I suspect that it is related to the unit fund (so if you could post a picture of that, I can confirm my suspicions).
My suspicion is that it is accounting for the fund value that the company could earn from a surrender. It's common for companies to offer surrender values slightly lower than the fund value of assets as the insurer will need to cover expenses associated with a surrender.
So the insurer would need to account for this in this calculation. If I am right, the calculation would be:
Fund value at the end of the year*(amount paid to policyholder which in this case is 0%*premium payable for year 1)*probability of surrender
And, as the years go by, the 0% changes as outlined in the question. It is a negative because this money would go from the unit fund to the non-unit fund as the insurer could then use it to offset the other benefits (like death benefits) that they offer (or just cover expenses of surrenders which are assumed 0 in this question).