IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oec/dafkad/5kzllbzzwvzs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Funding regulations and risk sharing

Author

Listed:
  • Colin Pugh
  • Juan Yermo

Abstract

This paper provides a description of the risk sharing features of pension plan design in selected OECD and non-OECD countries and how they correspond with the funding rules applied to pension funds. In addition to leading to a better understanding of differences in funding rules across countries with developed pension fund systems, the study considers the trend towards risk-based regulation. While the document does not enter the debate over the application of riskbased quantitative funding requirements to pension funds (as under Basel II or Solvency II), it identifies the risk factors that should be evaluated and considered in a comprehensive risk-based regulatory approach, whether prescriptive or principles-based. The three main risk factors identified are the nature of risks and the guarantees offered under different plans designs, the extent to which benefits are conditional and can be adjusted, and the extent to which contributions may be raised to cover any funding gap. In addition, the strength of the guarantee or covenant from the sponsoring employer(s) and of insolvency guarantee arrangements should be carefully assessed when designing funding requirements.

Suggested Citation

  • Colin Pugh & Juan Yermo, 2008. "Funding regulations and risk sharing," OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends, OECD Publishing, vol. 2008(1), pages 163-196.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:dafkad:5kzllbzzwvzs
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/fmt-v2008-art7-en
    Download Restriction: Full text available to READ online. PDF download available to OECD iLibrary subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Broeders, Dirk & Chen, An, 2010. "Pension regulation and the market value of pension liabilities: A contingent claims analysis using Parisian options," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1201-1214, June.
    2. Ivanka Daneva, 2009. "Investment Risk Management in Private Pension Systems," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 19-34.

    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:oec:dafkad:5kzllbzzwvzs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/oecddfr.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.