人口偏好的特征和退休制度的评估:来自智利的证据

Q4 Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Marcela Parada‐Contzen
{"title":"人口偏好的特征和退休制度的评估:来自智利的证据","authors":"Marcela Parada‐Contzen","doi":"10.3905/jor.2022.1.121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article studies population preferences and assessments of retirement systems in Chile. I use a unique survey that allowed me to construct individuals’ evaluations of different pillars within retirement systems (e.g., individual, solidary, and state-funded pillars), and their evaluations of current system performance and private pension fund administrators using attitudinal responses. The results imply that social well-being is an important consideration among high-income, highly educated individuals. College-educated individuals were significantly (6.8%) more likely to agree with a solidary pillar funded by contributors, while 1% increases in income significantly increased the likelihood of preferring a system with a solidary component (by 0.5%). This group was also more demanding with regard to the performance of the system and pension fund administrators. The findings also demonstrate that gender is a crucial determinant: men were consistently more likely than women to agree with the three-pillar model and social investments. This result suggests that women should be a specific target in communication campaigns when reforms are being designed and implemented.","PeriodicalId":36429,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Retirement","volume":"10 1","pages":"7 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Characterization of Population Preferences and Assessments of Retirement Systems: Evidence from Chile\",\"authors\":\"Marcela Parada‐Contzen\",\"doi\":\"10.3905/jor.2022.1.121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article studies population preferences and assessments of retirement systems in Chile. I use a unique survey that allowed me to construct individuals’ evaluations of different pillars within retirement systems (e.g., individual, solidary, and state-funded pillars), and their evaluations of current system performance and private pension fund administrators using attitudinal responses. The results imply that social well-being is an important consideration among high-income, highly educated individuals. College-educated individuals were significantly (6.8%) more likely to agree with a solidary pillar funded by contributors, while 1% increases in income significantly increased the likelihood of preferring a system with a solidary component (by 0.5%). This group was also more demanding with regard to the performance of the system and pension fund administrators. The findings also demonstrate that gender is a crucial determinant: men were consistently more likely than women to agree with the three-pillar model and social investments. This result suggests that women should be a specific target in communication campaigns when reforms are being designed and implemented.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Retirement\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"7 - 32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Retirement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3905/jor.2022.1.121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Retirement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/jor.2022.1.121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了智利退休制度的人口偏好和评估。我使用了一项独特的调查,使我能够构建个人对退休系统中不同支柱(例如,个人,团结和国家资助的支柱)的评估,以及他们对当前系统绩效和私人养老基金管理者的评估。结果表明,社会福利是高收入、高学历人群的重要考虑因素。受过大学教育的人(6.8%)更有可能同意由捐助者资助的团结支柱,而收入增加1%显着增加了倾向于具有团结成分的系统的可能性(0.5%)。这一群体对制度和养恤基金管理人员的业绩要求也更高。研究结果还表明,性别是一个关键的决定因素:男性始终比女性更有可能同意三支柱模型和社会投资。这一结果表明,在设计和执行改革时,应将妇女作为宣传运动的具体目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Characterization of Population Preferences and Assessments of Retirement Systems: Evidence from Chile
This article studies population preferences and assessments of retirement systems in Chile. I use a unique survey that allowed me to construct individuals’ evaluations of different pillars within retirement systems (e.g., individual, solidary, and state-funded pillars), and their evaluations of current system performance and private pension fund administrators using attitudinal responses. The results imply that social well-being is an important consideration among high-income, highly educated individuals. College-educated individuals were significantly (6.8%) more likely to agree with a solidary pillar funded by contributors, while 1% increases in income significantly increased the likelihood of preferring a system with a solidary component (by 0.5%). This group was also more demanding with regard to the performance of the system and pension fund administrators. The findings also demonstrate that gender is a crucial determinant: men were consistently more likely than women to agree with the three-pillar model and social investments. This result suggests that women should be a specific target in communication campaigns when reforms are being designed and implemented.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Retirement
Journal of Retirement Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Finance
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
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