IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mof/journl/ppr006e.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Employee's Pension Program Politically Viable?

Author

Listed:
  • Hideki Konishi

    (Professor, Waseda University)

  • Shimpei Otake

    (Department of Social Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology)

Abstract

In recent years, the mass media and young people in Japan often say that due to an aging population and falling birthrate the Japanese public pension system is failing. There has been no research, however, that verifies whether or not it is actually in danger. Since the Japanese pension system is in effect pay-as-you-go financed, whether current insured persons can receive pension in their retirement years depends on whether insured persons of the future generation are willing to pay insurance costs. In this sense, the political element in the viability of the pension system is inherently important. This paper formulates a repeated game in which a majority voting takes place for each period to determine whether to continue with or to halt the pension system with three generations -the elderly, middle-aged, and young- participating, and clarifies the conditions under which the pension system would be politically viable. Then, it simulates whether these conditions hold true for the Employees' Pension Program (second-tier portion, EPP for short), taking account of its revisions in 2004. Based on this simulation, the paper obtained the following results and policy implications. (1) the viability of the current pension system is not as critical as young people and the mass media make it out to be; (2) it is only until the 2020s that the viability of the system is relatively threatened, as there will be a tendency for the degree of viability to increase after the 2020s due to the progression of the aging population combined with the declining birthrate; (3) in order to balance pension financing while securing political stability, it would be effective to conduct reforms that reduce pension benefits for the generation of people who are currently over 50 years old, rather than raise final insurance rates or prolong adjustment periods through the so-called macro economy slides; and (4) reforms which drastically change current fiscal management, such as changes towards a funded system, privatization and the introduction of personal accounts, would be relatively easy to politically implement if doing so up to the first half of the 2020s.

Suggested Citation

  • Hideki Konishi & Shimpei Otake, 2009. "Is the Employee's Pension Program Politically Viable?," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 5(2), pages 287-318, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:mof:journl:ppr006e
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://warp.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/9908001/www.mof.go.jp/english/pri/publication/pp_review/ppr006/ppr006e.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guido Tabellini, 2000. "A Positive Theory of Social Security," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(3), pages 523-545, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    2. Loewy, Michael B., 1995. "Equilibrium policy with dynamically naive agents," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 319-331.
    3. Ryo Arawatari & Tetsuo Ono, 2011. "Old-age Social Security vs. Forward Intergenerational Public Goods Provision," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 11-26-Rev.2, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Aug 2013.
    4. repec:fgv:epgrbe:v:66:n:4:a:5 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hayo, Bernd & Ono, Hiroyuki, 2010. "Comparing public attitudes toward providing for the livelihood of the elderly in two aging societies: Germany and Japan," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 72-80, January.
    6. J. Ignacio Conde-Ruiz & Paola Profeta, "undated". "What Social Security: Beveridgean or Bismarckian?," Working Papers 2003-16, FEDEA.
    7. Giorgio Bellettini & Carlotta Berti Ceroni, 1999. "Is Social Security Really Bad for Growth?," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 2(4), pages 796-819, October.
    8. Georges Casamatta & Helmuth Cremer & Pierre Pestieau, 2000. "The Political Economy of Social Security," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(3), pages 503-522, September.
    9. Zhang, Muyang & Zhou, Guangsu & Fan, Gang, 2020. "Political Control and Economic Inequality: Evidence from Chinese Cities," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    10. Perotti, Enrico & Schwienbacher, Armin, 2009. "The political origin of pension funding," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 384-404, July.
    11. Robert Grafstein, 2009. "Antisocial Security: The Puzzle of Beggar‐Thy‐Children Policies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 710-725, July.
    12. Casey B. Mulligan & Ricard Gil & Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 2004. "Do Democracies Have Different Public Policies than Nondemocracies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(1), pages 51-74, Winter.
    13. Gonzalez-Eiras, Marti­n & Niepelt, Dirk, 2008. "The future of social security," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 197-218, March.
    14. Gianko Michailidis & Concepció Patxot & Meritxell Solé, 2019. "Do pensions foster education? An empirical perspective," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(38), pages 4127-4150, August.
    15. Yosr Abid Fourati & Cathal O'Donoghue, 2009. "Eliciting Individual Preferences for Pension Reform," Working Papers 0150, National University of Ireland Galway, Department of Economics, revised 2009.
    16. Rainald Borck, 2007. "Voting, Inequality And Redistribution," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 90-109, February.
    17. M.L. Leroux & P. Pestieau, 2014. "Social Security and Family Support," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 47(1), pages 115-143, February.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/2087 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Galasso, Vincenzo & Profeta, Paola, 2002. "The political economy of social security: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-29, March.
    20. Pinotti Paolo, 2009. "Financial Development and Pay-As-You-Go Social Security," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, March.
    21. Kemmerling, Achim & Neugart, Michael, 2009. "Financial market lobbies and pension reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 163-173, June.
    22. Georges Casamatta & Helmuth Cremer & Pierre Pestieau, 2005. "Voting on Pensions with Endogenous Retirement Age," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(1), pages 7-28, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mof:journl:ppr006e. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Policy Research Institute (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/prigvjp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.