Oferta y demanda de empleo en el sector tecnológico ecuatoriano
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i4.1787Palabras clave:
Mercado laboral, competencias digitales, automatización, educación superior, políticas de empleoResumen
Este artículo examina la relación entre la oferta y la demanda de empleo en el sector tecnológico ecuatoriano, a partir de una síntesis de evidencia internacional y consideraciones de política pública aplicables al contexto nacional. Se revisan marcos teóricos sobre cambio tecnológico, automatización y contenido de habilidades, y se discuten brechas de capital humano, desajustes formativos y señales del mercado laboral. Se propone un marco de acción con cuatro ejes: actualización curricular ágil, formación dual, políticas de primer empleo y alianzas público privadas orientadas a la productividad. Asimismo, se mapea la demanda de competencias (programación, ciencia de datos, ciberseguridad y habilidades socioemocionales) y se analizan riesgos asociados a la polarización ocupacional y la fuga de talento. El trabajo aporta tablas de síntesis para la toma de decisiones y una discusión basada en literatura con DOI. Se concluye que la coordinación entre Estado, academia y empresas es condición necesaria para cerrar brechas, acelerar la inserción juvenil y retener talento en un ecosistema digital inclusivo y competitivo.
Descargas
Citas
Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). The race between man and machine: Implications of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment. American Economic Review, 108(6), 1488–1542. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160696
Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2019). Automation and new tasks: How technology displaces and reinstates labor. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(2), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.2.3
Akerman, A., Gaarder, I., & Mogstad, M. (2015). The skill complementarity of broadband internet. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(4), 1781–1824. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjv028
Arntz, M., Gregory, T., & Zierahn, U. (2016). The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: A comparative analysis. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 189. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h56dvq7-en
Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.3.3
D. H., & Dorn, D. (2013). The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the U.S. labor market. American Economic Review, 103(5), 1553–1597. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.5.1553
D. H., Katz, L. F., & Kearney, M. S. (2006). The polarization of the U.S. labor market. American Economic Review, 96(2), 189–194. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282806777212620
Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279–1333. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801
Autor, D., Dorn, D., Katz, L. F., Patterson, C., & Van Reenen, J. (2020). The fall of the labor share and the rise of superstar firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(2), 645–709. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjaa004
Beaudry, P., Green, D. A., & Sand, B. M. (2016). The great reversal in the demand for skill and cognitive tasks. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(S1), S199–S247. https://doi.org/10.1086/682347
Bessen, J. E. (2018). AI and jobs: The role of demand (NBER Working Paper No. 24235). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24235
Bloom, N., Draca, M., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT, and productivity. Review of Economic Studies, 83(1), 87–117. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdv039
Bloom, N., Sadun, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2012). Americans do IT better: US multinationals and the productivity miracle. American Economic Review, 102(1), 167–201. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.1.167
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). SAGE. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/systematic-approaches-to-a-successful-literature-review/book245743
Brynjolfsson, E., Rock, D., & Syverson, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence and the modern productivity paradox: A clash of expectations and statistics. AEJ: Macroeconomics, 11(1), 39–83. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20180011
Cirera, X., & Maloney, W. F. (2017). The innovation paradox: Developing-country capabilities and the unrealized promise of technological catch-up. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1160-9
Deming, D. J. (2017). The growing importance of social skills in the labor market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1593–1640. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjx022
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2008). The race between education and technology. Belknap Press/Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9x5x
Goos, M., Manning, A., & Salomons, A. (2014). Explaining job polarization: Routine-biased technological change and offshoring. American Economic Review, 104(8), 2509–2526. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.8.2509
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed.). SAGE. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/an-introduction-to-systematic-reviews/book245744
Graetz, G., & Michaels, G. (2018). Robots at work. Review of Economics and Statistics, 100(5), 753–768. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00754
Javorcik, B. S. (2004). Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. American Economic Review, 94(3), 605–627. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828041464605
OECD. (2019). Perspectivas del Empleo 2019: El futuro del trabajo. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9ee00155-es
M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Carol Ginger Núñez Rubio, Peralta Carpio Faviola Lissette , José Luis Tenorio Almache
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Esta publicación está bajo una 
