- Adoption of AI technologies could make some workers more productive and replace others.
- A White House report finds that 20% of Americans work in jobs particularly likely to be impacted by AI.
- Low-income workers without college degrees may be most at risk of job replacement by AI.
Nothing is certain about the future of AI technologies, but three things are becoming clearer.
1. AI will likely impact or change millions of jobs in the years to come.
2. It will likely make some workers more productive.
3. It will probably replace some workers.
The million-dollar question is: How many workers – and which jobs – are most likely to see the positive and negative impacts of AI?
Twenty percent of Americans held ‘high exposure’ jobs that were most likely to be impacted by adoption of AI technologies, White House report finds published in March by the Council of Economic Advisers.
Certainly, the authors were not suggesting that 20% of Americans were likely to see their jobs replaced by AI. Indeed, AI-related job changes could impact one task but leave all others intact. Additionally, these changes could have positive consequences for workers.
That said, if and when an AI job replacement occurs, some workers could be more at risk than others.
“Some workers generally benefit from technological change, either because technological change provides them with new opportunities in the labor market or because it improves their productivity in their current job,” the council wrote. “Conversely, some suffer harm, usually due to job displacement.”
The council’s findings highlight what could be a reality of the next AI boom: It will be good for some workers and bad for others. While the adoption of AI technologies could help some workers become more productive, spend less time on boring tasks, earn higher wages and even have a four-day work week, others might face more competition, earn lower wages, or even see AI replace their jobs. jobs.
The lowest paid jobs could be those most at risk of being replaced by AI
The report did not highlight specific jobs or industries most likely to be negatively impacted by AI.
But the board wrote that workers most at risk of replacement met two criteria: Their jobs had high exposure to AI and had lower “performance requirements” — meaning their tasks had a lesser degree of “ difficulty or complexity” which might be more likely. to automate.
Ten percent of American workers meet both criteria, the council found. These were typically low-income workers without college degrees.
The findings “suggest that AI may be a skills-biased technology, increasing the relative demand for workers with high education levels in high-income occupations,” the council wrote. “They also suggest that AI could exacerbate overall income inequality if it substitutes for low-wage jobs and complements higher-wage jobs.”
Perhaps counterintuitive, the council found that the cohort of workers whose jobs were among the most exposed to AI – people with bachelor’s degrees – were the least likely to be in high-exposure jobs with low performance requirements, combining roles to maximum risk of replacement.
According to the council, 21% of people with bachelor’s degrees worked in jobs with high exposure to AI. However, only 6% of them were in jobs with high exposure and also low performance requirements. Conversely, 17% of high school graduates worked in jobs with high exposure to AI, and 14% worked in jobs with both high exposure to AI and low performance requirements.
This suggests that college-educated workers may be more likely to see the productivity benefits of AI, rather than seeing their jobs replaced by these technologies, the council theorized.
At the same time, 20% of women held jobs with high exposure to AI, compared to 19% of men. Twelve percent of women held jobs that met both the high exposure and low performance requirements criteria, compared to 9% of men.
The world is not black and white, so the impacts of AI on workers are unlikely to be either. This means that it is unlikely that every worker whose job is changed because of AI can be clearly placed into a “good change” or “bad change” category.
The board cited the hypothetical example of a school bus capable of driving itself, which, in theory, could make the job of a bus driver obsolete. In this scenario, the bus would likely need an adult on board to supervise the children.
“AI-based automation could fundamentally change the work of school bus drivers, but it is unlikely to eliminate this work,” the board wrote.
In this example, the bus driver keeps his job – a good outcome – but the nature of his job has changed significantly.
Major economic changes tend to help some workers and hurt others
The AI boom would not be the first major change in the global economy to have divergent impacts on workers.
When China became a major player in global trade in the 1980s, some economists argued that the deluge of low-cost goods was a net benefit to the United States, even though some domestic manufacturing jobs were lost in the process. .
“People who lost their jobs are losing money because of the China shock, but the rest of us are getting cheap stuff at Walmart and Target or wherever,” Nobel Prize-winning economist Angus Deaton said. to Business Insider. “And the theorem says that the value of what we gain is greater than the value of what they lose.”
Deaton said he was increasingly uncertain whether the tradeoff was worth it.
It remains to be seen whether the trade-offs arising from the AI boom will be significantly positive for Americans. Retraining workers who lose their jobs due to AI could help move things in a more positive direction.
But as Deaton’s example of globalization illustrates, the United States does not have a great track record of helping displaced workers find new jobs.
Has your work been impacted by AI technologies for better or worse? Are you ready to share your story? If so, contact this reporter at jzinkula@businessinsider.com.
businessinsider
