Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
Surgery robot
Surgeons are using robots to control operations, sometimes remotely from different continents. Photograph: MediaforMedical/Jean-Paul Chasse/Alamy
Surgeons are using robots to control operations, sometimes remotely from different continents. Photograph: MediaforMedical/Jean-Paul Chasse/Alamy

Will a lack of trust in robots hold back automation?

This article is more than 8 years old

A company making horse saddles and another making personal rape alarms highlight how automation brings benefits but also provokes concern

Rebecca Pick wants to ensure that a human eye is closely focused on the first of her personal protection alarms when they are being put together in a factory over the coming months.

Set to launch in June, the Personal Guardian will be a small device that attaches to a bra strap or belt which, when two buttons are pressed, will alert the police to an attack by connecting to the user’s mobile phone.

While there are options for her to have the first batch of the new devices put together by machine in China at a cheaper rate, Pick says it is more important to bear the cost and ensure they are quality controlled by the humans who put them together.

“It is very intensive in the labour skills that are required. People are sitting by hand and taking the PCB [chips], popping them in, soldiering all the wires together. It is very costly to do it that way but for this type of product we need to make sure that every product is looked at by a human that can tell that everything looks fine and they can test it. For me, that gives me a peace of mind rather than a machine popping them out,” she said.

Automation fears

With rapid advancements in technology which allow for such types of automation has come a debate about the future of work and skills. The Bank of England has warned up to 15m jobs in Britain are at risk as increasingly sophisticated machines do work that was previously the preserve of humans. Academics Carl Frey and Michael Osborne predicted in 2013 that 47% of US jobs were susceptible to automation by 2050.

As well as manual labour, this creep towards automation is also taking place in science, entertainment, medicine and food production. Surgeons have for a number of years used robots to control operations, sometimes remotely from different continents. While the Japanese company Spread is to open the first robot farm where industrial robots will carry out all but one of the tasks needed to grow tens of thousands of lettuces at a vast indoor farm in Kameoka, starting from mid-2017.

However, the issue of trust is a common concern for consumers and some manufacturers, such as Pick. When one of Google’s self-driving cars collided with a bus recently, commentators were quick to point out the problems with autonomous vehicles. A study last year into the safety of surgical robots found the use of the machines had been linked to 144 deaths out of a total of more than 1.7 million procedures over a 14 year period in the US. Although the number of deaths from medical and surgical complications in the US dropped dramatically between 1999 to 2009, just as these robotic techniques became popular.

A sign of progress

While some companies remain sceptical about the efficiency of autonomous production, others have been convinced. In Dublin, Bua Saddles, which makes a lightweight saddle for competitive horse riding, uses a range of automation techniques in its production process. Saddle making is steeped in tradition and the industry is not known for using new technology.

“Where automation is important, is for accuracy and consistency across every part,” says founder Martin Ryan. “It’s expensive and time consuming to set up but very efficient to use. If you are doing volume of an item, it’s the way to go in most cases.”

There are still touch points where humans interact with the production process such as when parts are sewn together and when glue is applied to the bonds, says Ryan who believes the progress of automation should not be feared.

“I think that you have to embrace technology as it moves on and makes systems more efficient because if you don’t someone else will and your approach will become redundant and you won’t be able to compete cost wise. I think embrace [it] and there are always new opportunities that bubble up that people have to migrate across to as changing professions.”

While unconvinced at the moment about the use of automation, Pick keeps an open mind for the future and says the ethical considerations of a shifting jobs market do not come into her decisions, just what is best for the consumer. “If a machine was 100% accurate, I would go for that machine but I do feel that this [production at present] is something that humans can do better because they can physically see it and check it,” she said.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos at the start of the year, concern was raised that women would be among the worst losers from automation-linked job losses.Countering the concern was Microsoft founder Bill Gates who said that same labour could be used for other needs.

“It’s amazing how many farming jobs we got rid of. The US feeds itself with less than 2% of the population. That’s really a very good thing,” Gates said at the event. He went on to say that until every old person is well taken care of and every child with disabilities has the support they need, “anything that allows us to make the goods we’re making today with less labour, that just gives society more options”.

Comments (…)

Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion

Most viewed

Most viewed