Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T23:45:42.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Liberalisation of the German Social Model: Public–Private Pension Reform in Germany since 2001

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2013

PAUL BRIDGEN  and
TRAUTE MEYER
PAUL BRIDGEN
Affiliation:
Sociology, Social Policy and Applied Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ email: Paul.Bridgen@soton.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Some commentators view reforms to the German political economy since the 1990s as constituting a broad liberalisation of a previously coordinated market economy (e.g., Streeck, 2009). Others argue that by maintaining protection for core workers the reforms represent a dualisation rather than liberalisation (e.g., Palier and Thelen, 2010). This debate has paid little attention to public–private pension reform since 2001. This paper argues that pensions have been a crucial component of the German social model since 1957 and demonstrates why comprehensive analysis of its development must consider them. After summarising how public and occupational pensions have supported core German workers since 1957, the paper calculates core workers’ projected net pensions and those of less privileged employees before and after recent reforms. On this basis, it concludes that pension reforms have created a system more characteristic of a liberal than a dualised political economy. Since the reform, the projected pensions of today's young workers are closer to the poverty line, and the gap between the projected benefits of core and peripheral workers has narrowed. Increasingly, as young core workers age, they will thus have less incentive to invest in employer specific skills, a development that threatens the model as a whole.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 37 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ALLBUS Studien-Nr. 4574, Supplement zur Fragebogendokumentation ALLBUS-Kumulation 1980–2010, GESIS Datenarchiv für Sozialwissenschaften, Leipzig, doi: 10.4232/1.11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altersvermögensgesetz (2000), Bundestagsdrucksache 14/4595,Gesetzentwurf der Fraktionen SPD und BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN: Enwurf eines Gesetzes zur Reform der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung und zur Förderung eines kapitalgedeckten Altersvorsorgevermögens, 14 November 2000, Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
Anderson, K. and Lynch, J. (2007), ‘Internal institutions and the policy preferences of organized labor: the effects of workforce ageing on union support for pension reform’, Comparative Politics, 39: 2, 189–208.Google Scholar
Aoki, M. (1994), ‘The contingent governance of teams: analysis of institutional complementarity’, International Economic Review, 35: 3, 657–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barclays Capital (2009), 2009 Barclays Capital Equity Gilt Study, www.barcap.com/Client+offering/Research/Global+Asset+Allocation/Equity+Gilt+Study.Google Scholar
Berner, F. (2009), Der hybride Sozialstaat: Die Neuordnung von öffentlich und privat in der sozialen Sicherung, Frankfurt and New York: Campus.Google Scholar
BetrAV (1957), ‘Ruhegeldrückstellungen sind kein Instrument einer steuerlichen Selbstfinanzierung’, BetrAV, 12: 113–15.Google Scholar
BetrAV (2007), ‘Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Förderung der betrieblichen Altersversorgung’, BetrAV, 6: 560–63.Google Scholar
Bischoff, H.-A. (1965), ‘Die sozialpolitische Bedeutung der betrieblichen Altersversorgung’, Betriebliche Altersversorgung, 20: 86–90.Google Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. (2005), ‘When do benevolent capitalists change their mind? Explaining the retrenchment of defined benefit pensions in Britain’, Social Policy and Administration, 39: 764–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. (2007), ‘Private pensions versus social inclusion? Three patterns of provison and their impact’, in Meyer, T., Bridgen, P. and Riedmuller, B. (eds.), Private Pensions versus Social Inclusion? Non-State Provision for Citizens at Risk in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 3–43.Google Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. (2009), ‘The politics of occupational pension reform in Britain and the Netherlands: the power of market discipline in liberal and corporatist regimes’, West European Politics, 32: 584–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit (2004), Tarifvertragliche Arbeitsbedingungen im Jahr 2004, www.bmas.bund.de/BMAS/Redaktion/Pdf/tarifvertragliche-arbeitsbedingungen-2004.Google Scholar
BVerfG (2002), 2 BvL 17/99 vom 6.3.2002, Absatz-Nr. (1–241), Karlsruhe, Bundesverf-assungsgericht, www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/ls20020306_2bvl001799.html .Google Scholar
Carlin, W. and Soskice, D. (2008), ‘German economic performance: disentangling the role of supply-side reforms, macro-economic policy and coordinated economic institutions’, Socio-Economic Review, 7: 67–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, G. L. (2003), European Pensions and Global Finance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clasen, J. And Goerne, A. (2011), ‘Exit Bismarck, enter dualism? Assessing contemporary German labour market policy, Journal of Social Policy, 40: 4, 795–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, E. P. (2002), ‘The European pension management industry’, Working Paper PI-0212, The Pensions Institute, www.ephilipdavis.com/penrefs.htm.Google Scholar
Dimson, E., Marsh, P. and Staunton, M. (2002), Triumph of the Optimists: 101 Years of Global Investment Returns, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DRV (2009), Rentenversicherung in Zeitreihen, Berlin: Verband Deutscher Rentenversicherungsträger.Google Scholar
DRV (2010), Versicherte und Rentner: Informationen zum Steuerrecht, Berlin: Deutsche Rentenversicherung, 5. Edition (9/2010), 105.Google Scholar
Ebbinghaus, B., Gronwald, M. and Wiβ, T. (2011), ‘Departing from Bismarckian public pensions’, in Ebbinghaus, B. (ed.), The Varieties of Pension Governance: Pension Privatisation in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmenegger, P., Häusermann, S., Palier, B. and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (eds.) (2012), The Age of Dualization, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission (2005), The Budgetary Projection Exercise of DG ECFIN and the Ageing Working Group: Detailed Description of Agreed Underlying Assumptions and of Projection Methodologies, ECFIN, REP/E3/NDG/53678, Brussels : European Commission, http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication6502_en.pdf.Google Scholar
Flecken, H.-L. (1990), ‘Die geplante Erhebung des statistischen Bundesamtes zur betrieblichen Altersversorgung 1989’, BetrAV, 45: 108–13.Google Scholar
GBE (2011), Entwicklung der Beitragssätze in der Sozialversicherung, Berlin, www.gbe-bund.de/gbe10/abrechnung.prc_abr_test_logon?p_uid=gastg&p_aid=&p_knoten=FID&p_sprache=D&p_suchstring=8862#m1.Google Scholar
Geyer, J. and Steiner, V. (2010), Public Pensions, Changing Employment Patterns and the Impact of Pension Reforms across Birth Cohorts, Deutsches Institut für Wirthschaftsforschung Discussion Paper 984, Berlin: DIW.Google Scholar
Gnaedinger, D. (2010), ‘Germany in recession and pensions dilemma’, European Pensions, January/February, www.europeanpensions.net/ep/Germany-in-recession-and-pensions-dilemma.php.Google Scholar
Hagen, K. and Kleinlein, A. (2012), ‘Ten years of the Riester pension scheme: no reason to celebrate’, DIW Economic Bulletin, 2: 2, 3–13, www.diw.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=diw_01.c.392365.de.Google Scholar
Hall, P. (2005), ‘Institutional complementarity: causes and effects’, Socio-Economic Review, 3: 2, 373–8.Google Scholar
Hall, P. and Soskice, D. (2001), ‘An introduction to varieties of capitalism’, in Hall, P. and Soskice, D. (eds.), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancké, B., Rhodes, M. and Thatcher, M. (2007), ‘Introduction: beyond varieties of capitalism’, in Hancké, B., Rhodes, M. and Thatcher, M. (eds.), Beyond Varieties of Capitalism: Conflict, Contradictions and Complementarities in the European Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassel, A. and Schiller, C. (2009), ‘Bringing the state back in: the role of fiscal federalism for welfare restructuring’, paper for the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics Annual Meeting, Paris, 16–18 July.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinrichs, K. (2009), ‘Pensions in Europe: convergence of old-age security systems?’, in Petersen, J.-K. and Petersen, K. (eds.), The Politics of Age. Basic Pension Systems in Comparative and Historical Perspective, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 119–43.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, K. and Kangas, O. (2003), ‘When is a change big enough to be a system shift? Small system-shifting changes in German and Finnish pension policies’, Social Policy and Administration, 37: 573–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockerts, H. G. (1980), Sozialpolitische Entscheidungen im Nachkriegsdeutschland, Stuttgart: Klett-Contra.Google Scholar
Höpner, M. (2001), ‘Corporate governance in transition: ten empirical findings on shareholder value and industrial relations in Germany’, MPIFG Discussion Paper01/5, Max-Planck-Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, D. (2006), ‘Varieties of capitalism: and then there was one’, Comparative politics, 36: 103–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Infratest Sozialforschung (1990), Alterssicherung in Deutschland 1986: Band III Rentner mit Zusatzsicherung, Munich.Google Scholar
Kalia, J. (2010), ‘German liabilities to rise by €50bn’, Global Pensions, 15 October, www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/1734517/global-deficits-set-hit-record-highs.Google Scholar
Keenay, G. and Whitehouse, E. R. (2003), ‘Financial resources and retirement in nine OECD countries: the role of the tax system’, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 8, dx.doi.org/10.1787/123770106732.Google Scholar
Kortleve, N., Nijman, T. and Ponds, E. (2006), ‘Introduction to “fair value and pension fund management”’, in Kortleve, N., Nijman, T. and Ponds, E. (eds.), Fair Value and Pension Fund Management, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 3–9.Google Scholar
Löbe, S. and Stadler, C. (2008), ‘The effect of internationally accepted accounting principles and other determinants on pension funding in Germany’, 69.175.2.130/~finman/Reno/Papers/pension-funding_i.pdf.Google Scholar
Manow, P. (2001a), ‘Comparative institutional advantages of welfare state regimes and new coalitions in wefare state reform’, in Pierson, P. (ed.), The New Politics of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 146–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manow, P. (2001b), ‘Globalisation, corporate finance, and coordinated capitalism: pension finance in Germany and Japan’, MPIfG Working Paper 01/5, www.mpifg.de/pu/workpap/wp01-5/wp01-5.html Accessed August 2008.Google Scholar
Mares, I. (2001), ‘Firms and the welfare state: when, why, and how does social policy matter to employers?’, in Hall, P. and Soskice, D. (eds.), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 184–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maydell, B. v. (1983), ‘Betriebliche Altersversorgung’ in Darstellung der Alterssicherungssysteme und der Besteuerung von Alterseinkommen. Gutachten der Sachverständigenkommission vom 19. November 1983, Bonn: Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Sozialordnung, pp. 243–81.Google Scholar
Meyer, T. and Bridgen, P. (2011), ‘Towards German liberalism and British social democracy: the evolution of two public-occupational pension regimes from 1945 to 2009’, in Clasen, J. (ed.), Converging Worlds of Welfare? British and German Social Policy in the 21st Century, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 157–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MISSOC (2000), Germany: Old-Age, European Commission, ec.europa.eu/employment_social/missoc/2000/d_part6_en.htm.Google Scholar
MISSOC (2007), Germany: Old-Age, European Commission, ec.europa.eu/employment_social/missoc/db/public/compareTables.do?year=20100701&lang=en.Google Scholar
OECD (2005), Pensions at Glance, Public Policies across OECD Countries, 2005 Edition, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Palier, B. and Thelen, K. (2010), ‘Institutionalizing dualism: complementarities and change in France and Germany’, Politics and Society, 38: 119–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riedmüller, B. and Willert, M. (2007), ‘The German pension system and social inclusion’, in Meyer, T., Bridgen, P. and Riedmuller, B. (eds.), Private Pensions versus Social Inclusion? Non-state Provision for Citizens at Risk in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 139–67.Google Scholar
Rueda, D. (2005), ‘Insider–outsider politics in industrialized democracies: the challenge to social democratic parties’, American Political Science Review, 99: 1, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruppert, W. (1985), ‘Verliert die betriebliche Altersversorgung an Bedeutung?’, Ifo Schnelldienst: Ifo Institute for Economic Research, 9: 21–3.Google Scholar
Ruppert, W. (1997), ‘Ungünstige Bedingungen für die betriebliche Altersversorgung’, Ifo Schnelldienst: Ifo Institute for Economic Research, 50: 28.Google Scholar
Schmähl, W. (2004), ‘Paradigm shift in German pension policy: measures aiming at a new public private mix and their effects’, in Rein, M. and Schmähl, W. (eds.), Rethinking the Welfare State: The Political Economy of Pension Reform, Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar, pp. 153–204.Google Scholar
Schmähl, W. (2007), ‘Dismantling an earnings-related social pension scheme: Germany's new pension policy’, Journal of Social Policy, 36: 319–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulze, I. and Jochem, S. (2007), ‘Germany beyond policy gridlock’, in Immergut Anderson, E. M. and Schulze, I. (eds.), Handbook on West European Pension Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 660–711.Google Scholar
Seeleib-Kaiser, M., Saunders, A. M. and Naczyk, M. (2009), ‘Shifting the public–private mix: a new dualisation of welfare’, a paper for the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics Annual Meeting, Paris, 16–18 July.Google Scholar
Social Protection Committee (2006), ‘Current and prospective theoretical pension replacement rates’, Report by the Indicators Sub-Group (ISG) of the SPC, 19 May 2006, http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_protection/docs/isg_repl_rates_en.pdf (accessed January 2007).Google Scholar
Streeck, W. (2009), Re-forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
TNS Infratest (2007), Situation und Entwicklung der betrieblichen Altersversorgung in Privatwirtschaft und öffentlichem Dienst 2001–2006 – Endbericht mit Tabelle, Munich.Google Scholar
TNS Infratest (2008), Situation und Entwicklung der betrieblichen Altersversorgung in Privatwirtschaft und öffentlichem Dienst 2001–2007 – Endbericht, Munich.Google Scholar
Trampusch, C. (2004), ‘Vom Klassenkampf zur Riesterrente: Die Mitbestimmung und der Wandel der Interessen von Gewerkschaften und Arbeitgeberverbänden an der betrieblichen und tariflichen Sozialpolitik’, Zeitschrift für Sozialreform, 50: 223–54.Google Scholar
Vitols, S. (2004), ‘Changes in Germany's bank-based financial systems: a varieties of capitalism perspective’, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin, Discussion Paper, SPII2004-03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willert, M. (2011), ‘Can personal pensions bridge the savings gap? Regulation and performance of personal pensions in Great Britain and Germany’, in Clasen, J. (ed.), Converging Worlds of Welfare? British and German Social Policy in the 21st Century Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 218–44, www.life-pensions.com/public/showPage.html?page = 323071; www.metallrente.de/versorgungswerk/tarifvertrag/index.php.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yermo, J. (2003), ‘Recent developments in occupational pension plan accounting’, Paris, OECD, www.imf.org/external/np/sta/ueps/2003/090903.pdf.Google Scholar