Abstract
In many policy areas it is essential to use the best estimates of life expectancy, but it is vital to most areas of pension policy. This paper presents the conceptual differences between static period and dynamic cohort mortality tables, estimates the differences in life expectancy for Portugal and Spain, and compares official estimates of both life expectancy estimates for Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States for 1981, 2010, and 2060. These comparisons reveal major differences between period and cohort life expectancy in and between countries and across years. The implications of using wrong estimates for pension policy, including financial sustainability, are explored.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 212-231 |
| Journal | Journal of Pension Economics and Finance |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 13 May 2020 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2021 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 1 No Poverty
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 5 Gender Equality
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Keywords
- Balancing mechanism
- cross-country comparison
- Lee-Carter
- life expectancy indexation
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Getting life expectancy estimates right for pension policy: Period versus cohort approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver