IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ecoapn/47.html

International mobile Arbeitskräfte: Der neue Standortwettbewerb

Author

Listed:
  • Koch, Philipp
  • Köppl-Turyna, Monika

Abstract

In einer globalisierten Welt spielt internationaler Standortwettbewerb eine zentrale Rolle. Eine hohe Wettbewerbsfähigkeit eines Landes oder einer Region hat positive Effekte auf die Ansiedlung von Unternehmen, die Innovationskraft und Produktivität, sowie schließlich auf das Wirtschaftswachstum im Allgemeinen. Die voranschreitende Digitalisierung, die durch die Erfahrungen aus der COVID-19 Pandemie weiter verstärkt wird, ruft eine neue Dimension von Standortwettbewerb hervor, die bis dato noch nicht ausführlich in der öffentlichen Debatte diskutiert wird: den Standortwettbewerb rund um die Ansiedlung von international mobilen Erwerbstätigen. [...] Der Standortwettbewerb und die in diesem Kontext relevanten Standortqualitäten sind aus einem unterschiedlichen Blickwinkel zu beurteilen als Standortkriterien mit dem Ziel Unternehmen anzusiedeln. Vielmehr ist es hierbei angezeigt Schritte zu setzen, welche die Attraktivität des Standorts Österreich aus Sicht der international mobilen Erwerbstätigen erhöhen. Zentrale Standortdimensionen sind unter anderem die Steuer- und Abgabenbelastung, die in Österreich im internationalen Vergleich überdurchschnittlich hoch ist, regulatorische Hürden zur Ausübung einer selbständigen Erwerbstätigkeit sowie die Qualität der Infrastruktur, insbesondere der digitalen Infrastruktur. Darüber hinaus sind außerdem die Lebensqualität und das Gesundheits- und Bildungssystem zentrale Standortdimensionen im Wettbewerb um international mobile Erwerbstätige.

Suggested Citation

  • Koch, Philipp & Köppl-Turyna, Monika, 2021. "International mobile Arbeitskräfte: Der neue Standortwettbewerb," Policy Notes 47, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ecoapn:47
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/235551/1/1761325167.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. David H. Autor & Frank Levy & Richard J. Murnane, 2003. "The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1279-1333.
    3. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Peter H. Egger & Sergey Nigai & Nora M. Strecker, 2019. "The Taxing Deed of Globalization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(2), pages 353-390, February.
    7. 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.
    8. David Card & John E. DiNardo, 2002. "Skill-Biased Technological Change and Rising Wage Inequality: Some Problems and Puzzles," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(4), pages 733-783, October.
    9. Glenn Dutcher, E., 2012. "The effects of telecommuting on productivity: An experimental examination. The role of dull and creative tasks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 355-363.
    10. 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.
    11. M. Christl & Monika Köppl–Turyna, 2020. "Gender wage gap and the role of skills and tasks: evidence from the Austrian PIAAC data set," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(2), pages 113-134, January.
    12. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2008. "Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising the Revisionists," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 300-323, May.
    13. 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.
    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. Thomsen, Stephan L, 2018. "Die Rolle der Computerisierung und Digitalisierung für Beschäftigung und Einkommen," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-645, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    2. Adam James Berg, 2019. "Skills tasks, and class- an integrated class based approach to understanding recent trends in economic inequality in the USA," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 117-138, June.
    3. Bhalotra, Sonia & Fernandez, Manuel & Wang, Fan, 2022. "The Distribution of the Gender Wage Gap: An Equilibrium Model," CEPR Discussion Papers 17253, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Lu, Chia-Hui, 2025. "Automation and job polarization," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    5. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Rentocchini, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2023. "Routinization, within-occupation task changes and long-run employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    6. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    7. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    8. Vahagn Jerbashian, 2019. "Automation and Job Polarization: On the Decline of Middling Occupations in Europe," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(5), pages 1095-1116, October.
    9. Silvia Vannutelli & Sergio Scicchitano & Marco Biagetti, 2022. "Routine-biased technological change and wage inequality: do workers’ perceptions matter?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 409-450, September.
    10. Dirk Antonczyk & Thomas DeLeire & Bernd Fitzenberger, 2018. "Polarization and Rising Wage Inequality: Comparing the U.S. and Germany," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-33, April.
    11. David J. Deming, 2017. "The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1593-1640.
    12. Goos, Maarten & Rademakers, Emilie & Röttger, Ronja, 2021. "Routine-Biased technical change: Individual-Level evidence from a plant closure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    13. Raquel Sebastian, 2018. "Explaining job polarisation in Spain from a task perspective," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 215-248, June.
    14. Tan, Joanne, 2024. "Multidimensional heterogeneity and matching in a frictional labor market — An application to polarization," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Hensvik, Lena & Skans, Oskar Nordström, 2023. "The skill-specific impact of past and projected occupational decline," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Orhun Sevinc, 2017. "Skill-Biased Technical Change and Labor Market Polarization: The Role of Skill Heterogeneity Within Occupations," Discussion Papers 1728, Centre for Macroeconomics (CFM).
    17. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "ELS issues in robotics and steps to consider them. Part 1: Robotics and employment. Consequences of robotics and technological change for the structure and level of employment," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 146501.
    18. Beckert, Bernd & Buschak, Daniela & Graf, Birgit & Hägele, Martin & Jäger, Angela & Moll, Cornelius & Schmoch, Ulrich & Wydra, Sven, 2016. "Automatisierung und Robotik-Systeme," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 11-2016, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    19. 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.
    20. Nicolas A. Roys & Christopher R. Taber, 2019. "Skill Prices, Occupations, and Changes in the Wage Structure for Low Skilled Men," NBER Working Papers 26453, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:ecoapn:47. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecoauat.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.