IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mod/depeco/0183.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Robots, Trade and Employment in Italian Local Labour Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Sergio Paba
  • Giovanni Solinas
  • Luca Bonacini
  • Silvia Fareri

Abstract

Three main shocks have affected advanced economies over the last 25 years, with significant consequences for work, production and economic growth. The first is technological change associated with robotics and the so-called Fourth industrial Revolution. The second, which is partly related to the first, is the diffusion of ICT and the development of intelligent software applied both to industry and tertiary activities. The third is the strong competitive pressure from low cost and emerging countries, which have changed the geography of world production and trade flows, often within global value chains. Following the seminal papers of Acemoglu and Restrepo (2017) and Dauth, Findeisen, Südekum and Woessner (2017), the aim of this paper is to assess the impact of these three shocks on employment in Italian local labour markets in the period 1991-2011. What is new in our approach is the explicit consideration of the role played by the different typologies of local labour systems and industrial districts. We find that robots do not have any negative effect on employment in local labour markets. On the contrary, robots seem to be associated with a growth in overall employment, mainly due to the tertiary sector. The second result is that there is some evidence of a positive effect of ICT investments on local employment, in particular non-manufacturing employment. The last and most robust result of the econometric analysis is the negative impact of trade with low cost countries on local employment. This result has one almost absolute protagonist: China. All these impacts are not homogeneous across the national territory and partly depend on the characteristics of the local productive systems and industrial districts.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergio Paba & Giovanni Solinas & Luca Bonacini & Silvia Fareri, 2020. "Robots, Trade and Employment in Italian Local Labour Systems," Department of Economics 0183, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
  • Handle: RePEc:mod:depeco:0183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://155.185.68.2/wpdemb/0183.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2016. "The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 205-240, October.
    2. Francesco Chiacchio & Georgios Petropoulos & David Pichler, 2018. "The impact of industrial robots on EU employment and wages- A local labour market approach," Working Papers 25186, Bruegel.
    3. Wolfgang Dauth & Sebastian Findeisen & Jens Suedekum, 2014. "The Rise Of The East And The Far East: German Labor Markets And Trade Integration," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(6), pages 1643-1675, December.
    4. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    5. Südekum, Jens & Dauth, Wolfgang & Findeisen, Sebastian & Woessner, Nicole, 2017. "German Robots – The Impact of Industrial Robots on Workers," CEPR Discussion Papers 12306, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2017. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series dp-297, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    7. Moretti, Enrico, 2011. "Local Labor Markets," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 14, pages 1237-1313, Elsevier.
    8. Valter Di Giacinto & Matteo Gomellini & Giacinto Micucci & Marcello Pagnini, 2014. "Mapping local productivity advantages in Italy: industrial districts, cities or both?," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 365-394.
    9. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2188-2244.
    10. Henderson, J. Vernon, 2003. "Marshall's scale economies," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-28, January.
    11. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2015. "Untangling Trade and Technology: Evidence from Local Labour Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(584), pages 621-646, May.
    12. Stefano Manzocchi & Beniamino Quintieri & Gianluca Santoni, 2017. "Local manufacturing productivity markers: an empirical study of the Italian counties," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 59(1), pages 255-279, July.
    13. Daniela Federici & Enrico Saltari, 2016. "Elasticity of substitution and the stagnation of Italian productivity," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(5), pages 503-515, July.
    14. Glaeser, Edward L., 2008. "Cities, Agglomeration, and Spatial Equilibrium," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199290444, Decembrie.
    15. Stefano Federico, 2014. "Industry Dynamics and Competition from Low-Wage Countries: Evidence on Italy," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 76(3), pages 389-410, June.
    16. Calcagnini, Giorgio & Travaglini, Giuseppe, 2014. "A time series analysis of labor productivity. Italy versus the European countries and the U.S," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 622-628.
    17. Luca Bonacini & Silvia Fareri & Giovanni Solinas & Sergio Paba, 2020. "I sistemi produttivi in Italia tra globalizzazione e digitalizzazione," Department of Economics 0166, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    18. Francesco Aiello & Fernanda Ricotta, 2016. "Firm heterogeneity in productivity across Europe: evidence from multilevel models," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 57-89, January.
    19. Dauth, Wolfgang & Findeisen, Sebastian & Südekum, Jens & Wößner, Nicole, 2017. "German robots - the impact of industrial robots on workers," IAB-Discussion Paper 201730, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    20. Paul A. Samuelson, 2004. "Where Ricardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 135-146, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gregory, Terry & Salomons, Anna & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "Racing With or Against the Machine? Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Mauro Caselli & Andrea Fracasso & Silvio Traverso, 2021. "Globalization, robotization, and electoral outcomes: Evidence from spatial regressions for Italy," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 86-111, January.
    3. Carbonero, Francesco. & Ernst, Ekkehard & Weber, Enzo., 2018. "Robots worldwide the impact of automation on employment and trade," ILO Working Papers 995008793402676, International Labour Organization.
    4. Lankisch, Clemens & Prettner, Klaus & Prskawetz, Alexia, 2019. "How can robots affect wage inequality?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 161-169.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7n49nkmngd8448a5ts5gt5ade0 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Aina Gallego & Thomas Kurer & Nikolas Schöll, 2018. "Not so disruptive after all: How workplace digitalization affects political preferences," Economics Working Papers 1623, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    7. Klump, Rainer & Jurkat, Anne & Schneider, Florian, 2021. "Tracking the rise of robots: A survey of the IFR database and its applications," MPRA Paper 107909, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Antón, José-Ignacio & Fernández-Macías, Enrique & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2020. "Does Robotization Affect Job Quality? Evidence from European Regional Labour Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 13975, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Martin Labaj & Materj Vitalos, 2019. "Automation and labor demand in European countries: A task-based approach to wage bill decomposition," Department of Economic Policy Working Paper Series 021, Department of Economic Policy, Faculty of National Economy, University of Economics in Bratislava.
    10. Van Roy, Vincent & Vertesy, Daniel & Damioli, Giacomo, 2019. "AI and Robotics Innovation: a Sectoral and Geographical Mapping using Patent Data," GLO Discussion Paper Series 433, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Philippe Aghion & Céline Antonin & Simon Bunel, 2019. "Artificial Intelligence, Growth and Employment: The Role of Policy," Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE), issue 510-511-5, pages 149-164.
    12. Maarten Goos & Melanie Arntz & Ulrich Zierahn & Terry Gregory & Stephanie Carretero Gomez & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez & Koen Jonkers, 2019. "The Impact of Technological Innovation on the Future of Work," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2019-03, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Nolan, Brian & Richiardi, Matteo & Valenzuela, Luis, 2018. "The Drivers of Inequality in Rich Countries," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-15, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    14. Sergio De Nardis & Francesca Parente, 2022. "Technology and task changes in the major EU countries," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(2), pages 391-413, April.
    15. Faber, Marius, 2018. "Robots and reshoring: Evidence from Mexican local labor markets," Working papers 2018/27, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    16. Teimouri, Sheida & Zietz, Joachim, 2020. "Coping with deindustrialization: A panel study for early OECD countries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-41.
    17. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2021. "Stop worrying and love the robot: An activity-based approach to assess the impact of robotization on employment dynamics," GLO Discussion Paper Series 802, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    18. Anelli, Massimo & Giuntella, Osea & Stella, Luca, 2019. "Robots, Labor Markets, and Family Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 12820, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Julia Bock-Schappelwein & Michael Böheim & Elisabeth Christen & Stefan Ederer & Matthias Firgo & Klaus S. Friesenbichler & Werner Hölzl & Mathias Kirchner & Angela Köppl & Agnes Kügler & Christine May, 2018. "Politischer Handlungsspielraum zur optimalen Nutzung der Vorteile der Digitalisierung für Wirtschaftswachstum, Beschäftigung und Wohlstand," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61256, February.
    20. Aina Gallego & Thomas Kurer & Nikolas Schöll, 2018. "Neither Left-Behind nor Superstar: Ordinary Winners of Digitalization at the Ballot Box," Working Papers 1063, Barcelona School of Economics.
    21. Camiña, Ester & Díaz-Chao, Ángel & Torrent-Sellens, Joan, 2020. "Automation technologies: Long-term effects for Spanish industrial firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Robots; ICT; Globalization; Local Labour Markets; Industrial Districts;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F16 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Labor Market Interactions
    • F66 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Labor
    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General
    • L80 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mod:depeco:0183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sara Colombini (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/demodit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.