Since 1981 close to forty countries have introduced systemic pension reforms that have replaced all or part of prior pay-as-you-go (PAYG) schemes with privately managed funded defined contribution (FDC) pillars or systems. However, over the past decade about half of these countries have subsequently cutback on, or entirely eliminated, these FDC schemes. In this article we explore some of the reasons why this reversal is often taking place in developing countries. As part of our analysis we propose a new pension reform typology that goes beyond the commonly used dichotomy between PAYG and pension privatization. We identify and discuss four factors that are of particular relevance to those seeking to understand the pension policy reversals that have been taking place in many developing countries: low pension coverage and incentive incompatibility, triple burden costs, tradeoffs between pension reforms and social pensions, and difficulties with annuitization.

No abstract