Search

The ageing of populations is an unprecedented worldwide phenomenon that has created anxiety about labour and skill shortages in many developed countries. One way to address these concerns is to extend the working lives of seniors through appropriate retirement, retention and recruitment policies. This paper utilises official policy documentation and employment data to compare the policies, practices and predicaments of senior employment in Hong Kong and Singapore, two of developed Asia's most ageing economies. It finds that while labour force participation rates among Hong Kong seniors have declined since the early 1990s, older workers in Singapore remain largely confined to the secondary labour market. This paper examines why these trends are occurring and whether longer working lives will lead to greater opportunities for ‘active ageing’ in employment or, conversely, force older workers into a reserve army of labour to maintain their incomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies of East Asian welfare regimes focus on similarities between social security schemes. In contrast, this paper explores cross-national variations in public–private pension mixes in six welfare states: China, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. Our research echoes the pension policy analysis of international organisations but takes a step forward with emphasis on the historical and institutional characteristics of the respective pension systems. The analysis identifies three institutional patterns. First, the statist pension system (Taiwan and China) primarily relies on public pensions to provide old-age security, with private pensions playing a rather minor role. Second, in the dualist pension system (Japan and Korea) both public and private pensions work in parallel to ensure retirement income, though a clear security gap exists between workers in the formal and informal economies. Finally, the individualist pension system (Hong Kong and Singapore) is characterised by genuine fully funded individual accounts, emphasising citizens' own responsibilities for ensuring old-age security. These three types of pension systems demonstrate distinct institutional characteristics and policy outcomes, illustrated by the juxtaposition of their institutional structures as well as by the comparison of key indicators collected from government reports and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development statistics. The paper concludes with a theoretical reflection of East Asian pension policies and a diagnosis of the distinct challenges confronted by each of the various pension patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]