IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v56y2023i4p1583-1614.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Skill‐replacing process innovation and the labour market: Theory and evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Wenbo Zhu

Abstract

I study the differential impacts of product innovation and process innovation on the labour market. Using European data from 2000 to 2018, I find that industries with proportionally more firms reporting product innovation than process innovation also tend to exhibit a lower income share of low‐skilled workers. To better understand the mechanism, I develop a dynamic growth model in which firms conduct both types of innovation endogenously. In the model, product innovation introduces new intermediate goods, which tend to require high‐skilled workers to implement. Process innovation simplifies existing production technologies and thereby allows firms to replace high‐skilled workers with low‐skilled ones. I calibrate an extended version of the model to the largest two industries in UK in 2014 and 2018, respectively. I find that product innovation has become less costly but increasingly demanding for skills, and the cost of process innovation has increased on average and become more diverse across firms. L'innovation du processus de remplacement des compétences et le marché du travail : théorie et données probantes. J'étudie les répercussions différentielles de l'innovation de produit et de l'innovation de processus sur le marché du travail. En utilisant des données européennes de 2000 à 2018, je constate que les industries dans lesquelles les entreprises déclarant une innovation de produit sont proportionnellement plus nombreuses que celles déclarant une innovation de processus ont également tendance à afficher une part de revenu plus faible pour les travailleurs peu spécialisés. Pour mieux comprendre le mécanisme, je mets au point un modèle de croissance dynamique dans lequel les entreprises mènent les deux types d'innovation de façon endogène. Dans ce modèle, l'innovation de produit introduit de nouveaux biens intermédiaires, dont la mise en œuvre tend à nécessiter des travailleurs hautement spécialisés. L'innovation de processus simplifie les technologies de production existantes et permet ainsi aux entreprises de remplacer les travailleurs hautement spécialisés par des travailleurs peu spécialisés. Je calibre une version élargie du modèle pour les deux plus grandes industries du Royaume‐Uni en 2014 et en 2018 respectivement. Je constate que l'innovation de produit est devenue moins coûteuse, mais de plus en plus exigeante en matière de compétences, et que le coût de l'innovation de processus a augmenté en moyenne et s'est diversifié d'une entreprise à l'autre.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenbo Zhu, 2023. "Skill‐replacing process innovation and the labour market: Theory and evidence," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 1583-1614, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:56:y:2023:i:4:p:1583-1614
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12681
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12681?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. Kleibergen, Frank & Paap, Richard, 2006. "Generalized reduced rank tests using the singular value decomposition," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 97-126, July.
    2. Galor, Oded & Tsiddon, Daniel, 1997. "Technological Progress, Mobility, and Economic Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 363-382, June.
    3. David H. Autor & David Dorn, 2013. "The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1553-1597, August.
    4. Lisandra Flach & Michael Irlacher, 2018. "Product versus Process: Innovation Strategies of Multiproduct Firms," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 236-277, February.
    5. Swati Dhingra, 2013. "Trading Away Wide Brands for Cheap Brands," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2554-2584, October.
    6. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    7. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2002. "Information Technology, Workplace Organization, and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 339-376.
    8. Erling Barth & James C. Davis & Richard B. Freeman & Andrew J. Wang, 2018. "The Effects of Scientists and Engineers on Productivity and Earnings at the Establishment Where They Work," NBER Chapters, in: US Engineering in a Global Economy, pages 167-191, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Rajan, Raghuram G & Zingales, Luigi, 1998. "Financial Dependence and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 559-586, June.
    10. Friedrich, Benjamin U. & Zator, Michał, 2023. "Flexibility costs of debt: Danish exporters during the cartoon crisis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 91-117.
    11. Acemoglu, Daron & Gancia, Gino & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2012. "Competing engines of growth: Innovation and standardization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 570-601.3.
    12. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    13. David H. Autor, 2015. "Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 3-30, Summer.
    14. Giulio Perani & Valeria Cirillo, 2015. "Matching industry classifications. A method for converting Nace Rev.2 to Nace Rev.1," Working Papers 1502, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Department of Economics, Society & Politics - Scientific Committee - L. Stefanini & G. Travaglini, revised 2015.
    15. Amit Khandelwal, 2010. "The Long and Short (of) Quality Ladders," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1450-1476.
    16. Per Krusell & Lee E. Ohanian & JosÈ-Victor RÌos-Rull & Giovanni L. Violante, 2000. "Capital-Skill Complementarity and Inequality: A Macroeconomic Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1029-1054, September.
    17. Hellmann, Thomas & Puri, Manju, 2000. "The Interaction between Product Market and Financing Strategy: The Role of Venture Capital," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(4), pages 959-984.
    18. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "The Race between Man and Machine: Implications of Technology for Growth, Factor Shares, and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1488-1542, June.
    19. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Directed Technical Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(4), pages 781-809.
    20. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(1), pages 7-72, March.
    21. Bartel, Ann P & Lichtenberg, Frank R, 1987. "The Comparative Advantage of Educated Workers in Implementing New Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(1), pages 1-11, February.
    22. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 1998. "Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1169-1213.
    23. Cesare Fracassi & Alessandro Previtero & Albert Sheen, 2022. "Barbarians at the Store? Private Equity, Products, and Consumers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(3), pages 1439-1488, June.
    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. David B. Audretsch & Mark Sanders, 2007. "Globalization and the Rise of the Entrepreneurial Economy," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-003, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    3. Daniele Angelini, 2023. "Aging Population and Technology Adoption," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2023-01, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    4. Zon, Adriaan van & Antonietti, Roberto, 2005. "Education and Training in a Model of Endogenous Growth with Creative Destruction," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Nico Voigtlaender, 2009. "Many Sectors Meet More Skills: Intersectoral Linkages and the Skill Bias of Technology," 2009 Meeting Papers 1136, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Ariell Reshef, 2013. "Is Technological Change Biased Towards the Unskilled in Services? An Empirical Investigation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(2), pages 312-331, April.
    7. Maurizio Iacopetta, 2009. "Technological progress and inequality: an ambiguous relationship," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Jean-Luc Gaffard & Lionel Nesta (ed.), Schumpeterian Perspectives on Innovation, Competition and Growth, pages 181-201, Springer.
    8. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Antonin Bergeaud & Richard Blundell & David Hemous, 2019. "Innovation and Top Income Inequality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 1-45.
    9. Berg, Andrew & Buffie, Edward F. & Zanna, Luis-Felipe, 2018. "Should we fear the robot revolution? (The correct answer is yes)," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 117-148.
    10. Falck, Oliver & Heimisch-Roecker, Alexandra & Wiederhold, Simon, 2021. "Returns to ICT skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    11. Borghans, Lex & ter Weel, Bas, 2007. "The diffusion of computers and the distribution of wages," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 715-748, April.
    12. Ariell Reshef, 2013. "Is Technological Change Biased Towards the Unskilled in Services? An Empirical Investigation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(2), pages 312-331, April.
    13. Nancy L. Stokey, 2018. "Technology and Skill: Twin Engines of Growth," NBER Working Papers 24570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Majumdar, Sumit K., 2014. "Technology and wages: Why firms invest and what happens," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 44-54.
    15. 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).
    16. Richard Nahuis & Henri de Groot, 2003. "Rising skill premia; you ain't seen nothing yet?," CPB Discussion Paper 20, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Gavilan, Angel, 2012. "Wage inequality, segregation by skill and the price of capital in an assignment model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 116-137.
    18. Patricia Crifo-Tillet & Etienne Lehmann, 2004. "Why Will Technical Change Not Be Permanently Skill-Biased?," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 7(1), pages 157-180, January.
    19. Nancy Stokey, 2021. "Technology and Skill: Twin Engines of Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 40, pages 12-43, April.
    20. Patricia Crifo & Etienne Lehmann, 2001. "Why the Kuznets Curve Will Always Reverse," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00150324, HAL.

    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:wly:canjec:v:56:y:2023:i:4:p:1583-1614. 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://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.