Home  Journals  National Interests: Priorities and Security  11(356) - 2017 November

Funded pension systems: Evidence from the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden

Vol. 13, Iss. 11, NOVEMBER 2017

Article PDF Version

Received: 31 August 2017

Received in revised form: 26 September 2017

Accepted: 14 October 2017

Available online: 29 November 2017

Subject Heading: SOCIAL SERVICES AND EDUCATION

JEL Classification: J32, H55, I38

Pages: 2152–2165

https://doi.org/10.24891/ni.13.11.2152

Importance The article discusses the practice of using funded pension schemes in the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden.
Objectives I perform a comparative analysis of methods that exist in OECD countries to involve citizens into mandatory/quasi-mandatory pension plans. I review the mandatory/quasi-mandatory format of pension plan formation. The article also presents my analysis and summary of the relevant experiences in the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark.
Methods To accomplish the objective, I use information, analytical materials and laws of OECD countries.
Results Analyzing the best foreign practices of promoting the pension plans among the population, I provide the scientific and methodological rationale how the best foreign practices can be used in the Russian Federation to involve the population into mandatory/quasi-mandatory pension schemes. The article presents my proposals for promoting non-governmental pension plans in the Russian Federation.
Conclusions and Relevance The quasi-mandatory model of pension plans can be used only if it proves beneficial in terms of public involvement, coverage, efficiency, distribution of the risk exposure and costs.

Keywords: quasi-mandatory pension schemes, mandatory insurance, OECD, individual pension capital

References:

1. Lyashok V.Yu., Nazarov V.S., Oreshkin M.S. [Factors of pension growth in modern Russia]. Nauchno-issledovatel'skii finansovyi institut. Finansovyi zhurnal = Research Financial Institute. Finance Journal, 2016, no. 1, pp. 7–21. (In Russ.)
2. Antolin P., Payet S., Yermo J. Coverage of Private Pension Systems: Evidence and Policy Options. OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions, 2012, no. 20. URL: Link
3. Sørensen O.B., Billig A., Lever M., Menard J.-C., Settergren O. The Interaction of Pillars in Multi‑Pillar Pension Systems: A Comparison of Canada, Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden. International Social Security Review, 2016, vol. 69, iss. 2, pp. 53–84. URL: Link
4. Tumanyants K.A., Antonenko I.V., Antosik L.V., Shlevkova T.V. [Pension savings investments: Government or private sector?]. Nauchno-issledovatel'skii finansovyi institut. Finansovyi zhurnal = Research Financial Institute. Finance Journal, 2017, no. 1, pp. 91–102. (In Russ.)
5. Nijman T. Pension Reform in the Netherlands: Attractive Options for Other Countries? Bankers, Markets & Investors, 2014, iss. 128, pp. 36–45.
6. Lavrenova E.S., Belomyttseva O.S. [Efficiency of pension accruals management in non-State pension funds]. Nauchno-issledovatel'skii finansovyi institut. Finansovyi zhurnal = Research Financial Institute. Finance Journal, 2016, no. 3, pp. 115–125. (In Russ.)
7. Kangas O., Lundberg U., Ploug N. Three Routes to Pension Reform: Politics and Institutions in Reforming Pensions in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. Social Policy & Administration, 2010, vol. 44, iss. 3, pp. 265–284. URL: Link

View all articles of issue

ISSN 2311-875X (Online)
ISSN 2073-2872 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 20, Iss. 4 April 2024

Archive