The assumed benefits of diversification – reducing the reliance of individuals on one form of retirement insurance – currently inform policy advice on pension reforms. The diversification argument also often justifies reforms of old age pensions, including their privatization. However, the merits of diversification, particularly if pursued through privatization, are questionable, as the authors of this Policy Brief show. They make three points in their argumentation. First, actual gains from diversification are limited. Private pension systems are not immune to regulatory risks, as often assumed. Moreover, diversification cannot protect against the macroeconomic shocks that represent the main challenges for pension systems. Secondly, the macroeconomic gains from private pillars are often overestimated in the policy debate. Finally, the costs of diversification through privatization are very high, despite the popular myth about reducing the implicit debt. In reality, retaining debt in its implicit form is the preferable option for public finances.

Table of contents

Full text

Related content

Agnes Streissler

Public and private pensions: lessons from the crisis

This Policy Brief considers the lessons to be drawn from the crisis for both public and private pensions in Europe. The author, Agnes Streissler, points out that both pay-as-you-go and funded systems are dependent on economic growth and are under pressure because of demographic changes. At the same time, private systems are considerably more risky... Find out more

Ivan Lesay

Pension reform in Slovakia

This paper presents an analysis of the pension system reform in Slovakia. The author briefly surveys the basic features of the pension system before and after the reform, discussing the reasons for the reform as well as its risks and possible social impact. After presentation of an alternative system and also general measures for improvement, a... Find out more