By Gary E. Marchant
Are robots and computers going to displace many or even most human jobs? And if they do, what will displaced workers do with their time and lives?
Those were the themes of the most recent CLSI Doomsday Scenario Study Group meeting on March 5, this time addressing the risks of technological unemployment. The session was led by Yvonne Stevens, a Research Fellow with the CSLI who recently co-authored an article surveying potential policy responses to technological unemployment, and who will be speaking on this topic in the opening plenary session of the Third Annual Conference on the Governance of Emerging Technologies to be held in Scottsdale, Arizona on May 26-28, 2015.
Stevens noted that while various experts dating back to economist John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s had predicted technology could result in widespread displacement of human jobs, current unemployment data suggests that this may now becoming a real problem, with new technologies eliminating more jobs than they create.
Stevens summarized three key recent books addressing the problem of Technological Unemployment – two books by the MIT duo of Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee – Race Against the Machine and The Second Machine Age –and Martin Ford’s The Lights in the Tunnel. These authors all document trends suggesting that technological unemployment is a serious problem, and suggest various strategies to try to address these problems, although they concede there are no silver bullets.
It is important to understand and distinguish the economic and social aspects of the technological unemployment problem according to Stevens. The economic dimension is how people will support and provide for themselves as jobs become more scarce. The social dimension relates to the value and self-worth that people obtain from their employment, and the stigma associated with unemployment. Stevens said one of the most poignant quotes from Race Against the Machine was the recognition that “forced idleness is not the same as voluntary leisure.” Stevens discussed the idea of some sort of “badge” system that recognizes and rewards people for social contributions outside the workplace, whether it be creative activities (e.g., art, music), helping others in need (e.g., seniors), open-source contributions, or volunteering to help with other problems that are currently under-valued by the current economic system (e.g., helping with environmental or infrastructure problems).
A spirited discussion then followed, with different perspectives expressed on how serious of a problem technological unemployment will be, what the policy responses should be, and the feasibility of potential solutions.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the discussion was the generational divide about how people will find meaning and self-worth in their lives as jobs may lose their central role in personal satisfaction and status. The more senior participants were concerned that young people will seek refuge in virtual realities and online fantasy worlds, which seemed to many in the audience to be a form of escapism that would not provide a meaningful life. In contrast, some of the student participants expressed a very different vision in which younger people will increasingly find meaning, worthwhile activities and personal relationships in online venues. Does such a shift to virtual existence represent an incremental shift in social existence not qualitatively different from other changes in societal organization throughout history, or does it represent a fundamental shift in human existence? It is clear that the technological unemployment problem raises many issues from short-term economic adjustments to long-term societal changes.
These issues will no doubt be further explored at the Governance of Emerging Technologies Conference plenary panel on this subject on May 26 featuring Yvonne Stevens, author Martin Ford and James Hughes from the IEET.
Photos: March 5, 2015, courtesy of Dawn Marchant.