NBER Working Papers · 2026 · Joshua S. Gans
中文摘要
自动化能否在不取代工人的情况下损害他们？我们研究这样一类工作：工人既重视生产有用的产出，也重视知道该产出依赖于自身的贡献。即使企业保留工人，可信的机器替代方案也会削弱工作的第二重意义来源。我们的模型表明，当工资充分调整时，这种意义损失会提高薪酬；当工资仅部分调整时，工人将自行承担部分损失。这种损失还可能提高自动化发生的可能性。外部开发者可能通过在许可授权前公开展示机器而获利，因为这种展示会降低人工替代方案的价值。这种“意义外部性”可能创造对机器的需求，并使有利可图的技术开发对社会有害。更高的技术质量与更大的公众显著性具有不同影响：质量改善产出，而显著性本身只会削弱人类工作的价值。因此，自动化可能在消灭工作岗位之前就降低工作的价值。
Abstract
Can automation harm workers without replacing them? We study jobs in which workers value both producing useful output and knowing that the output depends on their own contribution. A credible machine alternative can weaken that second source of meaning even when the firm retains the worker. Our model shows that this loss raises compensation when wages adjust fully; when they adjust only partly, workers bear some of the loss themselves. It can also make automation more likely. An external developer may profit by publicly demonstrating a machine before licensing it, because the demonstration lowers the value of the human alternative. This "meaning externality" can create demand for the machine and make profitable development socially harmful. Better technical quality and greater public salience have different effects: quality improves output, while salience alone weakens human work. Automation can, therefore, reduce the value of work before it eliminates jobs.