Search

BACKGROUND: To make the pension system robust to population ageing, Denmark will increase the statutory retirement age in tandem with national life expectancy. By universally increasing this age, this pension indexation policy might amplify known inequalities in mortality, such as those between people in different living arrangements. OBJECTIVE: We aim to quantify inequalities in mortality before retirement age by living arrangement over time and to estimate whether an increase in the retirement age could disproportionately affect disadvantaged groups. METHODS: We estimate the probability of dying between ages 50 and 65/67/70 for several cohorts of Danes living in different household types, stratifying by socioeconomic status. To give a more complete picture, we also calculate equivalent age for each sub-group. RESULTS: In Denmark considerable mortality inequalities exist depending on living arrangements, and they are becoming larger. Across all the dimensions of mortality we examine, single individuals cumulate a clear disadvantage. An increased retirement age would increase absolute and (for single individuals) relative differences in pre-retirement survival, adding to the widening trends across cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Relying on the national average to set the statutory retirement age risks maintaining these subpopulations' disadvantage. While early retirement schemes exist in Denmark, they mostly impact people based on their occupation. We highlight that other characteristics are strongly tied to mortality and should also be considered. CONTRIBUTION: This paper falls within a project developed and directed by Jim Vaupel from 2019 until his death. He believed that the Danish pension indexation policy risked unfairly damaging specific groups. The results of this paper show that by neglecting existing and widening inequalities, this might indeed be the case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Denmark and Sweden index their statutory retirement ages to life expectancy. When lifespan increases, so does retirement age. This policy does not consider demographic heterogeneity in life expectancy, e.g., between migrants and non-migrants, posing possible issues for pension policies that index retirement age to life expectancy. OBJECTIVE: To understand how mortality inequalities between migrants and non-migrants interact with the indexation of statutory retirement age in Denmark and Sweden. METHODS: We used Danish and Swedish registry data from 1988-2018, and included individuals aged 50+. Migrants were classified as European-born or non-European-born. We calculated the probability of dying before retirement age, remaining life expectancy at retirement age, lifespan inequalities after retirement age, and the likelihood that a nonmigrant would outlive a migrant. We also classified the Danish-born population into four income levels and compared them to migrant groups. RESULTS: Non-European-born migrants had the survival advantage in both countries, but equal or higher lifespan inequality at retirement. Sweden had a proportionally larger migrant population, but Denmark's was more diverse. The probability that a non-migrant would outsurvive a migrant was 40%-50% in both countries. CONCLUSIONS: The healthy migrant effect was observed in both Denmark and Sweden. Despite mortality advantages, migrants do not contribute to increasing life expectancy in Denmark or Sweden. CONTRIBUTION: This study contributes to the literature on mortality differences between migrants and non-migrants in Scandinavia. The novel contributions of this paper are the consideration of the socioeconomic status of non-migrants in Denmark, and the calculation of probabilities that migrants will outsurvive non-migrants, all within the context of pension policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]