense of public welfare. The session highlighted the tension between regulatory frameworks and real-world expectations in disaster response.

Another hypothetic case focused on a gas-to-energy plant with turbines under lease agreements. A low-pressure compressor blade failure caused major damage. Due to delays at the U.S.-based manufacturer’s repair facilities and lack of replacement units, downtime was projected at over six months. The plant had a 12-month gross profit policy with a 110% volatility clause, but challenges emerged around the lack of income stream segmentation, contract liabilities (take-or-pay gas supply), and whether losses triggered Increased Cost of Working (ICoW) claims.

In closing, the panelists emphasized cross-functional collaboration, particularly between claims and underwriting teams, and the urgent need to refine products to reflect today’s operational realities. In an energy landscape this volatile and interdependent, precision in policy language isn’t just helpful, it’s essential.