Skilling and deskilling: technological change in classical economic theory and its empirical evidence

Abstract

This article reviews and brings together two literatures: classical political economists' views on the skilling or deskilling nature of technological change in England, during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when they wrote, are compared with the empirical evidence about the skill effects of technological change that emerges from studies of economic historians. In both literatures, we look at both the skill impacts of technological change and at the "inducement mechanisms" that are envisaged for the introduction of new technologies. Adam Smith and Karl Marx both regarded the deskilling of the labour force as the predominant form of biased technical change, but other authors such as Charles Babbage also took account of capital-skill complementarities and skill-enhancing effects of technological change. For Smith, the deskilling bias was an unintended by-product of the increasing division of labour, which in his view "naturally" led to ever more simplification of workers' tasks. As opposed to Smith, Marx considered unskilled-biased technical change as a bourgeois weapon in the class struggle for impairing the workers' bargaining position. Studies of economic historians lend support to Marx's hypothesis about the inducement mechanisms for the introduction of unskilled-biased innovations, but have produced no clearcut empirical evidence for a deskilling tendency of eighteenth-and nineteenthcentury technological change as a whole. Industrialization in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries rather led to labour polarization, by simultaneously deskilling a large part of the workforce and raising the demand for some (but fewer) high-skilled workers.

Theorizing Human Resource Development Practices in Extended Contexts

“…Thus, innovation-induced deskilling requires HRD policy at the corresponding level to upskill affected individuals. With the right HRD interventions, the outcome of innovation-induced deskilling in open contexts is likely to generate more long-term skilling outcomes through sustained innovations (Brugger & Gehrke, 2018).…”

“…The literature also documents a concept of de-skilling as a phenomenon initially observed in the 19th century European innovation-driven industrialization. Karl Marx posited deskilling based on his "class struggle view" that innovation and industrialization were deliberately aimed at simplifying workers' tasks to support the replacement of skilled workers by unskilled workers (Brugger & Gehrke, 2018). Based on observations of the Fordist system, Braverman (1974), a neo-Marxist, noted that automated manufacturing contributed to the proletarianization and degradation of skilled work.…”

“…Based on observations of the Fordist system, Braverman (1974), a neo-Marxist, noted that automated manufacturing contributed to the proletarianization and degradation of skilled work. More recent literature argued that innovation and technological advances have both skilling and deskilling roles in open HIS contexts (Brugger & Gehrke, 2018).…”

Construction 4.0 and its potential impact on people working in the construction industry

“…The Construction 4.0 discourse does come with its own narrative of re-skilling (FIEC 2017) or multiskilled workers with 'new competencies and skills' (Dalenogare et al 2018:385), but for many this may result in a downgrading of their role and earning potential. Echoing the workforce skills changes as seen in the industrial revolutions of the past, this is unlikely to result in a homogenous deskilling of the workforce, but rather a simultaneous deskilling of a large part of the workforce whilst raising the demand for some, far fewer, highly-skilled workers (Brugger and Gehrke 2018). For example, in their study of the development of reinforced concrete in France, the UK and the US, Schweber and Harty (2010) found that traditionally skilled workers were replaced by two other roles: degree-qualified engineers to supervise the materials, and unskilled workers to mix and pour.…”

Symbolic capital, informal labor, and postindustrial markets: the dynamics of street vending during the 2014 world cup in São Paulo

“…As Roberts (2005) notes, B[t]he dynamism of the informal economy is undermined by cheap imports and by high-tech sectors in manufacturing and services, which do not put out work, as did the domestic manufacturing sector of [import-substitution industrialization]. ccording to the ILO (2002), economic restructuring in the late twentieth century led to an increase in the numbers of informal workers across the Global South. However, the relation between informal workers and postindustrial markets has received less attention, even though market concentration and skill-biased technical change raise the prospect of heightened exclusion (Brugger and Gehrke 2018). In fact, the idea of a marginal mass is making a comeback, even among scholars who criticized it in the past (González de la Rocha et al 2004;Perlman 2010).…”