Digital Law Journal

Advanced search

Regulation of robotics: Analysis of the leading countries’ experience


The paper compares and analyzes the experiences leading states have had in robotics regulation; on the basis of the identifi best practices, proposals are formulated for Russia in the corresponding fi d. The relevance of the research is determined by the rapid growth of the global robotics market over the last decade, as well as the introduction of robots in the widest range of human activities. The leading countries in the international robotics market were selected using the benchmarking method. A comparative analysis of the regulation in the fi d of robotics was conducted through a comparison matrix composed of several criteria. The criteria included the existence of regulations and a national program for the development of robotics, the presence of responsible government bodies or organizations, and sectoral “regulatory sandboxes”. It was discovered that, of the four studied countries (the Republic of Korea, Japan, Germany, and Russia), only one has all the components of the robotics regulation system. The authors formulated certain recommendations aimed at improving the corresponding domestic regulation system. In particular, considering the best practices of foreign countries, the parties concerned are encouraged to adopt a sectoral normative legal act, as well as to establish a specialized state agency.

About the Authors

O. B. Pichkov
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO-University)
Russian Federation

Oleg B. Pichkov — Ph.D. in Economics, Associate Professor, Dean of School of International Economic Relations

76, ave. Vernadsky, Moscow, Russia, 119454

A. A. Ulanov
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO-University)
Russian Federation

Alexander A. Ulanov* — Ph.D. in Economics, Deputy Vice-Rector for legal and administrative issues

76, ave. Vernadsky, Moscow, Russia, 119454



1. Ivanov, S., Webster, C., & Berezina, K. (2020). Robotics in tourism and hospitality. In Z. Xiang, M. Fuchs, U. Gretzel, & W. Höpken (Eds.), Handbook of e-tourism (pp. 1–27). Springer.

2. Jun, E. (2009). Korea’s robotland: Merging intelligent robotics strategic policy, business development, and fun. In J.-H. Kim, S. S. Ge, PVadakkepat, N. Jesse, A. A. Manum, S. Puthusserypady, U. Rückert, J. Sitte, U. Witkowski, R. Nakatsu, T. Braunl, J. Baltes, J. Anderson, C.-C. Wong, I. Verner, & D. Ahlgren (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 5744. Advances in robotics. FIRA 2009 (pp. 4–4). Springer.

3. Nambu, T. (2016). Legal regulations and public policies for next-generation robots in Japan. AI & Society, 31(4), 483–500.

4. Pak, M. (2021). Promoting the diffusion of technology to boost productivity and well-being in Korea. (Working Papers No. 1653). OECD Economics Department.

5. Palmerini, E., Bertolini, A., Battaglia, F., Koops, B.-J., Carnevale, A., & Salvini, P. (2016). RoboLaw: Towards a European framework for robotics regulation. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 86, 78–85.

6. Park, F. C. (2013). Robotics in Korea [Regional]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 20(1), 99–100.

7. Weng, Y. H., Sugahara, Y., Hashimoto, K., & Takanishi, A. (2015). Intersection of “Tokku” special zone, robots, and the law: A case study on legal impacts to humanoid robots. International Journal of Social Robotics 7(5), 841–857.


Views: 6121

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2686-9136 (Online)