Model of a New Social Contract in the Context of Robotization and Introduction of Artificial Intelligence

Robotization and the introduction of AI exert systemic pressure on the social contract due to the gap between the pace of technological transformation and the speed of institutional adaptation. In this context, the revision of the social contract to align with new realities is relevant. The purpose of the article is to examine the model of the new social contract forming as a result of robotization and the introduction of AI. The study employs conceptual modeling based on trends in political practices, labor market, and economic policy. As a result of the research, the main factors for revising the social contract are identified: (1) deficit of accountability of algorithmic power, (2) labor polarization and increasing vulnerability of social groups, (3) employment redistribution and problems of social integration. A model of the new social contract is presented, including algorithm transparency, innovations in the field of labor and education, as well as new tools for resource redistribution. The new social contract performs an adaptive function, providing intermediate institutions for collective risk management and future design. The research results supplement current works on the consequences of robotization and the introduction of AI, future research should account for new links between technologies, institutions, employment, and social mobility.

1. Shtrik V. Bought Time. The Delayed Crisis of Democratic Capitalism. Moscow: HSE Publishing House; 2019.

2. Benanav A. Automation and the future of work. Journal of Economic Sociology. 2022;23(3):92-108. (In Russ.). URL: https://doi.org/10.17323/1726-3247-2022-3-92-108

3. Acemoglu D., Restrepo P. Tasks, automation, and the rise in US wage inequality. Econometrica. 2022;90(5):1973- 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA19815

4. Mukhametov D.R.Artificial intelligence and regulatory expectations: Government and stakeholders in creation of the future image. Creative Economy. 2025;19(8):1967-1986. (In Russ.). URL: https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.19.8.123609

5. van Bekkum M., Borgesius F. Digital welfare fraud detection and the Dutch SyRI judgment. European Journal of Social Security. 2021;23(4):323-340. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211031257

6. Autor D., Levy F., Murnane R. The Skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2003;118(4):1279-1333. URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801

7. Kurer T.The declining middle: Occupational change, social status, and the populist right. Comparative Political Studies. 2020;53(10):1798-1835. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020912283

8. Kapetaniou C., Pissarides C. Productive robots and industrial employment: The role of national innovation systems. International Economic Review. 2025;66(1):25-52. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12738.

9. Fligstein N. The Architecture of markets: An economic sociology of twenty-first-century capitalist societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2001.

10. Mukhametov D.R.Algorithm transparency in the public sector: key aspects. Creative Economy. 2024;18(12):3867-3880. (In Russ.). URL: https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.18.12.122327

11. Schmager S., Grøder C.H., Parmiggiani E., Pappas I., Vassilakopoulou P.Exploring citizens’ stances on AI in public services: A social contract perspective. Data & Policy. 2024;6:e19. URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2024.13.

12. Petrosyants D.V.Artificial intelligence in “ivory tower”. Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2023;13(6):38-45. (In Russ.). URL: https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2023-13-6-38-45

13. Sim J., Lee S., Chun H.Robot taxes and corporate cash holdings: Evidence from a policy-induced natural experiment. Applied Economics. 2025:1-18. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2025.2602950

14. van Ewijk C.Voluntary collective pensions: A viable alternative? Economics & Philosophy. 2025;41(1):199-205. DOI: 10.1017/S0266267124000324

15. Mukhametov D.R. Sustainable development, intergenerational mobility, and political polarization: Analysis of key trends. Society: Politics, Economics, Law. 2025;10:81-88. (In Russ.). URL: https://doi.org/10.24158/pep.2025.10.9