The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance—Issues and Practice is publishing its first special issue on microinsurance. This is a bold and timely step; bold, as we still grapple with the basic question whether microinsurance is simply a low-cost variant of traditional insurance, or whether it is an altogether different paradigm, founded on other hypotheses and operated with dissimilar business processes. And timely, because microinsurance now features in many professional conferences on insurance, where hundreds of participants are eager to gain and share knowledge on this topic. The Geneva Papers, it is hoped, can add to the theoretical analysis or empirical evidence on microinsurance through the publication of five articles in this special issue, and disseminate some novel insights. Two of the five papers included in this special issue deal with the demand for microinsurance. The first, by Turner et al., explores a topical question on the mind of many practitioners, whether personal loss experience generates demand for microinsurance. The authors analyse this question by reference to the severe floods that occurred in Pakistan in 2010. Based on household data that the authors collected on actual exposure to flood damages, additional to information they collected through a series of simulation exercises in which individuals responded to hypothetical flood damages, they reported that individuals who were actually affected by a severe flood expressed a significantly higher propensity to insure than non-affected individuals; and that personal losses were more strongly associated with enhanced demand than observations of losses incurred by other people nearby, even though such observations of loss by others enhanced the demand for flood insurance significantly as well. Interestingly, people who received assistance to rebuild their house or replace livestock after the flood were significantly less interested in insuring themselves against flood losses, but assistance to recover other possessions of lesser value caused less dampening of demand for insurance. The study population in Pakistan was predominantly Muslim, so the authors also examined whether doubts about the compatibility of insurance with sharia (Islamic law) could have a weakening effect on demand, and concluded that this was not the case. On the other hand, simulated exposure to flood damage (observed in the experimental design group sessions) had little effect on strengthening demand for insurance. Turner offers valuable evidence that flood loss experience that is not compensated by relief or charity leads to strong demand for insurance.