Public/Private Pension Mix, Income Inequality, and Poverty Among the Elderly in Europe: An Empirical Analysis Using New and Revised OECD Data

J. Been, K. Caminada, K. Goudswaard, Olaf van Vliet
{"title":"Public/Private Pension Mix, Income Inequality, and Poverty Among the Elderly in Europe: An Empirical Analysis Using New and Revised OECD Data","authors":"J. Been, K. Caminada, K. Goudswaard, Olaf van Vliet","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2830508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior studies have suggested that higher public pensions are associated with lower income inequality among the elderly, whereas the reverse is true for private pensions. Van Vliet et al. (2012) empirically test whether relative shifts from public to private pension schemes entail higher levels of income inequality among the elderly using panel data from the OECD SOCX and the EU-SILC databases. Contrasting earlier empirical studies using either cross-sectional or time-series data, they do not find evidence that shifts from public to private pension provision are associated with higher levels of income inequality or poverty among elderly. The aim of the current paper is to extend the analysis of Van Vliet et al. by 1) adding additional countries, 2) adding additionally available years, and 3) using revised OECD SOCX data. In contrast to Van Vliet et al., we find that a greater relative importance of private pensions is associated with higher levels of income inequality and poverty among elderly. A central explanation of the difference in conclusions stems from revision of OECD SOCX data.","PeriodicalId":170522,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other European Economics: Labor & Social Conditions (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"38","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other European Economics: Labor & Social Conditions (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2830508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

Abstract

Prior studies have suggested that higher public pensions are associated with lower income inequality among the elderly, whereas the reverse is true for private pensions. Van Vliet et al. (2012) empirically test whether relative shifts from public to private pension schemes entail higher levels of income inequality among the elderly using panel data from the OECD SOCX and the EU-SILC databases. Contrasting earlier empirical studies using either cross-sectional or time-series data, they do not find evidence that shifts from public to private pension provision are associated with higher levels of income inequality or poverty among elderly. The aim of the current paper is to extend the analysis of Van Vliet et al. by 1) adding additional countries, 2) adding additionally available years, and 3) using revised OECD SOCX data. In contrast to Van Vliet et al., we find that a greater relative importance of private pensions is associated with higher levels of income inequality and poverty among elderly. A central explanation of the difference in conclusions stems from revision of OECD SOCX data.
欧洲公共/私人养老金结构、收入不平等和老年人贫困:基于经合组织新数据和修订数据的实证分析
先前的研究表明,较高的公共养老金与老年人之间的收入不平等程度较低有关,而私人养老金则相反。Van Vliet et al.(2012)使用来自OECD SOCX和EU-SILC数据库的面板数据,实证检验了从公共养老金计划到私人养老金计划的相对转变是否会导致老年人之间更高水平的收入不平等。通过对比使用横截面数据或时间序列数据的早期实证研究,他们没有发现从公共向私人养老金提供的转变与老年人收入不平等或贫困程度加剧有关的证据。本文的目的是通过以下方式扩展Van Vliet等人的分析:1)增加额外的国家,2)增加额外的可用年份,以及3)使用经修订的OECD SOCX数据。与Van Vliet等人的研究相反,我们发现私人养老金的相对重要性越大,老年人的收入不平等和贫困程度就越高。对结论差异的一个主要解释源于对经合组织SOCX数据的修订。
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信