Pension funding, productivity, ageing and economic growth

A key issue in pension reform is whether such a shift from PAYG to funding is largely a matter of reallocation of the financial burden of ageing (with the risk of a generation paying twice), or whether funding improves economic performance sufficiently to generate the resources required to meet the needs of an ageing population. This paper surveys the literature on the three main aspects of this question, whether pension funding boosts saving, whether it improves the supply of long term funds and whether there are improvements in allocative efficiency in capital and labour markets. It also provides new evidence on the positive benefits of funding for productivity growth, which can offset the deleterious effects on productivity that ageing may hav

How will ageing affect the structure of financial markets

The ageing of the world population is an ineluctable process with major economic implications. Whereas there is extensive research on macroeconomic effects and on financial asset prices there has been more limited systematic research into the impact of demographic changes on financial asset volumes and financial market structure more generally, as driven by age related household saving and asset allocation decisions. Our empirical work based on experience of 72 countries, viewed in the light of the existing literature, suggests that demographic changes have had a detectable impact on financial structure. Ageing tends to benefit bond markets relative to equity markets, while depressing private saving and external balances, albeit not sharply reducing the overall size of the financial sector. Continuation of such patterns during the coming period of ageing have wide-ranging implications for policymakers and market participants

Portfolio regulation of life insurance companies and pension funds

This paper examines the rationale, nature and financial consequences of two alternative approaches to portfolio regulations for the long-term institutional investor sectors life insurance and pension funds. These approaches are, respectively, prudent person rules and quantitative portfolio restrictions. The argument draws on the financial-economics of investment, the differing characteristics of institutions’ liabilities, and the overall case for regulation of financial institutions. Among the conclusions are: · regulation of life insurance and pensions need not be identical; · prudent person rules are superior to quantitative restrictions for pension funds except in certain specific circumstances (which may arise notably in emerging market economies), and; · although in general restrictions may be less damaging for life insurance than for pension funds, prudent person rules may nevertheless be desirable in certain cases also for this sector, particularly in competitive life sectors in advanced countries, and for pension contracts offered by life insurance companies. These results have implications inter alia for an appropriate strategy of liberalisation. 1 The author is Professor of Economics and Finance, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB3 4PH, United Kingdom (e-mail ‘[email protected]’, website: ‘www.geocities.com/e_philip_davis’). He is also a Visiting Fellow at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, an Associate Member of the Financial Markets Group at LSE, Associate Fellow of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and Research Fellow of the Pensions Institute at Birkbeck College, London. Work on this topic was commissioned by the OECD. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the XI ASSAL Conference on Insurance Regulation and Supervision in Latin America, Oaxaca, Mexico, 4-8 September 2000, and at the OECD Insurance Committee on 30 November 2000. The author thanks participants at the conference and A Laboul for helpful comments. Views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the institutions to which he is affiliated, nor those of the OECD. This paper draws on Davis and Steil (2000)

The role of pension funds as institutional investors in emerging markets

In recent years, a growing number of Emerging Market Economies, as well as most advanced countries, have witnessed growth of pension funds as institutional investors. This has often occurred in the wake of pension reform shifting retirement income provision from pay-as-you-go to funding. The ongoing ageing of the population and financing difficulties of pay-as-you-go systems suggests that such reforms will become yet more common in the future. Accordingly, it is important to analyse the impact of institutional investment on the economy. In this context, our aim is to address the role of pension funds as institutional investors in financial development, and the wider effects of such financial development on economic performance. We note inter alia some of the ways in which the behaviour and impact of institutional investors might differ in emerging market economies from advanced countries as well as policy issues

A confrontation of economic and theological approaches to “ending poverty” in Africa

We seek to assess the adequacy of an “economic” as opposed to a “Christian” worldview in confronting one of the major challenges to the world, namely the chronic nature of absolute poverty in much of Africa. Our study comprises, first, an overview and contrast of the two approaches in general terms and, second, a critical examination of economist Jeffrey Sachs’ The End of Poverty (which undergoes a theological critique) and theologian Ronald Sider’s Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger (which is subjected to economic criticism). Overall, we find that economic analyses rely on an excessively narrow view of human motivation, which may vitiate secular attempts to aid development. A blend of Biblical understanding and economic insight is needed for a genuine transformation of the lives of the poor to take place

A review of the economic theories of poverty

ABSTRACT This paper critically analyses the views of poverty adopted by different economic schools of thought which are relevant to the UK, as well as eclectic theories focused on social exclusion and social capital. We contend that each of the economic approaches has an important contribution to make to the understanding of poverty but that no theory is sufficient in itself; a selective synthesis is needed. Furthermore, economics by its nature omits important aspects of the nature and causes of poverty. The key points that follow from this analysis are: The definitions of poverty adopted over time have reflected a shift in thinking from a focus on monetary aspects to wider issues such as political participation and social exclusion. Classical economic traditions contend that individuals are ultimately responsible for poverty and accordingly provide a foundation for laissez faire policies. By contrast, Neoclassical (mainstream) economics is more diverse and can provide explanations for poverty, notably market failures, that are beyond individuals’ control. Both schools centre on the role of incentives and individual productivity in generating poverty but perhaps overemphasise monetary aspects, the individual as opposed to the group, and a limited role for government. They tend to be averse to policies of redistribution. Keynesian/neo-liberal schools, in contrast, focus on macroeconomic forces and emphasise the key role of government in providing not only economic stabilisation but also public goods. Poverty is considered largely involuntary and mainly caused by unemployment. Marxian/radical views see the role of class and group discrimination, which are largely political issues, as central to poverty. These theories assign a central role to the state in its intervention/regulation of markets. Prominent examples of anti-poverty proposals in this vein include minimum wages and anti discriminatory laws. Social exclusion and social capital theories recognise the role of social as well as economic factors in explaining poverty, giving them a similar weight. They offer a helpful contribution in understanding not only what the precursors of poverty are but also what underlies its persistence over time A selective synthesis of approaches is needed to maximise the relevance of economic insights in poverty reduction; furthermore, there is a need for a broader and richer range of motivations for human behaviour beyond the key focus of economics on purely material and individualistic aspects, such as the maximisation of one’s own consumption less disutility of labour. This calls for an integrated approach that draws elements from other social disciplines such as political theory and sociology. The analysis implies a number of policy recommendations, notably the need to focus on provision of forms of capital (including education) to aid the poor; anti discriminatory laws; community development; and policies to offset adverse incentives and market failures that underlie poverty

Towards a typology for systemic financial instability

This article seeks to provide a categorisation of events of systemic financial instability that have been experienced in recent decades, seeking to draw out common elements from these seemingly-diverse events. We maintain that despite the apparent diversity of events of financial instability, a useful summary categorisation is between bank, market-price and market-liquidity based crises. There are important subcategories of each type, such as domestic versus international, currency crisis linked, single-institution based, equity-related, property, commodities, deregulation and disintermediation linked crises. Such financial crises are usefully examined in the light of the theories of financial instability, not least to illuminate common generic patterns that can be helpful in macroprudential surveillance. We derive a framework for analysing the evolution of such crises, highlighting that it is vulnerability of a financial system that is the key common element to a crisis, besides the nature of propagation of a crisis to the wider economy. Besides having general applicability, notably to OECD countries, the typology and generic features have some relevant implications for euro area countries. Development of securities markets, the likelihood of regional crises and the likely impact of ageing are among aspects that warrant vigilance by policy makers in the euro zone

Is there a pensions crisis in the UK?

The UK pension system is traditionally seen as offering a good example to other countries, having features such as a low social security burden of the public sector as well as a high coverage of well-financed voluntary private schemes. But recent developments suggest that the model has shown weaknesses. The most pressing current issue is underfunding of defined benefit occupational schemes following the bear market; but there are also the ongoing crises of mis-selling of personal pensions and the failure of Equitable Life insurance company. In this paper we seek to investigate whether there is indeed a crisis and what the locus of the true crisis is. We find that there are important longer-term weaknesses of the UK system as well as these current difficulties, focusing on social security as well as private pensions. Pitfalls faced by UK policymakers offer important lessons to other countries seeking to set up or expand private pension provision

Liquidity, financial crises and the lender of last resort – How much of a departure is the sub-prime crisis?

Liquidity risks are endemic to banks, given the maturity transformation they undertake. This gives rise to risk of bank runs, the first line of defence against which should be appropriate liquidity policy of banks. Nonetheless, solvent banks can face liquidity difficulties at times of stress, necessitating liquidity support. The traditional role of the lender of last resort (LOLR) is to avoid unnecessary failures that could threaten systemic stability, while ensuring that there are suitable safeguards for central bank balance sheets and that moral hazard is minimised. The sub-prime crisis has shown that traditional models of bank liquidity risk and of LOLR require revision, as was already apparent to a lesser extent in the Russia/LTCM episode. Funding risk now interacts with market liquidity risk, to create difficult challenges for central banks. The LOLR has had to adapt radically, for example, in terms of lending to investment banks, taking lower quality collateral and lending for longer maturities. Central banks have also been challenged by difficulties in maintaining confidentiality of support and by the interaction of these problems with low levels of deposit insurance

The lender of last resort and liquidity provision: How much of a departure is the sub-prime crisis?

The traditional role of the lender of last resort (LOLR) is to avoid unnecessary bank failures that could threaten systemic stability, while ensuring that there are suitable safeguards for central bank balance sheets and that moral hazard is minimised. The sub-prime crisis has shown that traditional models of bank liquidity risk and of LOLR require revision, as was already apparent to a lesser extent in the Russia/LTCM episode. Funding risk now interacts with market liquidity risk, to create difficult challenges for central banks. Even in the relatively non-systemic period up to September 2008, the LOLR had to adapt radically, for example, in terms of lending to investment banks, taking lower quality collateral and lending for longer maturities. Central banks have also been challenged by difficulties in maintaining confidentiality of support and by the interaction of these problems with low levels of deposit insurance. Since September 2008, although action has mostly been in line with traditional approaches for systemic crises, there have been some further adaptations in line with the systemic nature of the crisis, notably by the Federal Reserve acting as market maker or investor of last resort in illiquid securities markets