Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T19:40:09.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards an equitable and sustainable points system. A proposal for pension reform in Belgium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2018

ERIK SCHOKKAERT ,
PIERRE DEVOLDER ,
JEAN HINDRIKS  and
FRANK VANDENBROUCKE
ERIK SCHOKKAERT
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, KU Leuven and CORE, Université catholique de Louvain (e-mail: erik.schokkaert@kuleuven.be)
PIERRE DEVOLDER
Affiliation:
ISBA, Université catholique de Louvain
JEAN HINDRIKS
Affiliation:
CORE, Economics School of Louvain, Université catholique de Louvain
FRANK VANDENBROUCKE
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam (UvA)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We describe the points system as proposed by the Belgian Commission for Pension Reform 2020–2040. Intragenerational equity can be realised through the allocation of points within a cohort. The intergenerational distribution is determined by fixing the value of a point for the newly retired and a sustainability parameter for the actual retirees. The value of the point links pensions to the average living standard of the employed population. We propose an automatic adjustment mechanism, in which a key role is played by the career length. This mechanism induces a balanced distribution of the burden of demographic and economic shocks over the different cohorts.

Keywords

D63H55J26Pension reformpoints systemautomatic adjustmentMusgrave rule
Type
Policy Paper/Brief
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 49 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

The ideas in this paper are the reflection of many stimulating discussions within the Commission Pension Reform 2020–2040. The authors thank the other members of the commission (Jos Berghman (+), Jacques Boulet, Bea Cantillon, Etienne de Callatay, Philippe De Mol, Ria Janvier, Alain Jousten, Françoise Masai, Hans Peeters, Gabriel Perl, Yves Stevens, Guy Van Camp, Elly Vandevelde and Koen Vleminckx) for their valuable input. The authors also thank Pierre Pestieau and an anonymous referee for their useful comments.

References

Ball, L., and Mankiw, G. (2007) Intergenerational risk sharing in the spirit of Arrow, Debreu, and Rawls, with applications to social security design. Journal of Political Economy, 115(4): 523–547.Google Scholar
Barr, N., and Diamond, P. (2009) Reforming pensions: principles, analytical errors and policy directions. International Social Security Review, 62(2): 5–29.Google Scholar
Blanchet, D., Bozio, A., and Rabaté, S. (2016) Quelles options pour réduire la dépendance à la croissance du système de retraite français? Revue Economique, 67: 879–911.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A. (2015) Rational Pension Policies. Munich Center for the Economics of Aging at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy, MEA Discussion Paper No. 09-2015.Google Scholar
Börsch-Supan, A., Reil-Held, A., and Wilke, C. (2007) How an Unfunded Pension System Looks Like Defined Contribution: The German Pension Reform. Munich Center for the Economics of Aging at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy, MEA Discussion Paper 07126.Google Scholar
Commission Pension Reform 2020-2040 (2014) A Strong and Reliable Social Contract (Dutch: Een sterk en betrouwbaar sociaal contract, French: Un contrat social performant et fiable). Brussels: Federal Administration Social Security.Google Scholar
De Donder, P., and Hindriks, J. (1998) The political economy of targeting. Public Choice, 95: 177–200.Google Scholar
De Menil, G., Murtin, F., Sheshinski, E., and Yokossi, T. (2016) A rational, economic model of paygo tax rates. European Economic Review, 89: 55–72.Google Scholar
Devolder, P., and de Valeriola, S. (2018) Pension design and risk sharing: mix solutions between DB and DC for public pension schemes. In Public Pension Systems. The Greatest Economic Challenge of the 21st Century. Verlag: Springer (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Devolder, P., and Melis, R. (2015) Optimal mix between pay as you go and funding for pension liabilities in a stochastic framework. Astin Bulletin, 45(3): 551–575.Google Scholar
Godinez-Olivares, H., Boado-Penas, M. C., and Haberman, S. (2016) Optimal strategies for pay-as-you-go finance: a sustainability framework. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 69: 117–126.Google Scholar
Howse, K. (2007) Updating the debate on intergenerational fairness in pension reform. Social Policy and Administration, 41: 50–64.Google Scholar
Knell, M. (2010) How automatic adjustment factors affect the internal rate of return of PAYG pension systems. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 9(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Lindbeck, A., and Persson, M. (2003) The gains from pension reform. Journal of Economic Literature, 41(1): 74–112.Google Scholar
Murtin, F., Mackenbach, J., Jasilionis, D., and Mira d'Ercole, M. (2017) Inequalities in Longevity By Education in OECD Countries: Insights From new OECD Estimates. Paris: OECD Publishing, OECD Statistics Working Papers 2017/02.Google Scholar
Musgrave, R. (1986) A reappraisal of financing social security. In Musgrave, R., Public Finance in a Democratic Society: Fiscal Doctrine, Growth and Institutions, Volume II. Brighton: Wheatsheaf Books, pp. 103–122.Google Scholar
Myles, J. (2002) A new social contract for the elderly? In Esping-Andersen, G., Gallie, D., Hemerijck, A. and Myles, J. (eds), Why We Need a New Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 130–172.Google Scholar
OECD (2012) Putting Pensions on Auto-Pilot: Automatic Adjustment Mechanisms and Financial Sustainability of Retirement-Income Systems. OECD Pensions Outlook 2012. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Queisser, M., and Whitehouse, E. (2006) Neutral or Fair? Actuarial Concepts and Pension-System Design. Paris, OECD: Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 40.Google Scholar
Schokkaert, E., and Van Parijs, P. (2003) Social justice and the reform of Europe's pension systems. Journal of European Social Policy, 13(3): 245–263.Google Scholar
Schwan, A., and Sail, E. (2013) Assessing the Economic and Budgetary Impact of Linking Retirement Ages and Pension Benefits to Increases in Longevity. Brussels: European Commission: European Economy Economic Papers 512.Google Scholar
Spinnewyn, F. (1989) Intergenerationele transfers en het pensioenstelsel. Tijdschrift voor Economie en Management, 34(1): 35–56.Google Scholar
Tabellini, G. (1991) The politics of intergenerational redistribution. Journal of Political Economy, 99: 335–357.Google Scholar