01178nas a2200445   4500008004100000022001400041245003900055210003600094260004200130300000800172490000700180653000700187653002800194653001400222653001300236653003100249653002100280653002200301653001400323653001500337653001100352653001800363653002300381653001500404653001600419653003400435653002200469653002500491653001500516653001600531653001300547653003300560653001500593653001800608653001900626653001600645100001800661700002300679856003000702       2020                        eng d  a1927-032100aEditorial: Insights (January 2020)0 aEditorial Insights January 2020  aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2020  a3-40 v1010aAI10aartificial intelligence10aB2B sales10abig data10abusiness-to-business sales10adata-based value10adigital solutions10aecosystem10aecosystems10aEthics10aGujarat State10aIndian IT industry10ainnovation10aIT clusters10aKnowledge Innovation clusters10aNetworks Analysis10aregional development10aRoboethics10aSmart robot10astrategy10aSystematic literature review10atechnology10avalue capture10avalue creation10avalue sales1 aTanev, Stoyan1 aSandstrom, Gregory  utimreview.ca/article/129801992nas a2200205   4500008004100000022001400041245006100055210005700116260004200173300001000215490000700225520142000232653002201652653001101674653001901685653001501704653001601719100002101735856003001756       2020                        eng d  a1927-032100aThe Ethical Dimensions of Public Opinion on Smart Robots0 aEthical Dimensions of Public Opinion on Smart Robots  aOttawabTalent First Networkc02/2020  a25-360 v103 aThis article investigates public opinion about smart robots, with special focus on the ethical dimension. In so doing, the study reviews relevant literature and analyzes data from the comments sections of four publically available online news articles on smart robots. Findings from the content analysis of investigated comments suggest that public opinion about smart robots remains fairly negative, and that public discussion is focused on potentially negative social and economic impacts of smart robots on society, as well as various liability issues. In particular, many comments were what can only be called “apocalyptical”, suggesting that the rise of smart robots is a threat to the very existence of human beings, and that the replacement of human labour by smart robots will lead to deepening the socio-economic gap, and concentrating power and wealth in the hands of even fewer people. Further, public discussion seems to pay little attention to the debate on whether robots should have “rights”, or on the increasing environmental effects of the growth in robotics. This study contributes to the extant literature on “roboethics”, by suggesting a dendrogram approach to illustrate themes based on a qualitative content analysis. It suggests that smart robot manufacturers should ensure better transparency and inclusion in their robotics design processes to foster public adoption of robots.10aContent analysis.10aEthics10aPublic opinion10aRoboethics10aSmart robot1 aWesterlund, Mika  utimreview.ca/article/132601906nas a2200205   4500008004100000022001400041245004200055210003900097260004200136300001000178490000700188520137700195653000701572653002801579653001101607653001501618653001601633100002101649856003001670       2020                        eng d  a1927-032100aAn Ethical Framework for Smart Robots0 aEthical Framework for Smart Robots  aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2020  a35-440 v103 aThis article focuses on “roboethics” in the age of growing adoption of smart robots, which can now be seen as a new robotic “species”. As autonomous AI systems, they can collaborate with humans and are capable of learning from their operating environment, experiences, and human behaviour feedback in human-machine interaction. This enables smart robots to improve their performance and capabilities. This conceptual article reviews key perspectives to roboethics, as well as establishes a framework to illustrate its main ideas and features. Building on previous literature, roboethics has four major types of implications for smart robots: 1) smart robots as amoral and passive tools, 2) smart robots as recipients of ethical behavior in society, 3) smart robots as moral and active agents, and 4) smart robots as ethical impact-makers in society. The study contributes to current literature by suggesting that there are two underlying ethical and moral dimensions behind these perspectives, namely the “ethical agency of smart robots” and “object of moral judgment”, as well as what this could look like as smart robots become more widespread in society. The article concludes by suggesting how scientists and smart robot designers can benefit from a framework, discussing the limitations of the present study, and proposing avenues for future research.10aAI10aartificial intelligence10aEthics10aRoboethics10aSmart robot1 aWesterlund, Mika  utimreview.ca/article/1312