IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v208y2021ics0165176521003414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do robots complement or substitute for older workers?

Author

Listed:
  • Battisti, Michele
  • Gravina, Antonio Francesco

Abstract

The impact of robotization on labor market outcomes has been recently empirically investigated along several directions, including employment, wages and labor productivity. This work contributes to this literature by looking for heterogeneous effects of robots on the workforce, analyzed by age cohorts. Relying on a panel of data from IFR (2019) and EU KLEMS (2009) over the years 1994–2005, we find consistent evidence of higher complementarity between robots and older workers (hours worked by employees aged 50 and over), and a greater substitutability among robots and younger cohorts of the labor market. These findings are robust to age group disaggregation and specific capital price deflators.

Suggested Citation

  • Battisti, Michele & Gravina, Antonio Francesco, 2021. "Do robots complement or substitute for older workers?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:208:y:2021:i:c:s0165176521003414
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176521003414
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110064?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "The Race between Man and Machine: Implications of Technology for Growth, Factor Shares, and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1488-1542, June.
    2. Per Krusell & Lee E. Ohanian & JosÈ-Victor RÌos-Rull & Giovanni L. Violante, 2000. "Capital-Skill Complementarity and Inequality: A Macroeconomic Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1029-1054, September.
    3. Marcel P. Timmer & Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los & Robert Stehrer & Gaaitzen J. Vries, 2015. "An Illustrated User Guide to the World Input–Output Database: the Case of Global Automotive Production," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 575-605, August.
    4. Matthew S. Rutledge & Gal Wettstein & Sara Ellen King, 2020. "Will Imports and Robots Push Older Workers into Nontraditional Jobs?," Issues in Brief 2020-6, Center for Retirement Research.
    5. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    6. Maya Eden & Paul Gaggl, 2018. "On the Welfare Implications of Automation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 15-43, July.
    7. Sotiris Blanas & Gino Gancia & Sang Yoon (Tim) Lee, 2019. "Who is afraid of machines?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(100), pages 627-690.
    8. Fallon, P R & Layard, P R G, 1975. "Capital-Skill Complementarity, Income Distribution, and Output Accounting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 83(2), pages 279-301, April.
    9. Jeffrey D. Sachs & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2012. "Smart Machines and Long-Term Misery," NBER Working Papers 18629, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Basso, Henrique S. & Jimeno, Juan F., 2021. "From secular stagnation to robocalypse? Implications of demographic and technological changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 833-847.
    11. Cette, Gilbert & Devillard, Aurélien & Spiezia, Vincenzo, 2021. "The contribution of robots to productivity growth in 30 OECD countries over 1975–2019," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    12. Mary O'Mahony & Marcel P. Timmer, 2009. "Output, Input and Productivity Measures at the Industry Level: The EU KLEMS Database," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(538), pages 374-403, June.
    13. Alberto Alesina & Michele Battisti & Joseph Zeira, 2018. "Technology and labor regulations: theory and evidence," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 41-78, March.
    14. Griliches, Zvi, 1969. "Capital-Skill Complementarity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 51(4), pages 465-468, November.
    15. Matthew J. Lindquist, 2005. "Capital–Skill Complementarity and Inequality in Sweden," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 107(4), pages 711-735, December.
    16. Daniel J. Henderson, 2009. "A Non‐parametric Examination of Capital–Skill Complementarity," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(4), pages 519-538, August.
    17. Steven G. Allen, 2019. "Demand for Older Workers: What Do Economists Think? What Are Firms Doing?," NBER Working Papers 26597, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Lee Changkeun & Kim Olivia Hye, 2023. "Unions and Automation Risk: Who Bears the Cost of Automation?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(3), pages 843-851, July.
    2. Nikolova, Milena & Cnossen, Femke & Nikolaev, Boris, 2024. "Robots, meaning, and self-determination," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(5).
    3. Lihua Zhang & Tian Gan & Jiachen Fan, 2023. "Do industrial robots affect the labour market? Evidence from China," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 787-817, July.
    4. Filippo Belloc & Gabriel Burdin & Fabio Landini, 2023. "Advanced Technologies and Worker Voice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(357), pages 1-38, January.
    5. Pablo Casas & Concepción Román, 2024. "The impact of artificial intelligence in the early retirement decision," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 51(3), pages 583-618, August.
    6. Li, Jianjun & Wu, Zhouyi & Yu, Kaijia & Zhao, Wei, 2024. "The effect of industrial robot adoption on firm value: Evidence from China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    7. Belloc, Filippo & Burdin, Gabriel & Landini, Fabio, 2022. "Robots, Digitalization, and Worker Voice," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1038, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    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. M. Battisti & M. Del Gatto & A. F. Gravina & C. F. Parmeter, 2021. "Robots versus labor skills: a complementarity/substitutability analysis," Working Paper CRENoS 202104, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    2. Hémous, David & Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Olsen, Morten & Zanella, carlo, 2019. "Automating Labor: Evidence from Firm-level Patent Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 14249, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Taniguchi, Hiroya & Yamada, Ken, 2022. "ICT capital–skill complementarity and wage inequality: Evidence from OECD countries," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    4. Berg, Andrew & Buffie, Edward F. & Zanna, Luis-Felipe, 2018. "Should we fear the robot revolution? (The correct answer is yes)," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 117-148.
    5. Pablo Casas & José L. Torres, 2023. "Automation, automatic capital returns, and the functional income distribution," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 113-135, January.
    6. Stähler, Nikolai, 2021. "The Impact of Aging and Automation on the Macroeconomy and Inequality," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Pablo Casas & José L. Torres, 2024. "Government size and automation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(3), pages 780-807, June.
    8. Perez-Laborda, Alejandro & Perez-Sebastian, Fidel, 2020. "Capital-skill complementarity and biased technical change across US sectors," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    9. Battisti, Michele & Gatto, Massimo Del & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2022. "Skill-biased technical change and labor market inefficiency," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Prettner, Klaus & Strulik, Holger, 2020. "Innovation, automation, and inequality: Policy challenges in the race against the machine," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 249-265.
    11. Reshef, Ariell & Santoni, Gianluca, 2023. "Are your labor shares set in Beijing? The view through the lens of global value chains," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Raveh, Ohad & Reshef, Ariell, 2016. "Capital imports composition, complementarities, and the skill premium in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 183-206.
    13. Castex, Gonzalo & (Stanley) Cho, Sang-Wook & Dechter, Evgenia, 2022. "The decline in capital-skill complementarity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    14. Jacobs, Arthur, 2023. "Capital-augmenting technical change in the context of untapped automation opportunities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 155-166.
    15. Gravina, Antonio Francesco & Foster-McGregor, Neil, 2020. "Automation, globalisation and relative wages: An empirical analysis of winners and losers," MERIT Working Papers 2020-040, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    16. Chris Papageorgiou & Marianne Saam, 2008. "Two‐level CES Production Technology in the Solow and Diamond Growth Models," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(1), pages 119-143, March.
    17. Gasteiger, Emanuel & Prettner, Klaus, 2022. "Automation, Stagnation, And The Implications Of A Robot Tax," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 218-249, January.
    18. Alonso, Cristian & Berg, Andrew & Kothari, Siddharth & Papageorgiou, Chris & Rehman, Sidra, 2022. "Will the AI revolution cause a great divergence?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 18-37.
    19. repec:bin:bpeajo:v:49:y:2019:i:2018-01:p:1-87 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Chen, Chaoran, 2020. "Capital-skill complementarity, sectoral labor productivity, and structural transformation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    21. Arvai Kai & Mann Katja, 2022. "Consumption Inequality in the Digital Age," Working papers 890, Banque de France.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Automation; Technology; Robots; Aging;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • M50 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - General
    • J23 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Demand

    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:eee:ecolet:v:208:y:2021:i:c:s0165176521003414. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.