How to calculate Robot Density ?

I read an article from 2021 that stated the UK's "robot density" (the number of robots per ten thousand workers) was the lowest in the G7.

History has shown the UK to traditionally be intentionally adverse to invest in her infrastructure, even when the workshop of the world. Presently a service based economy, the UK would not top any list within Europe, but does she need to ?

My question is how are such numbers reliably compiled and what level of efficiency is the tipping point relative to the economy ?

seems like you have questions ... there is a inital set of numbers, and this set is analized with other sets, because different sets have different impact factors

the number of sets used is higher depending on what economy atribute is analized, and how many people/jobs are to be targeted

big sets analization is not direct, because there is still a lot of missing data, so sometimes those sets may be simulated with different scenarious

off course, the set analization parameters, if not calibrated properly, may lead to unreliable results, and with data sets, this happens because there is too little initial data : for example, for a population of N individuals, is considered as representative only a statistical group of n<<<N, and this statistical group of n may not had been initialy declared accurate; for example, is not accurate enough to aproximate 100000 individuals to 10 groups of 10000 individuals, or to 100 groups of 1000 individuals, so one goal is to dinamically achieve population segmentation with increased accuracy, and this requires reducing the statistical group from size n to size 1 2 or 3, or something really small

at this moment, just pretend that you can simulate for real results :) if you don't know it allready, nowadays, "economical efficenty" is not what it was 150 years ago, back then it was true, or if you wish, it was cleaner, while now is doublespeaking, cherrpicking, adopted politics, at least G7 :)

---

when implementing robots/automatization, results are higher quantity, or quality, rarely both; but in all cases, is less human labor cost; so, is less human labor cost something economical efficient ? it is when the number of robots is still small, but when more and more activities got automatized, you end up with a lot of people unemplyed on the streets, and that amount is no longer part of the "efficient economy"; so, what can be done ? 150 years ago automatization could not lead to massival unemployment, but nowadays, it is within reach of few decades / kindly :)

Hi,
for several decades many of the worlds advanced economies have divested themselves of manufacturing and that manufacturing be done instead in China and/or India.

If COVID has taught us anything is that we cannot rely on long international supply chains.....they are just too vulnerable to disruption with major consequences for
the supposedly 'advanced' nation, bought to its knees for lack of materials or parts from foreign suppliers.

The current trend is for the manufacturing to return to the 'home' nation, with the US in the lead.

In order to be cost competitive the use of robots and other automation is required....bigtime.

If the UK has few robots and does not or refuses to invest in them then it will slip further and further behind. The UK is in danger of being a 'first world nation' making a really strong
play for 'second world status'.

Craig

Britain has been falling behind for a long time now and if my chief concern. However, it is not like the present government has not noticed this as they have implemented tax relief from 1 April 2021 until 31 March 2023, allowing for:

• 130% super-deduction capital allowance on qualifying plant and machinery investments
• 50% first-year allowance for qualifying special rate assets

ref : https://www.gov.uk/guidance/super-deduction


But the point made about manufacturing is clear, much like crypto-mining, it comes down to energy costs: the robots can be used anywhere, within reason, but the cost of running them is the burden.

My original point hinged on the calculations used to determine the best investment for the best return and not to just have higher numbers, as such league tables can often turn out.

This I feel is best decided by the business and so this tax re-claim from the current government is probably the best method of making to most meaningful impact.

arround here similar benefits had been made; during a recent conference, about automatization, with tenths of participants, from all of them :
... only 1 was on the market from a few years, and somehow developed something new through this program
... all the others starttups, thus 99%, where from private sector, and where only a few months old, with huge financial numbers allready : their product was data management for the government

it does not matter if that is uk, or other place; real question is who is the real beneficiar ?

The benefits are competitiveness in key areas that are needed during the best and worst of times.

It may be plain sailing in the best of times, where for example both France and the UK can CNC their own bannister rails from wood, but what happens when one country cannot, well then the other can step in an make a financial killing. Or we could just keep buying from China.

If you point hinges on which country makes the robots then I take your point and it's not like China is not actively attempting to consolidate the market for itself. But before that, the UK needs to introduce robotics, that is where we are right now.