The Relationship Between Employment and Technological Development: A Study of G-20 Countries

Öz

The effects of technological change on economic growth, employment, and inequality have become even more controversial today, given the rapid pace of change. While it is generally accepted that innovation supports productivity gains and creates opportunities for economic expansion, its impact on the labor market is less clear. New technologies can have negative consequences in the labor market by reducing demand for certain jobs. This can lead to unemployment for some workers. On the other hand, they can increase labor demand by creating entirely new industries, occupations, and work forms. Understanding the dynamic relationship between technological change and the labor market is even more important today, especially as economies are transformed by automation and digitalization. In this context, the aim of this study is to investigate the effects of technological development on employment in G-20 countries between 1994 and 2019. First, the cointegration relationship between variables was examined using the Pedroni method, and then long-run coefficient estimates were made using the FMOLS and DOLS methods. According to the FMOLS and DOLS estimator results, technological development positively affected employment. According to the FMOLS estimator, it was concluded that a one-unit increase in technological development increased employment by 8.13 units, and according to the DOLS estimator, a one-unit increase in technological development increased employment by 6.53 units.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Employment
• Total Factor Productivity
• Renewable Energy
• Panel Data Analysis

İstihdam-Teknolojik Gelişme İlişkisi: G-20 Ülkeleri Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Öz

Teknolojik değişimin ekonomik büyüme, istihdam ve eşitsizlik üzerindeki etkileri, değişim hızının yüksek olduğu günümüzde daha da tartışmalı hale gelmiştir. Yeniliğin verimlilik artışlarını desteklediği ve ekonomik genişleme için fırsatlar yarattığı genel olarak kabul görse de, emek piyasası üzerindeki etkisi daha belirsizdir. Yeni teknolojiler, belirli işlere olan talebi azaltarak iş gücü piyasasında olumsuz sonuçlara yol açabilmektedir. Öte yandan, tamamen yeni endüstriler, meslekler ve iş biçimleri yaratarak iş gücüne olan talebi artırabilmektedir. Teknolojik değişim ile iş gücü piyasası arasındaki dinamik ilişkiyi anlamak, özellikle ekonomilerin otomasyon ve dijitalleşme ile dönüşüm geçirdiği günümüzde daha da önemlidir. Bu anlamda çalışmanın amacı 1994-2019 yılları arasında G-20 ülkelerinde teknolojik gelişmenin istihdam üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmaktır. İlk olarak değişkenler arasındaki eşbütünleşme ilişkisi Pedroni yöntemiyle incelenmiş, devamında ise uzun dönem katsayı tahmini ise FMOLS ve DOLS yöntemiyle tahmin edilmiştir. FMOLS ve DOLS tahmincisi sonuçlarına göre teknolojik gelişme istihdamı pozitif etkilemiştir. FMOLS tahmincisine göre teknolojik gelişmedeki bir birimlik artış istihdamı 8.13 birim artırdığı, DOLS tahmincisine göre teknolojik gelişmedeki bir birimlik artış istihdamı 6.53 birim artırdığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İstihdam
• Toplam Faktör Verimliliği
• Yenilenebilir Enerji
• Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

1. Abel, J. R., & Deitz, R. (2012). Job polarization and rising inequality in the nation and the New York–Northern New Jersey region. Current Issues in Economics and Finance, 18(7). Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
2. Acemoglu, D., & Loebbing, J. (2022). Automation and polarization (NBER Working Paper No. 30528). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w30528
3. Asteriou, D., & Hall, S. G. (2007). Applied econometrics: A modern approach (Rev. ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
4. Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F., & Kearney, M. S. (2006). The polarization of the U.S. labor market (NBER Working Paper No. 11986). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w11986
5. Autor, D., Chin, C., Salomons, A. M., & Seegmiller, B. (2022). New frontiers: The origins and content of new work, 1940–2018 (NBER Working Paper No. 30389). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w30389
6. Autor, D., & Salomons, A. (2018). Is automation labor-displacing? Productivity growth, employment, and the labor share (NBER Working Paper No. 24871). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24871
7. Ayhan, F., & Elal, O. (2023). The impact of technological change on employment: Evidence from OECD countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 191, 122439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122439
8. Baffour, P. T., Ebo Turkson, F., Gyeke-Dako, A., & diğerleri. (2020). Innovation and employment in manufacturing and service firms in Ghana. Small Business Economics, 54, 1153–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0120-7

9. Barbieri, L., Mussida, C., Piva, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2019). Testing the employment and skill impact of new technologies: A survey and some methodological issues (GLO Discussion Paper No. 397). Global Labor Organization.
10. Bogliacino, F., & Vivarelli, M. (2012). The job creation effect of R&D expenditures. Australian Economic Papers, 51(2), 96–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8454.2012.00425.x
11. Card, D., & DiNardo, J. E. (2003). Technology and U.S. wage inequality: A brief look. In D. K. Ginther, M. Zavodny, & L. H. Foley (Eds.), Technology, growth, and the labor market (pp. 125–149). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0325-5_7
12. Comin, D. (2010). Total factor productivity. In S. N. Durlauf & L. E. Blume (Eds.), Economic growth. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230280823_32
13. Cresti, L., Dosi, G., & Fagiolo, G. (2023). Technological interdependencies and employment changes in European industries. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 64, 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2022.11.006
14. Çelik, O. (2020). The impact of technology on employment at regional level: The case of Turkey. Öneri Dergisi, 15(54), 412–430. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.771657
15. De Michelis, A., Estevão, M., & Wilson, B. A. (2013). Productivity or employment: Is it a choice? (IMF Working Paper No. 13/97). International Monetary Fund.
16. Eeckhout, J., Hedtrich, C., & Pinheiro, R. (2026). IT and urban polarization. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 18(1), 223–259. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20220306
17. Feldmann, H. (2013). Technological unemployment in industrial countries. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 23, 1099–1126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-013-0308-6
18. Gibbs, M., & Bazylik, S. (2022). How is new technology changing job design? IZA World of Labor, (344). https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.344.v2
19. Harrison, R., Jaumandreu, J., Mairesse, J., & Peters, B. (2014). Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 35, 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.06.001
20. Hornbeck, R., & Moretti, E. (2019). Who benefits from productivity growth? Direct and indirect effects of local TFP growth on wages, rents, and inequality (NBER Working Paper No. 24661). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24661
21. Hötte, K., Somers, M., & Theodorakopoulos, A. (2023). Technology and jobs: A systematic literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194, 122750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122750
22. Jebli, M. B., Youssef, S. B., & Ozturk, I. (2016). Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: The role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and trade in OECD countries. Ecological Indicators, 60, 824–831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.031
23. Jones, C. I. (2019). Paul Romer: Ideas, nonrivalry, and endogenous growth. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 121(3), 859–883. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjoe.12370
24. Kamihigashi, T., & Sasaki, Y. (2022). The impact of multi-factor productivity on income inequality (Discussion Paper Series No. DP2022-31). Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
25. Ladu, M. G. (2012). The relationship between total factor productivity growth and employment: Some evidence from a sample of European regions. Empirica, 39(4), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-012-9202-y
26. Lücke, M. (1999). Sectoral value added prices, TFP growth, and the low-skilled wage in high-income countries (Kiel Working Paper No. 923). Institut für Weltwirtschaft, Universität Kiel.
27. Marire, J. (2022). Unemployment, total factor productivity, budget deficit, and wage share in South Africa. Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, 14(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.20885/ejem.vol14.iss2.art4
28. Nosratabadi, J. (2023). The effect of trade sanctions on employment through total factor productivity. International Economics and Economic Policy, 20, 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-023-00555-y
29. Pedroni, P. (1997). Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series with an application to the PPP hypothesis: New results (Working Paper). Indiana University.
30. Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(Special issue), 653–670.
31. Pedroni, P. (2000). Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. Advances in Econometrics, 15, 93–130.
32. Pissarides, C. A., & Vallanti, G. (2007). The impact of TFP growth on steady-state unemployment. International Economic Review, 48(2), 607–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2007.00439.x
33. Piva, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2018). Technological change and employment: Is Europe ready for the challenge? Eurasian Business Review, 8(1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-017-0100-x
34. Ricardo, D. (2004). On the principles of political economy and taxation (P. Sraffa, Ed.; with the collaboration of M. H. Dobb). In The works and correspondence of David Ricardo (Vol. 1). Liberty Fund. (Original work published 1817/1951)
35. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Pt. 2), S71–S102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725
36. Say, J.-B. (2001). A treatise on political economy; or, the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth (C. R. Prinsep, Trans.; C. C. Biddle, Notes). Batoche Books. (Original work published 1880)
37. Schmitt, J., Shierholz, H., & Mishel, L. (2013, November 19). Don't blame the robots: Assessing the job polarization explanation of growing wage inequality. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/technology-inequality-dont-blame-the-robots/
38. Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). The theory of economic development. Harvard University Press.
39. Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312–320.
40. Stehrer, R. (2022). Capital accumulation, total factor productivity, and employment growth: Medium-term relations in a cross-section analysis (No. 161). Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission.
41. Steuart, J. (1966). An inquiry into the principles of political economy. Oliver and Boyd. (Original work published 1767)
42. Van Roy, V., Vértesy, D., & Vivarelli, M. (2018). Technology and employment: Mass unemployment or job creation? Research Policy, 47(9), 1762–1776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.008
43. Violante, G. L. (2018). Skill-biased technical change. In S. N. Durlauf & L. E. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (pp. 12389–12394). Palgrave Macmillan.