2012年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_Gender_Difference_in_Retirement_Income_and_Pension_Policy_21页_261kb

Summary of "Gender Differences in Retirement Income and Pension Policy: Simulating the Effects of Various DB and DC Schemes"

Core Content

This research report investigates gender differences in retirement income and evaluates the impact of various Defined Benefit (DB) and Defined Contribution (DC) pension schemes on the relative financial position of men and women in the EU. It focuses on how pension design, particularly in relation to career patterns, child-rearing, and longevity, affects the distribution of retirement resources between genders.

Main Points

1. Gender Disadvantages in the Labour Market

• Women in many European countries face disadvantages such as lower participation rates, shorter working lives, and lower earnings.
• These differences significantly affect their retirement income.
• Pension systems often aim to compensate for these disadvantages, but only to a limited extent.

2. Pension System Design and Gender Equality

• DB systems typically base benefits on average wages and seniority, and may offer a minimum pension for disadvantaged women.
• DC systems link benefits to contributions and life expectancy, and are more sensitive to gender differences in career continuity and earnings.
• DC systems can provide more equal retirement income distribution than DB systems if no redistributive measures are explicitly introduced, due to their structure that reduces the advantage of steeper earnings profiles, more common among men.

3. Redistributive Measures and Their Impact

• Introducing a minimum pension in DB systems improves the relative position of women with discontinuous or poor careers.
• In DC systems, recognizing care activities through pension credits is less effective than using unisex longevity tables to neutralize the effect of longer female life expectancy on pension benefits.
• Survivors' benefits in DC systems increase the pension ratio for men more than for women, while in DB systems, they reduce the net present value of benefits for women.

4. Simulation Methodology

• The study simulates four stylized career patterns for women, compared to a single pattern for men.
• These patterns include:
  • Full-time (F)
  • Full-time, part-time, full-time (F/P/F)
  • Full-time, part-time (F/P)
  • Short career (S)
• The model considers two pension schemes: DB and DC, and various normative frameworks such as:
  • Minimum pension provision
  • Pension credits for childbearing and childrearing
  • Survivors' benefits
  • Unisex versus gender-specific transformation coefficients

5. Key Indicators

• P ratio: Ratio of women's to men's pension benefits.
• PVB ratio: Ratio of the present value of women's to men's pension benefits, capturing differences in life expectancy.
• NPVR ratio: Ratio of the net present value of women's to men's pension benefits, reflecting the overall generosity of the system and contributory history.

Key Findings

• Working career is the most significant determinant of retirement income differences between genders.
• DC systems generally perform better in reducing gender gaps in retirement income, especially when no specific gender-related provisions are included.
• Unisex transformation coefficients in DC systems significantly improve gender equality, with a 13% increase in the P ratio and a 15% increase in the PVB ratio compared to the base case.
• Minimum pension in DB systems helps disadvantaged women, but is less effective than unisex longevity tables in DC systems.
• Pension credits for child-rearing have limited impact on improving the relative position of women, with only a 2% improvement in both P and PVB ratios.
• Survivors' benefits in DC systems benefit men more, while in DB systems, they reduce the net present value of benefits for women.
• Results are consistent across scenarios, showing that the most effective measure for improving gender equality in retirement income is the use of unisex longevity tables in DC systems.

Conclusion

The study highlights that while pension systems can mitigate gender disparities, they are not sufficient to fully address them. DC systems, when designed with unisex longevity tables, offer a more equitable distribution of retirement income compared to DB systems, especially for women with discontinuous or lower-earning careers. The effectiveness of redistributive measures varies depending on the pension scheme and the specific rules implemented.