IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/decwpa/202110.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market Power and Artificial Intelligence Work on Online Labour Markets

Author

Listed:

Abstract

We investigate three alternative but complementary indicators of market power on one of the largest online labour markets (OLMs) in Europe: (1) the elasticity of labour demand, (2) the elasticity of labour supply, and (3) the concentration of market shares. We explore how these indicators relate to an exogenous change in platform policy. In the middle of the observation period, the platform made it mandatory for employers to signal the rates they were willing to pay as given by the level of experience required to perform a project, i.e., entry, intermediate or expert level. We find a positive labour supply elasticity ranging between 0.06 and 0.15, which is higher for expert-level projects. We also find that the labour demand elasticity increased while the labour supply elasticity decreased after the policy change. Based on this, we argue that market-designing platform providers can influence the labour demand and supply elasticities on OLMs with the terms and conditions they set for the platform. We also explore the demand for and supply of AI-related labour on the OLM under study. We provide evidence for a significantly higher demand for AI-related labour (ranging from +1.4% to +4.1%) and a significantly lower supply of AI-related labour (ranging from -6.8% to -1.6%) than for other types of labour. We also find that workers on AI projects receive 3.0%-3.2% higher wages than workers on non-AI projects.

Suggested Citation

  • DUCH BROWN Nestor & GOMEZ-HERRERA Estrella & MUELLER-LANGER Frank & TOLAN Songul, 2022. "Market Power and Artificial Intelligence Work on Online Labour Markets," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2021-10, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:decwpa:202110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC127373
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Keith Chen & Judith A. Chevalier & Peter E. Rossi & Emily Oehlsen, 2019. "The Value of Flexible Work: Evidence from Uber Drivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2735-2794.
    2. Erik Brynjolfsson & Daniel Rock & Chad Syverson, 2021. "The Productivity J-Curve: How Intangibles Complement General Purpose Technologies," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 333-372, January.
    3. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 69-85, Fall.
    4. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, 2019. "Digital Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 3-43, March.
    5. Kässi, Otto & Lehdonvirta, Vili, 2018. "Online labour index: Measuring the online gig economy for policy and research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 241-248.
    6. Azar, José & Marinescu, Ioana & Steinbaum, Marshall & Taska, Bledi, 2020. "Concentration in US labor markets: Evidence from online vacancy data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    7. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    8. Hart, Oliver D, 1988. "Incomplete Contracts and the Theory of the Firm," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 119-139, Spring.
    9. Marinescu, Ioana & Ouss, Ivan & Pape, Louis-Daniel, 2021. "Wages, hires, and labor market concentration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 506-605.
    10. Ioana Marinescu & Ronald Wolthoff, 2020. "Opening the Black Box of the Matching Function: The Power of Words," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 535-568.
    11. Falck, Oliver & Heimisch-Roecker, Alexandra & Wiederhold, Simon, 2021. "Returns to ICT skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    12. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Nov.
    13. Alekseeva, Liudmila & Azar, José & Giné, Mireia & Samila, Sampsa & Taska, Bledi, 2021. "The demand for AI skills in the labor market," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    15. Douglas O. Staiger & Joanne Spetz & Ciaran S. Phibbs, 2010. "Is There Monopsony in the Labor Market? Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 211-236, April.
    16. Lee, Neil & Clarke, Stephen, 2019. "Do low-skilled workers gain from high-tech employment growth? High-technology multipliers, employment and wages in Britain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    17. Jason Furman & Robert Seamans, 2019. "AI and the Economy," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 161-191.
    18. Daniel L. Chen & John J. Horton, 2016. "Research Note—Are Online Labor Markets Spot Markets for Tasks? A Field Experiment on the Behavioral Response to Wage Cuts," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 403-423, June.
    19. Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Trends and priority shifts in artificial intelligence technology invention: A global patent analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 60-69.
    20. Ernst Ekkehardt & Merola Rossana & Samaan Daniel, 2019. "Economics of Artificial Intelligence: Implications for the Future of Work," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-35, June.
    21. Webber, Douglas A., 2015. "Firm market power and the earnings distribution," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 123-134.
    22. Tommaso Ciarli & Mattia Di Ubaldo & Maria Savona, 2019. "Innovation and Self-Employment," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    23. Chen, Daniel L. & Horton, John J., 2016. "Are Online Labor Markets Spot Markets for Tasks?: A Field Experiment on the Behavioral Response to Wage Cuts," IAST Working Papers 16-37, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    24. Kit Baum, 2007. "Instrumental variables: Overview and advances," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2007 12, Stata Users Group.
    25. Torberg Falch, 2010. "The Elasticity of Labor Supply at the Establishment Level," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 237-266, April.
    26. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua S. Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Artificial Intelligence: The Ambiguous Labor Market Impact of Automating Prediction," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(2), pages 31-50, Spring.
    27. 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.
    28. Balsmeier, Benjamin & Woerter, Martin, 2019. "Is this time different? How digitalization influences job creation and destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    29. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 139-159.
    30. Berg, Janine., 2016. "Income security in the on-demand economy : findings and policy lessons from a survey of crowdworkers," ILO Working Papers 994906483402676, International Labour Organization.
    31. Andrews,Donald W. K. & Stock,James H. (ed.), 2005. "Identification and Inference for Econometric Models," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521844413.
    32. Arindrajit Dube & Jeff Jacobs & Suresh Naidu & Siddharth Suri, 2020. "Monopsony in Online Labor Markets," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 33-46, March.
    33. 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.
    34. Morgan R. Frank & David Autor & James E. Bessen & Erik Brynjolfsson & Manuel Cebrian & David J. Deming & Maryann Feldman & Matthew Groh & José Lobo & Esteban Moro & Dashun Wang & Hyejin Youn & Iyad Ra, 2019. "Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(14), pages 6531-6539, April.
    35. Arindrajit Dube & Alan Manning & Suresh Naidu, 2018. "Monopsony and Employer Mis-optimization Explain Why Wages Bunch at Round Numbers," NBER Working Papers 24991, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    36. Stefano Baruffaldi & Brigitte van Beuzekom & Hélène Dernis & Dietmar Harhoff & Nandan Rao & David Rosenfeld & Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2020. "Identifying and measuring developments in artificial intelligence: Making the impossible possible," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2020/05, OECD Publishing.
    37. Annarosa Pesole & Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Enrique Fernandez Macias & Federico Biagi & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez, 2018. "Platform Workers in Europe: Evidence from the COLLEEM Survey," JRC Research Reports JRC112157, Joint Research Centre.
    38. José Azar & Ioana Marinescu & Marshall Steinbaum, 2019. "Measuring Labor Market Power Two Ways," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 317-321, May.
    39. repec:fth:prinin:455 is not listed on IDEAS
    40. Righi, Riccardo & Samoili, Sofia & López Cobo, Montserrat & Vázquez-Prada Baillet, Miguel & Cardona, Melisande & De Prato, Giuditta, 2020. "The AI techno-economic complex System: Worldwide landscape, thematic subdomains and technological collaborations," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    41. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    42. Fossen, Frank M. & Sorgner, Alina, 2019. "New Digital Technologies and Heterogeneous Employment and Wage Dynamics in the United States: Evidence from Individual-Level Data," IZA Discussion Papers 12242, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    43. Agrawal, Ajay & Gans, Joshua & Goldfarb, Avi (ed.), 2019. "The Economics of Artificial Intelligence," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226613338, December.
    44. Joshua Angrist & Alan Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Working Papers 834, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    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. Rolf, Steven & O'Reilly, Jacqueline & Meryon, Marc, 2022. "Towards privatized social and employment protections in the platform economy? Evidence from the UK courier sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    2. Cantarella, Michele & Strozzi, Chiara, 2022. "Piecework and Job Search in the Platform Economy," IZA Discussion Papers 15775, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Gómez-Herrera, Estrella, 2022. "Mobility restrictions and the substitution between on-site and remote work: Empirical evidence from a European online labour market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    2. Azar, José & Marinescu, Ioana & Steinbaum, Marshall & Taska, Bledi, 2020. "Concentration in US labor markets: Evidence from online vacancy data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    3. Alan Manning, 2021. "Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(1), pages 3-26, January.
    4. Lyu, Wenjing & Liu, Jin, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence and emerging digital technologies in the energy sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    5. Albert Jan Hummel, 2021. "Monopsony Power, Income Taxation and Welfare," CESifo Working Paper Series 9128, CESifo.
    6. Albert Jan Hummel, 2021. "Monopsony power, income taxation and welfare," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-051/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Fossen, Frank M. & Sorgner, Alina, 2022. "New digital technologies and heterogeneous wage and employment dynamics in the United States: Evidence from individual-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Anna Sokolova & Todd Sorensen, 2021. "Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Meta-Analysis," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(1), pages 27-55, January.
    9. Seifried, Mareike, 2021. "Transitions from offline to online labor markets: The relationship between freelancers' prior offline and online work experience," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-101, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Bas Scheer & Wiljan van den Berge & Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2022. "Alternative Work Arrangements and Worker Outcomes: Evidence from Payrolling," CPB Discussion Paper 435, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    11. 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).
    12. Cortes, Guido Matias & Lerche, Adrian & Schönberg, Uta & Tschopp, Jeanne, 2023. "Technological Change, Firm Heterogeneity and Wage Inequality," IZA Discussion Papers 16070, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. 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.
    14. Langella, Monica & Manning, Alan Patrick, 2021. "The measure of monopsony," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113925, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Maarten Goos & Melanie Arntz & Ulrich Zierahn & Terry Gregory & Stephanie Carretero Gomez & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez & Koen Jonkers, 2019. "The Impact of Technological Innovation on the Future of Work," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2019-03, Joint Research Centre.
    16. Graetz, Georg, 2020. "Technological change and the Swedish labor market," Working Paper Series 2020:19, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    17. Arendt, Lukasz & Gałecka-Burdziak, Ewa & Núñez, Fernando & Pater, Robert & Usabiaga, Carlos, 2023. "Skills requirements across task-content groups in Poland: What online job offers tell us," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Genz, Sabrina & Schnabel, Claus, 2021. "Digging into the digital divide: Workers' exposure to digitalization and its consequences for individual employment," Discussion Papers 118, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Chair of Labour and Regional Economics.
    19. Rammer, Christian & Fernández, Gastón P. & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2022. "Artificial intelligence and industrial innovation: Evidence from German firm-level data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    20. Gregory Crawford, 2008. "The discriminatory incentives to bundle in the cable television industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 41-78, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Online labour markets; artificial intelligence; market power; exogenous change in platform policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • J40 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - General

    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:ipt:decwpa:202110. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.