The Routine Biased Technical Change hypothesis : a critical review.

  1. Raquel Sebastián Lago 1
  2. Biagi, Federico
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revista:
Joint Research Centre (European Commission)

Año de publicación: 2018

Páginas: 33

Tipo: Informe

DOI: 10.2760/986914 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

In this report we contribute to the growing debate about how the introduction of technology affects labour demand. First, we provide some background of the main theoretical frameworks (SBTC and RBTC) used by researchers to explain recent changes in the employment distribution. Second, we review the most important empirical studies using the RBTC model. Overall, the prevailing economic literature provides empirical support to the RBTC model: cheaper computerisation progressively replaces human labour in routine tasks, thereby leading to an increase in the relative demand for workers performing non-routine tasks. Third, we show that the RBTC captures quite well the changes in the employment distribution, but we argue that it presents challenges from a conceptual, operational, and empirical point of view. These challenges are discussed in the report. Finally, we argue that the literature has yet to converge to a model that consistently explains how technology affects the labour demand. The RBTC has the merit of providing an explanation of why cheaper computerisation progressively replaces human labour in routine tasks, leading to an increase in the relative demand for workers performing nonroutine tasks. However, it is not immune to severe challenges, especially on the empirical ground. Future research should focus on the development of a measurement framework that addresses the challenges raised in this report.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Acemoglu, D. (2002). “Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market”, Journal of Economic Literature, 40(1), 7-72.
  • Acemoglu, D. and Autor, D. H. (2011). Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings, in: O. Ashenfelter and D.E. Card (eds.) Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. 4B, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 1043-1171.
  • Akcomak, S., Kok, S., and Rojas-Romagosa, H. (2013). The effects of technology and offshoring on changes in employment and task-content of occupations. Technical report, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
  • Anghel, B., De la Rica, S., and Lacuesta, A. (2014). “The impact of the Great Recession on employment polarization in Spain”, SERIEs, 5(2-3):143-171.
  • Autor, D. H (2015) “Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3): 3-30.
  • Autor, D. H and Dorn, D. (2013). “The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market”, American Economic Review, 103(5): 1553–1597.
  • Autor, D. and Handel, M. (2013). “Putting tasks to the test: Human capital, job tasks, and wages”, Journal of Labor Economics, 31(2), 59–96.
  • Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F. and Kearney, M. S. (2006). “The Polarization of the U.S. Labor Market”, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 96(2), 189-194.
  • Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F. and Krueger, A. (1998) “Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(1), 1169-1214.
  • Autor, D. H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R. J. (2003). “The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279-1334.
  • Bartel, A. P., and Lichtenberg, F., R. (1987). "The Comparative Advantage of Educated Workers in Implementing New Technology: Some Empirical Evidence,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 69 (1), 1-11.
  • Beaudry, P. and Green, D. A. (2000). “Cohort patterns in Canadian earnings: Assessing the role of skill premia in inequality trends” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d`Economique, 33(4), 907-936.
  • Biagi and Sebastian (2018). “New technologies and Routinization: How robust is the evidence for the EU??”, (forthcoming).
  • Blinder, A. S. (2009). “How many US jobs might be offshorable?”, World Economics, 10(2), 41.
  • Brunello, G., Fort, M. and Weber, G. (2009). “Changes in Compulsory Schooling, Education and the Distribution of Wages in Europe?”, The Economic Journal, 119(536), 516-539.
  • Card, D. and Lemieux, T. (2001) “Education, Earnings, and the Canadian G.I. Bill”. Canadian Journal of Economics, 34(2), 313-344.
  • Cortes, G. M., Jaimovich, N., Nekarda, C. J., Siu, H. E. (2014). “The Micro and Macro of Disappearing Routine Jobs: A Flows Approach”, NBER Working Paper No. 20307
  • Eurofound (2014). Drivers of Recent Job Polarization and upgrading in Europe: European Jobs Monitor 2014, Eurofound, Dublin.
  • Fernandez, R. M. (2001). “Skill-Biased Technological Change and Wage Inequality: Evidence from a Plant Retooling”, American Journal of Sociology, 107(2), 273-320.
  • Fernández-Macías, E. (2012). Job polarization in Europe? Changes in the employment structure and job quality, 1995-2007. Work and Occupations, 39(2):157-182.
  • Fernández-Macías, E. and Bisello, M. (2017). What do you do at work and how: a framework to measure tasks across occupations. Working paper.
  • Fernández-Macías, E. and Hurley, J. (2016). “Routine-biased technical change and job polarization in Europe”, Socio-Economic Review, page mww016.
  • Fonseca, T., Lima, F., and Pereira, S. (2018). “Job polarisation, technological change and routinisation: evidence for Portugal”, Labour Economics, 51, pp. 317-339.
  • Goldin, C., and Katz, L. F. (1996). “Technology, Skill, and the Wage Structure: Insights from the Past”, AEA Papers and Proceedings, 86(2), 252-257.
  • Goldin, C., and Katz, L. F. (2007). “Long-Run Changes in the Wage Structure: Narrowing, Widening, Polarizing”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 135-167.
  • Goos, M., Manning, A. (2007). “Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(1), 118-133.
  • Goos, M., Manning, A., and Salomons, A. (2009). “Job Polarization in Europe”, AEA Papers and Proceedings, 99(2), 58-63.
  • Goos, M., Manning, A. and Salomons, A. (2010). “Explaining job polarization in Europe: The roles of technology, globalization and institutions”. CEP Discussion Paper No. 1026, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, London.
  • Goos, M., Manning, A. and Salomons, A. (2014). “Explaining job polarization: routinebiased technological change and offshoring”, American Economic Review, 104(8): 2509-26.
  • Green, F. (2012). “Employee involvement, technology and evolution in job skills: A taskbased analysis”, Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 65(1): 35–66.
  • Handel, M. (2012). “Trends in Job Skills Demands in OECD Countries”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No 143, OECD Publishing.
  • ILO (2015) World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2015. International Labour Office , ILO, Geneva
  • Juhn, C., Murphy, K. M. and Pierce, B. (1993). “Wage inequality and the rise in returns to skills”, Journal of Political Economy, 101, 410-442.
  • Kampelmann, S. and Rycx, F. (2011). “Task-biased changes of employment and remuneration: The case of occupations”. IZA Discussion Paper 5470
  • Katz, L. F. and Murphy, K. M. (1992). “Changes in Relative Wages, 1963-1987: Supply and Demand Factors”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(1), 35-78.
  • MaCurdy, T. and Mroz, T. (1995). Estimating macro effects from repeated cross-sections. Technical report, University of Standford.
  • Manning, A. (2004). “We can work it out: The Impact of Technological Change on the Demand for Low-Skill Workers”, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 51(5), 581-60.
  • Marcolin L., Miroudot S. and Squicciarini M. (2016). "The routine content of occupations: new cross-country measures based on PIAAC", OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2016/02, OECD, Paris.
  • Matthes, B., Christoph, B., Janik, F., Ruland, M. (2014). “Collecting information on job tasks - an instrument to measure tasks required at the workplace in a multi-topic survey”, Journal for Labor Market Research, 47(4), 273-297.
  • Mazzolari, F. and Ragusa, G. (2013). “Spillovers from High-Skill Consumption to Low-Skill Labor Markets”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 74-86.
  • Michaels, G., Natraj, A., and Van Reenen, J. (2014) “Has ICT polarized skill demand? Evidence from eleven countries over 25 years”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 96 (1), 60-77. 14
  • Naticchioni, P, Ragusa, G., and Massari, R. (2014) “Uncondicional and Conditional Wage Polarization in Europe”, IZA Discussion Papers 8465, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  • OECD (2017). OECD employment Outlook 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  • Sebastian, R. (2018). “Explaining Job Polarisation in Spain from a Task Perspective”. SERIEs, Vol.9 Issue 2, pp215-248, Springer (DOI: 10.1007/s13209-018-0177-1)
  • Spitz-Oener, A. (2006). “Technical Change, Job tasks, and Rising Educational Demands: Looking Outside the Wage Structure”, Journal of Labor Economics, 24(2), 235-270.
  • Tinbergen, J. (1974). “Substitution of Graduate by Other Labor.’ Kyklos 27, 217-226.
  • Tinbergen, J. (1975). “Income Differences. Recent Research”, Amsterdam: North Holland
  • Wright, E. O. and Dwyer, R. E. (2003) “The Patterns of Job Expansions in the USA: A Comparison of the 1960s and 1990s”, Socio Economic Review, 1, p. 289-325.