By analysing pension reforms in three Nordic countries -Denmark, Finland and Sweden -that apply different institutional solutions in their old-age security programmes, this article argues that the political processes that shaped the country-specific pension set-ups in the 1950s and 1960s had important ramifications for subsequent reform possibilities. A high degree of inertia exists not only in the institutions themselves but also in the political reform options and the ways in which pensions were reformed. The analysis shows that the 'new politics' was not new in any of the three countries. Furthermore, given the differences in the three cases, the analysis questions the nature of pension reform. The Swedish reform in the late 1990s was a 'big bang' that eliminated the old and changed everything; the Finns built on piecemeal reforms of conversion that gradually changed the whole system; and, while the Danish story appears to be one of stability and status quo, the drift of Danish policy ultimately changed the basic characteristics of the system. Although all three countries have more or less thoroughly reformed their pensions, the reform processes have differed according to both historical legacies and institutional frameworks.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract