IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sur/surrec/0111.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Gender Dimension of Technical Change and Task Inputs

Author

Listed:
  • Joanne Lindley

    (University of Surrey)

Abstract

Studies have shown technical change has led to job polarisation. A relatively unexplored aspect of this is whether there has been a gender bias. This paper shows gender bias in technology driven skill polarisation. Between 1997 and 2006 the demand for women shows hollowing out across education groups as a consequence of technical change. This was not the case for men. Overall, the demand for women has fallen relative to that for men as a consequence of technical change. This can be explained by a gender bias in the complementarities between computerisation and changes in task inputs. Numeracy skills are the largest complementarity to technical change and these help to explain the increase in the demand for highly skilled women. However, there are gender biased complementarities to technical change across a range of other non-routine tasks which can explain the fall in the demand for medium educated women and the overall increase in the relative demand for men. At the same time there was a fall in the gender pay differential. For moderate and complex computer users this fall is largely explained by changes in qualifications. However, there remains a large unexplained component suggesting that gender biased demand shifts towards numerate and computer literate women have significantly contributed to the closing of the gender pay gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanne Lindley, 2011. "The Gender Dimension of Technical Change and Task Inputs," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0111, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
  • Handle: RePEc:sur:surrec:0111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.som.surrey.ac.uk/2011/DP01-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence F. Katz & Kevin M. Murphy, 1992. "Changes in Relative Wages, 1963–1987: Supply and Demand Factors," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 35-78.
    2. Francis Green, 2009. "Employee Involvement, Technology and Job Tasks," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 326, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    3. Sandra E. Black & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2010. "Explaining Women's Success: Technological Change and the Skill Content of Women's Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 187-194, February.
    4. Katz, Lawrence F. & Autor, David H., 1999. "Changes in the wage structure and earnings inequality," Handbook of Labor Economics,in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 26, pages 1463-1555 Elsevier.
    5. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2005. "Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Re-Assessing the Revisionists," NBER Working Papers 11627, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Blau, Francine D & Kahn, Lawrence M, 1997. "Swimming Upstream: Trends in the Gender Wage Differential in 1980s," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-42, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Stephen Machin & John Van Reenen, 2007. "Changes in Wage Inequality," CEP Special Papers 18, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    9. Altonji, Joseph G. & Blank, Rebecca M., 1999. "Race and gender in the labor market," Handbook of Labor Economics,in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 3143-3259 Elsevier.
    10. Stephen Machin & John Van Reenen, 1998. "Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence from Seven OECD Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1215-1244.
    11. Juhn, Chinhui & Murphy, Kevin M & Pierce, Brooks, 1993. "Wage Inequality and the Rise in Returns to Skill," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 410-442, June.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Susan Harkness, 1996. "The gender earnings gap: evidence from the UK," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 1-36, May.
    15. Autor, David & Dorn, David, 2009. "Inequality and Specialization: The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs in the United States," IZA Discussion Papers 4290, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    16. Stephen Machin, 2004. "Skill-Biased Technical Change and Educational Outcomes," Chapters,in: International Handbook on the Economics of Education, chapter 5 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Robinson, Helen, 2002. " Wrong Side of the Track? The Impact of the Minimum Wage on Gender Pay Gaps in Britain," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 64(5), pages 417-448, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gender Pay; Task-Bias Technology Change; Skills;

    JEL classification:

    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J2 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials

    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:sur:surrec:0111. 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: (Ioannis Lazopoulos). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/desuruk.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.