Robotisation has significantly lower productivity effects than previously assumed, and may cause falling wages, according to a new study from EconPol Europe. The study also rejects previous research findings that the technology causes skill-biased technological change, and instead finds the opposite to be true.

The findings are the result of an analysis of data from the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), currently the most widely used data on the economic effects of robotisation. The authors of the EconPol study claim that using the data can be misleading if information on sectors that are either unaffected by or only marginally exposed to robotisation is combined with those that are heavily affected, such as manufacturing.

“By concentrating only on those sectors that really use robots and excluding the sectors that virtually have no robots we show that previous results have to be reversed,” said Dr Benjamin Bittschi (EconPol Europe, IHS Vienna) – co-author of the research. “In particular, this restriction leads to the fact that we no longer have any effects of the robots on productivity, prices, wages and the skill-composition of the workforce.”

Fears of robot usurpers may be unfounded

Fears that automation will lead to mass unemployment are a recurring social and economic issue. In recent decades, these fears have been fed by the rapid spread of new technologies such as industrial robots. However, due to lack of data it has not been possible for economists to assess the effects that robots actually have on important economic outcomes such as productivity, prices, wages and the skill-composition of the workforce.

Previous research claimed that the contribution of robots to productivity growth is five per cent for the period 1993-2007, placing its impact on a similar level as the steam engine in the 19th century, highways in the mid-20th century – and, more recently, ICT. However, based on the new analysis, Dr Bittschi and co-authors of the study find that productivity in the economy as a whole would have been two per cent lower in 2007 – not even half the amount claimed by previous research.

Less a disruption, more a continuation

When the analysis was repeated using data for the 2008–2015 period, researchers were again unable to detect any significant effects of robotisation on productivity, prices or wages. “We interpret this as an indication that the effects of robotisation weaken over time, at least at an aggregate industry level,” said Dr Bittschi.

“Only if demographic factors of the workforce are considered can positive effects on productivity be found, which supports the idea that the ageing process is closely connected to automation,” he added.

“To interpret our results, it is important to keep in mind that robots have a very low prevalence across all industries – and thus it is not astonishing, in contrast to what one might expect, that there are not necessarily any substantial positive or negative effects for the economy as a whole,” the researcher noted.

“Additionally, further literature shows that the disruptive potential of current robot technology may have been overstated as it possibly does not represent a break with known automation technologies, but is rather an iteration of the same,” he added in closing.