PEOPLE and mobility RISK
A physical and psychological impact
People are the most critical asset to any organisation. Companies bear a legal and moral obligation to protect their personnel from conflict risks, which include threats to their physical, mental, and financial wellbeing. The nature of these risks will vary according to the conflict, but may include exposure to warfare, violence, crossfire, and kidnap and extortion at the direction of foreign states. All of these carry a high potential of threat to life, and typically impose a significant psychological toll on employees, in the form of stress, uncertainty, and potential grief. The impact of these strains may continue long after the immediate risk to life has passed.
These threats are more pronounced than ever before. As organisations adopt more globalised operating models – with internationally dispersed teams, cross-border assignments, and mobile talent – their exposure to geographically diverse risks has increased significantly. The Middle East exemplifies this trend, having seen a marked increase in expatriate labour over the past decade as Gulf economies transition towards a more service-oriented model. But recent escalation within the region also serves to highlight the vulnerability of any large financial district, and the need for employers operating in what were typically classed as low-risk locations to have a robust crisis management plan in place.
Geopolitical instability can also lead to secondary sources of risk. For instance, economic uncertainty arising from events such as conflict, revolution, or coup d’etat can place greater financial pressure on local populations, increasing the incidence of extortive crimes. This increases the security risk for both travelling populations and any employees based in-region.
The challenge of displacement
How organisations respond to these threats is key, and is itself an operational challenge. Employers may need to provide mental health support services for employees affected by conflict, or to facilitate and communicate short-term changes to working patterns. But perhaps the most complex challenge is that of displacement. When conflict escalates, employers may be required to charter private transportation, engage global security contractors, or secure temporary visas on behalf of foreign nationals looking to escape the immediate area. This is not straightforward, and requires close coordination with diplomatic or military authorities.
In reality, the optimal solution will likely be context-dependent: the protocol to evacuate employees from a mainland European nation such as Ukraine, for example, would differ substantially from that required to evacuate from Taiwan, an island nation with limited geographical airspace. The nationality of the employees (and their dependents) in need of assistance will also dictate the best course of action, including whether an employee is a local national – someone working for a multinational organisation and living within their country of origin – or an expatriate. Alternatively, some employees simply may not wish to evacuate. For these individuals, employers’ short-term focus will likely centre around securing shelter in a nearby safe location, along with medical, financial, and legal support.
In all these scenarios, organisations’ ability to respond effectively is contingent on the availability and quality of data – including employee work and home locations, as well as accurate and timely intelligence on the nature of events on the ground. In practice, this information may be fragmented, delayed, or difficult to verify. Organisations must therefore determine not only what is happening, but which sources to rely on, how to interpret conflicting reports, and how to translate that information into action. This often requires coordination with external partners, including travel management companies and security providers.
The challenges continue after any evacuation has taken place. If employees are dispersed across multiple locations and time zones, employers may be required to provide shelter, financial assistance, and access to local healthcare services – not only a significant operational task, but a substantial financial undertaking. In these circumstances, maintaining consistent protection across different locations becomes increasingly difficult, particularly where existing insurance arrangements are tied to a single country of residence or operating environment. This may be further compounded by regulatory constraints on insurance provision across different jurisdictions. In so-called ‘non-admitted’ markets, such as China, insurers are restricted from providing cover via foreign policies, requiring locally compliant solutions.
As conditions change, gaps in coverage may emerge precisely when support is most needed. Employees who are temporarily relocated, or who remain in-region under deteriorating conditions, may fall outside the scope of existing policies. While organisations may attempt to arrange local or short-term solutions, doing so is often time-sensitive, administratively complex, and costly. Even where broader cover is in place, insurers may reassess exposure as a situation escalates. In practice, this can lead to restrictions, exclusions, or the withdrawal of cover altogether, further increasing uncertainty for employers seeking to maintain continuity of support.
Insurance without borders
Recent developments in the Middle East have challenged assumptions around geographic risk, with locations such as the UAE now viewed through the lens of proximity to conflict. This has been accompanied by the evacuation of large numbers of people on a cross-country scale that hasn’t been seen since the Arab Spring. The high potential costs of these large-scale movements are causing employers to reassess the limit adequacy of evacuation risk transfer solutions. The nature of the Middle East conflict has also raised questions within the Accident and Health Insurance market around the distinction between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ war, and the implications this has on coverage.
These same dynamics can also influence claims patterns, particularly where access to healthcare and workforce location shifts materially. For example, a reduction in workforce presence in markets with high historic healthcare costs may lead to lower utilisation. In time, this may feed through into how insurers assess and price risk in the region.
KEY COVERAGES
International Employee Assistance Programme (iEAP)
A confidential employer-sponsored benefit that provides global workforces and their dependants with 24/7 access to mental health counseling, crisis support, and practical guidance for personal or work-related challenges.
International Private Medical Insurance (IPMI)
Provides high-quality medical coverage for individuals, couples, and families permanently or semi-permanently living overseas. Unlike standard travel insurance, which is only for short-term trips and emergency-only care, IPMI acts as a comprehensive, long-term health insurance plan that follows you across borders.
International Life Insurance
A global life insurance policy designed for people living and working outside their home countries. It ensures that if an individual passes away overseas, a lump sum payment is paid to their dependents to provide financial support, helping cover living expenses and repatriation of remains.
Specialist Accident & Health (A&H) Insurance
Bespoke policies designed for people travelling to or based in high-risk locations including war zones, or carrying out hazardous occupations. It primarily covers accidental death and disablement, though it can also include emergency medical evacuation.
Special Crime (K&R) Insurance
These policies cover a breadth of people-related security risks including kidnap, extortion, and detention providing access to response consultancy advice and victim support and psychiatric care following an incident. There is also the option to include emergency security evacuation, a coverage with no war exclusions which can sit alongside A&H policies.