J. Felipe, Donna Faye Bajaro, Gemma Estrada, J. Mccombie
{"title":"就业和技术进步之间关系的测试隐藏了什么","authors":"J. Felipe, Donna Faye Bajaro, Gemma Estrada, J. Mccombie","doi":"10.13133/2037-3643_73.295_5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"R The debate about whether technical progress causes technological unemployment, as the Luddites argued in the early 19 th century, has recently resurfaced in the context of new technologies and automation and the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. We review the main issues and then consider in detail the studies of Autor and Salomons (2017, 2018). They find that after both direct and indirect effects are accounted for, technical change is, on the aggregate, employment-augmenting. They find no evidence that technical change (proxied by the growth of productivity) reduces employment growth. We demonstrate that the regressions they estimate are problematic because they approximate an accounting identity. One or two variables in the identity (output growth or both output growth and capital growth) are omitted, which implies that the coefficient of productivity growth suffers from omitted-variable bias. As the omitted variable is known, we can have a good idea of what the statistical results must be. We conclude that, unfortunately, their work does not shed light on the question they address. JEL codes : E24, O30, O47","PeriodicalId":44488,"journal":{"name":"PSL Quarterly Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What do tests of the relationship between employment and technical progress hide\",\"authors\":\"J. Felipe, Donna Faye Bajaro, Gemma Estrada, J. Mccombie\",\"doi\":\"10.13133/2037-3643_73.295_5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"R The debate about whether technical progress causes technological unemployment, as the Luddites argued in the early 19 th century, has recently resurfaced in the context of new technologies and automation and the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. We review the main issues and then consider in detail the studies of Autor and Salomons (2017, 2018). They find that after both direct and indirect effects are accounted for, technical change is, on the aggregate, employment-augmenting. They find no evidence that technical change (proxied by the growth of productivity) reduces employment growth. We demonstrate that the regressions they estimate are problematic because they approximate an accounting identity. One or two variables in the identity (output growth or both output growth and capital growth) are omitted, which implies that the coefficient of productivity growth suffers from omitted-variable bias. As the omitted variable is known, we can have a good idea of what the statistical results must be. We conclude that, unfortunately, their work does not shed light on the question they address. JEL codes : E24, O30, O47\",\"PeriodicalId\":44488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSL Quarterly Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSL Quarterly Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13133/2037-3643_73.295_5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSL Quarterly Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13133/2037-3643_73.295_5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
What do tests of the relationship between employment and technical progress hide
R The debate about whether technical progress causes technological unemployment, as the Luddites argued in the early 19 th century, has recently resurfaced in the context of new technologies and automation and the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. We review the main issues and then consider in detail the studies of Autor and Salomons (2017, 2018). They find that after both direct and indirect effects are accounted for, technical change is, on the aggregate, employment-augmenting. They find no evidence that technical change (proxied by the growth of productivity) reduces employment growth. We demonstrate that the regressions they estimate are problematic because they approximate an accounting identity. One or two variables in the identity (output growth or both output growth and capital growth) are omitted, which implies that the coefficient of productivity growth suffers from omitted-variable bias. As the omitted variable is known, we can have a good idea of what the statistical results must be. We conclude that, unfortunately, their work does not shed light on the question they address. JEL codes : E24, O30, O47