Workforce automation risks across race and gender in the United States

IF 0.9 4区经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS American Journal of Economics and Sociology Pub Date : 2023-11-22 DOI:10.1111/ajes.12554

Ian P. McManus

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although the effects of automation on the future of work have received considerable attention, little research has been conducted on the costs of this technological transformation for different populations of workers. This article makes an important contribution as one of the first to analyze the intersectional effects of workforce automation across race and gender in the United States. Multilevel survey data models are employed using two distinct measures of automation job displacement risk for over 1.4 million Americans across 385 occupations. This research demonstrates that the intersection of race and gender matters for individual automation risks. Education, age, disability, and nativity are also significant. These findings indicate that labor market outcomes of job automation will be based not only on differences in human capital but critically on socially constructed identities as well.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

美国不同种族和性别的劳动力自动化风险

尽管自动化对未来工作的影响受到了相当大的关注，但很少有人研究这种技术变革对不同工人群体的成本。这篇文章作为第一个分析美国跨种族和性别的劳动力自动化的交叉效应的文章之一做出了重要贡献。采用多层次调查数据模型，对385个职业的140多万美国人进行了两种不同的自动化工作取代风险测量。这项研究表明，种族和性别的交集对个人自动化风险很重要。教育、年龄、残疾和出生也很重要。这些发现表明，工作自动化对劳动力市场的影响不仅取决于人力资本的差异，还取决于社会建构的身份。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

American Journal of Economics and Sociology Multiple-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) was founded in 1941, with support from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, to encourage the development of transdisciplinary solutions to social problems. In the introduction to the first issue, John Dewey observed that “the hostile state of the world and the intellectual division that has been built up in so-called ‘social science,’ are … reflections and expressions of the same fundamental causes.” Dewey commended this journal for its intention to promote “synthesis in the social field.” Dewey wrote those words almost six decades after the social science associations split off from the American Historical Association in pursuit of value-free knowledge derived from specialized disciplines. Since he wrote them, academic or disciplinary specialization has become even more pronounced. Multi-disciplinary work is superficially extolled in major universities, but practices and incentives still favor highly specialized work. The result is that academia has become a bastion of analytic excellence, breaking phenomena into components for intensive investigation, but it contributes little synthetic or holistic understanding that can aid society in finding solutions to contemporary problems. Analytic work remains important, but in response to the current lop-sided emphasis on specialization, the board of AJES has decided to return to its roots by emphasizing a more integrated and practical approach to knowledge.

期刊最新文献

Issue Information Issue Information Supply chain digitalization and corporate ESG performance Configurational paths of entrepreneurial activity: An analysis based on the technology–organization–environment framework Digital financial inclusion, rural consumption and economic growth in China