Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 44 Download : 14

Main Article Content

Abstract

The paper clarifies the interdependencies between AI adoption, industry upgrading, and economic development in the context of global digital transformation. With mixed-methods integrating econometrics and case studies, we test models formalizing mediating and threshold effects in AI-industry-economy relations. Our approach leverages a novel AI penetration score by industries alongside economic indicators and measures of industry sophistication. The results indicate that AI uptake mediates the pass-through of industry structure change to economic performance, with contribution levels increasing above certain thresholds. Evidence suggests that the association between the working-age population and economic growth varies by alternative industry upgrading rankings, with technologically sophisticated structures making better use of demographic opportunities. Threshold analysis identifies regimes where AI substitutes for traditional economic relations, revealing policy intervention points. These findings contribute to growth theory innovation by measuring AI's catalytic economic function and offer methodological innovation in the analysis of technological contributions. Strategic AI development agendas, human capital policies, and coordination mechanisms are among the key implications required to achieve inclusive growth in the digital economy. This study closes knowledge gaps on how demographic and technological drivers interact through industry structures to determine economic trajectories. Empirical results show that AI adoption mediates 52.8% of manufacturing sophistication's impact on GDP growth, threshold effects emerge at an AI adoption index of 0.43-0.45, where economic impacts increase threefold, and the working-age population's growth effect varies from 0.072 below the threshold to 0.411 above the threshold in the highest industrial upgrading quartile.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence Industrial upgrading Economic development Threshold effects Working-age population Digital transformation

Article Details

Author Biography

Xiaofei Hao, Faculty of Economics, Srinakharinwirot University, 114 Sukhumvit 23, Bangkok 10110, Thailand

Xiaofei Hao is currently studying for a doctorate at Srinakharinwirot University in Thailand.
His research interests include information asymmetry in microeconomics, etc.

How to Cite
Hao, X., Ratniyom, A., & Sukpaiboonwat, S. (2025). The impact of AI-driven industrial upgrading on economic development. Future Technology, 4(4), 1–11. Retrieved from https://fupubco.com/futech/article/view/406
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Bookmark and Share

References

  1. K. Schwab, The fourth industrial revolution, World Economic Forum, 2016. https://www.weforum.org/about/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-by-klaus-schwab/
  2. D.R. Heath, Prediction machines: the simple economics of artificial intelligence: by Ajay Agrawal, Joshua Gans and Avi Goldfarb, Published in 2018 by Harvard Business Review Press, 272 pp., 30.00(hardcover),KindleEdition: 16.19, ISBN: 978-1-633695672, Taylor & Francis, 2019. https://www.predictionmachines.ai/
  3. E. Brynjolfsson, D. Rock, C. Syverson, The productivity J-curve: How intangibles complement general purpose technologies, American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 13(1) (2021) 333-372. DOI：10.1257/mac.20180386
  4. E. Brynjolfsson, A. McAfee, The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies, WW Norton & company2014. https://wwnorton.com/books/the-second-machine-age/
  5. N. Zolas, Z. Kroff, E. Brynjolfsson, K. McElheran, D.N. Beede, C. Buffington, N. Goldschlag, L. Foster, E. Dinlersoz, Advanced technologies adoption and use by us firms: Evidence from the annual business survey, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2021. DOI：10.3386/w28290
  6. D.E. Bloom, D. Canning, G. Fink, Implications of population ageing for economic growth, Oxford review of economic policy 26(4) (2010) 583-612. DOI：10.1093/oxrep/grq038
  7. D. Acemoglu, P. Restrepo, The race between man and machine: Implications of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment, American economic review 108(6) (2018) 1488-1542. DOI：10.1257/aer.20160696
  8. J. Furman, R. Seamans, AI and the Economy, Innovation policy and the economy 19(1) (2019) 161-191. DOI：10.1086/699936
  9. P. Aghion, U. Akcigit, P. Howitt, What do we learn from Schumpeterian growth theory?, Handbook of economic growth, Elsevier2014, pp. 515-563. DOI：10.1016/B978-0-444-53540-5.00001-X
  10. D. Rodrik, Premature deindustrialization, Journal of economic growth 21 (2016) 1-33. DOI: 10.1007/s10887-015-9122-3
  11. D. Andrews, C. Criscuolo, P.N. Gal, The best versus the rest: the global productivity slowdown, divergence across firms and the role of public policy, (2016). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/63629cc9-en
  12. K. Lee, Schumpeterian analysis of economic catch-up: Knowledge, path-creation, and the middle-income trap, Cambridge University Press2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107337244
  13. D. Canning, J. Sevilla, The Demographic Dividend: A New Perspective on the Economic Consequences of Population Change, Rand Corporation2000. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1274.html
  14. E. Brynjolfsson, K. McElheran, The rapid adoption of data-driven decision-making, American Economic Review 106(5) (2016) 133-139. DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20161016
  15. E. Brynjolfsson, D. Rock, C. Syverson, Artificial intelligence and the modern productivity paradox, The economics of artificial intelligence: An agenda 23(2019) (2019) 23-57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/9780226613475-003
  16. D.J. Teece, Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world, Research policy 47(8) (2018) 1367-1387. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.015
  17. B.E. Hansen, Sample splitting and threshold estimation, Econometrica 68(3) (2000) 575-603. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0262.00124
  18. R.M. Baron, D.A. Kenny, The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of personality and social psychology 51(6) (1986) 1173. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
  19. B.E. Hansen, Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference, Journal of econometrics 93(2) (1999) 345-368. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-4076(99)00025-1
  20. J. Bai, P. Perron, Estimating and testing linear models with multiple structural changes, Econometrica (1998) 47-78. DOI: 10.2307/2998540
  21. R.K. Yin, Case study research and applications: Design and methods, Sage publications2017. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/case-study-research-and-applications/book250150
  22. K.M. Eisenhardt, M.E. Graebner, Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges, Academy of management journal 50(1) (2007) 25-32. 10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
  23. M.B. Miles, A.M. Huberman, J. Saldaña, Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. 3rd, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2014. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-data-analysis/book246128
  24. J.W. Creswell, V.L.P. Clark, Designing and conducting mixed methods research, Sage publications2017. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research/book241842