Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:10:59.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Behavioral economics perspectives on public sector pension plans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2011

JOHN BESHEARS ,
JAMES J. CHOI ,
DAVID LAIBSON  and
BRIGITTE C. MADRIAN
JOHN BESHEARS
Affiliation:
Stanford University, Graduate School of Business, 518 Memorial Way, Stanford, CA 94305-5015, USA and NBER (e-mail: beshears@stanford.edu)
JAMES J. CHOI
Affiliation:
Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, P.O. Box 208200, New Haven, CT 06520-8200, USA and NBER (e-mail: james.choi@yale.edu)
DAVID LAIBSON
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Harvard University, Littauer Center, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA and NBER (e-mail: dlaibson@harvard.edu)
BRIGITTE C. MADRIAN
Affiliation:
Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, 79 JFK Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA and NBER (e-mail: Brigitte_Madrian@harvard.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We describe the pension plan features of the states and the largest cities and counties in the U.S. Unlike in the private sector, defined benefit (DB) pensions are still the norm in the public sector. However, a few jurisdictions have shifted toward defined contribution (DC) plans as their primary savings plan, and fiscal pressures are likely to generate more movement in this direction. Holding fixed a public employee's work and salary history, we show that DB retirement income replacement ratios vary greatly across jurisdictions. This creates large variation in workers’ need to save for retirement in other accounts. There is also substantial heterogeneity across jurisdictions in the savings generated in primary DC plans because of differences in the level of mandatory employer and employee contributions. One notable difference between public and private sector DC plans is that public sector primary DC plans are characterized by required employee or employer contributions (or both), whereas private sector plans largely feature voluntary employee contributions that are supplemented by an employer match. We conclude by applying lessons from savings behavior in private sector savings plans to the design of public sector plans.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 315 - 336
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

References

Agnew, J. R., Anderson, L. R., Gerlach, J. R. and Szykman, L. R. (2008) Who chooses annuities: an experimental investigation of gender, framing and defaults. American Economic Review, 98(2): 418–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Applied Research and Consulting (2009) Financial Capability in the United States, [online]. Available at http://www.finrafoundation.org/web/groups/foundation/@foundation/documents/foundation/p120536.pdf (accessed 9 August 2010).Google Scholar
Benartzi, S. (2001) Excessive extrapolation and the allocation of 401(k) accounts to company stock? Journal of Finance, 56(5): 1747–1764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benartzi, S. and Thaler, R. H. (2001) Naive diversification strategies in retirement saving plans. American Economic Review, 91(1): 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benartzi, S. and Thaler, R. H. (2007) Heuristics and biases in retirement savings behavior. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3): 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2008) The importance of default options for retirement saving outcomes: evidence from the united states. In Kay, S. J. and Sinha, T. (eds), Lessons from Pension Reform in the Americas. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 59–87.Google Scholar
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2010 a) Simplification and saving. NBER Working Paper No. 12659.Google Scholar
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2010 b) The Limitations of Defaults. Harvard University Working paper.Google Scholar
Brown, J. R. (2007) Rational and behavioral perspectives on the role of annuities in retirement planning. NBER Working Paper No. 13537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. R., Kling, J. R., Mullainathan, S. and Wrobel, M. V. (2008) Why don't people insure late-life consumption? A framing explanation of the under-annuitization puzzle. American Economic Review, 98(2): 304–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. R., Liang, N. and Weisbenner, S. (2007) Individual account investment options and portfolio choice: behavioral lessons from 401(k) plans. Journal of Public Economics, 91(10): 1992–2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. R. and Weisbenner, S. (2009) Who chooses defined contribution plans? In Brown, J. R., Liebman, J. B. and Wise, D. A. (eds), Social Security Policy in a Changing Environment. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 131–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvet, L. E., Campbell, J. Y. and Sodini, P. (2009) Measuring the financial sophistication of households. American Economic Review, 99(2): 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D. and Ransom, M. (2011) Pension plan characteristics and framing effects in employee savings behavior. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(1): 228–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, G. D., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C. and Metrick, A. (2009) Optimal defaults and active decisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4): 1639–1674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chalmers, J. and Reuter, J. (2009) How do retirees value life annuities? Evidence from public employees. NBER Working Paper No. 15608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, S. and Stevens, A. H. (2008) What you don't know can't help you: worker knowledge and retirement decision-making. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(2): 253–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2004 a) Plan design and 401(k) savings outcomes. National Tax Journal, 57(2): 275–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2009 a) Reducing the complexity costs of 401(k) participation through quick enrollment. In Wise, D. A. (ed.), Developments in the Economics of Aging. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2009 b) Mental accounting in portfolio choice: evidence from a flypaper effect. American Economic Review, 99(5): 2085–2095.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2010) Why does the law of one price fail? An experiment on index mutual funds. Review of Financial Studies, 23(4): 1405–1432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (forthcoming) $100 Bills on the sidewalk: suboptimal investment in 401(k) plans. Review of Economics and Statistics. doi:10.1162/REST_a_00100.Google Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C. and Metrick, A. (2004 b) Employees’ investment decisions about company stock. In Mitchell, O. S. and Utkus, S. P. (eds), Pension Design and Structure. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C. and Metrick, A. (2006) Saving for retirement on the path of least resistance. In McCaffrey, E. J. and Slemrod, J. (eds), Behavioral Public Finance: Toward a New Agenda. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 304–351.Google Scholar
Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C. and Metrick, A. (2009) Reinforcement learning and savings behavior. Journal of Finance, 64(6): 2515–2534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engen, E. M., Gale, W. G. and Uccello, C. R. (1999) The adequacy of retirement saving. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2: 65–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goda, G. S. and Manchester, C. F. (2010) Incorporating employee heterogeneity into default rules for retirement plan selection. NBER Working Paper No. 16099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustman, A. L., Steinmeier, T. L. and Tabatabai, N. (2007) Imperfect knowledge of plan type. NBER Working Paper No. 13379.Google Scholar
Holden, K. C. and Nicholson, S. (1998) Selection of a joint-and-survivor pension. Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Paper No. 1175–98. University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Hu, W. Y. and Scott, J. S. (2007) Behavioral obstacles in the annuity market. Financial Analysts Journal, 63(6): 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huberman, G. and Jiang, W. (2006) Offering vs. choice by 401(k) plan participants: equity exposure and number of funds. Journal of Finance, 61(2): 763–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, A., Massa, M. and Simonov, A. (2007) Pension portfolio choice and menu exposure. In Mitchell, O. S., Soldo, B. J. and Madrian, B. C. (eds), Redefining Retirement: How Will Boomers Fare? Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 248–271.Google Scholar
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O. S. (2006) Financial literacy and planning: implications for retirement wellbeing. Pension Research Council Working Paper No. 2006–1.Google Scholar
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O. S. (2007) Financial literacy and retirement preparedness: evidence and implications for financial education. Business Economics, 42(1): 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusardi, A., Mitchell, O. S. and Curto, V. (2010) Financial literacy among the young. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(2), 358–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusardi, A. and Tufano, P. (2009) Debt literacy, financial experiences, and overindebtedness. NBER Working Paper No. 14808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madrian, B. C. and Shea, D. F. (2001) The power of suggestion: inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4): 1149–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maine Unified Retirement Plan Task Force (2010) Task Force Study and Report: Maine State Employee and Teacher Unified Retirement Plan. MainePERS.Google Scholar
Mitchell, O. S. (1999) New trends in pension benefit and retirement provisions. NBER Working Paper No. 7381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, O. S., Mottola, G. R., Utkus, S. P. and Yamaguchi, T. (2007) The dynamics of lifecycle investing in 401(k) plans. Pension Research Council Working Paper No. 2007–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munnell, A. H. and Soto, M. (2005) What replacement rates do households actually experience in retirement? Boston College Center for Retirement Research Working Paper No. 2005–10.Google Scholar
Munnell, A. H. and Sundén, A. (2004) Coming up Short: The Challenge of 401(k) Plans. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Munnell, A. H., Webb, A. and Golub-Sass, F. (2007) Is there really a retirement saving crisis? An NRRI analysis. Boston College Center for Retirement Research Issue Brief No. 7–11.Google Scholar
Nessmith, W. E. and Utkus, S. P. (2008) Target-date funds: plan and participation adoption in 2007. Vanguard Center for Retirement Research, 33: 1–16.Google Scholar
Pensions & Investments (2010 a) The P&I 1000: Largest Retirement Funds. Data set available online at http://www.pionline.com/section/datastore#pi1000 (accessed 7 July 2010).Google Scholar
Pensions & Investments (2010 b) The P&I 1000. Pensions & Investments, 38(3): 13.Google Scholar
Previtero, A. (2010) Stock market returns and annuitization. Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saku, A. (2005) Does the balance of power within a family matter? The case of the retirement equity act. Journal of Public Economics, 89(9–10): 1699–1717.Google Scholar
Scholz, J. K., Seshadri, A. and Khitatrakun, S. (2006) Are Americans saving ‘optimally’ for retirement? Journal of Political Economy, 114(4): 607–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snell, R. (2010 a) Pension reform: not easy, but worth it. State Legislatures, [online] July/August, 32–34. Available online at http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=20716 (accessed 6 August 2010).Google Scholar
Snell, R. (2010 b) State defined contribution and hybrid pension plans. National Conference of State Legislatures [online]. Available online at http://www.ncsl.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=yGsmFhwoq7E%3d&tabid=18511 (accessed 6 August 2010).Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H. and Benartzi, S. (2004) Save more tomorrow: using behavioral economics to increase employee savings. Journal of Political Economy, 112(S1): S164–S187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Census Bureau (2008) Number and Membership of State and Local Public Employee Retirement Systems by State: Fiscal Year 2008. Available online at http://www.census.gov/govs/retire/2008ret05a.html (accessed 4 August 2010).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2007) National Compensation Survey: Employee Benefits in Private Industry in the United States, 2005. Available online at http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/sp/ebbl0022.pdf (accessed 18 January 2011).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefit Security Administration (2008) Private Pension Plan Bulletin Historical Tables. Available online at: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/privatepensionplanbulletinhistoricaltables.pdf (accessed 13 December 2007).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefit Security Administration (2010) Private Pension Plan Bulletin: Abstract of 2007 Form 5500 Annual Reports. Available online at: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/2007pensionplanbulletin.pdf (accessed 4 August 2010).Google Scholar
Yaari, M. E. (1965) Uncertain lifetime, life insurance, and the theory of the consumer. Review of Economic Studies, 32(2): 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, T. S. (2005) Understanding the defined benefit versus defined contribution choice. Pension Research Council Working Paper No. 2005–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar