Article content continued

Let me illustrate with the Canadian experience. At the time of Confederation, about half of working Canadians were employed in agriculture in one form or another. Of course, technological advances led to enormous increases in productivity, creating opportunities for people to move away from farms and into cities.

New technologies, coupled with the newly available workforce, sparked the creation of whole new activities, both in manufacturing and in services. By the 1920s, only one-third of Canadians were still involved in agriculture.

By the 1950s, that figure was down to 15% and, today, it is less than 2%. And, yet, agricultural output today is more than three times what it was 80 years ago. Clearly, agricultural employment fell because technological advances and scale economies allowed for greater output with fewer employees. This freed up the labour that allowed for the industrialization of Canada and fueled the development of the service sector.

The same process is continuing today with the decline in employment in goods production. New technologies, automation and robotics are allowing for higher productivity and output with fewer workers. Canadian factories are about five times more productive today than they were in 1955. This means more output per worker, not necessarily fewer workers.

Indeed, improved productivity is essential to compete internationally, which is itself essential to maintaining or growing a business. In other words, without increases in productivity, the business itself and all of the associated jobs can be lost. This is the creative destruction process at work. Specific jobs lost to automation are gone. Exporting companies who closed their doors in the wake of the global recession in 2007–09 are unlikely to return. Rather, surviving companies will expand, and other, new companies will grow in their place.”