GCRI · Labs
工作未来实验室
Work changes when technologies, contracts, skills and institutions change, and research on that change is often loud and weakly identified. This lab studies how automation, platform work, remote work, skills 系统 and workplace institutions reshape jobs and organisations, with designs that can tell a real effect from a trend. This page sets out the mechanisms, the measures, the data, the methods and the people who decide on the evidence.
Future of work lab: how the risk develops.
Workforce and institutional change research. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Tasks change before jobs
Technologies automate or augment specific tasks, not whole occupations. Jobs are rebundled, skill demands shift within roles, and the effect on employment depends on how firms reorganise work around the tool.
Exposure is not impact
Indices of which occupations are exposed to a technology describe potential, not outcome. Adoption, cost, regulation and bargaining decide what happens, so exposure indices need causal evidence before they inform policy.
Institutions mediate change
Collective agreements, training 系统, 社会保护 and labour law shape whether change raises productivity and wages or shifts risk onto workers. The same technology can produce different outcomes under different institutions.
Workplace trials carry power
Experiments inside firms involve employees who may not feel free to refuse. Consent, worker representation, data protection and a real right to opt out decide whether a workplace study is ethical and its results credible.
存量、流量、延迟和一个临界阈值。
两个存量，即压力和 适应能力，由一个增强的增长回路、一个延迟的平衡响应以及压力超过能力时产生的损害相连；越过阈值后，系统可能发生突变。这是使用明示示例数值的教学模型，不是预测。
控制措施
- 压力增长
- 每年 6.0%
- 能力在降低压力方面的效力
- 每年 4.0%
- 对感知压力的投资响应
- 20%
- 感知延迟
- 4.0 年
- 压力的临界阈值
- 60 项指数
- 越过阈值后的放大
- 2.0 倍
- 模拟年数
- 50 年
读数
- 峰值压力
- 113 指数
- 期末能力
- 186 指数
- 超过阈值的年数
- 15.8 年
数字、方法与来源
| 年份 | 压力 | 能力 | 感知 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 20.0 | 50.0 | 20.0 |
| 4 | 23.3 | 44.9 | 21.2 |
| 8 | 27.2 | 42.2 | 24.0 |
| 12 | 31.7 | 42.3 | 27.7 |
| 16 | 36.8 | 45.5 | 32.2 |
| 20 | 42.3 | 51.5 | 37.2 |
| 24 | 47.9 | 60.3 | 42.6 |
| 28 | 53.2 | 71.3 | 48.0 |
| 32 | 57.8 | 84.3 | 53.1 |
| 36 | 66.4 | 98.4 | 58.4 |
| 40 | 82.7 | 115.9 | 69.7 |
| 44 | 97.8 | 139.7 | 83.8 |
| 48 | 109.1 | 169.4 | 97.3 |
方法
- 系统动力学 Forrester (1961), Industrial Dynamics, MIT Press; Sterman (2000), Business Dynamics
- 临界转变与临界点 Scheffer and others (2009), Early-warning signals for critical transitions, Nature 461
- 因果回路图 Sterman (2000), Business Dynamics, McGraw-Hill
- 不确定性扇形图（参数蒙特卡罗） Spiegelhalter, Pearson and Short (2011), Visualising uncertainty about the future, Science 333
- 单因素敏感性（龙卷风图） Saltelli and others (2008), Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer, Wiley
数据
No observed data enters this model: it runs on the teaching values set by the controls, to be replaced with a programme’s own evidence.
贯穿六大支柱，由 Nexus Consortium 牵头
The work lab studies change in each domain’s workforce.
Findings feed the Labs 证据系列. The ILO’s 2023 working paper sets out exposure measures.
- Workplace study sites.
- Worker accounts with consent.
How future of work lab is modelled, measured and tested.
模型、其假设、数据和不确定性，以科学家或工程师会核查的形式呈现。结构遵循已发表的方法。所取数值仅为示意，不是研究发现。
模型、方程与假设
The model structure used for future of work lab, the assumptions it makes and how each is tested.
Ri = f(Hi, Ei, Vi, Ci)危害、风险暴露、脆弱性和应对能力EAL = ∑k pk · Lk对年概率为 pkxt+1 = A xt + B ut + εtA carries the couplings, u the shock, ε the error| 假设 | 为何制作 | 如何检验 |
|---|---|---|
| 在一次事件中，危害与暴露相互独立 | 使损失积分保持可计算 | 与基于联合记录拟合的 copula 进行比较 |
| 耦合在工作点附近是线性的 | 让冲击通过 A 传播 | 在线性范围之外施加扰动并比较 |
| 脆弱性曲线可以在不同地点之间迁移使用 | 很少有本地曲线可用 | 在有观测损失的地方据此进行验证 |
- 输入
- 带溯源信息的版本化数据集
- 成果
- 分布，绝不是单一数字
- 代码
- 连同模型卡和测试一起发布
- 复现
- 相同的数据、代码、环境和随机种子
衡量什么，以及衡量得如何。
每个指标都注明其单位、频率、背后的来源类型以及数值将附带的证据标签。此处不显示数值：数值由计划依据其自身权限提供。
| 指标 | 单位 | 节奏 | 来源类型 | 标签 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task exposure index | dimensionless index by occupation | 年度 | Task databases mapped to technology capability | 模型生成 |
| Firm adoption of the studied technology | percent of firms | 年度 | Enterprise surveys | 估算 |
| Adult skills proficiency | score on the survey scale | per survey cycle | OECD Survey of Adult Skills | 观测 |
| Job quality index | composite index | per survey cycle | Working conditions surveys | 估算 |
| Participation in job-related training | percent of adults | 年度 | Labour force and adult education surveys | 已发布统计 |
| Pre-analysis plans for workplace trials | percent of trials registered before launch | 年度 | AEA RCT Registry | 已发布统计 |
| Worker representatives consulted | percent of workplace studies | 每项研究 | Study ethics records | 已声明 |
证据来自何处。
具名公共数据集与机构记录，各自注明许可类别。依协议获得的来源仅按其条款使用，绝不再次发布。
| 来源 | 它提供什么 | 许可类别 |
|---|---|---|
| ILOSTAT (International Labour Organization) | Employment, hours, wages and informality by country | Free and open, CC BY |
| OECD Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) | Literacy, numeracy and problem solving of adults, with job tasks | OECD terms; microdata by release |
| O*NET (US Department of Labor) | Task, skill and work activity descriptors by occupation | Open, CC BY |
| ESCO (European Commission) | Multilingual classification of skills, competences and occupations | 免费开放，须署名 |
| European Working Conditions Survey (Eurofound) | Job quality, autonomy, work intensity and representation | Free for research, end-user licence |
| AEA RCT Registry (American Economic Association) | Registered field experiments and pre-analysis plans in economics | Free access, terms of use |
| National labour force surveys | Employment, occupation and training microdata | Terms per statistical office |
由谁决定，以及证据服务于什么。
实验室 prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| 谁来决定 | 问题 | 本页面服务的证据 |
|---|---|---|
| Labour ministries and public employment services | Which training and transition programmes to fund or scale | Impact evaluations with credible comparison groups, cost data, effects by group |
| Employers and worker representatives | Whether and how to introduce a technology, with what consultation and safeguards | Pilot evaluation, task and job-quality effects, data protection assessment |
| Research ethics committees | Whether a workplace experiment protects voluntariness and personal data | Consent design, opt-out route, representation agreement, data minimisation |
| 研究资助方 | Which questions on work and technology merit sustained funding | Evidence gaps mapped by strength of design, not by volume of commentary |
该主题产生的产出
- Pre-analysis plans for workplace and labour market trials
- Occupational task maps linked to technology capability, with the method stated
- Evaluations of training and transition programmes with the identification strategy stated
- Ethics and consultation records for studies inside workplaces
What experts ask about changing work.
- Which tasks within an occupation are changing, rather than which jobs disappear?
- Who bears the costs of transition, by region, age, sex, sector and skill level?
- Which training, matching and income-support measures actually change outcomes?
- How do institutions such as schools, unions, employers and public employment services adapt?
- How do heat, disasters and supply disruptions affect work and safety?
The forces reshaping work.
Economists analyse technological change at the level of tasks. A technology may substitute for some tasks, complement others and create new ones; the net effect on an occupation depends on the mix and on how employers reorganise work. Automation and AI tend to affect routine cognitive and manual tasks first, but recent tools also reach into tasks once thought to require judgement.
Other forces act alongside technology. Ageing populations change labour supply and care needs. 气候变化 raises heat exposure for outdoor and industrial workers and shifts employment between sectors during energy transitions. Trade and supply-chain disruptions can concentrate job losses in particular places, where the effects persist for years.
Institutions shape outcomes. The same technology can produce very different results depending on training 系统, labour law, 社会保护 and bargaining arrangements.
Evidence and its limits.
- 01
Task and occupation data
Classifications of work activities linked to employment data. They lag behind real change and vary between countries.
- 02
Labour force and administrative records
Surveys and registers tracking employment, earnings and transitions. Access is often restricted and linking sources raises privacy questions.
- 03
影响评估
Randomised and quasi-experimental studies of training and matching programmes using 因果推断. Results may not transfer across labour markets.
- 04
Workplace experiments
Controlled trials of new tools or practices inside organisations, under consent and ethics review.
Forecasts of jobs lost or created are highly sensitive to assumptions and are not presented as predictions. The lab reports scenarios with their assumptions.
Where this page’s references lead.
阅读本页时所对照的机构和文件。状态和版本会变化；每个链接都指向发布机构。
问题与解答。
Does exposure to automation mean jobs will be lost?
Why register a pre-analysis plan for a field experiment?
Can employees refuse to take part in a workplace study?
Does the lab predict how many jobs will be lost to AI?
Can an employer run a workplace trial with the lab?
How does this lab differ from the Future of Work and Skills platform?
从本页贡献证据。
报告 is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- 电子邮件网关 GW-GCRI从本页发送证据、更正、案例、方法、审查、翻译或概况投稿。它会带上本页标签送达，由负责的编辑接收。
- Zenodo开放存缴存缴并提交到社区用您的 ORCID iD 在 Zenodo 上发布您自己的记录，然后提交到那里的 Reports 社区。由策展人审核；DOI 仍归您所有。
- 报告GCRI查看所有贡献方式贡献类型、各自的评审方式、您获得的署名、许可协议，以及绝不接受的内容。
切勿发送个人数据、敏感基础设施细节或您无权分享的任何内容。贡献在使用前会经过审查；发送贡献不赋予署名权或编辑权，赞助也绝不能换取研究结论。
法律文件。
本网站上的地图、数据和图表仅作为背景和一般信息展示。它们不是建议、预测或预警；信息的局限见免责声明和数据说明。