Advertisement

The Development of Labour Relations in the Digital Transformation of Agriculture

  • Egor Skvortsov
Conference paper
  • 4 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 40)

Abstract

The digital transformation of agriculture is an objective process associated with a scientific and technological progress. This process is due to the use of technologies of a new generation, which include the Internet of Things (IoT), Big Data, Artificial intelligence (AI), and robotics. The main scientific idea is that digitalization of agriculture will result in a significant transformation of labour relations. The strengths of it include an increase in employment flexibility and labour mobility, a decrease in personnel risks, a decrease in shady employment in the agrarian sector, improvement in the living standards of people employed in agriculture, an increase in the income level of workers based on personal KPI. The weaknesses of this process are the low adaptation of rural people to changing conditions, low rates of digitalization of agriculture, opposition of workers to changes, the necessity of changes in the legal framework of labour relations. Digitalization gives opportunities for involvement of highly qualified specialists to the industry, for making a personal career, expanding opportunities for distance employment, the emergence of new professions. The threats consist in increasing the level of unemployment, training of the personnel in industry-specific educational institutions on outdated programs, polarization of labour in the industry.

Keywords

Digital economy Agriculture Labour relations Robotics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to colleagues and heads of agricultural organizations with robotics for their help in conducting the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Ivanov, Y. G., & Lapkin, A. G. (2013). Sravnitelnaya otsenka energo, trudo i ekspluatatsionnykh zatrat pri perevode korov s doyeniya v molokoprovod na robot «Lely astronaut». Vestnik VNIIMZh, 3, 188–191.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wauters, E., & Mathijs, E. (2004). Socio-economic consequences of automatic milking on dairy farms. Proceedings of the international symposium. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gustafsson, M., & Benfalk, C. (2004). Different locations of instant cooling in the automatic milking system and the effect on milk quality. In Proceedings of the international symposium automatic milking. A better understanding. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mikulova, M. (2011). Content of free fatty acids lipolytic bacteria and somatic cells in relation to milking technology. Journal of Agrobiology, 28(1), 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2013). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerization? Oxford Martin School, Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology (p. 38).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Manyika, J., Chui, M., Miremadi, M., Bughin, J., George, K., Willmott, P., & Dewhurst, M. (2017). A future that works: Automation, employment and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ford, M. (2015). Rise of the robots: Technology and the threat of a jobless future. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kapelyushnikov, R. I. (2017). Tekhnologicheskiy progress – Pozhiratel rabochikh mest? Voprosy Ekonomiki, 11, 142–157.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Samir, K. C., & Lutz, W. (2017). The human core of the shared socioeconomic pathways: Population scenarios by age, sex and level of education for all countries to 2100. Global Environmental Change, 42(1), 181–192.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Acosta-Navarrete, M. S., Padilla-Medina, J. A., Botello-Alvarez, J. E. Prado-Olivarez, J., Perez-Rios, M. M., Diaz-Carmona, J. J., & Fernandes-Dzharamilo, A. A. (2014). Instrumentariy i kontrol dlya uluchsheniya urozhaynosti. Biosistema: Biofakty dlya proizvodstva produktov pitaniya v XXI veke (pp. 363–400).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Antony, A., & Engel, B. A. (2009). Web-based decision support tool for nutrient and pesticide analysis. In American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Annual International Meeting.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vermesan, O., Broring, A., Tragos, E., Serrano, M., Bacciu, D., Chessa, S., & Bahr, R. (2017). Internet of robotic things – Converging sensing/actuating. Hyperconnectivity. Artificial intelligence and IoT platforms. In O. Vermesan & J. Bacquet (Eds.), Cognitive hyperconnected digital transformation: Internet of things intelligence evolution (pp. 97–155). River Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baron, B., Balaji, S. S., Anthuvan Jerald Majella, A., et al. (2015). Using mobile robots to act as surveillance in the crop field. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 10(6), 15825–15832.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Astrand, B., & Baerveldt, A. J. (2002). An agricultural mobile robot with vision-based perception for mechanical weed control. Autonomous Robots, 13(1), 21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Egor Skvortsov
    • 1
  1. 1.Ural Federal UniversityYekaterinburgRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations