IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/128289.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linking artificial intelligence job exposure to expectations: understanding AI losers, winners, and their political preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Green, Jane
  • Grant, Zack
  • Evans, Geoffrey
  • Inglese, Gaetano

Abstract

The rapid expansion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the workplace has significant political implications. How can we understand perceptions of both personal job risks and opportunities, given each may affect political attitudes differently? We use an original, representative survey from Great Britain to reveal; (i) the degree to which people expect personal AI-based occupational risks versus opportunities, (ii) how much this perceived exposure corresponds to variation in existing expert-derived occupational AI-exposure measures; (iii) the social groups who expect to be AI winners and AI losers; and (iv) how personal AI expectations are associated with demand for different political policies. We find that over 1-in-3 British workers anticipate being an AI winner (10%) or loser (24%) and, while expectations correlate with classifications of occupational exposure, factors like education, gender, age, and employment sector also matter. Politically, both self-anticipated AI winners and losers show similar support for redistribution, but they differ on investment in education and training as well as on immigration. Our findings emphasise the importance of considering subjective winners and losers of AI; these patterns cannot be explained by existing occupational classifications of AI exposure.

Suggested Citation

  • Green, Jane & Grant, Zack & Evans, Geoffrey & Inglese, Gaetano, 2025. "Linking artificial intelligence job exposure to expectations: understanding AI losers, winners, and their political preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 128289, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:128289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/128289/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colantone, Italo & Stanig, Piero, 2018. "Global Competition and Brexit," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(2), pages 201-218, May.
    2. Andy Dickerson & Damon Morris, 2019. "The Changing Demand for Skills in the UK," CVER Research Papers 020, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    3. Baccini, Leonardo & Weymouth, Stephen, 2021. "Gone For Good: Deindustrialization, White Voter Backlash, and US Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 550-567, May.
    4. Alan S. Blinder, 2009. "How Many US Jobs Might be Offshorable?," World Economics, World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 10(2), pages 41-78, April.
    5. Walter, Stefanie, 2017. "Globalization and the Demand-Side of Politics: How Globalization Shapes Labor Market Risk Perceptions and Policy Preferences," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 55-80, January.
    6. Scheiring, Gábor & Serrano-Alarcón, Manuel & Moise, Alexandru & McNamara, Courtney & Stuckler, David, 2024. "The Populist Backlash Against Globalization: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 892-916, July.
    7. Nicole Wu, 2023. "“Restrict foreigners, not robots”: Partisan responses to automation threat," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 505-528, July.
    8. Green, Jane & Hellwig, Timothy & Fieldhouse, Edward, 2022. "Who Gets What: The Economy, Relative Gains and Brexit," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 320-338, January.
    9. Owen, Erica & Johnston, Noel P., 2017. "Occupation and the Political Economy of Trade: Job Routineness, Offshorability, and Protectionist Sentiment," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 665-699, October.
    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. Fetzer, Thiemo & Edenhofer, Jacob & Garg, Prashant, 2025. "Local decline and populism," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    2. Leonardo Baccini & Iain Osgood & Stephen Weymouth, 2019. "The service economy: U.S. trade coalitions in an era of deindustrialization," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 261-296, June.
    3. Marcello Natili & Fedra Negri, 2023. "Disentangling (new) labour market divides: outsiders’ and globalization losers’ socio-economic risks in Europe," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1561-1585, April.
    4. Egger, Hartmut & Fischer, Christian, 2020. "Increasing resistance to globalization: The role of trade in tasks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    5. Cevat G. Aksoy & Sergei Guriev & Daniel S. Treisman, 2018. "Globalization, Government Popularity, and the Great Skill Divide," NBER Working Papers 25062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Stephen Drinkwater & Colin Jennings, 2022. "The Brexit referendum and three types of regret," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 275-291, December.
    7. Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2024. "Trust we lost: The impact of the Treuhand experience on political alienation in East Germany," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 54-75.
    8. Chiara Franco & Giovanni Marin & Filomena Pietrovito, 2023. "Exposure to FDI and attitudes towards multinational enterprises: Do M&A matter?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 1648-1669, June.
    9. Margherita Corina & Christopher Hartwell & Alfonso Carballo, 2025. "Correction: Holding back the damage: strong political institutions and the effect of populism on business investment," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 56(6), pages 819-819, August.
    10. Beatrice Magistro, 2020. "Financial literacy and support for free trade in the UK," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 2050-2069, August.
    11. Valentina Gonzalez‐Rostani, 2024. "Engaged robots, disengaged workers: Automation and political alienation," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 1703-1730, November.
    12. Philipp Harms & Nils D. Steiner, 2023. "Attitudes towards Globalization: A Survey," Working Papers 2305, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. Harms, Philipp & Schwab, Jakob, 2020. "Depression of the deprived or eroding enthusiasm of the elites: What has shifted the support for international trade?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2010. "Services Trade and Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 642-692, September.
    15. Thiemo Fetzer & Stephan Kyburz, 2024. "Cohesive Institutions and Political Violence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(1), pages 133-150, January.
    16. Sascha O. Becker & Thiemo Fetzer, 2018. "Has Eastern European Migration Impacted UK-born Workers?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 376, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    17. Haas, Levi & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus R., 2019. "International Trade: Smarten up to talk the talk," MPRA Paper 99096, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Alex Chernoff & Casey Warman, 2023. "COVID-19 and implications for automation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(17), pages 1939-1957, April.
    19. Davide Consoli & Francesco Vona & Francesco Rentocchini, 2016. "That was then, this is now: skills and routinization in the 2000s," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 847-866.
    20. van der Velde, Lucas, 2022. "Phasing out: Routine tasks and retirement," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 784-803.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:128289. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.