A latecomer to supplementary funded pension provision, Italy’s multi-pillarisation plan was launched in the 1990s under extremely adverse conditions. Supplementary schemes were expected to achieve universal coverage relying primarily on second pillar occupational pension funds. Twenty-five years after its launch, the comprehensive plan can hardly be called successful with respect to both coverage and the relative importance of second and third pillar institutions. Extreme variation in coverage rates between occupational categories and across economic sectors suggests, however, that these developments cannot be merely interpreted as a consequence of institutional resilience and path-dependent dynamics. The article applies an ‘actor-centred institutionalist’ framework to respond to three main questions. What explains the still limited coverage of supplementary pillars in Italy? What factors account for the prominent role played by third pillar pension schemes in contrast to policy-makers’ original intentions? Which factors allow us to understand the significant variation in coverage across both occupational categories and economic sectors?

Pension multi-pillarisation in Italy : actors, “institutional gates” and the “new politics” of funded pensions / M. Jessoula. - In: TRANSFER. - ISSN 1024-2589. - 24:1(2018 Feb), pp. 73-89. [10.1177/1024258917748275]

Pension multi-pillarisation in Italy : actors, “institutional gates” and the “new politics” of funded pensions

M. Jessoula
2018

Abstract

A latecomer to supplementary funded pension provision, Italy’s multi-pillarisation plan was launched in the 1990s under extremely adverse conditions. Supplementary schemes were expected to achieve universal coverage relying primarily on second pillar occupational pension funds. Twenty-five years after its launch, the comprehensive plan can hardly be called successful with respect to both coverage and the relative importance of second and third pillar institutions. Extreme variation in coverage rates between occupational categories and across economic sectors suggests, however, that these developments cannot be merely interpreted as a consequence of institutional resilience and path-dependent dynamics. The article applies an ‘actor-centred institutionalist’ framework to respond to three main questions. What explains the still limited coverage of supplementary pillars in Italy? What factors account for the prominent role played by third pillar pension schemes in contrast to policy-makers’ original intentions? Which factors allow us to understand the significant variation in coverage across both occupational categories and economic sectors?
Le plan italien en matiere de pension a plusieurs piliers, qui marque une entree tardive du pays dans la logique des pensions complementaires, a ete´ adopte´ dans les anne´es 1990 dans des conditions extremement defavorables. Les regimes complementaires etaient censes fournir une couverture universelle en se basant essentiellement sur le second pilier des fonds de pension professionnelle. Vingt-cinq ans plus tard, le plan dans son ensemble peut difficilement etre qualifie´ de succes, tant en termes de couverture que d’importance relative des institutions du second et du troisieme pilier. Les differences considerables dans les taux de couverture selon les categories professionnelles et les secteurs economiques suggerent toutefois que ces evolutions ne peuvent etre simplement interprete´es comme la consequence d’une resilience institutionnelle, et de dynamiques propres au chemin suivi. L’article applique un cadre « institutionnaliste centre´ sur l’acteur » pour repondre a trois questions essentielles: qu’est-ce qui explique la couverture encore limitee des piliers complementaires en Italie ? Quels facteurs expliquent le role essentiel jouè par les regimes de pension du troisieme pilier, a` rebours des intentions initiales des decideurs politiques? Quels facteurs nous permettent de comprendre les variations considerables de couverture entre categories professionnelles et entre secteurs economiques?
welfare; welfare state; pensioni; previdenza complementare; supplementary pensions; reform; Italy
Settore SPS/04 - Scienza Politica
feb-2018
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Jessoula in Transfer 1_2018_accepted version.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Post-print, accepted manuscript ecc. (versione accettata dall'editore)
Dimensione 1.06 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.06 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
1024258917748275.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 366.68 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
366.68 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/550677
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact