Work–Life Balance and Life Satisfaction in OECD Countries: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Work–life balance, as an effort to achieve a balance between work and personal (family) life, has been a key area of concern in labor policies since the early 2000s. One factor contributing to this trend is the implicit assumption that implementing a work–life balance policy increases people’s life satisfaction. The association between work–life balance and life satisfaction, however, is not self-evident. In this article, we investigate the effect of work–life balance on life satisfaction using data on men and women in OECD countries. A cross-sectional analysis suggests that implementing work–life balance policy leads to the improvement of life satisfaction for both men and women. However, the work–life balance elasticity of life satisfaction—the percentage change in life satisfaction in response to a 1% change in the level of work–life balance—is greater for men than for women. Conventionally, work–life balance issues have predominantly been thought to concern women rather than men. The present results imply that institutional design that adequately incorporates the work–life balance of both men and women is important for increasing life satisfaction.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic €32.70 /Month

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Similar content being viewed by others

Economic Growth and Work–Life Balance

Chapter © 2021

Well-Being and the Labour Market from a Global View: It’s Not Just the Money

Chapter © 2015

Bad Jobs Versus Good Jobs: Does It Matter for Life and Job Satisfaction?

Article 30 May 2023

Explore related subjects

Notes

For example, Karkoulian et al. (2016) noted that, given the crucial role that work–life balance plays in the well-being of employees, existing studies have devoted extensive research efforts to determining the effects of different variables on the quality of employees’ work–life balance.

In the OECD Better Life Index, time devoted to leisure and personal care is expressed in hours per day rather than as a percentage of time devoted to these pursuits. In the present study, these values were divided by 24 and expressed as percentages of time devoted to leisure and personal care in one day. Here, “leisure” includes sports activities, participating in and attending events, visiting or entertaining friends, watching television, listening to the radio at home, and other leisure activities. “Personal care” is defined as activities such as sleeping; eating and drinking; personal, household, and medical services; and travel related to personal care (OECD 2011b).

Among the numerous empirical studies on income inequality conducted in the past, examples of major studies published in journals after year 2000 include Bourguignon and Morrison (2002) and Sala-i-Martin (2006). These studies have used various indicators to conduct detailed examinations of the unequal distribution of personal income on a global scale. Helpman (2004) has provided a simple and concise survey of existing empirical research on income inequality.

Oshio and Kobayashi’s (2011) findings appear to be analogous to Alesina et al.’s (2004) results for Europe, which showed that inequality resulted in a loss of happiness among poor people.

Oshio and Urakawa (2014) demonstrated that perceived income inequality, rather than actual inequality, was associated with subjective well-being, using cross-sectional data collected from a nationwide, Internet survey conducted in Japan. Their empirical results supported the hypothesis that subjective assessments of income inequality affects individuals’ subjective well-being, that is, perceived income inequality was negatively associated with subjective well-being.

Szücs et al. (2011) found that satisfaction with work–life balance and overall life satisfaction were closely related in European countries. Specifically, the greater the satisfaction with the work–life balance, the greater the overall life satisfaction. They concluded that organizational and personal initiatives intended to improve individuals’ ability to balance work and non-work roles may increase not only satisfaction with work–life balance, but also general life satisfaction, which would contribute to a higher quality of life.

Frey (2018) noted that objective evaluations of health by medical doctors were less strongly correlated with life satisfaction, although subjectively perceived good health and subjective life satisfaction are closely related.

Helliwell and Huang (2014) showed that, for people who were employed, a one percentage point increase in local unemployment had an impact on well-being roughly equivalent to a 4% decline in household income, based on large United States surveys.

Using data on 10 European countries, Ochsen and Welsch (2011) found that the social costs of unemployment, in terms of its impact on life satisfaction, are related to the duration of unemployment. Specifically, reducing long-term unemployment may have a stronger impact on well-being than would reducing the number of people who are unemployed at any point in time. Therefore, these researchers highlighted the importance of labor policies on long-term unemployment.

According to Kyo et al. (2013), structural and frictional factors accounted for approximately 60% of overall unemployment in Japan, in terms of the average from January 2010 to January 2011.

References

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this article was presented at the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Japan Economic Policy Association, Kokushikan University, May 2015. I am grateful to Professor Hiroyuki Kawanobe for constructive comments and discussions. Two anonymous reviewers have also offered helpful remarks, which have made this article more valuable and readable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Tokyo University of Science, 1-11-2 Fujimi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0071, Japan Hideo Noda
  1. Hideo Noda