IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jpenef/v15y2016i01p55-89_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring retirement savings adequacy: developing a multi-pillar approach in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • KNOEF, MARIKE
  • BEEN, JIM
  • ALESSIE, ROB
  • CAMINADA, KOEN
  • GOUDSWAARD, KEES
  • KALWIJ, ADRIAAN

Abstract

The Dutch pension system is highly ranked on adequacy. These rankings, however, are based on fictitious replacement rates for median income earners. This paper investigates whether the Dutch pension adequacy is still high when we take into account the resources that people really accumulate, using a large administrative data set. A comprehensive approach is followed: not only public and private pension rights, but also private savings and housing wealth are taken into account. Summed over all age- and socioeconomic groups we find a median gross replacement rate of 83% and a net replacement rate of 101%. At retirement age, 31% of all households face a gross replacement rate that is lower than 70% of current income. Public and occupational pensions each account for more than 35% of total pension annuities. Private non-housing assets account for 14% and imputed rental income from net housing wealth accounts for about 10%. Some vulnerable groups, such as the self-employed, have below average replacement rates. Results are fairly similar to results found in the UK, indicating that we should be careful in evaluating the adequacy of pensions systems on the basis of fictitious replacement rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Knoef, Marike & Been, Jim & Alessie, Rob & Caminada, Koen & Goudswaard, Kees & Kalwij, Adriaan, 2016. "Measuring retirement savings adequacy: developing a multi-pillar approach in the Netherlands," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 55-89, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:15:y:2016:i:01:p:55-89_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474747214000341/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:jpenef:v:15:y:2016:i:01:p:55-89_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pef .

    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.