New technologies are changing the labor market

In a science fiction film (based on the book by Isaac Asimov) “I, Robot”, the father of the main character lost his job due to the introduction of robots in production. And not only he alone, the film shows the whole depressed world of the future. A future in which people massively lost their jobs, because computers and robots did this work much better, faster and cheaper. You will say that something similar has already happened in human history, and over time the situation has improved, people have retrained and adapted. However, today, now, there is a “creeping” relapse - “technology” has again begun to take work away from people. Moreover, the forecasts do not inspire optimism anymore.

All of us have long been accustomed to robots in production, and even fully automated enterprises are no longer new to us. Today, in the US and Europe, specialized software is actively pushing people out of the tourism business and retail sales, even replacing government officials. MIT School of Management Professor Eric Brynjolfsson ( Erik Brynjolfsson ), together with researcher Andrew McAfee ( Andrew McAfee ) argue that the widespread introduction of automated systems, specialized software and robots has already caused a strong slowdown in US employment growth. In a number of their works and interviews, the authors propagate the point of view according to which we are not expected at all by a “brave new world” in which automation and robotization increase the level of well-being of the entire population. Researchers believe that instead developed countries will face mass unemployment, and most of all not only manufacturing and tourism will suffer from automation, but also education, medicine, legal and financial services.


')
Researchers emphasize that high technology is not at all evil. They allow many professions to make it safer, easier and more productive. But at the same time, the same technologies leave many other professions behind, completely devaluing them. This process already affects medium and even smaller productions thanks to the creation of new, cheaper robots capable of performing a wide range of tasks. The same can be said about the areas of public administration and the provision of various services. And it's not just robots. Thanks to the development of software, cheaper electronics and the availability of storage for large amounts of data, many routine tasks can be automated today. This has already led in the United States to the disappearance of many jobs in the customer service and postal services. In some cases, automation reaches such a level that “the program communicates with another program, as a result new digital processes are created”. All this is the reason for the growth of labor productivity without increasing the number of jobs (employment). And supporters of this point of view warn that the development and implementation of elements of artificial intelligence can affect even those jobs that seem to us today solely to the prerogative of people.

Pros and cons

Opponents Brynjölfsson and McAfee object that simultaneously with the automation of various workplaces, new ones will be created. For example, at the forum held in April of this year, Aethon ’s owner Aldo Zini (Aldo Zini) said: “We allow people to be replaced in jobs that they don’t want and shouldn’t do” (Aethon produces robots for the transport of drugs and food and garbage in hospitals).

Aaron Edsinger from Redwood Robotics (developing robotic manipulators) took a compromise position on this issue. He positions robots not as a human replacement, but as an additional tool for human workers: "We believe that our products make the work of workers more efficient and lead to an increase in the productivity of enterprises."

Mick Mounz (Mick Mountz), founder of Kiva Systems , believes that its products do not deprive people of work, since the main customers are large companies that are developing so quickly that they do not have time to hire workers. In addition, it allows fast-growing companies to survive by reducing overhead costs. What does the use of robots instead of humans imply?

However, Brynjölfsson and McAfee argue that due to the high rates of technology development, the destruction of jobs occurs faster than the emergence of new ones. They believe that this is one of the reasons for the stagnation in the US economy and the widening gap in incomes of different segments of the population. And this, in their opinion, is also happening in other developed countries.

Opinion Eric and Andrew is not unfounded, it is confirmed by numbers. In economics, one of the measures of labor productivity is the quantity of production (or its value expression) created by an employee per unit of time. The graph below shows the dynamics of labor productivity and employment in the United States:



This graph clearly demonstrates the growth of labor productivity and the welfare of the country, which led to intensive job creation from the end of World War II to the beginning of the 2000s. But in the past 10 years there has been a stagnation of employment with continued growth in productivity. Researchers believe that the cause is precisely high-tech progress. However, their opponents also do not speak out unfounded: in 2011, a study was conducted, according to which employment increased in Brazil, South Korea, Germany, China and the USA despite the increasing use of industrial robots. True, this study took into account only the most dangerous and highly specialized models of robots that can not work alongside people. Much more modern and safe autonomous robots that can greatly affect the overall employment statistics in these countries are not taken into account in this study.

Proponents of automation and robotization refer to the historical experience of previous technological revolutions and argue that, despite the loss of jobs by some workers, the total economic effect from the introduction of technological innovations has been positive. As an example, such statistics are given: about 100 years ago, about 70% of workers in the United States were engaged in agriculture, today they are only 2%. The reason for this is the introduction of tractors. Another given example: in the postwar period, about 30% of workers in the United States were employed in production, nowadays they are about 10%, which is associated with the automation of enterprises.

Such logical relationships usually look very convincing and self-evident. Rodney Brooks (Rodney Brooks), founder of Rethink Robotics , believes that autonomous robots will revive and strengthen the economy, as computers did 30 years ago.

Brynjölfsson and McAfee, by contrast, argue that the closest historical experience refutes such statements. In support of their position, they give another chart:



It shows the dynamics of changes in gross domestic product and the median level of income . Brynjelfsson comments on this picture as follows: “This is a great paradox of our time - labor productivity is at the highest level, innovations are being introduced more quickly than ever, but at the same time, our income is falling and the number of jobs is decreasing. People lose because technology develops so fast that we can’t keep up with them. ”



By the way, recently British researchers from Oxford have conducted a study , the results of which turned out to be very pessimistic: in the next 20 years, about 45% of jobs in the United States are highly likely to be automated / computerized. The British believe that this process will proceed in two stages: first, computers will crowd out people in the most crucial areas, such as logistics, production and administration. Next will be the service sector, sales and construction. Further, the speed of automation will slow down due to "difficult" for machines professions. However, with the development of artificial intelligence will follow a new wave of automation, which will affect science, engineering and art.

So what's the reason?

Disagreeing with the findings of Brynjölfsson and McAfee, economists point out that there are several possible explanations for the gaps between labor productivity, employment, and median income. For example, the financial crisis and the decline in international trade. It is more likely that this is a consequence of a whole complex of events and trends, and not just technological progress. In other words, no one knows exactly why the growth in employment stopped, but many disagree with the explanation of Brynjölfsson and McAfee.

One of the economists, opponents, David Autor (David Autor), however, notes that computer technology has changed the labor market, and not all changes were for the best. Automation has affected a number of professions whose representatives previously belonged to the middle class. As a result, today there was a polarization in the labor market into highly and low-skilled professions (with appropriate pay), and the middle class was “depleted.” However, Otor does not agree with the fact that high technology negatively affects the entire labor market as a whole. And even if this is true, historical experience suggests that this is a temporary phenomenon, a transitional period.

That's just the story does not answer the question, when will modern high technology create enough jobs to compensate for the unemployment generated by the technology? And it’s not at all true that in this case the story will repeat. It is quite possible scenario in which the problem of employment for those who lose their jobs due to automation will not be solved.

What's next?

Even if Brynjölfsson and McAfee are wrong about the reasons for the decline in employment, it is difficult to dismiss the fact that high technology is increasingly destroying the middle class and widening the gap between the rich and the poor. Indeed, the lowest paid jobs are still more efficient and profitable to “trust” people, and the most highly paid jobs for robots and computers are not yet possible. Whatever one may say, but automation not only improves the economy, but also "throws to the side" many people who have to relearn themselves in order not to sink to the very bottom.

However, until the complete disappearance of professions traditionally belonging to the middle class (of course, this does not apply to Russia) is still far away. And the reason for this is the enormous difficulties in creating artificial intelligence: modern robots are very poorly adapted to abnormal changes in the working process. Man’s advantage over machines lies precisely in its flexibility and versatility. And, despite the pessimistic conclusions of Brynjölfsson and McAfee, most likely, the United States and Europe in the next 50 years can not worry about mass unemployment of the “golden mean” of the population of the middle class.