As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to advance, questions surrounding its impact on labour have become a focal point of public discourse. Despite the growing adoption of AI across industries, experts, like Manoj Pant, a visiting professor at Shiv Nadar University, argue that the widespread fear of AI making human labour redundant is largely unfounded.
Addressing concerns that have emerged in the wake of accelerated AI usage, Pant highlights that while AI may increase production efficiency, it still relies heavily on human consumption, meaning people will remain an essential part of the economic cycle.
Post-Pandemic Inequality and the AI Debate
The conversation about AI’s potential impact on employment has been amplified by broader concerns over income inequality, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. The digital shift brought about by the pandemic led to increased AI integration in industries like telecommunications, manufacturing, and data analytics. In particular, there has been a growing use of AI for cost reduction by automating routine tasks, such as telephone answering or inventory management. However, Pant observes that while AI can displace labour in specific sectors, it is unlikely to completely replace human workers.
He draws a comparison between the current hype around AI and the Y2K scare in the late 1990s, which saw industries scrambling to prepare their systems for the year 2000. Back then, many feared a global disruption of computer systems, but the crisis never materialized. “Current calls to adopt AI or risk failure may well go the same way,” Pant remarked.
AI: A Powerful Tool with Limitations
Pant explains that AI, particularly newer models like ChatGPT and Bard, can function as “super search engines,” handling large volumes of data in a fraction of the time it would take a team of human analysts. However, while AI can deliver quick results, it does so with minimal transparency. “AI tools usually cite a single answer,” Pant says, “and you often have no idea how that number is generated.” He points out that this lack of transparency can be problematic in fields where accuracy and reliability are paramount, particularly in areas like econometrics or data-driven decision-making.
Additionally, Pant stresses that AI’s ability to generate solutions does not eliminate the need for human analytical skills. It is still the individual’s responsibility to determine why certain answers are required. Pant argues that the current obsession with AI could detract from developing these critical thinking skills. “While AI may actually generate the desired answer, it is still the individual who needs to determine why that answer is needed.”
AI’s Role in Production and Consumption
While AI is increasingly viewed as a game-changer in production processes, Pant is quick to point out that AI is primarily a production-side innovation. As he sees it, AI will continue to play a role in creating more efficient production methods, but it still requires human consumers to sustain economic growth. “New products do not create entirely new consumers,” Pant notes, emphasizing that human labour will continue to be necessary for consumption, even if AI reduces the need for it in production.
In conclusion, Pant argues that fears of labour displacement by AI are largely exaggerated. While AI may lead to a reallocation of labour within the economy, it will not completely eliminate the need for human workers. “While production methods can get more sophisticated, human beings have no competition as consumers,” he adds.
As the AI revolution continues to evolve, Pant’s view offers a more tempered perspective, suggesting that while AI will shape the future of work, human labour will remain indispensable.
