Even Economists Aren’t Sure What AI Will Do to the Job Market
Despite widespread predictions of increased unemployment, experts are uncertain how and where jobs will be affected.
- By
- August 03, 2026
- CBR - Economics
Fears about technology replacing human labor have a long and illustrious history. Back in 1978, when British television only had three channels, the BBC science show Horizon devoted an episode to the then-still-new(ish) technology of microprocessors. As the program’s original listing explained:
A machine that can read aloud; a driverless tractor; a production line without humans; a warehouse that needs no staff. Science-fiction fantasies that have already arrived! The reason is a 1-inch square chip of silicon called a microprocessor. . . . Offices, shops and factories are already being made more productive in a way that will cost millions of jobs. Now the chips are down, what are we going to do about it? Must we accept the widespread unemployment to come? Can we survive if we don’t? Above all, why is nobody talking about it?
This program description could, of course, have been written, with very minor changes, about the potential of artificial intelligence in 2026. AI has joined a long list of technologies that, by improving productivity, have been prophesied to swell the ranks of the unemployed. In a variation on the theme, this time it’s white-collar workers—coders, lawyers, accountants, and a host of others—who could be out of work.
How real, though, are these concerns? A May poll of US economists by Chicago Booth’s Clark Center for Global Markets found that even the experts are rather unsure.
The poll asked the panel whether “use of artificial intelligence over the next ten years will lead to a substantial increase in the unemployment rates in advanced countries.” Weighted by confidence, almost two-thirds of respondents expressed uncertainty, while a quarter disagreed and fewer than 10 percent agreed.
The high levels of uncertainty are understandable. This is, after all, a question to which the answer depends on how a technology develops, how it is rolled out, how firms and workers react, and also, to an extent, on how public policy responds.
“It is too early to know,” wrote Aaron Edlin of the University of California at Berkeley. “Past technological innovations have not. But this time could be different.” As Harvard’s Eric Maskin put it, “Many jobs will surely be lost, but we don’t know yet how many new ones will be created.”
The panel was most certain that AI will create uncertainty.
The panel had more confidence about AI’s impact on wages, however. Asked whether the “use of artificial intelligence over the next ten years will have a negative impact on the earnings potential of substantial numbers of high-skilled workers in advanced countries,” more than half agreed or strongly agreed, while just 13 percent disagreed and 36 percent expressed uncertainty.
“There are many claims that AI will impact high-skill workers. The evidence outside of coding is scant,” argued Daron Acemoglu of MIT, one of those expressing uncertainty. “AI will displace customer service and many other service workers. If displaced, high-skill workers may be able to adapt better to AI and take jobs away from low-skill workers.”
Robert Shimer of the University of Chicago, in agreeing with the proposition, noted that there is nonetheless a lot of nuance to consider: “Use of artificial intelligence over the next ten years will have a negative impact on some high-skilled workers and a positive impact on others.”
The panel was most certain that AI will create uncertainty. Asked whether “use of artificial intelligence over the next ten years will lead to substantially greater uncertainty about the likely returns to investment in education,” nearly 70 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed. “At this point, AI creates a great deal of uncertainty, in many areas, and is likely to continue to do so,” Yale’s Larry Samuelson wrote.
Collectively, the panel’s responses suggest that economists share the sense many people have: AI is going to change the job market. But on the big questions—Is this time different? Are we about to experience technology-driven unemployment?—even the experts will have to wait and see.
Duncan Weldon is an economist, journalist, and author who regularly writes for the Financial Times, New Statesman, and other publications. This is an edited version of a column that ran on Booth’s Clark Center website.
More from Chicago Booth Review
More from Chicago Booth
Your Privacy
We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice, which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.