IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i1p359-378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deserving a Just Pension: A Factorial Survey Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Carlos Castillo
  • Francisco Olivos
  • Ariel Azar

Abstract

Objective This study analyzes which characteristics of pension recipients are taken into account when evaluating the fairness of pensions. Furthermore, it identifies some respondents’ characteristics and preferences that could be related to the justice evaluation of different pension amounts. Methods A factorial survey was designed to simultaneously analyze the association of respondents’ and recipients’ characteristics with the pensions’ justice evaluation. Results Findings indicate that although there is a consensual demand for larger pensions, it is still believed that pensions should be allocated primarily based on individual achievement. Conclusions Although in general, larger pensions are on average considered as more just, the justice criteria rely heavily on individual achievement over redistributive considerations, showing willingness to accept very low pensions for those considered not deserving them.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Carlos Castillo & Francisco Olivos & Ariel Azar, 2019. "Deserving a Just Pension: A Factorial Survey Approach," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(1), pages 359-378, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:359-378
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12539
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12539
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12539?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:359-378. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.