Deregulation and its Discontents

Deregulation and its Discontents

Rewriting the Rules in Asia

Edited by M. Ramesh and Michael Howlett

Deregulation and its Discontents examines the different ways in which the issues related to deregulation and reregulation have been addressed in Asia. The role of government in business has gone through distinct, if overlapping, cycles: regulation, deregulation and reregulation. However, little is known about deregulation and even less about reregulation, particularly in relation to Asia. The contributors to this book examine the links between the cycles through detvailed analyses of the electricity market, pensions and stock markets in the Asia Pacific. They also offer an explanation of regulatory cycles.

Chapter 8: Governance and Regulation of Provident and Pension Funds in Asia

Mukul G. Asher and Amarendu Nandy

Subjects: asian studies, asian economics, asian politics and policy, economics and finance, asian economics, public sector economics, politics and public policy, asian politics, social policy and sociology, economics of social policy


Mukul G. Asher and Amarendu Nandy Governance and regulation of corporations (or companies) and of provident and pension funds1 involves managing principal-agent (or agency) relationships. These arise when principals (for example stockholders in the case of corporations, provident and pension fund beneficiaries, and taxpayers when government funding is involved) need to rely on agents (corporate managers, provident and pension fund trustees, government bureaucrats) to pursue their (principal) interests.2 Since the 1997 East Asian financial crisis, there has been increasing awareness of the need for good corporate governance practices in Asian countries. The progress in translating this awareness into an effective institutional and regulatory framework has predictably been slow and uneven in Asia.3 A parallel awareness of good governance practices and sound supervision and regulation of provident and pension schemes in Asia has however been much slower. There are several factors which may help explain this phenomenon. First, the pension sector in Asia has been dominated by the statemandated and managed schemes. This has meant relatively low importance of occupational pension plans. The state sector has usually been reluctant to separate service delivery from supervision and regulation functions. As a result, policy formulation, oversight and its implementation are not separated. In addition, in many Asian countries (such as Singapore, China and Vietnam) even the basic socio-economic information is used as an instrument to be used tactically by the policymakers rather than as a public good. In other countries (such as Indonesia, India and Sri Lanka) effective oversight by the Parliament and...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information