As deployments to conflict and crisis zones increase, so too does the legal and reputational exposure for organisations sending personnel abroad.  This article explores how the insurance market is adapting to heightened scrutiny around duty of care, particularly in jurisdictions like the UK, where legal frameworks increasingly intersect with international risk standards. 

Humanitarian, development, and media organisations frequently operate in volatile regions such as Ukraine, the West Bank, and the Sahel. These missions are often short-term, multinational, and fluid, yet insurance policies can remain static, built on legacy structures that assume global cover equals global protection. In practice, many of these policies exclude key exposures or provide only minimal support in the areas where protection is most needed.

This assumption is under increasing scrutiny. Real-world events have exposed gaps in policy definitions, limitations around ‘journey continuation’ clauses, and a lack of explicit inclusion for national staff. More importantly, the burden of duty of care is shifting from moral obligation to formal legal liability, especially where planning is undocumented or support mechanisms falter under pressure.

Shift in accountability 

In the UK, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 holds organisations criminally liable if gross failures in health and safety management result in a person’s death, including, potentially, during overseas deployments. While prosecutions under the Act remain relatively rare, its existence signals a broader shift in organisational accountability. What were once theoretical legal consequences are now being taken seriously, by funders, families, and, increasingly, by courts.

Travel risk insurance has become more than a compliance checkbox. It can form a critical part of an organisation’s legal defence

In this context, travel risk insurance has become more than a compliance checkbox. It can form a critical part of an organisation’s legal defence, demonstrating that risks were anticipated, support was  resourced, and procedures were in place. However, if a policy’s scope is ambiguous, or if exclusions are poorly understood, particularly in relation to local national staff or region-specific risks, insurance may offer little protection in practice.

Documented planning

Further momentum is being driven by the increasing prominence of ISO 31030. While not a legally binding standard, it is now being referenced in legal consultations and governance reviews as a benchmark for best practice in travel risk management. It calls for structured, documented planning, a gap many organisations have yet to close.

Insurers are beginning to respond. In place of static, flat-rate policies, some underwriters are piloting modular frameworks that adjust based 
on mission duration, staff nationality, and operational geography. Greater scrutiny is also being applied to journey continuation clauses, ensuring support doesn’t lapse immediately after an evacuation. At the same time, underwriters are increasingly requesting evidence of pre-departure planning, security briefings, and 24/7 crisis support before providing competitive terms.

These changes carry practical implications for risk managers and brokers alike. Policies that do not provide for local staff inclusion, or lack a clear mechanism to add them, are rapidly falling out of favour. Likewise, insurers are beginning to favour clients with audit-ready documentation that shows risk has been properly assessed, communicated, and mitigated. In some cases, real-time threat intelligence and local response capability are being integrated into underwriting models, shifting insurance decisions closer to real-time operational risk.

The days of generic global travel insurance are ending. As legal and reputational scrutiny grows, insurance must evolve into a strategic component of international workforce governance. The organisations that succeed in this new landscape will be those that treat insurance not just as a policy, but as a signal of intent, readiness, and care.