The study by the UN International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) said the figure, representing only direct losses, was more accurate than traditional tallies.
Most tallies "just represent the picture from internationally-reported disasters, the big disasters which get into the headlines," said Andrew Maskrey, author of the UNISDR's latest Global Assessment Report.
"If you add in all the nationally-reported disasters, which don't get into the international media and the international databases, our impression is that losses are about 50 per cent higher than is currently being reported, and losses are going up rapidly," he said.
Businesses have been outsourcing to disaster-prone locations without taking adequate catastrophe-proofing precautions, a move which could be potentially costly in case of a disaster, he noted.
More From This Section
In 2011, for example, rains swamped factories located on a flood plain in Thailand, hitting a plant that supplied the global auto sector and thereby halting output in countries such as the United States, Britain, China and India.
"This has obviously enabled a number of global businesses to become competitive, more profitable, more productive, but in doing so, this has meant there's been an awful lot of investment in capital assets in highly hazard-prone locations."
Unthinking investment in risk regions could be dubbed "toxic assets", he added.
And any damage could have long-term effects, he added.
"Say your business does stop, you're out of business for two or three months, your customers are likely to migrate to an alternative business, skilled workers may go elsewhere, your market share may go down and your reputation may suffer," he added.
The report showed that even firms with risk-management departments tend to frame the issue in terms of political and market threats, currency fluctuations, or litigation.