Abstract
In this research, the authors studied the socio-demographic and behavioral evolutions of Pillar II and Pillar III participants in Romania, using a model based on time series analysis, graphical representations and comparative tables. The data were taken from the official statistics of the Financial Supervisory Authority for the period 2007-2024 and were processed by the authors to highlight the structural differences between the two forms of saving. The results show that Pillar II functions predominantly as a mandatory saving mechanism, with a low level of individual involvement, an aspect reflected in the automatic evolution of the structure of participants and the gradual aging of the taxpayer base. In contrast, Pillar III is emerging as a voluntary instrument, characterized by active and selective participation, predominantly by people with stable incomes and higher financial education. The data analysis indicates a substantial increase in interest in voluntary savings in mature age groups, along with a recent trend of expansion among young people. The conclusions emphasize that the efficiency of the two pillars depends on both the legislative architecture and the level of financial education, and the integrated interpretation of the statistical series confirms the importance of developing public policies that stimulate sustainable accumulation and informed participation in private pension systems. The earlier participation in the private pension system begins, the greater the capitalization of contributions and the higher the final retirement income. Personal financial responsibility must be cultivated from the early part of one's career, as exclusive dependence on the public pension no longer guarantees a decent standard of living.
Cuvinte cheie
Participant
contributions
saving
yield
private pensionq
Istoric articol
Publicat
01.02.2026
Informații autori
Citare recomandată
Mădălina‑Gabriela Anghel, Denis‑Arthur Strijek (2026). Socio-Demographic and Behavioral Profile of Private Pension Fund Participants in Romania: Comparative Analysis of Pillar II and Pillar III. Journal of Economic Sciences, 1(1), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.65631/jes.1.2026.8
Referințe bibliografice
[1] Alonso-García, J., Boado-Penas, M.C., Devolder, P., Adequacy, fairness and sustainability of pay-as-you-go-pension-systems: defined benefit versus defined contribution, The European Journal of Finance, 24(13), 1100-1122, 2018;
[2] Andersen, A.G., Markussen, S, Røed, K., Pension reform and the efficiency-equity trade-off: impacts of removing an early retirement subsidy. Labour Economics, 72, 102050, 2021;
[3] Anghel, M.G., Popescu, A.M., Strijek, D.A., The situation of pensioners has become increasingly difficult. Romanian Statistical Review, Supplement, 2, 10-16, 2023;
[4] Anghelache, C., Anghel, M.G., Analysis of the correlation between the employed population, unemployment and vacancies. Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, 3, „Academica Brâncuşi” Publisher, 19-25, 2018;
[5] Ayuso, M., Bravo, J.M., Holzmann, R., Palmer, E., Addressing the life expectancy gap in pension policy. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 99, 200-221, 2021;
[6] Been, J., Caminada, K., Goudswaard, K., van Vliet, O., Public/private pension mix, income inequality and poverty amongst the elderly in Europe: an empirical analysis using new and revised OECD data. Social Policy & Administration, 51, 1079-1100, 2017;
[7] Brandt, U., Frommert, D.,; Zanker, D., Financial Crisis, Confidence in Financial Markets and Participation in Private Pension Plans in Germany, Socialine Teorija Empirija Politika ir Praktika, 29, 8-22, 2024;
[8] Busemeyer, M.R., Abrassart, A., Nezi, R., Beyond positive and negative: new perspectives on feedback effects in public opinion on the welfare state, British Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 137-162, 2021;
[9] Dillingh, R., Li, Y., Mastrogiacomo, M., The displacement effect of compulsory pension savings on private savings. Evidence from the Netherlands, using pension funds supervisory data. Journal of the Economics of Ageing, 26, 2023;
[10]Doctrinal, L., Changes in Private Pensions and Income Inequality in Retirement: A Decomposition Analysis by Income Source in Nine European Countries (1986-2018). Work Aging and Retirement, 10 (4), 361-372, 2023;
[11]Ebbinghaus, B., Inequalities and poverty risks in old age across Europe: The doubleedged income effect of pension systems, Social Policy & Administration, 55, 440-455, 2021;
[12]Fernández, J.J., Gonzales, S., Socio-Economic Gaps in Workers' Participation in Private Pension Programmes in Ten European Countries. Journal of Social Policy, 53(4), 1187-1219, 2024;
[13]Gebesoglu, P.F., Ertugrul, H.M. Bulut, Ü., The determinants of savings rates in OECD countries: The role of private pensions. Central Bank Review, 23(1), 1-7, 2023;
[14]Peng, X., Fan, S., Asset allocation for a DC pension plan with dynamic attention, Finance Research Letters, 82, September, 107513, 2025;
[15]Wiß, T., Fernández, J., Anderson, K., Attitudes towards the public-private mix for retirement income in Europe, Journal of European Social Policy, https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928725134590, 2025;
[16]*** Financial Supervisory Authority, Statistical data on private pension funds section.