Texnologik ishsizlik - Technological unemployment

21-asrda robotlar nafaqat ishlab chiqarishda, balki xizmat ko'rsatish sohasida ham, masalan, sog'liqni saqlashda o'z rollarini bajarishni boshlaydilar.

Texnologik ishsizlik sabab bo'lgan ish joylarini yo'qotishdir texnologik o'zgarish. Bu asosiy turi tarkibiy ishsizlik.

Texnologik o'zgarishlar odatda mehnatni tejaydigan "mexanik-mushak" mashinalari yoki yanada samaraliroq "mexanik-aql" jarayonlarini joriy etishni o'z ichiga oladi (avtomatlashtirish ) va bu jarayonlarda odamlarning roli minimallashtiriladi.[1] Avtoulov otlarni asta-sekin eskirganidek, odamlarning ish joylari ham butun ta'sirida bo'lgan zamonaviy tarix. Tarixiy misollarga quyidagilar kiradi hunarmand to'quvchilar joriy etilganidan keyin qashshoqlikka tushdi mexanizatsiyalashgan dastgohlar. Davomida Ikkinchi jahon urushi, Alan Turing "s Bomba mashina bir necha soat ichida minglab yillik shifrlangan ma'lumotlarni siqib va ​​dekodlashdi. Texnologik ishsizlikning zamonaviy namunasi - chakana kassalarni ko'chirish o'z-o'ziga xizmat qilish.

Texnologik o'zgarish ish joyining qisqa muddatli yo'qolishiga olib kelishi mumkinligi keng qabul qilingan. Bu ishsizlikning doimiy o'sishiga olib kelishi mumkin degan qarash uzoq vaqtdan beri ziddiyatli bo'lib kelgan. Texnologik ishsizlik bo'yicha munozaralar ishtirokchilarini umuman optimistlar va pessimistlarga bo'lish mumkin. Optimistlar qisqa vaqt ichida innovatsiyalar ish joylariga xalaqit berishi mumkinligiga rozilik bildiradi, ammo har xil kompensatsiya ta'sirlari ish joylariga hech qachon uzoq muddatli salbiy ta'sir ko'rsatmasligini ta'minlaydi. Holbuki pessimistlar hech bo'lmaganda ba'zi bir hollarda yangi texnologiyalar bandlikdagi ishchilar sonining doimiy pasayishiga olib kelishi mumkinligi haqida bahslashing. Tomonidan "texnologik ishsizlik" iborasi ommalashgan Jon Maynard Keyns o'tgan asrning 30-yillarida, bu "noto'g'ri tuzatishning faqat vaqtinchalik bosqichi" deb aytgan.[2] Shunga qaramay, hech bo'lmaganda odam mehnatini siqib chiqaradigan mashinalar masalasi muhokama qilinmoqda Aristotel vaqt.

XVIII asrga qadar ham elita, ham oddiy odamlar hech bo'lmaganda masala paydo bo'lgan hollarda, umuman texnologik ishsizlik bo'yicha pessimistik nuqtai nazarga ega bo'lar edi. Hozirgi zamongacha bo'lgan tarixning aksariyat qismida ishsizlik darajasi past bo'lganligi sababli, bu mavzu kamdan-kam hollarda eng muhim muammo edi. XVIII asrda, ayniqsa, o'sha paytdagi Buyuk Britaniyada ommaviy ishsizlikning o'sishi bilan mashinalarning ish joylariga ta'siridan qo'rqish kuchaygan. Sanoat inqilobi. Shunga qaramay, ba'zi iqtisodiy mutafakkirlar ushbu innovatsiyalar ish joylariga salbiy ta'sir ko'rsatmaydi deb da'vo qilib, ushbu qo'rquvga qarshi bahslasha boshladilar. Ushbu dalillar 19-asrning boshlarida rasmiylashtirildi klassik iqtisodchilar. 19-asrning ikkinchi yarmi davomida texnika taraqqiyoti jamiyatning barcha qatlamlariga, shu jumladan ishchilar sinfiga ham foyda keltirishi tobora ravshanlashdi. Innovatsiyalarning salbiy ta'siridan xavotir kamaygan. Atama "Luddit yanglishlik "innovatsiya bandlikka doimiy zararli ta'sir ko'rsatishi mumkin degan fikrni tavsiflash uchun ishlab chiqilgan.

Texnologiyalar uzoq muddatli ishsizlikka olib kelishi ehtimoldan yiroq degan qarash oz sonli iqtisodchilar tomonidan takrorlanib kelinmoqda. 1800-yillarning boshlarida bularga kiritilgan Rikardo o'zi. 1930 va 60-yillarda avj olgan munozaralarning qisqacha kuchayishi paytida o'nlab iqtisodchilar texnologik ishsizlik haqida ogohlantirdilar. Xususan, Evropada, yigirmanchi asrning yigirma o'n yilligida yana ogohlantirishlar mavjud edi, chunki sharhlovchilar ko'plab sanoatlashgan mamlakatlar tomonidan 1970-yillardan beri ishsizlikning doimiy o'sishini ta'kidladilar. Shunga qaramay, ham professional iqtisodchilarning, ham manfaatdor keng jamoatchilikning aniq ko'pchiligi 20-asrning aksariyat qismida optimistik fikrda edilar.

21-asrning ikkinchi o'n yilligida butun dunyo bo'ylab texnologik ishsizlik kuchayishi mumkin degan bir qator tadqiqotlar e'lon qilindi. Oksford professorlari Karl Benedikt Frey va Maykl Osborne, masalan, AQShdagi ish joylarining 47 foizini avtomatlashtirish xavfi mavjud deb taxmin qilishgan.[3] Biroq, ularning topilmalari tez-tez noto'g'ri talqin qilinmoqda va PBS NewsHours-da ular yana aniqladilarki, ularning topilmalari kelajakdagi texnologik ishsizlikni anglatmaydi.[4] Ko'pgina iqtisodchilar va sharhlovchilar hanuzgacha bunday qo'rquvlar asossiz deb ta'kidlashsa-da, oldingi ikki asrning aksariyat qismida keng qabul qilinganidek, texnologik ishsizlikdan tashvish yana bir bor ortib bormoqda.[5][6][7] Hisobot Simli 2017 yilda iqtisodchi kabi bilimdon odamlarning so'zlarini keltiradi Gen Sperling va menejment professori Endryu Makafi mavjud va yaqinlashib kelayotgan ish yo'qotishlarini avtomatlashtirish bilan ishlash "muhim muammo" degan fikrda.[8] Moliya kotibining so'nggi da'vosi to'g'risida Stiv Mnuchin avtomatlashtirish "keyingi 50 yoki 100 yil davomida iqtisodiyotga katta ta'sir ko'rsatmaydi", deydi Makafi, "men sohada bunga ishonadigan hech kim bilan gaplashmayman".[8] Yaqinda amalga oshirilgan texnologik yangiliklar odamlarni professional, oq tanli, past malakali, ijodiy sohalar va boshqa "aqliy ish" lar bilan eskirishi mumkin.[9][7]

The Jahon banki "s Jahon taraqqiyoti hisoboti 2019 avtomatlashtirish ishchilarni ishdan bo'shatganda, texnologik innovatsiyalar ko'proq yangi sanoat va ish joylarini muvozanatda yaratadi.[10]

Munozaralar doirasidagi masalalar

Bandlikka uzoq muddatli ta'sir

Ish joylarini yo'qotishdan ko'proq ish o'rinlarini yo'qotadigan tarmoqlar mavjud. Dasturiy ta'minot texnologiyasining umumiy maqsadi, hatto u yaratadigan sanoat va ish joylari ham abadiy emasligini anglatadi.

Lourens Summers[11]

Texnologik ish bilan bog'liq munozaralarning barcha ishtirokchilari ish joylarining vaqtincha yo'qotilishi texnologik yangilik natijasida kelib chiqishi mumkin degan fikrga kelishmoqda. Xuddi shunday, yangilik ba'zan ishchilarga ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatishi haqida hech qanday tortishuv yo'q. Qarama-qarshiliklar innovatsiyalarning umumiy bandlikka doimiy salbiy ta'sir ko'rsatishi mumkinligiga e'tibor qaratadi. Doimiy ishsizlik darajasini empirik ravishda aniqlash mumkin, ammo sabablari munozaraga sabab bo'ladi. Optimistlar qisqa muddatli ishsizlikni yangilik tufayli kelib chiqishi mumkin deb qabul qiladilar, ammo bir muncha vaqt o'tgach, kompensatsiya ta'siri har doim kamida yo'q qilingan ish hajmini yaratadi. Ushbu optimistik qarash doimiy ravishda e'tirozga uchragan bo'lsa-da, 19 va 20-asrlarning aksariyat qismida asosiy iqtisodchilar orasida hukmronlik qilgan.[12][13] Masalan, mehnat iqtisodchilari Jeykob Mincer va Stephan Danninger tomonidan olingan mikro-ma'lumotlardan foydalangan holda empirik tadqiqot ishlab chiqildi Daromadlar dinamikasini panelli o'rganish va, agar qisqa muddatda texnologik taraqqiyot yalpi ishsizlikka noaniq ta'sir ko'rsatsa-da, u uzoq muddatda ishsizlikni kamaytiradi. Ammo ular 5 yillik kechikishni o'z ichiga olganda, texnologiyaning qisqa muddatli bandlik ta'sirini qo'llab-quvvatlovchi dalillar ham yo'q bo'lib ketadigandek, texnologik ishsizlik "afsona bo'lib tuyuladi".[14]

Tushunchasi tarkibiy ishsizlik, ishsizlikning doimiy darajasi, hatto eng yuqori nuqtasida ham yo'qolmaydi biznes tsikli, 1960-yillarda mashhur bo'ldi. Pessimistlar uchun texnologik ishsizlik tarkibiy ishsizlikning keng ko'lamli hodisalarini qo'zg'atadigan omillardan biridir. 1980-yillardan boshlab hatto optimistik iqtisodchilar ham rivojlangan iqtisodiyotlarda tarkibiy ishsizlik haqiqatan ham o'sganligini (yo'qolganlar) tobora ko'proq qabul qilmoqdalar, ammo ular buni aybdor deb bilishadi globallashuv va offshoring texnologik o'zgarishlardan ko'ra. Boshqalar da'vo qilishlaricha, ishsizlikning doimiy o'sishining asosiy sababi hukumatlar ta'qib qilishni istamasliklari edi kengaytirish siyosati beri keynesianizmning siljishi bu 70-yillarda va 80-yillarning boshlarida sodir bo'lgan.[12][15][16] 21-asrda va ayniqsa 2013 yildan beri pessimistlar butun dunyo bo'ylab davom etayotgan texnologik ishsizlikning o'sib borayotgan tahdidi ekanligi tobora ortib borayotgani haqida bahslashmoqdalar.[13][17][18][19]

Kompensatsiya ta'siri

Jon Kay milodiy 1753 yil Fly Shuttle ixtirochisi, tomonidan Ford Madoks Braun, ixtirochining tasviri Jon Kay erkaklar uni mehnatini tejaydigan mexanik dastgohdan g'azablangan xaloyiqdan qochib qutulish uchun uni uyidan olib ketishayotganida, xotinini o'pish. Hozirda kompensatsiya effektlari keng tushunilmagan.

Kompensatsiya effektlari - bu ishchilarga dastlab yangi texnologiyalar sababli ish joylarini yo'qotishlarini "qoplaydigan" innovatsiyalarning mehnatga qulay oqibatlari. 1820-yillarda bir nechta kompensatsiya effektlari tasvirlangan Demoq Rikardoning uzoq muddatli texnologik ishsizlik yuzaga kelishi mumkin degan bayonotiga javoban. Ko'p o'tmay, tomonidan butun effektlar tizimi ishlab chiqildi Ramsey Makkullox. Tizim tomonidan "kompensatsiya nazariyasi" deb nomlangan Marks, u hech qanday ta'sir ko'rsatishi kafolatlanmaganligini ta'kidlab, g'oyalarga hujum qilishni boshladi. Kompensatsiya ta'sirining samaradorligi bo'yicha kelishmovchilik o'sha paytdan beri texnologik ishsizlik bo'yicha akademik munozaralarning markaziy qismi bo'lib qolmoqda.[16][20]

Kompensatsiya ta'siriga quyidagilar kiradi:

  1. Yangi mashinalar orqali. (Innovatsiyalarni talab qiladigan yangi uskunalarni yaratish uchun zarur bo'lgan mehnat).
  2. Yangi investitsiyalar bo'yicha. (Xarajatlarni tejash va shu sababli yangi texnologiyadan olinadigan foydani faollashtirish.)
  3. Ish haqining o'zgarishi bo'yicha. (Ishsizlik yuzaga kelgan hollarda, bu ish haqining pasayishiga olib kelishi mumkin, shuning uchun ko'proq ishchilarni hozirgi arzon narxda qayta ish bilan ta'minlashga imkon beradi. Boshqa tomondan, ba'zan ishchilar rentabelligi oshgani sayin ishchilarning ish haqi o'sishidan bahramand bo'lishadi. daromadlarning ko'payishi va shuning uchun xarajatlarning ko'payishi, bu esa o'z navbatida ish o'rinlarini yaratishga undaydi.)
  4. Arzon narxlar bo'yicha. (Bu keyinchalik talabni ko'payishiga va shuning uchun ko'proq ish bilan ta'minlanishiga olib keladi.) Narxlarning pasayishi ham ish haqi pasayishini qoplashga yordam beradi, chunki arzon tovarlar ishchilarning sotib olish qobiliyatini oshiradi.
  5. Yangi mahsulotlar bo'yicha. (Innovatsiyalar to'g'ridan-to'g'ri yangi ish o'rinlarini yaratadigan joyda).

"Yangi mashinalarda" effekti endi iqtisodchilar tomonidan kamdan-kam muhokama qilinadi; Marks buni muvaffaqiyatli rad etganligi ko'pincha qabul qilinadi.[16] Hatto pessimistlar ham "yangi mahsulotlar bo'yicha" ta'siri bilan bog'liq bo'lgan mahsulotni yangilash ba'zan bandlikka ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatishi mumkinligini tan olishadi. "Jarayon" va "mahsulot" yangiliklari o'rtasida muhim farq bo'lishi mumkin.[eslatma 1] Lotin Amerikasidan olingan dalillarga ko'ra, mahsulotni yangilash jarayonning yangilanishidan ko'ra, bandlik darajasining o'sishiga sezilarli darajada yordam beradi.[21] Ishchilarning ish joylarini yo'qotishlarini qoplashda boshqa ta'sirlarning darajasi qanchalik muvaffaqiyatli ekanligi zamonaviy iqtisodiyot tarixi davomida keng muhokama qilingan; masala hali ham hal qilinmagan.[16][22] Kompensatsiya ta'sirini potentsial ravishda to'ldiradigan bunday ta'sirlardan biri bu ishdir ko'paytiruvchi. Enriko Moretti tomonidan ishlab chiqilgan tadqiqotlarga ko'ra, ma'lum bir shaharda yuqori texnologiyalar sohalarida har bir qo'shimcha malakali ish o'rinlari yaratilishi bilan, savdoga yaroqsiz sohada ikkitadan ortiq ish o'rinlari yaratiladi. Uning topilmalari shuni ko'rsatadiki, texnologik o'sish va natijada yuqori texnologiyali sohalarda yangi ish o'rinlari yaratish muhimroq bo'lishi mumkin parchalanish ta'siri kutganimizdan ko'ra.[23] Evropadan keltirilgan dalillar, shuningdek, ish joyining multiplikatorining bunday samarasini qo'llab-quvvatlamoqda, mahalliy yuqori texnologiyali ish joylari beshta qo'shimcha qo'shimcha ravishda past texnologik ish o'rinlarini yaratishi mumkinligini ko'rsatmoqda.[24]

Hozirgi kunda ko'plab iqtisodchilar texnologik ishsizlik haqida pessimistik fikrda, kompensatsiya effektlari asosan optimizmlar 19 va 20-asrlarda aytganidek ishlaydi deb qabul qilmoqdalar. Shunga qaramay, ular kompyuterlashtirishning paydo bo'lishi kompensatsiya effektlari endi unchalik samarasiz ekanligini anglatadi. Ushbu dalilning dastlabki namunasi tomonidan qilingan Vasili Leontiv 1983 yilda. U bir muncha buzilishlardan keyin avansni tan oldi mexanizatsiya Sanoat inqilobi davrida ish kuchiga bo'lgan talab oshdi, shuningdek, ortib boradigan oqibatlar tufayli ish haqi oshdi hosildorlik. Dastlabki mashinalar mushaklarning kuchiga bo'lgan talabni pasaytirgan bo'lsa-da, ular aqlsiz edilar va samarali ishlash uchun inson operatorlarining katta qo'shinlariga muhtoj edilar. Kompyuterlar ish joyiga kiritilganidan beri, nafaqat mushak kuchiga, balki inson miyasiga ham ehtiyoj kam. Demak, hosildorlik o'sishda davom etayotgan bo'lsa ham, inson mehnatiga bo'lgan talabning pastligi ish haqi va ish bilan bandlikni anglatishi mumkin.[16][18][25] Biroq, ushbu dalilni so'nggi empirik tadqiqotlar to'liq qo'llab-quvvatlamaydi. Bir tadqiqot Erik Brynjolfsson va Lorin M. Xitt 2003 yilda kompyuterlashtirishning firma darajasida o'lchangan mahsuldorlik va ishlab chiqarish o'sishiga qisqa muddatli ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatadigan to'g'ridan-to'g'ri dalillar keltirilgan. Bundan tashqari, ular kompyuterlashtirish va texnologik o'zgarishlarning uzoq muddatli mahsuldorligi yanada katta bo'lishi mumkin.

Ludditlarning xatolari

Agar Luddit xatolari haqiqat bo'lsa, biz hammamiz ishsiz qolamiz, chunki unumdorlik ikki asrdan beri oshib bormoqda.

Aleks Tabarrok[26]

Ba'zan "ludditlarning xatoligi" atamasi uzoq muddatli texnologik ishsizlikdan xavotirga tushganlar tovon ta'sirini hisobga olmaganliklari sababli xatoga yo'l qo'yishmoqda degan fikrni ifodalash uchun ishlatiladi. Ushbu atamani ishlatadigan odamlar odatda texnologik taraqqiyot bandlik darajasiga uzoq muddatli ta'sir ko'rsatmaydi va oxir-oqibat barcha ishchilar uchun ish haqini ko'paytiradi deb umid qilishadi, chunki taraqqiyot jamiyatning umumiy boyligini oshirishga yordam beradi. Bu atama 19-asrning boshlarida paydo bo'lgan Ludditlar. 20-asr va 21-asrning birinchi o'n yilligi davomida iqtisodchilar orasida hukmron fikr uzoq muddatli texnologik ishsizlikka bo'lgan ishonch haqiqatan ham xato. Yaqinda avtomatlashtirishning afzalliklari teng taqsimlanmagan degan qarashni qo'llab-quvvatlash kuchaymoqda.[13][27][28]

Uzoq muddatli qiyinchilik paydo bo'lishi uchun ikkita asosiy asos mavjud. An'anaviy ravishda joylashtirilgan narsa - Ludditlarga (bu ularning fikrlashlarining haqiqatan ham aniq xulosasi bo'ladimi yoki yo'qmi) taalluqlidir, ya'ni cheklangan miqdordagi ish mavjud va agar mashinalar bu ishni qilsalar, hech qanday bo'lishi mumkin emas. odamlar bajarishi uchun qolgan boshqa ishlar. Iqtisodchilar buni buni bir martalik xato, aslida bunday cheklov mavjud emasligini ta'kidladi. Biroq, boshqa bir taxmin shundaki, uzoq muddatli qiyinchiliklar paydo bo'lishi mumkin, bu esa bironta mehnatga aloqasi yo'q. Shu nuqtai nazardan, mavjud bo'lishi mumkin bo'lgan ish hajmi cheksizdir, lekin (1) mashinalar "oson" ishlarning ko'p qismini bajarishi mumkin, (2) "oson" ning ta'rifi axborot texnologiyalari rivojlanib borishi bilan kengayib boradi va (3) "oson" dan tashqarida bo'lgan ish (ko'proq mahorat, iste'dod, bilim va bilimlar o'rtasidagi tushunarli aloqalarni talab qiladigan ish), ko'pchilik odamlar ta'minlay oladigan darajadan kattaroq bilim qobiliyatlarini talab qilishi mumkin, chunki 2-nuqta doimo rivojlanib boradi. Ushbu so'nggi nuqtai nazar ko'plab zamonaviy advokatlar tomonidan uzoq muddatli, tizimli texnologik ishsizlik ehtimoli to'g'risida qo'llab-quvvatlanmoqda.

Malaka darajasi va texnologik ishsizlik

Innovatsiyalarning mehnat bozoriga ta'sirini muhokama qilayotganlar orasida keng tarqalgan nuqtai nazar shundan iboratki, bu asosan malakasi past bo'lganlarga zarar etkazadi, ko'pincha malakali ishchilarga foyda keltiradi. Kabi olimlarning fikriga ko'ra Lourens F. Kats, bu yigirmanchi asrning aksariyat qismi uchun to'g'ri kelgan bo'lishi mumkin, ammo 19-asrda ish joyidagi yangiliklar asosan qimmatbaho hunarmandlarni ko'chirgan va odatda past malakalarga foyda keltirgan. 21-asrning yangiliklari ba'zi bir malakasiz ishlarning o'rnini bosgan bo'lsa, boshqa past malakali kasblar avtomatizatsiyaga chidamli bo'lib qolmoqda, oraliq ko'nikmalarni talab qiladigan oq yoqalar esa avtonom kompyuter dasturlari tomonidan tobora ko'proq bajarilmoqda.[29][30][31]

Biroq ba'zi bir so'nggi tadqiqotlar, masalan, 2015 yilda Georg Graetz va Gay Maykllar tomonidan nashr etilgan maqolada, hech bo'lmaganda ular o'rgangan sohada - sanoat robotlarining ta'siri - innovatsiya yuqori malakali ishchilar uchun ish haqi ko'payib, ishchilarga salbiy ta'sir ko'rsatishi aniqlandi. past va o'rta ko'nikmalar.[32] 2015 yilgi hisobot Karl Benedikt Frey, Maykl Osborne va Citi tadqiqotlari innovatsiyalar asosan o'rta malakali ish joylariga xalaqit bergani bilan kelishib oldilar, ammo yaqin o'n yil ichida avtomatlashtirishning ta'siri past mahoratga ega bo'lganlarga ko'proq tushishini taxmin qildi.[33]

Geoff Kolvin da Forbes kompyuter hech qachon qila olmaydigan ish turiga oid bashoratlar noto'g'ri ekanligini isbotladi. Insonlar qanday qadr-qimmatga ega bo'lishlarini oldindan bilish uchun yaxshiroq yondashuv, masalan, odamlar sudyalar kabi muhim qarorlar uchun javobgar bo'lishini talab qiladigan faoliyatni topishdir. Bosh direktorlar, avtobus haydovchilari va hukumat rahbarlari, yoki bu vazifalarni avtomatlashtirish mumkin bo'lsa ham, inson tabiatini faqat chuqur shaxslararo aloqalar qondirishi mumkin.[34]

Aksincha, boshqalar hatto malakali inson ishchilarining ham eskirganligini ko'rishmoqda. Oksford akademiklari Karl Benedikt Frey va Maykl A Osborne kompyuterlashtirish ishlarning deyarli yarmi ortiqcha bo'lishi mumkinligini taxmin qilishdi;[35] 702 ta kasb baholanib, ular avtomatlashtirish imkoniyati bilan ta'lim va daromad o'rtasidagi o'zaro bog'liqlikni aniqladilar, ofis ishlari va xizmat ko'rsatish ishlari xavf ostida qolmoqda.[36] 2012 yilda hammuassisi Quyosh mikrosistemalari Vinod Xosla avtomatlashtirilgan avtomatlashtirilgan o'qitish natijasida yaqin ikki o'n yillikda tibbiyot shifokorlarining 80% ish joylari yo'qolishini bashorat qildi tibbiy diagnostika dasturi.[37]

Ampirik topilmalar

Asosan mikroiqtisodiy darajada amalga oshirilgan texnologik ishsizlikning ta'sirini aniqlashga qaratilgan ko'plab empirik tadqiqotlar bo'lib o'tdi. Mavjud firma darajasidagi tadqiqotlarning aksariyati texnologik yangiliklarning mehnatga mos xususiyatini topdi. Masalan, nemis iqtisodchilari Stefan Lachenmaier va Horst Rottmann, mahsulot va jarayon innovatsiyalari ish bilan ta'minlashga ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatadi. Ular, shuningdek, jarayon innovatsiyalari mahsulotni ishlab chiqarishga nisbatan yangi ish o'rinlarini yaratish samarasiga ega ekanligini aniqladilar.[38] Ushbu natijani Qo'shma Shtatlarda ham dalillar qo'llab-quvvatlaydi, bu shuni ko'rsatadiki, ishlab chiqaruvchi firmalarning innovatsiyalari ish joylarining umumiy soniga ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatadi, shunchaki firmalarga xos xatti-harakatlar bilan cheklanmaydi.[39]

Biroq, sanoat darajasida tadqiqotchilar texnologik o'zgarishlarning ish samaradorligi bo'yicha turli xil natijalarni topdilar. 2017 yilda Evropaning 11 mamlakatida ishlab chiqarish va xizmat ko'rsatish sohalari bo'yicha olib borilgan tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, texnologik innovatsiyalarning ish bilan ta'minlanishining ijobiy ta'siri faqat o'rta va yuqori texnologiyalar sohalarida mavjud. Shuningdek, bandlik va kapitalni shakllantirish o'rtasida salbiy bog'liqlik mavjud bo'lib, bu texnologik taraqqiyot potentsial ravishda mehnatni tejashga olib kelishi mumkinligini ko'rsatmoqda, chunki bu jarayon innovatsiyasi ko'pincha investitsiyalar tarkibiga kiritiladi.[40]

Texnologik zarbalar va ishsizlik o'rtasidagi bog'liqlikni o'rganish uchun cheklangan makroiqtisodiy tahlil qilingan. Mavjud tadqiqotlarning oz miqdori, ammo aralash natijalarni ko'rsatmoqda. Italiyalik iqtisodchi Marko Vivarelli jarayon innovatsiyasining ishchi kuchini tejash samarasi Italiya iqtisodiyotiga Qo'shma Shtatlarga qaraganda ko'proq salbiy ta'sir qilgan ko'rinadi. Boshqa tomondan, mahsulotni yaratish bo'yicha innovatsiyalarning ish joyini yaratish samarasi Italiyada emas, balki faqat AQShda kuzatilishi mumkin edi.[41] 2013 yildagi yana bir tadqiqot, texnologik o'zgarishlarning doimiy, ishsiz ta'sirini topadi.[42]

Texnologik yangilanish choralari

Texnologik yangilikni miqdoriy ravishda qamrab olishga va hujjatlashtirishga harakat qiladigan to'rtta asosiy yondashuv mavjud. 1999 yilda Jordi Gali tomonidan taklif qilingan va 2005 yilda Nevill Frensis va Valeri A. Rami tomonidan ishlab chiqilgan birinchisi, texnologik zarbalarni aniqlash uchun vektorli avtoregressiyada (VAR) uzoq muddatli cheklovlardan foydalanish, faqatgina texnologiya uzoq muddatli ta'sirga ta'sir qiladi ish unumdorligi.[43][44]

Ikkinchi yondashuv Susanto Basu, John Fernald va Miles Kimball.[45] Ular kengaytirilgan holda texnologiyaning umumiy o'zgarishini yaratadilar Solow qoldiqlari, doimiy bo'lmagan daromad va nomukammal raqobat kabi umumiy, texnologik bo'lmagan ta'sirlarni nazorat qilish.

Dastlab 1999 yilda Jon Shea tomonidan ishlab chiqilgan uchinchi usul to'g'ridan-to'g'ri yondashuvni o'z ichiga oladi va tadqiqot va tajriba-konstruktorlik (AR-GE) xarajatlari va patentga talabnomalar soni kabi kuzatiladigan ko'rsatkichlardan foydalanadi.[46] Texnologik innovatsiyalarning ushbu o'lchovi empirik tadqiqotlarda juda keng qo'llaniladi, chunki u faqat texnologiya uzoq muddatli mahsuldorlikka ta'sir qiladi va taxminiy o'zgarishlarga asoslangan chiqish o'zgarishini juda aniq ushlaydi. Shu bilan birga, AR-GE kabi to'g'ridan-to'g'ri choralar bilan cheklovlar mavjud. Masalan, ilmiy-tadqiqot ishlari faqat innovatsiyalardagi ulushni o'lchaganligi sababli, mahsulotning kiritilgan ko'rsatkich bilan mukammal darajada bog'liqligi ehtimoldan yiroq emas. Bundan tashqari, AR-GE yangi mahsulot yoki xizmatni ishlab chiqish va uni bozorga chiqarish o'rtasidagi noaniq kechikishni qo'lga kirita olmaydi.[47]

Mishel Aleksopulos tomonidan tuzilgan to'rtinchi yondashuv texnologik taraqqiyotni aks ettirish uchun texnologiya va informatika sohalarida nashr etilgan yangi sarlavhalar sonini ko'rib chiqadi, bu esa tadqiqot va tadqiqotlar xarajatlari ma'lumotlariga mos keladi.[48] Ilmiy-tadqiqot ishlari bilan taqqoslaganda, bu ko'rsatkich texnologiyadagi o'zgarishlar orasidagi kechikishni aniqlaydi.

Tarix

XVI asrgacha

Rim imperatori Vespasian, og'ir ishlarni ishdan bo'shatadigan og'ir yuklarni tashishning arzon usulidan voz kechgan

Muallif Gregori Vayolning so'zlariga ko'ra, texnologik ishsizlik fenomeni hech bo'lmaganda g'ildirak ixtiro qilinganidan beri mavjud bo'lishi mumkin.[49] Qadimgi jamiyatlarda o'z mehnati bilan o'zini boqishga qodir bo'lmaganlarning qashshoqligini yo'qotish uchun turli usullar mavjud edi. Qadimgi Xitoy va qadimgi Misr hech bo'lmaganda miloddan avvalgi ikkinchi ming yillikdan kelib chiqqan texnologik ishsizlikka javoban turli xil markazlashtirilgan yordam dasturlari bo'lishi mumkin edi.[50] Qadimgi ibroniylar va tarafdorlari qadimiy veda dini markazlashtirilmagan javoblarga ega bo'lib, kambag'allarga yordam ularning e'tiqodlari bilan rag'batlantirildi.[50] Yilda qadimgi Yunoniston, ko'p sonli erkin ishchilar ikkala ta'sir tufayli o'zlarini ishsiz topishlari mumkin edi qadimiy mehnatni tejash texnologiyasi va qullardan raqobatlashishga ("go'sht va qon mashinalari")[51]). Ba'zan, bu ishsiz ishchilar ochlikdan o'lishgan yoki o'zlarini qullikka majbur qilishgan, ammo boshqa hollarda ularni tarqatish materiallari qo'llab-quvvatlagan. Perikllar qabul qilingan texnologik ishsizlikka javob berdi jamoat ishlari ishsizlarni pullik ish bilan ta'minlash dasturlari. Konservatorlar Periklning dasturlarini davlat pullarini behuda sarflayotgani uchun tanqid qildilar, ammo mag'lubiyatga uchradilar.[52]

Ehtimol, olimning texnologik ishsizlik hodisasini muhokama qilgan dastlabki namunasi Aristotel bilan sodir bo'lishi mumkin. Siyosat agar mashinalar etarlicha rivojlangan bo'lsa, endi inson mehnatiga ehtiyoj qolmaydi.[53]

Yunonlarga o'xshash, qadimgi rimliklar, texnologik ishsizlik muammosiga qashshoqlikni tarqatish orqali tarqatdi. Ba'zida bir necha yuz ming oilani birdaniga shunday qo'llab-quvvatladilar.[50] Ko'pincha, ish o'rinlari to'g'ridan-to'g'ri yaratilardi jamoat ishlari tomonidan boshlangan dasturlar kabi Gracchi. Turli imperatorlar hatto mehnatni tejashga oid yangiliklarni rad etish yoki taqiqlashgacha borishdi.[54][55] Bir misolda, imperator qachon mehnatni tejaydigan ixtironing kiritilishiga to'sqinlik qildi Vespasian og'ir yuklarni arzon narxlarda tashishning yangi usuliga "Siz mening kambag'al yuk tashuvchilarimga nonlarini topishiga ruxsat berishingiz kerak" deb rad etdi.[56] Milodning ikkinchi asrining oxirlarida Rim imperiyasida ishchi kuchi etishmovchiligi rivojlana boshladi va shu paytdan boshlab Evropada ommaviy ishsizlik ming yilliklar davomida kamayganga o'xshaydi.[57]

The o'rta asrlar va erta Uyg'onish davri yangi ixtiro qilingan texnologiyalarni va Klassik davrda deyarli yaratilmagan, eskirgan texnologiyalarni keng tatbiq etishni ko'rdi.[58] Evropada ommaviy ishsizlik XV asrda qisman aholi sonining ko'payishi natijasida va qisman qo'shimcha dehqonchilik uchun erlar mavjudligining o'zgarishi tufayli yana paydo bo'la boshladi. erta to'siqlar.[59] Ishsizlik tahdidi natijasida buzilayotgan yangi texnologiyalarga nisbatan bag'rikenglik kamaydi. Evropa hukumati ko'pincha mehnatga yaroqli aholining kichik bo'limlarini ifodalovchi guruhlar tomonida bo'lishadi, masalan Gildiyalar, yangi texnologiyalarni taqiqlash va ba'zida ularni ilgari surish yoki ular bilan savdo qilishga harakat qilganlarni qatl etish.[60]

16-18 asr

Yelizaveta I tomonidan ixtiro qilingan trikotaj mashinasini patentlashdan bosh tortgan Uilyam Li "Ixtiro mening kambag'al sub'ektlarimga nima qilishi mumkinligini o'ylab ko'ring. Bu, albatta, ularni ishdan mahrum qilish va ularni tilanchilarga aylantirish orqali ularni yo'q qilishga olib keladi" dedi.

Buyuk Britaniyada hukmron elita Evropaning aksariyat qit'alariga nisbatan yangiliklarga nisbatan biroz cheklangan yondoshishni boshladi, bu esa Buyuk Britaniyaning haydashda erta etakchilik qilishining mumkin bo'lgan sababi sifatida keltirilgan. Sanoat inqilobi.[61] Shunga qaramay, innovatsiyalarning bandlikka ta'siriga nisbatan tashvish 16 va 17 asr boshlarida kuchli bo'lib qoldi. Ixtirochi yangi texnologiyalarning rad etilishining mashhur namunasi paydo bo'ldi Uilyam Li qirolicha Yelizaveta I ni mehnatni tejaydigan naqshli mashinani ko'rishga taklif qildi. Qirolicha ushbu texnologiya to'qimachilik ishchilari orasida ishsizlikni keltirib chiqarishi mumkinligi sababli patent berishni rad etdi. Frantsiyaga ko'chib o'tgandan so'ng va o'z ixtirosini targ'ib qilishda muvaffaqiyatga erisha olmaganidan so'ng, Li Angliyaga qaytib keldi, ammo yana Elizabethning vorisi tomonidan rad etildi Jeyms I xuddi shu sababga ko'ra.[18]

Ayniqsa Shonli inqilob, hukumat ishchilarning innovatsiyalar tufayli ishdan ayrilish xavotirlariga nisbatan kamroq xushyoqish bilan qarashdi. Ning tobora ta'sirchan yo'nalishi Merkantilist mehnatni tejash texnologiyasini joriy etish, aslida ishsizlikni kamaytiradi deb o'ylardi, chunki bu ingliz firmalariga chet el raqobatiga qarshi o'z bozor ulushini oshirishga imkon beradi. 18-asrning boshlaridan boshlab ishchilar endi texnologik ishsizlik tahdidiga qarshi hukumat tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanishiga ishona olmaydilar. Ba'zan oladilar to'g'ridan-to'g'ri harakat, o'zlarini buzuvchi yangiliklardan himoya qilishga urinishda, masalan, mashinani buzish. Shumpeter 18-asr rivojlanib borishi bilan mutafakkirlar texnologik ishsizlik haqida signalni chastotasi ortib borishi bilan kuchaytirishi kerakligini ta'kidlamoqda fon Justi taniqli namuna bo'lish.[62] Shumpeter, shuningdek, elita o'rtasida hukmronlik nuqtai nazaridan texnologik ishsizlik uzoq muddatli muammo bo'lmaydi degan pozitsiyada qat'iylashdi.[18][59]

19-asr

Faqat 19-asrda texnologik ishsizlik bo'yicha bahs-munozaralar avj oldi, ayniqsa, o'sha davrning ko'plab iqtisodiy mutafakkirlari to'plangan Buyuk Britaniyada. Ishiga asoslanib Din Taker va Adam Smit, siyosiy iqtisodchilar zamonaviy intizomga aylanadigan narsalarni yaratishga kirishdi iqtisodiyot.[2-eslatma] Ko'pgina merkantilizmni rad etgan holda, yangi intizom a'zolari asosan texnologik ishsizlik doimiy muammo bo'lmaydi degan fikrga kelishdi. 19-asrning dastlabki bir necha o'n yilligida bir nechta taniqli siyosiy iqtisodchilar optimizm qarashga qarshi chiqishdi, chunki yangilik uzoq muddatli ishsizlikni keltirib chiqarishi mumkin. Bularga kiritilgan Sismondi,[63] Maltus, J S tegirmoni va 1821 yildan boshlab Rikardoning o'zi.[64] O'z yoshidagi eng obro'li siyosiy iqtisodchi sifatida, Rikardoning fikri boshqalarga intizomda qiyin bo'lgan. Javob bergan birinchi yirik iqtisodchi bu edi Jan-Batist Say, agar ular mahsulot miqdorini kamaytirmoqchi bo'lsalar, hech kim mashinani joriy qilmaydi, deb ta'kidlagan[3-eslatma] va bu kabi Say Qonuni etkazib berish o'z talabini yaratishini ta'kidlaganidek, har qanday ko'chirilgan ishchilar bozor moslashishga ulgurganidan keyin avtomatik ravishda boshqa joyda ish topadi.[65] Ramsey Makkullox Sayning texnologik ishsizlik haqidagi optimistik qarashlarini kengaytirdi va rasmiylashtirdi va boshqalar tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlandi Charlz Babbig, Nassau katta va boshqa ko'plab taniqli bo'lmagan siyosiy iqtisodchilar. 19-asrning o'rtalariga kelib, Karl Marks bahslarga qo'shildi. Rikardo va Mill ijodiga asoslanib, Marks texnologik ishsizlikka chuqur pessimistik nuqtai nazar bilan murojaat qilib, ancha oldinga bordi; uning qarashlari ko'plab izdoshlarni jalb qildi va doimiy fikr maktabiga asos soldi, ammo asosiy iqtisodiyot keskin o'zgargani yo'q. 1870-yillarga kelib, hech bo'lmaganda Buyuk Britaniyada, texnologik ishsizlik ham ommaviy tashvish sifatida, ham ilmiy munozaralar uchun muammo bo'lib qoldi. Innovatsiya Britaniya jamiyatining barcha qatlamlari, shu jumladan ishchilar sinfining farovonligini oshirayotgani tobora ayon bo'ldi. Sifatida klassik fikr maktabi yo'l berdi neoklassik iqtisodiyot, Mill va Rikardoning pessimistik dalillarini inobatga olish va inkor etish uchun asosiy fikrlash kuchaytirildi.[66]

20-asr

Innovatsiyalar doimiy ishsizlikni keltirib chiqaradi, degan fikrni tanqid qiluvchilar texnologiya ishchilar tomonidan qo'llaniladi va ularni keng miqyosda almashtirmaydi deb ta'kidlaydilar.

20-asrning dastlabki yigirma yillari davomida ommaviy ishsizlik 19-asrning birinchi yarmida bo'lgan asosiy muammo emas edi. Da Marksistik maktab va yana bir qancha mutafakkirlar hali ham optimizm qarashga qarshi chiqishdi, texnologik ishsizlik 1920-yillarning o'rtalaridan oxirigacha asosiy iqtisodiy fikrlash uchun jiddiy tashvish tug'dirmadi. 20-asrning 20-yillarida ommaviy ishsizlik yana Evropada dolzarb muammo sifatida paydo bo'ldi. Bu vaqtda AQSh umuman obod edi, ammo u erda ham shaharlik ishsizlik 1927 yildan osha boshladi. Qishloqdagi amerikalik ishchilar ish joylarini yo'qotib qo'yishgan 20-yillarning boshlaridan; kabi takomillashtirilgan qishloq xo'jaligi texnologiyasi tufayli ko'pchilik ko'chirilgan edi traktor. Iqtisodiy munozaralar uchun tortishish markazi shu vaqtga qadar Buyuk Britaniyadan AQShga ko'chib o'tdi va aynan shu erda 20-asrning texnologik ishsizlik bo'yicha ikki katta munozarasi davri sodir bo'ldi.[67]

Ikki bahsning eng avj pallasi 1930 va 1960 yillarda bo'lgan. Iqtisodiy tarixchi Gregori R Vayrolning so'zlariga ko'ra, ushbu ikkita epizod bir-biriga o'xshashdir.[68] Ikkala holatda ham, akademik munozaralar oldin ishsizlik sonining ko'payishi bilan bog'liq bo'lgan xalq tashvishi boshlandi. Ikkala holatda ham munozaralar aniq hal qilinmadi, ammo urush boshlanishi bilan ishsizlik kamayganligi sababli susayib ketdi - Ikkinchi Jahon urushi 30-yillarning bahslari uchun va Vetnam urushi 1960 yillar epizodlari uchun. Ikkala holatda ham, munozaralar o'sha paytdagi hukmron paradigma doirasida o'tkazilgan bo'lib, ilgari o'ylangan fikrlarga ozgina ishora qilgan. 1930-yillarda optimistlar o'zlarining dalillarini asosan tovon ta'sirida har qanday qisqa muddatli ishsizlikni avtomatik ravishda kamaytirish uchun bozorlarning o'zini o'zi tuzatuvchi kuchiga bo'lgan neo-klassik e'tiqodlarga asoslanishdi. 1960-yillarda kompensatsiya ta'siriga bo'lgan ishonch kamroq kuchli edi, ammo asosiy oqim Keynsiyalik iqtisodchilar vaqt asosan hukumat aralashuvi bozor kuchlari tomonidan bartaraf etilmagan har qanday doimiy texnologik ishsizlikka qarshi tura oladi deb ishongan. Yana bir o'xshashlik - har bir epizodning oxiriga kelib yirik Federal tadqiqotning nashr etilishi bo'lib, u uzoq muddatli texnologik ishsizlik yuzaga kelmasligini aniqladi (garchi tadqiqotlar bilan kelishilgan bo'lsa ham, ishchilar qisqa muddatli ishdan bo'shatilishida asosiy omil bo'lgan va maslahat bergan) yordam berish bo'yicha hukumat harakati).[4-eslatma][68]

Sifatida kapitalizmning oltin davri o'tgan asrning 70-yillarida yakuniga etdi, ishsizlik yana ko'tarildi va bu vaqt eng rivojlangan iqtisodiyotlar bo'ylab asrning qolgan qismida nisbatan yuqori darajada saqlanib qoldi. Bir nechta iqtisodchilar yana bir bor ta'kidladilar, bu, ehtimol, eng ko'zga ko'ringan narsa, yangilik bilan bog'liq bo'lishi mumkin Pol Samuelson.[69] Umuman olganda, 20-asrning so'nggi o'n yilliklarida Evropada texnologik ishsizlikdan tashvish bildirilgan, ammo AQShda bir nechta misollar mavjud edi.[70] Texnologik ishsizlik haqida ogohlantiruvchi bir qator mashhur asarlar ham nashr etildi. Bularga kiritilgan Jeyms S. Albus 1976 yil nomli kitob Xalqlar kapitalizmi: Robot inqilobi iqtisodiyoti;[71][72]Devid F. Nobl 1984 yilda nashr etilgan asarlari bilan[73] va 1993 yil;[74] Jeremi Rifkin va uning 1995 yildagi kitobi Ishning oxiri;[75] va 1996 yilgi kitob Global tuzoq.[76] 1930 va 60-yillardagi qizg'in bahs-munozaralar davrlaridan tashqari, aksariyat hollarda, 20-asrda ham professional iqtisodchilar, ham keng jamoatchilik o'rtasida texnologiya uzoq muddatli ishsizlikni keltirib chiqarmaydi degan kelishuv mavjud edi.[77]

21-asr

Fikrlar

Texnologik ishsizlik davrida - texnologiya tobora ko'proq malakali ishchilarni eskirishga majbur qilmoqda, degan fikr keng tarqalgan.

Prof. Mark MakKarti (2014)[78]

Yangiliklar 21-asrning birinchi o'n yilligida uzoq muddatli ishsizlikni keltirib chiqarmaydi degan umumiy kelishuv, garchi u bir qator ilmiy ishlar bilan kurashishda davom etsa ham,[16][22] kabi mashhur asarlar bilan Marshall Brain "s Robotik millat[79] va Martin Ford "s Tunneldagi chiroqlar: avtomatlashtirish, texnologiyani tezlashtirish va kelajak iqtisodiyoti.[80]

2011 yilgi kitobi nashr etilganidan beri Mashinaga qarshi poyga, MIT professorlar Endryu Makafi va Erik Brynjolfsson texnologik ishsizlik haqida tashvish bildirayotganlar orasida taniqli bo'lgan. Ikki professor nisbatan optimistik bo'lib qolmoqda, ammo "musobaqada g'olib bo'lishning kaliti raqobat emas qarshi mashinalar lekin raqobatlashish uchun bilan mashinalar ".[81][82][83][84][85][86][87]

Concern about technological unemployment grew in 2013 due in part to a number of studies predicting substantially increased technological unemployment in forthcoming decades and empirical evidence that, in certain sectors, employment is falling worldwide despite rising output, thus discounting globalization and offshoring as the only causes of increasing unemployment.[17][18][88]

In 2013, professor Nick Bloom of Stenford universiteti stated there had recently been a major change of heart concerning technological unemployment among his fellow economists.[89] 2014 yilda Financial Times reported that the impact of innovation on jobs has been a dominant theme in recent economic discussion.[90] According to the academic and former politician Maykl Ignatieff writing in 2014, questions concerning the effects of technological change have been "haunting democratic politics everywhere".[91]Concerns have included evidence showing worldwide falls in employment across sectors such as manufacturing; falls in pay for low and medium skilled workers stretching back several decades even as productivity continues to rise; the increase in often precarious platform mediated ish bilan ta'minlash; and the occurrence of "jobless recoveries" after recent recessions. The 21st century has seen a variety of skilled tasks partially taken over by machines, including translation, legal research and even low level journalism. Care work, entertainment, and other tasks requiring empathy, previously thought safe from automation, have also begun to be performed by robots.[17][18][92][93][94][95]

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary and Harvard economics professor Lourens Summers stated in 2014 that he no longer believed automation would always create new jobs and that "This isn't some hypothetical future possibility. This is something that's emerging before us right now." Summers noted that already, more labor sectors were losing jobs than creating new ones.[5-eslatma][11][96][97][98] While himself doubtful about technological unemployment, professor Mark MacCarthy stated in the fall of 2014 that it is now the "prevailing opinion" that the era of technological unemployment has arrived.[78]

2014 yilda Davos uchrashuv, Tomas Fridman reported that the link between technology and unemployment seemed to have been the dominant theme of that year's discussions. A survey at Davos 2014 found that 80% of 147 respondents agreed that technology was driving jobless growth.[99] At the 2015 Davos, Gillian Tett found that almost all delegates attending a discussion on inequality and technology expected an increase in inequality over the next five years, and gives the reason for this as the technological displacement of jobs.[100] 2015 saw Martin Ford g'alaba qozonish Financial Times va McKinsey Business Yilning eng yaxshi kitobi mukofoti uning uchun Robotlar paydo bo'lishi: texnologiya va ishsiz kelajak tahdidi, and saw the first world summit on technological unemployment, held in New York. In late 2015, further warnings of potential worsening for technological unemployment came from Endi Xeylden, Angliya banki 's chief economist, and from Ignazio Visko, hokimi Italiya banki.[101][102] In an October 2016 interview, US President Barak Obama said that due to the growth of artificial intelligence, society would be debating "unconditional free money for everyone" within 10 to 20 years.[103] In 2019, computer scientist and artificial intelligence expert Styuart J. Rassel stated that "in the long run nearly all current jobs will go away, so we need fairly radical policy changes to prepare for a very different future economy." In a book he authored, Russell claims that "One rapidly emerging picture is that of an economy where far fewer people work because work is unnecessary." However, he predicted that employment in healthcare, home care, and construction would increase.[104]

Other economists have argued that long-term technological unemployment is unlikely. In 2014, Pew Research canvassed 1,896 technology professionals and economists and found a split of opinion: 48% of respondents believed that new technologies would displace more jobs than they would create by the year 2025, while 52% maintained that they would not.[105] Economics professor Bruce Chapman from Avstraliya milliy universiteti has advised that studies such as Frey and Osborne's tend to overstate the probability of future job losses, as they don't account for new employment likely to be created, due to technology, in what are currently unknown areas.[106]

General public surveys have often found an expectation that automation would impact jobs widely, but not the jobs held by those particular people surveyed.[107]

Tadqiqotlar

A number of studies have predicted that automation will take a large proportion of jobs in the future, but estimates of the level of unemployment this will cause vary. Tadqiqot tomonidan Karl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne of the Oksford Martin maktabi showed that employees engaged in "tasks following well-defined procedures that can easily be performed by sophisticated algorithms" are at risk of displacement. The study, published in 2013, shows that automation can affect both skilled and unskilled work and both high and low-paying occupations; however, low-paid physical occupations are most at risk. It estimated that 47% of US jobs were at high risk of automation.[18] In 2014, the economic think tank Bruegel released a study, based on the Frey and Osborne approach, claiming that across the Yevropa Ittifoqi 's 28 member states, 54% of jobs were at risk of automation. The countries where jobs were least vulnerable to automation were Shvetsiya, with 46.69% of jobs vulnerable, the Buyuk Britaniya at 47.17%, the Gollandiya at 49.50%, and Frantsiya va Daniya, both at 49.54%. The countries where jobs were found to be most vulnerable were Ruminiya at 61.93%, Portugaliya at 58.94%, Xorvatiya at 57.9%, and Bolgariya at 56.56%.[108][109] A 2015 report by the Taub Center found that 41% of jobs in Isroil were at risk of being automated within the next two decades.[110] In January 2016, a joint study by the Oksford Martin maktabi va Citibank, based on previous studies on automation and data from the Jahon banki, found that the risk of automation in developing countries was much higher than in developed countries. It found that 77% of jobs in Xitoy, 69% of jobs in Hindiston, 85% of jobs in Efiopiya, and 55% of jobs in O'zbekiston were at risk of automation.[111] The World Bank similarly employed the methodology of Frey and Osborne. Tomonidan 2016 yilgi tadqiqot Xalqaro mehnat tashkiloti found 74% of salaried electrical & electronics industry positions in Tailand, 75% of salaried electrical & electronics industry positions in Vetnam, 63% of salaried electrical & electronics industry positions in Indoneziya, and 81% of salaried electrical & electronics industry positions in the Filippinlar were at high risk of automation.[112] 2016 yil Birlashgan Millatlar report stated that 75% of jobs in the developing world were at risk of automation, and predicted that more jobs might be lost when corporations stop autsorsing to developing countries after automation in industrialized countries makes it less lucrative to outsource to countries with lower labor costs.[113]

The Iqtisodiy maslahatchilar kengashi, a US government agency tasked with providing economic research for the White House, in the 2016 Prezidentning iqtisodiy hisoboti, used the data from the Frey and Osborne study to estimate that 83% of jobs with an hourly wage below $20, 31% of jobs with an hourly wage between $20 and $40, and 4% of jobs with an hourly wage above $40 were at risk of automation.[114] 2016 yilgi tadqiqot Ryerson universiteti found that 42% of jobs in Kanada were at risk of automation, dividing them into two categories - "high risk" jobs and "low risk" jobs. High risk jobs were mainly lower-income jobs that required lower education levels than average. Low risk jobs were on average more skilled positions. The report found a 70% chance that high risk jobs and a 30% chance that low risk jobs would be affected by automation in the next 10–20 years.[115] Tomonidan 2017 yilgi tadqiqot PricewaterhouseCoopers found that up to 38% of jobs in the US, 35% of jobs in Germaniya, 30% of jobs in the Buyuk Britaniya, and 21% of jobs in Yaponiya were at high risk of being automated by the early 2030s.[116] Tomonidan 2017 yilgi tadqiqot Balli davlat universiteti found about half of American jobs were at risk of automation, many of them low-income jobs.[117] 2017 yil sentyabr oyidagi hisobot McKinsey & Company found that as of 2015, 478 billion out of 749 billion working hours per year dedicated to manufacturing, or $2.7 trillion out of $5.1 trillion in labor, were already automatable. In low-skill areas, 82% of labor in apparel goods, 80% of agriculture processing, 76% of food manufacturing, and 60% of beverage manufacturing were subject to automation. In mid-skill areas, 72% of basic materials production and 70% of furniture manufacturing was automatable. In high-skill areas, 52% of aerospace and defense labor and 50% of advanced electronics labor could be automated.[118] In October 2017, a survey of axborot texnologiyalari decision makers in the US and UK found that a majority believed that most business processes could be automated by 2022. On average, they said that 59%of business processes were subject to automation.[119] A November 2017 report by the McKinsey Global Institute that analyzed around 800 occupations in 46 countries estimated that between 400 million and 800 million jobs could be lost due to robotic automation by 2030. It estimated that jobs were more at risk in developed countries than developing countries due to a greater availability of capital to invest in automation.[120] Job losses and downward mobility blamed on automation has been cited as one of many factors in the resurgence of millatchi va protektsionist politics in the US, UK and France, among other countries.[121][122][123][124][125]

However, not all recent empirical studies have found evidence to support the idea that automation will cause widespread unemployment. A study released in 2015, examining the impact of industrial robots in 17 countries between 1993 and 2007, found no overall reduction in employment was caused by the robots, and that there was a slight increase in overall wages.[32] Da chop etilgan tadqiqotga ko'ra McKinsey har chorakda[126] in 2015 the impact of computerization in most cases is not replacement of employees but automation of portions of the tasks they perform.[127] 2016 yil OECD study found that among the 21 OECD countries surveyed, on average only 9% of jobs were in foreseeable danger of automation, but this varied greatly among countries: for example in Janubiy Koreya the figure of at-risk jobs was 6% while in Avstriya it was 12%.[128] In contrast to other studies, the OECD study does not primarily base its assessment on the tasks that a job entails, but also includes demographic variables, including sex, education and age. It is not clear however why a job should be more or less automatise just because it is performed by a woman. 2017 yilda, Forrester estimated that automation would result in a net loss of about 7% of jobs in the US by 2027, replacing 17% of jobs while creating new jobs equivalent to 10% of the workforce.[129] Another study argued that the risk of US jobs to automation had been overestimated due to factors such as the heterogeneity of tasks within occupations and the adaptability of jobs being neglected. The study found that once this was taken into account, the number of occupations at risk to automation in the US drops, ceteris paribus, from 38% to 9%.[130] A 2017 study on the effect of automation on Germany found no evidence that automation caused total job losses but that they do effect the jobs people are employed in; losses in the industrial sector due to automation were offset by gains in the service sector. Manufacturing workers were also not at risk from automation and were in fact more likely to remain employed, though not necessarily doing the same tasks. However, automation did result in a decrease in labour's income share as it raised productivity but not wages.[131]

A 2018 yil Brukings instituti study that analyzed 28 industries in 18 OECD countries from 1970 to 2018 found that automation was responsible for holding down wages. Although it concluded that automation did not reduce the overall number of jobs available and even increased them, it found that from the 1970s to the 2010s, it had reduced the share of human labor in the value added to the work, and thus had helped to slow wage growth.[132] 2018 yil aprel oyida, Adair Tyorner, sobiq raisi Moliyaviy xizmatlar vakolatxonasi va boshlig'i Yangi iqtisodiy fikrlash instituti, stated that it would already be possible to automate 50% of jobs with current technology, and that it will be possible to automate all jobs by 2060.[133]

Premature deindustrialization

Premature deindustrialization occurs when developing nations deindustrialize without first becoming rich, as happened with the advanced economies. Kontseptsiya tomonidan ommalashtirildi Dani Rodrik in 2013, who went on to publish several papers showing the growing empirical evidence for the phenomena. Premature deindustrialization adds to concern over technological unemployment for developing countries - as traditional compensation effects that advanced economy workers enjoyed, such being able to get well paid work in the service sector after losing their factory jobs - may not be available.[134][135] Some commentators, such as Carl Benedikt Frey, argue that with the right responses, the negative effects of further automation on workers in developing economies can still be avoided.[136]

Sun'iy intellekt

Shuningdek qarang: AIni egallash

Since about 2017, a new wave of concern over technological unemployment had become prominent, this time over the effects of artificial intelligence (AI).[137]Sharhlovchilar, shu jumladan Calum Chace va Daniel Xulme have warned that if unchecked, AI threatens to cause an "economic singularity", with job churn too rapid for humans to adapt to, leading to widespread technological unemployment. Though they also advise that with the right responses by business leaders, policy makers and society, the impact of AI could be a net positive for workers.[138][139]

Morgan R. Frank va boshq. cautions that there are several barriers preventing researchers from making accurate predictions of the effects AI will have on future job markets.[140] Marian Krakovsky has argued that the jobs most likely to be completely replaced by AI are in middle-class areas, such as professional services. Often, the practical solution is to find another job, but workers may not have the qualifications for high-level jobs and so must drop to lower level jobs. However, Krakovsky (2018) predicts that AI will largely take the route of "complementing people," rather than "replicating people." Suggesting that the goal of people implementing AI is to improve the life of workers, not replace them.[141] Studies have also shown that rather than solely destroying jobs AI can also create work: albeit low-skill jobs to train AI in low-income countries.[142]

Keyingi Prezident Putin 's 2017 statement that which ever country first achieves mastery in AI "will become the ruler of the world", various national and millatparvar governments have announced AI strategies. Concerns on not falling behind in the AI qurollanish poygasi have been more prominent than worries over AI's potential to cause unemployment. Several strategies suggest that achieving a leading role in AI should help their citizens get more rewarding jobs. Finland has aimed to help the citizens of other EI nations acquire the skills they need to compete in the post AI jobs market, making a free course on "The Elements of AI" available in multiple European languages.[143][144][145]

Yechimlar

Preventing net job losses

Banning/refusing innovation

"What I object to, is the craze for machinery, not machinery as such. The craze is for what they call labour-saving machinery. Men go on 'saving labour', till thousands are without work and thrown on the open streets to die of starvation." - Gandi, 1924[146]

Historically, innovations were sometimes banned due to concerns about their impact on employment. Since the development of modern economics, however, this option has generally not even been considered as a solution, at least not for the advanced economies. Even commentators who are pessimistic about long-term technological unemployment invariably consider innovation to be an overall benefit to society, with J. S. Mill being perhaps the only prominent western political economist to have suggested prohibiting the use of technology as a possible solution to unemployment.[20]

Gandi iqtisodiyoti called for a delay in the uptake of labour saving machines until unemployment was alleviated, however this advice was largely rejected by Neru who was to become prime minister once India achieved its independence. The policy of slowing the introduction of innovation so as to avoid technological unemployment was, however, implemented in the 20th century within China under Mao ma'muriyat.[147][148][149]

Shorter working hours

In 1870, the average American worker clocked up about 75 hours per week. Just prior to World War II working hours had fallen to about 42 per week, and the fall was similar in other advanced economies. Ga binoan Vasili Leontiv, this was a voluntary increase in technological unemployment. The reduction in working hours helped share out available work, and was favoured by workers who were happy to reduce hours to gain extra leisure, as innovation was at the time generally helping to increase their rates of pay.[25]

Further reductions in working hours have been proposed as a possible solution to unemployment by economists including John R. Commons, Lord Keynes and Luidji Pasinetti. Yet once working hours have reached about 40 hours per week, workers have been less enthusiastic about further reductions, both to prevent loss of income and as many value engaging in work for its own sake. Generally, 20th-century economists had argued against further reductions as a solution to unemployment, saying it reflects a lump of labour fallacy.[150]In 2014, Google's co-founder, Larri Peyj, suggested a four-day workweek, so as technology continues to displace jobs, more people can find employment.[96][151][152]

Jamoat ishlari

Programmes of jamoat ishlari have traditionally been used as way for governments to directly boost employment, though this has often been opposed by some, but not all, conservatives. Jan-Batist Say, although generally associated with free market economics, advised that public works could be a solution to technological unemployment.[153] Some commentators, such as professor Mathew Forstater, have advised that public works and guaranteed jobs in the public sector may be the ideal solution to technological unemployment, as unlike welfare or guaranteed income schemes they provide people with the social recognition and meaningful engagement that comes with work.[154][155]

Uchun less developed economies, public works may be an easier to administrate solution compared to universal welfare programmes.[25] As of 2015, calls for public works in the advanced economies have been less frequent even from progressives, due to concerns about davlat qarzi.[iqtibos kerak ] A partial exception is for spending on infrastructure, which has been recommended as a solution to technological unemployment even by economists previously associated with a neoliberal agenda, such as Larri Summers.[156]

Ta'lim

Improved availability to quality education, including skills training for adults and other faol mehnat bozori siyosati, is a solution that in principle at least is not opposed by any side of the political spectrum, and welcomed even by those who are optimistic about long-term technological employment. Improved education paid for by government tends to be especially popular with industry.[iqtibos kerak ]

Proponents of this brand of policy assert higher level, more specialized learning is a way to capitalize from the growing technology industry. Leading technology research university MIT published an open letter to policymakers advocating for the "reinvention of education", namely a shift "away from rote learning" and towards STEM fanlar.[157] Similar statements released by the U.S President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PACST ) have also been used to support this STEM emphasis on enrollment choice in higher learning.[158] Education reform is also a part of the U.K government's "Industrial Strategy", a plan announcing the nation's intent to invest millions into a "technical education system".[159] The proposal includes the establishment of a retraining program for workers who wish to adapt their skill-sets. These suggestions combat the concerns over avtomatlashtirish through policy choices aiming to meet the emerging needs of society via updated information. Of the professionals within the academic community who applaud such moves, often noted is a gap between economic security and formal education[160] —a disparity exacerbated by the rising demand for specialized skills—and education's potential to reduce it.

However, several academics have also argued that improved education alone will not be sufficient to solve technological unemployment, pointing to recent declines in the demand for many intermediate skills, and suggesting that not everyone is capable in becoming proficient in the most advanced skills.[29][30][31] Kim Taipale has said that "The era of bell curve distributions that supported a bulging social middle class is over... Education per se is not going to make up the difference."[161] while an op-ed piece from 2011, Pol Krugman, an economics professor and columnist for the Nyu-York Tayms, argued that better education would be an insufficient solution to technological unemployment, as it "actually reduces the demand for highly educated workers".[162]

Living with technological unemployment

Welfare payments

The use of various forms of subsidies has often been accepted as a solution to technological unemployment even by conservatives and by those who are optimistic about the long term effect on jobs. Welfare programmes have historically tended to be more durable once established, compared with other solutions to unemployment such as directly creating jobs with public works. Despite being the first person to create a formal system describing compensation effects, Ramsey McCulloch and most other classical economists advocated government aid for those suffering from technological unemployment, as they understood that market adjustment to new technology was not instantaneous and that those displaced by labour-saving technology would not always be able to immediately obtain alternative employment through their own efforts.[20]

Asosiy daromad
Asosiy maqolalar: Asosiy daromad va Kafolatlangan minimal daromad

Several commentators have argued that traditional forms of welfare payment may be inadequate as a response to the future challenges posed by technological unemployment, and have suggested a asosiy daromad alternativa sifatida.[163] People advocating some form of basic income as a solution to technological unemployment include Martin Ford, [164] Erik Brynjolfsson,[90] Robert Reyx, Endryu Yang, Elon Musk, Zoltan Istvan va Yigit tik turibdi. Reich has gone as far as to say the introduction of a basic income, perhaps implemented as a salbiy daromad solig'i is "almost inevitable",[165] while Standing has said he considers that a basic income is becoming "politically essential".[166]Since late 2015, new basic income pilots have been announced in Finland, the Netherlands, and Canada. Further recent advocacy for basic income has arisen from a number of technology entrepreneurs, the most prominent being Sem Altman, prezidenti Y kombinatori.[167]

Skepticism about basic income includes both right and left elements, and proposals for different forms of it have come from all segments of the spectrum. For example, while the best-known proposed forms (with taxation and distribution) are usually thought of as left-leaning ideas that right-leaning people try to defend against, other forms have been proposed even by liberterlar, kabi von Hayek va Fridman. Respublikachi prezident Nikson 's Family Assistance Plan (FAP) of 1969, which had much in common with basic income, passed in the Uy ammo mag'lubiyatga uchradi Senat.[168]

One objection to basic income is that it could be a disincentive to work, but evidence from older uchuvchilar in India, Africa, and Canada indicates that this does not happen and that a basic income encourages low-level tadbirkorlik and more productive, collaborative work. Another objection is that funding it sustainably is a huge challenge. While new revenue-raising ideas have been proposed such as Martin Ford's wage recapture tax, how to fund a generous basic income remains a debated question, and skeptics have dismissed it as utopian. Even from a progressive viewpoint, there are concerns that a basic income set too low may not help the economically vulnerable, especially if financed largely from cuts to other forms of welfare.[166][169][170][171]

To better address both the funding concerns and concerns about government control, one alternative model is that the cost and control would be distributed across the private sector instead of the public sector. Companies across the economy would be required to employ humans, but the job descriptions would be left to private innovation, and individuals would have to compete to be hired and retained. This would be a for-profit sector analog of basic income, that is, a market-based form of basic income. Bu a dan farq qiladi ish kafolati in that the government is not the employer (rather, companies are) and there is no aspect of having employees who "cannot be fired", a problem that interferes with economic dynamism. The economic salvation in this model is not that every individual is guaranteed a job, but rather just that enough jobs exist that massive unemployment is avoided and employment is no longer solely the privilege of only the very smartest or highly trained 20% of the population. Another option for a market-based form of basic income has been proposed by the Iqtisodiy va ijtimoiy adolat markazi (CESJ) as part of "a Just Third Way" (a Uchinchi yo'l with greater justice) through widely distributed power and liberty. Called the Capital Homestead Act,[172] eslatadi Jeyms S. Albus 's Peoples' Capitalism[71][72] bunda pul yaratish va securities ownership are widely and directly distributed to individuals rather than flowing through, or being concentrated in, centralized or elite mechanisms.

Broadening the ownership of technological assets

Several solutions have been proposed which do not fall easily into the traditional chap-o'ng siyosiy spektr. This includes broadening the ownership of robots and other productive capital assets. Enlarging the ownership of technologies has been advocated by people including Jeyms S. Albus[71][173] John Lanchester,[174] Richard B. Freeman,[170] and Noah Smith.[175]Jaron Lanier has proposed a somewhat similar solution: a mechanism where ordinary people receive "nano payments " uchun katta ma'lumotlar they generate by their regular surfing and other aspects of their online presence.[176]

Structural changes towards a post-scarcity economy

Asosiy maqola: Kamomaddan keyingi iqtisodiyot

Zeitgeistlar harakati (TZM), Venera loyihasi (TVP) as well as various individuals and organizations propose tarkibiy o'zgarishlar towards a form of a tanqislikdan keyingi iqtisodiyot in which people are 'freed' from their automatable, monotonous jobs, instead of 'losing' their jobs. In the system proposed by TZM all jobs are either automated, abolished for bringing no true value for society (such as ordinary reklama ), rationalized by more samarali, barqaror va ochiq processes and collaboration or carried out based on alturizm and social relevance (see also: Uffi ), opposed to compulsion or monetary gain.[177][178][179][180][181] The movement also speculates that the free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity, invention, community and social capital as well as reducing stress.[177]

Boshqa yondashuvlar

The threat of technological unemployment has occasionally been used by free market economists as a justification for supply side reforms, to make it easier for employers to hire and fire workers. Conversely, it has also been used as a reason to justify an increase in employee protection.[15][182]

Iqtisodchilar, shu jumladan Larri Summers have advised a package of measures may be needed. He advised vigorous cooperative efforts to address the "myriad devices" – such as tax havens, bank secrecy, money laundering, and regulatory arbitrage – which enable the holders of great wealth to avoid paying taxes, and to make it more difficult to accumulate great fortunes without requiring "great social contributions" in return. Summers suggested more vigorous enforcement of anti-monopoly laws; reductions in "excessive" protection for intellectual property; greater encouragement of profit-sharing schemes that may benefit workers and give them a stake in wealth accumulation; strengthening of collective bargaining arrangements; improvements in corporate governance; strengthening of financial regulation to eliminate subsidies to financial activity; easing of land-use restrictions that may cause estates to keep rising in value; better training for young people and retraining for displaced workers; and increased public and private investment in infrastructure development, such as energy production and transportation.[11][96][97][183]

Maykl Spens has advised that responding to the future impact of technology will require a detailed understanding of the global forces and flows technology has set in motion. Adapting to them "will require shifts in mindsets, policies, investments (especially in human capital), and quite possibly models of employment and distribution".[6-eslatma][184]

Shuningdek qarang

Izohlar

  1. ^ Labour-displacing technologies can be classified under the headings of mexanizatsiya, avtomatlashtirish, and process improvement. The first two fundamentally involve transferring tasks from humans to machines. The third often involves the elimination of tasks altogether. The common theme of all three is that tasks are removed from the workforce, decreasing employment. In practice, the categories often overlap: a process improvement can include an automating or mechanizing achievement. The line between mechanization and automation is also subjective, as sometimes mechanization can involve sufficient boshqaruv to be viewed as part of automation.
  2. ^ Smith did not directly address the problem of technological unemployment, but the Dean had, saying in 1757 that in the long term, the introduction of machinery would allow more employment than would have been possible without them.
  3. ^ Typically the introduction of machinery would both increase output and lower cost per unit.
  4. ^ In the 1930s, this study was Unemployment and technological change(Report no. G-70, 1940) by Corrington Calhoun Gill of the 'National Research Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent changes in Industrial Techniques'. Some earlier Federal reports took a pessimistic view of technological unemployment, e.g. Memorandum on Technological Unemployment (1933) by Ewan Clague Bureau of Labor Statistics. Some authorities – e.g. Udo Sautter in Chpt 5 of Three Cheers for the Unemployed: Government and Unemployment Before the New Deal (Cambridge University Press, 1991) – say that in the early 1930s there was near consensus among US experts that technological unemployment was a major problem. Other's though like Bryus Bartlett yilda Is Industrial Innovation Destroying Jobs (Cato Journal 1984) argue that most economists remained optimistic even during the 1930s. In the 1960s episode, the major Federal study that bookmarked the end of the period of intense debate was Technology and the American economy (1966) by the 'National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress' established by president Lyndon Jonhson in 1964
  5. ^ Other recent statements by Summers include warnings on the "devastating consequences" for those who perform routine tasks arising from robots, 3-D printing, artificial intelligence, and similar technologies. In his view, "already there are more American men on disability insurance than doing production work in manufacturing. And the trends are all in the wrong direction, particularly for the less skilled, as the capacity of capital embodying artificial intelligence to replace white-collar as well as blue-collar work will increase rapidly in the years ahead." Summers has also said that "[T]here are many reasons to think the software revolution will be even more profound than the agricultural revolution. This time around, change will come faster and affect a much larger share of the economy. [...] [T]here are more sectors losing jobs than creating jobs. And the general-purpose aspect of software technology means that even the industries and jobs that it creates are not forever. [...] If current trends continue, it could well be that a generation from now a quarter of middle-aged men will be out of work at any given moment."
  6. ^ Spence also wrote that "Now comes a ... powerful, wave of digital technology that is replacing labor in increasingly complex tasks. This process of labor substitution and disintermediatsiya has been underway for some time in service sectors – think of ATMs, online banking, enterprise resource planning, customer relationship management, mobile payment systems, and much more. This revolution is spreading to the production of goods, where robots and 3D printing are displacing labor." In his view, the vast majority of the cost of digital technologies comes at the start, in the design of hardware (e.g. sensors) and, more important, in creating the software that enables machines to carry out various tasks. "Once this is achieved, the marginal cost of the hardware is relatively low (and declines as scale rises), and the marginal cost of replicating the software is essentially zero. With a huge potential global market to amortize the upfront fixed costs of design and testing, the incentives to invest [in digital technologies] are compelling." Spence believes that, unlike prior digital technologies, which drove firms to deploy underutilized pools of valuable labor around the world, the motivating force in the current wave of digital technologies "is cost reduction via the replacement of labor." For example, as the cost of 3D printing technology declines, it is "easy to imagine" that production may become "extremely" local and customized. Moreover, production may occur in response to actual demand, not anticipated or forecast demand. "Meanwhile, the impact of robotics ... is not confined to production. Though self-driving cars and drones are the most attention-getting examples, the impact on logistics is no less transformative. Computers and robotic cranes that schedule and move containers around and load ships now control the Port of Singapore, one of the most efficient in the world." Spence believes that labor, no matter how inexpensive, will become a less important asset for growth and employment expansion, with labor-intensive, process-oriented manufacturing becoming less effective, and that re-localization will appear globally. In his view, production will not disappear, but it will be less labor-intensive, and all countries will eventually need to rebuild their growth models around digital technologies and the human capital supporting their deployment and expansion.

Adabiyotlar

Iqtiboslar

  1. ^ Chuang, Szufang; Graham, Carroll Marion (3 September 2018). "Embracing the sobering reality of technological influences on jobs, employment and human resource development: A systematic literature review". Evropa o'quv va taraqqiyot jurnali. 42 (7/8): 400–416. doi:10.1108/EJTD-03-2018-0030. ISSN  2046-9012.
  2. ^ The Economic Possibilities of our Grandchildren (1930). E McGaughey, 'Robotlar sizning ishingizni uzoqlashtiradimi? To'liq bandlik, asosiy daromad va iqtisodiy demokratiya '(2018) SSRN, 2-qism (2)
  3. ^ Frey, Karl Benedikt; Osborne, Michael A (1 January 2017). "Bandlikning kelajagi: ish joylari kompyuterlashtirishga qanchalik moyil?". Texnologik prognozlash va ijtimoiy o'zgarishlar. 114: 254–280. CiteSeerX  10.1.1.395.416. doi:10.1016 / j.techfore.2016.08.019. ISSN  0040-1625.
  4. ^ "Are we on the brink of a jobless future?". PBS NewsHour. 2017 yil 31-avgust. Olingan 15 dekabr 2017.
  5. ^ "Kelajakda hamma ishsiz qoladimi?". 2014 yil 4-avgust.
  6. ^ Censky, Annalyn. "0% ishsizlik nimaga o'xshaydi". CNN.
  7. ^ a b Thompson, Derek (July–August 2015). "Ishsiz dunyo". Atlantika. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  8. ^ a b Dreyfuss, Emily (24 March 2017), "Hate to break it to Steve Mnuchin, but AI's already taking jobs", Simli
  9. ^ Porte, Eduardo; Manjoo, Farhad (9 March 2016). "A Future Without Jobs? Two Views of the Changing Work Force". The New York Times.
  10. ^ "Ishning o'zgaruvchan tabiati". Olingan 8 oktyabr 2018.
  11. ^ a b v Lourens H. Summers (2014 yil 7-iyul). "Lawrence H. Summers on the Economic Challenge of the Future: Jobs". Olingan 22 avgust 2014.
  12. ^ a b Woirol 1996, pp. 77–90
  13. ^ a b v Krugman, Pol (2013 yil 12-iyun). "Sympathy for the Luddites". The New York Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  14. ^ Mincer, Jacob; Danninger, Stephan (July 2000). "Technology, Unemployment, and Inflation" (PDF). Milliy iqtisodiy tadqiqotlar byurosi.
  15. ^ a b Cesaratto, Sergio; Stirati, Antonella; Serrano, Franklin (October 2001). "Technical Change, Effective Demand, and Employment". Center for Full Employment And Price Stability. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  16. ^ a b v d e f Vivarelli, Marco (January 2012). "Innovation, Employment and Skills in Advanced and Developing Countries: A Survey of the Literature" (PDF). Mehnatni o'rganish instituti. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  17. ^ a b v Waters, Richard (3 March 2014). "Technology: Rise of the replicants" ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  18. ^ a b v d e f g Carl Benedikt Frey & Michael A. Osborne (17 September 2013). "The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation" (PDF). Oxford University, Oxford Martin School. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  19. ^ On the other hand, from a more positive perspective, some have argued that technological change will alter the structure of an organization in the sense that those in management roles will increasingly become more specialized to those roles as technology that assists collaboration and workflow management allows employees to manage themselves. The typical management role will, as a result, change to allow managers to concentrate on the task of supporting employees and improving their performance thus allowing them to add more, rather than less, value.
  20. ^ a b v Blaug 1997, p182
  21. ^ Crespi, Gustavo; Tacsir, Ezequiel (December 2012). "Effects of Innovation on Employment in Latin America". Amerikalararo taraqqiyot banki.
  22. ^ a b Vivarelli, Marco (February 2007). "Innovation and Employment: : A Survey" (PDF). Mehnatni o'rganish instituti. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  23. ^ Moretti, Enrico (May 2010). "Mahalliy multiplikatorlar". Amerika iqtisodiy sharhi. 100 (2): 373–377. doi:10.1257/aer.100.2.373.
  24. ^ Goos, Maarten; Konings, Jozef; Vandeweyer, Marieke (September 2015). "Employment Growth in Europe: The Roles of Innovation, Local Job Multipliers and Institutions". Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute.
  25. ^ a b v Leontiv, Vassily (1983 yil sentyabr). "Technological Advance, Economic Growth, and the Distribution of Income". Aholini va rivojlanishni ko'rib chiqish. 9 (3): 403–410. doi:10.2307/1973315. JSTOR  1973315.
  26. ^ Tabarrok, Aleks (2003 yil 31-dekabr). "Productivity and unemployment". Marginal inqilob. Olingan 11 mart 2007.
  27. ^ Ford 2009, Chpt 3, 'The Luddite Fallacy'
  28. ^ Lord Skidelskiy (2013 yil 12-iyun). "Death to Machines?". Project Syndicate. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  29. ^ a b Kats, Lourens F.; Margo, Robert A. (2014). "Technical Change and the Relative Demand for Skilled Labor: The United States in Historical Perspective". In Boustan; Frydman; Margo (eds.). Human Capital in History: The American Record. doi:10.3386/w18752. S2CID  41004800.
  30. ^ a b David H. Autor; Dorn, David (August 2013). "The growth of low skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market". Amerika iqtisodiy sharhi. 103 (5): 1553–97. CiteSeerX  10.1.1.231.4843. doi:10.1257/aer.103.5.1553. S2CID  844385.
  31. ^ a b Bodri, Pol; Green, David A.; Sand, Benjamin M. (2016). "The Great Reversal in the Demand for Skill and Cognitive Tasks" (PDF). Mehnat iqtisodiyoti jurnali. 34 (S1): S199–S247. doi:10.1086/682347. S2CID  36722085.
  32. ^ a b Graets, Georg; Michaels, Guy (mart 2015). "Ishdagi robotlar". Iqtisodiy siyosatni o'rganish markazi. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  33. ^ Karl Benedikt Frey, Maykl Osborne va Citi tadqiqotlari (2015 yil fevral). "TEXNOLOGIYA ISHIDA: Innovatsiyalar va ish bilan ta'minlash kelajagi" (PDF). Oksford Martin maktabi. Olingan 4 noyabr 2015.
  34. ^ Colvin, Geoff (2015 yil 23-iyul). "Odamlar kam baholangan". Baxt. Olingan 26 iyul 2015.
  35. ^ Meltzer, Tom (2014 yil 15-iyun). "Robotlar shifokorlari onlayn yuristlar avtomatlashtirilgan me'morlar: kasblar kelajagi?". Guardian.
  36. ^ Frey, = Karl Benedikt; Osborne, Maykl A. (2013 yil 17 sentyabr). "Bandlikning kelajagi: Ishlar kompyuterlashtirishga qanchalik ta'sirchan?" (PDF).
  37. ^ Xosla, Vonod (2012 yil 10-yanvar). "Bizga shifokorlar kerakmi yoki algoritmmi?". TechCrunch.
  38. ^ Laxenmaier, Stefan; Rottmann, Xorst (2011). "2010 yil may". Xalqaro sanoat tashkiloti jurnali. 29 (2): 210–220. CiteSeerX  10.1.1.522.7577. doi:10.1016 / j.ijindorg.2010.05.004. S2CID  56406443.
  39. ^ Coad, Aleks; Rao, Rekha (2011 yil may). "AQShning yuqori texnologiyali ishlab chiqarish sanoatidagi innovatsiyalarning barqaror bandlik ta'siri". Evolyutsion iqtisodiyot jurnali. 21 (2): 255–283. doi:10.1007 / s00191-010-0209-x. S2CID  154768766.
  40. ^ Piva, Mariakristina; Vivarelli, Marko (2017 yil yanvar). "Texnologik o'zgarishlar va ish bilan ta'minlash: Rikardo va Marks haq edimi?". Mehnat iqtisodiyoti instituti.
  41. ^ Vivarelli, Marko (1995). Texnologiyalar iqtisodiyoti va ish bilan ta'minlash nazariyasi va empirik dalillar. Italiya: Edvard Elgar nashriyoti. ISBN  978-1-85898-166-6.
  42. ^ Feldmann, Xorst (2013 yil noyabr). "Sanoat mamlakatlaridagi texnologik ishsizlik". Evolyutsion iqtisodiyot jurnali. 23 (5): 1099–1126. doi:10.1007 / s00191-013-0308-6. S2CID  154073397.
  43. ^ Gali, Xordi (1999). "Texnologiya, ish bilan ta'minlash va ishbilarmonlik tsikli: texnologik shoklar yig'indining tebranishini tushuntiradimi?". Amerika iqtisodiy sharhi. 89 (1): 249–271. doi:10.1257 / aer.89.1.249. S2CID  154622671.
  44. ^ Frensis, Nevill; Ramey, Valeriya (2005). "Texnologiyalar tomonidan boshqariladigan haqiqiy biznes tsikl gipotezasi o'likmi? Shoklar va agregat dalgalanmalar qayta ko'rib chiqildi". Pul iqtisodiyoti jurnali. 52 (8): 1379–1399. CiteSeerX  10.1.1.198.157. doi:10.1016 / j.jmoneco.2004.08.009.
  45. ^ Basu, Susanto; Fernald, Jon; Kimball, Miles (2006). "Texnologiyalarni takomillashtirish qisqaradimi?". Amerika iqtisodiy sharhi. 96 (5): 1418–48. CiteSeerX  10.1.1.202.121. doi:10.1257 / aer.96.5.1418. S2CID  55596760.
  46. ^ Shea, Jon (1998). "Texnologiya shoklari nima qiladi?" (PDF). NBER Makroiqtisodiyot yillik. 13: 275–322. doi:10.1086 / ma.13.4623748. S2CID  152644849.
  47. ^ Aleksopulos, Mishel; Cohen, Jon (2011). "Dalillarning hajmi: o'tgan asrdagi texnik o'zgarishlarni yangi ob'ektiv orqali o'rganish" (PDF). Kanada Iqtisodiyot jurnali. 44 (2): 413–450. doi:10.1111 / j.1540-5982.2011.01639.x. S2CID  153779555.
  48. ^ Aleksopulos, Mishel (2011). "Hammasini o'qing !! Texnologiya zarbasidan keyin nima sodir bo'ladi?". Amerika iqtisodiy sharhi. 101 (4): 1144–1179. doi:10.1257 / aer.101.4.1144. S2CID  154653527.
  49. ^ Woirol 1996 yil, p. 17
  50. ^ a b v "Yordam". San-Bernardino okrugi Quyoshi. Kaliforniya. 1940 yil 3 mart. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  51. ^ Forbes 1932 yil, p2
  52. ^ Forbes 1932 yil, pp24 -30
  53. ^ Kampa, Rikkardo (2014 yil fevral). "Texnologik o'sish va ishsizlik: global ssenariy tahlili". Evolyutsiya va texnologiyalar jurnali. ISSN  1541-0099.
  54. ^ Forbes 1993 yil, 2-bob
  55. ^ Forbes 1932 yil, passim, qarang. 49-53 betlar
  56. ^ Suetoniusning XVIII bobining sakkizinchi kitobiga qarang O'n ikki Qaysar.
  57. ^ Forbes 1932 yil, pp147 -150
  58. ^ Roberto Sabatino Lopez (1976). "Chpt. 2,3". O'rta asrlardagi savdo inqilobi, 950-1350. Kembrij universiteti matbuoti. ISBN  978-0521290463.
  59. ^ a b Shumpeter 1987 yil, Chpt 6
  60. ^ Ba'zida ushbu qatllar odatda faqat eng yomon jinoyatchilarga tegishli bo'lgan usullar bilan amalga oshirildi, masalan, Frantsiyaning janubida bir marta, 58 kishi Ketrin g'ildiragi taqiqlangan tovarlarni sotish uchun. Chpt 1 ga qarang Dunyoviy faylasuflar.
  61. ^ Masalan, tomonidan Ser Jon Xabakkuk yilda O'n to'qqizinchi asrda Amerika va Britaniya texnologiyalari (1962), Kembrij universiteti matbuoti - Xabakkuk, shuningdek, ishchi kuchi etishmovchiligi sababli ingliz hamkasblari bilan taqqoslaganda, AQSh ishchilarining texnologiyalarni joriy etishga nisbatan kamroq qarshilik ko'rsatganligi, bu esa innovatsiyalarni yanada yangilashga va shu sababli samaraliroq bo'lishiga olib keldi. Amerika ishlab chiqarish tizimi
  62. ^ Shumpeter 1987 yil, Chpt 4
  63. ^ Sowell, T. (2006), "5-bob: Sismondi: beparvo qilingan kashshof", Klassik iqtisodiyot to'g'risida
  64. ^ Dastlab innovatsiya butun aholiga foyda keltiradi degan fikrda bo'lganida, Rikardoni Maltus texnologiya ishchilar sinfining ish haqini pasaytirishi va uzoq muddatli ishsizlikni keltirib chiqarishi mumkinligiga ishontirgan. U ushbu qarashlarini uchinchi va oxirgi (1821) nashrga qo'shilgan "Mashinasozlik to'g'risida" bobida mashhur ifoda etgan Siyosiy iqtisod va soliqqa tortish tamoyillari to'g'risida
  65. ^ Bartlett, Bryus (2014 yil 18-yanvar). "Sanoat innovatsiyasi ish joylarini yo'q qiladimi?". Academia.edu (Dastlab Cato Journal-da nashr etilgan). Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  66. ^ Woirol 1996 yil, 2, 20-22 betlar
  67. ^ Woirol 1996 yil, 2, 8-12 betlar
  68. ^ a b Woirol 1996 yil, 8-12 betlar
  69. ^ Samuelson, Pol (1989). "Rikardo haq edi!". Skandinaviya iqtisodiyot jurnali. 91 (1): 47–62. doi:10.2307/3440162. JSTOR  3440162.
  70. ^ Woirol 1996 yil, 143–144-betlar
  71. ^ a b v Jeyms S. Albus, Xalqlar kapitalizmi: Robot inqilobi iqtisodiyoti (Bepul Yuklash)
  72. ^ a b Jeyms S. Albus, Xalq kapitalizmi asosiy veb-sayti
  73. ^ Noble 1984
  74. ^ Noble 1993 yil.
  75. ^ Rifkin 1995 yil
  76. ^ Global tuzoq 21-asrda paydo bo'lishi mumkin bo'lgan "20/80 jamiyat" ni belgilaydi. Ushbu potentsial jamiyatda mehnatga layoqatli aholining 20% ​​dunyo iqtisodiyotini ushlab turish uchun etarli bo'ladi. Mualliflar Mixail Gorbachyovning taklifiga binoan 1995 yil 27 sentyabr - 1 oktyabr kunlari San-Frantsiskodagi Fairmont mehmonxonasida barcha qit'alardan kelgan 500 ta etakchi siyosatchilar, biznes rahbarlari va akademiklar ishtirokidagi konferentsiyada "beshdan bir jamiyat" atamasi qanday paydo bo'lganligini tasvirlaydi. . Mualliflar ish hajmining pasayishi natijasida hosildorlikning oshishini tasvirlaydilar, shuning uchun bu ishchi kuchining beshdan bir qismi tomonidan amalga oshirilishi va mehnatga layoqatli odamlarning to'rtdan to'rt qismi ishsiz qolishi mumkin.
  77. ^ Woirol 1996 yil, p. 3
  78. ^ a b MakKarti, Mark (2014 yil 30 sentyabr). "Texnologiyalarni o'ldiradigan afsonani o'ldiradigan vaqt". Tepalik. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  79. ^ Miya 2003 yil.
  80. ^ Ford 2009 yil.
  81. ^ Lor, Stiv (2011 yil 23 oktyabr). "Odamlar emas, balki mashinalar uchun ko'proq ish o'rinlari bashorat qilinmoqda". The New York Times.
  82. ^ Endryu Kin, Internet qanday qilib bizni yanada boyitib, tengsizlikka olib kelayotgani to'g'risida qiziqish (TCTV), bilan suhbat Endryu Makafi va Erik Brynjolfsson, TechCrunch, 2011.11.15
  83. ^ Krasny, Jill (2011 yil 25-noyabr). "MIT professorlari: 99% texnika boomida mushtlarini silkitishi kerak". Business Insider.
  84. ^ Timberg, Skott (2011 yil 18-dekabr). "Xodim, RIP". Salon.com.
  85. ^ Leonard, Endryu (2014 yil 17-yanvar). "Robotlar sizning ishingizni o'g'irlamoqda: texnologiya o'rta sinfni yo'q qilish bilan qanday tahdid qilmoqda". Salon.com.
  86. ^ Rotman, Devid (iyun 2015). "Texnologiya ish joylarini qanday yo'q qilmoqda". MIT. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  87. ^ "FT ning yozgi kitoblari 2015" ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. 2015 yil 26-iyun. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  88. ^ Tompson, Derek (2014 yil 23-yanvar). "Robotlar qanday ishlarni qabul qiladilar?". Millat. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  89. ^ Maxsus hisobot (2013 yil 29 mart). "Kuchli tanlov: robotlar tomonidan ish joylarini yo'q qilish yaratilishdan ko'proq bo'lishi mumkin". Iqtisodchi. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  90. ^ a b Kardiff Garsiya, Erik Brynjolfsson va Mariana Mazzukato (2014 yil 3-iyul). Robotlar hali ham bizning nazoratimizda ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  91. ^ Ignatieff, Maykl (2014 yil 10-fevral). "Mashinalarni bo'ysundirish uchun bizga yangi Bismark kerak" ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  92. ^ Lord Skidelskiy (2013 yil 19-fevral). "Robotlar ko'tarilishi: ishning kelajagi qanday bo'ladi?". Guardian. London. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  93. ^ Bria, Francesca (2016 yil fevral). "Robot iqtisodiyoti allaqachon kelgan bo'lishi mumkin". ochiq demokratiya. Olingan 20 may 2016.
  94. ^ Srnicek, Nik (Mart 2016). "Texnologik ishsizlikning bu safar haqiqatan ham farq qilishi mumkin bo'lgan 4 sabab". novara sim. Arxivlandi asl nusxasi 2016 yil 25 iyunda. Olingan 20 may 2016.
  95. ^ Endryu Makafi va Erik Brynjolfsson (2014). "passim, qarang esp Chpt. 9 ". Ikkinchi mashina asri: porloq texnologiyalar davrida ish, taraqqiyot va farovonlik. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN  978-0393239355.
  96. ^ a b v Miller, Kler Keyn (2014 yil 15-dekabr). "Robotlar aqlli bo'lib o'sib borar ekan, amerikalik ishchilar ilgarilab ketishga intilmoqda". The New York Times.
  97. ^ a b Larri Summers, Tengsizlik jumboq, Demokratiya: g'oyalar jurnali, № 32 son, 2014 yil bahor
  98. ^ Vinik, Erin (2017 yil 12-dekabr). "Advokat-botlar ish joylarini silkitmoqdalar". MIT Technology Review. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  99. ^ "Forum munozarasi: Texnologiyalar va bandlikni qayta ko'rib chiqish <- Ishning markazliligi, 1:02 - 1:04 ->". Jahon iqtisodiy forumi. 2014 yil yanvar. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  100. ^ Gillian Tett (2015 yil 21-yanvar). texnologiya keyingi besh yil ichida ish joylarini almashtirishni davom ettiradi ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  101. ^ Xeylde, Endi (Noyabr 2015). "Mehnat ulushi". Angliya banki. Olingan 20 may 2016.
  102. ^ Visko, Ignazio (Noyabr 2015). "Vaqt uchun ular o'zgaruvchan ..." Italiya banki. Olingan 20 may 2016. Iqtibos jurnali talab qiladi | jurnal = (Yordam bering)
  103. ^ "Prezident Obama: Kelasi 10 yoki 20 yil ichida biz so'zsiz bepul pul haqida bahslashamiz"'". 2016 yil 12 oktyabr. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  104. ^ Zakari B. Wolf. "Robotlar ham sizning ishingizga kelishadi". CNN. Maks Pepperning rasmlari. Olingan 8 sentyabr 2019.
  105. ^ Smit, Aaron; Anderson, Janna (2014 yil 6-avgust). "AI, robototexnika va ish o'rinlari kelajagi". Pew tadqiqot markazi. Olingan 14 avgust 2014.
  106. ^ Greber, Jeykob (2015 yil 1-fevral). "Avtomatlashtirish kuchayib borayotganligi sababli bandlik qo'rquvi". Avstraliya moliyaviy sharhi. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  107. ^ Vinsent, Jeyms (2018 yil 7 mart). "Aksariyat amerikaliklar sun'iy intellekt o'zlarining ishlarini emas, boshqalarning ishlarini yo'q qiladi deb o'ylashadi". The Verge.
  108. ^ "Evropa Ittifoqi ishlarining 50% dan ortig'i kompyuterlashtirish xavfi ostida". 2014 yil 22-iyul. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  109. ^ Bowles, Jeremy (2014 yil 22-iyul). "Evropa Ittifoqidagi ishlarning yarmidan ko'pini kompyuterlar almashtirishi mumkin". Business Insider. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  110. ^ Madala-Brik, Shavit. "Kasblar xavf ostida: Isroil mehnat bozoridagi kompyuterlashtirish tendentsiyalari" (PDF). taubcenter.org.il.
  111. ^ "Avtomatlashtirishning rivojlanayotgan mamlakatlarga ta'siri 85% gacha ish o'rinlarini xavf ostiga qo'yadi". Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  112. ^ 4, Ish beruvchilar faoliyati byurosi; Switzerl, Morillons Genève 22 yo'nalishi. "Ish beruvchilar faoliyati byurosi (ACTEMP)" (PDF). Olingan 14 mart 2018.CS1 maint: raqamli ismlar: mualliflar ro'yxati (havola)
  113. ^ "BMT hisoboti: rivojlanayotgan dunyoda robotlar barcha ishchilarning uchdan ikki qismini almashtiradi". 2016 yil 11-noyabr. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  114. ^ Goldstein, Stiv (2016 yil 23-fevral). "Robotlar soatiga 20 dollar yoki undan kam haq to'laydigan ishlarga kelishmoqda, buni Oq uy topadi". MarketWatch. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  115. ^ "Avtomatlashtirish kelgusida Kanadadagi 10 dan 4 ta ish joyini katta xavf ostiga qo'yishi mumkin", deydi tadqiqot.. CBC News. 2016 yil 15-iyun. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  116. ^ Nelson, Eshe (2017 yil 24 mart). "Nima uchun Amerika ish joylari Germaniya yoki Buyuk Britaniyadagi ishlardan ko'ra avtomatizatsiya xavfiga ko'proq ta'sir qiladi". Kvarts. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  117. ^ Uells, Nik (2017 yil 19-iyul). "Amerikalik ish o'rinlarining yarmi avtomatlashtirish xavfiga duchor bo'ladi, yangi tadqiqot shuni ko'rsatadiki". CNBC. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  118. ^ Bolden-Barret, Valeri (2017 yil 13-sentabr). "Hisobot: Ishlab chiqarishda ish o'rinlarining aksariyati avtomatlashtirilishi mumkin". HR sho'ng'in. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  119. ^ "Axborot texnologiyalari sohasidagi qarorlarni qabul qiluvchilar gapirishadi: 2022 yilgacha 59% biznes-jarayonlar avtomatlashtirilishi mumkin". Ish simlari. 4 oktyabr 2017 yil. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  120. ^ "Ishning kelajagi ish, mahorat va ish haqi uchun nimani anglatadi". McKinsey & Company. 2017 yil 28-noyabr. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  121. ^ Dashevskiy, Evan (2017 yil 8-noyabr). "Robotlar qanday qilib Brexitni keltirib chiqardi va Donald Trampning ko'tarilishi". Kompyuter jurnali. Arxivlandi asl nusxasi 2017 yil 8-noyabrda. Olingan 11 yanvar 2018.
  122. ^ Torrance, Jek (2017 yil 25-iyul). "Tramp uchun robotlar: avtomatizatsiya AQShdagi saylovlarni tezlashtirdimi?". Bugungi kunda boshqaruv. Olingan 11 yanvar 2018.
  123. ^ Xarris, Jon (29 dekabr 2016). "Tramp va Brexitdan saboq: o'z xalqi uchun juda murakkab jamiyat hamma narsani xavf ostiga qo'yadi". Guardian. ISSN  0261-3077. Olingan 11 yanvar 2018.
  124. ^ G'arbiy, Darrell (18.04.2018). "Robotlar va AI sizning ishingizni egallaydimi? Avtomatlashtirishning iqtisodiy va siyosiy oqibatlari". Brukings instituti.
  125. ^ Byorn, Klar (2016 yil 7-dekabr). "'Odamlar adashdi ': Frantsiyaning "Tramplendlar" saylovchilari juda o'ng tomonga qarashmoqda ". Local.fr.
  126. ^ Maykl Chuy, Jeyms Manyika va Mehdi Miremadi (2015 yil noyabr). "Ish joylarini avtomatlashtirishning to'rtta asoslari Jismoniy va bilimlarni avtomatlashtirish rivojlanib borishi bilan ko'plab ish joylari yo'q qilish o'rniga qayta belgilanadi - hech bo'lmaganda qisqa vaqt ichida". McKinsey har chorakda. Olingan 7-noyabr 2015. Yaqin yoki o'rta muddatda juda kam kasblar to'liq avtomatlashtiriladi. Aksincha, ba'zi bir tadbirlar avtomatlashtirilishi ehtimoli ko'proq ....CS1 maint: bir nechta ism: mualliflar ro'yxati (havola)
  127. ^ Lor, Stiv (2015 yil 6-noyabr). "Avtomatlashtirish ish joylarini o'ldirgandan ko'ra o'zgartiradi". The New York Times. Olingan 7-noyabr 2015. McKinsey tomonidan olib borilgan yangi tadqiqotlarga ko'ra, texnologiya asosida ishlaydigan avtomatizatsiya har qanday kasbga ta'sir qiladi va ishni o'zgartirishi mumkin
  128. ^ Arnts, Melani; Gregori, Terri; Zierahn, Ulrich (2016 yil 14-may). "OECD mamlakatlarida ish joylarini avtomatlashtirish xavfi". OECD Ijtimoiy, ish bilan ta'minlash va migratsiya bo'yicha ish hujjatlari. doi:10.1787 / 5jlz9h56dvq7-uz. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  129. ^ "Forrester: Marketing: Forrester 2027 yilga kelib avtomatizatsiya 24,7 million ish joyini bo'shatib, 14,9 million ish joyini qo'shishini taxmin qilmoqda". www.forrester.com. Olingan 14 mart 2018.
  130. ^ Arntz, Melani; Gregori, Terri; Zierahn, Ulrich. "Avtomatlashtirish xavfini qayta ko'rib chiqish". Qabul qilingan 06/11/2017. Iqtibos jurnali talab qiladi | jurnal = (Yordam bering); Sana qiymatlarini tekshiring: | kirish tarixi = (Yordam bering)
  131. ^ Daut, Volfgang; Findayzen, Sebastyan; Suedekum, Jens; Vessner, Nikol. "Nemis robotlari - sanoat robotlarining ishchilarga ta'siri". SSRN  3039031. Qabul qilingan 06/11/2017. Iqtibos jurnali talab qiladi | jurnal = (Yordam bering); Sana qiymatlarini tekshiring: | kirish tarixi = (Yordam bering)
  132. ^ Avtor, Devid; Salomons, Anna (2018 yil 8 mart). "Avtomatlashtirish ish joyini o'zgartiradimi? Hosildorlikning o'sishi, bandlik va mehnat ulushi". Brukings.
  133. ^ Kook, Anna (2018 yil 12-aprel). "Bugungi kunda barcha ishlarning yarmi avtomatlashtirilishi mumkin - va 50 yil ichida ularning barchasi bo'lishi mumkin". MarketWatch.
  134. ^ Metyu Yglesias (2016). "Muddatidan oldin sanoatlashtirish: global iqtisodiy rivojlanish uchun yangi tahdid". vox.com. Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  135. ^ Joshua Grinshteyn (2019). "Sanoatlashtirishsiz rivojlanishmi? Uy xo'jaligi farovonligi va muddatidan oldin sanoatlashtirish". Iqtisodiy muammolar jurnali. 55 (3): 612–633. doi:10.1080/00213624.2019.1634452. S2CID  202310084.
  136. ^ Karl Benedikt Frey, Ebrahim Rahbari (2016). "Mehnatni tejash texnologiyalari rivojlanayotgan dunyoda ish joylarining o'limiga sabab bo'ladimi?" (PDF). Brukings instituti. Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  137. ^ "Sun'iy intellekt yangi ish turlarini yaratadi". Iqtisodchi. 2017 yil 26-avgust. Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  138. ^ Calum Chace (2016). "Deklaratsiya, yubiley". Iqtisodiy yakkalik: sun'iy intellekt va kapitalizmning o'limi. Uchta C. ISBN  978-0993211645.
  139. ^ Calum Chace , Daniel Xulme (2016). "passim". 2045 yildan hikoyalar. Uchta C. ISBN  978-0993211645.
  140. ^ Frank, Morgan R.; Avtor, Devid; Bessen, Jeyms E .; Brynjolfsson, Erik; Cebrian, Manuel; Deming, Devid J.; Feldman, Maryann; Grox, Metyu; Lobo, Xose; Moro, Esteban; Vang, Dashun (2019 yil 2-aprel). "Sun'iy aqlning mehnatga ta'sirini tushunish yo'lida". Milliy fanlar akademiyasi materiallari. 116 (14): 6531–6539. doi:10.1073 / pnas.1900949116. ISSN  0027-8424. PMC  6452673. PMID  30910965.
  141. ^ Krakovskiy, Marina (2017 yil 27-dekabr). "Yangi ish o'rinlari". ACM aloqalari. 61 (1): 21–23. doi:10.1145/3157077. ISSN  0001-0782. S2CID  1085217.
  142. ^ Anvar, Muhammad Amir; Grem, Mark (2020 yil 20-aprel). "Raqamli mehnat iqtisodiy chegarada: afrikalik ishchilar va global axborot iqtisodiyoti". Afrika siyosiy iqtisodiyotiga sharh. 47 (163): 95–105. doi:10.1080/03056244.2020.1728243. ISSN  0305-6244. S2CID  214074400.
  143. ^ Gregori C. Allen (2017 yil 5-sentyabr). "Putin va Mask haq: kim sun'iy intellektni o'zlashtirsa, dunyoni boshqaradi". CNN. Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  144. ^ Tim Dutton (2018 yil 28-iyun). "AI milliy strategiyalariga umumiy nuqtai". Medium.com. Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  145. ^ Olli Koski, Kay Xusso (20.06.2018). "Sun'iy aql: iqtisodiyot, ish bilan ta'minlash, bilim va axloqning to'rt yo'nalishi". Iqtisodiy ishlar va bandlik vazirligi (Finlyandiya) (shved tilida). Olingan 22 mart 2020.
  146. ^ Gandining ishsizlik mavjud bo'lganda innovatsiyani sekinlashtirish kerak degan qarashlariga oid kichik bir to'plami uchun qarang Mashinalarning o'rni
  147. ^ B. N. Ghosh (2007). Gandi siyosiy iqtisod: tamoyillar, amaliyot va siyosat. Ashgate. 14, 15 betlar. ISBN  978-0754646815.
  148. ^ Sangxvi, Vijay (2006). Sonia Gandi davrida Kongressning qayta tiklanishi. Kalpaz. 33-35 betlar. ISBN  978-8178353401.
  149. ^ Ram K. Vepa (2003). Maoning Xitoyi: o'tish davri millati. Abhinav nashrlari. 180-183 betlar. ISBN  978-8170171119.
  150. ^ Walker, Tom (2007). "Nima uchun iqtisodchilar bir martalik mehnatni yoqtirmaydilar". Ijtimoiy iqtisodiyotni qayta ko'rib chiqish. 65 (3): 279–291. doi:10.1080/00346760701635809. S2CID  145673544. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  151. ^ Larri Peyj rivojlangan intellektual tizimlarning ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy ta'siri haqidagi fikrlarini muhokama qiladi mo'l-ko'llikni yaratish uchun ilg'or raqamli texnologiyalardan qanday foydalanish mumkinligi (tavsiflanganidek) Piter Diamandisning kitobi ), odamlarning ehtiyojlarini ta'minlash, ish haftasini qisqartirish va texnologik ishsizlikning zararli ta'sirini kamaytirish. 2014-07-03. Bilan munozara Sergey Brin va Vinod Xosla. Taxminan 13:00 dan boshlab videoga. Auditoriya portfel kompaniyalarining bosh direktorlaridan iborat Xosla korxonalari.
  152. ^ Waters, Richard (2014 yil 31 oktyabr). "Google asoschilaridan biri va bosh direktori Larri Peyj bilan FT intervyusi". Financial Times.
  153. ^ Baumol, Uilyam J. (2000). Leontiefning buyuk sakrashi: Kuesnaydan tashqari, Marks va fon Bortkevich. Iqtisodiy tizimlarni tadqiq qilish. p. 465. doi:10.1080/09535310050005662.
  154. ^ Forstater, Metyu (2001 yil avgust). "Kapitalistik iqtisodiyotdagi ishsizlik - siyosat haqida o'ylash uchun fikr tarixi" (PDF). To'liq bandlik va narxlarning barqarorligi markazi, Missuri-Kanzas-Siti universiteti. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  155. ^ Forstater, Mathew (2015). "Yaxshi dunyo uchun ishlash Bandlik huquqini kataloglashtirish". Falsafa va ijtimoiy tanqid. 41 (1): 61–67. doi:10.1177/0191453714553500. S2CID  145119895.
  156. ^ To'plar, Ed; Lourens Summers (hamraislar) (2015 yil yanvar). "Inklyuziv farovonlik bo'yicha komissiyaning hisoboti" (PDF). Amerika taraqqiyot markazi. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  157. ^ "Davlat siyosati bo'yicha bir qator tavsiyalar". digital.mit.edu. Olingan 29 noyabr 2017.
  158. ^ "Prezidentning Ilmiy va texnologiya bo'yicha maslahatchilar kengashi bakalavriat ta'limi tashabbusi bayonini e'lon qildi". 2 iyun 2014 yil. Olingan 29 noyabr 2017.
  159. ^ "Sanoat strategiyasi: 5 ta asos - GOV.UK". www.gov.uk. Olingan 29 noyabr 2017.
  160. ^ "Kuz-2007". NEA. Olingan 29 noyabr 2017.
  161. ^ Bollier, Devid (2013 yil yanvar). "POWER-CURVE IJTIMOIY: Rivojlanayotgan tarmoq iqtisodiyotida innovatsiyalar, imkoniyat va ijtimoiy tenglik kelajagi". Aspen instituti. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  162. ^ Krugman, Pol (2011 yil mart). "Darajalar va dollarlar". The New York Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  163. ^ Kaplan, Andreas; Haenlein, Maykl (2019). "Siri, Siri, mening qo'limda: Bu erdagi eng adolatli kim? Sun'iy aqlning talqinlari, rasmlari va natijalari to'g'risida". Biznes ufqlari. 62: 15–25. doi:10.1016 / j.bushor.2018.08.004.
  164. ^ Ford 2009 yil, passim, qarang. 158-168 betlar
  165. ^ GleninCA (2014 yil 26 mart). "Robert Reyx: AQShda" Umumiy asosiy daromad deyarli muqarrar'". Kundalik kos. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  166. ^ a b Kris Giles Sept, Sara O'Connor, Claire Jones va Ben McLannahan (18 sentyabr 2014). "To'lovni to'lash" ((ro'yxatdan o'tish talab qilinadi)). Financial Times. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.CS1 maint: bir nechta ism: mualliflar ro'yxati (havola)
  167. ^ Tarnoff, Ben (2016 yil 16-may). "Texnik milliarderlar bizdan boyib ketishdi. Endi ular bizni maydalab ovqatlantirmoqchi". Guardian. London. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  168. ^ Nikson, Richard (1978). RN: Richard Niksonning xotiralari. Nyu-York: Grosset va Dunlap. ISBN  978-0-448-14374-3.
  169. ^ Ford 2009 yil, s.162-168.
  170. ^ a b Rotman, Devid (2015 yil 16-iyun). "Robotlar kimga tegishli bo'ladi?". MIT. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  171. ^ Shnayder, Natan (Yanvar 2015). "Nega Tech Elite universal asosiy daromad ortida qolmoqda". Vitse-muovin. Olingan 14 iyul 2015.
  172. ^ Capital Homestead Act qisqacha mazmuni, Iqtisodiy va ijtimoiy adolat markazi
  173. ^ "Doktor Jeyms Albus". James-albus.org. Olingan 28 mart 2013.
  174. ^ Lancher, Jon (Mart 2015). Robotlar keladi, Vol. 37, № 5, 3-8 betlar, London kitoblarning sharhi
  175. ^ Smit, Nuh (2013 yil 14-yanvar). "Mehnatning oxiri: ishchilarni robotlarning paydo bo'lishidan qanday himoya qilish kerak". Atlantika.
  176. ^ Lanier, Jaron (2013). Kelajak kimga tegishli?. Allen Leyn. p.passim, qarang esp p.20. ISBN  978-1846145223.
  177. ^ a b "Zeitgeistlar harakati bo'yicha tez-tez so'raladigan savollar №5 - 2) Ishni avtomatlashtirish". Arxivlandi asl nusxasi 2012 yil 15-avgustda. Olingan 4 yanvar 2017.
  178. ^ Feyr, Alan (2009 yil 16 mart). "Piter Jozef va Jak Fresko pul iqtisodiyotini tanqid qilishdi". The New York Times. Olingan 5 yanvar 2017.
  179. ^ Tsitgeistlar harakati belgilab berdi: yangi fikr poezdini amalga oshirish (PDF). Arxivlandi asl nusxasi (PDF) 2017 yil 13-yanvarda. Olingan 5 yanvar 2017.
  180. ^ Simon, Aleks (2015 yil 20-iyun). "O'zaro fikrlarni kutmoqdamiz: Piter Jozefning 2016 yilgi ekranga chiqarilishidan oldin kutilgan yangi filmlar seriyasi". Huffington Post. Olingan 5 yanvar 2017.
  181. ^ Donovan, Travis (2010 yil 16-may). "Zeitgeistlar harakati: barqaror kelajakni tasavvur qilish". Huffington Post. Olingan 5 yanvar 2017.
  182. ^ Mehnatning kamayib borayotgan ulushi - tashvishlanadigan tomoshabinmi?, Iqtisodchi, 2013.11.05
  183. ^ Turk, Viktoriya (2014 yil 19-iyun). "Robotlar sizning ishingizni qabul qilishidan qo'rqmang, ularning orqasidagi monopoliyalardan qo'rqing". Vice.com.
  184. ^ Maykl Spens, Labor-ning raqamli ko'chishi (2014-05-22), Project Syndicate

Manbalar

Qo'shimcha o'qish

Shuningdek qarang: Kategoriya: Avtomatlashtirish bo'yicha ishlar