« What Detroit can learn from Bangalore | Main | Why are currency markets so volatile? »

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Long-run trends in working time and leisure

Over the past century there has been a large decline in average hours worked in what are today's advanced industrialised countries. Two recent papers have looked at the issue. The first, and best known, is the new NBER working paper by Valerie A. Ramey and Neville Francis: A Century of Work and Leisure (free PDF here). The paper found that much of the decline in US working hours has been offset by more in education:

Has leisure increased over the last century? Standard measures of hours worked suggest that it has. In this paper, we develop a comprehensive measure of non-leisure hours that includes market work, home production, commuting and schooling for the last 105 years. We also present empirical and theoretical arguments for a definition of “per capita” that encompasses the entire population.

The new measures reveal a number of interesting 20th Century trends. First, 70 percent of the decline in hours worked has been offset by an increase in hours spent in school. Second, contrary to conventional wisdom, average hours spent in home production are actually slightly higher now than they were in the early part of the 20th Century. Finally, leisure per capita is approximately the same now as it was in 1900.

Also worth citing is Working Time over the 20th Century by Alexander Ueberfeldt (Bank of Canada working paper 2006-18). Examining Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, he finds a major decline in the workweek length which in most countries, was not offset by an increase in the number of employed persons. In fact, the employment rate declined in many cases - partly offsetting the effects of the shorter working week. Here is the abstract

From 1870 to 2000, the workweek length of employed persons decreased by 41 per cent in industrialized countries. The employment rate, employment per working age person, displays large movements but no clear secular pattern. This motivated the question: What accounts for the large decrease in the workweek length and developments in the employment rate over the past 130 years?

The answer is given in a dynamic general-equilibrium model with supervisory and production workers. Over time, both types of workers become more productive. In a calibrated version of the model, productivity gains of supervisors account for a large fraction of the decline in the workweek length in Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The model, augmented to include taxes, government spending, and technological progress, captures the movement in the employment rates of the three countries.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341caf5253ef00d8345dbabc69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Long-run trends in working time and leisure:

» How much leisure in the I-Cubed Economy from The Intangible Economy
Just because work is moving from the tangible/physical to the intangible/information doesn't necessarily mean that our leisure time is increasing. In fact, while average work hours have declined by traditional measures, leisure has not increased -- as ... [Read More]

Comments

The link below suggests Americans will be busier than ever:

http://www.wallstreetdigest.com/sample/viewStory.php?id=306&issue_id=25

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Economist Weblogs

Blogging Stuff

Blog powered by TypePad

Disclaimer


  • This is a personal web site, produced in my own time and solely reflecting my personal opinions. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of my employer, past or present, or any other organisation with which I may be affiliated. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities.