Back to the database
Record STMT-W52BEDAAdvisory

Robots, institutional roles and joint action: some key ethical issues

Position paper International lawGlobaladopted

This academic paper examines the possibility of human-robot joint action and the occupancy of institutional roles by robots using social ontology frameworks. The author argues that because robots are not moral or rational agents, they cannot perform morally significant joint actions or genuinely occupy institutional roles involving moral duties. Consequently, robots remain technological instruments under human control, and the search for physical properties that reliably correlate with moral properties faces significant obstacles.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

SpringerIndustry
Publisher
Legal forceAdvisory
Under whose authorityInternational law
Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsGeneral public

Researchers and scholars in philosophy, robotics, and AI ethics should read this to understand the conceptual and ethical limits of granting moral or institutional status to robots.

Sectors
Research and science · applied philosophy and robotics research

What the document contains

What's covered

The document addresses the philosophical and ethical dimensions of human-robot interaction, analyzing concepts of joint action, social ontology, institutional roles, and moral agency. It evaluates whether current robots can participate in joint actions or occupy institutional roles, concluding with a deflationary analysis of robot capabilities in moral contexts.

What's missing

The text does not provide specific technical guidelines for software development, legislative text, or actionable regulatory frameworks for governing AI deployment.

Key takeaways
  • Robots are capable of performing basic joint doings and simple organizational tasks, but they cannot engage in genuine human-like joint actions.
  • Because robots lack consciousness, intentions, and the capacity to recognize moral properties, they are not moral or rational agents.
  • Robots cannot properly occupy institutional roles because such roles typically entail moral rights, duties, and accountability to institutional authority.
  • The program to find physical properties in the environment that reliably correlate with complex moral properties faces insurmountable obstacles.
  • Robots must remain technological instruments under the direct control of human agents who bear full moral and institutional responsibility.
Outline
· Introduction
· Joint actions and social institutions
· Robots, joint action and institutional roles
· Robots and moral properties
· Conclusion
Issued4 December 2024
Length10,218 words · 11 pages
FormatNot recorded
Scopeglobal

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Fairness

0/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Dignity

0/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Human Oversight

3/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

Robots are, or ought to be, technological instruments under the control of human agents in the service of the collective goods definitive of the institutions in question

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Privacy

0/5

Protection of personal data and private life

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Enforcement

0/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Impact Assessment

0/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

Introduction

screening score · 2026-10-24

Topics

robot_ethics joint_action social_institutions moral_agency autonomous_systems