Search

Begin New Search Topic Science and Technology Publication Year within 5 Years

61. Assessing the Impact of New Technologies on Wages and Labour Income Shares

Author:
Antea Barišić, Mahdi Ghodsi, and Robert Stehrer
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper advances the literature on the impacts of new technologies on labour markets, focusing on wage and labour income shares. Using a dataset from 32 countries and 38 industries, we analyse the effects of new technologies – proxied by patents, information and communication technology (ICT) capital usage, and robot intensity – on average wages and labour income shares over time. Our results indicate a positive correlation between patents and wage levels along with a minor negative impact on labour income shares, suggesting that technology rents are not fully passed on to labour. Robot intensity is positively associated with labour income shares, while ICT capital has an insignificant effect. These effects persist over time and are reinforced by global value chain (GVC) linkages. Our conclusions align with recent research indicating that new technologies have a generally limited impact on wages and labour income shares.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Labor Issues, Investment, Global Value Chains, Robotics, and Income
Political Geography:
Global Focus

62. The Mexican Space Industry: Past, Present, and Future

Author:
Katya Echazarreta
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
Mexico has been a participant in the ever-evolving global space industry for almost four decades now. Over that period, there have been opportunities for the country to enter the emerging field as a prominent actor. However, upon a close analysis of Mexican history, it is evident that this particular industry was most likely defined by private commercial needs first and social needs second.1 As demand for space technology grew, the need for a space agency became ap- parent. However, the Mexican Space Agency’s development was misconstrued from its inception. Its purpose was to financially stimulate the Mexican space industry as opposed to centering on the development of an astronaut program or the construction of rocket technology. The initial financing of $800,000 did not properly set the agency up for success. At the time, it was believed that Mexico would catch up to Brazil and Canada in their technological development over a period of ten years.2 However, the test of time has proven this to be far from the case. In the years that followed, Mexico was again presented with an opportunity to change its course with the Space Activities Constitutional Reform gaining traction in 2023. This reform would prioritize Space activities as a means of national development and grant the country’s Congress the rights necessary to create secondary laws to regulate the industry for both government and com- mercial players. By allowing not only national but also international players to get involved, Mexico would become a more prominent player in the Space Industry.3 As the commercial space industry continues to grow into projected estimates of $1 trillion or more by 2040, Mexico finds itself in an ideal moment to regulate its own space activities to encourage active participation in the field.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Reform, Space, Innovation, and Industry
Political Geography:
Latin America and Mexico

63. AI and the US Economy: Optimism, Pessimism, or Realism?

Author:
Fredrick Hernandez, Zach Moller, and Gabe Horwitz
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
There were 130 websites on the internet in 1993; today there are 1.1 billion.1 Over those 30 years, the US economy quadrupled in nominal size and tripled in per capita income.2 The digital age has been very good for America. But it has also concentrated wealth and opportunity. The richest American in 1993 would only be the 101st richest today in inflation-adjusted dollars.3 There are now 735 billionaires living in America today, compared to fewer than 75 in the world in 1993.4 Meanwhile, the gains for the middle class were not stellar. Real median household income grew a solid, but not spectacular, 32% during the internet age. Most of that gain accrued to the two-fifths of working age America with a college degree.5 “50% to 70% of the changes in the US wage structure are intimately linked to automation, particularly digital automation,” MIT economist Daron Acemoglu estimates.6 That was the digital age. What about the artificial intelligence age? Ask McKinsey partner Michael Chui about AI and he says “it can be great not only for companies but for humankind.”7 But Eliezer Yudkowsky, co-founder of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, said that if someone builds an over-powered AI, he expects “that every single member of the human species and all biological life on Earth dies shortly thereafter.”8 What seems clear is that whether we’re addressing the future of humankind or the well-being of the workforce, policymakers and industries must make intentional choices to get the best of AI and avoid the worst. Since AI will change the way we work and learn, this paper unpacks different economic projections to give policymakers a better read on what this technology will do to everything from American GDP to skill training. Broadly speaking, there are three distinct perspectives on AI and the economy. Optimists predict AI will elevate the working class, accelerate our national prosperity, and lower costs. Pessimists say AI will contribute to income inequality in the United States, jobs will be automated out of existence, and large corporations will gain far more than workers and families. Pragmatists accept AI will have positive benefits to the economy but acknowledge the mixed bag of how it will affect jobs and generally call for specific actions to mitigate harms and spread benefits. Below, we explore the key takeaways from each perspective. This is a product in a multi-year series to help educate policymakers on the implications and policy choices confronting Congress and the Administration on next generation Artificial Intelligence.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economy, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Technologies, and Optimism
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

64. Competing Values Will Shape US-China AI Race

Author:
Valerie Shen and Jim Kessler
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
President Biden’s AI executive order reflects a set of values recognizable to all Americans: Privacy, equal treatment and civil rights; free speech and expression; the rule of law; opportunity and free market capitalism; pluralism; and advancement of global leadership as the beacon of a free world. President Xi Jinping’s government has also issued AI regulations with values recognizable to China: Collectivism and obedience to authority; social harmony and homogeneity; market authoritarianism and rule of state; and digital world hegemony to restore China’s rightful place as the Middle Kingdom. The United States and China may share similar broad goals for “winning” AI along the lines of leading innovation and advancement, spurring broad-based economic growth and prosperity, achieving domestic social stability, and becoming the clear global influencer for the rest of the world—but they define those goals and seek to achieve those ends through very different values. Those values embedded in our respective AI policies and underlying technology carry high-stakes, long-term national and economic security implications as US and Chinese companies compete directly to become dominant in emerging global markets. They also share similar fears that reflect each country’s values. China worries that AI could cause social unrest if information to a sheltered population is too real and unfiltered. America fears that AI could cause social unrest if information Americans receive is too fake. And that massive disinformation and algorithms that rile the population could threaten our democratic system. Why do these value differences matter when it comes to the AI race? Below, we outline six contrasting values that we believe will be the most determinative in how the US-China AI competition plays out. We argue that understanding our different values-based approaches illuminates our respective advantages and disadvantages in this competition. It assesses who is currently set up to “win” across key metrics and determines how to lean into our democratic advantages or mitigate some practical disadvantages compared with the PRC, this will ultimately win the AI marathon.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

65. What role for Chinese FDI in Africa? New survey evidence from Ethiopia and Ghana

Author:
Charles Ackah, Alemayehu Geda, Holger Görg, and Federico Merchan
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
Foreign investments bring in not only new employment but also novel technology, managerial skill and know-how, that may also dissipate into the local economy. It is not clear whether this effect differs by the nationality of source countries, in particular between Chinese and non-Chinese firms. Based on a firm level survey on Ethiopia and Ghana, we found that all types of firms are engaged in limited R&D and innovation activity and their transfer to host countris in both countries. There is little difference between Chinese and non-Chinese foreign firms in such technology and managerial skill transfer once controlling for firm size and industry characteristics in the majority of metrices (R&D activities, horizontal & vertical spillover, directly adopting techniques). However, we found for Ghana that Chinese firms have more suppliers but are less likely to transfer technology to them. Chinese firms are more likely to transfer managerial skills than non-Chinese firms in Ghana though not in Ethiopia. Also, there is little evidence that foreign firms transfer technology via horizontal or backward spillovers in either countries. Finally, Chinese firms are much more likely to receive host country policy support than other foreign firms in Ghana but not in Ethiopia.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Foreign Direct Investment, Economy, and Technological Transfer
Political Geography:
Africa, China, Ethiopia, and Ghana

66. The EU and military AI governance: Forging value-based coalitions in an age of strategic competition

Author:
Katja Creutz, Ville Sinkkonen, Mahmoud Javadi, and Michal Onderco
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has increased dramatically, driving discussion on the best way to govern it. While much of the discussion has focused on AI in the civilian domain, its usage in military applications raises distinct ethical and legal questions that actors increasingly seek to address. Governance initiatives are becoming more common, even though strategic competition between major powers remains a challenge. The EU navigates this governance landscape more hesitantly than in the civilian domain with its Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA). More information is needed regarding what kind of regulation, and especially with whom the Union could pursue such avenues. This paper seeks to address these questions by presenting and analyzing results from an expert survey conducted in autumn 2023 by researchers at Erasmus University Rotterdam. It argues that the EU needs to pursue a broad range of cooperation formats to advance its values and interests in the context of military AI. Strategic multilateralism is needed, especially with like-minded states that share values with the Union.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, European Union, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Europe

67. China’s approach to AI standardisation: State-guided but enterprise-led

Author:
Junhua Zhu
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
AI standardisation is a major battleground in the international AI race, in which states compete against each other for standard-setting power. China sees AI standardisation as a sector in which it could become a norm-maker rather than a norm-taker. The global landscape of AI standardisation is undergoing a phase of reconstruction. The US and China are discussing new bilateral standardisation frameworks, while the significance of pre-existing multilateral standardisation frameworks is declining. The Chinese approach to AI standardisation is found to be heavily reliant on the corporate sector, following an enterprise-led and state-guided pattern. The state cooperates closely with the private sector in a community of practice, acting as a catalyst in the early stage, a supporter in the mid-stage, and a supervisor in the later stage of the AI standardisation process. Enhancing a contextualised understanding of the fast-changing landscape of AI standardisation in China is critical for European policymakers to safeguard Europe’s competitiveness, preserve European values, and engage in dialogue on global AI governance.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Economic Policy, Artificial Intelligence, and Standardization
Political Geography:
China and Asia

68. Bridging the Gap: Accelerating Technology Adoption for Sustainable Food Production

Author:
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Emerging AgTech innovations have the potential to radically improve the sustainability, profitability, and accessibility of US-produced food. Rapid adoption of agricultural technological (AgTech) innovation is required to meet the future needs of a safe and sustainable US agricultural system that generates more food despite a confluence of obstacles jeopardizing agricultural productivity, while establishing consumer trust to ensure food innovation is accepted by society. With climate change and growing populations putting increasing pressure on our food systems to produce, farmers and their supply chain partners must find a way to rise to food production challenges through the rapid adoption of technology and scientific innovation. However, a recent history of AgTech innovations that failed to achieve widespread consumer acceptance underscores the importance of consumer buy-in for technical innovation in agricultural production. We need to rebuild consumer trust of new technology in food production, streamline and coalesce processes that expedite innovation, and ensure new innovation is accessible and profitable for growers. Based on a June 2023 roundtable, the second in a series of regular convenings, the white paper "Bridging the Gap: Accelerating Technology Adoption for Sustainable Food Production" explores the current development, challenges, and potential of emerging AgTech innovations, and concludes with action recommendations designed to remove barriers and expedite the next generation of AgTech integration in US food production.
Topic:
Agriculture, Science and Technology, Food Security, Sustainability, and Productivity
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

69. The Diffusion of New Technologies

Author:
Aakash Kalyani, Nicholas Bloom, Marcela Carvalho, Tarek A. Hassan, Josh Lerner, and Ahmed Tahoun
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
We identify phrases associated with novel technologies using textual analysis of patents, job postings, and earnings calls, enabling us to identify four stylized facts on the diffusion of jobs relating to new technologies. First, the development of economically impactful new technologies is geographically highly concentrated, more so even than overall patenting: 56% of the most economically impactful technologies come from just two U.S. locations, Silicon Valley and the Northeast Corridor. Second, as the technologies mature and the number of related jobs grows, hiring spreads geographically. But this process is very slow, taking around 50 years to disperse fully. Third, while initial hiring in new technologies is highly skill-biased, over time the mean skill level in new positions declines, drawing in an increasing number of lower-skilled workers. Finally, the geographic spread of hiring is slowest for higher-skilled positions, with the locations where new technologies were pioneered remaining the focus for the technology’s high-skill jobs for decades.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Science and Technology, Innovation, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

70. Tesla as a Global Competitor: Strategic Control in the EV Transition

Author:
Matt Hopkins and William Lazonick
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
In this paper, we assess the implications of Elon Musk’s strategic control over Tesla, the pioneering company that has become central to the electric vehicle transition. We document how, as Tesla’s CEO for 16 years, Musk has exercised strategic control to direct the transformation of the company from an uncertain startup to a global leader. Now that Tesla is profitable corporate predators (aka hedge-fund activists) may challenge Musk’s strategic control—a possibility of which the CEO is well aware. To retain his control over Tesla as a publicly listed company, Musk depends on holding a sufficient proportion of Tesla’s shares outstanding to possess the voting power to fend off predatory value extractors. In addition to accumulating Tesla shares by investing $291.2 million at early stages of the company’s evolution, Musk has relied upon massive stock-option grants from the Tesla board, under the guise of “compensation”, in 2009, 2012, and 2018, to boost his shareholding and, with it, his voting power. Hence the Delaware Court of Chancery’s decision in January 2024 to rescind Musk’s 2018 stock-option package—by far the largest ever granted to a corporate executive—poses a threat to Musk’s strategic control at Tesla. As the “Technoking” of Tesla strategizes to maintain his control over the company’s decision-making, anyone concerned with the role that Tesla will play in the evolving EV transition should be asking how CEO Musk might use, or abuse, his powerful position.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economic Competition, Electric Vehicles, Tesla, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America