Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor.

Picture of David Autor
David Autor
Picture of James E. Bessen
James E. Bessen
Picture of Erik Brynjolfsson
Erik Brynjolfsson
Picture of Manuel Cebrian
Manuel Cebrian
Picture of David J. Deming
David J. Deming
Picture of Maryann Feldman
Maryann Feldman
Picture of Matthew Groh
Matthew Groh
Picture of José Lobo
José Lobo
Picture of Esteban Moro
Esteban Moro
Picture of Dashun Wang
Dashun Wang
Picture of Hyejin Youn
Hyejin Youn
Picture of Iyad Rahwan
Iyad Rahwan
Teaser image

Abstract

Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and automation technologies have the potential to significantly disrupt labor markets. While AI and automation can augment the productivity of some workers, they can replace the work done by others and will likely transform almost all occupations at least to some degree. Rising automation is happening in a period of growing economic inequality, raising fears of mass technological unemployment and a renewed call for policy efforts to address the consequences of technological change. In this paper we discuss the barriers that inhibit scientists from measuring the effects of AI and automation on the future of work. These barriers include the lack of high-quality data about the nature of work (e.g., the dynamic requirements of occupations), lack of empirically informed models of key microlevel processes (e.g., skill substitution and human–machine complementarity), and insufficient understanding of how cognitive technologies interact with broader economic dynamics and institutional mechanisms (e.g., urban migration and international trade policy). Overcoming these barriers requires improvements in the longitudinal and spatial resolution of data, as well as refinements to data on workplace skills. These improvements will enable multidisciplinary research to quantitatively monitor and predict the complex evolution of work in tandem with technological progress. Finally, given the fundamental uncertainty in predicting technological change, we recommend developing a decision framework that focuses on resilience to unexpected scenarios in addition to general equilibrium behavior.

Materials