Retirement Research Consortium
Read More About…
the RRC's evolution and research contributions in a series of articles in the Social Security Bulletin.
The Retirement Research Consortium (RRC) consists of three multidisciplinary centers housed in three separate institutions (Boston College, the University of Michigan, and the National Bureau of Economic Research) and is funded through cooperative agreements with the Social Security Administration. The current five-year cooperative agreements run from FY2014 through FY2018.
The RRC has three main goals:
- Research and evaluate a wide array of topics related to Social Security and retirement policy,
- Disseminate information on Social Security and retirement issues relevant to policymakers, researchers, and the general public, and
- Train scholars and practitioners in research areas relevant to Social Security and retirement issues.
To meet these goals, the centers perform many activities. They conduct research, prepare policy briefs and working papers, hold an annual meeting, and provide research and training support for young scholars. Links to recent RRC research are provided below. For further information about RRC activities, affiliated institutions, or individual researchers, please visit the websites of the respective institutions:
- Center for Retirement Research at Boston College
- Michigan Retirement Research Center
- National Bureau of Economic Research
Recent RRC Research
by Norma B. Coe, Stehpan Lindner, Kendrew Wong, and April Yanyuan Wu
SSA Project # BC12-18
Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Working Paper 2013-12
by Richard W. Johnson, Barbara A. Butrica, and Corina Mommaerts
SSA Project # BC09-14
Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Working Paper 2010-8
The results show that early boomers worked longer than members of the Silent Generation, and that the pathways older workers follow out of the labor force have become more complex over time. The median retirement age for men was about one-half year higher in the 1943–47 cohort than in the 1933–37 cohort (62 vs. 61.5), but differences were more pronounced at older ages. By age 65, for example, 40 percent of early boomer men had not yet retired, compared with only 20 percent of Silent Generation men. Both male and female workers in the 1933–37 cohort were much less likely than their counterparts in the 1913–17 cohort to follow the traditional retirement path of exiting the labor force from full-time employment and never returning to work.