Pension reform
Australia and China compared
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13119204 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hazel Bateman (0000-0002-6997-938X, UNSW Sydney, corresponding author), Kevin Liu (0000-0002-8754-3504, UNSW Sydney) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 456-474 |
| Publication date | 2017-10-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Economic and Political Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2470-4024 • E-ISSN: 2095-4816 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/20954816.2017.1384620 |
| OpenAlex | W2766976803 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 12 |
Over the past few decades, China’s pension system has evolved from separate schemes almost exclusively for urban and public sector workers to one with broad national coverage. In a similar time-frame, successive Australian governments have introduced reforms to Australia’s retirement income arrangements in an attempt to increase retirement savings and address age-related pressures on the financing of the publicly provided age pension. This paper compares, contrasts and assesses the pension systems in China and Australia. Although China and Australia are at different stages of economic development and demographic transition and operate quite different pension systems, there are lessons to be learned from each other
Business · China · Development economics · Economic growth · Economic policy · Economics · National Pension · Pension · Pension system · Political science · Social pension · Elder Abuse and Neglect · Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving · Migration, Aging, and Tourism Studies · Finance
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.33 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2022 (3) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |