## redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2018/december/redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2018/december/redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2018/december/redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr.pdf.json)

---

### Changing social, economic, and demographic context
- Postwar norm: most people married, wife as caregiver, husband as breadwinner, lifetime employment, unchanging skills.
- Contemporary reality: lifetime employment no longer the norm; labor markets more fluid; rapid technological change requiring frequent skills updates; more women in paid work; more divorces; parenthood less tied to marriage.
- Consequences:
  - Fewer workers with continuous employment records, undermining employer-based contribution organization for social security and private pensions.
  - Employment more precarious, with spells of part-time work, self-employment, unemployment, or time outside the formal labor force.
  - Shorter shelf life for skills; need for repeated retraining over a longer working life.
  - Greater importance of early childhood development and diverse education and training delivery methods.
- Systemic risks heightened: trade wars, economic crises, political instability, environmental damage (including climate change and nuclear accidents), and demographic aging—many of which are characterized as uncertainties rather than calculable risks.

### Why a welfare state? (functions and theoretical foundations)
- Three central purposes:
  - Assist the poor.
  - Address market failures (imperfect information, behavioral departures from rationality, incomplete markets/contracts, insurance market failures).
  - Support economic growth (investing in skills, income transfers that improve health and educational outcomes).
- Welfare state as optimal risk sharing:
  - Insurance at birth against unknowable futures to help relieve poverty.
  - Response to market failures—state or parastatal provision of insurance against unemployment, medical risks, and social care.
  - Contribution to growth by enabling risk-taking (e.g., start-ups) while avoiding excessive protection that stifles initiative.
- Distinction between risk and uncertainty:
  - Risk: probability distributions known enough for actuarial insurance to work (example: auto insurance).
  - Uncertainty: long-run unknowns (example: future inflation rates) that the actuarial model copes with poorly.
  - Social insurance can address both risk and uncertainty by placing everyone in a single risk pool and adjusting contributions over time.

### Policy responses and design principles
- Income risks during working life:
  - Provide income to the jobless and expand earning opportunities via training and childcare.
  - Universal basic income debates hinge on benefit level and income distribution; skewed income distributions imply net beneficiaries outnumber net contributors, making large benefits fiscally and incentive-wise problematic unless growth expands the tax base (e.g., through AI-driven growth).
- Retirement-income reforms:
  - Move away from reliance solely on employment-based contributory schemes.
  - Implement flat-rate, noncontributory pension plans financed from taxation and awarded on age and residence tests without contribution requirements.
    - Reported uptake: spreading in Canada, Chile, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and in developing economies.
  - Advantages of noncontributory pensions: relieve poverty and reduce the retirement income gap between men and women.
  - Parallel policy: increase minimum retirement age over time as longevity rises.
  - No single best pension system for all countries (reference to Barr and Diamond 2009).
  - Examples of alternative designs:
    - Notional defined-contribution plan (Sweden, 1990s) — pay-as-you-go with benefits closely related to cumulative contributions; also adopted in Latvia, Norway, and Poland.
    - Individual accounts should be part of a broader system and organized through simple, cheaply administered savings plans (mandatory or with automatic enrollment) offering limited choice and a good default (Barr and Diamond 2017).
    - Future possibility: base pension contributions on consumption spending via electronic payments.
- Health-care financing and delivery:
  - Private actuarial insurance is a poor fit for medical risks due to intractable market failures; intervention at necessary scale becomes de facto social insurance with everyone in a single risk pool (Barr 2012).
  - Financing from social insurance or tax-based systems is the normative basis for systems that work well; the United States is an outlier in reliance on private actuarial insurance.
- Skills, education, and training:
  - Strategic attributes needed:
    - Emphasis on early childhood development given persistent early cognitive and social gaps.
    - Flexible choices over subject, method, speed of skills acquisition, and pathways between vocational and academic training.
    - Financing mix to support delivery methods, including taxpayer funding and well-designed student loans (examples: Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom).
  - Larger role for firms in training and repeated, diverse retraining over the life cycle.
- Financing considerations:
  - Where primary purpose is insurance (health care) or poverty relief (basic pensions), financing through employment-linked contributions is less effective and can discourage formal employment.
  - Alternatives: broadly based taxation or dedicated revenue unrelated to employment status (example: portion of consumption tax proceeds) (Levy 2008).
  - Distinguish structure (market vs. state delivery) from financing choices; country fiscal situations and political economy will shape feasible options (example: Scandinavian preference for higher taxes vs. political constraints in the United Kingdom or the United States).

### Role of the state and policy implementation principles
- Market and state activity should be mutually reinforcing; policy design should follow economic theory and the extent of market failure.
- Many solutions can respect market mechanisms while correcting failures and accommodating modern labor/family structures; behavioral economics tools (e.g., automatic enrollment or "nudging") can increase pension saving.
- State involvement is significant across pension financing, regulation, and sometimes delivery; health-care delivery varies (private in Canada, public in Scandinavia, mixed in France and Germany), but effective systems rely on social insurance or tax financing rather than private actuarial insurance.
- Ideology should set objectives ("what"); the "how" (roles of market and state) should be treated as a technical matter driven by market failures and major uncertainties.

*Nicholas Barr — Finance & Development, December 2018.*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2018/december/redesigning-the-welfare-state-barr.pdf_