IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/wpaper/201902.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What are the policy options? A systematic review of policy responses to the impacts of robotisation and automation on the labour market

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Three main policy responses to the labour market challenges posed by robotisation and automation have emerged in the research literature. The first is 'taxing robots' and using this revenue to introduce a basic income that could offset the negative impacts of replacing humans by robots. The second option highlights the ownership of robots so that taking part in the new source of wealth is possible. The third focuses on strengthening the comparative advantages, the creativity, and the social intelligence of humans that robots will never be able to match. All of these policy responses are supported by economic rationales and research findings but a systematic review shows that all of them raise further questions and challenges that should be carefully investigated in order to choose the right path. This paper offers a comprehensive overview of these questions. Furthermore, in a broader sense these policy options—redistributing the benefits of technological changes, increasing accesses to the benefits and utilisation of changes, and supporting the individual and institutional adjustment to changes—are relevant to every technological transformation. Hence, the lessons that are drawn from the current discussion of policy options driven by specific technologies, robotization, and automation might serve as a precursor to potential policy responses triggered by other technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoltan Csefalvay, 2019. "What are the policy options? A systematic review of policy responses to the impacts of robotisation and automation on the labour market," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2019-02, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
  • Handle: RePEc:ipt:wpaper:201902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/jrc116992.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesco Chiacchio & Georgios Petropoulos & David Pichler, 2018. "The impact of industrial robots on EU employment and wages: A local labour market approach," Working Papers 25186, Bruegel.
    2. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2009. "Job Polarization in Europe," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 58-63, May.
    3. Unni Pillai, 2013. "A Model of Technological Progress in the Microprocessor Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 877-912, December.
    4. James Browne & Herwig Immervoll, 2017. "Mechanics of replacing benefit systems with a basic income: comparative results from a microsimulation approach," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 15(4), pages 325-344, December.
    5. 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].
    6. Mafini Dosso & Lesley Potters & Alexander Tuebke, 2017. "R&D and Innovation across Global Value Chains: Insights for EU Territorial Innovation Policy," JRC Working Papers JRC107930, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    7. 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.
    8. David M. Byrne & Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2013. "Is the Information Technology Revolution Over?," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 25, pages 20-36, Spring.
    9. Balliester, Thereza. & Elsheikhi, Adam., 2018. "The future of work a literature review," ILO Working Papers 994987493402676, International Labour Organization.
    10. Amrit Amirapu and Arvind Subramanian, 2015. "Manufacturing or Services? An Indian Illustration of a Development Dilemma - Working Paper 409," Working Papers 409, Center for Global Development.
    11. Pajarinen, Mika & Rouvinen, Petri, 2014. "Computerization Threatens One Third of Finnish Employment," ETLA Brief 22, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    12. Sara Amoroso & Pietro Moncada-Paterno-Castello, 2018. "Inward Greenfield FDI and Patterns of Job Polarisation," JRC Working Papers JRC111347, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    13. Ana Aizcorbe & Stephen D Oliner & Daniel E Sichel, 2008. "Shifting Trends in Semiconductor Prices and the Pace of Technological Progress," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 43(3), pages 23-39, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Amrit Amirapu & Arvind Subramanian, 2015. "Manufacturing or Services? An Indian Illustration of a Development Dilemma," Working Papers id:7521, eSocialSciences.
    16. Lordan, Grace, 2018. "Robots at work: a report on automatable and non-automatable employment shares in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 90500, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Sara Amoroso & Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2018. "Inward Greenfield FDI and Patterns of Job Polarization," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    18. Gilbert CETTE, 2015. "Which Role for ICTs as a Productivity Driver Over the Last Years and the Next Future?," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(100), pages 65-83, 4th quart.
    19. Sebastian Lago Raquel & Federico Biagi, 2018. "The Routine Biased Technical Change hypothesis: a critical review," JRC Working Papers JRC113174, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    20. Jon Pareliussen & Hyunjeong Hwang & Heikki Viitamäki, 2018. "Basic income or a single tapering rule? Incentives, inclusiveness and affordability compared for the case of Finland," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1464, OECD Publishing.
    21. repec:aei:rpaper:37301 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    robotisation; automation; policies; industrial transformation; labour market; innovation; territorial development;

    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:wpaper:201902. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Publication Officer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.