The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries: A Comparative Analysis

By M. Arntz, Terry Gregory, Ulrich Zierahn. 2016

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor (2019, result): “One study assessed recent developments in AI to conclude that 47% of current US employment is at high risk of computerization (23), while a contrasting study, using a different methodology, concluded that a less alarming 9% of employment is at risk (24).”
The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Issues and Implications for Career Research and Practice (2018, methodology): “Taking such a task-based approach, Arntz et al. (2016) estimated the extent to which specific tasks might be automated and the degree to which individuals in an occupation perform such tasks, based on the International Assessment of Adult Competencies Program.”
Robots, reshoring, and the lot of low-skilled workers (2018, unknown): “At the same time, robots, 3D printers, and devices based on machine learning have become better at performing the tasks of labor (see, for example, Frey and Osborne, 2013, 2017; Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2016; Arntz et al., 2016).”
Brave new world: service robots in the frontline (2018, background): “New technologies will also create new jobs (Arntz et al., 2016) and very different employment ecosystems (c.f., Subramony et al., 2018).”
Occupational, industry, and geographic exposure to artificial intelligence: A novel dataset and its potential uses (2021, background): “…that developments in AI may pose to workers (e.g., Jordan, 2018; Stark, 2017; Wacker, 2017), and a stream of research has begun to examine how AI and automation may affect the workforce (e.g., Acemoglu & Restrepo, 2018; Arntz, Gregory, & Zierahn, 2016; Frey & Osborne, 2017; Mann & Püttmann, 2017).”
Measuring the Occupational Impact of AI: Tasks, Cognitive Abilities and AI Benchmarks (2020, background): “This paper contributes to the literature on measuring the occupational impact of AI (Frey and Osborne, 2017; Arntz et al., 2016; Nedelkoska and Quintini, 2018), although we distinguish between technological feasibility of AI and the full automation (substitution through machines) of a task.”
Technological change and employment: is Europe ready for the challenge? (2018, unknown): “Indeed, international organizations (UNIDO and OECD) are increasingly concerned about this risk (see Crespi and Tacsir 2012; UNIDO 2013; Arntz et al. 2016; OECD 2016).”
Algorithms at Work: The New Contested Terrain of Control (2020, unknown): “Although others have addressed the macro-economic changes associated with replacement of jobs by algorithms (e.g., Arntz, Gregory, & Zierahn, 2016; Autor, 2015a, 2015b; Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014; Davenport & Kirby, 2016; Ekbia & Nardi, 2017; Elliott, 2014; Frey & Osborne, 2017; Mindell, 2015;…”
Productive employment and decent work: The impact of AI adoption on psychological contracts, job engagement and employee trust (2020, unknown): “In contrast, some scholars predict that AI technology at work will affect the nature of tasks not jobs (Arntz et al., 2016).”
The future of skills: employment in 2030 (2017, background): “Arntz et al. (2016) observe that within an occupation, many workers specialise in tasks that cannot be automated.”
The Employment Consequences of Robots: Firm-Level Evidence (2020, unknown): “Research examining the effect of robots on labor is still nascent, with only a few studies examining the substitutability of robots on work (Acemoglu and Restrepo 2017, Arntz et al. 2016, Frey and Osborne 2017, Mann and Püttmann 2017, Manyika 2017).”