向李嘉图和汤普森学习：早期工业革命与人工智能时代的机器与劳动
Learning From Ricardo and Thompson: Machinery and Labor in the Early Industrial Revolution and in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Annual Review of Economics · 2024 · [{"name": "Daron Acemoğlu", "affiliation": ["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"]}, {"name": "Simon Johnson", "affiliation": ["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"]}]
中文摘要
大卫·李嘉图最初认为机器会帮助工人，但后来修正了这一看法，这很可能是基于纺织业自动化的影响。尽管棉纺织品成为英国经济中最大的部门之一，棉织工的实际工资在数十年间并未上涨。正如 E.P. 汤普森所强调的，自动化迫使工人进入不健康、受到严密监视且几乎没有自主性的工厂。自动化可以提高工资，但只有在伴随能提高劳动边际生产率的新任务、和/或互补部门有足够的额外雇佣时才会如此。当工人无法争取其在生产率增长中应得的份额时，工资不太可能上涨。如今，人工智能可能提升平均生产率，但也可能替代许多工人，同时降低仍在职者的工作质量。如同李嘉图的时代，自动化对当今工人的影响，远比从更高生产率到更高工资的自动关联更为复杂。
Abstract
David Ricardo initially believed machinery would help workers but revised his opinion, likely based on the impact of automation in the textile industry. Despite cotton textiles becoming one of the largest sectors in the British economy, real wages for cotton weavers did not rise for decades. As E.P. Thompson emphasized, automation forced workers into unhealthy factories with close surveillance and little autonomy. Automation can increase wages, but only when accompanied by new tasks that raise the marginal productivity of labor and/or when there is sufficient additional hiring in complementary sectors. Wages are unlikely to rise when workers cannot push for their share of productivity growth. Today, artificial intelligence may boost average productivity, but it also may replace many workers while degrading job quality for those who remain employed. As in Ricardo's time, the impact of automation on workers today is more complex than an automatic linkage from higher productivity to better wages.