Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Time Use Choices and Volunteer Labour Supply

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines time allocation and satisfaction with time use of volunteers and non-volunteers. Using data from the German Time Use Survey, we find that volunteers spend more time on work-related activities. Moreover, time use choices are associated with women’s propensity to volunteer and men’s satisfaction with time use, which is a proxy for individual well-being. Controlling for possible endogeneity of volunteering, our results suggest that volunteering needs to be treated as endogenous for women, while volunteering is an exogenous and positive predictor for men’s time use satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Exceptions are Booth and van Ours (2008), Hafstrom and Paynter (1991) and Phipps et al. (2001).

  2. We reversed the original scale for the sake of simplicity (see "Appendix", Question 1, for original wording).

  3. We provide descriptive statistics of the sample and the volunteer domains in Table 7 in “Appendix”.

  4. See Table 6 in “Appendix” for a detailed description.

  5. The description of the variables is provided in Table 6 in “Appendix”.

  6. The dependent TUS variable has seven categories that can be ordered sequentially. OLS models yield robust estimation results with lower standard errors. Thereby, OLS does not account for the ordinal scale. Ordered Probit (not reported) yield qualitatively equal results. The coefficients are smaller and differ from ordered Logit by a factor of about \(\sqrt{(}\pi ^{2}/3)\) due to the different scaling. Both models fit the data equally well with respect to information criteria.

  7. We consider participants who gave answers for at least four out of the six surveyed domains. ETU is no longer included as a control in this regression model because of the weak internal consistency and reversed items (Cronbach’s \(\alpha < 0.55\)).

  8. The survey design suggests that the causal direction is determined by a relationship such that volunteering predicts TUS. Individuals chronicle three days of a week, whereby their reported TUS is likely to be affected by the course of these three days. Individuals are likely to have undertaken their volunteer work before and did not decide to volunteer (or not) after they perceived a certain TUS.

  9. Exogeneity determines that a regressor is not explained by the model but is exogenously predetermined.

  10. 2SLS estimates yield similar coefficients and standard errors (see "Appendix", Table 9). We also instrumented volunteering among the single domains (see "Appendix", Tables 10 and 11). However, we cannot reject the hypothesis of weak instruments for all equations.

  11. Results remain robust considering either all individuals (not only working-age population) or individuals with the same diary structure (one day surveyed on the weekend, two days of the working week).

References

  • Andreoni, J., Brown, E., & Rischall, I. (2003). Charitable giving by married couples: Who decides and why does it matter? Journal of Human Resources, 38(1), 111–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apinunmahakul, A., Barham, V., & Devlin, R. A. (2009). Charitable giving, volunteering, and the paid labor market. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(1), 77–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, C. F., Schaffer, M. E., & Stillman, S. (2002). IVREG2: Stata module for extended instrumental variables/2SLS and GMM estimation. Statistical software components. Boston: Boston College Department of Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becchetti, L., Conzo, P., & Di Febbraro, M. (2018). The monetary-equivalent effect of voluntary work on mental wellbeing in Europe. Kyklos, 71(1), 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becchetti, L., Pelloni, A., & Rossetti, F. (2008). Relational goods, sociability, and happiness. Kyklos, 61(3), 343–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1965). A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal, 75(299), 493–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R. (2010). Who gives what and when? A scenario study of intentions to give time and money. Social Science Research, 39(3), 369–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, A. L., & van Ours, J. C. (2008). Job satisfaction and family happiness: The part-time work puzzle. Economic Journal, 118(526), F77–F99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., Meer, J., & Williams, J. F. (2019). Why do people volunteer? An experimental analysis of preferences for time donations. Management Science, 65, 1455–1947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruni, L., & Stanca, L. (2008). Watching alone: Relational goods, television and happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65(3–4), 506–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, I., & van Wanrooy, B. (2013). Long working hours and working-time preferences: Between desirability and feasibility. Human Relations, 66(8), 1131–1155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cappellari, L., Ghinetti, P., & Turati, G. (2011). On time and money donations. Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(6), 853–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, K. M., & Devlin, R. A. (1997). Can volunteer work help explain the male–female earnings gap? Applied Economics, 29(6), 707–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, K. M., & Devlin, R. A. (1998). The payoff to work without pay: Volunteer work as an investment in human capital. Canadian Journal of Economics, 31(5), 1179–1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • DellaVigna, S., List, J. A., & Malmendier, U. (2012). Testing for altruism and social pressure in charitable giving. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1), 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demoussis, M., & Giannakopoulos, N. (2008). Analysis of domain satisfactions: Evidence from a panel of Greek women. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(4), 1347–1362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittrich, M., & Mey, B. (2015a). Are people satisfied with their time use? Empirical evidence from German survey data. Economics Bulletin, 35(4), 2903–2914.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dittrich, M., & Mey, B. (2015b). Gender differences in volunteer activities: Evidence from German survey data. Economics Bulletin, 35(1), 349–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), 94–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dow, G. K., & Juster, T. F. (1985). Goods, times, and well-being: The joint dependence problem. In T. F. Juster & F. Stafford (Eds.), Time, goods, and well-being (pp. 397–413). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einolf, C. J. (2011). Gender differences in the correlates of volunteering and charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(6), 1092–1112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorillo, D. (2012). Volunteer work and domain satisfactions: Evidence from Italy. International Journal of Social Economics, 39(1/2), 97–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B. (1997). Working for nothing: The supply of volunteer labor. Journal of Labor Economics, 15(1), 140–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesthuizen, M., & Scheepers, P. (2012). Educational differences in volunteering in cross-national perspective: Individual and contextual explanations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(1), 58–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govekar, P. L., & Govekar, M. A. (2002). Using economic theory and research to better understand volunteer behavior. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 13(1), 33–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guryan, J., Hurst, E., & Kearney, M. (2008). Parental education and parental time with children. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(3), 23–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackl, F., Halla, M., & Pruckner, G. J. (2007). Volunteering and income—the fallacy of the good samaritan? Kyklos, 60(1), 77–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafstrom, J. L., & Paynter, M. (1991). Time use satisfaction of wives: Home, farm, and labor force workload. Lifestyles, 12(2), 131–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, F., Cnaan, R. A., Brudney, J. L., Ascoli, U., Meijs, L. C., & Ranade, S. (2000). Public perception of “who is a volunteer”: An examination of the net-cost approach from a cross-cultural perspective. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 11(1), 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L. P. (1982). Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50(4), 1029–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J. F., & Putnam, R. D. (2004). The social context of well-being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), 1435–1446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). Toward national well-being accounts. American Economic Review, 94(2), 429–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, J. A. (2013). Why are married men working so much? An aggregate analysis of intra-household bargaining and labour supply. Review of Economic Studies, 80(3), 1055–1085.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilley, A., & Slonim, R. (2014). The price of warm glow. Journal of Public Economics, 114, 58–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., & Aaker, J. (2008). The happiness of giving: The time-ask effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 543–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7(3), 186–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, A., & Snyder, M. (2017). Investigating similarities and differences between volunteer behaviors: Development of a volunteer interest typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(1), 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsunaga, Y., Yamauchi, N., & Okuyama, N. (2010). What determines the size of the nonprofit sector?: A cross-country analysis of the government failure theory. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 21(2), 180–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, S., & Stutzer, A. (2008). Is volunteering rewarding in itself? Economica, 75(297), 39–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menchik, P. L., & Weisbrod, B. A. (1987). Volunteer labor supply. Journal of Public Economics, 32(2), 159–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minagawa, J., & Upmann, T. (2013). A note on parental time allocation. Labour Economics, 25, 153–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira, M. J. (2003). A conditional likelihood ratio test for structural models. Econometrica, 71(4), 1027–1048.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musick, M. A., & Wilson, J. (2008). Volunteers: A social profile. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1993). Aids volunteers and their motivations: Theoretical issues and practical concerns. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 4(2), 157–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phipps, S., Burton, P., & Osberg, L. (2001). Time as a source of inequality within marriage: Are husbands more satisfied with time for themselves than wives? Feminist Economics, 7(2), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prouteau, L., & Wolff, F.-C. (2006). Does volunteer work pay off in the labor market? Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(6), 992–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramey, V. A., & Francis, N. (2009). A century of work and leisure. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 1(2), 189–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shantz, A., Banerjee, R., & Lamb, D. (2018). The relationship between male and female youth volunteering and extrinsic career success: A growth curve modeling approach. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(2), 201S–225S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. H. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23(3), 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stebbins, R. A. (1996). Volunteering: A serious leisure perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(2), 211–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stock, J. H., & Yogo, M. (2005). Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. In D. W. K. Andrews & J. H. Stock (Eds.), In identification and inference for econometric models: Essays in honor of Thomas Rothenberg (pp. 80–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taniguchi, H. (2006). Men’s and women’s volunteering: Gender differences in the effects of employment and family characteristics. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 83–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taniguchi, H. (2012). The determinants of formal and informal volunteering: Evidence from the American Time Use Survey. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 920–939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiehen, L. (2000). Has working more caused married women to volunteer less? Evidence from time diary data, 1965 to 1993. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(4), 505–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger, L. S. (1991). Altruism as a motivation to volunteer. Journal of Economic Psychology, 12(1), 71–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Praag, B., Frijters, P., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2003). The anatomy of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 51(1), 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Y. (2009). Work and leisure: A history of ideas. Journal of Labor Economics, 27(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (2012). Volunteerism research: A review essay. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(2), 176–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winship, C., & Mare, R. D. (1984). Regression models with ordinal variables. American Sociological Review, 49(4), 512–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen, S. T., & Zampelli, E. M. (2014). What drives charitable donations of time and money? The roles of political ideology, religiosity, and involvement. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 50, 58–67.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Applied Economics, Deggendorf Institute of Technology, D-94469, Deggendorf, Germany

    Marcus Dittrich

  2. CESifo, Munich, Germany

    Marcus Dittrich

  3. Department of Economics and Business Administration, Chemnitz University of Technology, D-09107, Chemnitz, Germany

    Bianka Mey

Authors
  1. Marcus Dittrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bianka Mey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus Dittrich.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Survey Questions

Q1: How satisfied are you with your time use for the following domain or persons?

figure a

Q2: How do you evaluate your current time use? Is your time use rather too low, just right or too much?

figure b

See Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.

Table 6 Variable description
Full size table
Table 7 Descriptive overview of the sample
Full size table
Table 8 Domain-specific TUS: volunteers and non-volunteers
Full size table
Table 9 Time use satisfaction and endogeneity: 2SLS
Full size table
Table 10 Volunteering and endogeneity among single domains: LIML estimates, males
Full size table
Table 11 Volunteering and endogeneity among single domains: LIML estimates, females
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dittrich, M., Mey, B. Time Use Choices and Volunteer Labour Supply. Voluntas 32, 1299–1319 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00179-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00179-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation