Labour supply and commuting

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. This series presents research findings based either directly on data from the German SocioEconomic Panel Study (SOEP) or using SOEP data as part of an internationally comparable data set (e.g. CNEF, ECHP, LIS, LWS, CHER/PACO). SOEP is a truly multidisciplinary household panel study covering a wide range of social and behavioral sciences: economics, sociology, psychology, survey methodology, econometrics and applied statistics, educational science, political science, public health, behavioral genetics, demography, geography, and sport science. Terms of use: Documents inThe decision to publish a submission in SOEPpapers is made by a board of editors chosen by the DIW Berlin to represent the wide range of disciplines covered by SOEP. There is no external referee process and papers are either accepted or rejected without revision. Papers appear in this series as works in progress and may also appear elsewhere. They often represent preliminary studies and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be requested from the author directly. The data used in this paper was made available to us by the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (GSOEP) at the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin). Jos van Ommeren is affiliated to the Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. We would like to thank the editor and an anonymous referee for useful comments and suggestions. LABOUR SUPPLY AND COMMUTING 02-10-2009Eva Gutiérrez-i-Puigarnau AbstractWe examine the effect of commuting on labour supply patterns. A labour supply model is introduced which shows that commuting distance increases daily workhours, whereas the effect on total labour supply is ambiguous. This paper addresses these issues empirically using the socio-economic panel data for Germany between 1997 and 2007. Endogeneity of commuting distance is accounted for by using employer-induced changes in commuting distance. In line with the theoretical model developed, we find that commuting distance has a slight positive effect on daily workhours. Further, we find a similar effect on weekly labour supply, but no effect on workdays. Distinguishing between males and females, it appears that the effects on labour supply are mainly through the behaviour of females, but the effects for females are still small.

Commuting Time and Household Responsibilities: Evidence Using Propensity Score Matching

“…Furthermore, time‐use surveys are important in analyzing the relationship between commuting time and time devoted to noncommuting activities, which includes housework, childcare, and leisure. Other alternative methodologies used to analyze commuting behavior are panel data on commuting behavior (Gutiérrez‐i‐Puigarnau et al., ) and geo‐visualization (Kwan, ; Kwan and Lee, ; Gershenson, ; Kwan and Kotsev, ).…”

The Educational Bias in Commuting Patterns: Micro-Evidence for the Netherlands

“…While there is no strong relationship between commuting distance and wages (Manning, 2003;Gutiérrez-i-Puigarnau and Van Ommeren, 2010), wages are often thought to be endogenous with respect to commuting time. Workers with a higher wage are likely to travel faster because they have a higher opportunity cost of time.…”

Commute Costs and Labor Supply: Evidence from a Satellite Campus

“…Disutility includes discomfort from noise, pollution, or effort. Ommeren (2010a). To maintain exogeneity of commute distance, the authors use employer-induced workplace relocations and exclude workers who change residences.…”