IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i16p6928-d1455192.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Industrial Robots on Labor Income Share: Empirical Evidence from Chinese A-Listed Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Junhong Du

    (College of Mathematics and System Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Chuanyue Zhao

    (College of Mathematics and System Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Yingying Hu

    (College of Mathematics and System Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Xiaohong Chen

    (College of Mathematics and System Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

Abstract

Based on data from the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) and Chinese A-Share Listed Companies 2011–2019, this paper evaluates how the penetration of industrial robots in China affects the labor income share from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. We first develop a theoretical framework considering robots in the task model, consider different tasks matching different types of labor, construct a labor income share model including robots based on the task model, and perform a theoretical analysis finding that industrial robots can improve labor income. Then, we explore the mechanism of labor price distortion as an intermediate variable that can reduce the labor income share, finding that robots are able to effectively reduce the negative impact of labor price distortions on labor income share. After correcting for potential endogeneity problems, the results confirm a positive, significant, and lasting impact of industrial robot penetration on labor income share, confirming that labor price distortion is the underlying mechanisms through which the robots can effectively reduce the negative impact of labor price distortions on labor income share. At the same time, the impact of robots on firms’ labor income shares varies significantly across different regions, external financial dependence, and skill premiums. Our findings can help the government to provide a decision-making basis for how industrial robots can better serve people in the new century, ensuring that people can share in the achievements of economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Junhong Du & Chuanyue Zhao & Yingying Hu & Xiaohong Chen, 2024. "Impact of Industrial Robots on Labor Income Share: Empirical Evidence from Chinese A-Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:6928-:d:1455192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/6928/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/6928/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Directed Technical Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(4), pages 781-809.
    3. Juann H Hung & Priscila Hammett, 2016. "Globalization and the Labor Share in the United States," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 193-214, March.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Timothy J. Bartik, 1991. "Who Benefits from State and Local Economic Development Policies?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number wbsle.
    7. Frey, Carl Benedikt & Osborne, Michael A., 2017. "The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-280.
    8. Fariha Kamal & Mary E. Lovely & Devashish Mitra, 2019. "Trade liberalisation and labour shares in China," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(12), pages 3588-3618, December.
    9. David H. Autor, 2015. "Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 3-30, Summer.
    10. DeCanio, Stephen J., 2016. "Robots and humans – complements or substitutes?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 280-291.
    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. Daniele Angelini, 2023. "Aging Population and Technology Adoption," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2023-01, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    2. Gregory, Terry & Salomons, Anna & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "Racing With or Against the Machine? Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Jasmine Mondolo, 2022. "The composite link between technological change and employment: A survey of the literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1027-1068, September.
    4. Patrick Mellacher & Timon Scheuer, 2021. "Wage Inequality, Labor Market Polarization and Skill-Biased Technological Change: An Evolutionary (Agent-Based) Approach," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 58(2), pages 233-278, August.
    5. Robert Stehrer, 2022. "The Impact of ICT and Intangible Capital Accumulation on Labour Demand Growth and Functional Income Shares," wiiw Working Papers 218, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    6. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2021. "Stop worrying and love the robot: An activity-based approach to assess the impact of robotization on employment dynamics," GLO Discussion Paper Series 802, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    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. 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).
    9. Caitlin Allen Whitehead & Haroon Bhorat & Robert Hill & Tim Köhler & François Steenkamp, 2021. "The Potential Employment Implications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies: The Case of the Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services Sector," Working Papers 202106, University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit.
    10. Zilian, Laura S. & Zilian, Stella S. & Jäger, Georg, 2021. "Labour market polarisation revisited: evidence from Austrian vacancy data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 55, pages 1-7.
    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. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Usabiaga, Carlos & Núñez, Fernando & Arendt, Lukasz & Gałecka-Burdziak, Ewa & Pater, Robert, 2022. "Skill requirements and labour polarisation: An association analysis based on Polish online job offers," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Oussama Chemlal & Wafaa Benomar, 2024. "The Technological Impact on Employment in Spain between 2023 and 2035," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-30, April.
    18. Gaetano Basso & Giovanni Peri & Ahmed S. Rahman, 2020. "Computerization and immigration: Theory and evidence from the United States," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 1457-1494, November.
    19. Ge, Peng & Sun, Wenkai & Zhao, Zhong, 2021. "Employment structure in China from 1990 to 2015," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 168-190.
    20. Dauth, Wolfgang, 2014. "Job polarization on local labor markets," IAB-Discussion Paper 201418, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:6928-:d:1455192. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.