2018年-IMF国际货币组织全球_The_Exposure_to_Routinization_Labor_Market_Implications_for_Developed_and_Developing_Economies_39页_1mb

IMF Working Paper Summary: The Exposure to Routinization: Labor Market Implications for Developed and Developing Economies

Core Content

This working paper by Mitali Das and Benjamin Hilgenstock explores the impact of routinization—the automation of routine tasks—on labor market polarization in developed and developing economies. The paper introduces a new measure of routinization exposure and examines its implications for employment and wage dynamics.

Main Points

1. Definition of Routinization Exposure

• Routinization refers to the risk of jobs being automated by information and computer technology (ICT).
• The measure of exposure is based on routine task intensity (RTI) scores assigned to occupations.
• These scores are derived from the U.S. Department of Labor's Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT), and reflect the likelihood of automation based on the codifiability of tasks.

2. Key Findings

• Developing economies are significantly less exposed to routinization than developed economies.
• Initial exposure to routinization is a strong predictor of long-term exposure.
• In highly exposed countries, polarization dynamics are strong, with declining routine exposure over time.
• In low-exposed countries, globalization and structural transformation dominate, leading to increasing routine exposure.
• Routine exposures are converging between developed and developing economies, with the latter showing rising exposure over time.

3. Stylized Facts

• Agriculture has the lowest routinization exposure due to the manual and on-site nature of tasks.
• Manufacturing, financial services, and transportation and storage have the highest routinization exposure because of precise, well-understood procedures.
• Routine exposure has been higher in developed economies but has converged over time, suggesting increasing risk of automation in developing countries.

4. Drivers of Change in Routinization Exposure

• The decline in the price of capital goods and technological adoption are key factors in developed economies.
• In developing economies, structural transformation and globalization are the main drivers of increasing routinization exposure.
• Factor substitution elasticity is lower in developing economies, limiting the scope for automation-driven labor displacement.

5. Implications for Labor Markets

• The lack of polarization in developing economies so far is attributed to low initial exposure and limited factor substitution.
• However, rising routinization exposure in these economies suggests a potential risk of future polarization, which could affect productivity, growth, and inequality.
• The structural transformation hypothesis is empirically supported as an alternative explanation for polarization in developing economies.

Key Information

Data and Methodology

• The paper uses national censuses, labor force surveys, and international databases to calculate routinization exposure for 160 countries and 14 industries.

• The exposure is measured at 1-digit occupation levels using harmonized ISCO-88 classifications.

• The RTI score is calculated as:
  $$
  R T I _ {k} = \ln \left(T _ {k} ^ {R}\right) - \ln \left(T _ {k} ^ {M}\right) - \ln \left(T _ {k} ^ {A}\right)
  $$
  where $T_{k}^{R}$, $T_{k}^{M}$, and $T_{k}^{A}$ represent routine, manual, and abstract task inputs in occupation $k$.

• Aggregate routinization scores are calculated by weighting RTI scores with employment shares:
  $$
  R T I _ {j i t} = \sum_ {l} \omega_ {l j i t} \times R T I _ {l}, \quad R T I _ {i t} = \sum_ {l} \omega_ {l i t} \times R T I _ {l}
  $$
  where $\omega_{ljit}$ and $\omega_{lit}$ are the employment shares of occupation $l$ in industry $j$, country $i$, at time $t$.

Implications

• The initial exposure to routinization can serve as a forward-looking indicator of future labor market developments.
• The convergence of routinization exposure between developed and developing economies raises concerns about future labor market polarization in the latter.

Conclusion

The paper contributes to the understanding of labor market polarization by:

1. Introducing a new, consistent, and comparable measure of routinization exposure.
2. Highlighting systematic differences in routinization exposure between developed and developing economies.
3. Identifying key drivers of routinization exposure in both types of economies.
4. Showing that developing economies are not immune to the effects of routinization, and that rising exposure may indicate future polarization.

The authors suggest that structural transformation may be a dominant force in developing economies, leading to increased routinization exposure, and that continued trends could have significant consequences for labor markets in these economies.

References and Further Reading

• JEL Classification Numbers: E0, F16, J0, J21, O33
• Keywords: Polarization, routine occupations, automation, structural transformation, information technology, globalization, inequality
• Authors' Email Addresses: mdas@imf.org, bhilgenstock@imf.org

Figures and Tables

• Figure 1: Aggregate Routinization Scores Across Occupations
• Figure 2: Distribution of Routine Exposure Across Industries
• Figure 3: Evolution of Routine Exposure Across Country Groups
• Table 1: Summary Statistics
• Table 2: Determinants of Long-Run Changes in Routine Exposure
• Table 3: Initial Routine Exposure and Changes in Occupational Employment Shares
• Table 4: Determinants of Long-Run Changes in Occupational Employment Shares

This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of how automation and routinization are reshaping labor markets in both developed and developing economies.