Fieke van der Lecq, project manager of the Netspar project and professor of Pension Markets at VU Amsterdam: "The questions we wanted to answer with our scenario analysis are: How is someone who is accruing their pension helped with financial retirement planning? Who is responsible for what?"
In scenario 1, government-individual, the government is the main provider of various pension options and people building up their pensions can choose from standard packages. In scenario 2, market-individual, not the government but the market is the main provider. People building up their pensions can and must choose from many options and need help doing so. In scenario 3, market-collective, the market is the main provider and people building up their pensions have little choice. And in scenario 4, government-collective, the government is the main provider and pensions are to a large extent regulated from above.
As usual with so-called scenario studies, it is not about which scenario actually plays out. The scenarios help the various parties to prepare for possible developments. A striking conclusion is that each scenario requires an active government. In the years ahead, the government must, for example, already implement the legislation and regulations to ensure that the relevant parties fulfil their tasks optimally. In addition, the government must guarantee privacy and supervisory authorities will have to cooperate more.
Furthermore, in most scenarios, tech companies are of increasing importance for pension provision, pension administration, asset management and the provision of information and advice. People accruing pensions can benefit from this, but the government must build in safeguards to ensure that market participants act fairly and ethically, including when they use the technology developed by tech companies.