IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nzt/nztwps/15-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Practical Approach to Well-being Based Policy Development: What Do New Zealanders Want from Their Retirement Income Policies?

Author

Listed:
  • Joey Au
  • Andrew Coleman
  • Trudy Sullivan

    (The Treasury)

Abstract

This paper investigates the practicality of using a sophisticated multi-criteria analysis technique to estimate the preferences of a representative sample of the public to inform policy advice. Our application concerns retirement income policy and we use a multicriteria decision-making survey to (i) investigate the relative importance of seven aspects of retirement income policies to a sample of 1,066 New Zealanders, (ii) document the diversity of policy preferences in a statistically rigorous manner, and (iii) evaluate the way people rank three different retirement income policies from an individual well-being perspective. The results of the paper suggest that multi-criteria surveys as a tool have considerable potential to help policymakers develop and identify policies that are aligned with the way people want to live. In terms of retirement income policies, we find that (i) there is widespread opposition to means-testing, (ii) a majority of respondents would choose an increase in current taxes if this could prevent even larger tax increases on future generations, and (iii) there are strongly divergent preferences over the appropriate eligibility age for New Zealand Superannuation. Overall, a policy combination that raises the age of eligibility for New Zealand Superannuation and reduces future tax increases is opposed by many and preferred by few. However, a policy that more aggressively prefunds New Zealand Superannuation by immediately raising taxes is supported by a majority of people of all ages and income groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Joey Au & Andrew Coleman & Trudy Sullivan, 2015. "A Practical Approach to Well-being Based Policy Development: What Do New Zealanders Want from Their Retirement Income Policies?," Treasury Working Paper Series 15/14, New Zealand Treasury.
  • Handle: RePEc:nzt:nztwps:15/14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2015-09/twp15-14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sears, David O. & Funk, Carolyn L., 1990. "The limited effect of economic self-interest on the political attitudes of the mass public," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 247-271.
    2. Gamper, C.D. & Turcanu, C., 2007. "On the governmental use of multi-criteria analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 298-307, April.
    3. Soroka, Stuart N. & Wlezien, Christopher, 2005. "Opinion–Policy Dynamics: Public Preferences and Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 665-689, October.
    4. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2014. "Beyond Happiness and Satisfaction: Toward Well-Being Indices Based on Stated Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2698-2735, September.
    5. Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis, 2000. "Reciprocity, Self-Interest and the Welfare State," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 26, pages 33-53.
    6. Nancy Devlin;Jon Sussex, 2011. "Incorporating Multiple Criteria in HTA: Methods and Processes," Monograph 000189, Office of Health Economics.
    7. Fong, Christina, 2001. "Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 225-246, November.
    8. Kenneth J. Arrow & Herve Raynaud, 1986. "Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511754, December.
    9. Oecd, 1998. "Public Opinion Surveys as Input to Administrative Reform," SIGMA Papers 25, OECD Publishing.
    10. Girol Karacaoglu, 2015. "The New Zealand Treasury's Living Standards Framework - Exploring a Stylised Model," Treasury Working Paper Series 15/12, New Zealand Treasury.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Alesina, Alberto & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2005. "Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 897-931, June.
    2. Yosr Abid Fourati & Cathal O'Donoghue, 2009. "Eliciting Individual Preferences for Pension Reform," Working Papers 0150, National University of Ireland Galway, Department of Economics, revised 2009.
    3. Assar Lindbeck & Sten Nyberg & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2003. "Social Norms and Welfare State Dynamics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(2-3), pages 533-542, 04/05.
    4. Boarini, Romina & Le Clainche, Christine, 2009. "Social preferences for public intervention: An empirical investigation based on French data," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 115-128, January.
    5. Haferkamp, Alexandra & Fetchenhauer, Detlef & Belschak, Frank & Enste, Dominik, 2009. "Efficiency versus fairness: The evaluation of labor market policies by economists and laypeople," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 527-539, August.
    6. Mounir Karadja & Johanna Mollerstrom & David Seim, 2017. "Richer (and Holier) Than Thou? The Effect of Relative Income Improvements on Demand for Redistribution," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 201-212, May.
    7. Andreea-Oana Iacobuță & Mihaela Ifrim, 2020. "Welfare Mentality as a Challenge to European Sustainable Development. What Role for Youth Inclusion and Institutions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-25, April.
    8. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2006. "A Liberal Egalitarian Paradox," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 393-408, November.
    9. Christina Fong & Panu Poutvaara, 2019. "Redistributive politics with target-specific beliefs," ifo Working Paper Series 297, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    10. Gwangeun Choi, 2021. "Individuals’ socioeconomic position, inequality perceptions, and redistributive preferences in OECD countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 239-264, June.
    11. Eiji Yamamura, 2021. "Information of income position and its impact on perceived tax burden and preference for redistribution: An Internet Survey Experiment," Papers 2106.11537, arXiv.org.
    12. Christina Fong, 2003. "Emphatic responsiveness: Evidence from a randomized experiment on giving to welfare recipients," Framed Field Experiments 00149, The Field Experiments Website.
    13. Holger Stichnoth, 2012. "Does immigration weaken natives’ support for the unemployed? Evidence from Germany," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 631-654, June.
    14. Stichnoth, Holger, 2010. "Does immigration weaken natives' support for the welfare state? Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-008, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Joakim Kulin & Alexander Seymer, 2014. "What's Driving the Public? A Cross-Country Analysis of Political Attitudes, Human Values and Political Articulation," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 19(1), pages 145-158, February.
    16. Shah, Syed Munawar & Abdul-Majid, Mariani, 2019. "Reciprocity, self-interest and reputation: debt vs equity contracts," Islamic Economic Studies, The Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI), vol. 27, pages 53-64.
    17. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Falch, Ranveig & Huang, Zhongjing & Tungodden, Bertil, 2022. "Acceptance of inequality between children: Large-Scale Experimental Evidence from China and Norway," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2022, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    18. Marx, Paul & Schumacher, Gijs, 2014. "The Effect of Economic Change and Elite Framing on Economic Preferences: A Survey Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 7979, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Corneo, Giacomo & Fong, Christina M., 2008. "What's the monetary value of distributive justice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 289-308, February.
    20. Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I39 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Other
    • J26 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Retirement; Retirement Policies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nzt:nztwps:15/14. 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: CSS Web and Publishing, The Treasury (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tregvnz.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.