There's a paper that proposes long term property insurance, which makes it seem the one year contract is the standard? http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/risk/library/J2010(JIR)_DJ,HK,...
If your neighborhood floods, that's a bunch of insurance claims, but if your city floods, that's potentially a bailout, bankruptcy, or contract exemption for the insurer. (In some cases, like sea level rise in Florida, there's already an understanding that the state is subsidizing insurance that wouldn't be available otherwise.)
So I could definitely imagine some value for a buyer-focused service that carries information about all known risk, not just covered/unsubsidized risk.
Otherwise, because of future known risks, it would be untenable.
Also, many formerly vacant parcels of land known to be in the likely paths of hurricanes, have become subdivisions.
I guess that is why flood insurance is a separate and optional policy?
We need to start controlled abandonment of those areas already many decades early - starting from not investing more into building there.
This is a very cheap way of massive scale disaster preparedness: not having people where the disaster happens.