an article by George J. Borjas (Harvard Kennedy School, USA) and Richard B. Freeman (Harvard University, USA) published in RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences Volume 5 Issue 5 (December 2019)
Abstract
Using numbers of industrial robots shipped to primarily manufacturing industries as a supply shock to an industry labor market, we estimate that an additional robot reduces employment by roughly two to three workers overall and by three to four workers when robots are likely to be good substitutes for humans.
The supply shock also reduces wages. The estimates far exceed those of an additional immigrant on employment and wages.
While growth of robots in the 2000s was too modest to be a major determinant of wages and employment, the estimated effects suggest that continued exponential growth of industrial robots could disrupt job markets in the foreseeable future and thus merit attention from analysts and policymakers concerned about the economic well-being of workers.
Full text (PDF 23pp)
Showing posts with label automation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label automation. Show all posts
Thursday, 5 December 2019
Demographics and technology explain secular stagnation and more
a column by Henrique Basso and Juan F Jimeno for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
Advanced economies will face large demographic and radical technological change in the next decades.
This column shows how demographics and endogenous technological changes, which encompass both innovation and automation, can interact to limit the future prospects for growth and alter the factor income distribution. Due to a trade-off between innovation and automation, lower fertility and population ageing are likely to generate more automation, but also lead to a reduction in GDP per capita growth and the labour income share.
Continue reading
Advanced economies will face large demographic and radical technological change in the next decades.
This column shows how demographics and endogenous technological changes, which encompass both innovation and automation, can interact to limit the future prospects for growth and alter the factor income distribution. Due to a trade-off between innovation and automation, lower fertility and population ageing are likely to generate more automation, but also lead to a reduction in GDP per capita growth and the labour income share.
Continue reading
Thursday, 21 November 2019
History and future of human-automation interaction
an article by Christian P. Janssen and Stella F. Donker (Utrecht University, the Netherlands), Duncan P. Brumby (University College London, UK) and Andrew L. Kun (University of New Hampshire, USA) published in International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Volume 131 (November 2019)
Highlights
We review the history of human-automation interaction research, assess its current status and identify future directions.
We start by reviewing articles that were published on this topic in the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies during the last 50 years.
We find that over the years, automated systems have been used more frequently
Hey ho, back to the future anyone?
Highlights
- We review the history of human-automation interaction research in IJHCS.
- Automated systems are used by non-professional users, in more dynamic contexts.
- Given the expansion of the field, there is a continued need for HCI contributions.
- We discuss important future areas for human-automation interaction research.
We review the history of human-automation interaction research, assess its current status and identify future directions.
We start by reviewing articles that were published on this topic in the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies during the last 50 years.
We find that over the years, automated systems have been used more frequently
- in time-sensitive or safety-critical settings,
- in embodied and situated systems, and
- by non-professional users.
- issues of function and task allocation between humans and machines,
- issues of trust, incorrect use, and confusion,
- the balance between focus, divided attention and attention management,
- the need for interdisciplinary approaches to cover breadth and depth,
- regulation and explainability,
- ethical and social dilemmas,
- allowing a human and humane experience, and
- radically different human-automation interaction.
Hey ho, back to the future anyone?
Wednesday, 6 November 2019
Automation and its enemies
a column by Carl Benedikt Frey and Ebrahim Rahbari for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
Mechanisation during the Industrial Revolution accelerated economic growth and prosperity in the long term, but it was fiercely opposed by workers who did not share in its short-term gains.
This column argues that similar forces are at play today.
A new revolution in automation is eliciting resistance since it threatens to render jobs redundant. The column proposes policy interventions to raise productivity and prosperity in the short term, to reap the benefits of the new technologies in the long term.
Continue reading
Mechanisation during the Industrial Revolution accelerated economic growth and prosperity in the long term, but it was fiercely opposed by workers who did not share in its short-term gains.
This column argues that similar forces are at play today.
A new revolution in automation is eliciting resistance since it threatens to render jobs redundant. The column proposes policy interventions to raise productivity and prosperity in the short term, to reap the benefits of the new technologies in the long term.
Continue reading
Tuesday, 24 September 2019
Automation and jobs: When technology boosts employment
an article by James Bessen for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
Do industries shed or create jobs when they adopt new labour-saving technologies?
This column shows that manufacturing employment grew along with productivity for a century or more, and only later decreased. It argues that the changing nature of demand was behind this pattern, which led to market saturation.
This implies that the main impact of automation in the near future may be a major reallocation of jobs, not necessarily massive job losses.
Continue reading
Do industries shed or create jobs when they adopt new labour-saving technologies?
This column shows that manufacturing employment grew along with productivity for a century or more, and only later decreased. It argues that the changing nature of demand was behind this pattern, which led to market saturation.
This implies that the main impact of automation in the near future may be a major reallocation of jobs, not necessarily massive job losses.
Continue reading
Friday, 26 July 2019
The future is ours: Women, automation and equality in the digital age
a new IPPR publication
Following the Commission on Economic Justice's work on automation, IPPR has examined the impact automation could have on women. Our new report The Future is Ours: Women, automation and equality in the digital age shows that working women are more than twice as likely as working men to hold jobs with high potential for automation. But when workers are cheaper than machines, there is little incentive to invest in automating technologies.
The report argues that without intervention gender inequality could deepen as women are stuck in low-pay roles and less able to access new roles in the economy. It is imperative that government ensures that the increasing use of robots, cognitive technologies and artificial intelligence don't widen existing gender pay and wealth gaps.
Managed correctly, automation could increase productivity. These gains could be used to increase low incomes and to transform how we value key job roles that have historically been characterised by feminised work performed primarily by women, for low wages. Increased productivity could also allow us to produce the same amount with less work: we could choose to reduce working time, potentially relieving the 'double shift' of paid and unpaid work faced by many women and facilitating a more equal balance of unpaid work between genders.
Technology is not destiny. Now is our chance to accelerate automation to create a more just economy. To realise these benefits will require automation to be led by those it affects, and that must include women.
Summary report (PDF 2pp)
Full text (PDF 56pp)
Following the Commission on Economic Justice's work on automation, IPPR has examined the impact automation could have on women. Our new report The Future is Ours: Women, automation and equality in the digital age shows that working women are more than twice as likely as working men to hold jobs with high potential for automation. But when workers are cheaper than machines, there is little incentive to invest in automating technologies.
The report argues that without intervention gender inequality could deepen as women are stuck in low-pay roles and less able to access new roles in the economy. It is imperative that government ensures that the increasing use of robots, cognitive technologies and artificial intelligence don't widen existing gender pay and wealth gaps.
Managed correctly, automation could increase productivity. These gains could be used to increase low incomes and to transform how we value key job roles that have historically been characterised by feminised work performed primarily by women, for low wages. Increased productivity could also allow us to produce the same amount with less work: we could choose to reduce working time, potentially relieving the 'double shift' of paid and unpaid work faced by many women and facilitating a more equal balance of unpaid work between genders.
Technology is not destiny. Now is our chance to accelerate automation to create a more just economy. To realise these benefits will require automation to be led by those it affects, and that must include women.
Summary report (PDF 2pp)
Full text (PDF 56pp)
Monday, 15 July 2019
Robots and firms
a column by Michael Koch, Ilya Manuylov and Marcel Smolka for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
The rise of robots has sparked an intense debate about the labour market effects of their adoption.
This column explores differences in robot adoption across firms and analyses the labour market effects of robot adoption at the firm level. It reveals a productivity-enhancing reallocation of labour and market shares across firms, with robot-adopting firms creating new job opportunities and expanding their scale of operations, while non-adopters experience negative output and employment effects in the face of tougher competition.
Continue reading
The rise of robots has sparked an intense debate about the labour market effects of their adoption.
This column explores differences in robot adoption across firms and analyses the labour market effects of robot adoption at the firm level. It reveals a productivity-enhancing reallocation of labour and market shares across firms, with robot-adopting firms creating new job opportunities and expanding their scale of operations, while non-adopters experience negative output and employment effects in the face of tougher competition.
Continue reading
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Stop saying "robots are coming for your job"; start saying "Your boss wants to replace you with a robot"
a post by Cory Doctorow for the Boing Boing blog
Tech reporter and sf writer Brian Merchant (previously) calls our attention to the peculiar construction of the problem statement in articles about automation and obsolescence, in which "robots are coming to steal your job."
The thing is robots don't (yet) autonomously arrange to show up at your workplace, uninvited, and take your job. Instead, your boss entertains sales calls (or solicits them!) from companies who want to see your work replaced with a robot, and then your boss makes a decision about whether that replacement will come with an equitable sharing of the fruits of automation (shorter hours and higher pay all around!) or whether they will be hoarded by the forces of capital ("sorry, the robot stole your job, nothing I can do about it").
Continue reading
Tech reporter and sf writer Brian Merchant (previously) calls our attention to the peculiar construction of the problem statement in articles about automation and obsolescence, in which "robots are coming to steal your job."
The thing is robots don't (yet) autonomously arrange to show up at your workplace, uninvited, and take your job. Instead, your boss entertains sales calls (or solicits them!) from companies who want to see your work replaced with a robot, and then your boss makes a decision about whether that replacement will come with an equitable sharing of the fruits of automation (shorter hours and higher pay all around!) or whether they will be hoarded by the forces of capital ("sorry, the robot stole your job, nothing I can do about it").
Continue reading
Monday, 3 June 2019
Measuring the welfare effects of AI and automation
a column by Jacques Bughin, Christopher Pissarides and Eric Hazan for VOX: CEPR’;s Policy Portal
Artificial intelligence promises economic growth as well as creating fear for those whose jobs it may replace.
This column takes a wider approach to examining how AI and other technologies will affect citizens’ welfare beyond just their income. It argues that the new technologies are intrinsically neither good nor bad, it is how they are deployed and how the transition is crafted that conditions the welfare dynamics of societies.
Continue reading
Definitely more on the social issues than the economics. An interesting read.
Artificial intelligence promises economic growth as well as creating fear for those whose jobs it may replace.
This column takes a wider approach to examining how AI and other technologies will affect citizens’ welfare beyond just their income. It argues that the new technologies are intrinsically neither good nor bad, it is how they are deployed and how the transition is crafted that conditions the welfare dynamics of societies.
Continue reading
Definitely more on the social issues than the economics. An interesting read.
Monday, 13 May 2019
Skills Outlook 2019: How does the United Kingdom Compare?
via OECD
The Skills Outlook Scoreboard assesses the extent to which the United Kingdom is able to make the most of digitalisation. The United Kingdom’s performance is measured along 3 main dimensions:
In the United Kingdom, according to OECD estimates, 13.7% of workers are in occupations at high risk of automation and would need moderate training efforts (up to 1 year) to transit to safer occupations with low or medium risk of automation.
An additional 2.6% would need important training (up to 3 years) to avoid the risk of automation.
Teachers in the United Kingdom are well prepared: more than 60% of them are top performers in problem solving in technology-rich environment and only 32% (the lowest value among OECD countries), report to be in need of training in ICT for teaching.
See the OECD website for options
The Skills Outlook Scoreboard assesses the extent to which the United Kingdom is able to make the most of digitalisation. The United Kingdom’s performance is measured along 3 main dimensions:
- Skills for the digitalisation,
- Digital exposure and
- Skills-related policy effort.
In the United Kingdom, according to OECD estimates, 13.7% of workers are in occupations at high risk of automation and would need moderate training efforts (up to 1 year) to transit to safer occupations with low or medium risk of automation.
An additional 2.6% would need important training (up to 3 years) to avoid the risk of automation.
Teachers in the United Kingdom are well prepared: more than 60% of them are top performers in problem solving in technology-rich environment and only 32% (the lowest value among OECD countries), report to be in need of training in ICT for teaching.
See the OECD website for options
Thursday, 11 April 2019
Next-generation technologies and the future of trade
a column by Susan Lund and Jacques Bughin for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
The history of trade reflects the ongoing march of technological innovation.
This column argues that despite today’s increased trade tensions, rising nationalism, and slowdown in global goods trade, globalisation is not in retreat. Instead, it is entering a new chapter that is being driven by flows of information and data, as well as technological changes that are reshaping industry value chains.
Continue reading
The history of trade reflects the ongoing march of technological innovation.
This column argues that despite today’s increased trade tensions, rising nationalism, and slowdown in global goods trade, globalisation is not in retreat. Instead, it is entering a new chapter that is being driven by flows of information and data, as well as technological changes that are reshaping industry value chains.
Continue reading
Monday, 1 April 2019
How confident are we in forecasting the automation of work?
an article by Elliot Jones for the DEMOS blog
Earlier today I blogged what the BBC Business News was saying about the ONS forecast, this one is more detailed.
This week, the Office for National Statistics released their first statistics on which occupations they believe are at the highest risk of automation across England. They estimate about 7.4% of all jobs are at high risk of automation, i.e. there is a 70%+ probability that workers in that occupation will be replaced with some combination of software and robotics. In particular, they predict:
Continue reading
Earlier today I blogged what the BBC Business News was saying about the ONS forecast, this one is more detailed.
This week, the Office for National Statistics released their first statistics on which occupations they believe are at the highest risk of automation across England. They estimate about 7.4% of all jobs are at high risk of automation, i.e. there is a 70%+ probability that workers in that occupation will be replaced with some combination of software and robotics. In particular, they predict:
- Over 10% of roles held by women are at high risk of automation, compared to 4% of men’s roles.
- 15.7% of 20-24-year-olds are in roles that are at high risk of automation, more than any other age group.
- The North-East, the East of England, Cornwall and Devon have the highest average risk of local jobs being automated, whereas the rest of the South and London have the lowest average risk of automation.
Continue reading
Automation could replace 1.5 million jobs, says ONS
a post by Jonty Bloom for the BBC Business News blog
Some 1.5 million people in England are at high risk of losing their jobs to automation, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
It says 70% of the roles at high risk of automation are currently held by women. Part-timers and the young are the next most at risk.
The ONS analysed the jobs of 20 million people in 2017 and found 7.4% of these were at high risk of being replaced.
It has developed a "bot" to show the risks for particular occupations.
The ONS defines automation as tasks currently carried out by workers being replaced with technology. That could mean computer programs, algorithms, or even robots.
The three occupations with the highest probability of automation are waiters and waitresses, shelf fillers and elementary sales occupations, all of which are low-skilled or routine.
Those at the lowest risk are medical practitioners, higher education teaching professionals, and senior professionals in education.
Continue reading
Some 1.5 million people in England are at high risk of losing their jobs to automation, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
It says 70% of the roles at high risk of automation are currently held by women. Part-timers and the young are the next most at risk.
The ONS analysed the jobs of 20 million people in 2017 and found 7.4% of these were at high risk of being replaced.
It has developed a "bot" to show the risks for particular occupations.
The ONS defines automation as tasks currently carried out by workers being replaced with technology. That could mean computer programs, algorithms, or even robots.
The three occupations with the highest probability of automation are waiters and waitresses, shelf fillers and elementary sales occupations, all of which are low-skilled or routine.
Those at the lowest risk are medical practitioners, higher education teaching professionals, and senior professionals in education.
Continue reading
Thursday, 20 December 2018
Demography, unemployment, and automation: Challenges in creating (decent) jobs until 2030
a column by David Bloom, Mathew McKenna and Klaus Prettner for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
Future global employment needs are of central importance for policymakers.
This column estimates that, based on growth in the working-age population, labour force participation rates, and unemployment, about three quarters of a billion jobs will need to be created in 2010–2030.
It also discusses how automation will add to the number of jobs required.
Future global employment needs are of central importance for policymakers.
This column estimates that, based on growth in the working-age population, labour force participation rates, and unemployment, about three quarters of a billion jobs will need to be created in 2010–2030.
It also discusses how automation will add to the number of jobs required.
Tuesday, 3 July 2018
Attracting young people to the mining industry: six recommendations
an article by Jan Johansson, Bo Johansson, Joel Lööw, Magnus Nygren and Lena Abrahamsson (Luleå University of Technology, Sweden) published in International Journal of Mining and Mineral Engineering Volume 9 Number 2 (2018)
Abstract
The present workforce in the mining industry is ageing, and mining companies have difficulties recruiting young people who are not particularly interested in working in the industry. Simultaneously, mining companies tend to rely on contractors that offer volume flexibility and expertise, often in a combination that is economically appealing.
This makes recruitment and development of the whole of the mining workforce complex.
To recruit the right workforce, mining companies and their contractors need to cooperate and improve their knowledge about both attractive and repelling work features so that they can make wiser strategic decisions based on facts.
On the basis of a Swedish context, we discuss different aspects of attractive workplaces and summarise our 'lessons learned' in six recommendations dealing with general health and safety issues, work organisation, competence development, gender equality, social responsibility and outsourcing.
Abstract
The present workforce in the mining industry is ageing, and mining companies have difficulties recruiting young people who are not particularly interested in working in the industry. Simultaneously, mining companies tend to rely on contractors that offer volume flexibility and expertise, often in a combination that is economically appealing.
This makes recruitment and development of the whole of the mining workforce complex.
To recruit the right workforce, mining companies and their contractors need to cooperate and improve their knowledge about both attractive and repelling work features so that they can make wiser strategic decisions based on facts.
On the basis of a Swedish context, we discuss different aspects of attractive workplaces and summarise our 'lessons learned' in six recommendations dealing with general health and safety issues, work organisation, competence development, gender equality, social responsibility and outsourcing.
Tuesday, 24 April 2018
Does everyone really need a job? Why we should question full employment
a post by Scotty Hendricks for the Big Think blog
Photo by Mike Kononov and Solomon Hsu on Unsplash
The idea that diligence is a virtue and that a person who doesn’t work full time is morally suspect is a common one. Phrases like “idle hands are the tools of the devil” suggest to us that work is inherently good and that if we don't work full-time then we have somehow failed. For many people, unemployment is as much something to be ashamed of as it is an economic problem.
It is no surprise then that we rarely ask – “do we all need to work?”
Think about it. The advance of technology over the last century and the increasing threat of automation have made many jobs obsolete. We have more wealth than at any other point in human history, we've created machines by which we can be more productive than any other point in human history, and have more things to do in our spare time than ever before. Why should we all work full-time jobs if we can afford to work part-time for the same economic output?
This is the question Andrew Taggart has asked for years. Taggart, a practical philosopher, understands that people have a need to contribute and often find meaning in work, but questions if our society can offer jobs that fulfill these needs to everybody. He points out that full employment schemes have historically focused on short-term, unskilled and labor-intensive employment that often fail to satisfy our need to contribute meaningfully to the world.
Continue reading
Photo by Mike Kononov and Solomon Hsu on Unsplash
The idea that diligence is a virtue and that a person who doesn’t work full time is morally suspect is a common one. Phrases like “idle hands are the tools of the devil” suggest to us that work is inherently good and that if we don't work full-time then we have somehow failed. For many people, unemployment is as much something to be ashamed of as it is an economic problem.
It is no surprise then that we rarely ask – “do we all need to work?”
Think about it. The advance of technology over the last century and the increasing threat of automation have made many jobs obsolete. We have more wealth than at any other point in human history, we've created machines by which we can be more productive than any other point in human history, and have more things to do in our spare time than ever before. Why should we all work full-time jobs if we can afford to work part-time for the same economic output?
This is the question Andrew Taggart has asked for years. Taggart, a practical philosopher, understands that people have a need to contribute and often find meaning in work, but questions if our society can offer jobs that fulfill these needs to everybody. He points out that full employment schemes have historically focused on short-term, unskilled and labor-intensive employment that often fail to satisfy our need to contribute meaningfully to the world.
Continue reading
Sunday, 15 April 2018
Humans Need Not Apply
an article by Dexter Levick for DEMOS
Visions of a technological utopia in which humans are free of the shackles of work and where purpose-built robots undertake a myriad of tasks in their place has long been a motif of science fiction. Yet the seemingly exponential advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) means that vision may soon become a reality. A report published last year by IPPR concluded that one in three jobs are thought to be at risk from automation within the next two decades – the general consensus amongst academics being that these will be primarily low-skilled jobs. Recently released research by the OECD puts that number lower, but still suggests a significant impact, concluding one in ten jobs are likely to be automated.
Whether the actual number of jobs to be automated is one in three, one in ten or something else, automation will necessitate some kind of shift in social policy, including welfare. Science fiction may have presented us with stark depictions of the process of automation, but it has little to offer about what that shift should look like – for example, how our welfare system will need to adapt to a labour economy in which AI plays a key role.
Continue reading
Visions of a technological utopia in which humans are free of the shackles of work and where purpose-built robots undertake a myriad of tasks in their place has long been a motif of science fiction. Yet the seemingly exponential advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) means that vision may soon become a reality. A report published last year by IPPR concluded that one in three jobs are thought to be at risk from automation within the next two decades – the general consensus amongst academics being that these will be primarily low-skilled jobs. Recently released research by the OECD puts that number lower, but still suggests a significant impact, concluding one in ten jobs are likely to be automated.
Whether the actual number of jobs to be automated is one in three, one in ten or something else, automation will necessitate some kind of shift in social policy, including welfare. Science fiction may have presented us with stark depictions of the process of automation, but it has little to offer about what that shift should look like – for example, how our welfare system will need to adapt to a labour economy in which AI plays a key role.
Continue reading
Saturday, 3 February 2018
‘The rise of the robots’ and ‘productivity pessimism’ can’t both be right
a post by Adam Corlett for the Resolution Foundation blog
Talk of looming automation, AI and robots is pervasive in public policy chat – including in the government’s new industrial strategy. Almost as common are projections that the weak growth of the past decade is here to stay – including in the latest official economic outlook. Sometimes these assumptions are even mentioned in the same breath. But these forecasts can’t both be right, and one outcome is definitely preferable to the other.
In the ‘robots’ view of the next ten or twenty years, machine learning will allow many jobs or tasks to be automated; from driving taxis to diagnosing disease and from cashiers to translators. And it’s not just AI. Greater physical capability could mean ubiquitous flying drones, robots on construction sites and the continued mechanisation of manufacturing. The new industrial strategy argues that “the world is undergoing a technological revolution… of a scale, speed and complexity that is unprecedented”. Similarly, Labour’s Future of Work Commission states that “both the scope and pace of the current technological revolution are likely to be at least as great as any that has gone before.”
But at the same time the government’s independent economic forecasters, the Office for Budget Responsibility, have downgraded their forecast for growth in productivity – or how much the country produces compared to the total number of hours worked by humans. Crucially, their projections are based not on expectations about future technology but purely on what past trends would suggest.
Continue reading
Talk of looming automation, AI and robots is pervasive in public policy chat – including in the government’s new industrial strategy. Almost as common are projections that the weak growth of the past decade is here to stay – including in the latest official economic outlook. Sometimes these assumptions are even mentioned in the same breath. But these forecasts can’t both be right, and one outcome is definitely preferable to the other.
In the ‘robots’ view of the next ten or twenty years, machine learning will allow many jobs or tasks to be automated; from driving taxis to diagnosing disease and from cashiers to translators. And it’s not just AI. Greater physical capability could mean ubiquitous flying drones, robots on construction sites and the continued mechanisation of manufacturing. The new industrial strategy argues that “the world is undergoing a technological revolution… of a scale, speed and complexity that is unprecedented”. Similarly, Labour’s Future of Work Commission states that “both the scope and pace of the current technological revolution are likely to be at least as great as any that has gone before.”
But at the same time the government’s independent economic forecasters, the Office for Budget Responsibility, have downgraded their forecast for growth in productivity – or how much the country produces compared to the total number of hours worked by humans. Crucially, their projections are based not on expectations about future technology but purely on what past trends would suggest.
Continue reading
Friday, 2 February 2018
Immigration in the era of automation
a column by Gaetano Basso, Giovanni Peri and Ahmed Rahman for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal
The US and Europe have both seen wage polarisation in the last three decades, in parallel with increasing technical automation. This column analyses the impact of immigration on this wage divergence via its effect on the labour supply side. It finds that immigration partially reverses natives’ polarisation of employment opportunities and wages by expanding aggregate demand and allowing natives to move to better paying occupations. Policies to reduce low-skilled migration with the aim of favouring native middle-class labour market opportunities may in fact do the opposite.
Continue reading
The US and Europe have both seen wage polarisation in the last three decades, in parallel with increasing technical automation. This column analyses the impact of immigration on this wage divergence via its effect on the labour supply side. It finds that immigration partially reverses natives’ polarisation of employment opportunities and wages by expanding aggregate demand and allowing natives to move to better paying occupations. Policies to reduce low-skilled migration with the aim of favouring native middle-class labour market opportunities may in fact do the opposite.
Continue reading
Thursday, 26 October 2017
The rise of robots in the German labour market
a column for VOX: CEPR’s Policy Portal by Wolfgang Dauth, Sebastian Findeisen, Jens Südekum and Nicole Woessner
Recent research has shown that industrial robots have caused severe job and earnings losses in the US. This column explores the impact of robots on the labour market in Germany, which has many more robots than the US and a much larger manufacturing employment share. Robots have had no aggregate effect on German employment, and robot exposure is found to actually increase the chances of workers staying with their original employer. This effect seems to be largely down to efforts of work councils and labour unions, but is also the result of fewer young workers entering manufacturing careers.
Continue reading
Recent research has shown that industrial robots have caused severe job and earnings losses in the US. This column explores the impact of robots on the labour market in Germany, which has many more robots than the US and a much larger manufacturing employment share. Robots have had no aggregate effect on German employment, and robot exposure is found to actually increase the chances of workers staying with their original employer. This effect seems to be largely down to efforts of work councils and labour unions, but is also the result of fewer young workers entering manufacturing careers.
Continue reading
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
