MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W284941610

Oxford Handbook of Pensions and Retirement Income

2008· article· en· W284941610 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roland Eisen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Risk & Insurance · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPensionContext (archaeology)EconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceLawHistory
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Oxford Handbook of Pensions Income, edited by Gordon L. Clark, Alicia H. Munnell, J. Michael Orszag with the assistance of Kate Williams, 2006, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 893 pages Over the past several years the study of the economics of pensions retirement income has grown in importance, particularly outside the disciplines of insurance economics, law, mathematics. The interest is increasing mainly because of the discussion about the bomb, which is now for most of the industrialized countries a reversed one, an implosion! As international attention on retirement financing increases, it is appropriate that Clark, Munnell, Orszag have edited this Handbook. The Handbook is divided into five major parts, with each part being organized around a series of sections themes. All in all, it consists of 42 chapters with an impressive list of contributors. Besides the Introduction, a first part (entitled Retirement in Context) a final part (entitled Looking Ahead), the book is divided into sections in a manner consistent with the well-known three pillars (or layers) of the pension literature: Public Retirement, Employer-Sponsored Retirement, Individual Household Plans. In its total, this overpowering volume is impossible to review to do justice to all the contributors. Therefore, let me mention only some chapters I am especially interested in. Chapter 11, written by E. Philips Davis Yu-Wei Hu, is about Funding, Saving, Economic Growth. This is a very important question because with enough growth the demographic changes are almost negligible. The authors focus on such a shift from PAYG (i.e., unfunded pay-as-you-go) 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 some or all of the resources required to meet the need of an ageing population (p. 201, my emphasis). All in all, the authors weigh their arguments very carefully. David A. Wise, one of the leading specialists in this field, has written chapter 16 about Early Retirement. The public private pension plans allow workers to retire earlier; in addition, they often impose a very substantial 'implicit tax' on work (p. 310). Combining the trend of early retirement with the forthcoming demographic trends serves to magnify the increasing financial burden for the social security systems and thus contribute to their own insolvency (p. 332). As a result, changes in program provision that focus on removing the incentives to retire early can have very important implications for the labor force participation of older workers thus for the financial position of social security programs. The third part starts with chapter 18, written by Alicia H. Munnell, entitled EmployerSponsored Plans: The Shift From Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution. The chapter focuses on the United States' the United Kingdom's second tier (or layer) because supplementary employer pension plans play a major role in the retirement income system, the nature of those pensions has changed dramatically (p. 361) from defined benefit (DB) to defined contribution (DC) plans. Munnell is selective in her analysis, as she does not examine Canada or the Netherlands. The focus is also not Australia (or Switzerland) because these systems are mandatory. Munnell critically evaluates the implications of shifting from DB to 401 (k) plans, as well the shift to money purchase plans in the United Kingdom. Both place virtually all risk responsibility for retirement income on the worker in choosing [h]ow much to contribute, how to allocate contributions among stocks, bonds, fixed income securities, how to change those allocations over time (p. 377). Furthermore, at retirement, individual accounts also face further problems: how much to annuitize, how to cope with longevity inflation. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,026
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,303

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,143
Tête enseignante GPT0,385
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Risk & InsuranceMême sujetRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentTravaux en français237 207