Participation in Workplace Pension Schemes and the Effect of Provision: Evidence from the United Kingdom*

Fiscal Studies

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 189-206

  Nunes, Bernardo Fonseca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

E21; I38; J32; J48; matching estimators; pensions; propensity score; retirement savings

Indexed keywords

EID: 85040720060     PISSN: 01435671     EISSN: 14755890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-5890.2017.12152     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Abadie, A. and Imbens, G. (2016), ‘Matching on the estimated propensity score’, Econometrica, vol. 84, pp. 781–807.
2. Arad, A. and Rubinstein, A. (2015), ‘The people's perspective on libertarian-paternalistic policies’, Tel Aviv University, Institute for Consumer Policy (ConPolicy), working paper.
3. Austin, P. (2011), ‘An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies’, Multivariate Behavioral Research, vol. 46, pp. 399–424.
4. Becker, S. and Caliendo, M. (2007), ‘Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects’, Stata Journal, vol. 7, pp. 71–83.
5. Benartzi, S. and Thaler, R. (2013), ‘Behavioral economics and the retirement savings crisis’, Science, vol. 339, pp. 1152–3.
6. Beshears, J., Choi, J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. (2009), ‘The importance of default options for retirement saving outcomes’, in R. Brown, J. Liebman and D. Wise (eds), Social Security Policy in a Changing Environment, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7. Beshears, J., Choi, J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. (2010), ‘The impact of employer matching on savings plan participation under automatic enrolment’, in D. Wise (ed.), Research Findings in the Economics of Aging, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Blundell, R. and Costa Dias, M. (2009), ‘Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics’, Journal of Human Resources, vol. 44, pp. 565–640.
9. Brown, S. and Taylor, K. (2014), ‘Household finances and the “Big Five” personality traits’, Journal of Economic Psychology, vol. 45, pp. 197–212.
10. Bryan, M. and Lloyd, J. (2014), Who Saves for Retirement? 2: Eligible Non-Savers, London: Strategic Society Centre.
11. Bryan, M., Lloyd, J., Rabe, B. and Taylor, M. (2011), Who Saves for Retirement?, London: Strategic Society Centre.
12. Cameron, A. and Trivedi, P. (2005), Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Carrol, G., Choi, J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. and Metrick, A. (2009), ‘Optimal defaults and active decisions’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 120, pp. 1639–74.
14. Chetty, R., Friedman, J., Leth-Petersen, S., Nielsen, T. and Olsen, T. (2014), ‘Active vs passive decisions and crowd-out in retirement savings accounts: evidence from Denmark’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 129, pp. 1141–219.
15. Choi, J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. and Metrick, A. (2006), ‘Saving for retirement on the path of least resistance’, in E. McCaffrey and J. Slemrod (eds), Behavioral Public Finance: Toward a New Agenda, New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
16. Cribb, J. and Emmerson, C. (2016), ‘What happens when employers are obliged to nudge? Automatic enrolment and pension saving in the UK’, Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), Working Paper no. W16/19.
17. Cronqvist, H. and Thaler, R. (2004), ‘Design choices in privatized social-security systems: learning from the Swedish experience’, American Economic Review, vol. 94, pp. 424–8.
18. Felsen, G., Castelo, N. and Reiner, P. (2013), ‘Decisional enhancement and autonomy: public attitudes towards overt and covert nudges’, Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8, pp. 202–13.
19. Hagman, W., Anderson, D., Vastfjall, D. and Tinghog, G. (2015), ‘Public views on policies involving nudges’, Review of Philosophy and Psychology, vol. 6, pp. 439–53.
20. th edition, UK Data Service, SN: 5151.
21. Jung, J. and Mellers, B. (2016), ‘American attitudes toward nudges’, Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11, pp. 622–74.
22. Kausel, E., Hansen, E. and Tapia, P. (2016), ‘Responsible personal finance: the role of conscientiousness in bank and pension savings in Chile’, International Review of Finance, vol. 16, pp. 161–7.
23. Keller, P., Harlam, B., Loewenstein, G. and Volpp, K. (2011), ‘Enhanced active choice: a new method to motivate behavior change’, Journal of Consumer Psychology, vol. 21, pp. 373–83.
24. Lawless, L., Drichoutis, A. and Nayga Jr, R. (2013), ‘Time preferences and health behaviour: a review’, Agricultural and Food Economics, December, pp. 1–17.
25. Lewbel, A., Dong, Y. and Yang, T. (2012), ‘Comparing features of convenient estimators for binary choice models with endogenous regressors’, Canadian Journal of Economics, vol. 45, pp. 809–29.
26. Madrian, B. (2012), ‘Matching contributions and savings outcomes: a behavioral economics perspective’, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Working Paper no. 18220.
27. Madrian, B. and Shea, D. (2001), ‘The power of suggestion: inertia in 401(k), participation and saving behaviour’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 116, pp. 1149–87.
28. Manning, J., Hedden, T., Wickens, N., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Prelec, D. and Gabrieli, J. (2014), ‘Personality influences temporal discounting preferences: behavioral and brain evidence’, Neuroimage, vol. 98, pp. 42–9.
29. Mantel, N. and Haenszel, W. (1959), ‘Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease’, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 22, pp. 719–48.
30. nd edition, New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31. Nyhus, E. and Webley, P. (2001), ‘The role of personality in household saving and borrowing behaviour’, European Journal of Personality, vol. 15, pp. 85–103.
32. th edition, UK Data Service, SN: 6689.
33. Peretti-Watel, P., L'Haridon, O. and Seror, V. (2013), ‘Time preferences, socioeconomic status and smokers’ behaviour, attitudes and risk awareness’, European Journal of Public Health, vol. 23, pp. 783–8.
34. Reisch, L. and Sunstein, C. (2016), ‘Do Europeans like nudges?’, Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11, pp. 310–25.
35. Rosenbaum, P. (2002), Observational Studies, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
36. Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1983a), ‘The role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects’, Biometrika, vol. 70, pp. 41–55.
37. Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1983b), ‘Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 45, pp. 212–18.
38. Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1985), ‘Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score’, American Statistician, vol. 39, pp. 33–8.
39. Samuelson, W. and Zeckhauser, R. (1988), ‘Status quo bias in decision making’, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, vol. 1, pp. 7–59.
40. Sunstein, C. (2013), ‘Impersonal default rules vs. active choices vs. personalized default rules: a triptych’, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2171343.
41. Sunstein, C. (2015), ‘Do people like nudges?’, Harvard University, Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, Regulatory Policy Program Working Paper no. RPP-2015-14.
42. Sunstein, C. and Thaler, R. (2003), ‘Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron’, University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 70, pp. 1159–202.
43. Thaler, R. and Benartzi, S. (2004), ‘Save more tomorrow: using behavioral economics to increase employee savings’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 112, pp. 164–87.