This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Assessing the Notional Defined Contribution Model

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John B. Williamson () (Boston College)
Abstract

The structure of pension systems varies by two key dimensions: the way in which benefits are determined and the way in which they are financed. The determination of benefits follows one of two main methods: (1) the defined benefit approach, in which benefits are based on a formula that relies on how much workers make and how long they work; and (2) the defined contribution approach, in which benefits are typically determined by the amount contributed and the accumulated earnings on those contributions. Pension financing also follows one of two general approaches: (1) pay-as-you-go, with contributions from current workers and their employers used to pay the pensions of current retirees; and (2) funded, with contributions invested in individual accounts that are used by workers to pay for their own retirement benefits. Today most national pension systems are based in large part on the defined benefit model and are financed on a pay-as-you-go basis. But as many of these schemes have matured and some of their limitations have emerged, policymakers have begun to search for alternatives. One alternative that has received a great deal of attention since the early 1980s is the funded defined contribution model of individual accounts. Another alternative emerged in the mid-1990s: the notional defined contribution (NDC) model. It also features individual accounts, but they are financed on a pay-as-you-go basis. This issue in brief draws on evidence from six countries that have introduced NDC schemes: Sweden (1994), Italy (1995), Latvia (1996), the Kyrgyz Republic (1997), Poland (1999), and Mongolia (2000). It describes the NDC model, reviews its major strengths and limitations, and assesses how widespread it may become in the future.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://crr.bc.edu/images/stories/Briefs/ib_24.pdf
File Format:
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for Retirement Research in its series Issues in Brief with number ib24.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 8
Date of creation: Oct 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:crr:issbrf:ib24

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 550 Fulton Hall, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
Phone: (617) 552-1762
Fax: (617) 552-1750
Email:
Web page: http://www.bc.edu/centers/crr/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F Baum).

Related research
Keywords: pension systems benefits defined benefit defined contribution

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
J26 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Retirement; Retirement Policies

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Tullio Jappelli & Mario Padula & Renata Bottazzi, 2003. "Retirement Expectations and Pension Reforms," CSEF Working Papers 92, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Salerno, Italy. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over 800 institutions contribute their bibliographic data directly to this service.

This page was last updated on 2008-9-25.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.