'AI will create more jobs than it destroys': El Puerto's promise is plausible, but the key data point lies elsewhere

By Andalucía Información · October 22, 2026.

Thirty percent of existing jobs in Spain are exposed to the influence of artificial intelligence, according to the article, which uses that figure to frame the event "Training in the Age of Artificial Intelligence," organized by Publicaciones 7.0 (Grupo Publicaciones del Sur) at El Centro Inglés in El Puerto de Santa María. The forum brought together professionals from the technology, business and education sectors, as well as students from the school.

The argument that made the headline came from África Arévalo, sales director at ITeligent: AI "will create more jobs than it destroys." Carlos Rioja, who holds a PhD in Computer Architecture and teaches Computer Engineering at the University of Cádiz (UCA), agreed. According to the outlet's account, the debate pointed to a major transformation of the labor market in which humans will still be needed in a supervisory role.

The speakers identified profiles that will be in demand in the short term: AI governance specialist, algorithm auditor and cybersecurity expert. They also stressed "soft skills" (personal, social, emotional and communication skills), critical thinking and planning. Juan Antonio Parra, president of AJE Cádiz (the young entrepreneurs' association), urged students to "know how to think" and not let a machine do their thinking for them. Arévalo summed up the risk this way: AI won't take your job, but "someone who knows how to use it better than you" will.

The mayor, Germán Beardo, opened the sessions with a message of openness to change, citing the use of AI to speed up procedures in local government as an example. Rioja, for his part, raised a concern: that some country might hand its government over to AI, a risk he linked to social inequality.

**Our take.** Two things should be kept apart. That the net effect on employment will be positive is a reasonable hypothesis, with historical precedents in other technological revolutions, but the material contains no study or figure to support it: it is the speakers' opinion, not a measured result. More broadly, the aggregate balance hides what matters: the jobs created are not the same as those destroyed, they are not in the same places, and they are not filled by the same people.

That is the difficult short term we should not sugarcoat. Back-office and administrative tasks are generally singled out as among the most exposed, and whoever does that work today does not automatically become an algorithm auditor. That bridge, fast, high-quality training, is the real challenge. The speakers themselves acknowledge as much when they call for adapting degree programs to a reality that is moving faster than they are.

The "soft skills" argument also has an interesting point: judgment, communication and the ability to supervise are precisely what best resist automation. And Parra's argument about small businesses is relevant: if AI reduces large companies' scale advantage, competition improves. But only if smaller firms have real access to the tools and to the training to use them.

In the long run, we keep our horizon: an AI that frees up time, as Rioja welcomes when talking about the bureaucratic burden, and that ultimately generates abundance so that everyone can work on what they are passionate about. But that destination is not reached through optimism at a panel discussion alone. It is reached if the transition is managed: training, protection and clear rules. The El Puerto debate is heading in the right direction; what is missing is data and concrete plans.