IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iwhdps/304457.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

From shares to machines: How common ownership drives automation

Author

Listed:
  • Emmens, Joseph
  • Hutschenreiter, Dennis
  • Manfredonia, Stefano
  • Noth, Felix
  • Santini, Tommaso

Abstract

Does increasing common ownership influence firms' automation strategies? We develop and empirically test a theory indicating that institutional investors' common ownership drives firms that employ workers in the same local labor markets to boost automation-related innovation. First, we present a model integrating task-based production and common ownership, demonstrating that greater ownership overlap drives firms to internalize the impact of their automation decisions on the wage bills of local labor market competitors, leading to more automation and reduced employment. Second, we empirically validate the model's predictions. Based on patent texts, the geographic distribution of firms' labor forces at the establishment level, and exogenous increases in common ownership due to institutional investor mergers, we analyze the effects of rising common ownership on automation innovation within and across labor markets. Our findings reveal that firms experiencing a positive shock to common ownership with labor market rivals exhibit increased automation and decreased employment growth. Conversely, similar ownership shocks do not affect automation innovation if firms do not share local labor markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Emmens, Joseph & Hutschenreiter, Dennis & Manfredonia, Stefano & Noth, Felix & Santini, Tommaso, 2024. "From shares to machines: How common ownership drives automation," IWH Discussion Papers 23/2024, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iwhdps:304457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/304457/1/1906752958.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julian Atanassov, 2013. "Do Hostile Takeovers Stifle Innovation? Evidence from Antitakeover Legislation and Corporate Patenting," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 68(3), pages 1097-1131, June.
    2. Itzhak Ben-David & Francesco Franzoni & Rabih Moussawi & John Sedunov, 2021. "The Granular Nature of Large Institutional Investors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6629-6659, November.
    3. Inés Macho-Stadler & Thierry Verdier, 1991. "Strategic managerial incentives and cross ownership structure: A note," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 285-297, October.
    4. José Azar & Xavier Vives, 2021. "General Equilibrium Oligopoly and Ownership Structure," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 999-1048, May.
    5. Anders Akerman & Ingvil Gaarder & Magne Mogstad, 2015. "The Skill Complementarity of Broadband Internet," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1781-1824.
    6. Hutschenreiter, Dennis, 2023. "Common Ownership and the Market for Technology," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277640, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/170cd4sul89ddpnfuomvfm0jc0 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Narayanan Jayaraman & Ajay Khorana & Edward Nelling, 2002. "An Analysis of the Determinants and Shareholder Wealth Effects of Mutual Fund Mergers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1521-1551, June.
    9. Benjamin Moll & Lukasz Rachel & Pascual Restrepo, 2022. "Uneven Growth: Automation's Impact on Income and Wealth Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2645-2683, November.
    10. Dennis C. Hutschenreiter & Tommaso Santini & Eugenia Vella, 2022. "Automation and sectoral reallocation," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 335-362, May.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Paul Beaudry & Mark Doms & Ethan Lewis, 2010. "Should the Personal Computer Be Considered a Technological Revolution? Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan Areas," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(5), pages 988-1036.
    14. 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.
    15. Philippe Aghion & Céline Antonin & Simon Bunel & Xavier Jaravel, 2020. "What Are the Labor and Product Market Effects of Automation? New Evidence from France," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03403062, HAL.
    16. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Marina Chugunova & Klaus Keller & Jose Azar & Sampsa Samila, 2023. "Monopsony and Automation," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 432, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    18. Danzer, Alexander M. & Feuerbaum, Carsten & Gaessler, Fabian, 2024. "Labor supply and automation innovation: Evidence from an allocation policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    19. Guy Michaels & Ashwini Natraj & John Van Reenen, 2010. "Has ICT Polarized Skill Demand? Evidence from Eleven Countries over 25 Years," CEP Discussion Papers dp0987, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    20. Melanie Arntz & Terry Gregory & Ulrich Zierahn, 2016. "The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries: A Comparative Analysis," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 189, OECD Publishing.
    21. 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.
    22. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Lia Sheer, 2021. "Knowledge Spillovers and Corporate Investment in Scientific Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 871-898, March.
    23. José Azar & Xavier Vives, 2021. "Reply to: Comments on “General Equilibrium Oligopoly and Ownership Structure”," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 1061-1063, May.
    24. Lewellen, Katharina & Lowry, Michelle, 2021. "Does common ownership really increase firm coordination?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 322-344.
    25. Sun, Liyang & Abraham, Sarah, 2021. "Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 175-199.
    26. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3n1gbsj6rs80ipqv9d42nfd0ge is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Guy Michaels & Ashwini Natraj & John Van Reenen, 2014. "Has ICT Polarized Skill Demand? Evidence from Eleven Countries over Twenty-Five Years," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(1), pages 60-77, March.
    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. 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).
    2. Arvai Kai & Mann Katja, 2022. "Consumption Inequality in the Digital Age," Working papers 890, Banque de France.
    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. Zhang, Xinchun & Sun, Murong & Liu, Jianxu & Xu, Aijia, 2024. "The nexus between industrial robot and employment in China: The effects of technology substitution and technology creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. David Kunst, 2019. "Deskilling among Manufacturing Production Workers," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-050/VI, Tinbergen Institute, revised 30 Dec 2020.
    8. 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.
    9. Jaimovich, Nir & Saporta-Eksten, Itay & Siu, Henry & Yedid-Levi, Yaniv, 2021. "The macroeconomics of automation: Data, theory, and policy analysis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-16.
    10. 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).
    11. Clément Bosquet & Paul Maarek & Elliot Moiteaux, 2021. "Routine-biased technological change and wages by education level: Occupational downgrading and displacement effects," Working Papers hal-03270715, HAL.
    12. Eric D Gould, 2019. "Explaining the Unexplained: Residual Wage Inequality, Manufacturing Decline and Low-skilled Immigration," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1281-1326.
    13. David Autor & Caroline Chin & Anna Salomons & Bryan Seegmiller, 2024. "New Frontiers: The Origins and Content of New Work, 1940–2018," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 139(3), pages 1399-1465.
    14. Maarek, Paul & Moiteaux, Elliot, 2021. "Polarization, employment and the minimum wage: Evidence from European local labor markets," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Gaggl, Paul & Kaufmann, Sylvia, 2020. "The cyclical component of labor market polarization and jobless recoveries in the US," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 334-347.
    16. Hensvik, Lena & Skans, Oskar Nordström, 2023. "The skill-specific impact of past and projected occupational decline," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    17. Hong Cheng & Lukasz A. Drozd & Rahul Giri & Mathieu Taschereau-Dumouchel & Junjie Xia, 2021. "The Future of Labor: Automation and the Labor Share in the Second Machine Age," Working Papers 20-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    18. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Du, Longzheng & Lin, Weifen, 2022. "Does the application of industrial robots overcome the Solow paradox? Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    automation; common ownership; local labor markets; market power;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • J23 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Demand
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:iwhdps:304457. 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/iwhhhde.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.