Although technology has long affected the labor force, recent advances in artificial intelligence and robotics are heightening concerns about automation replacing a growing number of occupations, including highly skilled or “knowledge-based” jobs.
Of 700 occupations in the US, 47 percent are at “high risk” from automation, a 2013 Oxford University study said.
A McKinsey study released this year offered a similar view, saying “about half” of activities in the world’s workforce “could potentially be automated by adapting currently demonstrated technologies,” although only about 5 percent of jobs could be “fully automated.”
Another report by PwC this month concluded that about a third of jobs in the US, Germany and Britain could be eliminated by automation by the early 2030s, with losses concentrated in transportation and storage, manufacturing and wholesale and retail trades.
However, experts warn that such studies might fail to grasp the full extent of the risks to the working population.
“The studies are underestimating the impact of technology — some 80 to 90 percent of jobs will be eliminated in the next 10 to 15 years,” said Vivek Wadhwa, a tech entrepreneur and faculty member at Carnegie Mellon University in Silicon Valley.
“Artificial intelligence is moving a lot faster than anyone had expected,” Wadhwa said.
Warnings of dire social consequences from automation have also come from the likes of physicist Stephen Hawking, tech entrepreneur Elon Musk and others.
Hebrew University of Jerusalem historian Yuval Harari writes in his book, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, that technology would lead to “superfluous people” as “intelligent non-conscious algorithms” improve.
“As algorithms push humans out of the job market, wealth and power might become concentrated in the hands of the tiny elite that owns the all-powerful algorithms, creating unprecedented social and political inequality,” he wrote.
He points to the Oxford study, estimating a high probability of job loss to automation — cashiers at 97 percent, paralegals at 94 percent and bakers at 89 percent, for example.
Boston University economist and researcher James Bessen dismisses alarmist predictions, contending that advances in technology generally lead to more jobs, even if the nature of work changes.
His research found that automated teller machines did not decrease bank tellers’ employment, and that automation of textile mills in the 19th century led to an increase in weaving jobs because it created more demand.
However, he acknowledged that “the new jobs being created need higher skills.”
Former US president Barack Obama’s council of economic advisers also warned last year that most jobs paying less than US$20 an hour “would come under pressure from automation.”
Although the net impact of robots remains unclear, tech leaders and others are debating how to deal with the potential job displacement.
Microsoft founder Bill Gates said last month that he supports a “robot tax,” an idea floated in Europe.
“You don’t want to be taxing the machines because they enable people to earn higher wages,” Bessen said. “If you tax machines, you will slow the beneficial side of the process.”
Peter Diamandis, chairman of the X Prize Foundation for technical innovation and founder of the Silicon Valley think-tank Singularity University, is among those calling for a universal basic income to compensate people for job losses.
Offering income guarantees “will be one of many tools empowering self-actualization at scale,” he said in a blog post.
Wadhwa says the problems run deeper and would require more creative solutions.
“A basic income won’t solve the social problems of joblessness because people’s identity revolves around our jobs,” he said.
Bessen says reversing the trends of the past decades, where high-skilled jobs gain at the expense of others, pose a “big challenge.”
“It’s entirely possible we can meet the challenge,” he said. “But the evidence in the past 20 years is that things are moving in the wrong direction.” |
Inquiry list
CYRUS Facebook INDUSTRIE 4.0/AUTOMATIC OPTIC INSPECTION
