This thesis examines the relationship between demographic ageing, as captured by temporal, within-country variation in the ratio of elderly to the working-age population – the dependency ratio – on citizens’ support for the welfare state. The research problem is vitally relevant considering the worsening demographic structure of advanced democracies, a process that is having considerable ramifications on the possibilities of financing comprehensive welfare states. Using a time-series cross-sectional design, and building on representative survey data from 13 advanced democracies, the thesis specifically assesses the relationship between the dependency ratio, and individual spending preferences towards 1) the welfare state as a whole, as captured by an additive index, 2) education policy, and 3) old-age benefits. It also assesses whether demographic ageing exacerbates attitude differences between age groups, thereby scrutinising some assumptions made previously on the issue of intergenerational cleavages. The thesis uncovers no significant relationship between the dependency ratio and general support for the welfare state. However, the dependency ratio is shown be positively correlated with citizens’ support for education policy, while being instead potentially negatively correlated with support for old-age benefits. The differences between these two policies, in terms of their enjoyed support, are important considering the presumed shift in welfare state priorities towards what is commonly called social investment. Indeed, they indicate that there may be popular support for the type of reform strategies whose purpose is to invest in tomorrow’s diminishing workforce, whereas the support for more compensatory old-age policies may instead be weakening. There are also signs that the positive effect on the support for education policy is lower among older individuals. This evidence is quite interesting considering the previous expectations of deepening intergenerational cleavages as a consequence of demographic ageing, but the weak indications of this development in previous empirical research.

Die Arbeit zeigt im Rahmen einer theoretischen Analyse, einer Institutionenanalyse und einer empirischen Einstellungsanalyse, welche normativen Konzepte von Gerechtigkeit in der Alterssicherung relevant sind, wie vor diesem Hintergrund bestimmte institutionelle Regelungen zu bewerten sind und welche Einstellungen in der deutschen Bevölkerung dazu vorliegen. Zunächst wird dargelegt, dass es kein a priori vollständig überzeugendes Konzept von Generationengerechtigkeit gibt. Insbesondere auf Generational-Equity basierende Ansätze, die suggerieren das Problem intergenerationaler Gerechtigkeit in der Rentenversicherung finanzmathematisch lösen zu können, muss mit Skepsis begegnet werden. Aufgrund theoretischer Überlegungen vorzuziehen sind hybride Konzepte, die sowohl universalistische als auch kultur- und demo-sensitive Aspekte in sich vereinen. Die Institutionenanalyse erbringt weiter, dass das zentrale mit Generationengerechtigkeit verknüpfte Problem weniger die Ungleichheit zwischen Generationen hinsichtlich ihrer durchschnittlichen Güterausstattung ist, sondern die in der Generationenfolge zunehmende intragenerationale Ungleichheit. Schließlich zeigt die empirische Analyse der Gerechtigkeitseinstellungen, dass Statussicherung bei den Renten wichtiger einzuschätzen ist als Beitragsäquivalenz. Die primären Vorstellungen von Gerechtigkeit in der Alterssicherung orientieren sich stark am institutionellen Status quo und kaum an abstrakten Generational-Equity-Konzepten, die die in der Bevölkerung verbreitete Verlustaversion vernachlässigen. Urteilsheuristiken und regimespezifische Sozialisation erklären dabei insgesamt mehr Variation als partikulare ökonomische oder altersspezifische Interessen. Die Probleme des Rentensystems im Zuge des demografischen Wandels werden gleichwohl gesehen, wobei Lösungsansätze eher in der Familien- und Bildungspolitik gesucht werden, während Reformen im bestehenden Rentensystem Ungerechtigkeitsgefühle kurzfristig sogar verstärken. / This thesis demonstrates by theoretical, institutional and empirical analysis, which justice concepts are relevant in old-age provision, how specific institutional arrangements have to be evaluated in this context and which justice attitudes on that matter exist in the German population. Firstly, there is no a priori convincing theoretical concept of generational justice. Especially concepts based on generational equity that propose to solve the problem of intergenerational justice in old-age provision by generational accounting methods have to be considered with skepticism. For theoretical reasons, hybrid concepts that encompass universalistic as well as culture- and demo-sensitive aspects should be preferred. Institutional analysis shows furthermore that the central problem connected to generational justice has less to do with inequality between generations and more with growing inequality within cohorts in the generational succession. Finally, the empirical analysis of justice attitudes provides evidence for the relative priority of status conservation over input-equity in the determination of just old-age benefits. Primary notions of justice in old-age provision are strongly anchored in the institutional status quo and only marginally influenced by abstract generational equity concepts that also neglect widespread loss aversion among individuals. Heuristics and regime-specific socialization explain more variation in justice attitudes than particularistic economic or age-specific interests do. The general public does not neglect the problems of pension-systems in the wake of demographic changes however, but solutions are rather seen in family and education policies, while reforms in existing pension arrangements even amplify feelings of injustice in the short run.