On integrated chance constraints in alm for pension funds

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-8.xsd">
<mods version="3.8">
<titleInfo>
<title>On integrated chance constraints in alm for pension funds</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20180010576">
<namePart>Dufresne, François</namePart>
<nameIdentifier>MAPA20180010576</nameIdentifier>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<originInfo>
<place>
<placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">bel</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="marc">2018</dateIssued>
<issuance>serial</issuance>
</originInfo>
<language>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription>
<form authority="marcform">print</form>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract displayLabel="Summary">We discuss the role of integrated chance constraints (ICC) as quantitative risk constraints in asset and liability management (ALM) for pension funds. We define two types of ICC: the one period integrated chance constraint (OICC) and the multiperiod integrated chance constraint (MICC). As their names suggest, the OICC covers only one period, whereas several periods are taken into account with the MICC. A multistage stochastic linear programming model is therefore developed for this purpose and a special mention is paid to the modeling of the MICC. Based on a numerical example, we first analyze the effects of the OICC and the MICC on the optimal decisions (asset allocation and contribution rate) of a pension fund. By definition, the MICC is more restrictive and safer compared to the OICC. Second, we quantify this MICC safety increase. The results show that although the optimal decisions from the OICC and the MICC differ, the total costs are very close, showing that the MICC is definitely a better approach since it is more prudent</abstract>
<note type="statement of responsibility">Youssouf A. F. Toukourou, François Dufresne</note>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080591021">
<topic>Fondos de pensiones</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080585518">
<topic>Gestión de activos</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080592837">
<topic>Programación lineal</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080586447">
<topic>Modelo estocástico</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080579258">
<topic>Cálculo actuarial</topic>
</subject>
<classification authority="">6</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Astin bulletin</title>
</titleInfo>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Belgium : ASTIN and AFIR Sections of the International Actuarial Association</publisher>
</originInfo>
<identifier type="issn">0515-0361</identifier>
<identifier type="local">MAP20077000420</identifier>
<part>
<text>01/05/2018 Volumen 48 Número 2 - mayo 2018 , p. 571-609</text>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<recordInfo>
<recordContentSource authority="marcorg">MAP</recordContentSource>
<recordCreationDate encoding="marc">180712</recordCreationDate>
<recordChangeDate encoding="iso8601">20180717154925.0</recordChangeDate>
<recordIdentifier source="MAP">MAP20180022531</recordIdentifier>
<languageOfCataloging>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">spa</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
</modsCollection>