Get your free personalized podcast brief
We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
The idea that AI will create net new jobs is challenged by the Jevons paradox. Even if demand for work increases, AI's ability to increase the supply of that work even faster leads to wage compression for humans, as seen with London cab drivers post-GPS/Uber.
Related Insights
Contrary to the job loss narrative, AI will increase demand for knowledge workers. By drastically lowering the cost of their output (like code or medical scans), AI expands the number of use cases and total market demand, creating more jobs for humans to prompt, interpret, and validate the AI's work.
Instead of outright replacing entire roles, AI is more likely to cause significant wage compression. As AI makes certain skills more common, it floods the labor supply for those tasks, driving down pay for both displaced workers and incumbents in affected fields.
Counterintuitively, making a task cheaper and easier with AI doesn't just eliminate jobs; it drastically increases the overall demand for that task. Just as Excel created more accountants, AI's efficiencies will lead to an explosion in the volume of work, creating new roles and opportunities.
As technology made marketing tasks more efficient (e.g., Google Ads), it democratized access, causing a 5x increase in marketing jobs since the 1970s. Box's CEO argues AI will have a similar effect on all knowledge work by lowering costs, which will dramatically increase overall demand for that work.
AI makes tasks cheaper and faster. This increased efficiency doesn't reduce the need for workers; instead, it increases the demand for their work, as companies can now afford to do more of it. This creates a positive feedback loop that may lead to more hiring, not less.
Tech leaders cite Jevon's Paradox, suggesting AI efficiency will create more jobs. However, this historical model may not hold, as the speed of AI disruption outpaces society's ability to adapt, and demand for knowledge work isn't infinitely elastic.
AI tools make software development drastically cheaper. Rather than replacing engineers, this efficiency will likely trigger the Jevons paradox: the unlocked demand for new, more powerful software will skyrocket, increasing the overall need for people who can direct these new capabilities.
The US economy is currently experiencing near-zero job growth despite typical 2% productivity gains. A significant increase in productivity driven by AI, without a corresponding surge in economic output, could paradoxically lead to outright job losses. This creates a scenario where positive productivity news could have negative employment consequences.
Counterintuitively, AI tools that make software engineering more efficient are increasing the demand for engineers. By lowering the cost of development (Jevons Paradox), AI is unlocking latent demand from non-tech industries that previously couldn't afford a large engineering workforce.
The Jevons Paradox observes that technologies increasing efficiency often boost consumption rather than reduce it. Applied to AI, this means while some jobs will be automated, the increased productivity will likely expand the scope and volume of work, creating new roles, much like typewriters ultimately increased secretarial work.
