IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecolab/v33y2022i1p178-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rethinking the measurement of occupational task content

Author

Listed:
  • Matthias Haslberger

Abstract

Which tasks workers perform in their jobs is critical for how technological change plays out in the labour market. This article critically reviews existing measures of occupational task content and makes the case for rethinking how this concept is operationalised. It identifies serious shortcomings relating to the theoretical content and the empirical implementation of existing measures. Based on survey data from European Union countries between 2000 and 2015, it then introduces novel measures of routine task intensity and task complexity at the International Standard Classification of Occupations 1988 two-digit level that address these shortcomings. The indices will contribute to a more theoretically informed understanding of technological change and benefit both labour economists and sociologists in investigating the nature of recent technological change. JEL Codes: J23, J24

Suggested Citation

  • Matthias Haslberger, 2022. "Rethinking the measurement of occupational task content," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(1), pages 178-199, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecolab:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:178-199
    DOI: 10.1177/10353046211037095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10353046211037095
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10353046211037095?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Sebastian Lago Raquel & Federico Biagi, 2018. "The Routine Biased Technical Change hypothesis: a critical review," JRC Research Reports JRC113174, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2006. "Technical Change, Job Tasks, and Rising Educational Demands: Looking outside the Wage Structure," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 235-270, April.
    7. Colin Caines & Florian Hoffmann & Gueorgui Kambourov, 2017. "Complex-Task Biased Technological Change and the Labor Market," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 25, pages 298-319, April.
    8. repec:iab:iabjlr:v:52:i:1:p:art.8 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Salvatori, Andrea, 2018. "The anatomy of job polarisation in the UK," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 52(1), pages 1-8.
    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. 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.
    12. Andrea Salvatori, 2018. "The anatomy of job polarisation in the UK," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-15, December.
    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. Antonio Martins-Neto & Nanditha Mathew & Pierre Mohnen & Tania Treibich, 2024. "Is There Job Polarization in Developing Economies? A Review and Outlook," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 39(2), pages 259-288.
    2. 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.
    3. Wenchao Jin, 2022. "Occupational polarisation and endogenous task-biased technical change," Working Paper Series 0622, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. 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).
    5. Cortes, Guido Matias & Salvatori, Andrea, 2019. "Delving into the demand side: Changes in workplace specialization and job polarization," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 164-176.
    6. Andrea Salvatori, 2018. "The anatomy of job polarisation in the UK," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Du Yuhong & Wei Xiahai, 2020. "Task content routinisation, technological change and labour turnover: Evidence from China," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(3), pages 324-346, September.
    8. Cirillo, Valeria & Evangelista, Rinaldo & Guarascio, Dario & Sostero, Matteo, 2021. "Digitalization, routineness and employment: An exploration on Italian task-based data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    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. 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. 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.
    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. Nikolaos Terzidis & Raquel Ortega‐Argilés, 2021. "Employment polarization in regional labor markets: Evidence from the Netherlands," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(5), pages 971-1001, November.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Florent Bordot & Andre Lorentz, 2021. "Automation and labor market polarization in an evolutionary model with heterogeneous workers," LEM Papers Series 2021/32, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Piotr Lewandowski & Albert Park & Wojciech Hardy & Yang Du & Saier Wu, 2022. "Technology, Skills, and Globalization: Explaining International Differences in Routine and Nonroutine Work Using Survey Data," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(3), pages 687-708.
    19. Cavaglia, Chiara & Etheridge, Ben, 2020. "Job polarization and the declining quality of knowledge workers: Evidence from the UK and Germany," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    20. Roma Keister & Piotr Lewandowski, 2016. "A routine transition? Causes and consequences of the changing content of jobs in Central and Eastern Europe," IBS Policy Papers 05/2016, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Employment demand; Europe; European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS); occupational tasks; routine bias; skill bias; technological change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J23 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Demand
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    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:sae:ecolab:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:178-199. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.