Page added on January 18, 2017
When countries around the world face a rapidly ageing workforce, machines will help to fill the gap
The United Nations forecasts that the global population will rise from 7.3 billion to nearly 10 billion by 2050, a big number that often prompts warnings about overpopulation. Some have come from neo-Malthusians, who fear that population growth will outstrip the food supply, leaving a hungry planet. Others appear in the tirades of anti-immigrant populists, invoking the spectre of a rising tide of humanity as cause to slam borders shut. Still others inspire a chorus of neo-Luddites, who fear that the “rise of the robots” is rapidly making human workers obsolete, a threat all the more alarming if the human population is exploding.
Before long, though, we’re more likely to treasure robots than to revile them. They may be the one thing that can protect the global economy from the dangers that lie ahead.
An increase of 2.5 billion people may sound catastrophic. But what matters for economic growth is not the number of people but the rate of population growth. Since its peak in the 1960s, that rate has slumped by almost half to just 1 per cent, and the UN forecast assumes that this slowdown will continue. Women are having fewer children, so fewer people are entering the working ages between 15 and 64, and labour-force growth is poised to decline from Chile to China. At the same time, owing to rapid advances in health care and medicine, people are living longer, and most of the coming global population increase will be among the retirement crowd. These trends are toxic for economic growth, and boosting the number of robots may be the easiest answer for many countries.
One simple way to estimate how fast an economy can grow is by adding working-age population growth and productivity growth: if the number of workers and output per worker are both increasing by 1 per cent a year, then economic output should rise by roughly 2 per cent. Over the past decade, both sides of that equation have declined dramatically across the world. In the US, productivity growth has fallen by almost half from its postwar average, but growth in the labour force has slid even faster, dropping by two-thirds to an average pace of 0.5 per cent, according to calculations performed for my book. Though many explanations have been offered for the slow recovery from the global financial crisis of 2008, the clearest answer may be ageing populations. Something will have to fill the void left by, say, retiring farmers, and particularly at a time of rising hostility to immigrants, it is likely to be farmbots.
It may not be long before economists are worrying about a global shortage of robots. In many industrial countries, from Germany to Japan to South Korea, growth in the working-age population has already peaked, acting as a drag on the economy. Widely overlooked, however, is the fact that the population-growth slowdown is unfolding even faster in the emerging world, according to my research.
Consider the turning point that China hit last year. For the first time since records began in the 1950s, its working-age population growth was negative. As a result, China’s labour force is expected to lose 1 million workers each year for the foreseeable future, and it is also ageing rapidly. Studies by Evercore ISI, a research firm, show that the elderly share of the population is rising more than twice as fast as it did in the US and more than four times faster than in France at similar stages of development. Asked by an alarmed dinner companion about the threat robots posed to jobs in China, Nobel economist Daniel Kahneman responded: “You just don’t get it. In China, the robots are going to come just in time.” No wonder Beijing now offers heavy subsidies to companies involved in industrial automation.
And timing is critical. Those who fear the job-destroying impact of machines say this generation of technology is different because it is coming so fast. If older generations created tools for use by humans, such as sewing machines, the new forms of automation are imbued with artificial intelligence, capable of “machine learning” and of rapidly replacing humans in a broad swath of jobs, from manufacturing to services — even jobs that involve writing about robots. Concern about this disruptive advance has been stirred up by authorities such as Oxford University researchers Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne, who predicted in 2013 that nearly half of US jobs would be at risk from automation in the next decade or two.
These alarms have sounded before, however. The Machine Intelligence Research Institute at the University of California at Berkeley has found that today, the average forecast for when artificial intelligence will arrive is about 20 years. But that was also the standard prediction in 1955. And often, humans find a way of working with their automated creations. After the introduction of supermarket scanners, the number of cashiers grew. Though legal-discovery software appeared to threaten the jobs of paralegals, their ranks increased, too. Now, many fear that self-driving trucks will displace millions of American truckers, but they may create more and better jobs for those who service those increasingly complex vehicles.
If automation was displacing human workers as fast as implied in recent books such as Martin Ford’s “The Rise of the Robots”, then we should be seeing a negative impact on jobs already. We’re not. Since 2008, economic growth has been weak compared with that in other post-crisis recoveries, but job growth in the major industrial countries has been relatively strong. In the Group of Seven, the world’s top industrial countries, unemployment has fallen faster than expected in the face of weak economic growth, and faster than in any comparable period since at least the 1970s. The Japanese economy is growing at 0.8 per cent, yet it is at full employment. According to my research, the job picture has been particularly strong in Germany, Japan and South Korea — the industrial countries that employ the most robots.
True, robots do represent a new obstacle for some poorer nations, namely those few that do not suffer from population decline. In the postwar era, countries such as China escaped poverty by moving a rising young population off the farm and into more productive jobs in factories. Indeed, it was unusual for any country to sustain rapid growth unless the working-age population was increasing faster than 2 per cent a year. My analysis shows that, in the 1980s, 17 of the 20 largest emerging economies had a working-age population expanding that fast, according to my research, but now there are only two: Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. And they will have a hard time moving a large segment of their young populations into industrial jobs, given that they now have to compete with robotic manufacturing elsewhere.
Yet for the rising number of countries facing population decline, the effort to lift the labour force has begun. Starting in the 1980s, led by Singapore, nations from Chile to Australia have offered baby bonuses for women to have more children, but many have found that these bonuses are ineffective in the face of stronger cultural forces, including the desire of many women to pursue a career before having children. Others have tried with some success to boost the workforce directly by raising the retirement age, offering women incentives to join or return to the labour force after having kids and opening doors to immigrant workers.
The simple maths, however, shows that particularly in rapidly ageing, conservative societies such as Japan and Germany, none of these groups has the potential to make up for coming declines in the working-age population. Germany decided to admit roughly 1 million refugees in 2015, in part for economic reasons, but the resulting controversy has reduced the flow. Germany would have to admit 1.5 million each year through 2030 to fully offset the economic impact of its ageing population. Japan, which on average admits fewer than 70,000 immigrants per year, would have to admit 1 million annually. Given the widespread political backlash against immigration, increases this large are unlikely.
So far, robots are drawing comparatively little populist fire, perhaps in part because their numbers are still quite low. Worldwide, the industrial labour force includes about 320 million humans, compared with just 1.6 million robots. That’s a huge gap, even counting the superior strength and speed of the robots. And most of them fall in the category of unintelligent machines, committed to a single task such as turning a bolt or painting a car door. Nearly half of them work in the auto industry, which is still the largest employer (of humans) in the US.
In the future, economists may start counting robots the way they now count gains in the working-age population, as a driver of growth. For much of the world, robots will stand alongside immigrants, women and the elderly as another pool of labour.
Whether by design or accident, many of the countries with the most rapidly ageing populations already have the most robots. According to the International Federation of Robotics, the nations with the highest density of industrial robots include South Korea, with 531 per 10,000 employees, Japan with 305 and Germany with 301. The US ranks eighth with 176. China is well behind with only 49, but on the bright side — arguably — it had the world’s fastest-growing robot population.
Today, population trends are the most powerful force shaping the rise and fall of nations, the starting point of any discussion about an economy’s prospects. Most of the world is greying fast, and the economic answer to ageing will be all hands on deck, no matter what they’re made of.
–Washington Post
Ruchir Sharma, chief global strategist at Morgan Stanley Investment Management, is the author of “The Rise and Fall of Nations: Forces of Change in the Post-Crisis World”, from which this essay is adapted.
18 Comments on "How robots will save the economy"
Midnight Oil on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 3:49 pm
McDonalds plans to hire thousands of them…robots that is….and at least they will get there order correct
penury on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 3:53 pm
As I was reading I noticed a large percentage of erroneous or untruthful information. When I got to the end and saw that it was WaPost, Morgan Stanley and Gulf news. World wise the labor force equals? The eligible workforce numbers in the U.S. are over 300 million, with over 90 million not participating which has maintained the unemployment level as low as they say. If the quoted world employment is what they say we are really hosed.
Apneaman on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 4:21 pm
Another one of those Indian (dot not feather) neo liberal zealots. What is it with the fervent believers coming out of that country anyway? Those people breed like rats and are the last people, along with the Chinese, I will listen to regarding breeding.
Apneaman on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 4:34 pm
Philippines will offer free birth control to 6 million women
The move will hopefully reduce poverty
http://www.wyff4.com/article/philippines-will-offer-free-birth-control-to-6-million-women/8586615
Chasity belts – front hole only – will also help.
Arodrigo on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 5:04 pm
Penury, The eligible workforce numbers in the US is not even close to 300 million. Wherever did you get the idea that only 20 million out of a population of 320 (approx.) are children, very old, or too crippled to work?
makati1 on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 5:22 pm
Ap, ending the Catholic anti-birth control decree would help even more. Most every religion preaches against controlling births. For instance, like Catholics, a good Mormon does NOT use birth control. It is against their beliefs. That is why most Mormon families have 4, 6, 8, 10 kids. All expected to pay their tithes when they earn money.
BTW: That ‘tithe’ is 10%+ of your total GROSS income, for life. Not a bad scam isn’t it?
Davy on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 5:51 pm
More bullshit from the status quo narrative of progress and a constantly growing healthy economy. Economic demand destruction will end robots in their tracks as a transitional force in our civilization. Many of our techno fantasies will likewise fail. There is not going to be trips to mars and the moon. Asteroids are not going to be mined. Instead we are going back to animal and human power. If we are lucky we can incorporate many different modern technological assets in this process of a return to simplicity. We will surely manage to use robots to do things. They will be around and available for certain uses. We can bring back mechanical ways to harness work that were so effective in the 19th century. We can salvage some of the modern technologies we are so proud of from the 20th. What we are not going to have is a world of robots doing our heavy lifting. We can’t take care of what we have now how are we going to build out a whole new infrastructure? Techno optimist and their dreams of robots and a solar powered world is just dreams. They are wonderful dreams but they will likely not become reality per the challenges ahead.
sidzepp on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 7:41 pm
Back in 2008 the factory I worked at in Michigan began introducing robotic lines. Within one year the machines replaced some thirty hourly employees. Of course Sun Capital was altruistic and raised our wages accordingly. Actually they looked for more ways to add more bots to the assembly process.
The future of robots means that more wealth will flow to the top and more displaced workers will end up working as contract workers for companies like UBER.
penury on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 8:06 pm
I question the thought that AI will mean more wealth to flow to the top. We are approaching “unmoveable object. hit by irresitable force” paradox. Consumers without money cannot consume. Companies cannot sell their products unless consumers have money. Robotics must reach a point of equilibrium with requirements of humans or what comes next?
sidzepp on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 8:16 pm
As long as easy credit is available to the consumer, they will continue to consume. We get some dozen credit card applications a week and my credit line is constantly increased though we are very frugal with our cards. Until the weight of all debt collapses economies, companies will continually look for ways of improving their bottom line. Of course they don’t have the foresight to look ahead at what the loss of jobs means for moving their products.
Midnight Oil on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 8:41 pm
Sidzepp, Years ago I read an account of one owner of a factory here in the United States that wished to remain and stay competitive with the foreign competitors eroding his market share. Hired consultants and explored automating his facility as much as possible to cut costs.
One consultant point blank said the Chinese would still eat his lunch even if he automated all processes because of other factors/costs he incurred.
An example would be golf balls, for all practical purposes pretty much robatic machined made….the cheapest arecstill imported from the Far East.
Trump will fix that…..
sidzepp on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 8:47 pm
When one looks at the cabinet selections of our commander-in-tweet, we find a who’s who of ultra-conservatives who will dismantle, the educational system, the prison system, the EPA, OSHA, the health care system, and any other agency that interferes with their desire to make this country more profitable for the one percenters and their apologists.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 10:07 pm
“An increase of 2.5 billion people may sound catastrophic”. Oh hell no! Maybe horrific,insane, or cataclysmic. But the robots will enact a work around that will be great for anyone who doesn’t need to eat or breathe.
Danny on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 10:55 pm
Stupid enough to be written by a robot.
GregT on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 11:12 pm
“Before long, though, we’re more likely to treasure robots than to revile them. They may be the one thing that can protect the global economy from the dangers that lie ahead.”
🙂
GregT on Wed, 18th Jan 2017 11:13 pm
Sorry, my bad.
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
Anonymous on Thu, 19th Jan 2017 6:30 am
I for one welcome our new robot overlords, and look forward to toiling away in their mines for my daily proto-carb ration.
penury on Thu, 19th Jan 2017 3:51 pm
Sidzepp, easy credit for people who have no employment? What are we all going to adopt the European model of “basic incomes” for all?
I know that u.S fiat is backed only by “the full faith and credit” of the country but what do you back basic income for 9 billion people on?