Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp1632.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Willing to pay for security: a discrete choice experiment to analyse labour supply preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Nikhil Datta
Abstract
This paper investigates the extent to which labour supply preferences are responsible for the marked rise in atypical work arrangements in the UK and US. By employing vignettes in a discrete job choice experiment in a representative survey, I estimate the distribution for preferences and willingness-to-pay over various job attributes. The list of attributes includes key distinguishing factors of typical and atypical work arrangements, such as security, work-related benefits, flexibility, autonomy and taxation implications. The results are indicative that the majority of the population prefer characteristics associated with traditional employee-employer relationships, and this preference holds even when analysing just the sub-sample of those in atypical work arrangements. Additionally, preferences across the UK and US are very similar, despite differences in labour market regulations. Rather than suggesting that labour supply preferences have contributed to the increase in atypical work arrangements, I find that the changing nature of work is likely to have significant negative welfare implications for many workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikhil Datta, 2019. "Willing to pay for security: a discrete choice experiment to analyse labour supply preferences," CEP Discussion Papers dp1632, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1632
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1632.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rui Costa & Stephen Machin, 2019. "The labour market," CEP Election Analysis Papers 046, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Yohei Mitani & Nicholas Flores, 2014. "Hypothetical Bias Reconsidered: Payment and Provision Uncertainties in a Threshold Provision Mechanism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(3), pages 433-454, November.
    3. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    4. Nikhil Datta & Giulia Giupponi & Stephen Machin, 2019. "Zero-hours contracts and labour market policy," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(99), pages 369-427.
    5. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    6. Karen Blumenschein & Glenn C. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, January.
    7. Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 2016. "The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015," NBER Working Papers 22667, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    9. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    10. Craig E. Landry & John A. List, 2007. "Using Ex Ante Approaches to Obtain Credible Signals for Value in Contingent Markets: Evidence from the Field," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 420-429.
    11. repec:feb:framed:0073 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    13. Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 2019. "Understanding Trends in Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States," NBER Working Papers 25425, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Blumenschein, Karen & Johannesson, Magnus & Yokoyama, Krista K. & Freeman, Patricia R., 2001. "Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay in the health care sector: results from a field experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 441-457, May.
    15. John Loomis, 2011. "What'S To Know About Hypothetical Bias In Stated Preference Valuation Studies?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 363-370, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diris, Ron & Van Vliet, Olaf, 2022. "The Relation between Skills and Job Security: Identifying the Contractual Return to Skills," IZA Discussion Papers 15513, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Adams-Prassl, Abi & Balgova, Maria & Qian, Matthias, 2020. "Flexible Work Arrangements in Low Wage Jobs: Evidence from Job Vacancy Data," IZA Discussion Papers 13691, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Jack Blundell, 2020. "Clusters in UK Self-Employment," CEP Occasional Papers 48, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Dhingra, Swati & Machin, Stephen, 2020. "The Crisis and Job Guarantees in Urban India," IZA Discussion Papers 13760, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Bertoni, Marco & Chattopadhyay, Debdeep & Gu, Yuanyuan, 2023. "Medical Brain Drain – Assessing the Role of Job Attributes and Individual Traits," IZA Discussion Papers 16243, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Manning, Alan & Mazeine, Graham, 2020. "Subjective job insecurity and the rise of the precariat: evidence from the UK, Germany and the United States," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108485, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2022. "How Much Do Workers Actually Value Working from Home?," CESifo Working Paper Series 10073, CESifo.
    8. Jack Blundell, 2020. "Clusters in UK Self-Employment," CEP Occasional Papers 048, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    9. Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer, 2020. "Intergenerational effects of employment protection reforms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 104016, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    11. Adermon, Adrian & Hensvik, Lena, 2022. "Gig-jobs: Stepping stones or dead ends?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    12. Swati Dhingra & Fjolla Kondirolli, 2023. "Jobless and Stuck: Youth Unemployment and COVID-19 in India," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 71(3), pages 580-610, September.
    13. Abi Adams-Prassl & Tom Waters & Maria Balgova & Matthias Qian, 2023. "Firm concentration & job design: the case of schedule flexible work arrangements," IFS Working Papers W23/14, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    14. Cattaneo, Maria Alejandra & Gschwendt, Christian & Wolter, Stefan C., 2024. "How Scary Is the Risk of Automation? Evidence from a Large Scale Survey Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 17097, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer, 2020. "Intergenerational effects of employment protection reforms," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    16. Jack Blundell, 2021. "Wage responses to gender pay gap reporting requirements," CEP Discussion Papers dp1750, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Adams-Prassl, Abigail & Balgova, Maria & Qian, Matthias, 2020. "Flexible Work Arrangements in Low Wage Jobs: Evidence from Job Vacancy Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 15263, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Richard Audoly & Manudeep Bhuller & Tore Adam Reiremo, 2024. "The Pay and Non-Pay Content of Job Ads," Staff Reports 1124, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    19. Dhingra, Swati & Kondirolli, Fjolla, 2023. "Jobless and stuck: youth unemployment and COVID-19 in India," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119619, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Manning, Alan & Mazeine, Graham, 2024. "Subjective job insecurity and the rise of the precariat: evidence from the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114258, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    21. Blundell, Jack, 2021. "Wage responses to gender pay gap reporting requirements," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114416, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    22. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2024. "Working from home, commuting, and gender," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(3), pages 1-23, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Datta, Nikhil, 2019. "Willing to pay for security: a discrete choice experiment to analyse labour supply preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103390, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Timothy C. Haab & Matthew G. Interis & Daniel R. Petrolia & John C. Whitehead, 2013. "From Hopeless to Curious? Thoughts on Hausman's 'Dubious to Hopeless' Critique of Contingent Valuation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 593-612.
    3. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Thomas G. Poder, 2018. "Payment and Provision Consequentiality in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: Single or Double “Knife-Edge” Evidence?," Cahiers de recherche 18-02, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    4. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    6. Sergio Colombo & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Klaus Glenk, 2022. "The relative performance of ex‐ante and ex‐post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 845-873, September.
    7. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    8. Ana I. Sanjuán‐López & Helena Resano‐Ezcaray, 2020. "Labels for a Local Food Speciality Product: The Case of Saffron," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 778-797, September.
    9. Tito Boeri & Giulia Giupponi & Alan B. Krueger & Stephen Machin, 2020. "Solo Self-Employment and Alternative Work Arrangements: A Cross-Country Perspective on the Changing Composition of Jobs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 170-195, Winter.
    10. Mark A. Andor & Manuel Frondel & Colin Vance, 2017. "Mitigating Hypothetical Bias: Evidence on the Effects of Correctives from a Large Field Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 777-796, November.
    11. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2016. "Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is," Monash Economics Working Papers 42-16, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    12. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke D. Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2022. "Reducing bias in preference elicitation for environmental public goods," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 280-308, April.
    13. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    14. Hermann Donfouet & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2013. "Using respondents’ uncertainty scores to mitigate hypothetical bias in community-based health insurance studies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 277-285, April.
    15. Anna Kollerup & Jacob Ladenburg, 2021. "Willingness to pay for accommodating job attributes when returning to work after cancer treatment: A discrete choice experiment with Danish breast cancer survivors," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 35(3), pages 378-411, September.
    16. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2014. "Putting One's Money Where One's Mouth is: Increasing Saliency in the Field," Monash Economics Working Papers 43-14, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    17. Gustafsson-Wright, Emily & Asfaw, Abay & van der Gaag, Jacques, 2009. "Willingness to pay for health insurance: An analysis of the potential market for new low-cost health insurance products in Namibia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1351-1359, November.
    18. John K. Horowitz & Kenneth E. McConnell & James J. Murphy, 2013. "Behavioral foundations of environmental economics and valuation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 4, pages 115-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. John C. Whitehead & Melissa S. Weddell & Peter A. Groothuis, 2016. "Mitigating Hypothetical Bias In Stated Preference Data: Evidence From Sports Tourism," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 605-611, January.
    20. Pengfei Liu & Xiaohui Tian, 2021. "Downward Hypothetical Bias in the Willingness to Accept Measure for Private Goods: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1679-1699, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    atypical work; self-employment; willingness-to-pay; experiment; labour supply preferences;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • J32 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Nonwage Labor Costs and Benefits; Retirement Plans; Private Pensions
    • J81 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Working Conditions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1632. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.