Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Bringing inclusivity to robotics with INBOTS

Nature Machine Intelligence volume 1, page 164 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor — Advances in robotics and digital transformation currently make it possible to move robotic systems beyond the factory assembly line into private and institutional spaces such as our homes, schools and hospitals. In these places, robotics can facilitate human–machine cooperation and achieve what would not be possible for a human being or a machine separately. For example, self-driving cars use data from thousands of human drivers to learn how to respond appropriately, and robotic surgical systems enable surgeons to perform minimally invasive operations. The benefits may be substantial but it will be necessary to ensure that these are fairly distributed. We believe that current developments in robotics and the majority of existing robo-ethical reflections1 do not sufficiently consider the paradigm of inclusivity. Inclusive robotics requires an ethical design approach that guarantees security, accessibility and respect for human dignity.

The implementation of inclusive robotics can only happen with international support. We are participating in a Horizon 2020 project, financed by the European Commission, called INBOTS, which promotes inclusive robotics. The overall objective of INBOTS is to create a strong community hub, bringing together experts who can share experiences and debate various issues around responsible research, technology transfer, regulation and legislation. The INBOTS programme expects to help increase adoption of interactive robotics by end-users, improve understanding of societal needs by researchers from industry and academia, and create an adequate regulatory framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Report of COMEST on Robotics Ethics (UNESCO, 2017); http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0025/002539/253952E.pdf

  2. Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989); http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38f0.html

  3. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN, 2007); http://www.refworld.org/docid/45f973632.html

  4. Nussbaum, M. C. & Sen, A. (eds) The Quality of Life (Oxford Univ. Press, 1993).

  5. Strategic Research Agenda for Robotics in Europe 2014–2020 962–993 (euRobotics, 2014); https://www.eu-robotics.net/cms/upload/topic_groups/SRA2020_SPARC.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Logic, Cognition, Language, and Information, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain

    Aníbal Monasterio Astobiza

  2. Center for Bioethics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Aníbal Monasterio Astobiza

  3. Department of Science, Technology and Society, Institute of Philosophy, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

    Mario Toboso

  4. University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

    Manuel Aparicio

  5. Department of Theoretical and Practical Philosophy, Institute of Philosophy, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

    Txetxu Ausín & Daniel López

  6. University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Ricardo Morte

  7. Neural Rehabilitation Group, Cajal Institute, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

    José Luis Pons

Authors
  1. Aníbal Monasterio Astobiza
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Toboso
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manuel Aparicio
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Txetxu Ausín
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel López
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ricardo Morte
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. José Luis Pons
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aníbal Monasterio Astobiza.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monasterio Astobiza, A., Toboso, M., Aparicio, M. et al. Bringing inclusivity to robotics with INBOTS. Nat Mach Intell 1, 164 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0040-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0040-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing