Is there an optimal pension fund size? A scale-economy analysis of administrative costs

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<rdf:Description>
<dc:creator>Bikker, Jacob a.</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-05</dc:date>
<dc:description xml:lang="es">Sumario: This article investigates scale economies and the optimal scale of pension funds, estimating different cost functions with varying assumptions about the shape of the underlying average cost function: U-shaped versus monotonically declining. Using unique data for Dutch pension funds over 1992-2009, we find that unused scale economies for both administrative activities are indeed large and concave, that is, huge for small pension funds and decreasing with pension fund size. We observe a clear optimal scale of around 40,000 participants during 1992-2000 (pointing to a U-shaped average cost function), which increases in subsequent years to size above the largest pension fund, pointing to monotonically decreasing average costs. These model-based outcomes are roughly in line with the results of a survivorship analysis</dc:description>
<dc:identifier>https://documentacion.fundacionmapfre.org/documentacion/publico/es/bib/160706.do</dc:identifier>
<dc:language>spa</dc:language>
<dc:rights xml:lang="es">InC - http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</dc:rights>
<dc:subject xml:lang="es">Economías de escala</dc:subject>
<dc:subject xml:lang="es">Fondos de pensiones</dc:subject>
<dc:subject xml:lang="es">Modelos actuariales</dc:subject>
<dc:type xml:lang="es">Artículos y capítulos</dc:type>
<dc:title xml:lang="es">Is there an optimal pension fund size? A scale-economy analysis of administrative costs</dc:title>
<dc:relation xml:lang="es">En: The Journal of risk and insurance. - Nueva York : The American Risk and Insurance Association, 1964- = ISSN 0022-4367. - 05/06/2017 Volumen 84 Número 2 - junio 2017 , p. 739-769</dc:relation>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>