@article {angrisani_samek_kapteyn_2021,
	title = {Introduction to the Special Issue on New Longitudinal Data for Retirement Analysis and Policy},
	journal = {Journal of Pension Economics and Finance},
	year = {2021},
	pages = {1{\textendash}5},
	abstract = {The number of data sources available for academic research on retirement economics and policy has increased rapidly in the past two decades. Data quality and comparability across studies have also improved considerably, with survey questionnaires progressively converging towards common ways of eliciting the same measurable concepts. Probability-based Internet panels have become a more accepted and recognized tool to obtain research data, allowing for fast, flexible, and cost-effective data collection compared to more traditional modes such as in-person and phone interviews. In an era of big data, academic research has also increasingly been able to access administrative records (e.g., Kost{\o}l and Mogstad, 2014; Cesarini et al., 2016), private-sector financial records (e.g., Gelman et al., 2014), and administrative data married with surveys (Ameriks et al., 2020), to answer questions that could not be successfully tackled otherwise.},
	keywords = {Longitudinal data, Methodology},
	doi = {10.1017/S1474747221000044},
	author = {Marco Angrisani and Samek, Anya and Arie Kapteyn}
}
@inbook {5192,
	title = {Institutions and Saving for Retirement: Comparing the United States, Italy, and the Netherlands},
	booktitle = {Analyses in the Economics of Aging},
	year = {2005},
	note = {ProCite field 6 : In ProCite field 8 : ed.},
	pages = {281-316},
	publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
	organization = {University of Chicago Press},
	chapter = {9},
	address = {Chicago},
	abstract = {This paper analyzes retirement saving and portfolio choice in the United States, Italy, and the Netherlands. In addition to relying on public retirement provisions, households prepare for retirement through tax-sheltered and after-tax savings. They may invest these funds in a wide variety of assets, including housing, stocks, bonds, savings accounts, and so on.  These asset types differ in their risk, return, and liquidity characteristics as well as in their fiscal treatment.  Economic theory postulates that housholds allocate their portfolios according to their risk aversion, time horizon, uncertain out-of-pocket medical expenditures, income risk, informal (family) risk-sharing arrangements, and more.  While the literature has tested various parts of the theory, both testing and quantification of the theory are hampered by the fact that some of the major variables do not exhibit sufficient variation within a country to establish their relative importance for portfolio choice, or, more generally, for retirement saving and investment.  This paper partially fills that gap by exploring three countries with widely varying institutional arrangements for retirement income.},
	keywords = {Consumption and Savings, Methodology},
	url = {https://www.nber.org/chapters/c10364},
	author = {Arie Kapteyn and Panis, Constantijn},
	editor = {David A Wise}
}
