Search

Technological Change and Systemic Inequality: A Political-Economic Analysis Based on the Labour Market, Capital Accumulation and the Distribution of Opportunities

Author(s)

Liyu Chen

Affiliation(s)

King's College London, London, UK

Abstract

This paper explores how international migration reshapes traditional citizenship and national identity amid globalization. From the theoretical perspective of transnationalism, it argues that cross-border ties blur the dividing line between legal citizenship and individual belonging, challenging the nation-state-centered traditional view of citizenship. the study holds that the reconstruction of citizenship is jointly shaped by capital flows, migration policies and social stratification. On one hand, under neoliberalism, investor and skilled migrant policies increasingly link residency eligibility to economic contribution and fuel the commodification of citizenship. On the other hand, large numbers of low-skilled migrants fill labor shortages yet work under precarious employment, suffering from inadequate social security and restricted political participation. Besides, descendants of transnational migrants develop hybrid cross-border identities but may struggle with identity conflicts and a lack of belonging. Based on the above analysis, the paper concludes that citizenship is no longer merely a legal membership; instead, it represents evolving power relations shaped by interactions among transnational capital flows, labor migration and state governance. When formulating migration policies, governments should strike a balance between economic growth goals and social inclusion to adapt to the evolving practice of citizenship in a globalized world.

Keywords

Technological Change; Systemic Inequality; Labour Market Polarization; Capital Accumulation; Digital Divide; Inclusive Policy

References

[1] Capraro V., Lentsch A., Acemoglu D., Akgun S., Akhmedova A., Bilancini E., Bonnefon J. F., Brañas-Garza P., Butera L., Douglas K. M. and Everett J. A. (2024) ‘The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making’, PNAS nexus, 3(6). doi:https://doi. org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae191. [2] Council on Foreign Relations (2023) How Did Mass Production and Mass Consumption Take Off After World War II? Available at: https://education. cfr. org/learn/reading/how-did-mass- production-and-mass-consumption-take-after-world-war-ii (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [3] Docquier, F. (2014) ‘The brain drain from developing countries’, the Brain Drain from Developing Countries, 31. doi:https://doi. org/10.15185/izawol. 31. [4] Emmenegger, P., Häusermann, S., Palier, B. and Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2012) ‘How we Grow Unequal’, the Age of Dualization, pp. 3–26. doi:https://doi. org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199797899.003.0001. [5] Gilens, M. (2005) ‘Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(5), pp. 778–796. doi:https://doi. org/10.1093/poq/nfi058. [6] Hern, A. (2020) Gig economy traps workers in precarious existence, says report. Available at: https://www. theguardian. com/business/2020/jan/29/gig-economy-traps-workers-in-precarious-existence-says-report (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [7] Hötte, K., Somers, M. and Theodorakopoulos, A. (2023) ‘Technology and jobs: A systematic literature review’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194. doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. techfore. 2023.122750. [8] Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P. and Sinha, A. K. (2024) ‘Digital economy to improve the culture of industry 4.0: A study on features, implementation and challenges’, Green Technologies and Sustainability, 2(2). doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. grets. 2024.100083. [9] Jones, K. (2022) the populist damage to the trading system, CEPR. Available at: https://cepr. org/voxeu/columns/populist-damage-trading-system (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [10] Katz, M. L. (2020) ‘Big Tech mergers: Innovation, competition for the market, and the acquisition of emerging competitors’, Information Economics and Policy, 54. doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. infoecopol. 2020.100883. [11] Kavya, T. B. and Shijin, S. (2020) ‘Economic development, financial development, and income inequality nexus’, Borsa Istanbul Review, 20(1), pp. 80–93. doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. bir. 2019.12.002. [12] Lee, C. M. (2024) the Future ofK-Power: What South Korea Must Do After Peaking. Available at: https://carnegieendowment. org/research/2024/08/the-future-of-k-power-what-south-korea- must-do-after-peaking?lang=en (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [13] Lewis, J. A. (2022) Technology and Power. Available at: https://www. csis. org/analysis/technology-and-power (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [14] Milanović, B. (2016) Global Inequality: a New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge; London: the Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press. [15] OECD (2014) Employment and Skills Strategies in Korea. OECD Reviews on Local Job Creation. OECD Publishing. doi:https://doi. org/10.1787/9789264216563-en. [16] Piketty, T. (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century. London: Harvard University Press. [17] Prettner, K. and Strulik, H. (2019) ‘Innovation, automation, and inequality: Policy challenges in the race against the machine’, Journal of Monetary Economics, 116. doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. jmoneco. 2019.10.012. [18] Salvo, C., Weisdorf, J. and Ridolfi, L. (2022) the impact of mechanisation on wages and employment: Evidence from the diffusion of steam power. Available at: https://cepr. org/voxeu/columns/impact-mechanisation-wages-and-employment-evidence-diffusion-steam-power (Accessed: 11 December 2024). [19] Seuyong, F. T., Silwal, A. R., Begazo Gomez, T. P., Newhouse, D. L., Ghauran, N. and Delaure, K. A. I. (2023) the Size and Distribution of Digital Connectivity Gaps in Sub-Saharan Africa EQUITABLE GROWTH, FINANCE & INSTITUTIONS INSIGHT. Available at: https://documents1. worldbank. org/curated/en/099241003142325200/pdf/IDU0cb2e42f30502 60484d0b8370b84eee303ecf. pdf. [20] Sindakis, S. and Showkat, G. (2024) ‘The Digital Revolution in India: Bridging the Gap in Rural Technology Adoption’, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 13(1). doi:https://doi. org/10.1186/s13731-024-00380-w. [21] Smeeding, T. M. (2016) ‘Multiple Barriers to Economic Opportunity for the “Truly” Disadvantaged and Vulnerable’, RSF: the Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 2(2), p. 98. doi:https://doi. org/10.7758/rsf. 2016.2. 2.04. [22] Thompson, M. (2022) ‘Money for everything? Universal basic income in a crisis’, Economy and Society, 51(3), pp. 1–22. doi:https://doi. org/10.1080/03085147.2022.2035930. [23] Upreti, A. and Sridhar, V. (2024) ‘Effect of automation of routine and non-routine tasks on labour demand and wages’, IIMB Management Review. doi:https://doi. org/10.1016/j. iimb. 2024.09.001. [24] Visser, J. (2023) ‘Will they rise again? Four scenarios for the future of trade unions’, Economic & Industrial Democracy, 45(3). doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831x231178850.