AI raises wages for workers whose tasks are augmentable — but only in the formal sector; informal workers do not capture augmentation rents, implying labor market institutions, not technology access, are the binding constraint in the Global South.

Main Finding

This paper develops a theory and measurement framework for decomposing human capital into three cognitive factors—physical-manual (HP), routine-cognitive (HC, AI-substitutable), and augmentable-cognitive (HA, AI-complementary)—and shows empirically for Colombia that AI adoption raises returns to HA only where firms capture digital labor (i.e., in the formal sector). Key empirical results: an HA level effect (~+9.1% per SD), a positive augmentation interaction in the formal sector (reported estimates range ≈ +0.05 to +0.16; IV 2SLS ≈ +0.234) and a negative/zero interaction in the informal sector (≈ −0.044). A triple interaction (AHC × D × Formal) strongly confirms formality as the binding channel.

Key Points

• Theoretical contribution

  • Proposes an orthogonal decomposition Hi = HP ⊕ HC ⊕ HA.
  • Introduces an amplification function ϕ(Df) that multiplies the productivity of HA with a firm’s digital labor stock Df.
  • Derives an “augmented Mincer” wage specification: log wage depends on HA, HA×D, HC×D with testable signs (β2 > 0 for HA×D; β3 < 0 for HC×D).
  • Predicts that augmentation rents accrue only where firms invest in digital labor—formal firms in dual labor markets.

• Measurement innovation

  • Builds an Augmented Human Capital index (AHC) by scoring 18,796 O*NET task statements with an LLM (Claude Haiku 4.5) for augmentation potential (0–100).
  • Aggregates task scores to occupations using O*NET importance weights and a chained SOC→ISCO→CIUO-08 crosswalk to map to 440 Colombian occupations.
  • Validation: high convergent correlations with other AI exposure indices (e.g., r = +0.86 vs. Felten AIOE, r = +0.79 vs. Eloundou GPT), negative correlations with automation measures (Frey–Osborne r ≈ −0.79), and inter-LLM reliability (Krippendorff’s α ≈ 0.71 after adjusting level bias).

• Empirical evidence (Colombia, GEIH microdata)

  • Sample: 105,517 workers (estimation sample after restrictions), 442 occupations, 20 sectors.
  • Constructs sector×occupation AI-adoption proxy D using within-sector indicators: formality rate (0.30), mean education (0.25), mean income (0.20), large-firm share (0.25).
  • Main empirical patterns:
    • AHC increases explanatory power of wage regressions substantially (R² rises from ~0.28 to ~0.44 in augmented specifications).
    • HA × D interaction positive and significant in formal sector; negative/insignificant in informal sector.
    • Triple interaction AHC × D × Formal large and significant (paper reports +0.519, p < 0.001).
    • Heterogeneity: augmentation premium strongest for older/experienced workers (ages 46–65) and in health and education sectors.
  • Identification: sector fixed effects, placebo permutation of AHC (yields null), and an IV strategy for D using pre-period (2018–19) sector capital intensity (first-stage F ≈ 229; 2SLS β2 ≈ +0.234, p = 0.008).
  • Oaxaca–Blinder: AI adoption explains ~20.9% of the formal/informal wage gap (more than education’s contribution in this decomposition); AHC and AHC×D explain ~5.5%.

Data & Methods

• Measurement pipeline

  • Tasks scored: 18,796 unique O*NET task statements.
  • LLM scoring outputs per task: augmentation potential (aok ∈ [0,100]), substitution risk (sok ∈ [0,100]), augmentation type label (decision support, information synthesis, creative amplification, etc.).
  • Occupation AHC: weighted average of task augmentation scores using O*NET importance weights.
  • Crosswalk: chained SOC → ISCO-08 → CIUO-08 (Colombian adaptation) covering ~99.9% of GEIH employment.

• Microdata and construction of D

  • Primary microdata: Colombia’s GEIH 2024 wave; final N ≈105.5k after age/income restrictions.
  • AI-adoption proxy D built at sector × occupation-group cell (677 cells) from observable GEIH indicators (formality rate, mean education, mean income, large-firm share) with pre-specified weights.

• Econometric specifications

  • Baseline: augmented Mincer with controls (experience, experience², education years), sector fixed effects, and interactions HA × ln D and HC × ln D.
  • Robustness/identification: sector FE to absorb sector-level confounders; permutation placebo tests; IV (pre-period capital intensity) to address endogeneity of D; heterogeneity and Oaxaca–Blinder decompositions; re-scoring subsample with alternate LLM (Claude Sonnet 4) to check reliability.

• Validation and robustness checks

  • Convergent/discriminant external validation against existing AI-exposure/automation indices.
  • Inter-rater reliability across LLMs (Pearson r ≈ 0.76, Spearman ρ ≈ 0.75).
  • Placebo permutations and model specifications (including restricting to formal workers) show the main pattern is robust.
  • 2SLS yields larger point estimate than OLS, suggesting attenuation bias from measurement error in D.

Implications for AI Economics

• Theory and measurement

  • Advances human capital theory by treating cognitive capacity as a multidimensional vector (HP, HC, HA), clarifying why AI simultaneously substitutes and complements different cognitive activities.
  • Demonstrates a practical LLM-based measurement strategy (AHC) for the augmentable component that can be adapted to other countries and datasets.

• Labor markets and distributional effects

  • Shows that capture of AI-driven augmentation rents depends on firm-level investment/institutions (formality), not only individual skills or technology access—highlighting institutional constraints as central in developing economies.
  • Suggests AI adoption can widen wage gaps across formal/informal sectors and across workers with different cognitive compositions, shaping inequality and wage structure.

• Policy and training

  • Implication for education and training: policies should target augmentable cognitive skills (HA: complex communication, contextual judgment, synthesis) and complementarities with firm digital adoption.
  • Formalization policies and encouragement of firm digital labor investments may be as important as access to AI tools for enabling workers to capture augmentation rents.

• Measurement & research agenda

  • Validates the use of LLMs as measurement instruments for latent task-level economic constructs, but underscores the need for inter-model validation and attention to systematic level biases.
  • Opens avenues: apply the AHC framework to other developing countries, track dynamics as firm digital investments evolve, and combine task-level behavioral data (on-the-job use of AI) with AHC for stronger causal claims.

Caveats (as noted or implied in the paper) - AHC relies on LLM task scoring and a constructed sector×occupation D proxy; measurement assumptions matter. The paper addresses this with validation, robustness checks, and IV, but remaining concerns include possible residual confounding and generalizability beyond Colombia. - The mapping from model scores to real-world augmentability depends on how firms and workers actually deploy AI tools; uptake heterogeneity within cells could attenuate estimated effects.