Well there's a good case for qualitative research and hands on interviews...

Disaster insurance reimagined by Jarzabkowski global.oup.com/academic/pro...

World bank and the EU have a number of excellent reports with solid data evidencing the big problem

But insurance need to be thought in relation to welfare states

renewal.org.uk/content/file...

yes this hasn't gained enough international attention. It's so important and remarkable these days that decolonisation can take place peacefully, through negotiated settlements, respect of the law, and the will of the people.

It’s going to be the Far west for insurance companies

I loved the French one both as a PhD and an examiner. It's such a unique opportunity in academic life to have a detailed, in-depth discussion, in which people give so much of their time to a junior colleague in view of taking the PhD further. It's really a celebration of the commitment of the PhD

I can't find your description of the French system, so here it is: commitee of 5 to 8 examiners, including two 'rapporteurs' who authorised the viva. PhD presents their work, then supervisors compliments, and then detailed questioning of the committee generally totalling 3 to 5 hours.

changes can happen before (in the NL and FR). It happens that an examiner refuses the viva unless changes are implemented though it is rare and a sign of a supervision problem or 'politics' (disagreements between supervisors and examiners), but the role of the supervisor is to prevent this

Or just overwork? is this really necessary?