But what happens in one geographic area affects the economy as a whole, and robots in one area can create positive spillovers. These benefits for the rest of the economy include reducing the prices of goods and creating shared capital income gains.
Including this spillover, one robot per thousand workers has slightly less of an impact on the population as a whole, leading to an overall 0.
Thus, adding one robot reduces employment nationwide by 3. In a separate study of robot adoption in France , Acemoglu and his co-authors found that French manufacturing firms that added robots became more productive and profitable, but that increases in robot use led to a decline in employment industrywide.
The impact of robots varies among different industries, geographic areas, and population groups. Unsurprisingly, the effect of robots is concentrated in manufacturing. Employees in these industries saw the most negative effects, and researchers also estimate negative effects for workers in construction and retail, as well as personal services.
The impact of robots was consistent when that industry was taken out of the equation, the researchers write. Robots are most likely to affect routine manual occupations and lower and middle class workers, and particularly blue-collar workers, including machinists, assemblers, material handlers, and welders, Acemoglu and Restrepo write.
Both men and women are affected by adoption of robots, though men slightly more. For men, impacts are seen most in manufacturing jobs. For women, the impacts were seen most in non-manufacturing jobs. Robots negatively affect workers at all education levels, though workers without college degrees were impacted far more than those with a college degree or more. Some parts of the United States saw relatively small adoption of robots, while in other states, including Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Texas, and Virginia, robots have been adopted more along the order of two to five robots per thousand workers.
In some parts of Texas, that number goes up to five to 10 per thousand workers, the researchers found. Detroit was the commuting zone with the highest exposure to robots.
Robots also reduce workplace injuries, according to the study. Our guidelines not only serve as a handy reference tool for governments looking to adopt AI technology, but also set baseline standards for effective, responsible public procurement and deployment of AI — standards that can be eventually adopted by industries. We invite organizations that are interested in the future of AI and machine learning to get involved in this initiative.
Read more about our impact. Wu also urged business leaders to be mindful of their low-skilled workers. As a company automates and the middle-skill level shrinks, those entry-level workers lose upward mobility.
There is no middle skill to go to. There are no supervisory jobs to go to. Knowledge Wharton , ,. Republished with permission from Knowledge Wharton The online research and business analysis journal of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum. Top stories: The most female-friendly companies; how to navigate guilt at work; and why is the year of the worker. I accept.
A new study shows that robots are changing the workplace in unexpected ways. Knowledge Wharton ,. Take action on UpLink. A new study by one of us James Bessen , along with Maarten Goos, Anna Salomons, and Wiljan van den Berge, provides the first large-scale quantitative evidence of how automation affects individual workers, using government data from for 36, firms in the Netherlands, covering about 5 million workers each year.
We found that automation does indeed affect many workers. This affects both their economic prospects and their overall wellbeing. Comparing workers who experience such a spike in a given year with a control group that experiences spikes later enables analysis of how the spikes affect workers. The paper looks at both tenured workers three years or more at the firm and recently hired workers.
Although many commentators liken the introduction of automation in a workplace to a mass layoff or a plant closing, the study shows that that comparison is not particularly apt and suggests those fears are overblown. The data shows that workers do experience loss of both earnings and work following a spike, but that these losses are substantially less than that experienced by workers following a mass layoff.
In the sample, only 0. In contrast, in the Netherlands, about 3. The comparable rate is 4. We use cookies to offer you a better browsing experience, analyse site traffic and personalise content.
If you continue to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies. Accept Reject Settings. Close Privacy Overview This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website.
We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies.
But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary Necessary.
0コメント