IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v19y2025i4p1086-1100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Input Legitimacy of Occupational Pensions in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Mayer
  • Tobias Wiß

Abstract

As private asset‐based welfare like funded occupational pension schemes gain importance, legitimacy concerns arise due to financial market downturns and low investment returns. This paper assesses their input legitimacy by distinguishing between individual‐direct and collective‐representative input possibilities in decision‐making processes. We argue that individual‐direct input possibilities decrease while collective‐representative input possibilities increase with occupational pensions' compulsion. To test these hypotheses, we compare voluntary occupational pension schemes in Austria, Spain, and Ireland with (quasi‐)mandatory schemes in the Netherlands and Denmark, using Germany as a test case due to recent reforms enhancing their importance. Our institutional analysis and novel survey reveal that compulsory occupational pensions are associated with lower individual‐direct and higher collective‐representative input possibilities. These findings underscore the critical role of participatory procedures in establishing legitimacy in private governance, suggesting they may strengthen public trust and satisfaction with non‐state governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Mayer & Tobias Wiß, 2025. "Assessing Input Legitimacy of Occupational Pensions in Europe," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 1086-1100, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:19:y:2025:i:4:p:1086-1100
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12647
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12647
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12647?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:wly:reggov:v:19:y:2025:i:4:p:1086-1100. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.