IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-393124.html

Robots, jobs, and optimal fertility timing

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Costanzo

Abstract

This paper examines how industrial robots influence the timing of childbirth in Europe. Higher exposure to robots is associated with earlier fertility in low- and high-skilled regional labor markets and with a delay in medium-skilled ones. The underlying mechanisms are rationalized through a model of fertility, parameterized with data on individuals’ expectations about the displacement and creation of jobs due to automation. Variations in the simulated timing of childbirth are associated with corresponding changes in childlessness rates. The results establish a link between the Routine-Biased Technological Change hypothesis and demographic behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Costanzo, 2025. "Robots, jobs, and optimal fertility timing," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/393124, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/393124
    Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/393124/3/630b0ae0-1f95-4c8e-ad33-acee8b5ce917.pdf
    File Function: Full text for the whole work, or for a work part
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2017. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series dp-297, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Uwe JIRJAHN & Stephen C. SMITH, 2018. "Nonunion Employee Representation: Theory And The German Experience With Mandated Works Councils," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(1), pages 201-233, March.
    2. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates, 2023. "What Happened to US Business Dynamism?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(8), pages 2059-2124.
    3. Lütkenhorst, Wilfried, 2018. "Creating wealth without labour? Emerging contours of a new techno-economic landscape," IDOS Discussion Papers 11/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    4. Joshua Greenstein, 2020. "The Precariat Class Structure and Income Inequality among US Workers: 1980–2018," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 447-469, September.
    5. Colombo, Emilio & Mercorio, Fabio & Mezzanzanica, Mario, 2019. "AI meets labor market: Exploring the link between automation and skills," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 27-37.
    6. Wang, Changming & Liao, Hongwei & Zhu, Lei & He, Leihua, 2024. "The haze reduction effect in china under the digital economy," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    7. Sonal Pandey, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence and Food Industry," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2021 0058, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    8. Alejandro Micco, 2019. "The Impact of Automation in Developed Countries," Working Papers wp480, University of Chile, Department of Economics.
    9. Goos, Maarten & Rademakers, Emilie & Röttger, Ronja, 2021. "Routine-Biased technical change: Individual-Level evidence from a plant closure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    10. 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.
    11. Pierre Barral & Mehdi Senouci, 2018. "Walking on two legs: Growth accounting with labor-saving and capital-saving technical change," Working Papers hal-01709599, HAL.
    12. David Autor & Anna Salomons, 2018. "Is Automation Labor Share–Displacing? Productivity Growth, Employment, and the Labor Share," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 49(1 (Spring), pages 1-87.
    13. Thomas Gries & Wim Naudé, 2022. "Modelling artificial intelligence in economics," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 56(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Andrea Salvatori & Seetha Menon & Wouter Zwysen, 2018. "The effect of computer use on job quality: Evidence from Europe," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 200, OECD Publishing.
    15. Lankisch, Clemens & Prettner, Klaus & Prskawetz, Alexia, 2019. "How can robots affect wage inequality?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 161-169.
    16. Warning, Anja & Weber, Enzo, 2018. "Digitalisation, hiring and personnel policy: evidence from a representative business survey," IAB-Discussion Paper 201810, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    17. Manav Raj & Robert Seamans, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence, Labor, Productivity, and the Need for Firm-Level Data," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 553-565, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Antonio Cabrales & Penélope Hernández & Angel Sánchez, 2020. "Robots, labor markets, and universal basic income," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, December.
    19. Fran Stewart & Kathryn Kelley, 2020. "Connecting Hands and Heads: Retooling Engineering Technology for the “Smart†Manufacturing Workplace," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 34(1), pages 31-45, February.
    20. Ana L. ABELIANSKY & Eda ALGUR & David E. BLOOM & Klaus PRETTNER, 2020. "The future of work: Meeting the global challenges of demographic change and automation," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(3), pages 285-306, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ulb:ulbeco:2013/393124. 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: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.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.