Most proposals on possible climate risk insurance architecture emphasise prevention and insurance, but the AOSIS proposal also had a rehabilitation component. "The AOSIS proposal ... has a better chance of acceptance," noted Koko Warner, head of Social Vulnerability and Environmental Migration department at the UN University Institute for Environment and Human Security Section (UNU-EHS), who also presented the other big insurance proposal at the conference on behalf of the Munich Climate Insurance Initiative (MCII).  The MCII was set up in 2005 by UNU-EHS, Germanwatch, a North-South watchdog initiative, IIASA, the Munich Re Foundation, the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, which researches ecological, geophysical and socioeconomic aspects of worldwide climatic change, the European Climate Forum, a platform for joint science-based climate change studies, the Tyndall Centre, which researches sustainable responses to climate change, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), focusing on sustainable energy development, the World Bank and independent experts.

The Prevention Pillar of the MCII proposal makes reducing human and economic losses its top priorities, and includes carefully designed incentives for preventing or reducing risk. The proposal calls for comprehensive risk assessments across vulnerable countries, which could uncover unforeseen possibilities for risk reduction and help lay the groundwork for risk transfer systems.
             The Insurance pillar has two tiers: first, a Climate Insurance Pool that would absorb a pre-defined proportion of high-level risk of disaster loss among the vulnerable; second, a Climate Insurance Assistance Facility that would provide technical support and other forms of assistance, allowing public-private insurance systems to provide cover for the middle layers of risk in these countries.
             The AOSIS proposal suggested that rich countries pay for the insurance from the Adaptation Fund. The Fund, which has yet to become operational, is expected to raise money from a levy of about two percent on credits generated by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), set up under the Kyoto Protocol.

The mechanism allows industrialised countries to earn and trade emissions credits by implementing projects in either developed countries or developing ones, and put the credits towards meeting their greenhouse gas emission targets.
             The MCII proposal suggested that vulnerable countries pool their risks, which would cost them less.
             As the conference reached its last day, there was still dissatisfaction over the Adaptation Fund: developing countries were unhappy with the management of disbursement and the amount of money available, while sympathetic rich countries like Germany said current resources for the Adaptation Fund were inadequate.