Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T15:01:08.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Information and legitimacy: results from an experimental survey on attitudes to the 2017 pension reform in Finland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2021

Olli Kangas Open the ORCID record for Olli Kangas [Opens in a new window] ,
Ilpo Airio ,
Karoliina Koskenvuo ,
Susan Kuivalainen Open the ORCID record for Susan Kuivalainen [Opens in a new window]  and
Sanna Tenhunen Open the ORCID record for Sanna Tenhunen [Opens in a new window]
Olli Kangas*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Research, University of Turku, Turku, Uusimaa, Finland
Ilpo Airio
Affiliation:
Planning and Evaluation, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland
Karoliina Koskenvuo
Affiliation:
The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland
Susan Kuivalainen
Affiliation:
Research Department, Elaketurvakeskus, Eläketurvakeskus, Finland
Sanna Tenhunen
Affiliation:
Research Department, Finnish Centre for Pensions, Finnish Centre for Pensions, Helsinki, Finland
*
*Corresponding author. Email: olli.kangas@utu.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The legitimacy of a pension system or any social security program depends on its credibility and perceived fairness. In order to gauge this legitimacy, we need to understand the relation between people's knowledge and attitudes. This experimental survey into the role of knowledge and perceptions divided respondents into two groups: the ‘treatment’ group received an information letter about a forthcoming pension reform before they were interviewed, while the control group was interviewed without receiving this ‘treatment’. Comparisons of the responses from the two groups allow us to assess how the level of knowledge and the provision of information affect people's opinions on policy reform. We also consider the patterns of covariation between background factors, people's concerns, and attitudes toward pension reform. The results show that the information letter had a significant impact on subjective but not on the objective level of knowledge. Receiving the information letter improved acceptance and perceptions of the fairness of the reform.

Keywords

Informationlegitimacypension reform

JEL classification

G22: Insurance • Insurance Companies • Actuarial Studies D83: Search • Learning • Information and Knowledge • Communication • Belief • Unawareness
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , July 2022 , pp. 359 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abid, Y and O'Donoghue, C (2014) Irish citizens’ attitudes to pension reform and redistribution. Social Policy and Society 13, 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agnew, JR and Szykman, LR (2005) Asset allocation and information overload: the influence of information display, asset choice and investor experience. Journal of Behavioral Finance 6, 54–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angrist, JD and Pischke, J-S (2009) Mostly Harmless Econometrics. An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bay, AH and Pedersen, AW (2004) National pension systems and mass opinion: a case study of confidence, satisfaction and political attitudes in Norway. International Journal of Social Welfare 13, 112–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeri, T and Tabellini, G (2012) Does information increase political support for pension reform? Public Choice 150, 327–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeri, T, Börsch-Supan, A, Tabellini, G, Moene, KO and Lockwood, B (2001) Would you like to shrink the welfare state? A survey of European citizens. Economic Policy 16, 8–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, C and Manza, J (2006) Why do welfare states persist? Journal of Politics 68, 816–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B (2010) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, AC and Trivedi, PK (2010) Microeconometrics Using Stata. College Station Texas: Stata Press.Google Scholar
Chan, S and Stevens, AH (2004) Do changes in pension incentives affect retirement? Journal of Public Economics 88, 1307–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, S and Stevens, AH (2008) What you don't know can't help you: pension knowledge and retirement decision-making. The Review of Economics and Statistics 90, 253–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D and Druckman, J (2007) Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review 101, 637–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D and Druckman, J (2010) Dynamic public opinion: communication effects over time. American Political Science Review 104, 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, H, Taylor-Gooby, P and Leruth, B (2018) Political legitimacy and welfare state futures. Social Policy & Administration 52, 835–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, F, Jacobs, L and Kim, D (2010) Trusting what you know: information, knowledge, and confidence in social security. The Journal of Politics 72, 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández, JJ and Jaime-Castillo, AM (2013) Positive or negative policy feedbacks? Explaining popular attitudes towards pragmatic pension policy reforms. European Sociological Review 29, 803–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finseraas, H and Jakobsson, N (2014 a) Does a simple information intervention change the perception of a reform? Applied Economics Letters 21, 1266–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finseraas, H and Jakobsson, N (2014 b) Does information about the pension system affect knowledge and retirement plans? Journal of Pension Economics and Finance 13, 250–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finseraas, H, Jakobsson, N and Svensson, M (2017) Do knowledge gains from public information campaigns persist over time? Results from a survey experiment on the Norwegian pension reform. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance 16, 108–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forss, S and Jääskeläinen, P (1986) Viesti, väline ja vaikutus: Tutkimus esitemuotoisen työeläketiedotuksen perillemenosta ja siihen vaikuttavista tekijöistä [Message, means and impact]. Eläketurvakeskuksen tutkimuksia 3/1986.Google Scholar
Gouveia, AF (2017) Political support for reforms of the pension system: two experiments. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance 16, 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemerijck, A (2013) Changing Welfare States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hershey, DA, Henkens, K and van Dalen, HP (2010) What drives retirement income worries in Europe? A multilevel analysis. European Journal of Aging 7, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hicks, P (2001) Public support for retirement income reform. Labour Market and Social Policy – Occasional Papers No. 55, Directorate for Education, Employment, Labour and Social Affairs. Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Committee.Google Scholar
Honneth, A and Frazer, N (2003) Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, P (2000) Tiedolla ja taidolla kansalaisten tietoyhteiskuntaan [Moving towards citizens’ knowledge society by information and knowhow]. Eläketurvakeskuksen tutkimuksia 2000:1.Google Scholar
Jacobs, LR and Shapiro, RY (1998) Myths and misunderstandings about public opinion toward social security: knowledge, support and reformism. In Arnold, RD, Graetz, MJ and Munnel, AH (eds), Framing the Social Security Debate: Values, Politics, and Economics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, pp. 355–388.Google Scholar
Kahma, N and Takala, M (2012) Luottamus eläketurvaan [Trust in pension security]. Eläketurvakeskuksen raportteja 01/2012.Google Scholar
Kangas, O, Lundberg, U and Ploug, N (2010) Three routes to pension reform: politics and institutions in reforming pensions in Denmark, Finland and Sweden. Social Policy and Administration 44, 265–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, JB and Luttmer, EFP (2015) Would people behave differently if they better understood social security? Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 7, 275–299.Google Scholar
Lusardi, A and Mitchell, OS (2009) How ordinary consumers make complex economic decisions: financial literacy and retirement readiness. NBER Working Paper 15350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusardi, A and Mitchell, OS (2014) The economic importance of financial literacy: theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature 52, 5–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacLeod, P, Fitzpatrick, A, Hamlyn, B, Jones, A, Kinver, A and Page, L (2012) Attitudes to pensions: the 2012 survey. Department of Work and Pensions Research Report No 813: London.Google Scholar
Margalit, A (1998) The Decent Society. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mastrobuoni, G (2011) The role of information for retirement behavior: evidence based on the stepwise introduction of the social security statement. Journal of Public Economics 95, 913–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myles, J and Pierson, P (2001) The comparative political economy of pension reform. In Pierson, P (ed.), The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 305–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, E (2014) Raising the retirement age: retrenchment, feedback and attitudes. In Kumlin, S and Stadelmann-Steffen, I (eds), How Welfare States Shape the Democratic Public. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 223–243.Google Scholar
Naumann, E (2017) Do increasing reform pressures change welfare state attitudes? An experimental study on population aging, pension reform preferences, political knowledge and ideology. Aging and Society 37, 266–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, E (2018) Trust in ageing societies: confidence in pensions across Europe. In Ebbinghaus, B and Naumann, E (eds), Welfare State Reforms Seen from Below. London: Palgrave/MacMillan, pp. 187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nivalainen, S and Tenhunen, S (2018) Pension knowledge, impact of economic incentives and retirement intentions. Finnish Centre for Pensions Studies 01/2018. (Study in Finnish, summary available in English.).Google Scholar
OECD (2017) Pensions at a Glance 2017: OECD and G20 Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
OECD (2019) Pensions at a Glance 2019: OECD and G20 Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Pierson, C (2006) Beyond the Welfare State. The New Political Economy of Welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge Polity Press.Google Scholar
Reipas, K and Sankala, M (2015) Effects of the 2017 earnings-related pension reform – projections based on the government bill. Finnish Centre for Pensions reports 08/2015.Google Scholar
Stata (2011) Structural Equation Modeling, Release 12. College Station Texas: A Stata Press Corporation.Google Scholar
Svallfors, S (2004) Class, attitudes and the welfare state: Sweden in comparative perspective. Social Policy and Administration 38, 119–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takala, M (2015) Luottamus eläketurvaan vuosina 2011 ja 2014 [Trust in pension security in 2011 and 2014]. Eläketurvakeskuksen raportteja 2015.Google Scholar
van Rooij, MCJ, Lusardi, A and Alessie, R (2011) Financial literacy and stock market participation. Journal of Financial Economics 101, 449–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar