Theories of Agency and Social Structure in Understanding Leisure - Essay Example

Theories of agency and Social Structure of Comparative Analysis of Different Theories of Agency and Social Structure Used in Understanding Leisure Leisure are the activities which people undertake at will for the purposes of relaxation, diversion from normal obligations at times at broadening ones knowledge or for self-development and gains (Banks, 2014, p.143). Several theories have been used by social scientist to understand and explain the concept of leisure. These include: the theories of agency and social structure. This paper intends to compare and contrast these theories. Agency is the ability of people to make personal decisions and act in away which is guided by their intentions, preference or interest (Banks, 2014, p.147). Agency considers individuals to possess the freedom of choice and disregards any presence of constraints or external societal pressures. These decisions are believed to be the means of shaping their lives. The two main agency theories include: the rational choice theory and the theory of individualism. The rational choice theory states that social processes result from a number of actions made by individuals on their own free will. Individuals are considered to be rational and make decisions which will be able to maximize their utility given their current position or constraints (Banks, 2014, p.156). This can be used to understand why leisure is used as an investment. This is because the individuals will be interested in achieving the optimal level at their work places and so make decisions which will enable this to happen. By doing this, they will be maximizing the utility achievable from leisure in making their work and careers better. Theory of Individualism on the other hand states that, individuals are influenced to make personal decisions on their leisure time by the increasing risks in the society especially at work place and self interest. Because the individuals are interested in getting themselves in a better and secure position, they will pursue leisure objectives which will enable this to happen. In this case the necessity of choice will be at play in making the individuals strive to present and promote themselves in a manner which indicates they are in control of their own lives (Banks, 2009, p.674). Both theories consider individuals to be the primary units of the social world. The actions of the individuals are believed to results in outcomes which can be observed in the world. These outcomes shape and define the existing world and so the decisions made by individuals have a greater impact on the whole society. Both theories emphasize on the use of agency by individuals in order to pursue their own personal goals. Both of them agree that individuals have a free will to do whatever they deem fit. In both instances it can be seen that individuals make a choice of using leisure as a form of investment rather than as form of escape from societal obligations. The theories do not consider social structure to play any part on the decisions made by the individuals. They suggest the actions of individuals as being fully as a result of their capabilities to make their own choices. Rational choice theory explains that individuals make their choices with the intention of maximizing their utility for the purposes of achieving their own goals. On the other hand individualism on the other hand explains individuals make personal choices guided by their need to present themselves as being in control and responsible for their own lives. Rational choice acknowledges that societal structures are in existence and suggest that people make their choices of maximizing utility based on these structures. Unlike rational choice, individualism suggests that the existing societal constraints are on the decline hence forcing people to make their own personal decisions on their lives. According to this theory the social structures which were in place are no longer there to shape the community and so one is left with the responsibility of shaping his own life. Rational choice places high importance on the value of freedom of choice and validates the individual’s preference without considering the outcome of the decision. On the other hand, individualisms only values the free choices which leads to and individual to become self-governing, intelligent and self expressive in leisure and other social aspects. Social structures are the means which are used to identify and differentiate groups of people in the society. Structure can be in terms of age, gender, class and ethnicity. Structures are considered to play a role in the level of capacity of people to make free choices. They are therefore considered as societal constraints. Apart from being considered as constraints they can also be seen as a means of providing opportunities to different types of people and enabling them to exercise agency. There are two theories based on structure which are used to explain leisure. Marxist theory explains leisure in terms of push and pull between the working people and the employers. The laborers want an opportunity to practice agency both at work and home by advocating for shorter working hours (Waring, 2008, p.300). This theory divides people into two classes the laborers and the property owners. According to the theory the laborers have limited opportunities to exercise their agencies owing to the unequal distribution of resources which makes them poor. Feminist theory focuses on gender inequalities between men and woman. Feminists depend on gender to analyze the structural differences between men and women and states that these differences result in different levels of being able to exercise their agency. According to the theory, women are restricted by their sex and are not able to fully make their own personal decisions on leisure. Both theories do not deny that agency exists but emphasize on the existence of social structures which place restrictions on the levels of agency which can be applied by the different groups of people. Both theories are concerned with the inequality and exploitations which exists in the society. Feminism looks at the inequality between men and women and Marxists describes the inequality between the laborers and the employers. Both theories advocate for values of fairness and equality to be observed at the places of work. They both agree that the opportunities for work and leisure should be equalized for all the workers. Marxist describes division of labor in terms of the negative impact it has on the workers while feminism concentrates on the gender division of labor; how labor is divided between men and women in the society. Marxists illustrate class difference as being the basis of division of labor in the society while feminist considers division of labor being based on gender. According to Marxist theory leisure is the result of the struggles which exists between employees and employers. On the other hand feminism considers leisure as the struggle between men and women (Eccles, 2010, p.1). In Marxists theory leisure is seen as anything which is opposite to working. However, feminism insists that there is little difference between work and leisure especially in the case of women who undertake domestic duties and engage in unpaid work. Their leisure and work time overlap and they do not get opportunities for private leisure. The main similarity which can be observed between the agency-led theories and the structure-led theories is they are both interested in determining the relationship between individuals and the social world. They both are concerned with finding out the reasons behind the actions and decisions made by individuals. Based on both the concepts the theories can be used to explain how people make use of their leisure time and activities. Agency-led approach emphasizes on the value of human agency in making leisure based decisions. They entirely disregard the existence of social structure in shaping the choices made by individuals. Unlike the agency- led approach, structure-led approach places emphasis on the societal structures which are considered to be the main determinants of the decisions made by individuals. Human agency is not totally disregarded but is considered to be constrained by the existing inequalities. In conclusion, the theories either rely on the concept of agency or that of social structure as the basis of understanding leisure. Both the agency theories agree that individuals are guided by their free will in making their leisure decisions. The structural theories on the other hand claim that the capacity to exercise agency varies with different groups as a result of the social structures in place. All the theories hold different values which assists the social scientists in understanding and determining the leisure trends in the society. PART 2: Interpretation of Numerical Data Unemployment rates in the United Kingdom, European Union and United States in the period March 2009- March 2014 The unemployment rate in the European Union was the highest in March 2013. It was at about 10.9 per cent while the unemployment rates in the United Kingdom and United States were both at 8.1 per cent. The unemployment rate in European Union was lowest in March 2009. The unemployment rate in that period was at 8.8 per cent. The unemployment rate in the UK fell by 1.4 percentage points in the period Jan-March 2012 to Jan-March 2014. (6.8 - 8.2).This was a decrease of 17.07 per cent as illustrated by the workings below. Workings: [6.8 - 8.2] = -1.4 ÷ 8.2 = -0.1707 × 100 = -17.07 % References Banks, M., 2009. ‘Fit and working again? The instrumental leisure of the creative class’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 661–81. Banks, M., Gill, R. and Taylor, S., 2014. Theorizing cultural work: Labor, continuity and change in the cultural and creative industries. Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change. Eccles, L., 2010. ‘Angry young girls: binge-drinking culture “creating a generation of aggressive and out-of-control women”’, Daily Mail, 29 November. Waring, A., 2008. ‘Health club use and lifestyle: exploring the boundaries between work and leisure’, Leisure Studies, Vol. 27, no.3, pp. 295–309. Read More