“Mokyr,J., Vickers, C., & Ziebarth, N. L. (2015). The History ofTechnological Anxiety. Journalof Economic Perspectivesand the Future of Economic Growth: Is ThisTime Different?, 29 (3),31-50”.
Accordingto the article, technology has been epitomized as a paramount driverof economic growth. Nevertheless, some economists and researcherssuggest that technology has triggered cultural anxiety, over thepast. Technology has raised a myriad of concerns among economiststhat have been proved to have a significant impact in the future. Forinstance, the article asserts that increased use of technology infuture will lead to the substitution of human resource to machines.As a result, there will be technological unemployment that hasadverse effects on the economy. Additionally, technology has raisedanxiety over its moral impacts on human welfare. Finally, there hasbeen a critical concern over the timings of technological progress.The growth and development of the western economies may result inslowed advances in the economy and productivity of other nations, infuture.
Thearticle delves into the short-term and long-term implications oftechnology on the economy. Different economists have variedperspectives on the impacts of technology. For instance, ThomasMortimer stipulates that technology would set back employment asthousands of workers would lose their jobs. It is evident that theuse of machine would be more efficient and cheaper compared to humanlabor. Therefore, most companies would lay off employees formachines. However, James Steuart claimed that technologicalunemployment would only happen under a very abrupt introduction ofthe innovation. There are both short run and long run implications oftechnology on economic growth and development. Therefore, it is vitalto put into consideration both aspects when assessing technologicalimplications.
Thearticle further suggests that the short-term effect of technologywould be temporary technological unemployment On the contrary, suchinitiation would have a long-term benefit to the economy. Theintroduction of machines during the industrial revolution caused adisruption of the labor market. Despite increased factory wages,employees’ income drastically dropped leading to adverse standardsof living. On the other hand, technology has elicited the issue oflabor alienation and its impact on the general populace. According toKarl Marx, technology epitomizes the connection and association ofhumans and nature.
Thearticle projects the future of technology and its impact onemployment and factory production. The modern world has adjusted tothe enhanced information technology, resulting into more machinery ascompared to human labor. The economic transition in the future ispredicted to be disruptive and adversely affecting workers andindustries. The industrial revolution transition was done with littlegovernment backing for the individuals affected. Nevertheless, thecurrent change would require various public policies to amelioratethe adverse impacts of the dislocation. Government intervention willhave a crucial role in securing employment opportunities for manyindividuals thus stabilize the economy.
Inconclusion, the article emphasizes on the benefits of technology andhow it has helped enhance economic growth. Researchers andeconomists tend to over-estimate the implications of technology inthe short-run and underrate its long-term impacts. Technology hasincreased efficiency in the workplace and improved performancethrough the use of enhanced business strategies. According to thearticle, technology is the primary force behind globalization andeconomic growth and development. Economists have raised differentopinions on the implication of technology in the contemporary world.However, most research studies claim that technological advantagesoutweigh the disadvantages hence people should incorporatetechnology in business organizations to enhance productivity andperformance.
Mokyr, J., Vickers, C., & Ziebarth, N. L. (2015). The History of Technological Anxiety. Journal of Economic Perspectivesand the Future of Economic Growth: Is This Time Different?, 29 (3), 31-50.