IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v13y2025a10114.html

Governing the Digital Transition: The Moderating Effect of Unemployment Benefits on Technology‐Induced Employment Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Golboyz

    (Institute for Social Policy, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria)

Abstract

The digital transition shapes work in numerous ways. For instance, by affecting employment structures. To ensure that the digital transition results in better employment opportunities in terms of socio‐economic status, labour markets have to be guided appropriately. The European Pillar of Social Rights can be the political framework to foster access to employment and tackle inequalities that result from the digital transition. Current research primarily examines scenarios of occupational upgrading and employment polarisation. In the empirical literature, there is no consensus on which of these developments prevail. Findings vary between countries and across different study periods. Accordingly, this article provides a theoretical explanation for the conditions under which occupational upgrading and employment polarisation become more likely. Further, this article examines how the use of information and communication technology (ICT) capital in the production of goods and services affects the socio‐economic status of individuals and, more importantly, whether unemployment benefits moderate this effect. Methodologically, the article uses multilevel maximum likelihood regression models with an empirical focus on 12 European countries and 19 industries. The analysis is based on data from the European Labour Force Survey (EU‐LFS), the European Union Level Analysis of Capital, Labour, Energy, Materials, and Service Inputs (EU‐KLEMS) research project, and the Comparative Welfare Entitlements Project (CWEP). The results of the article indicate that generous unemployment benefits are associated with occupational upgrading. This implies that educational and vocational labour market policies need to be developed to prevent the under‐skilled from being left behind and to enable these groups to benefit from the digital transition. Consequently, it is not only the extent to which work involves routine tasks or the skills of workers that determine how technological change affects employment, but also social rights shape employment through unemployment benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Golboyz, 2025. "Governing the Digital Transition: The Moderating Effect of Unemployment Benefits on Technology‐Induced Employment Outcomes," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v13:y:2025:a:10114
    DOI: 10.17645/si.10114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/10114
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/si.10114?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. Fonseca, Tiago & Lima, Francisco & Pereira, Sonia C., 2018. "Job polarization, technological change and routinization: Evidence for Portugal," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 317-339.
    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. Battisti & M. Del Gatto & A. Gravina & C. Parmeter, 2021. "Robots versus labor skills: a complementarity/substitutability analysis," Working Paper CRENoS 202104, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    2. Bachmann, Ronald & Gonschor, Myrielle & Lewandowski, Piotr & Madoń, Karol, 2024. "The impact of Robots on Labour market transitions in Europe," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 422-441.
    3. Araújo, Isabel & Carneiro, Anabela, 2020. "Educational Mismatches of Newly Hired Workers: Short and Medium-run Effects on Wages," GLO Discussion Paper Series 668, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    4. Blien, Uwe & Dauth, Wolfgang & Roth, Duncan H.W., 2021. "Occupational routine intensity and the costs of job loss: evidence from mass layoffs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    5. Antonio Martins-Neto & Nanditha Mathew & Pierre Mohnen & Tania Treibich, 2024. "Is There Job Polarization in Developing Economies? A Review and Outlook," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 39(2), pages 259-288.
    6. Lewandowski, Piotr & Keister, Roma & Hardy, Wojciech & Górka, Szymon, 2020. "Ageing of routine jobs in Europe," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(4).
    7. Usabiaga, Carlos & Núñez, Fernando & Arendt, Lukasz & Gałecka-Burdziak, Ewa & Pater, Robert, 2022. "Skill requirements and labour polarisation: An association analysis based on Polish online job offers," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    8. Micole De Vera & Javier Garcia‐Brazales, 2025. "Establishment size and the task content of jobs: evidence from 46 countries," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 92(366), pages 548-579, April.
    9. Yuhong Du & Hazrul Shahiri & Xiahai Wei, 2025. "The penetration of robotic technology, task content routinisation and job satisfaction: Evidence from China," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 50(3), pages 876-894, August.
    10. Kobayashi, Toru & Yamamoto, Isamu, 2020. "Job tasks and wages in the Japanese labor market: Evidence from wage functions," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    11. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2022. "Mismatch in preferences for working from home – evidence from discrete choice experiments with workers and employers," IBS Working Papers 05/2022, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    12. Carlos Oliveira, 2024. "Income and wage inequality in democratic Portugal, 1974–2020," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 393-414, September.
    13. Guyonne Kalb & Jordy Meekes, 2021. "Wage Growth Distribution and Changes over Time: 2001–2018," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(1), pages 76-93, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Dias Da Silva, António & Laws, Athene & Petroulakis, Filippos, 2019. "Hours of work polarisation?," Working Paper Series 2324, European Central Bank.
    16. Deng, Yue & Feng, Aiya & Hu, Dezhuang, 2025. "Gender earnings gap in Chinese firms: Can it be narrowed by industrial robots?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. Fonseca, Tiago & de Faria, Pedro & Lima, Francisco, 2019. "Human capital and innovation: the importance of the optimal organizational task structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 616-627.
    18. Barbieri, Laura & Mussida, Chiara & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2019. "Testing the employment and skill impact of new technologies: A survey and some methodological issues," MERIT Working Papers 2019-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Mohamed Ali Marouani & Phong Le Minh, 2021. "Inequality and occupational change in times of Revolution: the Tunisian perspective," Working Papers hal-04000997, HAL.
    20. Pietro Giorgio Lovaglio & Mattia Riussi, 2025. "How is Labour Demand Changing Across European Regions in the Post-COVID-19 Era," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 48(5-6), pages 524-575, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:socinc:v13:y:2025:a:10114. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.