Discussion on the ethical dilemmas panel

Robots are frequently engineered to minimise—or entirely eliminate—friction. But could this drive toward seamless efficiency come at a cost? Might friction, paradoxically, serve a valuable purpose? Take, for instance, the role of robotics in waste management. If advanced machines can autonomously sort mixed refuse, why should individuals bother separating recyclables into distinct bins? Is the removal of effort always an improvement—or does it risk eroding responsibility, awareness, or engagement?

This question was posed to me prior to engaging in the interesting panel debate at the Climate Robotics Summit, organised by the Climate Robotics Network. Despite technical issues causing my lateness, it was an interesting discussion with speakers Prof. Robert Krueger from Worchester Polytechnic Institute, Brooke Zhang fromTailwind Climate, and Er. Bikash Gurung from Robotics Association of Nepal, moderated by Dr. Patrick Meier, Founder of Climate Robotics Network. A recording of the discussion will be available shortly.

Someone recently asked why someone like me would involved in an event such as the Climate Robotics Summit. My answer was that it is more important than ever for social and behavioural scientists to be involved in discussions about design and implementation of robotics systems and their impact on humans’ mental health and wellbeing. It goes without saying that this was evident from the discussion during the ethical dilemmas panel. Thank you Patrick Meier for inviting me!