Future of work in Mexico: how to make experts agree on a joint vision

5 min

On the surface, the future of work is not a salient issue in Mexico, nor in many other Latin American countries. But beneath the surface the story changes. The way technology transforms work and welfare is a hotly debated topic, yet such discussions often happen in “siloed” communities that don’t talk to each other. We brought together stakeholders from technology, industry, labour movements and academia in a workshop to talk about common visions and areas of disagreement. While opinions differ on the severity and nature of the technology shock in Mexico, there are also some notable commonalities: for instance, the focus on training and skilling. Breaking down silos and institutionalising dialogue would help create a joint vision and agenda for the country.

Future of work in Mexico

Technology has already transformed the way Mexicans work. The rapid changes in automation, digitalisation and, most recently, the use of artificial intelligence will have many positive effects, for instance by increasing the productivity of Mexican companies. However, technology will also lead to job displacement and increased inequality. Given the sheer size and speed of the transition, it will require a joint collaborative effort from all major stakeholders – governments, trade unions/workers’ representatives, employers, tech experts and tech companies – to transform education systems, social protection and infrastructure, as we show in a recent book.

While there are several obstacles impeding such a joint effort, here we will focus on experts and stakeholders, who might disagree on a) the nature and size of the digital disruption, b) the policy implications and c) the bigger vision on what to do.

The problem: how to create a joint vision

Most experts agree that the future of work will transform labour markets in middle-income countries such as Mexico. However, those experts often have very different, if not polarised views on how negative the consequences will be. They also disagree on the right type of policies, from investment to social protection. One deeper reason for these disagreements lies in the phenomenon of “policy silos”, i.e. the fact that different stakeholders and different types of experts usually talk predominantly to each other and rarely go beyond their silos. To remedy this, we brought key Mexican experts and stakeholders together to make them aware of their different problem diagnoses and visions, and to help them find common ground for a joint effort. The resulting expert workshop took place at El Colegio de México and was attended by participants from all major sectors: government, employers’ associations, workers’ representatives, tech experts and academics.

Areas of agreement

We observed agreement on some aspects of the disruption, with various implications for policymaking. As for the disruption, most, if not all, experts agree that there will be transition costs for those sectors and jobs that do compete against physical and digital machines. One example would be the banking and insurance sector. Moreover, the transformation will be uneven in terms of occupations and sectors, and different segments of the population, especially younger vs. older workers. There is also a gender gap in risks, with women being particularly affected by new types of work. Finally, and most importantly, the shock will also be uneven in a geographic sense, since some regions in Mexico (such as the north and centre) are much more advanced in the digital transformation than others.

As for policy recommendations, most experts agree that more investment in infrastructure is needed, starting with the basics such as electrification and connectivity. Another relatively uncontroversial topic is the need for reskilling and acquiring those skills necessary to deal with the digital transformation.

Areas of disagreement

Yet the devil lies in the details, as they say. When we look at the problem definition stage, not everyone agrees on the size of the shock. For instance, most economists tend to be less alarmed. One recurring argument is that Mexico is a low-wage economy, so firms have fewer incentives to invest in labour-replacing technology. Technology and business experts, as well as workers’ representatives, tend to see a much bigger impact. Firms, for instance, will be pushed towards digitalisation and automation, not (only) because of cost pressures, but (also) because of pressures from individual and corporate customers demanding digital solutions.

Similarly, there is disagreement on the precise nature and type of policy solutions. Tech companies tend to be very evasive on this topic. Workers’ representatives call for more empowerment and more of a voice, but not all workers they represent actually join the movement and call for more social and labour protection. In part, these differences can be explained by who wins and who loses from technological disruption. We see that those benefiting from the system do not want to change it. But there is also the problem of disjointed vision and strategy; for instance, how to deal with the huge informal sector where regulations often leave those people behind.

Creating a joint vision through a high-level national dialogue

The workshop revealed that Mexico lacks a common vision for the future of work shared by all major stakeholders. Of course, this reveals differing economic interests on crucial matters such as regulation and protection. Yet even before we talk about money, such a common vision fails because experts tend to talk in silos. In those cases, reaching a joint problem definition and a joint policy strategy would indeed benefit from a more participatory form of politics, involving key stakeholders and making them aware of each other’s perspectives. Hence, the Mexican government would be well-advised to create an inclusive forum for such dialogue to take place.