The expectation is that of automation or at least a substantial change in half of today's jobs over the next 15-20 years. Based on the tasks categorized as "routine" in OECD surveys of the population aged 16 to 65, 14% of existing jobs in the OECD area could be easily automated and another 31% are at risk of profound change , thus bringing to half of existing jobs those expected to change substantially. And contrary to what is often said, it will not be so much the less skilled jobs that will be disrupted , as much as the intermediates, judging by what has happened in the last 20 years. Low and high skills have polarized the labor market while intermediate skills have decreased between 5 and 15% in all OECD countries. In the United States they went from 61% to 46% of the total.
Another just published study conducted by the International Monetary Fund on the position of women in the digital economy, shows that women are more likely to do routine jobs that can be easily automated than men. Based on current technology 26 million jobs held by women in 30 OECD countries plus Cyprus and Singapore are at high risk (70% chance) of being replaced by robots in the next 20 years. Above all, women over 40 and with lower levels of professionalism, in sales for example, are at a high risk of automation. Extrapolating the findings globally, 180 million female jobs are at risk of being replaced by robots. The relatively good news is that women are also more present in jobs that require social skills such as teachers and nurses which are expected to expand. Furthermore, it must be taken into account that repetitive tasks such as that of a bank teller, replaced by ATMs, have allowed the change to more creative and complex communication tasks such as consultancy for the investment of savings etc ...
While some newspapers have written about 800 million jobs being wiped out by automation, serious studies point out that being able to be automated does not necessarily mean being so immediately: it will depend on the decisions of the companies which are in turn determined by the institutional and economic characteristics of the countries in which they operate. Not only that: new jobs will be created by the increase in productivity of the digital economy and therefore by the increase in wages and the reduction of working hours to produce goods and services. We expect the multiplication of jobs in the sectors of leisure, travel, etc... As Keynes already wrote in the "economic prospects for our grandchildren".
These are the facts and numbers that show how robocalypse is not around the corner: in countries where there are more robots per 10.000 employed -Korea, Singapore, Germany, Japan- unemployment is between 2 and 3,8%, while in Italy which has 4 times fewer robots unemployment is at 10% (see graph below).
The explanation is simple: technological innovation is the engine of medium-long term growth. Which creates jobs and allows high wages. In fact, innovation is an essential part of total productivity, ie the efficiency of the economy as a whole. When this doesn't grow, the economy doesn't grow: in countries where total productivity is higher than Italy's, i.e. all European countries except Greece, growth is higher and unemployment lower.
But there is a problem, indeed a paradox that must be resolved by all advanced countries: despite robots, computing power, communication speed, the productivity of advanced economies continues to grow at a paltry 0,5% per year, far from the 2,5% experienced in the period 1995-2005 in the United States, for example.
Two conferences were held on this topic a few days apart: first, the conference on the implications of digital transformation for businesses was held in London, organized by the OECD together with the department for business and industrial strategy and the department for digital, the culture etc.. of Great Britain. Then in Rome a conference on Building Human capital for 21st century jobs, organized by the Bank of Italy with the World Bank.
Digital innovation and human capital are in fact the engines of productivity at the enterprise level: Why aren't they reflected in the overall efficiency of the economy?
