IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/24066.html

Robots and Wage Polarization: The effects of robot capital by occupation

Author

Listed:
  • Daisuke ADACHI

Abstract

This paper examines the distributional impacts of the increased utilization of industrial robots, emphasizing their role in specific tasks and their international trade. The study constructs a novel dataset based on tracking shocks to the cost of acquiring robots from Japan, termed the Japan Robot Shock (JRS), and analyzes these across various occupations that have adopted robots. A general equilibrium model is developed which incorporates robot automation in a large open economy, and a model-implied optimal instrumental variable (MOIV) is constructed from the JRS to address the identification challenges posed by the correlation between automation shocks and JRS. The analysis reveals that the elasticity of substitution (EoS) between robots and labor is heterogeneous across occupations, reaching up to 3 in production and material-moving jobs, which is significantly higher than the EoS between other capital goods and labor. The findings suggest that robots significantly contributed to wage polarization in the U.S. from 1990 to 2007.

Suggested Citation

  • Daisuke ADACHI, 2024. "Robots and Wage Polarization: The effects of robot capital by occupation," Discussion papers 24066, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:24066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/24e066.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antràs Pol, 2004. "Is the U.S. Aggregate Production Function Cobb-Douglas? New Estimates of the Elasticity of Substitution," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-36, April.
    2. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2013. "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2121-2168, October.
    3. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Claire Lelarge & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "Competing with Robots: Firm-Level Evidence from France," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 110, pages 383-388, May.
    5. Südekum, Jens & Dauth, Wolfgang & Findeisen, Sebastian & Woessner, Nicole, 2017. "German Robots – The Impact of Industrial Robots on Workers," CEPR Discussion Papers 12306, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. 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.
    7. Ezra Oberfield & Devesh Raval, 2021. "Micro Data and Macro Technology," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(2), pages 703-732, March.
    8. Montobbio, Fabio & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica & Vivarelli, Marco, 2022. "Robots and the origin of their labour-saving impact," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Berthold Herrendorf & Christopher Herrington & Ákos Valentinyi, 2015. "Sectoral Technology and Structural Transformation," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 104-133, October.
    10. Maya Eden & Paul Gaggl, 2018. "On the Welfare Implications of Automation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 15-43, July.
    11. Artuc, Erhan & Bastos, Paulo & Rijkers, Bob, 2023. "Robots, tasks, and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Kahn, Charles M, 1980. "The Solution of Linear Difference Models under Rational Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(5), pages 1305-1311, July.
    13. Nancey Green Leigh & Benjamin R. Kraft, 2018. "Emerging robotic regions in the United States: insights for regional economic evolution," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(6), pages 804-815, June.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Gustavo de Souza & Haishi Li, 2023. "Robots, Tools, and Jobs: Evidence from Brazilian Labor Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 10813, CESifo.
    17. 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.
    18. Jonathan Heathcote & Fabrizio Perri & Giovanni L. Violante, 2010. "Unequal We Stand: An Empirical Analysis of Economic Inequality in the United States: 1967-2006," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 13(1), pages 15-51, January.
    19. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2008. "Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising the Revisionists," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 300-323, May.
    20. Lorenzo Caliendo & Maximiliano Dvorkin & Fernando Parro, 2019. "Trade and Labor Market Dynamics: General Equilibrium Analysis of the China Trade Shock," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 741-835, May.
    21. Julieta Caunedo & David Jaume & Elisa Keller, 2023. "Occupational Exposure to Capital-Embodied Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(6), pages 1642-1685, June.
    22. Jaimovich, Nir & Saporta-Eksten, Itay & Siu, Henry & Yedid-Levi, Yaniv, 2021. "The macroeconomics of automation: Data, theory, and policy analysis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-16.
    23. Joachim Hubmer, 2023. "The Race Between Preferences and Technology," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(1), pages 227-261, January.
    24. Dauth, Wolfgang & Findeisen, Sebastian & Südekum, Jens & Wößner, Nicole, 2017. "German robots - the impact of industrial robots on workers," IAB-Discussion Paper 201730, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    25. Daisuke Adachi & Daiji Kawaguchi & Yukiko U. Saito, 2024. "Robots and Employment: Evidence from Japan, 1978–2017," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 591-634.
    26. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2022. "Demographics and Automation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(1), pages 1-44.
    27. Galle, Simon & Lorentzen, Linnea, 2024. "The unequal effects of trade and automation across local labor markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    28. Russell W. Cooper & John C. Haltiwanger, 2006. "On the Nature of Capital Adjustment Costs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(3), pages 611-633.
    29. Lorenzo Caliendo & Fernando Parro, 2015. "Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects of NAFTA," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(1), pages 1-44.
    30. Gustavo de Souza & Haishi Li, 2023. "Robots, Tools, and Jobs: Evidence from Brazilian Labor Markets," Working Paper Series WP 2023-42, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    31. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Schneider, Florian, 2024. "Do robots boost productivity? A quantitative meta-study," MPRA Paper 123392, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Adachi, Daisuke, 2025. "Elasticity of substitution between robots and workers: Theory and evidence from Japanese robot price data," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    2. Lee, Eunhee, 2020. "Trade, inequality, and the endogenous sorting ofheterogeneous workers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Toon Van Overbeke, 2023. "Conflict or cooperation? Exploring the relationship between cooperative institutions and robotisation," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 550-573, September.
    4. vom Lehn, Christian, 2018. "Understanding the decline in the U.S. labor share: Evidence from occupational tasks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 191-220.
    5. Mauro Caselli & Andrea Fracasso & Sergio Scicchitano & Silvio Traverso & Enrico Tundis, 2021. "Stop worrying and love the robot: An activity-based approach to assess the impact of robotization on employment dynamics," DEM Working Papers 2021/06, Department of Economics and Management.
    6. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2025. "What workers and robots do: An activity-based analysis of the impact of robotization on changes in local employment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    7. 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.
    8. Borusyak, Kirill & Jaravel, Xavier, 2024. "Are trade wars class wars? The importance of trade-induced horizontal inequality," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    9. 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.
    10. Stemmler, Henry, 2023. "Automated Deindustrialization: How Global Robotization Affects Emerging Economies—Evidence from Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Lionel Fontagné & Ariell Reshef & Gianluca Santoni & Giulio Vannelli, 2024. "Automation, global value chains and functional specialization," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 662-691, May.
    12. Jacobs, Arthur, 2023. "Capital-augmenting technical change in the context of untapped automation opportunities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 155-166.
    13. Terry Gregory & A.M. Salomons & Ulrich Zierahn, 2016. "Racing With or Against the Machine? Evidence from Europe," Working Papers 16-05, Utrecht School of Economics.
    14. Galle, Simon & Lorentzen, Linnea, 2024. "The unequal effects of trade and automation across local labor markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    15. Artuc, Erhan & Bastos, Paulo & Rijkers, Bob, 2023. "Robots, tasks, and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    16. Kudoh, Noritaka & Miyamoto, Hiroaki, 2025. "Robots, AI, and unemployment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    17. Jurkat, Anne & Klump, Rainer & Schneider, Florian, 2025. "Robots and wages: A meta-analysis," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 541-567.
    18. Arthur Jacobs, 2023. "Capitalist-Worker Wealth Distribution in a Task-Based Model of Automation," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 23/1064, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    19. Mauro Caselli & Andrea Fracasso & Silvio Traverso, 2021. "Globalization, robotization, and electoral outcomes: Evidence from spatial regressions for Italy," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 86-111, January.
    20. Naude, Wim, 2019. "The race against the robots and the fallacy of the giant cheesecake: Immediate and imagined impacts of artificial intelligence," MERIT Working Papers 2019-005, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    More about this item

    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:eti:dpaper:24066. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.