From responsible robotics towards a human rights regime oriented to the challenges of robotics and artificial intelligence
This academic paper examines the limitations of the responsible robotics and AI initiatives, arguing that inherent theoretical complexities in assigning responsibility require a complementary human rights framework. The authors propose a human rights regime directed specifically against harms arising from robotics and artificial intelligence to invert the power relationship between humans and technology. The proposed framework aims to both protect and empower people against the challenges introduced by advanced technologies by placing humanness at the core.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Researchers, ethicists, and policymakers looking for a philosophical foundation and human rights approach to govern AI and robotics.
What the document contains
The article addresses the philosophical and theoretical shortcomings of the responsible robotics movement, the difficulties in ascribing responsibility to autonomous systems, and the proposal for a human rights framework specifically designed to address AI and robotics challenges.
The text does not provide specific legislative text, binding regulatory enforcement mechanisms, or technical standards for AI development.
- The concept of responsibility in robotics is not monolithic and contains inherent theoretical contradictions.
- Human responsibility serves as the primary frame of reference, which is increasingly disrupted by advanced AI and robotics.
- A complementary human rights regime is necessary as the other side of the responsibility coin to address robotic harms.
- Human rights should be developed to both negatively protect and positively empower humans against AI and robotics challenges.
Abstract Introduction and theoretical background The problem of responsibility in robotics Proposal for a human rights regime Conclusion
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
3/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
While every effort should be expended to ensure that issues of responsibility are addressed at each stage of technological progression
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Fairness
0/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Human Dignity
3/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
by emphasising the social and reflective character of the notion of humanness as well as the difference between the human and nonhuman.
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Human Oversight
0/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Privacy
0/5Protection of personal data and private life
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Transparency
0/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24
Impact Assessment
0/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-24