Author
Listed:
- Gabriella Cagliesi
- Denise Donna Hawkes
- Max Tookey
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to adopt the principles of labour economics, behavioural economics and social influence to identify constraints and enablers that influence people’s choices in relation to the labour market decisions. Design/methodology/approach - A sequential empirical methodology has been adopted, where data from the British Household Panel Survey (2009) has been collected to explain various statuses of labour market activity, with a focus on workless-ness, across the categories of unemployment, being a student, disability, retirement and being a carer – differentiating for gender and age. The paper develops and substantiates the hypothesis theoretically and gives some indications using a multi-disciplinary approach. Findings - The authors found that labour market opportunities, choices and achievements are affected by the interrelations and interactions of an individual’s demographic and psychological characteristics (such as age, gender, heuristics, perceptions, beliefs, attitude’s goals and ambitions) along with external factors (such as geographical, socio- cultural and economic conditions). Originality/value - This study makes a unique contribution to labour economics as the authors abandon the traditional welfare approach and use a more general framework of capabilities and refined functioning to interpret how different types of constraints – ranging from socio-economic conditions and environmental background to specific features of individual processes of choices and decision making – affect preferences and functioning’s. The study also identifies how “under-employment” complements the use of BE/social influence in explaining labour market inactivity, and highlights how the findings of this study have important implications for policy.
Suggested Citation
Gabriella Cagliesi & Denise Donna Hawkes & Max Tookey, 2017.
"A multi-disciplinary approach to explaining workless-ness in Britain,"
International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 44(7), pages 937-959, July.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ijsepp:ijse-10-2015-0267
DOI: 10.1108/IJSE-10-2015-0267
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:ijse-10-2015-0267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.