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

5Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

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?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jessoula, M. (2018). Pension multi-pillarisation in Italy: actors, ‘institutional gates’ and the ‘new politics’ of funded pensions. Transfer, 24(1), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258917748275

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free