IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp9736.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differences in Job De-Routinization in OECD Countries: Evidence from PIAAC

Author

Listed:
  • de la Rica, Sara

    () (University of the Basque Country)

  • Gortazar, Lucas

    () (World Bank)

Abstract

The aim of the paper is threefold. First, we compute differences on the degree of de-routinization of job contents across a harmonized and hence comparable sample of Anglo-Saxon, many European and even Asian advanced countries. We do so by using very precise information on job contents at the worker level, which allows for job task heterogeneity within occupations. Second we assess the extent to which computer adoption leads to the observed difference in the degree of de-routinization of job contents. Third, we test whether higher degrees of technology adoption are associated to higher wage inequality. Our results show remarkable differences in the degree of de-routinization of job contents across countries, being computer adoption at work a key significant driver of such differences. In particular, ICT use at work explains 13.4% (6.3%) of the cross-country unconditional (conditional) differences in de-routinization of job contents. Regarding the impact of adoption technology on wage inequality, our results indicate that although differences in ICT adoption explain an important and significant part of wage differentials, the effect is homogeneous for all the wage distribution, implying that we cannot find a significant association between wage inequality and technology adoption.

Suggested Citation

  • de la Rica, Sara & Gortazar, Lucas, 2016. "Differences in Job De-Routinization in OECD Countries: Evidence from PIAAC," IZA Discussion Papers 9736, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp9736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp9736.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2009. "Job Polarization in Europe," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 58-63, May.
    2. Daron Acemoglu, 1999. "Changes in Unemployment and Wage Inequality: An Alternative Theory and Some Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1259-1278, December.
    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. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. David H. Autor & Michael J. Handel, 2013. "Putting Tasks to the Test: Human Capital, Job Tasks, and Wages," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(S1), pages 59-96.
    7. Cabrales, Antonio & Dolado, Juan J. & Mora, Ricardo, 2014. "Dual Labour Markets and (Lack of) On-the-Job Training: PIAAC Evidence from Spain and Other EU Countries," IZA Discussion Papers 8649, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    8. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2006. "The Polarization of the U.S. Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 189-194, May.
    9. Firpo, Sergio & Fortin, Nicole M. & Lemieux, Thomas, 2011. "Occupational Tasks and Changes in the Wage Structure," IZA Discussion Papers 5542, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    10. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2014. "Explaining Job Polarization: Routine-Biased Technological Change and Offshoring," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2509-2526, August.
    11. Christian Dustmann & Johannes Ludsteck & Uta Schönberg, 2009. "Revisiting the German Wage Structure," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 124(2), pages 843-881.
    12. Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2006. "Technical Change, Job Tasks, and Rising Educational Demands: Looking outside the Wage Structure," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 235-270, April.
    13. Oaxaca, Ronald L. & Ransom, Michael R., 1994. "On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 5-21, March.
    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. Wojciech Hardy & Roma Keister & Piotr Lewandowski, 2016. "Technology or Upskilling? Trends in the Task Composition of Jobs in Central and Eastern Europe," HKUST IEMS Working Paper Series 2016-40, HKUST Institute for Emerging Market Studies, revised Dec 2016.
    2. Lewandowski, Piotr & Keister, Roma & Hardy, Wojciech & Górka, Szymon, 2017. "Routine and Ageing? The Intergenerational Divide in the Deroutinisation of Jobs in Europe," IZA Discussion Papers 10732, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    routine-biased technological change; de-routinization; polarization; PIACC; RIF-Regressions; wage decomposition;

    JEL classification:

    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:iza:izadps:dp9736. 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: (Mark Fallak). General contact details of provider: http://www.iza.org .

    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.