本文著重在英國私有化經驗能提供臺灣年金制度改革何種參 考，並比較兩個不同社會在實施年金制度條件之異同，分析現行臺 灣發展年金制度發展是屬私有化或多元主義，及其背後原因的探 討。因此，本文擬討論（1 )在釐清私有化與多元主義在老年年金 討論中的本質與内涵，以尋求比較研究的基礎；（2)探討英國年 金私有化的歷程，主要著眼於人口變遷、就業市場的發展趨勢、年 金財務狀況以及政黨競爭等影響因素的討論；（3)分析臺灣退休金 制度發展之歷程，分別從人口結構、政治結構、經濟發展及政府財 政等面向進行討論；（4)進而以臺灣及英國年金制度的發展經 驗，分析兩個個案在年金制度發展中私有化與多元主義歷程的差 異；（5)最後探討英國年金制度發展的經驗提供五點臺灣年金制 度改革的參考。 歸納言之，本文之結論：（1)以英國的經驗來看，台灣尚在 建構年金制度的階段，從現階段勞工退休金擬採個人退休帳户方案 的改革方向來看，年金權保障雖然得以加強，不過年金基金仍由政 府部門加以集體管理的方式，顯然與英國逐漸由市場運作的私有化 形式仍有不同。（2)台灣年金改革與其説是私有化，保守言之， 不如説是朝向多元主義的發展趨勢。（3)從英國年金制度發展過 程來看，年金私有化的目的在減輕政府財政負擔；台灣過去的老年經濟安全制度，政府財政的壓力並非直接來自於社會安全支出，因 此既然政府從未在年金制度上投注造成負擔，故而實無「年金私有 化」之論述。（4)近年來受社經環境及人口老化因素的影響，使 執政黨擬議規劃更具體的年金政策，但是財務規劃卻趨向保守，不 敢貿然採行完全由政府加税或開放自營退休金的市場政策，反而選 擇由保費與給付同步調整（國民年金）以及政府主導基金運用（勞 工退休新制）的保守政策。（5)就制度面來説，「想要好又要花 錢少」的内在結構性矛盾，是否只是反映台灣獨特的政經時空，或 已經發展一套屬於台灣特性的年金制度改革模式則尚待觀察。

This paper aims to explore the development of pension reform in Taiwan. There are some points are worth analyzing: 1 ) What's the meaning of the privatization and pluralism that apply to the pension policy and further, we will discuss the process of pension privatization in Britain. 2) To retrospect the transition from the state to the market about the development of pension policy in Britain. 3) According to 1) and 2) as above, we want to analyze the mechanism of pension scheme reform and the options for pension policy. 4) Through the experience of British pensions, we try to exam the retirement payment policy in Taiwan from the perspective of comparative study. 5) How to learn lessons from the British experiences with the privatization of pension? According to our analysis, we find: 1) The development of pension scheme have approached to be more complicated than Britain have done, but people will lose their freedom to choose the types of retirement’ s economic security plan. 2) Britain tries to end Basic Pension or keep it in low level of income replacement ratio, but at present Taiwan try to propose a universal National Pension Scheme urgently. 3) British Government efficiently utilizes the policy of tax relief to encourage people to choose private pension instead of public pension, but Taiwan Government stops up the function of tax exemption in order to centralize the pension fund. 4) An organization that is an independent review broad of pension scheme for supervising the British Pension Schemes is not belonging to the bureaucracy, but the management unit of pension fund in Taiwan is a part of bureaucracy. 5) In conclusion, the pension experience in British is going to privatize under less regulated by the state, but Taiwan case is inclined to be a pluralism under more regulated by KMT.