The World Bank Making Pension Reform Work: The Link to Labor and Financial Market Reforms Robert...

The World Bank

Making Pension Reform Work:The Link to Labor and Financial

Market Reforms

Robert HolzmannWorld Bank

International Forum on Pension Reform

Bled, Slovenia June 7-9, 2007

Enhancing Job Opportunities in ECA 2

The World Bank

2

Key messagesPension reform under an aging population is a world-wide reform agendaWithout deep structural reforms expenditure for public pension (and health) risk to derail fiscal policy for decades to comeSolutions for pensions (compared to health) are relatively straightforward and limitedYet to be successful, this requires parallel reforms in the labor and financial market, and beyond


The World Bank

3

RoadmapI. Demography: Aging and fiscal

implicationsII. Public pensions: What are the reform

drivers, options, and lessons?III. Labor Market: Key to solution but

how to keep the elderly employed?IV. Financial market: Funded pensions are

gaining importance but need a ready market

V. Conclusions and next steps


The World Bank

4

I. Demography: Aging and fiscal implications

All the world will experience severe aging over the decades to come, including the low income countriesIn Europe ageing is already well advanced and will continue due to fertility rates well below reproduction (around 1.4 compared to 2.1) and rising life expectanceCentral and South-Eastern Europe is expected to age even faster due to negative net-migration, and labor force may shrink by almost 1% p.a. till 2050Without further reforms, in some countries of the region public pension expenditure would increase by 6+% of GDP by 2050 (compared to reform countries)


The World Bank

5

Chart: Old-Age Dependency Ratios in Selected World Regions

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Year

Old

-Ag

e D

epen

den

cy R

atio

WORLD NORTH SOUTH EU-15 South Eastern Europe


The World Bank

6

II. Public Pensions: Reform DriversFiscal Pressure– Short-term pressure and consequences of un-sustainability: macro

instability and crowding-out of other social expenditure– Long-term pressure and aging of population (Annex table)

Need to align Systems with Socioeconomic Changes– Increase in life-expectancy and old-age pension– Increase in life-expectancy and disability pension– Female labor force participation, divorces and widow’s pensions

Challenges and Opportunities in Globalization– Reacting to shocks – the need of flexibility – Mobility across professions and countries– Financial Sector development – a crucial element to a absorb shocks

and to diversify risks


The World Bank

7

Pension Reform OptionsThe reform options for fiscal balance are limited– Higher contributions (or budget transfers)– Lower benefits– Later retirement: Splitting the gain in life expectancy

between more leisure and more work

Benefit design options, and trade-offs– Defined benefits (DB) or defined contribution (DC)

schemes– Balancing equity and efficiency (incl. incentives)

Funding options, and intergenerational re-distribution– Pay-as-you-go (unfunded) or pre-funding– (Some) funding helps, but no panacea against aging


The World Bank

8

2004 2025 2050

Ratio 60+ /20-59 39% 58% 80%

Ratio 65+ /20-64 27% 39% 58%

Ratio 70+ /20-69 18% 25% 40%

Re-defining the Dependency Ratio in EU25 …… to keep it constant

Source: Eurostat 2005 Demographic Projections


The World Bank

9

Reform trends and lessonsMove toward multi-pillar scheme with– Zero pillar providing poverty alleviation for elderly– Reformed unfunded first pillar, with better contribution benefit link

and higher retirement ages – Often new second funded pillar (see annex table)– New/revamped voluntary and funded pillar

Country innovations– Notional Defined Contribution System to reform first (unfunded and

earnings-related) pillar (Sweden, Latvia, Poland, Italy)– Clearing house approach to reduce costs of funded schemes (Sweden,

Poland, Argentina, Croatia, and soon Chile?)– Transforming severance benefits into funded combined

unemployment/retirement benefits (Austria, Korea, Italy, Chile)– Introducing nation-wide voluntary schemes with opting-out option

(NZ, UK)

Toward harmonization/coordination of schemes across occupations, sectors and countries (for equity and portability reasons) – challenge for European Union


The World Bank

10

Evolution of Number of Countries with Second Pillars

1

34

89

10

14

1617

19

23

25

28

3031

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1981 1985 1993 1994 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Num

ber o

f Cou

ntrie

s

Chile

NetherlandsSwitzerland

Peru

ArgentinaAustraliaColombiaDenmark

Uruguay

Mexico

BoliviaEl SalvadorHungaryKahzastan

PolandSweden

Hong Kong

Costa RicaLatvia

BulgariaCroatiaEstoniaRussia

Domenican R.Kosovo

IndiaKorea Lithuania

NigeriaSlovakia

Macedonia


The World Bank

11

III. Labor Market ReformsNumber of jobs in an economy is not fixed– Fallacy of lump of labor– Withdrawing elderly from the labor market does

not create sustainable jobs for younger cohorts– With increasing life expectancy elderly want to

work longer, if they find a job– Job creation requires multi-sector approach –

MILES to go– Incentives matter for both labor supply and

retirement decisions, and labor demand by firms


The World Bank

12

US

Sweden

Japan

Canada

SpainGermany

UK

Austria

France

NetherlandsItaly

Belgium

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Tax force to retire

Unu

sed

labo

r cap

acity

Retirement Incentives Matter:Implicit tax on remaining in work

Source: Gruber and Wise (1999) and Hofer and Koman (2001)


The World Bank

13

Chart 7. Male Exit Rates and Net Earnings Replacement at the Standard Retirement Age in Fourteen OECD Countries

Sources: Casey et al. (2003) and author's estimates of male labor force exit rates as described in the text.

Exit rate through age 60-64

USAUK

Swtz

Swed

Spa

Nor

Neth

Jpn

Ita

Fra

FinDeu

CanAustral

Exit Rate = 0.58 Repl Rate + 12.60

R2 = 0.25

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Net replacement rate at the standard retirement age (%)

Retirement Incentives Matter:Net replacement rate at retirement

Sources: Casey et al. (2003), and Burtless (2007)


The World Bank

14

Supply-side incentives to retire early

Insufficient (or non-actuarial) adjustment for early/delayed retirementHigh net-benefit level (replacement rate) that are typical for unsustainable schemesEarnings-test: Reduction in benefits while continue working Low minimum retirement ages (and social pressure to retire)Special early retirement programs, including for long-term unemployed and generous disability programsTax treatment of contributions and benefits


The World Bank

15

Keeping and creating demand for elderly workers

Addressing the productivity-wage gap for elderly– Moving the u-shaped productivity profile upward– Making wages more adjustable/reviewing the seniority

principleStrengthening life-long learning– Including training in wage negotiations– Creating flexibility across learning, working and

(retirement) leisureCreating mobility – Between sectors, countries and regions– Between different stages of family life and family

structures (e.g. child bearing, divorce)– Between positions/status across the life-cycle


The World Bank

16

III. Financial Market Reforms

Trend toward multi-pillar scheme and hence funded pensions will continue– By design - introduction of second pillar (e.g. Bulgaria,

Croatia, Macedonia, Slovakia, etc.)– By default/design – making the first pillar less generous

and supporting voluntary schemes (Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Slovenia?)

In Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe the savers-/dis-savers ratio will increase for the next decade providing conditions for fundingYet the financial sector must be able to deliver adequate risk-adjusted rates of return and actuarially fair annuity products


The World Bank

17

Savers/Dissavers Ratio for Key World and European Regions, 1950-2050

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Year

Sav

ers/

Dis

save

rs R

atio

(in

per

cen

t)

NORTH SOUTH CEB&SEE EU15 North America


The World Bank

18

Readiness of the Financial SectorGeneral readiness indicators include– Macroeconomic stability

– A sound financial infrastructure

– An adequate regulatory and supervisory capacity

– A government’ commitment for continue structural reforms

Countries in the region made main progress over last 15 years but more in banking than in non-banking areas (EBRD indicators in Annex)

Confirmed by more detailed readiness study for selected countries


The World Bank

19

Chart 4.1: Score of Readiness Indicators: In Year of Reform, and 5 Years later* (or 2006**)

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Bulgaria** Croatia** Hungary* Poland* Slovakia**

To

tal S

core

(n

orm

aliz

ed)

Score in Year of Reform Score in 2005

1/3

0/10/1

0/0

1/21/2

1/2

1/1

0/0

3/4

x/y: Red indicators in highly important areas / total number of "Red" indicators


The World Bank

20

Scaling-up for more and more diversified pension fund portfolio

Pension fund portfolio in the region still largely dominated by government bondsDiversification toward equity capital needed to deliver on return expectations– International diversification – but how much– Domestic share market – would it be able to

absorb additional 1% of GDP p.a.

How to develop investment opportunities in equity capital in a bank-based environment


The World Bank

21

IV. ConclusionsThe primary solution for pension and other social programs to address population aging is through higher labor force participation, in particular for elderly workersThis requires changes in worker’s incentives, such as benefit/contribution structure to stay in formal labor, and firm incentives to hire and keep elderly workersPension reforms will by default or design give more role to funded provisions. For pension funds to deliver the adequate rates of return will require major and sustained reforms in financial sector


The World Bank

22

ReferencesHolzmann, R., Richard Hinz, and Bank Team, 2005. Old-Age Income Support in the Twenty-first Century: An International Perspective on Pension Systems and Reform, Washington, DC: World Bank.Holzmann, R. R.N. Bebczuk, A. R. Musalem. 2007. Aging Populations and Financial Markets: Global Challenges and Regional Perspectives for Central, Eastern and Southern Europe, World Bank/ERSTE Foundation, in preparation. Queisser, M. and E. Whitehouse. 2006. Neutral or Fair? Actuarial Concepts and Pension-System Design. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 4. Paris: OECD.OECD. 2006. “Retirement Incentives”. Special Issue of “Pension at a Glance”. Paris: OECD. In print.Whitehouse, ED. Pension Panorama: Retirement-Income Systems in 53 Countries. Washington, D.C. World Bank and OECD.World Bank. 2005. Enhancing Job Opportunities in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.


The World Bank

23

Annex

Demographic Structure 2000 and 2050 (Source UN 2005)Second Pillar Reforms in Transition Economies (Source: World Bank)Public Pension Expenditure Projections for EU25 – 2004-2050 (Source: EU Commission)Transition Indicator Score: Banking (Source: EBRD)Transition Indicator Score: Non-Banking (Source: EBRD)


The World Bank

24

2050

Percentage ofpopulation

8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2000


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2050


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2000


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2050


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2000


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

2000


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

FemalesMales

Age

Age

Age

Age

World

More developedregions

Less developedregions

Least developedcountries

2050


8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

100+908070605040302010

0

100+908070605040302010

0

100+908070605040302010

0

100+908070605040302010

0

Source: UN Demographic Projections 2005


The World Bank

25

Country Starting Date First (or Zero) Pillar

Size of second pillar as

percent of payroll

Projected pension fund

assets in 2020 as

percent of GDP

Share of workforce in funded pillar in 2003/6

Switching strategy to new system

Hungary Operating

January 1998 PAYG DB 8 percent 32 percent 45 percent Mandatory new entrants Voluntary others

Kazakhstan Operating

January 1998 Guaranteed Minimum

10 percent 35 percent 82 percent Mandatory

Poland Operating

January 1999 PAYG DC/NDC

7.3 percent 34 percent 70 percent Mandatory <30, Voluntary 30–50

Latvia Operating

July 2001 (NDC January

1996)

PAYG DC/NDC

4 percent growing to 10

percent by 2010

25-30 percent 72 percent Mandatory <30, Voluntary 30–50

Croatia Operating

January 2002 PAYG DB 5 percent 25 –30 percent

73 percent Mandatory <40, Voluntary 40–50

Bulgaria Operating

January 2002 PAYG DB 5 percent 70 percent Mandatory <42

Estonia Operating

July 2002 PAYG DB 6 percent 20 percent 75 percent Voluntary (opt-out +2 percent)

Russia Operating

January 2002 PAYG DC/NDC

4 percent (6 percent in 2008)

n.a. 33 percent Mandatory <50

Kosovo Operating

January 2002 Universal/min.

consumption basket

level

10 percent 8 percent (end-2006)

30 percent Mandatory

Lithuania Operating

January 2004 PAYG DB 5.5 percent 35-40 percent 55 percent Voluntary

Slovakia Operating

January 2005 PAYG DB

9 percent 20 percent 73 percent Mandatory new entrants

Macedonia Operating

January 2006 PAYG DB 7.12 percent 26 percent 25 percent Mandatory new entrants

Romania Legislated

January 2008 PAYG DB

2 percent growing to 6

percent

9 percent Zero Mandatory <35 Voluntary 36-45

Ukraine Partially legislated

January 2009 PAYG DB 2 percent growing to 7

percent

n.a. Zero Mandatory: M<40, F<35 Voluntary: M<50, F<45


The World Bank

26

Public pensions, gross as % of GDP Change Change Change

Country 2004 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050 2004-2030 2030-2050 2004-2050

BE 10,4 10,4 11,0 12,1 13,4 14,7 15,7 15,5 4,3 0,8 5,1

CZ 8,5 8,2 8,2 8,4 8,9 9,6 12,2 14,0 1,1 4,5 5,6

DK 9,5 10,1 10,8 11,3 12,0 12,8 13,5 12,8 3,3 0,0 3,3

DE 11,4 10,5 10,5 11,0 11,6 12,3 12,8 13,1 0,9 0,8 1,7

EE 6,7 6,8 6,0 5,4 5,1 4,7 4,4 4,2 -1,9 -0,5 -2,5

GR

ES 8,6 8,9 8,8 9,3 10,4 11,8 15,2 15,7 3,3 3,9 7,1

FR 12,8 12,9 13,2 13,7 14,0 14,3 15,0 14,8 1,5 0,5 2,0

IE 4,7 5,2 5,9 6,5 7,2 7,9 9,3 11,1 3,1 3,2 6,4

IT 14,2 14,0 13,8 14,0 14,4 15,0 15,9 14,7 0,8 -0,4 0,4

CY 6,9 8,0 8,8 9,9 10,8 12,2 15,0 19,8 5,3 7,6 12,9

LV 6,8 4,9 4,6 4,9 5,3 5,6 5,9 5,6 -1,2 -0,1 -1,2

LT 6,7 6,6 6,6 7,0 7,6 7,9 8,2 8,6 1,2 0,7 1,8

LU 10,0 9,8 10,9 11,9 13,7 15,0 17,0 17,4 5,0 2,4 7,4

HU 10,4 11,1 11,6 12,5 13,0 13,5 16,0 17,1 3,1 3,7 6,7

MT 7,4 8,8 9,8 10,2 10,0 9,1 7,9 7,0 1,7 -2,1 -0,4

NL 7,7 7,6 8,3 9,0 9,7 10,7 11,7 11,2 2,9 0,6 3,5

AT 13,4 12,8 12,7 12,8 13,5 14,0 13,4 12,2 0,6 -1,7 -1,2

PL 13,9 11,3 9,8 9,7 9,5 9,2 8,6 8,0 -4,7 -1,2 -5,9

PT 11,1 11,9 12,6 14,1 15,0 16,0 18,8 20,8 4,9 4,8 9,7

SI 11,0 11,1 11,6 12,3 13,3 14,4 16,8 18,3 3,4 3,9 7,3

SK 7,2 6,7 6,6 7,0 7,3 7,7 8,2 9,0 0,5 1,3 1,8

FI 10,7 11,2 12,0 12,9 13,5 14,0 13,8 13,7 3,3 -0,3 3,1

SE 10,6 10,1 10,3 10,4 10,7 11,1 11,6 11,2 0,4 0,2 0,6

UK 6,6 6,6 6,7 6,9 7,3 7,9 8,4 8,6 1,3 0,7 2,0

EU15 1)10,6 10,4 10,5 10,8 11,4 12,1 12,9 12,9 1,5 0,8 2,3

EU10 10,9 9,8 9,2 9,5 9,7 9,8 10,6 11,1 -1,0 1,3 0,3

EU12 1)11,5 11,3 11,4 11,8 12,5 13,2 14,2 14,1 1,6 0,9 2,6

EU25 1)10,6 10,3 10,4 10,7 11,3 11,9 12,8 12,8 1,3 0,8 2,2

1) excluding Greece


The World Bank

27

Table 4.4a: Transition Indicator Score: Banking reform & interest rate liberalisation

1989 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006ALBANIA 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67ARMENIA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67

AZERBAIJAN 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33BELARUS 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

1.00 1.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67

BULGARIA 1.00 2.00 2.67 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67CROATIA 1.00 2.67 2.67 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 4.00 4.00 4.00CZECH

REPUBLIC1.00 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 4.00 4.00

ESTONIA 1.00 3.00 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 4.00 4.00 4.00FYR

MACEDONIA1.00 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67

GEORGIA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67HUNGARY 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

KAZAKHSTAN 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00KYRGYZ

REPUBLIC1.00 2.00 2.33 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33

LATVIA 1.00 3.00 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67LITHUANIA 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67MOLDOVA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67MONGOLIA 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33

MONTENEGRO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.67POLAND 1.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67

ROMANIA 1.00 3.00 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.00RUSSIAN

FEDERATION1.00 2.00 2.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.67

SERBIA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67SLOVAK

REPUBLIC1.00 2.67 2.67 2.67 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67

SLOVENIA 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33TAJIKISTAN 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33

TURKMENISTAN

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

UKRAINE 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 3.00UZBEKISTAN 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67

Source: EBRD


The World Bank

28

Table 4.4b: Transition Indicator Score: Securities markets & non-bank financial institutions

1989 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006ALBANIA 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67ARMENIA 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

AZERBAIJAN 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67BELARUS 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67

BULGARIA 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67CROATIA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 3.00CZECH

REPUBLIC1.00 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.67 3.67

ESTONIA 1.00 1.67 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.67FYR

MACEDONIA1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33

GEORGIA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67HUNGARY 1.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 4.00 4.00

KAZAKHSTAN 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67KYRGYZ

REPUBLIC1.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

LATVIA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00LITHUANIA 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.67 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00MOLDOVA 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00MONGOLIA 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

MONTENEGRO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67POLAND 1.00 3.00 3.33 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67

ROMANIA 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00RUSSIAN

FEDERATION1.00 2.00 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67 3.00

SERBIA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00SLOVAK

REPUBLIC1.00 2.67 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.67 3.00

SLOVENIA 1.00 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67TAJIKISTAN 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

TURKMENISTAN

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

UKRAINE 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 2.33UZBEKISTAN 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

Source: EBRD

The World Bank Making Pension Reform Work: The Link to Labor and Financial Market Reforms Robert...

Documents

Transcript of The World Bank Making Pension Reform Work: The Link to Labor and Financial Market Reforms Robert...