Advanced robotics and automation: implications for occupational safety and health
This EU-OSHA report examines the implications of advanced robotics and automation for occupational safety and health (OSH). It uses a comprehensive taxonomy to evaluate the effects of full and semi-automation across various tasks and economic sectors, detailing psychosocial, physical, and organisational impacts. Finally, it outlines relevant standards, risk assessment challenges, and provides recommendations for human-centred workplace applications.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Policymakers, researchers, employers, and occupational safety and health professionals seeking guidance on the implications of advanced robotics in the workplace.
What the document contains
The report covers the classification of advanced robotics and automation tasks (person-, object-, and information-related), their impacts on jobs and economic sectors, and specific OSH implications including psychosocial, physical, and organisational effects.
It does not provide binding legal regulations, specific corporate internal policies, or a comprehensive universal risk assessment tool for all possible robotics applications.
- Advanced robotics and automation significantly alter physical, psychosocial, and organisational aspects of work environments.
- Task automation reduces physical strain and musculoskeletal risks but introduces potential psychosocial challenges such as automation complacency, decreased job control, and job insecurity.
- Human-robot collaboration (cobots) requires careful interaction design, transparency, and adequate trust calibration to ensure safety and effectiveness.
- Organisational change management, thorough risk assessments, and targeted workforce reskilling are essential for safe and successful robot integration.
· 1 Introduction and objectives · 2 Methodology · 3 Advanced robotics and types of tasks · 4 OSH implications · 5 Conclusion and recommendations · 6 References
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
2/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
Especially as robotic systems expand in capabilities and autonomy, developers and also legislators need to consider the facet of responsibility and accountability in the interaction.
4.1.3 Interaction design
screening score · 2026-10-25
Fairness
0/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
screening score · 2026-10-25
Human Dignity
1/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
A feeling of alienation and loss of control , for instance, can be caused when a robotic system adapts its behaviour autonomously without notifying the user
4.1.3 Interaction design
screening score · 2026-10-25
Human Oversight
4/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
The experts further stressed that the ‘human in control’ principle should be regarded as a leading design guideline. Therefore, w hen designing workspaces in which robotic systems and humans work closely together, the worker should retain their sense of control over the working situation
4.1.2 Task design
screening score · 2026-10-25
Privacy
2/5Protection of personal data and private life
Excessive data collection can furthermore lead to actual or perceived monitoring of workplaces and employees’ performance and behaviour. This can lead to negative impacts on motivation, satisfaction, organisational trust or stress, even if principles of data protection according t o the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) are met
4.1.3 Interaction design
screening score · 2026-10-25
Transparency
3/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
Transparency stands for a more comprehensive treatment of information, including system state indication that an operator may need when dealing with autonomous systems , especially under high stress, workload or uncertainty.
4.1.3 Interaction design
screening score · 2026-10-25
Enforcement
1/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
Regarding the application of standards , the experts point ed out that end users do not have enough knowledge on robots and on the guidelines to implement them as well as that managers aren’t aware about the standards
4.4 Standards
screening score · 2026-10-25
Impact Assessment
3/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Accurate and in depth risk assessment of a technology in the workplace is vital to ensure OSH, and the lack of assessment tools capable of providing this for advanced robotic systems , cobots and AI based systems for the automation tasks, needs to be considered going forward
4.5 Risk assessment
screening score · 2026-10-25