Cited by 206Digitalization, Law, and RegulationEthics and Social Impacts of AILiterary and Philosophical Studies

Regulatory challenges of robotics: some guidelines for addressing legal and ethical issues

Open access
Leenes, Ronald, Palmerini, Erica, Koops, Bert-Jaap, Bertolini, Andrea, Salvini, Pericle, Lucivero, Federica·2017·Law, Innovation and Technology

Abstract

Robots are slowly, but certainly, entering people’s professional and private lives. They require the attention of regulators due to the challenges they present to existing legal frameworks and the new legal and ethical questions they raise. This paper discusses four major regulatory dilemmas in the field of robotics: how to keep up with technological advances; how to strike a balance between stimulating innovation and the protection of fundamental rights and values; whether to affirm prevalent social norms or nudge social norms in a different direction; and, how to balance effectiveness versus legitimacy in techno-regulation. The four dilemmas are each treated in the context of a particular modality of regulation: law, market, social norms, and technology as a regulatory tool; and for each, we focus on particular topics – such as liability, privacy, and autonomy – that often feature as the major issues requiring regulatory attention. The paper then highlights the role and potential of the European framework of rights and values, responsible research and innovation, smart regulation and soft law as means of dealing with the dilemmas.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17579961.2017.1304921

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leenes, R., Palmerini, E., Koops, B.-J., Bertolini, A., Salvini, P., & Lucivero, F.
Affiliations
  • Tilburg University (NL)
  • Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Leenes, Ronald
Venue
Law, Innovation and Technology
Published
2017-01-02
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
1-44
ISSN
  • 1757-9961 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-997X
OpenAlex
W2597726517
Cited by
206
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1
FWCI
121.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Law Innovation and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
European Commission (289092)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Literary and Philosophical Studies
Keywords
robotics regulation, legal and ethical issues, technological change, social norms, nudging, liability, privacy, autonomy, responsible research and innovation, smart regulation, soft law

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review