IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/polsoc/v40y2021i2p232-249..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring governance tensions of disruptive technologies: the case of care robots in Australia and New Zealand
[A regulatory approach for the Australian Charities and Not‐ for‐profit Commission: A discussion paper. Canberra: Regulatory institutions network occasional papers series]

Author

Listed:
  • Helen Dickinson
  • Catherine Smith
  • Nicole Carey
  • Gemma Carey

Abstract

Robots are increasingly appearing as a potential answer to the ‘care crisis’ facing a number of countries. Although it is anticipated that many positives will flow from the application of these technologies, they are also likely to generate unexpected consequences and risks. This paper explores the use of robots within disability and aged care settings in the Australian and New Zealand contexts. Informed by thirty-five semi-structured interviews with a range of stakeholders, the paper explores why this area is so difficult to govern examining areas identified as generating tensions around the use of robots in care settings. In each of these areas some respondents saw the introduction of robots to be relatively straightforward applications that do not require extensive structures of governance. Others, however, viewed these applications as having potentially greater implications and the need to govern for these over the longer term. The three areas of tension that we explore in this paper relate to independence and surveillance, the re-shaping of human interaction and who can care. These tensions illustrate some of the problems involved in governing robots in a care service context and some of the potentially difficult issues that governments will need to resolve if these technologies are to be effective. We conclude the paper arguing what is needed is a responsive regulation approach to help resolve some of the complexities and tensions in overseeing these technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Helen Dickinson & Catherine Smith & Nicole Carey & Gemma Carey, 2021. "Exploring governance tensions of disruptive technologies: the case of care robots in Australia and New Zealand [A regulatory approach for the Australian Charities and Not‐ for‐profit Commission: A ," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 232-249.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:40:y:2021:i:2:p:232-249.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14494035.2021.1927588
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schuelke-Leech, Beth-Anne, 2018. "A model for understanding the orders of magnitude of disruptive technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 261-274.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Akter, Shahriar & Hossain, Md Afnan & Sajib, Shahriar & Sultana, Saida & Rahman, Mahfuzur & Vrontis, Demetris & McCarthy, Grace, 2023. "A framework for AI-powered service innovation capability: Review and agenda for future research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Song, Yang & Zhang, Zhiyuan & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Rubin, Ofir, 2023. "Incentivizing green technology innovation to confront sustainable development," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Godart, Frédéric & Pistilli, Luca, 2024. "The multifaceted concept of disruption: A typology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Blume, Maximilian & Oberländer, Anna Maria & Röglinger, Maximilian & Rosemann, Michael & Wyrtki, Katrin, 2020. "Ex ante assessment of disruptive threats: Identifying relevant threats before one is disrupted," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Laudien, Sven M. & Reuter, Ute & Sendra Garcia, Francisco Javier & Botella-Carrubi, Dolores, 2024. "Digital advancement and its effect on business model design: Qualitative-empirical insights," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Löhr, Guido, 2023. "Conceptual disruption and 21st century technologies: A framework," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Van Auken, Howard E. & Fotouhi Ardakani, Mohammad & Carraher, Shawn & Khojasteh Avorgani, Razieh, 2021. "Innovation among entrepreneurial SMEs during the COVID-19 crisis in Iran," Small Business International Review, Asociación Española de Contabilidad y Administración de Empresas - AECA, vol. 5(2), pages 395-395, September.
    7. Yanzhang Gu & Longying Hu & Hongjin Zhang & Chenxuan Hou, 2021. "Innovation Ecosystem Research: Emerging Trends and Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    8. Mario Coccia, 2020. "Cyclical phenomena in technological change," Papers 2010.03168, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    9. Andrea North-Samardzic, 2020. "Biometric Technology and Ethics: Beyond Security Applications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 433-450, December.
    10. Hopster, Jeroen, 2021. "What are socially disruptive technologies?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. Padmanathan Kasinathan & Rishi Pugazhendhi & Rajvikram Madurai Elavarasan & Vigna Kumaran Ramachandaramurthy & Vinoth Ramanathan & Senthilkumar Subramanian & Sachin Kumar & Kamalakannan Nandhagopal & , 2022. "Realization of Sustainable Development Goals with Disruptive Technologies by Integrating Industry 5.0, Society 5.0, Smart Cities and Villages," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-31, November.
    12. Bingqiang Li & Jing Yu & Lei Huang & Jinzhi Li & Changhan Luo, 2021. "Coupling Development of Manufacturing Promotion and Innovation in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.
    13. Patricia Baudier & Galina Kondrateva & Chantal Ammi & Eric Seulliet, 2021. "Peace engineering : the contribution of blockchain systems to the e-voting process," Post-Print hal-02972161, HAL.
    14. Gaies, Brahim & Nakhli, Mohamed Sahbi & Sahut, Jean Michel & Guesmi, Khaled, 2021. "Is Bitcoin rooted in confidence? – Unraveling the determinants of globalized digital currencies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    15. Bhatt, Priyanka C. & Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Drave, Vinayak A. & Lu, Tzu-Chuen & Kumar, Vimal, 2023. "Patent analysis based technology innovation assessment with the lens of disruptive innovation theory: A case of blockchain technological trajectories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    16. Bingqiang Li & Lei Huang, 2019. "The Effect of Incremental Innovation and Disruptive Innovation on the Sustainable Development of Manufacturing in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    17. Rijswijk, Kelly & de Vries, Jasper R. & Klerkx, Laurens & Turner, James A., 2023. "The enabling and constraining connections between trust and digitalisation in incumbent value chains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    18. Chammassian, Raffi Gabriel & Sabatier, Valerie, 2020. "The role of costs in business model design for early-stage technology startups," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    19. Silva, Lucas Emmanuel Nascimento & Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Faria, Aline Mariane de & Borini, Felipe Mendes, 2024. "Innovation processes in ecosystem settings: An integrative framework and future directions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    20. Ponzoa, José M. & Gómez, Andrés & Villaverde, Silvia & Díaz, Vicente, 2021. "Technologically empowered? perception and acceptance of AR glasses and 3D printers in new generations of consumers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:40:y:2021:i:2:p:232-249.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.