IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwvjh/81-2-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Das schwedische Beispiel der kapitalgedeckten Altersvorsorge: ein Vorbild für Deutschland?

Author

Listed:
  • Marlene Haupt
  • Sebastian Kluth

Abstract

In the course of the ongoing debate regarding the critique of the German Riester pension the Swedish premium pension has often been referred to as a role model regarding potential amendments and reforms. The Swedish pension reform of 1998 has led to a reorganization towards a stratified scheme, consisting of a pay-as-you-go and a fully funded element. The mandatory implementation of the Swedish premium pension has proved to be the major difference in comparison to the voluntary German Riester pension. In addition, numerous differences between the two systems can be outlined, of which most are due to the differing methods of implementation in the countries old age provision systems. This paper evaluates the possibilities and limitations of a complete adoption of the Swedish premium pension (German premium pension) as well as a partial modification of the existing Riester scheme (Swedish-Riester). It becomes evident, that despite differences between the two schemes, the German Riester pension can in particular benefit from the Swedish premium pension with regard to transparent, coherent and consistent product information. Im Zuge der Kritik an der Riester-Rente wird vielfach auf die schwedische Prämienrente als Vorbild für mögliche Korrekturen und Reformen verwiesen. Dort kam es mit der Rentenreform von 1998 zu einem Umbau des staatlichen Alterssicherungssystems hin zu einem Mischsystem, bestehend aus einer umlagefinanzierten und einer kapitalgedeckten Komponente. Neben dem grundlegenden Gegensatz, dass es sich bei der kapitalgedeckten Prämienrente, im Vergleich zur Riester-Rente, um ein obligatorisches Versicherungselement der ersten Säule handelt, existieren eine Vielzahl weiterer Unterschiede, die zumeist systembedingt sind. Im folgenden Beitrag wird zum einen die vollständige Übertragung des schwedischen Modells auf Deutschland (deutsche Prämienrente) und alternativ eine Teiladaption einzelner Elemente zur besseren Ausgestaltung der Riester-Rente (Schweden-Riester) geprüft und bewertet. Dabei zeigt sich, dass Deutschland trotz evidenter Systemunterschiede insbesondere hinsichtlich der Bereitstellung standardisierter, transparenter und verständlicher Produktinformationen vom Beispiel und den Erfahrungen der kapitalgedeckten Altersvorsorge in Schweden profitieren kann.

Suggested Citation

  • Marlene Haupt & Sebastian Kluth, 2012. "Das schwedische Beispiel der kapitalgedeckten Altersvorsorge: ein Vorbild für Deutschland?," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(2), pages 213-230.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:81-2-15
    DOI: 10.3790/vjh.81.2.213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.81.2.213
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3790/vjh.81.2.213?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kornelia Hagen & Lucia A. Reisch, 2010. "Riesterrente: Politik ohne Marktbeobachtung," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 77(8), pages 2-14.
    2. Tiffe, Achim & Feigl, Michael & Fritze, Jürgen & Götz, Veruschka & Grunert, Claudia & Jaroszek, Lena & Rohn, Ilonka, 2012. "Ausgestaltung eines Produktinformationsblatts für zertifizierte Altersvorsorge- und Basisrentenverträge," EconStor Research Reports 57575, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Gut gemeint, aber nicht gut gemacht: Kommentar," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(47), pages 24-24.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rausch, Johannes, 2014. "Was wäre wenn wir Schweden wären? Ist das Schwedische Rentensystem auf Deutschland übertragbar?," MEA discussion paper series 201421, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.

    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. repec:mea:meawpa:13266 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Haupt, Marlene & Kluth, Sebastian, 2013. "Take a chance on me – Can the Swedish premium pension serve as a role model for Germany’s Riester scheme?," MEA discussion paper series 201301, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    3. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.
    4. Eva Bell, 2012. "Riester-Renten müssen verbraucherfreundlicher sein," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(2), pages 255-266.
    5. repec:mea:meawpa:12256 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Kornelia Hagen, 2012. "Dokumentation der Diskussionsbeiträge auf dem Workshop des DIW Berlin zum Thema "Riester-Rente - Grundlegende Reform dringend geboten!?": [Online-Artikel]," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(2), pages 280-311.
    7. Rausch, Johannes, 2014. "Was wäre wenn wir Schweden wären? Ist das Schwedische Rentensystem auf Deutschland übertragbar?," MEA discussion paper series 201421, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    8. Börsch-Supan, Axel & Gasche, Martin & Haupt, Marlene & Kluth, Sebastian & Rausch, Johannes, 2012. "Ökonomische Analyse des Rentenreformpakets der Bundesregierung," MEA discussion paper series 201205, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    9. Bert Rürup, 2012. "Die Riester-Reformen - Genese, Wunsch und Wirklichkeit," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(2), pages 35-42.
    10. Bettina Lamla, 2013. "Family background and the decision to provide for old age: a siblings approach," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 483-504, August.
    11. repec:mea:meawpa:12262 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:mea:meawpa:12261 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Glenzer, Franca & Gründl, Helmut & Wilde, Christian, 2014. ""And lead us not into temptation": Presentation formats and the choice of risky alternatives," ICIR Working Paper Series 16/14, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
    14. Lamla, Bettina, 2012. "Family background, informal networks and the decision to provide for old age: A siblings approach," MEA discussion paper series 201210, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    15. Kornelia Hagen, 2012. "Streitfall Bewertung des Riester-Sparens," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(2), pages 133-163.
    16. Schmähl, Winfried, 2011. "Warum ein Abschied von der neuen deutschen Alterssicherungspolitik notwendig ist," Working papers of the ZeS 01/2011, University of Bremen, Centre for Social Policy Research (ZeS).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public-private pension mix; Riester scheme; transferability of social policies; international comparison;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D18 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Protection
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions

    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:diw:diwvjh:81-2-15. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.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.