Pensions Policy Institute (PPI)
Центры, Исследовательские и аналитические
|Цели и задачи||
Pensions affect everyone. But too few people understand them and what is needed for adequate retirement provision. The PPI wants to change that. We believe that better information and understanding will lead to a better pensions framework and better provision for all.
The PPI aims to be the authoritative UK voice in pensions. The PPI has specific objectives to:
· Provide relevant and accessible information on the extent and nature of retirement provision
· Contribute fact-based analysis and commentary to the policy-making process
· Extend and encourage pension research and debate among pension experts
· Be a helpful sounding board for providers, policy makers and opinion formers
· Inform the public debate on pensions issues
We believe that the PPI is unique in the study of pensions, as it is:
· Independent, with no political bias or vested interest
· Led by experts focused on pensions and retirement provision
· Considering the whole pension framework: state, private, and the interaction between them
• Pursuing both academically rigorous analysis and practical policy commentary
• Taking a long-term perspective on pension policy outcomes
· Encouraging dialogue and debate with multiple constituencies
Director: Alison O'Connell
State Pension Reform
Modelling long-term policy reform options in the UK pension system (funded by the Nuffield Foundation)
Alternatives to pensions
State Pension Models
The Pensions Landscape
The Pensions Primer
Raising State Pension Age: Are We Ready?
Published Recearch are avaliable at web: http://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/news.asp?s=2
+44 20 7848 3744
+44 20 7848 3235
United Kingdom, London, Pensions Policy Institute, King's College, 4th floor, Waterloo Bridge Wing, Franklin-Wilkins Building, Waterloo Road, LONDON, SE1 9NN
pension landscape pension primer raising pension age state pension model state pension reform государственная пенсионная реформа пенсия
Pro et Contra. 2001. Т. 6. № 3. С. 46-62.
Occasional Paper (International Monetary Fund). 1996. No. 147.
American Economic Review. 1998. Vol. 88. No. 2. P. 158-163.