The thought-provoking document argues in favor of a radical rethink of the way developed societies approach work and suggests moving toward a 21-hour week. This view is based on the notion that the current economic model, based on increasing consumption to fuel growth, is no longer sustainable.nef believes that a shorter week would allow paid work to be more evenly distributed across society, enable parents to devote more time to their children and their neighbors. The idea is to adapt the economy to the needs of society and the environment rather than allowing the markets to dictate the way we live.
The market economy, the think tank argues, cannot grow indefinitely, and the natural economy has already reached its environmental limits. But there is still plenty of potential in the “core economy,” which is based on human capital and “made up of the abundant and priceless assets that are embedded in people’s everyday lives -- time, energy, wisdom, experience, knowledge and skills.” But in order to develop this human potential, we have to reconsider how we use time and attribute more value to unpaid activities instead of having our lives dominated mainly by paid work.
While this model may appear utopian, nef does not expect governments to immediately legislate a 21-hour week. With this report, the think tank wants to challenge existing notions and stimulate debate. It makes a well-argued case, based on British data, for revisiting some well-entrenched assumptions we make about our working lives.
The 9-to-5 five-day-a-week model emerged during a period when industry was the main engine of development and people clocked in at work. In the age of the Internet and the Blackberry, work has expanded into the space that used to be allocated to free time, and many tasks can be performed from a distance.
The 21-hour figure was chosen because it is very close to the average working week in Britain at the moment, if you even out the discrepancies between overworked people and those who are unemployed.
Looking at paid work would require challenging many norms and expectations. Income is currently not distributed in ways that reflect the actual value of the individual’s labor. Women tend to spend more time on the informal activities of the “core economy,” which currently isn’t adequately valued. According to nef, based on 2005 figures, housework and care for the elderly and children, if paid at the minimum wage, would account for 21 percent of Britain’s gross domestic product.
Shifting to a four-day week, nef explains, would help narrow the gender gap and allow everyone to create a better balance between paid work and the “core economy” of family, friends as well as community life and civic engagement.
Obstacles to such a radical change are, of course, plenty, and a long transition would be needed to make the necessary adjustments. The minimum wage, for instance, would need to be raised to ensure that people at the lower end of the pay scale do not lose out.
But if such an approach may appear farfetched in the current circumstances, many countries may be forced to radically rethink how their economies and society function in the future. Some interesting experiments have already been carried out. The state of Utah in the US has already successfully squeezed the 40-hour week into four days, for instance, resulting in increased employee satisfaction, reduced absenteeism and environmental savings for the state as well as for the individuals concerned who cut their commuting costs.
