Luddite or technophile?—policy preferences for governing technology-driven economic change

IF 3.2 2区经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Socio-Economic Review Pub Date : 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1093/ser/mwae025

Jaewook Lee

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent robotics and artificial intelligence advancements have exacerbated fears of technology-driven unemployment and inequality. However, the relationship between automation risks and regulatory policy support remains inconclusive. Moreover, the role of institutional safety net in shaping this connection, and factors influencing preference shifts regarding automation, remain understudied. This study conducts an online survey experiment in the UK and Sweden to address these gaps. First, we find subjective concern, and occupational risks combined with perceived weaker labor market safeguards, lead to calls for automation restriction and job loss compensation. These trends are particularly pronounced in the UK, where institutional protection for workers is less robust. Second, people support accelerating technology-driven change when they see its benefits shared widely, but this shift is mainly observed among individuals relatively safer from automation risks. Our findings suggest strengthening the institutional safety net and envisioning equitable benefit-sharing are crucial for moderating public anxiety toward technology-driven economic change.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

是 "卢德分子 "还是 "技术狂热者"--管理技术驱动的经济变革的政策偏好

最近的机器人技术和人工智能进步加剧了人们对技术驱动的失业和不平等的担忧。然而，自动化风险与监管政策支持之间的关系仍无定论。此外，机构安全网在形成这种关系中的作用以及影响自动化偏好转变的因素仍未得到充分研究。本研究在英国和瑞典进行了一项在线调查实验，以弥补这些不足。首先，我们发现，主观担忧、职业风险以及认为较弱的劳动力市场保障措施会导致限制自动化和失业补偿的呼声。这些趋势在英国尤为明显，因为英国对工人的制度性保护较弱。其次，当人们看到技术驱动的变革所带来的好处被广泛分享时，他们会支持加速技术驱动的变革，但这种转变主要出现在相对更安全地避免自动化风险的人群中。我们的研究结果表明，加强制度安全网和设想公平的利益共享对于缓和公众对技术驱动的经济变革的焦虑至关重要。

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

Socio-Economic Review Multiple-

CiteScore

6.80

自引率

10.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Originating in the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE), Socio-Economic Review (SER) is part of a broader movement in the social sciences for the rediscovery of the socio-political foundations of the economy. Devoted to the advancement of socio-economics, it deals with the analytical, political and moral questions arising at the intersection between economy and society. Articles in SER explore how the economy is or should be governed by social relations, institutional rules, political decisions, and cultural values. They also consider how the economy in turn affects the society of which it is part, for example by breaking up old institutional forms and giving rise to new ones. The domain of the journal is deliberately broadly conceived, so new variations to its general theme may be discovered and editors can learn from the papers that readers submit. To enhance international dialogue, Socio-Economic Review accepts the submission of translated articles that are simultaneously published in a language other than English. In pursuit of its program, SER is eager to promote interdisciplinary dialogue between sociology, economics, political science and moral philosophy, through both empirical and theoretical work. Empirical papers may be qualitative as well as quantitative, and theoretical papers will not be confined to deductive model-building. Papers suggestive of more generalizable insights into the economy as a domain of social action will be preferred over narrowly specialized work. While firmly committed to the highest standards of scholarly excellence, Socio-Economic Review encourages discussion of the practical and ethical dimensions of economic action, with the intention to contribute to both the advancement of social science and the building of a good economy in a good society.