SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çalışma ve Toplum / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 91

Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Sustainability Of Social Security Systems: The Technological Unemployment Premium Proposal

Yapay Zekâ, Otomasyon ve Sosyal Güvenlik Sistemlerinin Sürdürülebilirliği: Teknolojik İşsizlik Primi Önerisi

Semih Erdoğdu(SOSYAL GÜVENLİK KURUMU)0000-0001-5598-2484
Pages
2331–2364
Publication Date
2026-10-23
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study extends the emerging literature on automation and social security financing by showing how a financing response could be tied to measurable labour displacement and the resulting erosion of the contribution base.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) and automation for labour markets and the financial sustainability of contribution-based social security systems.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The analysis suggests that automation can generate substantial productivity gains, but may also reduce insured employment and weaken contribution revenues when displacement effects are sufficiently strong and persistent.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study extends the emerging literature on automation and social security financing by showing how a financing response could be tied to measurable labour displacement and the resulting erosion of the contribution base.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yapay zekâ · Sosyal güvenlik · Otomasyon

Abstract

This study examines the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) and automation for labour markets and the financial sustainability of contribution-based social security systems. Using a qualitative research design based on an integrative literature review and thematic synthesis, the study examines how AI-driven labour displacement may affect contribution-based social security financing. The analysis suggests that automation can generate substantial productivity gains, but may also reduce insured employment and weaken contribution revenues when displacement effects are sufficiently strong and persistent. In response to this financing risk, the study develops the Technological Unemployment Premium, a conceptual mechanism linked to the measurable employment effects of automation rather than to the technology itself. Unlike conventional robot tax proposals and other technology-based financing approaches, the proposed framework links potential contribution liability to measurable reductions in insured employment or contribution-generating payroll attributable to automation and outlines preliminary institutional responsibilities, transparent and verifiable assessment criteria, and sector-specific implementation considerations. The study extends the emerging literature on automation and social security financing by showing how a financing response could be tied to measurable labour displacement and the resulting erosion of the contribution base.

Özet

Bu çalışma, yapay zekâ (YZ) ve otomasyonun işgücü piyasaları ile prim esaslı sosyal güvenlik sistemlerinin finansal sürdürülebilirliği üzerindeki etkilerini incelemektedir. Bütünleştirici literatür taraması ve tematik senteze dayalı nitel bir araştırma tasarımı kullanılan çalışmada, YZ kaynaklı işgücü ikamesinin prim esaslı sosyal güvenlik finansmanını nasıl etkileyebileceği ele alınmaktadır. Analiz, otomasyonun önemli verimlilik artışları sağlayabileceğini; ancak işgücü ikame etkilerinin yeterince güçlü ve kalıcı olması durumunda sigortalı istihdamı azaltabileceğini ve sosyal güvenlik prim gelirlerini zayıflatabileceğini göstermektedir. Bu finansman riskine karşılık çalışma, teknolojinin kendisinden ziyade otomasyonun ölçülebilir istihdam etkileriyle ilişkilendirilen kavramsal bir mekanizma olarak Teknolojik İşsizlik Primi’ni geliştirmektedir. Geleneksel robot vergisi önerileri ve diğer teknoloji temelli finansman yaklaşımlarından farklı olarak önerilen çerçeve, potansiyel prim yükümlülüğünü otomasyona atfedilebilen sigortalı istihdam veya prime esas kazançlardaki ölçülebilir azalmalarla ilişkilendirmekte ve öncül kurumsal sorumluluklar, şeffaf ve doğrulanabilir değerlendirme ölçütleri ile sektöre özgü uygulama unsurları ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, bir finansman mekanizmasının ölçülebilir işgücü ikamesi ve bunun sonucunda prim tabanında meydana gelen aşınmayla nasıl ilişkilendirilebileceğini ortaya koyarak otomasyon ve sosyal güvenliğin finansmanına ilişkin gelişmekte olan literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Erdoğdu, S. (2026). Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Sustainability Of Social Security Systems: The Technological Unemployment Premium Proposal. Çalışma ve Toplum, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 91, 2331–2364. https://doi.org/10.54752/ct.1968160

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (46)

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2020). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal of Political Economy, 128(6), 2188–2244. https://doi.org/10.1086/705716
  4. Agrawal, A., Gans, J. S., & Goldfarb, A. (2019). Artificial intelligence: The ambiguous labor market impact of automating prediction. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(2), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.33.2.31
  5. Alper, Y. (2018). Temel sosyal politika sorunları: Sosyal güvenlik. In A. Tokol & Y. Alper (Eds.), Sosyal politika. Dora Basım Yayın.
  6. 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 No. 189). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h56dvq7-en
  7. Autor, 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
  8. Behrendt, C., Nguyen, Q. A., & Rani, U. (2019). Social protection systems and the future of work: Ensuring social security for digital platform workers. International Social Security Review, 72(3), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12212
  9. Boulanin, V. (2019). Artificial intelligence: A primer. In V. Boulanin (Ed.), The impact of artificial intelligence on strategic stability and nuclear risk: Volume I. Euro-Atlantic perspectives (pp. 13–25). Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2019-05/sipri1905-ai-strategic-stability-nuclear-risk.pdf
  10. Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2025). Generative AI at work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2), 889–942. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjae044
  11. Cabeçais de Carvalho, M. A. (2026). IoT, artificial intelligence, cloud computing and robotics and the contributory principle on social security. AI and Ethics, 6, Article 213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-026-01045-y
  12. Calligaro, F., & Cetrángolo, O. (2023). Financing universal social protection: The relevance and labour market impacts of social security contributions (WIEGO Working Paper No. 47). WIEGO and International Labour Organization. https://www.wiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/wiego-working-paper-no47.pdf
  13. Casas, P., & Torres, J. L. (2026). Automation, taxation, and social security sustainability. Hacienda Pública Española/Review of Public Economics, 256(1), 69–104. https://doi.org/10.7866/HPE-RPE.26.1.3
  14. Costinot, A., & Werning, I. (2023). Robots, trade, and luddism: A sufficient statistic approach to optimal technology regulation. The Review of Economic Studies, 90(5), 2261–2291. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdac076
  15. Díaz, A., & Grau Ruiz, M. A. (2020). Social security and robotization: Possible ways to finance human reskilling and promote employment. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 11(1), 340–350. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0020
  16. Dilik, S. (1992). Sosyal güvenlik. Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  17. Eloundou, T., Manning, S., Mishkin, P., & Rock, D. (2024). GPTs are GPTs: Labor market impact potential of LLMs. Science, 384(6702), 1306–1308. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adj0998
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. Goudswaard, K., & Caminada, K. (2015). Social security contributions: Economic and public finance considerations. International Social Security Review, 68(4), 25–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12086
  21. Guerreiro, J., Rebelo, S., & Teles, P. (2022). Should robots be taxed? The Review of Economic Studies, 89(1), 279–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdab019
  22. Holtmann, S., Braun, A.-S., Cho, J., Koch, R., & Langenmayr, D. (2025). Investment effects of a quasi-robot tax: Evidence from South Korea (WU International Taxation Research Paper Series No. 2025-14). WU Vienna University of Economics and Business. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5932438
  23. Hötte, K., Theodorakopoulos, A., & Koutroumpis, P. (2024). Automation and taxation. Oxford Economic Papers, 76(4), 945–969. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpae006
  24. Immervoll, H. (2024). Financing social protection in OECD countries: Role and uses of revenue earmarking (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 312). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/0d53155c-en
  25. International Labour Organization. (2002). Social security data required for the valuation of a national social security system. International Labour Office.
  26. International Labour Organization. (2024). World Social Protection Report 2024–26: Universal social protection for climate action and a just transition. International Labour Office. https://doi.org/10.54394/ZMDK5543
  27. International Social Security Association. (2025, June 10). Global overview of social security reforms 2023–2025. https://www.issa.int/analysis/global-overview-social-security-reforms-2023-2025
  28. Kang, D., Lee, J. H., & Quach, S. (2024). The welfare effects of a robot tax: Evidence from a tax credit for automation technologies in Korea. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5005128
  29. Korkusuz, R., & Uğur, S. (2010). Sosyal güvenlik hukukuna giriş. Karahan Kitabevi.
  30. Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.-G., Feld, T., & Hoffmann, M. (2014). Industry 4.0. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 239–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4
  31. Nilsson, N. J. (1998). Artificial intelligence: A new synthesis. Morgan Kaufmann.
  32. OECD. (2024a). Megatrends and the future of social protection. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/6c9202e8-en
  33. OECD. (2024b). Revenue statistics 2024. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c87a3da5-en
  34. Peetz, D. (2019). Digitalisation and the jobs of the future. In The realities and futures of work (pp. 145–166). ANU Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvq4c16w.9
  35. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  36. Şakar, M. (2017). Sosyal sigortalar uygulaması. Beta Yayınları.
  37. Talas, C. (1983). Sosyal ekonomi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Yayını.
  38. Thuemmel, U. (2023). Optimal taxation of robots. Journal of the European Economic Association, 21(3), 1154–1190. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvac062
  39. Tuncay, A. C., & Ekmekçi, Ö. (2015). Sosyal güvenlik hukuku dersleri (Yenilenmiş 17. bası). Beta.
  40. Turner, M. (2026). The bot tax: Why AI systems should pay social security on the wages they replace—A labor displacement levy proposal with empirical case study. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6723920
  41. Tyson, L. D., & Zysman, J. (2022). Automation, AI & work. Daedalus, 151(2), 256–271. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01914
  42. UNU-EGOV. (2023). Digital transformation of social security administration and services: A comparative analysis of Australia, Canada, Denmark and France (ILO Working Paper No. 93). Geneva: International Labour Office. https://doi.org/10.54394/RRID1984
  43. Virgilio, G. P. M., Saavedra Hoyos, F., & Bao Ratzemberg, C. B. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence on unemployment: A review. International Journal of Social Economics, 51(12), 1680–1695. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-05-2023-0338
  44. Wang, L., Liu, C., Liu, D., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Beyond jobs and wages: The hidden cost of automation on corporate social security contributions. International Review of Financial Analysis, 106, 104516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2025.104516
  45. Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
  46. Zhang, L., Gan, T., & Fan, J. (2023). Do industrial robots affect the labour market? Evidence from China. Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, 31(3), 787–817. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecot.12356