OECDs publikasjoner

OECD (2010). Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This report describes the main quantitative investment regulations applied to pension funds in OECD and selected non-OECD countries as of December 2009.

The questionnaire covers all types of pension plans financed via pension funds. Where regulations vary depending on the type of plan (occupational, personal, mandatory, voluntary, DB, DC, etc), the tables identify the types of plan that the investment regulations apply to.

The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions (minima and maxima) applied to pension funds at different legal levels (law, regulation, guidelines, etc). The survey also includes information on investment regulations pertaining to selected non-OECD countries that participate in the meetings of the Working Private Pension Party (WPPP) as observers (i.e. Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Estonia, India, Israel, Russian Federation and South Africa).

The survey contains four different tables. Table 1 contains only portfolio ceilings on pension fund investment by broad asset classes. Table 2 contains quantitative restrictions on foreign investment. Table 3 contains other quantitative restrictions classified by type of regulation. Table 4 shows the main changes to pension fund investment regulations during the period 2002-2009.

OECD (2009). 2008 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This report describes the main quantitative investment regulations applied to pension funds in OECD and selected non-OECD countries as of December 2008.

The questionnaire covers all types of pension plans financed via pension funds. Where regulations vary depending on the type of plan (occupational, personal, mandatory, voluntary, DB, DC, etc), the tables identify the types of plan that the investment regulations apply to.

The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions (minima and maxima) applied to pension funds at different legal levels (law, regulation, guidelines, etc). The survey also includes information on investment regulations pertaining to selected non-OECD countries that participate in the meetings of the Working Private Pension Party (WPPP) as observers (i.e. Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Estonia, India, Israel, Russian Federation and South Africa).

The survey contains 4 different tables. Table 1 contains only portfolio ceilings on pension fund investment by broad asset classes. Table 2 contains quantitative restrictions on foreign investment. Table 3 contains other quantitative restrictions classified by type of regulation. Table 4 shows the main changes to pension fund investment regulations during the period 2002-2008

OECD (2009). Transforming Pensions and Healthcare in a Rapidly Ageing World: Opportunities and Collaborative Strategies. Reports.

This report addresses the question of ageing societies from a perspective that integrates implications and solutions for both healthcare and pensions, whereas most reports look separately at one or the other. The report focuses on opportunities, whereas most previous ones have focused primarily on risks. Finally, the report provides an overview of a broad set of practical solutions, ranging from the existing, but underappreciated, to the highly innovative. This report combines the experience, ideas and wisdom of a wide range of participants and is the outcome of the second phase of a project mandated by the World Economic Forum’s financial services and healthcare communities. Phase one culminated in the publication of The Future of Pensions and Healthcare in a Rapidly Ageing World: Scenarios to 2030. Phase two, embodied in this report, distils the insights of interviews and workshops with approximately 200 experts and decision-makers in Beijing, Brussels, Davos, Dubai, Geneva, London, Milan, New York, Rome, Tianjin and Tokyo.

OECD (2009). Private Pensions and Policy Responses to the Crisis – Recommendation on Core Principles of Occupational Pension Regulation. Reports.

This report describes why occupational pensions play a major role in OECD countries and worldwide, complementing retirement income from state sources. Their financial importance is highlighted by the volume of assets they manage on behalf of plan members, USD 22 trillion at the end of 2008. Population ageing has also led many OECD countries to undertake a wide range of pension reforms – the overall effect of which has been to reduce public pension promises and in turn to increase the importance of private pension savings for retirement.

OECD (2008). 2007 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This report describes the main quantitative investment regulations applied to pension funds in OECD and selected non-OECD countries as of December 2007. The questionnaire covers all types of pension plans financed via pension funds. Where regulations vary depending on the type of plan (occupational, personal, mandatory, voluntary, DB, DC, etc), the tables identify the types of plan that the investment regulations apply to. The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions (minima and maxima) applied to pension funds at different legal levels (law, regulation, guidelines, etc). This year the survey was extended for the first time to non-OECD countries that participate in the meetings of the Working Private Pension Party (WPPP) as observers. These countries include Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Estonia, India, Israel, Russian Federation and South Africa. The survey contains 4 different tables. Table 1 contains only portfolio ceilings on pension fund investment by broad asset classes. Table 2 contains additional quantitative restrictions on foreign investment. Table 3 contains other quantitative restrictions classified by type of regulation. Table shows the main changes to pension fund investment regulations during the period 2002-2007.

OECD (2008). Sovereign Wealth and Pension Fund Issues. Reports.

Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) are pools of assets owned and managed directly or indirectly by governments to achieve national objectives. These funds have raised concerns about: i) financial stability; ii) corporate governance and iii) political
interference and protectionism. At the same time governments have formed other large pools of capital to finance public pension systems, i.e. Public Pension Reserve Funds (PPRFs). SWFs are set up to diversify and improve the return on foreign exchange reserves or commodity revenue, and to shield the domestic economy from fluctuations in commodity prices. PPRFs are set up to contribute to financing pay-as-you-go pension plans. The total of SWF pools is estimated at around USD 2.6 trillion in 2006/7, and is getting bigger rapidly, owing to current exchange rate policies and oil prices. The total amount for PPRFs is even larger, around USD 4.4 trillion in 2006/7, if the US Trust Fund is included (USD 2.2 trillion if excluded). SWFs and PPRFs share some characteristics, hence give rise to similar concerns.

However, their objectives, investment strategies, sources of funding and transparency requirements differ. There is concern about strategic and political objectives of SWFs, and their impact on exchange rates and asset prices. But SWFs also provide mechanisms for breaking up concentrations of portfolios that increase risk. Enhancing governance and transparency of SWFs is important, but such considerations have to be weighed against commercial objectives.

OECD (2007). 2006 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This report describes the main quantitative investment regulations applied to pension funds in OECD and selected non-OECD countries, as of December 2006. The questionnaire covers all types of pension plans financed via pension funds. Where regulations vary depending on the type of plan (occupational, personal, mandatory, voluntary, DB, DC, etc), the tables identify the types of plan that the investment regulations apply to. The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions (minima and maxima) applied to pension funds at different legal levels (law, regulation, guidelines, etc). This year the survey was extended for the first time to non-OECD countries that participate in the meetings of the Working Private Pension Party (WPPP) as observers. These countries include Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Estonia, India, Israel, Russia Federation and South Africa. The survey contains 3 different tables. Table 1 contains only portfolio ceilings on pension fund investment by broad asset classes. Table 2 contains additional quantitative restrictions on foreign investment. Table 3 contains other quantitative restrictions classified by type of regulation.

OECD (2005). Pension Funds for Government Workers in OECD Countries. Reports.

In many OECD countries these funds are among the largest in terms of assets and number of participants and constitute an important share of financial assets. Nonetheless, civil servants’ pension funds are exposed to particular risks related to the multiple roles played by the state which is, at same time, sponsor, regulator, supervisor, service provider, fiduciary agent and recipient of pension fund investments. Specific government-related agency problems can arise with respect to these funds which differ from those frequently analysed in the private sector. This paper analyses these risks in light of the experiences of Australia, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands and the United States and identifies good practices on how to avoid or mitigate them.

OECD (2005). 2004 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This document describes quantitative investment regulations on pension funds in OECD countries as of end December 2004.

The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions (minima and maxima) applied to autonomous pension funds in OECD countries at different legal levels (law, regulation, industry norms, etc). Table 1 contains only portfolio ceilings on pension fund investment by broad asset classes. Table 2 contains additional quantitative restrictions classified by type of regulation.

OECD (2004). Developments in Pension Fund Risk Management. Reports.

The paper opens with a brief overview of types of risk and types of pension plan, considering who bears risk in the different types of scheme. It then goes on to look at risk management at various stages of the investment process. Strategic asset allocation is first considered, whereby the broad investment policy of the fund is set, looking at how to match assets and liabilities in defined benefit schemes, and how to optimise returns most successfully in all funds, including defined contribution pension plans. Tactical asset allocation is then discussed, looking at the best way to achieve targeted returns, (passively, actively via derivatives), and ways to successfully diversify assets. Finally governance issues are examined, looking at ways to ensure that the investment process is both adequate and implemented properly, and limitations on current governance practices (in particular the prudent person rule and trustees) are considered. The paper finishes with a country survey, looking at risk management practices in selected OECD and Asian countries.

OECD (2004). Global Pension Statistics Project: Measuring the Size of Private Pensions with an International Perspective. Reports.

This article, which was published in Financial Market Trends, No. 87, October 2004, provides an overview of OECD's Global Pension Statistics Project and reports on results to date.

OECD (2004). 2003 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

This document describes the quantitative investment limits for pension funds in the OECD area as of December 2003. The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions applied to autonomous pension funds in OECD countries at different legal levels (law, regulation, industry norms).

OECD (2003). Issues Concerning Occupational Schemes for Civil Servants and Other Public Sector Workers. Reports.

This document raises some policy issues regarding the pension plans of public sector workers, which may include workers employed by central, federal, and local governments as well as workers working for state enterprises. These plans may be classified as private or public depending on the legal nature of the institution responsible for administering the payment of benefits.

OECD (2003). Financial Market Trends Impact on Private Pensions. Reports.

For the past few years, the Committee on Financial Markets (CMF) has devoted significant attention to the impact of retirement savings on the financial markets of Member countries. While the CMF is not directly responsible for pension issues , it is widely known that pensions are closely linked to issues that are of direct interest to the Committee, such as institutional investment and the development of capital markets. Indeed, one of the forces that underlay the extraordinary expansion of financial markets in the 1980s and 1990s was the accumulation of institutional savings driven in large part by the goal of financing retirement. The link between pensions, institutional investors and financial markets was a major theme in the 1998 publication "Institutional Investors in the New Financial Landscape," which originated in a special meeting between CMF delegates and outside experts in institutional investment and capital markets.

OECD (2003). Prudent Person Rule Standard for the Investment of Pension Fund Assets. Reports.

This paper develops work on the investment regulation of pension funds in accordance with the Programmes of Work of the OECD's Insurance Committee and the Working Party on Private Pensions. The manner in which pension fund assets are invested and the way in which that investment is regulated and supervised are crucial to the success of funded pension programmes. The regulation and supervision of pension assets has two main goals: First, to assure the safety and security of those assets and second, to create an environment in which asset management can obtain the best returns at an acceptable level of risk. Additionally and perhaps more controversially, through the regulation of pension asset management, countries may pursue goals exogenous to the health, stability and success of the pension system itself. How best to achieve these goals has been the subject of intense debate in both OECD and non-OECD countries in recent years, especially those that have established or are in the process of establishing funded pension programmes and, in particular, those in which assets are managed by private sector institutions.

OECD (2001). 2001 Survey of Investment Regulation of Pension Funds. Reports.

The information collected concerns all forms of quantitative portfolio restrictions applied to pension funds in OECD countries at different legal levels (law, regulation, normative, etc). Pension funds are independent legal entities that are established and managed mainly for the purpose of providing retirement and other old-age benefits (such as disability, health benefits) to the members of a pension plan. Pension funds as defined in this form exist in all countries except Greece, the Slovak Republic, and Turkey.

OECD (2001). Public-Private Interaction in the Structural Pension Reform in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 2)c of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2001). Private Pensions: Selected Country Profiles. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 1)b of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2001). Comparative Tables on Private Pension Schemes. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 1)a of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2001). Pension Fund Governance. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 1, 4)b of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2001). Principles for Investment Regulation of Pension Funds and Life Insurance Companies. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 1, 3)c of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2000). The Evolution of Pension Systems in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: Opportunities, Constraints, Dilemmas and Emerging Practices. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 2)d of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2000). Pension Funds in Latin America: Features and Limits. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 2)b of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2000). Pension Funds in Latin America: Recent Trends and Regulatory Challenges. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 2)a of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.

OECD (2000). Private Pensions: Regulatory Issues. Reports.

This document is Book 2, Part 2, 1)d of the Insurance and Private Pensions Compendium for Emerging Economies.