arbiter
JournalsAccount

The Spatial Anatomy of Working at Home: Concepts, Measures and Types of Spaces Used

Alan Felstead et al.

Industrial Relations Journal2026https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.70032article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This article provides a spatial analysis of working at home. It makes distinctions according to the extent to which the boundaries of work and home spatially overlap. Using this conceptual lens, it deploys data from Britain′s Skills and Employment Survey to track the trends and patterns of homeworking and hybrid working over the last two decades. The article also examines the type of home spaces used. It identifies the characteristics of those who use a home office as opposed to other spaces, such as the kitchen or the lounge, where unpaid domestic tasks are carried out. The results show that, first, the relatively privileged are more likely to work at home. Second, those spending more time working at home, living in larger and better‐maintained homes, and men rather than women are more likely to have a home office. Furthermore, gendered access to a home office persists even among dual‐earner households.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.70032

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{alan2026,
  title        = {{The Spatial Anatomy of Working at Home: Concepts, Measures and Types of Spaces Used}},
  author       = {Alan Felstead et al.},
  journal      = {Industrial Relations Journal},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.70032},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Spatial Anatomy of Working at Home: Concepts, Measures and Types of Spaces Used

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.