Nr 1 (12) 2016

Social Pol­icy


Pobierz numer pobierz plik w pdf

Table of Con­tents 1/2016 Eng­lish Edition

NOTE FROM THE EDITORZofia Czepulis-Rutkowska
REFORMING PENSIONS IN CHILENicholas Barr, Peter Dia­mond

Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska (Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies, War­saw, Poland)

Zofia Czepulis-Rutkowska (Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies, War­saw, Poland)
A debate on pen­sion sys­tems and reforms is going on in Euro­pean coun­tries for recent decades. The impor­tant fac­tors affect­ing the oper­a­tion of pen­sion sys­tems include: pop­u­la­tion aging, changes in struc­ture of the econ­omy, labour mar­ket activ­ity of women and increase in glob­al­iza­tion. The main chal­lenges for pen­sion sys­tems reform are: secur­ing the ade­quacy of the ben­e­fits and the finan­cial sus­tain­abil­ity of pen­sion sys­tems. The arti­cle is pre­sent­ing the main trends in reform­ing pen­sion sys­tems in selected coun­tries, Poland among them.

Key­words: pen­sion sys­tem, reforms, trends, Europe

Barr, N. (2013), The Pen­sion sys­tem in Swe­den, Report to the Expert Group on Pub­lic Eco­nom­ics, Min­istry of Finance, Swe­den,–7.pdf [access 15.01.2016].
Buse­meyer, M.R. (2006), Mov­ing the Unmov­able: Polit­i­cal Strate­gies of Pen­sion Reform in Ger­many, Ger­man Pol­icy Stud­ies, Vol­ume Three, Num­ber 3, pp. 400–445.
Clark, G.L. (2006), The UK Occu­pa­tional Pen­sion Sys­tem in Cri­sis, in: H. Pem­ber­ton, P. Thane, N. White­side (eds.), Britain’s Pen­sion Cri­sis: His­tory and Pol­icy, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press, Oxford.
Czepulis-Rutkowska, Z. (2004), Otwarta koor­dy­nacja w zakre­sie zabez­pieczenia osób starszych [Open coor­di­na­tion in the field of pro­tec­tion of the elderly], in: Prob­lemy ubez­pieczeń społecznych: w 70-lecie ist­nienia Zakładu Ubez­pieczeń Społecznych [Prob­lems of social insur­ance: 70 anniver­sary of the Social Insur­ance Insti­tu­tion], pod kier. U. Jack­owiak, A. Malaki, Pol­skie Sto­warzysze­nie Ubez­pieczenia Społecznego, Wrocław.
Euro­pean Com­mis­sion (2012), White Paper. An agenda for ade­quate, safe and sus­tain­able pen­sions, Brus­sels 16.2.2012, COM(2012) 55/2 final, Brus­sels.
Hagen, J. (2013), A His­tory of the Swedish Pen­sion Sys­tem, Work­ing Paper 2013:7, Upp­sala Cen­ter for Fis­cal Stud­ies, [access 15.01.2015].
OECD (1988), Reform­ing Pub­lic Pen­sions, Social Pol­icy Stud­ies No 5, Paris.
Żukowski, M. (2006), Reformy emery­talne w Europie [Pen­sion reforms in Europe], Wydawnictwo Akademii Eko­nom­icznej w Poz­na­niu, Poznań.

Nicholas Barr (Pro­fes­sor, Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics, United King­dom)
Peter Dia­mond (Pro­fes­sor, Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics, United King­dom; Mass­a­chu­setts Insti­tute of Tech­nol­ogy, United State of Amer­ica)
This paper argues that expe­ri­ence in Chile demon­strates (a) prob­lems with fully-funded defined-contribution indi­vid­ual accounts that were both pre­dictable and pre­dicted, and (b) a mostly ratio­nal evo­lu­tion­ary approach to address­ing those prob­lems. Sec­tion 2 briefly out­lines the 1981 sys­tem and its prob­lems. Sec­tion 3 dis­cusses strate­gic reform in 2008 which addressed some of those prob­lems. Sec­tion 4 – the main focus of the paper – dis­cusses the unfin­ished busi­ness left by the 2008 reforms and sets out the main pro­pos­als of the 2015 Bravo Com­mis­sion, includ­ing its 58 spe­cific pro­pos­als, which com­manded major­ity sup­port from the Com­mis­sion­ers, and its three very dif­fer­ent Global Pro­pos­als, about organ­is­ing and financ­ing the sys­tem, which are highly controversial.

Key­words: Chile, pen­sion sys­tem, strate­gic reform, organ­is­ing and financ­ing the system

Attana­sio, O., Meghir, C., Mitchell, O.S. (2015), What the U.S. can learn from Chile’s retire­ment sys­tem, For­tune, Octo­ber 29, [access 27.02.2016].
Barr, N. (2001) The wel­fare state as piggy bank: infor­ma­tion, risk, uncer­tainty, and the role of the state, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.
Barr, N., Dia­mond, P. (2009), Reform­ing pen­sions: Prin­ci­ples, ana­lyt­i­cal errors and pol­icy direc­tions, “Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Review”, Vol. 62, No. 2, 2009, pp. 5–29; also in French, Ger­man and Span­ish.
Barr, N., Dia­mond, P. (2010a), Pen­sion Reform: A Short Guide, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.
Barr, N., Dia­mond, P. (2010b), Pen­sion Reform in China: Issues, Options and Rec­om­men­da­tions, [access 27.02.2016].
Bielawska, K., Chłoń-Domińczak, A., Stańko, D. (2016), Retreat from manda­tory pen­sion funds in coun­tries of the East­ern and Cen­tral Europe in result of finan­cial and fis­cal cri­sis: Causes, effects and rec­om­men­da­tions for fis­cal rules, War­saw School of Eco­nom­ics, War­saw.
Chile Pres­i­den­tial Advi­sory Com­mis­sion on the Pen­sion Sys­tem (Comisión Asesora Pres­i­den­cial sobre el Sis­tema de Pen­siones) (the Bravo Com­mis­sion) (2015a), Resumen Ejec­tivo, San­ti­ago, Chile, [access 27.02.2016].
Chile Pres­i­den­tial Advi­sory Com­mis­sion on the Pen­sion Sys­tem (the Bravo Com­mis­sion) (2015b), Informe Final, San­ti­ago, Chile, [access 27.02.2016].
Chile Pres­i­den­tial Advi­sory Coun­cil (the Mar­cel Com­mis­sion) (2006), El Dere­cho a Una Vida Digna en la Vejez: Hacia un Con­trato Social con la Pre­visión en Chile, Vol. 1 Diag­nos­tico y Prop­uesta de Reforma; Vol. 2 Con­sulta Cuidadana, San­ti­ago, Chile.
In Eng­lish: Exec­u­tive Sum­mary, [access 27.02.2016].
In Pol­ish: Reformy sys­temu emery­tal­nego: Krótki prze­wod­nik, Pol­skie Towarzystwo Eko­nom­iczne, Rof­man, R., Apella, I., Vezza, E., eds. (2015), Beyond Con­trib­u­tory Pen­sions: Four­teen Expe­ri­ences with Cov­er­age Expan­sion in Latin Amer­ica, The World Bank, Wash­ing­ton DC.
Simonovits, A. (2011), The manda­tory pri­vate pen­sion pil­lar in Hun­gary: An obit­u­ary, “Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Review”, Vol. 64, No. 3, July-September, pp. 81–98.
Soto, M. (2007), The Chilean Pen­sion Reform: 25 Years Later, “Pen­sions”, No. 12, pp. 98–106. doi:10.1057/
World Bank (1994), Avert­ing the old age cri­sis, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.

Elaine Fultz (JMF Research Asso­ciates, Philadel­phia, United States of Amer­ica)
John Fran­cis (JMF Research Asso­ciates, Philadel­phia, United States of Amer­ica)
This paper exam­ines the US pub­lic pen­sion sys­tem – its cur­rent sta­tus, achieve­ments, prob­lems and pos­si­ble futures – through the prism of the 2016 Pres­i­den­tial cam­paign. Its main source of infor­ma­tion is polit­i­cal dis­course dur­ing state pri­mary elec­tions and cau­cuses held by the Demo­c­ra­tic and Repub­li­can par­ties in the months pre­ced­ing their nom­i­na­tion of Pres­i­den­tial can­di­dates. These events cre­ate a lively mar­ket­place of ideas in which con­tenders for their party’s nom­i­na­tion com­pete for the sup­port of vot­ers, orga­ni­za­tions, and donors, who in turn seek to influ­ence the con­tenders’ plat­forms. In this elec­tion year, the range of con­tender posi­tions on pub­lic pen­sions is unusu­ally wide and they have assigned dif­fer­ent pri­or­i­ties to improv­ing pen­sion ade­quacy, restruc­tur­ing the sys­tem to address new needs, estab­lish­ing long-term finan­cial bal­ance, and who should bear the cost of the lat­ter. The paper exam­ines their dis­course in three parts. Fol­low­ing the intro­duc­tion, part I describes the US pub­lic pen­sion sys­tem and Amer­i­cans’ atti­tudes toward it. Part II presents the con­tenders’ posi­tions on pen­sions, includ­ing those to improve, main­tain, and cut ben­e­fits. Included here is dis­cus­sion of their approaches to pen­sion finance as well. Part III high­lights pat­terns in the con­tenders’ views, con­sid­ers how they would alter US pen­sion prin­ci­ples and prac­tices, and ends with some thoughts on pol­i­cy­mak­ing after the election.

Key­words: US pub­lic pen­sion sys­tem, achieve­ments, pos­si­ble futures, prob­lems, pres­i­den­tial cam­paign discourse

Buc­knor, Ch., Baker, D. (2016), Still Work­ing Hard, CEPR, Wash­ing­ton, DC.
Buffie, N. (2016), CBO projects ris­ing wage inequal­ity, CEPR Blogs, 19 Feb­ru­ary 2016, viewed at [access 1.04.2016].
But­ler, S., Ger­ma­nis, P. (1983), Achiev­ing a Lenin­ist Strat­egy for Social Secu­rity, The Cato Insti­tute, Wash­ing­ton, DC, [access 1.04.2016].
Cling­man, M., Burkhal­ter, K., Chap­lain, Ch. (2015), Replace­ment rates for hypo­thet­i­cal retired work­ers, Actu­ar­ial Note, No. 2015.9, July 2015. Office of the Chief Actu­ary, Social Secu­rity Admin­is­tra­tion, Bal­ti­more, Mary­land.
Krug­man, P. (2015), Repub­li­cans against Retire­ment, “New York Times”, 17 August.
Mor­ris­sey, M. (2016), The State of Amer­i­can Retire­ment, Eco­nomic Pol­icy Insti­tute, Wash­ing­ton, DC.
National Acad­emy of Social Insur­ance (2015), Amer­i­cans make hard choices on Social Secu­rity: A sur­vey of trade-off analy­sis, viewed at:  [access 1.04.2016].
Page, B., Bar­tels, L., Sea­wright, J. (2013), Democ­racy and the Pol­icy Pref­er­ences of Wealthy Amer­i­cans, “Per­spec­tives in Pol­i­tics”, March, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 51–73.
Whit­man, K., Schoffner, D. (2011), The Evo­lu­tion of Social Security’s Tax­able Max­i­mum, Pol­icy Brief No. 2011-02, Social Secu­rity Administration.

Maria A. Szczur  (for­mer pro­fes­sor, the War­saw Acad­emy of Finance, Poland)
The sim­i­lar­ity between Poland and Canada, in such aspects as are impor­tant from the point of view of the pen­sion sys­tem (includ­ing the per­cent­age of peo­ple at post-productive age) encour­ages to under­take an analy­sis of the pos­si­bil­ity of trans­pos­ing into Poland the solu­tions suc­cess­fully applied in the other coun­try. On the other hand, there are sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ences between the two economies, which do not allow for a sim­ple trans­fer of the Cana­dian solu­tions to Poland. The paper presents the Cana­dian pen­sion sys­tem, with a par­tic­u­lar empha­sis on its pub­lic part.

Key­words: Canada, pen­sion sys­tem, social security

Annual Report. Canada Pen­sion Plan 2011–2012 (2012), Gov­ern­ment of Canada, Toronto, file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/ [access18.04.2016].

Annual Report. Canada Pen­sion Plan 2012–2013 (2013), Gov­ern­ment of Canada, Toronto, file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/CPP_AR_MARS2014_E.pdf [access 20.02.2016].
Annual Report. Canada Pen­sion Plan 2013–2014 (2014), Gov­ern­ment of Canada, Toronto file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/CPPAnnualReport_E_FINAL%20(1).pdf [access 18.04.2016].
Annual Report. Canada Pen­sion Plan 2014–2015 (2015), Gov­ern­ment of Canada, Toronto,  file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/408_CPP_Annual_Report_B&W_EN2%20(1).pdf [access 18.04.2016].
Barr, N., Dia­mond, P. (2014), Reformy sys­temu emery­tal­nego. Krótki prze­wod­nik, [Reforms of the Pen­sion Sys­tem. A Short Guide]  PTE, Warszawa, Canada Pen­sion Plan and Old Age Secu­rity ben­e­fits amounts effec­tive Jan­u­ary 1 (2016), [access 20.04.2016].
CPP Invest­ment Board (2015), Peo­ple. Pur­pose. Per­for­mance. 2015 Annual Report, Toronto,,%202015).pdf [access 18.04.2016].
CPP Invest­ment Board (2016), Peo­ple. Pur­pose. Per­for­mance. 2016 Annual Report, Canada,,%202016).pdf [access 18.04.2016].
Guest, D. (1997), The Emer­gence of Social Secu­rity in Canada, UBC Press, Van­cou­ver.
KNF [the Pol­ish Finan­cial Super­vi­sion Author­ity] (2015), Indy­wid­u­alne konta emery­talne i indy­wid­u­alne konta zabez­pieczenia emery­tal­nego w I półroczu 2015, [Indi­vid­ual pen­sion accounts and indi­vid­ual accounts for pen­sion secu­rity in the first half of 2015],  Warszawa.
KNF [the Pol­ish Finan­cial Super­vi­sion Author­ity] (2016), Infor­ma­cja doty­cząca pra­cown­iczych pro­gramów emery­tal­nych w 2015 r., [Infor­ma­tion on employ­ees’ pen­sion plans in 2015], Warszawa.
Lit­tle, B. (2008), Fix­ing The Future, Uni­ver­sity of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Makarenko, J. (2010), Canada Pen­sion Plan: Overview, His­tory and Debates, [access 18.04.2016].
Marsh, L. (1943), Report on Social Secu­rity in Canada, [access 18.04.2016].
Neren­berg, K. (2015), Trudeau’s finance min­is­ters and provin­cial col­leagues play Scrooge on pen­sion, [access 20.02.2016].
OECD (2015a), Pen­sions At a Glance. OECD and G20 indi­ca­tors, Paris, [access 18.04.2016].
OECD (2015b), Pen­sion Funds in Fig­ures, Paris, OECD (2015c), Pen­sion Pol­icy Notes. Canada 2015, Paris, [access 18.04.2016].
Reg­is­tered pen­sion plans (RPPs) and mem­bers, by type of plan and sec­tor (Total pub­lic and pri­vate sec­tors), [access 18.04.2016].
Schilling­ton, R. (2016), An Analy­sis of the Eco­nomic Cir­cum­stances of Cana­dian Seniors, Broad­bent Insti­tute, Ottawa.
Ser­vice Canada (2014), The Old Age Secu­rity Pen­sion, [access 18.04.2016].
Steele, J., Wag­man, J. (2016), We wanted pen­sion changes, but OAS age wasn’t one of them, „The Globe and Mail” of March 19.
Uppal, S. (2016), Finan­cial Lit­er­acy and Retire­ment Plan­ning, Sta­tis­tics Canada.
Williams, M. (2015), Reform­ing Canada’s Pen­sion Sys­tem for Sus­tain­abil­ity, Franklin Tem­ple­ton Invest­ments, Toronto.
Willis Tow­ers Wat­son (2016), Global Pen­sion Assets Study 2016, [access 18.04.2016].
Young, J. (2012), The Short His­tor­i­cal Primer on Canada’s Old Age Secu­rity Debate, [access 18.04.2016].

Krzysztof Hage­me­jer (Pro­fes­sor, Hochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sigg, Bonn, Ger­many; Col­legium Civ­i­tas, Uni­ver­sity of War­saw, Poland)
While Euro­pean pen­sion debates focus on long-term sus­tain­abil­ity of exist­ing pen­sion sys­tems, glob­ally the major chal­lenge is the lack cov­er­age. Only 30% of the world’s work­ing age pop­u­la­tion con­tributes to any pen­sion scheme and only slightly more than half of the worlds elderly receive any type of pen­sions or other income sup­port ben­e­fits. Main rea­sons of this sit­u­a­tion are at the labour mar­kets where only rel­a­tively small por­tions of the pop­u­la­tion are in for­mal employ­ment which would allow achiev­ing effec­tive cov­er­age by con­trib­u­tory pen­sion schemes. Paper shows that coun­tries which achieved sig­nif­i­cant expan­sion of cov­er­age did it through non-contributory, so-called social pen­sions – uni­ver­sal, means-tested or pension-tested. The main chal­lenge of non-contributory pen­sions ben­e­fits is not their sus­tain­abil­ity in terms of ben­e­fit costs as there is a num­ber of pol­icy para­me­ters allow­ing to con­trol ben­e­fit expen­di­ture, but sus­tain­abil­ity in terms of secur­ing ade­quate bud­getary fund­ing. It requires imple­ment­ing legal and bud­get­ing mech­a­nisms which would pre­vent dis­cre­tion and polit­i­cal volatil­ity in allo­cat­ing resources nec­es­sary to fund such pen­sion schemes.

Key­words: pen­sions, cov­er­age, devel­op­ing countries

Barr, N., Dia­mond, P. (208), Reform­ing Pen­sions – Prin­ci­ples and Pol­icy Choices, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.
Bar­ri­en­tos, A., Lloyd-Sherlock, P. (2003), Non-contributory pen­sions and social pro­tec­tion, Issues in social pro­tec­tion series, Dis­cus­sion paper 12, ILO Social Pro­tec­tion Sec­tor, Geneva.
Bertra­nou, F., Grushka, C.O. (2002), The non-contributory pen­sion pro­gramme in Argentina: Assess­ing the impact on poverty reduc­tion, ESS Paper No. 5, ILO, Geneva.
Bertra­nou, F., van Gin­neken, W., Solorio, C. (2004), The impact of tax-financed pen­sions on poverty reduc­tion in Latin Amer­ica: Evi­dence from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica and Uruguay, “Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Review” (Geneva, ISSA), 57(4), pp. 3–18.
Durán-Valverde, F. (2002), Anti-poverty pro­grammes in Costa Rica: The non-contributory pen­sion scheme, ESS Paper No. 8, ILO, Geneva.
Gassmann, F., Behrendt, C. (2006), Cash ben­e­fits in low-income coun­tries: Sim­u­lat­ing the effects on poverty reduc­tion for Tan­za­nia and Sene­gal, Issues in social pro­tec­tion series, Dis­cus­sion paper 15, ILO Social Secu­rity Depart­ment, Geneva.
Hage­me­jer, K. (2009), Rights-based Approach to Social Secu­rity Cov­er­age Expan­sion, in: Holz­mann, R., Robalino, D.A. and Takayama, N. (eds.), Clos­ing the Cov­er­age Gap: the Role of Social Pen­sions and Other Retire­ment Income Trans­fers, World Bank: Wash­ing­ton, pp. 57–72.
Hel­pAge Inter­na­tional (2004), Age and secu­rity: How social pen­sions can deliver effec­tive aid to poor older peo­ple and their fam­i­lies, Lon­don.
Hel­pAge Inter­na­tional (2006), Why social pen­sions are needed now – Brief­ing on social pen­sions, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].  
Holz­mann, R., Robalino, D.A. and Takayama, N., eds. (2009), Clos­ing the Cov­er­age Gap: the Role of Social Pen­sions and Other Retire­ment Income Trans­fers, World Bank, Wash­ing­ton.
Inter­na­tional Labour Office (2008a), Tan­za­nia: Social Pro­tec­tion Expen­di­ture and Per­for­mance Review and Social Bud­get, Social Secu­rity Depart­ment, Inter­na­tional Labour Office, Geneva, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].
Inter­na­tional Labour Office (2008b), Zam­bia: Social Pro­tec­tion Expen­di­ture and Per­for­mance Review and Social Bud­get, Social Secu­rity Depart­ment, Inter­na­tional Labour Office, Geneva, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].
Inter­na­tional Labour Office (2010), World Social Secu­rity Report 2010–2011, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].
Inter­na­tional Labour Office (2014), World Social Pro­tec­tion report 2014–2015, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].
Kidd, S. (2015), Estab­lish­ing Com­pre­hen­sive National Old Age Pen­sion Sys­tems, KfW Devel­op­ment Bank, Mate­ri­als on Devel­op­ment Financ­ing No 8, Avail­able at: [access 1.05.2016].
Pala­cios, R. and Knox-Vydmanov, C. (2014), The Grow­ing Role of Social Pen­sions: His­tory, Tax­on­omy and Key Per­for­mance Indi­ca­tors, “Pub­lic Admin­is­tra­tion and Devel­op­ment”, Vol. 34, Issue 4, pp. 251–264.
Schle­berger, E. (2002), Namibia’s uni­ver­sal pen­sion scheme: Trends and chal­lenges, ESS Paper No. 6, ILO, Geneva.
Schwarzer, H., Querino, A.C. (2002), Non-contributory pen­sions in Brazil: The impact on poverty reduc­tion, ESS Paper No. 11, ILO, Geneva.
World Bank (1994), Avert­ing the Old-Age Cri­sis: Poli­cies to Pro­tect the Old and pro­mote Growth, Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.

Pla­ton Tin­ios (Pro­fes­sor, Uni­ver­si­tyof Pireus, Greece; Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics, United King­dom)
The South Korean pen­sion sys­tem is a state-run PAYG social insur­ance sys­tem that has largely man­aged to avoid key prob­lems com­mon else­where. Gen­eral state pen­sions arrived on the scene rel­a­tively late – in 1988 – in an econ­omy dom­i­nated by small fam­ily firms and a famil­ial social pro­tec­tion sys­tem. Despite finan­cial sur­pluses, the sys­tem under­went two major reforms focused on sus­tain­abil­ity, in 1997 and 2007. Recent dis­cus­sions also high­light ade­quacy and old age poverty, with the prospect of rapid pop­u­la­tion age­ing. Korea has com­bined PAYG finance with a large pen­sion reserve – the  sec­ond largest sov­er­eign fund in the world – whilst also man­ag­ing to pre­serve the unity of the sys­tem by apply­ing com­mon rules.

Key­words: South Korea, pen­sion reform, pen­sion funds, ageing

Barr, N., Dia­mond, P.A. (2010), Pen­sion Reform: A short Guide, OUP Bloomberg Inc, 2014, Korea’s $400 Bil­lion Pen­sion Plans Hir­ing Spree for Push–02-07/korea-s-400-billion-pension-plans-hiring-spree-for-push [access 4.06.2016].
Bonoli, G.,  Shinkawa T. (2005), Pop­u­la­tion age­ing and the log­ics of pen­sion reform in West­ern Europe, East Asia and North Amer­ica, in: Bonoli, G. and Shinkawa T., Age­ing and Pen­sion Reform Around the World. Evi­dence from Eleven Coun­tries, Chel­tenham, Edward Elgar, pp. 1–23.
CIA (2015), The World Fact­book, 2015 ks.html [access 4.06.2016].
Jung, I.-Y., Kim, H. (2015), Improv­ing the Long-term Sus­tain­abil­ity of Pen­sion Sys­tem in Korea: Focus­ing on the National Pen­sion Scheme, NPS inter­na­tional con­fer­ence, “The Long Term Sus­tain­abil­ity of Pub­lic Pen­sion”, Jeonju, Korea, 29–30 Octo­ber.
Kim, Y.M., Kim, K.-S. (2005), Pen­sion Reform in Korea: Con­flict between social sol­i­dar­ity and long-term finan­cial sus­tain­abil­ity, in: Bonoli, G. and Shinkawa, T., Age­ing and Pen­sion Reform Around the World. Evi­dence from Eleven Coun­tries, Chel­tenham, Edward Elgar, pp. 208–229.
National Pen­sion Scheme Devel­op­ment Com­mit­tee (NPSDC) (2013), 2013 National Pen­sion Long-Term Actu­ar­ial Pro­jec­tion: Mea­sures to Improve the National Pen­sion Scheme, NPSDC, Seoul.
OECD (2016), Pen­sion spend­ing (indi­ca­tor), doi: 10.1787/a041f4ef-en [access 14.02.2016].
OECD (2015), ‘Korea’ Pen­sions at a Glance 2015: OECD and G20 Indi­ca­tors, OECD pub­lish­ing Paris.
Panageas, Tin­ios, P. (2016), “Pen­sions: Arrest­ing a race to the bot­tom”. In Reform­ing the Greek Econ­omy, edited by C. Meghir, Ch. Pis­sarides, D. Vayanos, N. Vet­tas, MIT Press forth­com­ing.
Tin­ios, P. (2015), Pen­sion Reform and the Greek cri­sis: A tale of ret­ro­spec­tive exter­nally imposed reform, NPS inter­na­tional con­fer­ence, The Long Term Sus­tain­abil­ity of Pub­lic Pen­sion’, Jeonju, Korea, 29–30 Octo­ber.
Tow­ers Wat­son (2015), The world’s 300 largest pen­sion funds – year end 2014, [access 4.06.2016].
US Social Secu­rity Admin­is­tra­tion (2015), Social Secu­rity Pro­grams around the World: Asia and the Pacific, 2014,–2015/asia/ [access 4.06.2016].

Wang Wei (Pub­lic Admin­is­tra­tion School, North­west­ern Uni­ver­sity, Xi’an, China
Zhang Yinghua (Cen­tre for Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity, Chi­nese Acad­emy of Social Sci­ences, Bei­jing, China)
p. 38–42)
China pen­sion sys­tem includes three sub-systems: the Urban Employ­ees’ Basic Pen­sion Sys­tem cov­er­ing employ­ees and the self-employed, Urban and Rural Res­i­dents Basic Pen­sion Sys­tem cov­er­ing the res­i­dents who are under­em­ployed, the Gov­ern­ment Organs and Pub­lic Insti­tu­tions Pen­sion Sys­tem cov­er­ing the employ­ees in pub­lic sec­tors. The over­all cov­er­age is more than 900 mil­lion peo­ple. The three sub-systems dif­fer in terms of insur­ance qual­i­fi­ca­tion, pay­ment rate and ben­e­fit lev­els. At present, the main prob­lems of the Chi­nese pen­sion sys­tem lies in empty oper­a­tion for indi­vid­ual accounts and inad­e­quate devel­op­ment of enter­prise annu­ity and indi­vid­ual deposit life insurance.

Key­words: China pen­sion sys­tem, employ­ees basic pen­sion sys­tem, gov­ern­ment organs and pub­lic insti­tu­tions pen­sion sys­tem, insti­tu­tional framework

China Human Resources and Social Secu­rity Sta­tis­ti­cal Bul­letin 2014 (2014), [accessed  17-02-2016 09:33 UTC].
Shuguang S., Chen W. (2013), The China pen­sion sys­tem under Aging: Chal­lenges and Choices, “The­o­ret­i­cal Ref­er­ence”, No. 11, pp. 7–11.
Yinghua Z. (2015), The notional account reform of Organs and Insti­tu­tions Pension-Design and Sus­tain­abil­ity, “Devel­op­ment and Research”, No. 3, pp. 7–11.
Bing­wen Z. (2015), China Pen­sion Devel­op­ment Report 2015, Eco­nomic Man­age­ment Press, pub­lished in Decem­ber.
Bing­wen Z. (2016a), The top-level design of the third pil­lar pen­sion insur­ance: the role of tax­a­tion and its far-reaching sig­nif­i­cance, “Chi­nese Acad­emy of Social Secu­rity Lab­o­ra­tory”, No. 031.
Bing­wen, Z. (2016b), The expan­sion of com­mer­cial insur­ance, pen­sion sys­tem is more secure, “Chi­nese Labor and Social Secu­rity”, Vol. 1, No. 15, p. 3.

List of Con­tri­bu­tions
is Pro­fes­sor of Pub­lic Eco­nom­ics at the Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics and the author of numer­ous books and arti­cles includ­ing The Eco­nom­ics of the Wel­fare State (2012), and Reform­ing Pen­sions: Prin­ci­ples and Pol­icy Choices (with Peter Dia­mond) (2008).  Along­side his aca­d­e­mic work is wide-ranging involve­ment in pol­icy, includ­ing spells at the World Bank and the Inter­na­tional Mon­e­tary Fund, as a mem­ber of the World Eco­nomic Forum’s Global Agenda Coun­cils on Demo­graphic Shifts and on Age­ing Soci­ety, and of the 2015 Pres­i­den­tial Com­mis­sion on Pen­sion Reform in Chile. A range of writ­ing can be found on

PETER DIAMOND is an Insti­tute Pro­fes­sor Emer­i­tus at MIT, where he taught from 1966 to 2011. He first con­sulted to U. S. Con­gress about Social Secu­rity reform in 1974.  He has ana­lyzed pen­sion sys­tems in Aus­tralia, Chile, China, France, Ger­many, Italy, the Nether­lands, New Zealand, Spain, Swe­den, and the US.  His books include Sav­ing Social Secu­rity: A Bal­anced Approach (with Peter R. Orszag), Reform­ing Pen­sions: Prin­ci­ples and Pol­icy Choices and Pen­sion Reform: A Short Guide (both with Nicholas Barr). He was one of the three win­ners of the 2010 Sveriges Riks­bank Prize in Eco­nomic Sci­ences in Mem­ory of Alfred Nobel for analy­sis of mar­kets with search frictions.

ZOFIA CZEPULIS-RUTKOWSKA is a senior researcher in the Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies in War­saw. Her research inter­ests cover social pol­icy insti­tu­tions with the focus on pen­sion sys­tems and long term care, social pol­icy mod­els and Euro­pean social pol­icy. She has par­tic­i­pated in numer­ous com­par­a­tive research projects. She is an author of many pub­li­ca­tions on var­i­ous aspects of social pol­icy. Apart from her research activ­i­ties she worked for Pol­ish Social Insur­ance Insti­tu­tion in the years 2003– 2010 as the direc­tor of Inter­na­tional Co-operation Depart­ment, and in 2011 for the Chan­cellery of the Pres­i­dent of Poland as the direc­tor of the Social Pol­icy Office. Dr Czepulis-Rutkowska was, in the years 2007–2014, an expert in the Pol­ish Sen­ate work­ing group prepar­ing the law on long term care.

JOHN FRANCIS also a part­ner at JMF Research Asso­ciates, focuses on social pol­icy, edu­ca­tion, and the ori­gins and roles of national iden­ti­ties.  He pre­vi­ously worked in the Office of Eco­nomic Pol­icy and Research of the New York City Human Resources Admin­is­tra­tion, where he was respon­si­ble for research in demo­graphic and fis­cal issues related to the NYC pop­u­la­tion receiv­ing pub­lic ben­e­fits.  He taught research design at the City Uni­ver­sity of New York Bernard Baruch Grad­u­ate School of Busi­ness. He has a PhD in com­pu­ta­tional lin­guis­tics and com­par­a­tive stud­ies in Indo-European from Har­vard Uni­ver­sity.

ELAINE FULTZ is a part­ner at JMF Research Asso­ciates in Philadel­phia, where her work focuses on social secu­rity, gov­er­nance, and labour and human rights. Pre­vi­ously she served as direc­tor of the Inter­na­tional Labour Organization’s Office for East­ern Europe and Cen­tral Asia in Moscow and, prior to that, as ILO Social Secu­rity Spe­cial­ist in Budapest, where she worked in 17 coun­tries of Cen­tral and East­ern Europe.  Before join­ing the ILO, she served as a pro­fes­sional staff mem­ber in the US House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives, Social Secu­rity Sub­com­mit­tee of the Ways and Means Com­mit­tee.  She is the author of many arti­cles on social secu­rity and has a PhD in Pub­lic Admin­is­tra­tion from New York Uni­ver­sity.

KRZYSZTOF HAGEMEJER is an econ­o­mist, spe­cial­iz­ing in eco­nom­ics and financ­ing of social poli­cies. Pro­fes­sor at Bonn-Rhein-Sieg Uni­ver­sity of Applied Sci­ences, Ger­many. Lec­turer at Col­legium Civ­i­tas, War­saw and Maas­tricht Grad­u­ate School of Gov­er­nance. Between 1993 and 2014 at Social Secu­rity Depart­ment of the Inter­na­tional Labour Organ­i­sa­tion in Geneva. Key mem­ber of the team work­ing on new inter­na­tional labour stan­dard, Rec­om­men­da­tion no 202 con­cern­ing National Floors of Social Pro­tec­tion, adopted by the Inter­na­tional Labour Con­fer­ence in 2012. Before, assis­tant pro­fes­sor at the Depart­ment of Eco­nom­ics of War­saw Uni­ver­sity and adviser to the Pol­ish Min­is­ter of Labour and Social Affairs. 1980–1991, adviser to the trade union fed­er­a­tion “Sol­i­darność”.

PLATON TINIOS  is an econ­o­mist, assis­tant pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­sity of Piraeus. He stud­ied at the Uni­ver­si­ties of Cam­bridge and Oxford. He served as Spe­cial Advi­sor to the Prime Min­is­ter of Greece from 1996 to 2004, spe­cial­iz­ing in pen­sions and the eco­nomic analy­sis of social pol­icy. He was a mem­ber of the EU Social Pro­tec­tion Com­mit­tee from 2000 to 2004. His research inter­ests include pen­sions, age­ing pop­u­la­tions, social pol­icy, labour eco­nom­ics and pub­lic finance. His work on gen­der aspects of age­ing, led to a 2013 EU report on the gen­der gap in pen­sions and a book pub­lished in the US in 2015.

MARIA A. SZCZUR  is an expert on social pol­icy in Poland and in the Euro­pean Union. She is par­tic­u­larly inter­ested in the old-age pen­sion sys­tems. Now partly  retired she still writes to research jour­nal and teaches in a col­lege. Apart from her research activ­i­ties she was in the 90-ties a deputy direc­tor in the Insti­tute of Labour and Social Stud­ies. She was later a Dean, as well as a lec­turer, in a pri­vate col­lege – Finance Acad­emy. She was also a mem­ber of the man­age­ment board respon­si­ble for finances in the Pol­ish Social Insur­ance Insti­tu­tion. She is an author of numer­ous pub­li­ca­tions on social pol­icy.

WANG WEI is a post­grad­u­ate of Pub­lic Admin­is­tra­tion School of North­west­ern Uni­ver­sity in China and majors in Chi­nese social secu­rity policy.

ZHANG YINGHUA is a researcher of Inter­na­tional Social Secu­rity Stud­ies Cen­tre of Chi­nese Acad­emy of Social Sci­ences at Bei­jing and holds a Ph.D. in Eco­nom­ics. The pri­mary focus on her research is Chi­nese pen­sion sys­tem and inter­na­tional social security

« powrót