A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Microsimulation for Public Policy. Experiences from the Swedish Model SESIM
- Department of Economics, Sweden
Cite this article
as: A. Klevmarken; 2022; Microsimulation for Public Policy. Experiences from the Swedish Model SESIM; International Journal of Microsimulation; 15(1); 153-185.
doi: 10.34196/ijm.00258
Figures
Figure 1
Structure of SESIM (Source Flood (2008a)). Note: The module “Noncash benfits” was not used in the project on population ageing, it was instead replaced by the module “Health and care of elderly”.
Figure 2
Public sector balances for people born in 1930-2009. (SEK, average per year of survival in Sweden adjusted for price changes and real growth.)
Figure 3
Simulated average days of inpatient care by age 50-100 for the birth cohorts of 1930, 1940, and 1950. Men and women, respectively. Source: Figure 10.2 in Bolin et al. (2008c).
Figure 4
Simulated development of total number of days of inpatient care for the total Swedish population, by gender. Source: Figure 10.7 in Bolin et al. (2008c).
Figure 5
Simulated population shares in work, retirement and disability; all age groups. Source: Figure 5 in Bolin et al. (2008b).
Figure 6
Average transition age to old-age retirement by gender using two alternative scenarios. Source: Figure 10 in Bolin et al. (2008b)
Figure 7
Financial and real wealth and cost of housing in SESIM. Source: Figure 1 in Flood and Klevmarken (2008).
Figure 8
Mean net wealth by period and age of the oldest in the household (SEK in 1999 prices). Source: Figure 3 in Flood and Klevmarken (2008).
Figure 9
Simulated health status 2000-2040 for people aged 75+. (Population shares by health status and year.). Source: Figure 13 in Bolin et al. (2008a).
Figure 10
Total number of elderly with around-the-clock care 2000-2039 (1000s). Source: Figure 6 in Fransson et al. (2008).
Figure 11
Total number of elderly with home help 2000-2039 (1000s). Source: Figure 6 in Fransson et al. (2008).
Figure 12
Average taxable income for retired relative to the average taxable income of working cohorts aged 20-64, by birth cohort and calendar year. Source: Figure 11 in Flood et al. (2008).
Figure 13
Poverty share by birth cohort and age (equivalized disposable income less than 50 % of the median income of the adult population). Source: Figure 14 in Flood et al. (2008).
Figure 14
Share of elderly living close to adult children. Source: Figure 2 in Fransson et al. (2008).
Tables
Table 1
Life-cycle incomes and return to higher education.
| Non university program | Short university program | Long university program | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | Males | Females | Males | Females | |
| Life-cycle income (1000 SEK) | 6974 | 5120 | 7727 | 5911 | 8861 | 6752 |
| Total return to education (1000 SEK) | 0 | 0 | 753 | 790 | 887 | 631 |
| Rate of return to education per year % | 6.0 | 8.7 | 4.9 | 6.3 | ||
-
Source: Table 5.2, Ericson and Hussénius, 2000.
Table 2
Share of students with loans who get their loans remitted at the age of 65 by gender and length of schooling.
| Interest rate (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1.3 | 2.8 | |
| Males | 7.6 | 21.7 | 38.2 |
| Females | 26.1 | 41.4 | 53.2 |
| Less than university | 5.0 | 7.4 | 13.2 |
| Short university | 4.4 | 11.1 | 17.7 |
| Long university | 23.3 | 41.8 | 58.8 |
-
Source: Tables 5.7 and 5.8 in Ericson and Hussénius, 2000.
Table 3
Gini coefficients by income concepts.
| Annual income | Life-cycle income | |
|---|---|---|
| Market income | 0.490 | 0.196 |
| Equivalent disposable income | 0.217 | 0.102 |
| - Indirect taxes | 0.224 | 0.104 |
| + Non-cash benefits | 0.189 | 0.086 |
-
Source: Table 1, Pettersson and Pettersson (2007).
Table 4
Gains and losses through the public sector by gender and income quintile (1000 SEK in 2003 price level).
| Men | Women | Quintiles of Life-cycle income | All | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | ||||
| Taxes | 7136 | 6389 | 4264 | 5741 | 6597 | 7691 | 9483 | 6758 |
| Transfers | 3562 | 4085 | 3924 | 3983 | 3915 | 3770 | 3543 | 3827 |
| Non-cash benefits | 2611 | 3245 | 2840 | 3109 | 3109 | 2922 | 2679 | 2932 |
| Net effect | -963 | 941 | 2500 | 1351 | 428 | -999 | -3262 | 0 |
-
Source: Tables 4 and 5, Pettersson and Pettersson (2007).
Table 5
Average and total number of inpatient hospital days for people 65+ by year.
| Year | Average no of days | Total no of days (1000) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base scenario | Improved health | Improved health & lower death risks | Base scenario | Improved health | Improved health & lower death risks | |
| 2000 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.2 | 4954 | 5068 | 4990 |
| 2020 | 3.2 | 3.1 | 3.5 | 6495 | 6270 | 8117 |
| 2040 | 3.4 | 2.9 | 4.0 | 8396 | 7241 | 12087 |
-
Source: Table 3 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Table 6
Total expenditures for inpatient care, home help and institutionalized care for people 65+.
| Year | Total expenditures (millions of SEK in fixed prices) | Total expenditure as share of the sum of direct taxes from households (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 92231 | 20.5 |
| 2020 | 166719 | 24.9 |
| 2040 | 339297 | 36.2 |
-
Source: Table 6 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Table 7
Median equivalized disposable income of 65+ relative to the median income of 20-64, by year in two scenarios.
| Year | Base scenario | High pension age |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 0.709 | 0.711 |
| 2020 | 0.634 | 0.693 |
| 2040 | 0.552 | 0.623 |
-
Source: Table 13 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Table 8
What income do those in most need of social care have? (Per cent of all 65+ in each form of care.).
| Year/Kind of care | Quartiles of the distribution of disposable income for all adults | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | All | |
| 2000 | |||||
| No care | 46.7 | 30.8 | 14.1 | 8.4 | 100 |
| Home help | 68.6 | 18.7 | 7.1 | 5.6 | 100 |
| Institutionalized | 65.5 | 22.2 | 8.0 | 4.3 | 100 |
| 2040 | |||||
| No care | 53.1 | 30.7 | 10.9 | 5.3 | 100 |
| Home help | 75.4 | 17.6 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 100 |
| Institutionalized | 76.4 | 14.7 | 4.6 | 4.2 | 100 |
-
Source: Table 17 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Table 9
How much wealth do those in most need of care have? (Per cent of all 65+ in each form of care).
| Year/kind of care | Quartiles of the distribution of net worth for all adults | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | All | |
| 2000 | |||||
| No care | 4.7 | 28.0 | 27.4 | 39.9 | 100 |
| Home help | 2.5 | 40.2 | 27.4 | 29.8 | 100 |
| Institutionalized | 2.0 | 39.9 | 25.8 | 32.3 | 100 |
| 2040 | |||||
| No care | 12.0 | 17.4 | 20.8 | 49.9 | 100 |
| Home help | 12.4 | 20.1 | 18.2 | 49.3 | 100 |
| Institutionalized | 11.1 | 21.6 | 19.9 | 47.4 | 100 |
-
Source: Table 18 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Table 10
Poverty rates among people aged 65+, by type of assistance, year and scenario (%).
| Scenario/year | Type of assistance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No assistance | Help at home | All day Surveillance | All 65+ | |
| Base scenario | ||||
| 2000 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| 2020 | 11.1 | 10.8 | 13.2 | 11.2 |
| 2040 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 16.3 | 14.5 |
| Increased pension age | ||||
| 2000 | 1.7 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
| 2020 | 6.8 | 7.2 | 10.1 | 7.0 |
| 2040 | 7.9 | 9.8 | 12.0 | 8.3 |
-
Source: Table 20 in Klevmarken (2008b).
Data and code availability
Please contact the authors for information on data and code availability.