IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jpenef/v16y2017i03p371-394_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political support for reforms of the pension system: two experiments

Author

Listed:
  • GOUVEIA, ANA FONTOURA

Abstract

We conduct two randomized control trials designed to understand the role of information and priming on the willingness to retrench the pension system. The first entails a survey to a sample of Portuguese voters, who are randomly presented with a text providing factual information about the public pension system. The second surveys a sample of Portuguese University students, randomly presented with an alternative order of questions. We show that more literacy on the pension system has a positive impact on the individual willingness to support reforms. Given that public opinion is usually seen as an important deterrent of effective action by politicians and that the level of voters’ literacy can be influenced by policy action, this analysis may provide useful insights to policy makers faced with the challenge of reforming existent pension systems. Our analysis also suggests that priming effects should not be ignored, given their impact in individuals in the extremes of the political spectrum.

Suggested Citation

  • Gouveia, Ana Fontoura, 2017. "Political support for reforms of the pension system: two experiments," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 371-394, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:16:y:2017:i:03:p:371-394_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474747216000305/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fornero, Elsa & Lo Prete, Anna, 2019. "Voting in the aftermath of a pension reform: the role of financial literacy," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Schuetz, Jana & Uebelmesser, Silke & Baginski, Ronja & Aprea, Carmela, 2023. "Pension reform preferences in Germany: Does information matter?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Ms. Izabela Karpowicz, 2019. "Self-Employment and Support for the Dutch Pension Reform," IMF Working Papers 2019/064, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Ana Fontoura Gouveia & Gustavo Monteiro & Sílvia Fonte Santa, 2019. "Product Markets’ Deregulation: A more Productive, more Effcient and more Resilient Economy?," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 230(3), pages 125-155, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jpenef:v:16:y:2017:i:03:p:371-394_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pef .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.