Short communicationBody mass index and employment status: A new look
Introduction
Obesity has been argued to have an impact on labour market outcomes for the following reasons:
- (i)
Obesity is a condition that reduces ability to work through its impact on health, and is a central explanation for the increase in disability among those under the age of 50 in the U.S. (Lakdawalla et al., 2004, Kinge and Morris, 2010). It does so by being a risk factor for a wide number of deliberating diseases, including coronary heart disease, type II diabetes, hypertension and stroke (NHLBI Obesity Education Initiative, 1998).
- (ii)
Obesity has an impact on certain characteristics that might reduce performance in the labour market, such as lower self-esteem, lower reservation wages and/or higher discount rates (Komlos et al., 2004, Offer, 2001).
- (iii)
There may be discrimination against the obese due to their physical attributes (Agerström and Rooth, 2011, Finkelstein et al., 2007, Pingitore et al., 1994, Popovich et al., 1997, Rooth, 2009). As discussed by Morris (2007) there are be three reasons for this. First, prejudice by employers, reflecting their distaste for obese workers and the psychological costs incurred when dealing with them (Mclean and Moon, 1980). Second, there may be stereotyping by employers, arising from a belief that the obese are less productive (Everett, 1990). Third, discrimination may arise through uncertainty, or a lack of knowledge about the productivity of obese workers (Pagan and Davila, 1997).
Several studies looked at obesity and labour market outcomes including a special issue in this journal (Kelly, 2014) and they generally found poorer labour market outcomes in women, while the results for men were more mixed (Burkhauser and Cawley, 2008, Cawley, 2000, Cawley, 2004, Norton and Han, 2008, Sabia and Rees, 2012, Renna and Thakur, 2010, Averett and Korenman, 1996, Shimokawa, 2008, Han et al., 2009, Greve, 2008, Johansson et al., 2009, Sarlio-Lähteenkorva and Lahelma, 1999, Bozoyan and Wolbring, 2011, Averett et al., 2012, Asgeirsdottir, 2011, Garcia and Quintana-Domeque, 2007, Brunello and D’Hombres, 2007, Atella et al., 2008, Villar and Quintana-Domeque, 2009, Baum and Ford, 2004). However, it is intrinsically difficult to establish the impact of obesity on employment status due to classic endogeneity issues1. Hence, earlier literature has used econometric techniques like instrumental variables, time-fixed effects and sibling-fixed effects. A common approach, which is also used in this study, has been to rely on genetic variation in weight as an instrument for BMI.
A notable literature has also used experimental designs, by e.g. sending out weight-manipulation photos or showing videos of applicants in different obesity categories, to study discrimination against the obese (Agerström and Rooth, 2011, Finkelstein et al., 2007, Pingitore et al., 1994, Popovich et al., 1997, Rooth, 2009). The obese were less likely to be called for interviews and seen as capable for the job, than the normal weight.
The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between BMI and employment status. The likelihood of employment is particularly interesting, as holding a job is a prerequisite for general labour market performance like wages and on-job performance. Two studies have done this using UK data and IV-regression methods. Morris (2007) investigated the impact of obesity on employment (measured as a binary variable) and found a negative effect of obesity on employment in both men and women. Lindeboom et al. (2010) studied the impact of obesity on employment (measured as a binary variable) and found a negative impact of obesity on employment in both men and women. However, the IV-regression models, which used biological relatives BMI as instruments, did not support the findings.
One might organise employment status as a multinomial choice variable, where the effect of the obesity variable is allowed to differ for various employment outcomes (e.g. disabled, retired and employed) (Renna and Thakur, 2010, Terza, 2002). However, a very limited literature has used this approach to study obesity and employment outcomes. Such approaches can provide more complex results, which can answer why and how obesity affects employment status. This study makes three contributions to the literature. First, it estimates the impact of obesity on employment status as a multinomial dependent variable covering a more representative sample of the population than Renna and Thakur (2010) who use data from the US restricted to persons aged 50 or more. Second, it uses instrumental variables, based on genetic variation in weight, as a robustness control. Third, covering a period from 1998 to 2013, the data is more recent than earlier British studies. This is important as obesity rates have increased and the composition of the obese population has changed.
Section snippets
Data and variables
The analysis is based on data from sixteen rounds (1998–2013) of the Health Survey for England (HSE)2
Analysis and estimation
I model employment status for individual i aswhere Y is a categorical measure of employment status; B is a measure of BMI or obesity; and X is a vector of individual, household and child's characteristics. u is an error term and c and γ are coefficients to be estimated. My primary models are multinomial logit models for each of the outcomes. I test the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives assumption (IIA) by a Hausman test in each regression.
I argue in the introduction that
Results
The employment outcomes have remained relatively consistent across time (Table 1). However, we observe that the share LOOKING has increased after 2008 in those not obese and the share HOME/FAMILY has decreased in both BMI groups. Across all years, larger shares of the obese are not working, compared with the non-obese.
In the IV sample each individual has a child (aged 11–21), which are used to generate the instrument. Compared with the full sample the IV sample has a higher mean age, lower
Conclusion
I found a significant positive association between BMI and employment disability in both men and women. The results were significantly different when I looked at the association between BMI and the probability of not working for other reasons. These findings were robust to variations in the functional form for BMI and were repeated in the IV-models. The findings support the prior expectation that BMI and employment status measured by a multinomial choice model provide new insight into how
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank conference participants at the Health Economists’ Study Group (Lancaster) and the Nordic Health Economists’ Study Group (Uppsala) for comments on a previous version of the paper. The author would also like to thank Laura Vallejo-Torres, Apostolos Davillas and Øystein Kravdal.
References (57)
Do body weight and gender shape the work force? The case of Iceland
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2011)- et al.
Are employers discriminating with respect to weight?: European Evidence using Quantile Regression
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2008) - et al.
Fat, muscles, and wages
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2011) - et al.
Does body weight affect wages?: Evidence from Europe
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2007) - et al.
Beyond BMI: the value of more accurate measures of fatness and obesity in social science research
J. Health Econ.
(2008) An economy of scales: a selective review of obesity's economic causes, consequences, and solutions
J. Health Econ.
(2015)- et al.
The medical care costs of obesity: an instrumental variables approach
J. Health Econ.
(2012) - et al.
Effect of nursing home ownership on the quality of post-acute care: an instrumental variables approach
J. Health Econ.
(2013) Obesity and labor market outcomes in Denmark
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2008)- et al.
Obesity and labour market success in Finland: the difference between having a high BMI and being fat
Econ. Hum. Biol.
(2009)
Association between obesity and prescribed medication use in England
Econ. Hum. Biol.
Assessing the impact of obesity on labor market outcomes
Econ. Hum. Biol.
Body mass index and occupational attainment
J. Health Econ.
The impact of obesity on employment
Lab. Econ.
Body mass index, waist circumference and employment: evidence from older Irish adults
Econ. Hum. Biol.
Direct and indirect effects of obesity on US labor market outcomes of older working age adults
Soc. Sci. Med.
Body weight and wages: evidence from Add Health
Econ. Hum. Biol.
Two-stage residual inclusion estimation: addressing endogeneity in health econometric modeling
J. Health Econ.
Peer effects in adolescent overweight
J. Health Econ.
Body composition and wages
Econ. Hum. Biol.
Evidence for a strong genetic influence on childhood adiposity despite the force of the obesogenic environment
The Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
The role of automatic obesity stereotypes in real hiring discrimination
J. Appl. Psychol.
The economic reality of the beauty myth
J. Human Resour.
Immigration, obesity and labor market outcomes in the UK
IZA J. Migration
Instrumental variables and GMM: estimation and testing
Stata J.
The wage effects of obesity: a longitudinal study
Health Econ.
Body weight and women's labor market outcomes
NBER Working Paper 7841
The impact of obesity on wages
J. Hum. Res.
Cited by (27)
The impact of overweight and obesity on unemployment duration among young American workers
2023, Economics and Human BiologyCausal effect of obesity on the probability of employment in women in Turkey
2023, Economics and Human BiologyRelationship of body mass index with meat production and energy reserves in yearling bucks
2023, Small Ruminant ResearchBody shape and stable employment opportunity analysis of China's nonagricultural labor market
2022, SSM - Population HealthCitation Excerpt :We also consider endogeneity and use the IV regression. Some studies (Bargain & Zeidan, 2019; Böckerman et al., 2019; Kinge, 2016; Tyrrell et al., 2016; Willage, 2018) have used genetic information for BMI, which is a well-suited instrument. In addition, variables used as instrumental variables for body shape include the lagged component of the respondents' own BMI(Gilleskie et al., 2017), the mean adult BMI at the regional level (Morris, 2006), the body status of biological relatives(Lindeboom et al., 2010), and the oldest child’s BMI(Kinge, 2017).
Are the costs of employer-sponsored health insurance passed on to workers at the individual level?
2021, Economics and Human BiologyFamily ties and child obesity in Italy
2021, Economics and Human Biology