IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1927-d500578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Impact of Human–Cobot Collaborative Manufacturing Implementation on the Occupational Health and Safety and the Quality Requirements

Author

Listed:
  • Alena Pauliková

    (Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management, Faculty of Materials Science and Technology in Trnava, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, 917 01 Trnava, Slovakia)

  • Zdenka Gyurák Babeľová

    (Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management, Faculty of Materials Science and Technology in Trnava, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, 917 01 Trnava, Slovakia)

  • Monika Ubárová

    (Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management, Faculty of Materials Science and Technology in Trnava, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, 917 01 Trnava, Slovakia)

Abstract

Implementing Industry 4.0 and interconnected robotization in industrial enterprises drifts towards occupational changes. Nowadays, the task is to create cooperation and collaboration between a robot and a human in a common robotized workplace so that it is safe and effective. The type of robot, the robotic device that works in collaboration with a human operator, is called a cobot. In the case of a closer interaction of the robot or cobot with humans, it is necessary to consider where it is possible to replace human work entirely or where it is possible to merely supplement it. The most socially acceptable option is the implementation of robots only for the performance of supplementary tasks, since the traditional work positions of people in manufacturing processes would remain largely preserved. On the other hand, workplace robotization is particularly suitable for work environments with hazardous chemical substances that are carcinogenic and toxic to humans. Similarly, robotization helps to improve workplace ergonomics and also to avoid, for humans, very laborious and often repetitive work. The SWOT analysis (analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) was used as a relevant tool to assess various aspects of the impact of increasing robotization on working positions in industrial enterprises. SWOT analysis is an indicative assessment of the suitability of implementation of robots in a given workplace, which helps to create an optimal solution and indicate new areas of needed analysis and research directions.

Suggested Citation

  • Alena Pauliková & Zdenka Gyurák Babeľová & Monika Ubárová, 2021. "Analysis of the Impact of Human–Cobot Collaborative Manufacturing Implementation on the Occupational Health and Safety and the Quality Requirements," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1927-:d:500578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1927/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1927/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1987. "Risk—Its Priority and Probability: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 159-172, June.
    2. Richard B. Freeman & Ina Ganguli & Michael J. Handel, 2020. "Within-Occupation Changes Dominate Changes in What Workers Do: A Shift-Share Decomposition, 2005–2015," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 110, pages 394-399, May.
    3. Malgorzata Jakubiak & Peter Kolesar & Ivailo Izvorski & Lucia Kurekova, 2008. "The Automotive Industry in the Slovak Republic," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 28010, December.
    4. Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Özcan, Berkay & Philipp, Julia, 2021. "Robots and the gender pay gap in Europe," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Ben Vermeulen & Jan Kesselhut & Andreas Pyka & Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2018. "The Impact of Automation on Employment: Just the Usual Structural Change?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-27, May.
    6. Ballestar, María Teresa & Díaz-Chao, Ángel & Sainz, Jorge & Torrent-Sellens, Joan, 2020. "Knowledge, robots and productivity in SMEs: Explaining the second digital wave," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 119-131.
    7. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2012. "Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-3597-6, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Domini, Giacomo & Grazzi, Marco & Moschella, Daniele & Treibich, Tania, 2022. "For whom the bell tolls: The firm-level effects of automation on wage and gender inequality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    2. Dario Guarascio & Alessandro Piccirillo & Jelena Reljic, 2024. "Will robot replace workers? Assessing the impact of robots on employment and wages with meta-analysis," LEM Papers Series 2024/03, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    3. Jana Stofkova & Matej Krejnus & Katarina Repkova Stofkova & Peter Malega & Vladimira Binasova, 2022. "Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Selected Methods in the Managerial Decision-Making Process in the Context of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Tiffany Hutcheson & Graeme Newell, 2018. "Decision-making in the management of property investment by Australian superannuation funds," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 43(3), pages 404-420, August.
    5. Filippi, Emilia & Bannò, Mariasole & Trento, Sandro, 2023. "Automation technologies and their impact on employment: A review, synthesis and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Martina Artmann, 2013. "Response-Efficiency-Assessment: A Conceptual Framework For Rating Policy'S Efficiency To Meet Sustainable Development On The Example Of Soil Sealing Management," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 1-33.
    7. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    8. Gözaçan Nazlıcan & Lafci Çisem, 2020. "Evaluation of Key Performance Indicators of Logistics Firms," Logistics, Supply Chain, Sustainability and Global Challenges, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 24-32, February.
    9. Bachmann, Ronald & Gonschor, Myrielle & Lewandowski, Piotr & Madoń, Karol, 2022. "The impact of robots on labour market transitions in Europe," Ruhr Economic Papers 933, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen, revised 2022.
    10. van der Velde, Lucas, 2022. "Phasing out: Routine tasks and retirement," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 784-803.
    11. Goraj, Rafał & Kiciński, Marcin & Ślefarski, Rafał & Duczkowska, Anna, 2023. "Validity of decision criteria for selecting power-to-gas projects in Poland," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    12. Xianmei Wang & Hanhui Hu, 2017. "Sustainability in Chinese Higher Educational Institutions’ Social Science Research: A Performance Interface toward Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Satheeskumar Navaratnam, 2022. "Selecting a Suitable Sustainable Construction Method for Australian High-Rise Building: A Multi-Criteria Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Md Monjurul Islam & Tofael Ahamed & Ryozo Noguchi, 2018. "Land Suitability and Insurance Premiums: A GIS-based Multicriteria Analysis Approach for Sustainable Rice Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-28, May.
    15. Roberta Mele & Giuliano Poli, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Geographical Data in Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Landscape Services †," Data, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-11, February.
    16. Mariia Dushenko & Clemet Thærie Bjorbæk & Kenn Steger-Jensen, 2018. "Application of a Sustainability Model for Assessing the Relocation of a Container Terminal: A Case Study of Kristiansand Port," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Hao-Chang Tsai & An-Sheng Lee & Huang-Ning Lee & Chien-Nan Chen & Yu-Chun Liu, 2020. "An Application of the Fuzzy Delphi Method and Fuzzy AHP on the Discussion of Training Indicators for the Regional Competition, Taiwan National Skills Competition, in the Trade of Joinery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    18. Adiprasetyo, Teguh & Suhartoyo, Hery & Firdaus, Arief, 2017. "Developing Strategy for Advancing Organic Agriculture as Sustainable Agricultural Practice," INA-Rxiv wb37h, Center for Open Science.
    19. Agata Marcysiak & Żanna Pleskacz, 2021. "Determinants of digitization in SMEs," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 9(1), pages 300-318, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1927-:d:500578. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.