IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v28y2019i3p477-501..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To be (routine) or not to be (routine), that is the question: a cross-country task-based answer†

Author

Listed:
  • Luca Marcolin
  • Sébastien Miroudot
  • Mariagrazia Squicciarini

Abstract

This work proposes a new measure of the routine content of occupations and sectors for 20 OECD countries, based on information about the sequence and flexibility of the tasks performed on the job. A negative but weak association emerges between routineness and skill intensity, which suggests the importance of both technological and organizational considerations in the measure of routine intensity. Between 2000 and 2010, employment mainly grew in non-routine occupations, especially in market services, while manufacturing shed routine and non-routine jobs. Changes in shares of employment by routine quartile are dominated by within-effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Luca Marcolin & Sébastien Miroudot & Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2019. "To be (routine) or not to be (routine), that is the question: a cross-country task-based answer†," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(3), pages 477-501.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:28:y:2019:i:3:p:477-501.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dty020
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giovanni DOSI & Maria Enrica VIRGILLITO, 2019. "Whither the evolution of the contemporary social fabric? New technologies and old socio‐economic trends," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 158(4), pages 593-625, December.
    2. Luca Marcolin & Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2018. "Investing in Innovation and Skills: Thriving through Global Value Chains," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 9(1).
    3. de Vries, Gaaitzen J. & Gentile, Elisabetta & Miroudot, Sébastien & Wacker, Konstantin M., 2020. "The rise of robots and the fall of routine jobs," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    4. 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).
    5. Óscar Afonso & Pedro G. Lima & Tiago Sequeira, 2022. "The effects of automation and lobbying in wage inequality: a directed technical change model with routine and non-routine tasks," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1467-1497, November.
    6. Du Yuhong & Wei Xiahai, 2020. "Task content routinisation, technological change and labour turnover: Evidence from China," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(3), pages 324-346, September.
    7. Carbonero, Francesco & Scicchitano, Sergio, 2021. "Labour and technology at the time of Covid-19. Can artificial intelligence mitigate the need for proximity?," GLO Discussion Paper Series 765, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. 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.
    9. Fana Marta & Giangregorio Luca, 2021. "Routine-biased technical change can fail: Evidence from France," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2021-14, Joint Research Centre.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J2 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • F16 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Labor Market Interactions
    • F66 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Labor

    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:oup:indcch:v:28:y:2019:i:3:p:477-501.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.