Does AI vibrancy reshape employment structures and unemployment? Short-run evidence from global panel data

This study examines whether national AI vibrancy affects employment structures and unemployment, utilising panel data for 36 countries (2017–2023) from the Stanford AI Vibrancy Index and World Bank indicators. Fixed- and random-effects models, along with Hausman tests and clustered standard errors, were applied. Results reveal no significant short-term effect of AI vibrancy on industrial or service employment, nor on unemployment. GDP per capita showed a modest positive effect on industry (β = 0.046, p < 0.10) and, in some models, on services (β = 0.045, p ≈ 0.06). Labour force participation correlated positively with service employment (β = 0.322, p < 0.10) and negatively with unemployment (β = –0.006, p < 0.01). Strong time effects reflect pandemic-related labour shifts: industrial jobs declined, service employment grew, and unemployment spiked temporarily. Overall, labour dynamics appear driven more by global shocks and demographics than by AI vibrancy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Technology
Published
2025-10-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2025.21-2.11
Primary Topic
Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does AI vibrancy reshape employment structures and unemployment? Short-run evidence from global panel data

Aleksandra Kuzior, Zhou Yong, Agnieszka Łopatka, Judit Oláh
Human Technology
Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
article

Does AI vibrancy reshape employment structures and unemployment? Short-run evidence from global panel data

Aleksandra Kuzior, Zhou Yong, Agnieszka Łopatka, Judit Oláh
article en

Abstract

This study examines whether national AI vibrancy affects employment structures and unemployment, utilising panel data for 36 countries (2017–2023) from the Stanford AI Vibrancy Index and World Bank indicators. Fixed- and random-effects models, along with Hausman tests and clustered standard errors, were applied. Results reveal no significant short-term effect of AI vibrancy on industrial or service employment, nor on unemployment. GDP per capita showed a modest positive effect on industry (β = 0.046, p < 0.10) and, in some models, on services (β = 0.045, p ≈ 0.06). Labour force participation correlated positively with service employment (β = 0.322, p < 0.10) and negatively with unemployment (β = –0.006, p < 0.01). Strong time effects reflect pandemic-related labour shifts: industrial jobs declined, service employment grew, and unemployment spiked temporarily. Overall, labour dynamics appear driven more by global shocks and demographics than by AI vibrancy.

Human TechnologyVol. 21(2)
University of Szczecin (PL), Silesian University of Technology (PL), Sumy State University (UA), John von Neumann University (HU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.