My IROS 2023 experience was quite engaging, I learned a lot about robotics and made a whole lot of new connections. However, nothing was more engaging to me than learning about wearable and assistive devices. It is for this reason that I decided to go to the keynote lecture Toward More Inclusive Rehabilitation Robots presented by Michelle J. Johnson. This Lecture talked about how to make robots more inclusive for those who might not normally have access to them, as well as what this might even mean.
I will start this reflection in the same way she started her lecture, by defining key terms to what I learned about these being “Health”, “Disability”, and “Inclusivity”[1]. Health, as defined in the keynote is a “State of complete physical, mental, and emotional well-being. Not simply the absence of disease.” This is key to define as it helps to analyze how helpful the robots in poorer regions of the world are actually helping them. The second word defined is what she calls a disability, this being “When there is a complex interaction between features of a person and the environment/society that they live in.” This too is key with a specific emphasis on the idea of it being when there is any sort of complex interaction between a person and where they live. Finally defining the word inclusivity in this setting is important, it is “When there is equal access to opportunities and resources, regardless of where the person lives.”
These terms have a lot to do with Michelle J. Johnson’s proposal for how to make rehabilitation robots more inclusive. First off, the purpose of a Therapy or Assistive Robot is to help someone return from where they were after an injury and help give them a sense of normality this ties into the health and disability terms that she defined. However these robots are in no way meant to replace jobs, just share the space with those who currently work these jobs and help make things easier for them.
But how do we make a robot that is both inclusive but also does all of the things listed above? To start we can look at the EFC of certain countries, and determine what even is affordable. According to the UN and as mentioned in the Keynote, something is affordable if it is within the average EFC of a country, however, it should at most be three times the average EFC. So, finding ways to make the robots cheaper is key. This can be done in a few ways, rebuilding them using more affordable methods, like 3D printing is one that Johnson proposes in her Keynote. Another is by using local supplies and labor to build robots. This is one she has ever seen in practice. On a trip to Botswana, she and her team brought a robot and helped them to both source and build two more robots using local labor. Finally, one more way she mentioned to help make robots more inclusive is by making them able to serve multiple purposes at once. According to her, this is difficult due to the bureaucracy, however, she has implemented it in one of the robots she was working on as there was a link discovered between people who have strokes and people who have HIV. This allowed her to create a robot that could test for both of these things and make it more affordable to those in the countries who might not have a ton of money to spend on it.
Why do I care about all of this though? I care because in my own opinion robotics, and technology in general should be used to help anyone, not just those who can afford the most expensive robots. I think if a revolution is coming in our technology, we need to be careful to serve those who need it and not just those who can afford it. I think that it’s essential to take into account everyone going forward and that is why I agree with Johnson’s ideas for more inclusive rehabilitation robots.
References:
[1] M.J. Johnson. 2023. Towards more inclusive rehabilitation robots.