.svg){kind=icon}
.svg){kind=icon}
New technologies such as battery energy storage systems, floating solar projects and AI data centre infrastructure often face closer scrutiny from insurers and lenders due to a lack of records and loss data. Marsh can assess design assumptions, fire and natural hazard resilience, operational controls and loss scenarios — helping project teams identify and address gaps before insurer or lender review.
The risks that shape your insurance outcomes start long before renewal
For organisations building or operating complex assets in Asia, risk is rarely static. Design gaps that go undetected early become costly retrofits, project delays, and compliance exposures later. In fact, up to 70% of rework in construction and engineering projects stems from design-induced errors. Unresolved design issues can also create regulatory exposure and drive higher ongoing insurance costs that compound well beyond the construction phase.
At renewal, the pressure rises. Insurers are applying greater technical scrutiny to complex facilities, prior losses, and natural catastrophe exposures. This means that submissions that fail to meet requirements often result in higher premiums, reduced capacity, or unfavourable terms.
The deeper problem is what happens at the insurer table itself. When the only engineering voice in the room belongs to the underwriter, organisations have little basis to challenge assumptions, counter technical clauses, or present their own risk narrative.
Marsh’s risk engineering team helps you close that gap. We prepare underwriter-grade evidence, validate exposure data, and quantify loss scenarios so you can lead the conversation at the insurer table.
How can Marsh’s risk engineering solutions support your business at every stage?
1) Pre-construction: Identify design risks before they are built in
Design issues are significantly harder and more expensive to resolve once they are embedded in a project. Marsh's property risk engineering design review identifies gaps early — when changes are still practical and cost-effective — across:
- Building features and construction design.
- Fire and life safety systems.
- Natural hazard resilience and process hazards.
- Insurer and lender technical expectations.
For data centres, renewable energy projects, infrastructure developments, and high-tech manufacturing facilities, early design review helps address potential obstacles before they affect project timelines or insurance outcomes.
2) Specialist modelling: Test complex risk scenarios with confidence
For high-hazard facilities where standard assessments fall short, Marsh uses computational fluid dynamics modelling to simulate fire, smoke, explosion, toxic gas dispersion and ventilation scenarios. The result is a data-led view of how complex risks behave in real environments which supports better design decisions and more defensible insurance submissions for semiconductor cleanrooms, data centres, battery energy storage systems, and chemical storage facilities.
3) Exposure data and loss modelling: Defend your limits
Inaccurate or unvalidated asset data can weaken your position at renewal. Marsh validates asset data and models potential loss scenarios — including estimated maximum loss, business interruption exposures and natural catastrophe risks — giving project owners a clearer, more defensible basis for evaluating deductibles, limits, retentions and premium trade-offs. Where needed, our engineers can also run valuations and risk finance optimisation to help determine the most efficient combination of retention, limits and premium for your programme.
4) Pre-renewal: Build your case before insurers set the terms
Marsh provides property underwriting surveys that give insurers the technical information they need to assess exposure, coverage and pricing on terms you have helped shape. Our risk engineers:
- Conduct site surveys and review key documents.
- Advocate to underwriters on behalf of clients to improve their risk profiles
- Compile findings into a property underwriting report.
- Review policy wordings to identify coverage gaps or misaligned clauses.
Your team can then walk into renewal discussions with evidence that explains what has improved, where exposures remain and how mitigation actions affect the overall risk picture.
Case study: How risk evidence gave a floating solar project stronger footing with lenders
The problem: A lender required independent assurance on the estimated maximum loss for a floating solar construction project. A prior loss estimate had raised questions, and the lender needed a clearer view of how natural catastrophe exposures and design considerations could affect the project's risk profile.
The solution: Marsh reviewed hazard exposures, proposed design features, and risk registers across construction and operations. Through collaborative workshops with the client and project stakeholders, our engineers identified gaps, aligned teams on critical risks, and reviewed mitigation priorities across the full project lifecycle.
The outcome: The client gained a structured, evidence-based view of the project's risk profile with actionable recommendations to strengthen risk controls. The work provided stronger technical evidence for both financing and insurance discussions, giving the lender the confidence it needed.
Case study: How fire modelling gave a semiconductor manufacturer defensible insurance limit
The problem: A semiconductor manufacturer needed a more data-led basis for setting fire insurance limits for its cleanroom operations. The business had previously relied on experience rather than engineering evidence, which made it harder to justify sums insured or negotiate confidently at renewal.
The solution: Marsh used fire dynamics simulation to model a worst-case cleanroom fire and smoke spread scenario, estimating the maximum foreseeable loss and determining appropriate insurance limits for the facility.
The outcome: The client gained clear, modelling-backed evidence, including estimated maximum foreseeable losses (MFL), to support fire insurance decisions and a more defensible basis for renewal discussions — alongside practical safety recommendations to reduce risk going forward.
Why Marsh?
The largest in-region team in Asia with sector specialists who speak your industry's language
With more than 90 risk engineers across Asia, Marsh brings dedicated sector specialists into insurance discussions across high-tech and semiconductor manufacturing, data centres, renewable energy, energy and power, construction and infrastructure, and pulp and paper. Local language capabilities across the region ensure sector-specific risks are identified and communicated in terms that resonate with both clients and underwriters.
End-to-end capability from risk quantification to insurance placement
Most risk engineering firms stop at the technical findings. Marsh goes further — combining engineering assessment, loss modelling, business interruption analysis and scenario modelling into a single underwriter-grade output. Our teams also review policy wordings to identify coverage gaps and misaligned clauses, supporting clients through the full placement and renewal process, not just the engineering phase.
Client-side advocacy backed by validated data
Marsh provides a client-side engineer to present the technical case directly to underwriters — giving your team a credible advocate in the room. This is backed by validated, auditable asset data and proprietary catastrophe datasets, ensuring your risk profile is not only technically sound but defensible under scrutiny.
FAQs
A property underwriting survey assesses property risks and gathers the technical information insurers need to evaluate exposure, coverage and pricing. Marsh Risk Engineering uses site surveys, document reviews and personnel discussions to prepare underwriter-grade evidence for placement or renewal discussions.
A pre-renewal underwriting review is useful before insurance renewal, after a major asset change, following a significant loss, or when insurers need more technical information. Early preparation, typically three months before the renewal period, gives risk teams more time to close information gaps and address underwriter concerns.
Underwriters' engineers typically need clear evidence that risks have been identified, quantified, and managed before they can recommend favourable terms. Marsh’s risk engineering team prepares underwriter-grade reports, validates exposure data, models potential losses and can present technical findings directly to insurers on the client's behalf — giving your team a stronger, more credible voice in the room.