"Regulation, I presume?" said the robot - Towards an iterative regulatory process for robot governance

Abstract This article envisions an iterative regulatory process for robot governance. In the article, we argue that what lacks in robot governance is actually a backstep mechanism that can coordinate and align robot and regulatory developers. In order to solve that problem, we present a theoretical model that represents a step forward in the coordination and alignment of robot and regulatory development. Our work builds on previous literature, and explores modes of alignment and iteration towards greater closeness in the nexus between research and development (R&D) and regulatory appraisal and channeling of robotics’ development. To illustrate practical challenges and solutions, we explore different examples of (related) types of communication processes between robot developers and regulatory bodies. These examples help illuminate the lack of formalization of the policymaking process, and the loss of time and resources that the waste of knowledge generated for future robot governance instruments implies. We argue that initiatives that fail to formalize the communication process between different actors and that propose the mere creation of coordinating agencies risk being seriously ineffective. We propose an iterative regulatory process for robot governance, which combines the use of an ex ante robot impact assessment for legal/ethical appraisal, and evaluation settings as data generators, and an ex post legislative evaluation instrument that eases the revision, modification and update of the normative instrument. In all, the model breathes the concept of creating dynamic evidence-based policies that can serve as temporary benchmark for future and/or new uses or robot developments. Our contribution seeks to provide a thoughtful proposal that avoids the current mismatch between existing governmental approaches and what is needed for effective ethical/legal oversight, in the hope that this will inform the policy debate and set the scene for further research.

[1]  Stijn van Voorst,et al.  Closing the regulatory cycle? A meta evaluation of ex-post legislative evaluations by the European Commission , 2016 .

[2]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  A New Approach to Risk Evaluation and Management: Risk‐Based, Precaution‐Based, and Discourse‐Based Strategies 1 , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[3]  Ghanem Soltana,et al.  A Model-Based Framework for Legal Policy Simulation and Compliance Checking , 2017 .

[4]  A. Garg Regulatory impact assessment – towards better regulation , 2008 .

[5]  Deborah G. Johnson Technology with No Human Responsibility? , 2015 .

[6]  Albert R. Jonsen,et al.  The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning , 1988 .

[7]  A. Jordan,et al.  Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices , 2012 .

[8]  Colin Kirkpatrick,et al.  Regulatory Impact Assessment: Towards Better Regulation? , 2008 .

[9]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  Science, Precaution, and the Politics of Technological Risk , 2008, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[10]  O. Bina,et al.  New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research , 2004 .

[11]  Pericle Salvini,et al.  DustCart, an autonomous robot for door-to-door garbage collection: From DustBot project to the experimentation in the small town of Peccioli , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  R. Kagan,et al.  Social License and Environmental Protection: Why Businesses Go Beyond Compliance , 2002, Law & Social Inquiry.

[13]  J. Kemp,et al.  The Concept of Law , 1962 .

[14]  Atsuo Takanishi,et al.  Intersection of “Tokku” Special Zone, Robots, and the Law: A Case Study on Legal Impacts to Humanoid Robots , 2015, International Journal of Social Robotics.

[15]  R. Brownsword,et al.  Law, Innovation and Technology: Before We Fast Forward—A Forum for Debate , 2009 .

[16]  R. Leenes,et al.  Regulatory challenges of robotics: some guidelines for addressing legal and ethical issues , 2017 .

[17]  Stijn van Voorst,et al.  The (non-)use of ex post legislative evaluations by the European Commission , 2019 .

[18]  Peer Hull Kristensen,et al.  Regulation under uncertainty: The coevolution of industry and regulation , 2018 .

[19]  Anna Wulf,et al.  Knowledge sharing and collaborative relationships in business ecosystems and networks: A definition and a demarcation , 2017, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[20]  Michiel A. Heldeweg,et al.  Normative Alignment, Institutional Resilience and Shifts in Legal Governance of the Energy Transition , 2017 .

[21]  Alan Borning,et al.  Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems , 2020, The Ethics of Information Technologies.

[22]  Helena Haapio,et al.  Proactive Law for Managers: A Hidden Source of Competitive Advantage , 2011 .

[23]  Michiel A. Heldeweg,et al.  Position paper mogelijkheden uitbreiding producentenverantwoordelijkheid voor afval , 2018 .

[24]  Ryan Calo The Case for a Federal Robotics Commission , 2014 .

[25]  M. Heldeweg,et al.  An experimental approach to regulating non-military unmanned aircraft systems , 2019 .

[26]  B. Lenz,et al.  Autonomes Fahren: Technische, rechtliche und gesellschaftliche Aspekte , 2015 .

[27]  Helge Toutenburg,et al.  The Social Control of Technology , 1982 .

[28]  John Turnpenny,et al.  Rationalising the Policy Mess? Ex Ante Policy Assessment and the Utilisation of Knowledge in the Policy Process , 2009 .

[29]  H. Sherwani,et al.  Innovation and Value Creation in Business Ecosystems , 2018 .

[30]  Alex Barco Martelo,et al.  Child-Robot Interaction Studies: From Lessons Learned to Guidelines , 2017 .

[31]  Paul Simmonds,et al.  Evaluation of Directive 2006/42/EC on Machinery , 2017 .

[32]  Chris Holder,et al.  Robotics and law: Key legal and regulatory implications of the robotics age (Part I of II) , 2016, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[33]  Cristina A. Costescu,et al.  Conference Proceedings New Friends 2015 , 2015 .

[34]  R. INFORMATIONAL REGULATION AND INFORMATIONAL STANDING : AKINS AND BEYOND , 2017 .

[35]  Experimental legislation concerning technological & governance innovation – an analytical approach , 2015 .

[36]  Bryant Walker Smith,et al.  Regulation and the Risk of Inaction , 2015 .

[37]  Colin Scott,et al.  Controlling the New Media: Hybrid Responses to New Forms of Power , 2002 .

[38]  Paolo Dario,et al.  An Investigation on Legal Regulations for Robot Deployment in Urban Areas: A Focus on Italian Law , 2010, Adv. Robotics.

[39]  Wendell Wallach,et al.  An Agile Ethical/Legal Model for the International and National Governance of AI and Robotics , 2017 .

[40]  Vijay Kumar,et al.  The grand challenges of Science Robotics , 2018, Science Robotics.

[41]  Wendell Wallach,et al.  Coordinating technology governance , 2015 .