Our directory of things of interest

University Directory

How would a four-day week affect the environment?

How would a four-day week affect the environment?
05 Dec
2019
The four-day week is often held as being of benefit to human well-being, but what would working fewer hours really mean for the environment?

The benefits of a four-day working week, we have been told, are numerous. Increased productivity, improved employee mental health and fewer sick days will apparently follow. Several companies are already trialling it, while the UK’s Labour Party has announced that it will cut the average working week to 32 hours within ten years if it gets into power – with no loss of pay. But among all of this research, the resultant impact on the environment has received less attention.

Stay connected with the Geographical newsletter!
signup buttonIn these turbulent times, we’re committed to telling expansive stories from across the globe, highlighting the everyday lives of normal but extraordinary people. Stay informed and engaged with Geographical.

Get Geographical’s latest news delivered straight to your inbox every Friday!

Now, with the climate crisis firmly in the headlines, this question is gaining more clout as a research theme. An obvious starting point is the potential impact of a four-day week on car use. In a recent study, nattily titled Four Better or Four Worse?, researchers at the Henley Business School considered this question via a survey, presented to 505 business leaders and a separate sample of 2,063 adults, designed to reflect the UK in terms of age, gender and religion.

By applying the respondent’s answers on commuting habits to Department for Transport traffic data, the researchers found that if scaled up to apply to the UK as a whole, a national four-day working week would reduce the number of miles driven each week by employees travelling to work by 558 million. This in turn would reduce fuel consumption and travel costs, with car mileage down by as much as nine per cent.

These findings correlate with other positive research on the issue. A 2012 study based on data from 29 OECD member nations from 1970 to 2007, found that a ten per cent reduction in work hours could lead to declines in ecological footprint, carbon footprint and CO2 emissions by 12.1 per cent, 14.6 per cent and 4.2 per cent respectively.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR MONTHLY PRINT MAGAZINE!
Subscribe to Geographical today for just £38 a year. Our monthly print magazine is packed full of cutting-edge stories and stunning photography, perfect for anyone fascinated by the world, its landscapes, people and cultures. From climate change and the environment, to scientific developments and global health, we cover a huge range of topics that span the globe. Plus, every issue includes book recommendations, infographics, maps and more!

Nevertheless, there is another side to the story. While it is reasonably simple to analyse the way employees might alter their commutes in a four-day scenario, predicting what people will do with their extra time is much harder. There are plenty of energy savings to be made by having fewer people at work (think reduced use of workplace computers or machinery), but if an employee’s new pursuits involve high energy consumption, many of these environmental benefits could be undone. An increase in short-haul flights or other car journeys for example, would be bad news.

‘Measuring net impact – including non-transport related benefits – is fraught with several estimation challenges,’ acknowledges Anupam Nanda, a professor at Henley Business School and one of the contributors to the recent study. ‘Anything related to human behaviour and collective net benefits is very difficult to predict.’

As a result, he says that this risk needs to be explicitly considered in any new policies, both to reduce the risk of a detrimental environmental effect and to stop the situation in which employees simply cram more work into fewer hours, with resulting implications on stress levels and healthcare costs. ‘Organisations and policy-makers need to devise strategies to minimise the possibility of adverse effects and maximise the benefits,’ says Nanda. ‘Further studies using behavioural economic models and primary data can provide more insights in designing those policies and strategies.’

geo line break v3

Free eBooks - Geographical Newsletter

Get the best of Geographical delivered straight to your inbox by signing up to our weekly newsletter and get a free collection of eBooks!

geo line break v3

Related items

NEVER MISS A STORY - Follow Geographical on Social

Want to stay up to date with breaking Geographical stories? Join the thousands following us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram and stay informed about the world.

More articles in PEOPLE...

Explorers

Trapped at home in Vancouver during the pandemic, but with…

Cultures

The dramatic scenery of the Jurassic Coast and the fossils…

Global Health

With millions of lives at stake, scientists have accelerated research…

Explorers

Polar explorer Felicity Aston and her Icelandic husband took on…

Development

Pressure is mounting on steelmakers to decarbonise, but it’s proving…

Explorers

Applying Western geographical concepts to distant lands isn’t always a…

Cultures

Dawn Starin learns more about the orchids being sipped, slurped and…

Development

The recipient of the 2018 Land Rover bursary, supported by…

Refugees

Climate change is forecast to trigger the mass migration of…

Cultures

Life on the outskirts of Lake Baikal in southern Siberia,…

I’m a Geographer

Steven Amstrup has dedicated his life to polar bears, working…

Cultures

Every autumn in the Caucasus Mountains, men climb to the…

People

Geographical’s first ever Christmas Gift Guide. Eco-friendly, ethically made, sustainable...

I’m a Geographer

Hazel Barton is a microbiologist and cave researcher. She is…

Development

Scientists are working to mimic the transfer of immune-boosting microbes…