Saving the midnight oil?

Working time reductions (WTRs) have been proposed as a policy with potential benefits for both the environment and well-being. Yet, empirical evidence remains limited. Moreover, the mechanisms through which WTRs affect well-being and environmental outcomes are not well understood. Income and time exert distinct influence, while moderating factors such as gender further shape these outcomes. To address these research gaps, my co-authors and I systematically reviewed 30 longitudinal and (quasi-)experimental studies examining the effects of different conceptualisations of WTRs (Manuscript 1). Second, I conducted a quasi-experimental study comparing Swiss employees who reduced their working hours with those who did not (Manuscript 2). Third, I cross-sectionally analysed the same data, focussing on gendered effects on time use and well-being (Manuscript 3). Our findings show that WTRs improve well-being, health, and work-family conflict, but that evidence on environmental effects is less convincing. In the longitudinal study, I found that while lower working hours enhance well-being, lower income negatively affects it, resulting in only short-term improvements in subjective well-being for those reducing their hours. For environmental behaviour, a WTR had small positive impacts for some, but no changes for other environmental behaviours. Furthermore, our research indicates that women may benefit more from WTRs than men regarding work-family conflict, suggesting gender dynamics play a crucial role. This research advances our understanding by synthesising empirical evidence of WTRs across multiple domains with more robust and causally interpretable methods. Importantly, I could replicate that environmental outcomes appear to primarily depend on income effects, whereas framing well-being outcomes in terms of income and time effects alone may be insufficient for understanding the complex dynamics of different factors at play – such as gender, work-family conflict, and time use. Crucially, the counteracting influences of income and working hours on well-being have implications for the income–well-being debate: Working less might provide a more sustainable route to increase well-being than earning more. Finally, my research highlights a possible conflict: Environmental effects of WTRs may require decreasing income, whereas social benefits may require a full wage compensation.