Abstract
Economists have typically defined ‘leisure’ residually, as equal to ‘non-work time’, and, despite the problematic classification of enjoyable jobs, commuting time and unemployment, presumed that individuals derive utility from non-work time and disutility from working time. However, a recent literature now emphasizes ‘social leisure’ and coordination problems in leisure time. Since longer working hours by some individuals make arranging a social life more difficult for others (thereby decreasing the utility of their non-work time), externalities in time use may create multiple possible equilibria in time use, which may explain the sharp divergence in working hours between Europe and the United States.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Alesina, A., Glaeser, E. and Sacerdote, B. 2005. Work and leisure in the U.S. and Europe: Why so different? Working paper no. 11278. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
Becker, G. 1965. A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal 75: 493–517.
Bell, L., and R. Freeman. 2001. The incentive for working hard: Explaining hours worked differences in the US and Germany. Labour Economics 8: 181–202.
Corneo, G. 2005. Work and television. European Journal of Political Economy 21: 99–113.
Di Tella, R., R. MacCulloch, and A. Oswald. 2003. The macroeconomics of happiness. The Review of Economics and Statistics 85: 809–827.
Dickinson, D. 1999. An experimental examination of labor supply and work intensities. Journal of Labor Economics 17: 638–670.
Frey, B., and A. Stutzer. 2002. Happiness and economics: How the economy and institutions affect well-being. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hamermesh, D. 1998. When we work. American Economic Review 88: 321–325.
Hamermesh, D. 2002. Timing, togetherness and time windfalls. Journal of Population Economics 15: 601–623.
Jenkins, S., and L. Osberg. 2005. Nobody to play with? The implications of leisure co-ordination. In The economics of time use, ed. D. Hamermesh and G. Pfann. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Juster, T., and F. Stafford, eds. 1985. Time, goods, and well-being. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
Knack, S., and P. Keefer. 1997. Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: 1251–1288.
Kuhn, T. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Marshall, A. 1920. Principles of economics. 8th ed, 1961. London: Macmillan.
OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2001. The well-being of nations: The role of human and social capital. Paris: OECD.
Osberg, L. 2003a. Understanding growth and inequality trends: The role of labour supply in the U.S.A. and Germany. Canadian Public Policy 29 (Supplement 1): S163–S183.
Osberg, L., ed. 2003b. The economic implications of social cohesion. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Putnam, R. 1993. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of the American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Winston, G. 1987. Leisure. In The new Palgrave: A dictionary of economics, ed. J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, and P. Newman, vol. 3. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Osberg, L. (2018). Leisure. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_901
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_901
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95188-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95189-5
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences