Carrots, sticks and old-age retirement. A review of the literature on the effects of the 2005 and 2017 pension reforms in Finland

S. Nivalainen, Sanna Tenhunen, Noora Järnefelt
{"title":"Carrots, sticks and old-age retirement. A review of the literature on the effects of the 2005 and 2017 pension reforms in Finland","authors":"S. Nivalainen, Sanna Tenhunen, Noora Järnefelt","doi":"10.18261/issn.2464-4161-2020-02-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the behavioural effects of Finland’s pension reforms in 2005 and 2017. With employment rates in older age groups at relatively low levels, both these reforms aimed to encourage later retirement and introduced a flexible old-age retirement age, initially between ages 63–68 and progressively raised to 65–70 years. However, the two reforms differed notably in terms of the means adopted. The 2005 reform relied heavily on “carrots”, i.e. individual choices and financial incentives. In the 2017 reform, “sticks” had a much bigger role, raising the age of eligibility for old-age pension. We consider how the behavioural effects of these two policies differed from each other. The article reviews the existing literature on pre-reform policy evaluations concerning the effects of the pension reforms and explores actual post-reform retirement behaviour based on studies that use register and survey data. It is shown that the 2005 reform failed to induce later retirement, and that employees in higher socio-economic positions benefited more from financial incentives associated with later retirement. In this regard, the 2017 reform, which will automat-ically increase retirement age via a higher age of eligibility, treats different socio-economic groups more equally.","PeriodicalId":165032,"journal":{"name":"Nordisk välfärdsforskning | Nordic Welfare Research","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordisk välfärdsforskning | Nordic Welfare Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2464-4161-2020-02-02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

This article reviews the behavioural effects of Finland’s pension reforms in 2005 and 2017. With employment rates in older age groups at relatively low levels, both these reforms aimed to encourage later retirement and introduced a flexible old-age retirement age, initially between ages 63–68 and progressively raised to 65–70 years. However, the two reforms differed notably in terms of the means adopted. The 2005 reform relied heavily on “carrots”, i.e. individual choices and financial incentives. In the 2017 reform, “sticks” had a much bigger role, raising the age of eligibility for old-age pension. We consider how the behavioural effects of these two policies differed from each other. The article reviews the existing literature on pre-reform policy evaluations concerning the effects of the pension reforms and explores actual post-reform retirement behaviour based on studies that use register and survey data. It is shown that the 2005 reform failed to induce later retirement, and that employees in higher socio-economic positions benefited more from financial incentives associated with later retirement. In this regard, the 2017 reform, which will automat-ically increase retirement age via a higher age of eligibility, treats different socio-economic groups more equally.
胡萝卜加大棒和老年退休。对芬兰2005年和2017年养老金改革影响的文献综述
本文回顾了2005年和2017年芬兰养老金改革的行为影响。由于老年群体的就业率相对较低,这两项改革都旨在鼓励推迟退休,并引入了灵活的老年退休年龄,最初在63-68岁之间,逐步提高到65-70岁。然而,这两项改革在采用的手段方面有明显的不同。2005年的改革很大程度上依赖于“胡萝卜”,即个人选择和财政激励。在2017年的改革中,“大棒”发挥了更大的作用,提高了领取养老金的年龄。我们将考虑这两项政策的行为影响如何彼此不同。本文回顾了改革前关于养老金改革效果的政策评价的现有文献,并通过使用登记和调查数据的研究来探索改革后的实际退休行为。研究表明,2005年的改革未能诱导延迟退休,社会经济地位较高的员工从与延迟退休相关的财务激励中获益更多。在这方面,2017年的改革将通过提高资格年龄自动提高退休年龄,更公平地对待不同的社会经济群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信