This paper examines the development of risk-based supervision of pension funds in Australia. The large number of pension funds has meant that since the inception of pension fund supervision in the early 1990's the regulator has sought to identify high risk funds and focus its attention on these funds. However, the regulator developed a more sophisticated risk-rating model, known as PAIRS/SOARS, in 1992 in order to apply a more disciplined and consistent ratings methodology. Four reasons are given for the move towards more sophisticated risk-based supervision: 1) creation of an integrated supervisor which allowed the use of techniques used in banking and insurance to be adopted for pension fund; 2) the need to better use available supervisory resources; 3) several pension fund failures; and 4) concerns about industry weaknesses. Supervisory techniques used particularly in the banking industry, such as universal licensing, 'fit and proper' assessment, and risk management requirements were adopted for the pension sector between 2004 and 2006. The paper provides an outline of the PAIRS/SOARS risk-rating model which was also adopted. It observes that the approach provides an analytical discipline to risk assessment, strengthens the link between risk assessment and supervisory response, and allows better targeting of supervisory resources.

'Risk-Based Supervision of Pension Funds' provides a review of the design and experience of risk-based pension fund supervision in countries that have been leaders in the development of these methods. The utilization of risk-based methods originates primarily in the supervision of banks. In recent years it has increasingly been extended to other types of financial intermediaries, including pension funds and insurers. The trend toward risk-based supervision of pensions reflects an increasing focus on risk management in both banking and insurance based on three key elements: capital requirements, supervisory review, and market discipline. Although similar in concept to the techniques developed in banking, its application to pension funds has required modifications, particularly for defined contribution funds that transfer investment risk to fund members. The countries examined–Australia, Denmark, Mexico, and the Netherlands–provide a range of experience that illustrates both the diversity of pension systems and the approaches to risk-based supervision, and also presents a commonality of focus on sound risk management and effective supervisory outcomes.

This paper examines the development of risk-based supervision of pension funds in Australia. The large number of pension funds has meant that since the inception of pension fund supervision in the early 1990's the regulator has sought to identify high risk funds and focus its attention on these funds. However, the regulator developed a more sophisticated risk-rating model, known as PAIRS/SOARS, in 1992 in order to apply a more disciplined and consistent ratings methodology. Four reasons are given for the move towards more sophisticated risk-based supervision: 1) creation of an integrated supervisor which allowed the use of techniques used in banking and insurance to be adopted for pension fund; 2) the need to better use available supervisory resources; 3) several pension fund failures; and 4) concerns about industry weaknesses. Supervisory techniques used particularly in the banking industry, such as universal licensing, 'fit and proper' assessment, and risk management requirements were adopted for the pension sector between 2004 and 2006. The paper provides an outline of the PAIRS/SOARS risk-rating model which was also adopted. It observes that the approach provides an analytical discipline to risk assessment, strengthens the link between risk assessment and supervisory response, and allows better targeting of supervisory resources.

In this fresh and valuable volume, experts from across the world provide guidance on pension design, risk management, and governance that is urgently needed in this rapidly changing pension environment. Aging populations are putting pressure on pay-as-you-go pension systems and spurring a shift to prefunded plans. Greater prefunding requires efficient risk management and judicious regulation and supervision. This book provides state-of-the-art analyses of these issues and should be required reading for scholars, practitioners, and anyone interested in the future of pensions. Alicia H. Munnell, Boston College Carroll School of Management and Center for Retirement Research, US How to deliver adequate pension benefits at reasonable costs is a huge challenge confronting our ageing societies. This book delivers a comprehensive overview of the latest insights into pension finance, pension system design, pension governance and risk based supervision. It combines state-of-the-art analyses with innovative policy proposals to increase the efficiency and resilience of pension systems and to advance these systems contribution to global financial stability. Renowned pension experts offer cutting-edge guidance for future decision making and the development of best practices. This exciting exploration of the frontiers in pension finance highlights key aspects of securing long term retirement provisions. Frontiers in Pension Finance will be of interest to a wide-ranging audience, especially academic researchers, pension practitioners, supervisors and public sector policymakers.

The traditional (final or average salary) pension that employers have provided their employees has suffered a huge decline in labor force coverage in the United Kingdom and the United States, and less severe declines in Canada and elsewhere. The traditional pension provides a precious measure of retirement security by paying retirees an annuity for life. This study compares developments in the countries just named and in Australia, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland to explain the forces behind the decline of the traditional pension and to contrast the experience of public sector employer-provided plans, where it remains dominant. Given the great value of the longevity insurance that the traditional plan provides, and the risks its diminished coverage entails, the book proposes a set of measures that either stem the decline or endow defined contribution pensions with some of the attributes of the traditional plan.

The financial crisis and the ensuing Great Recession alerted those seeking to protect old-age security, about the extreme risks confronting the financial and political institutions comprising our retirement system. The workforce of today and tomorrow must count on longer lives and deferred retirement, while at the same time it is taking on increased responsibility for managing retirement risk. This volume explores new ways to think about, manage, and finance longevity risk, capital market risk, model risk, and regulatory risk. The book offers an in-depth analysis of the 'black swans' that threaten private and public pensions around the world such as capital market shocks, surprises to longevity, regulatory/political risk, and errors in modelling, will all have profound consequences for stakeholders ranging from pension plan participants, plan sponsors, policymakers, and those who seek to make retirement more resistant. This book analyzes such challenges to retirement sustainability, and it explores ways to better manage and finance them. Insights provided help build retirement systems capable of withstanding what the future will bring.