IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03965-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unravelling motives and time use of additional leave in a flexible benefits plan: a mixed-methods case study in Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Damaris Castro

    (Ghent University)

  • Brent Bleys

    (Ghent University)

Abstract

Working-time reduction emerges as a promising measure for fostering a well-being economy, as it allows to reconsider time allocation between paid labour and other activities, potentially improving human and environmental well-being. This study investigates the motives for and planned time use of additional leave in the context of a flexible benefits plan, a specific form of working-time reduction that is increasingly popular among employees and employers. Despite its popularity, little is known about the rationale behind this choice and its potential to create socio-environmental benefits. Data were collected from a Belgian media company in 2022 using a mixed-methods approach, comprising a survey (N = 241) and semi-structured interviews (N = 13). The findings reveal that a mix of motives matters for choosing additional leave, including push, pull, personal and contextual factors, as well as the specifics of the flexible benefits plan. While the desire for more leisure emerges as a primary driver, difficulties in taking up the standard amount of leave present a key barrier. Employees plan to use their extra leave for diverse activities, mainly personal and social activities, household tasks, travel, and ad-hoc pursuits. However, preferences vary based on parental status, with couples having children primarily intending to use the leave for caregiving responsibilities. Notably, the primary activities for intended time use align with increased well-being and have relatively low environmental impacts, although positive effects may be partially offset for well-being (such as when paid work is replaced with unpaid care or household work) or for the environment (such as when spending the extra leave on environmentally intensive (travel) activities). These findings tentatively suggest that choosing additional leave in flexible benefits plans could contribute to a well-being economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Damaris Castro & Brent Bleys, 2024. "Unravelling motives and time use of additional leave in a flexible benefits plan: a mixed-methods case study in Belgium," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03965-8
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03965-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03965-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03965-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerold, Stefanie & Nocker, Matthias, 2018. "More Leisure or Higher Pay? A Mixed-methods Study on Reducing Working Time in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 27-36.
    2. Arnold Tukker & Bart Jansen, 2006. "Environmental Impacts of Products: A Detailed Review of Studies," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 10(3), pages 159-182, July.
    3. Luca Coscieme & Paul Sutton & Lars F. Mortensen & Ida Kubiszewski & Robert Costanza & Katherine Trebeck & Federico M. Pulselli & Biagio F. Giannetti & Lorenzo Fioramonti, 2019. "Overcoming the Myths of Mainstream Economics to Enable a New Wellbeing Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Arnold Tukker & Maurie J. Cohen & Klaus Hubacek & Oksana Mont, 2010. "The Impacts of Household Consumption and Options for Change," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 14(1), pages 13-30, January.
    5. Sean Urwin & Yiu‐Shing Lau & Gunn Grande & Matt Sutton, 2023. "Informal caregiving, time use and experienced wellbeing," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 356-374, February.
    6. Alan B. Krueger, 2009. "Measuring the Subjective Well-Being of Nations: National Accounts of Time Use and Well-Being," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number krue08-1.
    7. Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Coscieme, Luca & Costanza, Robert & Kubiszewski, Ida & Trebeck, Katherine & Wallis, Stewart & Roberts, Debra & Mortensen, Lars F. & Pickett, Kate E. & Wilkinson, Richard & Ragnar, 2022. "Wellbeing economy: An effective paradigm to mainstream post-growth policies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    8. Druckman, Angela & Buck, Ian & Hayward, Bronwyn & Jackson, Tim, 2012. "Time, gender and carbon: A study of the carbon implications of British adults' use of time," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 153-163.
    9. Hugo Hanbury & Christoph Bader & Stephanie Moser, 2019. "Reducing Working Hours as a Means to Foster Low(er)-Carbon Lifestyles? An Exploratory Study on Swiss Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Dolnicar, Sara & Grün, Bettina & Leisch, Friedrich, 2016. "Increasing sample size compensates for data problems in segmentation studies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 992-999.
    11. Lei Delsen & Jos Benders & Jeroen Smits, 2006. "Choices Within Collective Labour Agreements à la Carte in the Netherlands," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 44(1), pages 51-72, March.
    12. Robert Rudolf, 2014. "Work Shorter, Be Happier? Longitudinal Evidence from the Korean Five-Day Working Policy," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 1139-1163, October.
    13. Wiedmann, Thomas & Minx, Jan & Barrett, John & Wackernagel, Mathis, 2006. "Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with input-output analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 28-48, January.
    14. Andreja Brajša-Žganec & Marina Merkaš & Iva Šverko, 2011. "Quality of Life and Leisure Activities: How do Leisure Activities Contribute to Subjective Well-Being?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 81-91, May.
    15. Pullinger, Martin, 2014. "Working time reduction policy in a sustainable economy: Criteria and options for its design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 11-19.
    16. John Robinson & Steven Martin, 2008. "What Do Happy People Do?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 565-571, December.
    17. Ruut Veenhoven, 1991. "Is happiness relative?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-34, February.
    18. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Lorek, Sylvia, 2002. "Environmentally sustainable household consumption: from aggregate environmental pressures to priority fields of action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 127-140, December.
    19. François-Xavier Devetter & Sandrine Rousseau, 2011. "Working Hours and Sustainable Development," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(3), pages 333-355, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Castro, Damaris & Bleys, Brent, 2023. "Do people think they have enough? A subjective income sufficiency assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    2. Yosuke Shigetomi & Keisuke Nansai & Shigemi Kagawa & Susumu Tohno, 2016. "Influence of income difference on carbon and material footprints for critical metals: the case of Japanese households," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Andreas Froemelt & René Buffat & Stefanie Hellweg, 2020. "Machine learning based modeling of households: A regionalized bottom‐up approach to investigate consumption‐induced environmental impacts," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(3), pages 639-652, June.
    4. Patrick Bottazzi, 2019. "Work and Social-Ecological Transitions: A Critical Review of Five Contrasting Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.
    5. King, Lewis C. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2017. "Worktime Reduction as a Solution to Climate Change: Five Scenarios Compared for the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 124-134.
    6. Alcott, Blake, 2008. "The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lower environmental impact," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 770-786, February.
    7. Chad M. Baum & Christian Gross, 2017. "Sustainability policy as if people mattered: developing a framework for environmentally significant behavioral change," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 53-95, April.
    8. Panzone, Luca A. & Wossink, Ada & Southerton, Dale, 2013. "The design of an environmental index of sustainable food consumption: A pilot study using supermarket data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 44-55.
    9. Davies, Simon R. & Lupton, Richard C. & Allwood, Julian M., 2024. "How energy demand and wellbeing change as we use our time differently," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    10. Lukács, Bence & Antal, Miklós, 2023. "The practical feasibility of working time reduction: Do we have sufficient data?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    11. Smetschka, Barbara & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Egger, Claudine & Haselsteiner, Edeltraud & Moran, Daniel & Gaube, Veronika, 2019. "Time Matters: The Carbon Footprint of Everyday Activities in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Jiang, Yida & Long, Yin & Liu, Qiaoling & Dowaki, Kiyoshi & Ihara, Tomohiko, 2020. "Carbon emission quantification and decarbonization policy exploration for the household sector - Evidence from 51 Japanese cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    13. Hugo Hanbury & Christoph Bader & Stephanie Moser, 2019. "Reducing Working Hours as a Means to Foster Low(er)-Carbon Lifestyles? An Exploratory Study on Swiss Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Qinglong Shao, 2022. "Exploring the promoting effect of working time reduction on life satisfaction using Germany as a case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    15. Gerold, Stefanie & Hoffmann, Maja & Aigner, Ernest, 2023. "Towards a critical understanding of work in ecological economics: A postwork perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    16. Kerkhof, Annemarie C. & Nonhebel, Sanderine & Moll, Henri C., 2009. "Relating the environmental impact of consumption to household expenditures: An input-output analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1160-1170, February.
    17. Druckman, A. & Bradley, P. & Papathanasopoulou, E. & Jackson, T., 2008. "Measuring progress towards carbon reduction in the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 594-604, July.
    18. Dong, Han & Zhang, Jun & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2019. "Exploring, understanding, and modeling the reciprocal relation between leisure and subjective well-being," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 813-824.
    19. Hilke Brockmann, 2009. "Why Are Middle-Aged People so Depressed?: Evidence from West Germany," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 233, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    20. Linghan Zhang & Junyi Zhang, 2018. "Impacts of Leisure and Tourism on the Elderly’s Quality of Life in Intimacy: A Comparative Study in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03965-8. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.