Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2602.16631

Can Wearable Exoskeletons Reduce Gender and Disability Gaps in the Construction Industry?

Abstract

The share of construction trade jobs held by women and people with disabilities has remained stubbornly low in the face of chronic shortages of skilled labor. This study explores the potential of wearable assistive technologies to reduce these disparities. We use U.S. worker-level data to estimate employment and wage differences by gender and by mobility/strength impairments in construction and non-construction jobs. We also use occupational-level data to examine variations in workforce composition, physical skill requirements, and earnings across detailed construction occupations. Regression estimates indicate that being a woman and having strength and mobility impairments are associated with substantial employment and pay gaps in construction compared to non-construction jobs. Further analysis shows a high negative correlation between the representation of women and the ability levels required in those occupations. Finally, we discuss several wearable exoskeletons under development for people with upper-body and lower-body impairments, focusing on how these innovations could be integrated into construction jobs. These findings suggest that wearable exoskeletons that enhance manual dexterity, balance, and strength may improve the representation of women and people with disabilities in some of the higher-paying occupations in construction.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yana Rodgers, Xiangmin Liu, Jingang Yi, Liang Zhang. 2026-02-18. Can Wearable Exoskeletons Reduce Gender and Disability Gaps in the Construction Industry?. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2026.2615356

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN