Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Maarten Goos
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
What Happens to Workers at Firms that Automate?
UnavailablePublisher: Journals Gateway
The Review of Economics and Statistics (2025) 107 (1): 125–141.
Published: 03 January 2025
FIGURES
| View all 5
Abstract
View articletitled, What Happens to Workers at Firms that Automate?
View
PDF
for article titled, What Happens to Workers at Firms that Automate?
We estimate the impact of firm-level automation on individual worker outcomes by combining Dutch microdata with a direct measure of automation expenditures covering all private nonfinancial sector firms. Using a novel difference-in-differences event-study design leveraging lumpy investment, we find that automation increases the probability of incumbent workers separating from their employers. Workers experience a five-year cumulative wage income loss of 9% of one year’s earnings, driven by decreases in days worked. These adverse impacts of automation are larger in smaller firms, and for older and middle-educated workers. By contrast, no such losses are found for firms’ investments in computers.
Includes: Supplementary data
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
The Review of Economics and Statistics (2007) 89 (1): 118–133.
Published: 01 February 2007
Abstract
View articletitled, Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain
View
PDF
for article titled, Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain
This paper shows that the United Kingdom since 1975 has exhibited a pattern of job polarization with rises in employment shares in the highest- and lowest-wage occupations. This is not entirely consistent with the idea of skill-biased technical change as a hypothesis about the impact of technology on the labor market. We argue that the “routinization” hypothesis recently proposed by Autor, Levy, and Murnane (2003) is a better explanation of job polarization, though other factors may also be important. We show that job polarization can explain one-third of the rise in the log(50/10) wage differential and one-half of the rise in the log(90/50).