This article treats China’s pension reform as part of the global spread of neoliberalism, arguing that China’s pension reform was a process of the triumph of neoliberal models based on individual accounts. Chinese policymakers emulated or learned from the ILO social insurance in the 1980s, Singapore’s central provident funds until 1995, and the World Bank’s model since 1995, and the national forces dominated that process until 1995, when the World Bank established itself as the driving force. China’s pension reform has been far from successful, as shown in the difficulties in funding the individual accounts and the issue of fragmented coverage. But the neoliberal model will continue to exist, largely due to the fact that once adopted it is hard to abolish, and the continual compromises among policymakers.

This article analyses the patterns and dynamics of the global social insurance movement since the 1880s through the framework of 'interactive diffusion'. It argues that two principal models of social insurance -the German capitalist and Soviet socialist -diffused around the world throughout the twentieth century. It contends that global forces conveyed basic ideas while national forces determined the timing and specifics of the adoption of global models. From the 1980s, however, a new global model of privatization emerged with the rise of neo-liberalism and support from the World Bank. Privatization partially replaced public pension systems in Latin America, then in the former socialist countries in Europe and in a few other countries. Nevertheless, national compulsory social insurance has remained the predominant form for social protection in the world. ÃThe authors wish to extend their warmest thanks to Adam McKeown for his insightful comments on earlier versions of this article.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract