Capital-based Pension Funds: The Question of Risk Sharing

Anna Ząbkowicz

Abstract


Capital-based pension funds are built from the contributions of their participants and are invested in financial assets. Failed investments cause a fund’s capital to shrink, which generates a risk of low pension benefits and/or the insolvency of the fund. The risk can be shared between contributors, pension fund management companies, and the state (under a mandatory pension funds regime). This article attempts to emphasise that, particularly in the case of old-age insurance, the problem of who runs the most risk is pivotal and deserving of greater concern than the issue of whether the rate of return on investment is high enough. The aim is to draw attention to this rather neglected aspect of the recent reforms of the old-age insurance industry.
The method relies on an ordered analysis founded on a review of the relevant subject literature. The point is made that the change from the Defined Benefit (DB) to the Defined Contribution (DC) formula shifts most of the risk onto contributors. On the other hand, this change makes the business relatively safe for private insurers and banks and reduces pressure on the public finance balance sheet. The shift from DB to DC schemes is rather common in Europe, hence the main issues tackled in the article are relevant to a fairly big group of countries (including Poland).
The article discusses the issue of risk-sharing in reference to the modern experience of Chile, a country that pioneered changes with respect to capital-based pensions and DC schemes. It concludes that the element of social solidarity recently introduced into the Chilean system brings some relief to low-income workers and also supports the longevity of the fully-funded Defined Contribution system.


Keywords


pension reforms, funded pensions, Chile, Defined Contribution formula

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barr, N. and Diamond, P. (2008), “Reforming Pensions”. ISSR Draft, November, http://econ.lse.ac.uk/staff/nb/Barr_Diamond_crr.pdf (accessed: 9 May 2017).

Barr, N. and Diamond, P. (2009) “Reforming Pensions: Principles, Analytical Errors and Policy Directions”. International Social Security Review 62 (2), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-246x.2009.01327x.

Barr, N. and Diamond, P. (2016) “Reforming Pensions in Chile”. Polityka Społeczna 1: 4–9, https://www.ipiss.com.pl/?lang=enecon.lse.ac.uk/staff/nb/Barr_and_Diamond_2016_Chile.pdf (accessed: 9 May 2017).

Bertranou, F. (2016) “Pension Benefits in Chile: Is It Possible to Improve Adequacy and Solidarity?”. A joint ILO/IZA conference in partnership with leading G20 think tanks, ILO headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland, 10–11 March (work in progress – 29 February).

Bodie, Z., Marcus, A. J. and Merton, R. C. (1988) “Defined Benefit versus Defined Contribution Pension Plans: What Are the Real Trade-offs?” in Z. Bodie, J. B. Shoven, and D. A. Wise Pensions in the U.S. Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 139–62.

Credit Suisse (2014) “Chile: Pension Fund Snapshot as of May 2014”. Economics Research, 19 June, http://www.credit-suisse.com/researchandanalytics (accessed: 13 October 2017).

Garcia-Huitron, M. and van Leuvensteijn, M. (2015) “International Pension Reform Diffusion: A Tale about Chile and the Netherlands Trying to Learn from Each Other”. Het Verzekerings-Archief 4: 196–200, https://www.apg.nl/en/pdfs/chilean-example-in-dutch-pension-debate.pdf (accessed: 13 October 2017).

Hyde, M. (2014) “Classical Liberalism and Conservatism: How Is Chile’s ‘Private’ Pension System Best Conceptualised?”. Reader in Work & Pensions. School of Government, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK, https://c4ss.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/pensions.pdf (accessed: 13 October 2017).

IMF (2016) “Chile: Staff Concluding Statement of the 2016 Article IV Mission”. IMF, www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2016/11/02/MS110216-Chile-Staff-Concluding-Statement-of-the-2016-Article-IV-Mission (accessed: 6 February 2017).

Knowledge@Wharton (2009) “The Fall of Pension Funds in Chile: A Lesson from the Downturn”. Knowledge@Wharton, 25 February, http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-fall-of-pension-funds-in-chile-a-lesson-from-the-downturn/ (accessed: 6 February 2017).

Kritzer, B. E. (2008) “Chile’s Next Generation Pension Reform”. Social Security Bulletin 68 (2): 69–84.

Mesa-Lago, C. and Bertranou, F. (2016) “Pension Reforms in Chile and Social Security Principles, 1981–2015”. International Social Security Review 69 (1): 25–45, January/March, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/issr.12093/full (accessed: 6 February 2017).

Oręziak, L. (2014) OFE. Katastrofa prywatyzacji emerytur w Polsce [Open Pension Funds. Catastrophic privatisation of pensions in Poland]. Warsaw: Książka i Prasa.

Oręziak, L. (2016) “OFE nie jest świętością” [Open Pension Funds are not sacred]. GazetaPrawna.pl, 10 January, http://serwisy.gazetaprawna.pl/emerytury-i-renty/artykuly/916543,wywiad-prof-oreziak-ofe-nie-jest-swietoscia-chile.html (accessed: 6 February 2017).

Ostaszewski, K. M. (2001) “Macroeconomic Aspects of Private Retirement Programs”. North American Actuarial Journal 5 (3), p. 52–64, https://doi.org/10.1080/10920277.2001.10595998.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15678/AOC.2018.1807