IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jmacro/v78y2023ics0164070423000617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AI revolution and coordination failure: Theory and evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Ünveren, Burak
  • Durmaz, Tunç
  • Sunal, Seçkin

Abstract

This paper analyzes theoretically and empirically the coordination failure problem inherent within the 21st-century automation revolution. First, we build a general equilibrium model with labor-saving artificial intelligence (AI) technology that is developed through R&D investments in automation. The model exhibits multiple market equilibria due to a positive feedback loop between AI investments and general economic activities. The available evidence supports our model's predictions regarding the interaction between AI technologies, income inequality, and wages. We also find strong empirical support for multiple equilibria in AI development—the primary prediction of our model. These empirical and theoretical results suggest that AI development can cause coordination failures, thereby creating leaders and followers in automation. However, according to our policy analysis, R&D subsidies and public-private partnerships are efficient coordination devices to tackle this problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Ünveren, Burak & Durmaz, Tunç & Sunal, Seçkin, 2023. "AI revolution and coordination failure: Theory and evidence," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jmacro:v:78:y:2023:i:c:s0164070423000617
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmacro.2023.103561
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164070423000617
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmacro.2023.103561?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. Robert C. Feenstra & Robert Inklaar & Marcel P. Timmer, 2015. "The Next Generation of the Penn World Table," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(10), pages 3150-3182, October.
    2. David Autor & Anna Salomons, 2018. "Is Automation Labor-Displacing? Productivity Growth, Employment, and the Labor Share," NBER Working Papers 24871, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Caner, Mehmet & Hansen, Bruce E., 2004. "Instrumental Variable Estimation Of A Threshold Model," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 813-843, October.
    4. Martin Beraja & Nathan Zorzi, 2022. "Inefficient Automation," NBER Working Papers 30154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Hansen, Bruce E., 1999. "Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 345-368, December.
    6. Matthias Basedau & Simone Gobien & Sebastian Prediger, 2018. "The Multidimensional Effects Of Religion On Socioeconomic Development: A Review Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 1106-1133, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Partha Dasgupta & Joseph Stiglitz, 1980. "Uncertainty, Industrial Structure, and the Speed of R&D," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, Spring.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Yingying Lu & Yixiao Zhou, 2021. "A review on the economics of artificial intelligence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1045-1072, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Fierro, Luca Eduardo & Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto, 2022. "Automation, Job Polarisation, and Structural Change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 499-535.
    14. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and Work," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 197-236, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Andrew Berg & Jonathan D. Ostry & Charalambos G. Tsangarides & Yorbol Yakhshilikov, 2018. "Redistribution, inequality, and growth: new evidence," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 259-305, September.
    16. Bruce E. Hansen, 2000. "Sample Splitting and Threshold Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 575-604, May.
    17. Arnaud Costinot & Iván Werning, 2023. "Robots, Trade, and Luddism: A Sufficient Statistic Approach to Optimal Technology Regulation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2261-2291.
    18. Joao Guerreiro & Sergio Rebelo & Pedro Teles, 2022. "Should Robots Be Taxed?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(1), pages 279-311.
    19. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence, Automation and Work," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series dp-298, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    20. Lo, Andrew W. & Newey, Whitney K., 1985. "A large-sample chow test for the linear simultaneous equation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 351-353.
    21. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2188-2244.
    22. Kehoe, Timothy J, 1983. "Regularity and Index Theory for Economies with Smooth Production Technologies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 895-917, July.
    23. Michael Magill & Martine Quinzii & Jean‐Charles Rochet, 2015. "A Theory of the Stakeholder Corporation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83(5), pages 1685-1725, September.
    24. Ernst Ekkehardt & Merola Rossana & Samaan Daniel, 2019. "Economics of Artificial Intelligence: Implications for the Future of Work," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-35, June.
    25. Raj Chetty & Adam Guren & Day Manoli & Andrea Weber, 2011. "Are Micro and Macro Labor Supply Elasticities Consistent? A Review of Evidence on the Intensive and Extensive Margins," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 471-475, May.
    26. Russell W. Cooper, 2005. "Economic Policy in the Presence of Coordination Problems," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 115(4), pages 379-390.
    27. Frederick Solt & Philip Habel & J. Tobin Grant, 2011. "Economic Inequality, Relative Power, and Religiosity," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 92(2), pages 447-465, June.
    28. Edmond Awad & Sohan Dsouza & Richard Kim & Jonathan Schulz & Joseph Henrich & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2018. "The Moral Machine experiment," Nature, Nature, vol. 563(7729), pages 59-64, November.
    29. Richard Rogerson, 2007. "Taxation and market work: is Scandinavia an outlier?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(1), pages 59-85, July.
    30. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1996. "Markets with endogenous uncertainty: theory and policy," MPRA Paper 8612, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    31. Uwe Thuemmel, 2018. "Optimal Taxation of Robots," CESifo Working Paper Series 7317, CESifo.
    32. repec:bin:bpeajo:v:49:y:2019:i:2018-01:p:1-87 is not listed on IDEAS
    33. Caro-Burnett, Johann & Kaneko, Shinji, 2022. "Is Society Ready for AI Ethical Decision Making? Lessons from a Study on Autonomous Cars," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    34. 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.
    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. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    2. 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.
    3. Aisa, Rosa & Cabeza, Josefina & Martin, Jorge, 2023. "Automation and aging: The impact on older workers in the workforce," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    4. Mr. Andrew Berg & Lahcen Bounader & Nikolay Gueorguiev & Hiroaki Miyamoto & Mr. Kenji Moriyama & Ryota Nakatani & Luis-Felipe Zanna, 2021. "For the Benefit of All: Fiscal Policies and Equity-Efficiency Trade-offs in the Age of Automation," IMF Working Papers 2021/187, International Monetary Fund.
    5. Shimizu, Ryosuke & Momoda, Shohei, 2023. "Does automation technology increase wage?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Ryosuke Shimizu & Shohei Momoda, 2020. "Does Automation Technology increase Wage?," KIER Working Papers 1039, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    8. Wang, Hua & Liao, Lingtao & Wu, Ji (George), 2023. "Robot adoption and firm's capacity utilization: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. Artuc, Erhan & Bastos, Paulo & Rijkers, Bob, 2023. "Robots, tasks, and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    10. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer & Michael Peneder & Philipp Piribauer & Peter Reschenhofer, 2018. "Beschäftigungseffekte der Digitalisierung in den Bundesländern sowie in Stadt und Land," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61633, January.
    11. Mutascu, Mihai, 2021. "Artificial intelligence and unemployment: New insights," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 653-667.
    12. Barbieri, Laura & Mussida, Chiara & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2019. "Testing the employment and skill impact of new technologies: A survey and some methodological issues," MERIT Working Papers 2019-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Shreya Roy & Sugata Marjit & Bibek Ray Chaudhuri, 2022. "Role of Artificial Intelligence in Intra-Sectoral Wage Inequality in an Open Economy: A Finite Change Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 9862, CESifo.
    14. Ugur, Mehmet, 2024. "Innovation, market power and the labour share: Evidence from OECD industries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    15. Wang, Linhui & Cao, Zhanglu & Dong, Zhiqing, 2023. "Are artificial intelligence dividends evenly distributed between profits and wages? Evidence from the private enterprise survey data in China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 342-356.
    16. Fossen, Frank M. & Sorgner, Alina, 2022. "New digital technologies and heterogeneous wage and employment dynamics in the United States: Evidence from individual-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. Geiger, Niels & Prettner, Klaus & Schwarzer, Johannes A., 2018. "Automatisierung, Wachstum und Ungleichheit," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 13-2018, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    18. Ben Vermeulen & Jan Kesselhut & Andreas Pyka & Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2018. "The Impact of Automation on Employment: Just the Usual Structural Change?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-27, May.
    19. Nakatani, Ryota, 2024. "Optimal Taxation in the Automated Era," MPRA Paper 121347, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Heyman, Fredrik & Olsson, Martin, 2022. "Long-Run Effects of Technological Change: The Impact of Automation and Robots on Intergenerational Mobility," Working Paper Series 1451, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 29 Jun 2023.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Automation; Inequality; Multiple equilibria; Artificial Intelligence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:jmacro:v:78:y:2023:i:c:s0164070423000617. 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/inca/622617 .

    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.