Latest news with #DavidAutor
South China Morning Post
2 days ago
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Sorry, but the ‘China shock' was actually pretty good for America
The idea that China has stolen millions of American jobs in recent decades, causing a collapse in the manufacturing labour market, has long been a staple anti-Chinese narrative on both sides of US politics. Even economists and media pundits who grudgingly acknowledge that cheap Chinese goods have made life easier and more affordable for the average American would complain about these alleged mass job losses. And the blue-collar voters most severely affected by sectoral lay-offs and the decline in regional manufacturing make up a fair segment of Donald Trump 's Maga – 'Make America Great Again' – movement. But is this so-called China shock actually real? 09:42 Trump promises to bring US manufacturing back from China, but will his tariffs work? Trump promises to bring US manufacturing back from China, but will his tariffs work? Among the most influential research defending the 'China shock' claim is a series of papers by David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, David Dorn of the University of Zurich, and Gordon Hanson of the Harvard Kennedy School – especially their 2016 paper 'The China Shock: Learning from Labour Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade'.
Wall Street Journal
27-05-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
The Real Story of the ‘China Shock'
Few academic papers have been as influential—or as misunderstood—as those by David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon Hanson. Politicians and pundits often use these authors' papers to claim that China's rise has cost the U.S. up to 2.4 million jobs due to surging Chinese imports between 1999 and 2011. But these studies focus narrowly on what happened to manufacturing employment in local labor markets, not the U.S. as a whole. It's true that communities exposed to heavy Chinese import competition saw steep drops in manufacturing jobs and a rise in local unemployment. Crucially, the displaced workers mostly stayed put rather than moved for new work. It's no wonder these academic papers resonated because they highlighted real pain in America's industrial heartland. But treating the China shock as a verdict on national employment is a mistake.
NDTV
18-05-2025
- Business
- NDTV
MIT Retracts Popular Study Claiming AI Boosts Scientific Discoveries
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has disavowed the research of a PhD student on the impact of AI on the workforce that had impressed the field experts. On Friday (May 16), MIT released a statement, announcing that it reviewed the paper following concerns and decided that it should be "withdrawn from public discourse. "MIT has contacted arXiv to formally request that the paper be withdrawn and The Quarterly Journal of Economics, where it had been submitted," read the statement by MIT. The university said it had requested the study author to submit the request to withdraw the paper, but they had not done it yet. "Our understanding is that only authors of papers appearing on arXiv can submit withdrawal requests. We have directed the author to submit such a request, but to date, the author has not done so. Therefore, in an effort to clarify the research record, MIT respectfully request that the paper be marked as withdrawn from arXiv as soon as possible." The paper titled "Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation" was published on the preprint site, arXiv, in November 2024. Preprints, by definition, have not yet undergone peer review, but the study received considerable attention, including from the likes of MIT economists Daron Acemoglu (who recently won the Nobel Prize) and David Autor. The latter told the Wall Street Journal that he was "floored" by the findings. The study claimed that AI's introduction to a large but unidentified materials science lab led to the discovery of more materials and more patent filings. However, the increased efficiency came at the cost of reducing researchers' satisfaction with their work. Both Mr Acemoglu and Mr Autor, who were acknowledged in the paper footnote, released a statement alongside the MIT release. saying they found inconsistencies in the study after its release. "Over time, we had concerns about the validity of this research, which we brought to the attention of the appropriate office at MIT. In early February, MIT followed its written policy and conducted an internal, confidential review," read the joint statement. The researcher responsible for the study is no longer affiliated with the university, MIT added.
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
MIT disavows doctoral student paper on AI's productivity benefits
MIT says that due to concerns about the 'integrity' of a high-profile paper on the effects of artificial intelligence on the productivity of a materials science lab, the paper should be 'withdrawn from public discourse.' The paper in question, 'Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation,' was written by a doctoral student in the university's economics program. It claimed to show that the introduction of an AI tool into a large-but-unidentified materials science lab led to the discovery of more materials and more patent filings, but at the cost of reducing researchers' satisfaction with their work. MIT economists Daron Acemoglu (who recently won the Nobel Prize) and David Autor both praised the paper last year, with Autor telling the Wall Street Journal he was 'floored.' In a statement included in MIT's announcement on Friday, Acemoglu and Autor described the paper as 'already known and discussed extensively in the literature on AI and science, even though it has not been published in any refereed journal.' However, the two economists said they now have 'no confidence in the provenance, reliability or validity of the data and in the veracity of the research.' According to the WSJ, a computer scientist with experience in materials science approached Acemoglu and Autor with concerns in January. They brought those concerns to MIT, leading to an internal review. MIT says that due to student privacy laws, it cannot disclose the results of that review, but the paper's author is 'no longer at MIT.' And while the university's announcement does not name the student, both a preprint version of the paper and the initial press coverage identify the author as Aidan Toner-Rodgers. (TechCrunch has reached out to Toner-Rodgers for comment.) MIT also says it has requested the paper be withdrawn from The Quarterly Journal of Economics, where it was submitted for publication, and from the preprint website arXiv. Apparently only a paper's authors are able to submit arXiv withdrawal requests, but MIT says 'to date, the author has not done so."
TechCrunch
17-05-2025
- Business
- TechCrunch
MIT disavows doctoral student paper on AI's productivity benefits
MIT says that due to concerns about the 'integrity' of a high-profile paper on the effects of artificial intelligence on the productivity of a materials science lab, the paper should be 'withdrawn from public discourse.' The paper in question, 'Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation,' was written by a doctoral student in the university's economics program. It claimed to show that the introduction of an AI tool into a large-but-unidentified materials science lab led to the discovery of more materials and more patent filings, but at the cost of reducing researchers' satisfaction with their work. MIT economists Daron Acemoglu (who recently won the Nobel Prize) and David Autor both praised the paper last year, with Autor telling the Wall Street Journal he was 'floored.' In a statement included in MIT's announcement on Friday, Acemoglu and Autor described the paper as 'already known and discussed extensively in the literature on AI and science, even though it has not been published in any refereed journal.' However, the two economists said they now have 'no confidence in the provenance, reliability or validity of the data and in the veracity of the research.' According to the WSJ, a computer scientist with experience in materials science approached Acemoglu and Autor with concerns in January. They brought those concerns to MIT, leading to an internal review. MIT says that due to student privacy laws, it cannot disclose the results of that review, but the paper's author is 'no longer at MIT.' And while the university's announcement does not name the student, both a preprint version of the paper and the initial press coverage identify the author as Aidan Toner-Rodgers. (TechCrunch has reached out to Toner-Rodgers for comment.) MIT also says it has requested the paper be withdrawn from The Quarterly Journal of Economics, where it was submitted for publication, and from the preprint website arXiv. Apparently only a paper's authors are able to submit arXiv withdrawal requests, but MIT says 'to date, the author has not done so.'
