28 hours per week: The mobility and energy implications of working time reduction (WTR) in Germany

In February 2018, almost one million German metal industry workers won the right to reduce their working week from the standard 35 hours to 28 hours for up to two years. The employees involved work for companies such as Bosch and Daimler, whose actions are widely followed across the whole economy, thus raising the possibility that shorter working weeks will spread to other firms, sectors and countries. This development is of great interest, as it connects three important issues: (1) the future of work in a world transformed by automation, (2) changing lifestyles in contexts where economic security and basic needs are satisfied, and (3) a new approach to sustainability, given the inadequacy of traditional technology-biased measures to mitigate catastrophic climate change. Ecological economists have long speculated about the potential of a reduction of working hours to lower time pressure for individuals, decrease unemployment, and energy use and emissions due to less mobility and less consumption. Despite sustained media attention, there is little empirical research on the aspirations and practices of those voluntarily reducing their paid working time, as well as the implications for everyday life, mobility and consumption. For example, does the availability of more free time translate into a larger carbon footprint due to more leisure-related driving and flying? Within this project, we investigate actual changes in the lives of people who participate in the recently implemented German working time scheme, using a multi-methods approach to study two main questions: Firstly, we aim to understand what it takes for individuals to reduce their working time, taking into account motivations, actions and barriers. For this purpose, we conduct an online survey and several focus group discussions with scheme participants who choose shorter working hours, in order to identify their common characteristics and aspirations, as well as their motivations for joining the scheme. Upon this basis, we determine which aspects of working time reductions are socially attractive, gaining insights on how it could be popularised. Secondly, we want to know if working time reductions influence mobility patterns, energy consumption and therefore emissions associated with everyday life of the participating households. For this purpose, we empirically observe changes in scheme participants’ energy consumption due to reductions in working hours. We use expenditure statistics for a top-down estimation and our survey for a bottom-up estimation of relevant changes of consumption patterns. Utilizing household budget surveys and multi-regional, environmentally-extended input-output analysis, we quantify the global energy and emissions footprints of household consumption. In essence, we aim to determine under which conditions working time reductions are socially and environmentally beneficial and how they can be leveraged to increase the social and environmental potentials of WTR. Throughout the analysis of both aspirations and actual changes to consumption and energy footprints, we pay special attention to paid work in structuring everyday life and the role of mobility in lifestyle decisions. Whether mobility-related considerations influence working time decisions and how they matter for energy implications will provide useful insights for a new vision of sustainable prosperity.