歐盟年金政策的治理演進

Abstract

近年來受社會經濟變遷、人口結構轉變等因素影響，促使後工業化社會必須調整現行的制度安排以茲因應。其中，佔社會安全支出比例最高的年金政策即成為各國福利改革的重點項目。歐盟作為一個代表性的超國家組織，其本身對年金政策的整合與協調也影響著西方國家。本文基於上述全球年金改革趨勢的背景下，以歐盟作為探討案例，藉由探究歐盟年金政策，以暸解整體西方年金改革的經驗與意涵，作為臺灣年金改革的參考。本文的研究目的在於探究歐盟的年金政策在面臨內在歧異和整合的壓力下如何進行改革及其年金政策的具體內容與改革的政策過程；並以治理理論的觀點，瞭解在各會員國年金制度與理念的差異下，歐盟如何通過不同的治理工具來進行年金治理，以區辨其年金治理方式的趨勢與特徵。 本文的研究結果指出，歐盟早期以共同體治理方式，試圖在性別平等、可攜式年金權、單一保險市場、職業年金等涉及勞工四大自由相關權益的面向進行治理，此種治理方式雖使歐盟的年金政策略具雛形，卻缺乏整合性的年金樣貌；隨著2000年以後年金開放協調法的引進，歐盟逐漸摸索出合宜的治理方式來主導各會員國年金政策的發展，並確立年金改革的三大原則：年金適足性、可持續性以及年金系統的現代化，期望透過原則訂定、指標建立及同儕壓力等，促使會員國積極進行年金改革。歐盟彈性運用此兩種治理工具，逐漸呈現整合性的年金治理圖像。這兩種治理工具的運用也在不同政策領域表現出不一樣的治理混合型態。然而，年金政策本身的複雜性，加上各國年金制度與社會經濟狀況歧異，使會員國的年金改革步調不一。效率與正當性依舊是歐盟無可迴避的治理難題。 最後，本文認為，歐盟的年金政策發展與年金改革走向，在臺灣也可發現類似的政策軌跡，在兩相對照下可以引發進一步的思考與辯證。而歐盟年金改革的經驗，可以衍生出「年金權保障的身分認定」、「就業市場變遷影響勞工的年金階層化」等議題。另外，也可以從歐盟與會員國在年金改革的互動關係，檢證歐盟年金政策的治理效果。

For decades, a series of changes have shaken the post-industrial society, like socio-economic changes, demographic changes etc. These force the welfare states must adjust the current institutional arrangements in respond to the pressures. Therefore, pension policy, which accounts for the highest proportion of social security expenditure, becomes the main welfare reform project. European Union, as a representative supranational organization, integrates and coordinates its member states’ pension policy, also affects Western countries. Based on the context, this thesis take EU as a case, by exploring EU pension policy in order to understand the overall experience and meaning of pension reform in Western, as a reference for pension reform in Taiwan. The purpose of this study is to explore EU pension policy, to see how they reform their pension policy under inner discrepancy and integration pressure and to figure out the specific content of the policy reform process. Besides, from governance theory perspective, we can understand how the EU address different pension systems and ideas in Member States. By distinguishing different governance tools in the EU pension governance, we can find some trends and characteristics.

The present study shows that the EU use community governance in the area of gender equality, portability of pension rights, single insurance market and occupational pension policy in early times. Although community governance made little progress, it is still a incomplete picture of pension integration. With the introduction of the Open Method of Coordination in 2000 in pension policy, the EU gradually work out the appropriate form of governance to lead the development of the pension policy of the Member States, and establish the three principles of pension reform: adequacy of pensions, financial sustainability of pension systems and modernization of pension system. Hoping prompt the Member States to carry out pension reforms, they establish indicators and peer pressure. EU combine these two governance tools, it shapes integrated pension governance image gradually. These two governance tools used in different policy areas have diverse governance types. However, the complexity of the pension policy itself, coupled with the discrepancy between the national pension systems and the socio-economic status, the pace of pension reforms in member states are different too. Efficiency and legitimacy is still an unavoidable problem of governance in the EU.

All in all, I think that the pension policy development and pension reform trend in the EU also can be found in Taiwan and by comparing these two cases can lead to further thinking. The experience of pension reform in the EU has some implications, for example, “the identity and pension right” or “the labour market changes and the classification of private pension systems” both are important issues can be studied in the future. Also, researchers can validate the EU pension policy effects by evaluating the interaction between the EU and its Member States in pension reform.