Preferences for Redistribution and Pensions: What Can We Learn from Experiments?
AbstractRedistribution is an inevitable feature of collective pension schemes. It is still largely an open question what people‘s preferences are regarding redistribution—both through pensions schemes as well as more generally. It would seem that economists have little to say about this question, as they routinely assume that people are predominantly selfish. Economic experiments have revealed, however, that most people do in fact have redistributional preferences that are not merely inspired by self-interest. This paper reviews this experimental evidence. For that purpose we distinguish between three fundamentally different types of situations. The first deals with distributional preferences behind a veil of ignorance. What type of income distribution do people prefer when they do not know whether they will end up in an advantaged or disadvantaged position? A main result here is that, contrary to what John Rawls suggested, people do not prefer the maximin rule, but rather favor a utilitarian justice concept appended with a safety net for the poorest. Another result is that people are willing to accept income inequalities—as long as these are due to choices for which people can be held accountable. In the second type of situation, individuals make choices in front of the veil of ignorance and know their position. Experiments show that preferences for redistribution are strongly dependent on a person‘s own position. People in a relatively disadvantaged position want more redistribution than those in a relatively advantaged position, which shows that preferences for redistribution are clearly affected by self-interest. Still, even many of those in an advantaged position display a preference forredistribution. This holds, in particular, if inequality is due to chance rather than effort. There are also significant differences in preferences between the genders and between people with different political orientations. Finally, we discuss situations in which income is determined by interdependent rather than individual choices. People are dependent upon the cooperation of others for the achievement of their (income) goals. Experiments show that behavioral factors such as trust and reciprocity play a crucial role, and they also indicate that these factors are strongly affected by the institutional setting. In the closing parts of the paper we discuss whether and how these experimental results speak to the redistribution issues of pensions. For example, do they argue for or against mandatory participation? Should we have less redistribution and more actuarial fairness? How does this depend on the type of redistribution involved?
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Maastricht : METEOR, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization in its series Research Memoranda with number 014.
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/UMPublications.htm
public economics ;
Other versions of this item:
- Tausch, Franziska & Potters, Jan & Riedl, Arno, 2013. "Preferences for redistribution and pensions. What can we learn from experiments?," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(03), pages 298-325, July.
- Tausch Franziska & Potters Jan & Riedl Arno, 2010. "Preferences for Redistribution and Pensions: What Can We Learn from Experiments?," Research Memoranda 043, Maastricht : METEOR, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization.
- Tausch, Franziska & Potters, Jan & Riedl, Arno, 2010. "Preferences for Redistribution and Pensions: What Can We Learn from Experiments?," IZA Discussion Papers 5090, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Franziska Tausch & Jan Potters & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Preferences for Redistribution and Pensions. What can we Learn from Experiments?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3156, CESifo Group Munich.
- C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
- D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
- D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Economics; Underlying Principles
- D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
- D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy
- H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AGE-2011-03-12 (Economics of Ageing)
- NEP-ALL-2011-03-12 (All new papers)
- NEP-EVO-2011-03-12 (Evolutionary Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2011-03-12 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-HPE-2011-03-12 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-POL-2011-03-12 (Positive Political Economics)
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.:
- Ben d'Exelle & Arno Riedl, 2010.
"Directed generosity and network formation: Network dimension matters,"
Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS)
10-15, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
- Riedl Arno & Exelle Ben d, 2010. "Directed Generosity and Network Formation: Network Dimension Matters," Research Memoranda 065, Maastricht : METEOR, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization.
- Ben D'Exelle & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Directed Generosity and Network Formation: Network Dimension Matters," CESifo Working Paper Series 3287, CESifo Group Munich.
- D'Exelle, Ben & Riedl, Arno, 2010. "Directed Generosity and Network Formation: Network Dimension Matters," IZA Discussion Papers 5356, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Gueth, W. & Offerman, T. & Potter, J. & Strobel, M., 2002.
"Are family transfers crowded out by public transfers?","
Open Access publications from Maastricht University
urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-4951, Maastricht University.
- Güth, W. & Offerman, T.J.S. & Potters, J.J.M. & Strobel, M. & Verbon, H.A.A., 2002. "Are family transfers crowded out by public transfers?," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-91498, Tilburg University.
- Simon Gächter & Arno Riedl, 2006.
"Dividing Justly in Bargaining Problems with Claims,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 571-594, December.
- Simon G�chter & Arno Riedl, 2004. "Dividing justly in Bargaining Problems with Claims," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-044/1, Tinbergen Institute.
- Deken, J. de & Ponds, E.H.M. & Riel, B. van, 2006. "Social solidarity," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-348135, Tilburg University.
- Simon G�chter & Arno Riedl, 2003.
"Moral Property Rights in Bargaining with Infeasible Claims,"
Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers
03-055/1, Tinbergen Institute.
- Simon Gächter & Arno Riedl, 2005. "Moral Property Rights in Bargaining with Infeasible Claims," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 249-263, February.
- Gachter, Simon & Riedl, Arno, 2005. "Moral property rights in bargaining with infeasible claims," Open Access publications from Maastricht University urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-16453, Maastricht University.
- Ben-Ner, Avner & Putterman, Louis & Kong, Fanmin & Magan, Dan, 2004.
"Reciprocity in a two-part dictator game,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 333-352, March.
- Avner Ben-Ner & Louis Putterman, 1999. "Reciprocity in a Two Part Dictator Game," Working Papers 99-28, Brown University, Department of Economics.
- Avner Ben-Ner & Famin Kong & Louis Putterman & Dan Magan, . "Reciprocity in a Two-Part Dictator Game," Working Papers 0902, Human Resources and Labor Studies, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities Campus).
- Anke Gerber & Andreas Nicklisch & Stefan Voigt, 2013. "Strategic Choices for Redistribution and the Veil of Ignorance: Theory and Experimental Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 4423, CESifo Group Munich.
- Riedl A.M. & Cettolin E., 2013.
"Justice under uncertainty,"
036, Maastricht : GSBE, Graduate School of Business and Economics.
- May Elsayyad & Kai A. Konrad, 2011.
"Fighting Multiple Tax Havens,"
fighting_multiple_tax_hav, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Charles Bollen).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.