IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/labour/v37y2023i3p437-467.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The link between routine tasks and job polarization: A task measurement problem?

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Walo

Abstract

The routine task intensity of occupations is a concept frequently used to analyse the impact of technological change on employment. However, existing studies disagree on whether it can explain the observed job polarization in advanced economies. This article first shows that these seemingly contradictory results can be explained by the different routine task measurements used in these studies. Subsequently, the validity of these measurements is discussed. Preliminary results suggest that all measurements have conceptual weaknesses but that some appear more valid than others. Job polarization may therefore be explained by occupations' routine task intensity, but only to a limited extent.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Walo, 2023. "The link between routine tasks and job polarization: A task measurement problem?," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 37(3), pages 437-467, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:labour:v:37:y:2023:i:3:p:437-467
    DOI: 10.1111/labr.12251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/labr.12251
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/labr.12251?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lordan, Grace & Neumark, David, 2018. "People versus machines: The impact of minimum wages on automatable jobs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 40-53.
    2. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2010. "Explaining Job Polarization in Europe: The Roles of Technology, Globalization and Institutions," CEP Discussion Papers dp1026, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2022. "Tasks, Automation, and the Rise in U.S. Wage Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 1973-2016, September.
    4. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2009. "Job Polarization in Europe," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 58-63, May.
    5. Levy, Frank & Murnane, Richard J, 1996. "With What Skills Are Computers a Complement?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 258-262, May.
    6. Zsófia L. Bárány & Christian Siegel, 2018. "Job Polarization and Structural Change," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 57-89, January.
    7. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Nov.
    8. Brad Hershbein & Lisa B. Kahn, 2018. "Do Recessions Accelerate Routine-Biased Technological Change? Evidence from Vacancy Postings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1737-1772, July.
    9. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning, 2007. "Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 118-133, February.
    10. 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.
    11. David H. Autor & Michael J. Handel, 2013. "Putting Tasks to the Test: Human Capital, Job Tasks, and Wages," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(S1), pages 59-96.
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4t83lre9hm91sq006n4940n19s is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2017. "Is Modern Technology Responsible for Jobless Recoveries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 168-173, May.
    14. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2006. "The Polarization of the U.S. Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 189-194, May.
    15. Frey, Carl Benedikt & Osborne, Michael A., 2017. "The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-280.
    16. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 1997. "Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?," Working Papers 756, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    17. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2014. "Explaining Job Polarization: Routine-Biased Technological Change and Offshoring," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2509-2526, August.
    18. Emily C Murphy & Daniel Oesch, 2018. "Is Employment Polarisation Inevitable? Occupational Change in Ireland and Switzerland, 1970–2010," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 32(6), pages 1099-1117, December.
    19. Oesch, Daniel, 2013. "Occupational Change in Europe: How Technology and Education Transform the Job Structure," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199680962, Decembrie.
    20. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 1998. "Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1169-1213.
    21. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    22. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2017. "Revisiting the risk of automation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 157-160.
    23. repec:oec:stiaaa:2016/1-en is not listed on IDEAS
    24. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4t83lre9hm91sq006n4940n19s is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Tan, Joanne, 2024. "Multidimensional heterogeneity and matching in a frictional labor market — An application to polarization," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Jasmine Mondolo, 2022. "The composite link between technological change and employment: A survey of the literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1027-1068, September.
    3. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Rentocchini, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2023. "Routinization, within-occupation task changes and long-run employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    4. Schmidpeter, Bernhard & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2021. "Automation, unemployment, and the role of labor market training," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    5. David Autor & Caroline Chin & Anna Salomons & Bryan Seegmiller, 2024. "New Frontiers: The Origins and Content of New Work, 1940–2018," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 139(3), pages 1399-1465.
    6. Fierro, Luca Eduardo & Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto, 2022. "Automation, Job Polarisation, and Structural Change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 499-535.
    7. Azio Barani, 2021. "Innovazione tecnologica e lavoro: automazione, occupazione e impatti socio-economici," QUADERNI DI ECONOMIA DEL LAVORO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(114), pages 51-79.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:hal:journl:hal-04837769 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. David J. Deming, 2017. "The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1593-1640.
    11. Sara Amoroso & Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2018. "Inward Greenfield FDI and Patterns of Job Polarization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Wenchao Jin, 2022. "Occupational polarisation and endogenous task-biased technical change," Working Paper Series 0622, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    14. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "ELS issues in robotics and steps to consider them. Part 1: Robotics and employment. Consequences of robotics and technological change for the structure and level of employment," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 146501.
    15. Lordan, Grace & Stringer, Eliza-Jane, 2022. "People versus machines: The impact of being in an automatable job on Australian worker’s mental health and life satisfaction," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    16. Graetz, Georg, 2020. "Technological change and the Swedish labor market," Working Paper Series 2020:19, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    17. Ljubica Nedelkoska & Frank Neffke, 2019. "Skill Mismatch and Skill Transferability: Review of Concepts and Measurements," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1921, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2019.
    18. Łukasz Arendt & Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski, 2023. "Kontrowersje wokół wpływu nowoczesnych technologii na zatrudnienie i bezrobocie," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 2, pages 195-216.
    19. Sebastian Lago Raquel & Federico Biagi, 2018. "The Routine Biased Technical Change hypothesis: a critical review," JRC Research Reports JRC113174, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Cirillo, Valeria & Evangelista, Rinaldo & Guarascio, Dario & Sostero, Matteo, 2021. "Digitalization, routineness and employment: An exploration on Italian task-based data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    21. 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).

    More about this item

    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:bla:labour:v:37:y:2023:i:3:p:437-467. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csrotit.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.