A new $9 million research centre jointly funded by the CSIRO, Monash University, the Government and industry will look at post-retirement and super fund asset allocation in the context of an evolving superannuation system.
Monash Professor Deborah Ralston said the centre would provide an independent evidence base to inform policy and promote superannuation innovation.
Research will focus on ‘Superannuation and the Economy' and ‘Australians over 60', and issues such as super funds optimal asset allocation and its impact on the economy and post-retirement products and services.
Ten multi-disciplinary research teams drawn from Monash and Griffith Universities, the University of Western Australia and the University of Warwick in the UK, will look at members asset allocation preferences and switching behaviour, infrastructure investing and member outcomes, and health costs in post-retirement.
"Where superannuation is concerned we will be applying our skills in big data analytics, financial mathematics, real options, risk modelling, social science and behavioural economics," Alan Dormer, research theme leader for CSIRO's digital productivity and services flagship, said.
The cluster has been developed with a $3 million flagship cluster grant from CSIRO, a $3 million in-kind research contribution from university partners led by Monash University and $3 from industry partners and the Government.
It represents the first time the CSIRO, an organisation known for agricultural and environmental research, has become involved in the nation's retirement savings system.
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.