UNE Law’s Professor Paul Martin, Director of UNE’s Australian Centre for Agriculture and Law has had an article published in the journal “Agronomy” – ‘A Future Focused View of the Regulation of Rural Technology’. The article has been tagged as an Editor’s Choice!
Paul’s paper considers some of the legal issues that will affect the opportunities of agricultural technologies in the future. Laws that can impact on these opportunities include: government regulations; civil law, such as liability and contract; and, laws that shape and govern markets. Using the method of document analysis, Paul focusses on three legal aspects of agricultural robotics – equipment (machines and devices); data (capture, storage and communication); and, machine decision making.
The market for autonomous agricultural equipment will be impacted upon by laws that govern on- and off-farm issues. Risk of injury to the environment and third parties will need to be regulated. One example that Paul discusses are the new risks involved with the robotic application of pesticides and herbicides. On one hand, this new technology can offer precision of application, but on the other hand it will be done free of direct human observation, which could result in under- or over-dosing, spillage or incorrect spatial application.
Data collected through ‘digital agriculture’ and ‘smart farming’ has economic value creating the potential for competing interests, resulting in legal issues. These legal issues include: data property and user rights; data access and privacy; data ownership and sharing; private-sector data access by Government; civil access and use of data; data liability; and, control of anti-competitive practices. Farmers having a right to the data generated by their farms or equipment they own will face barriers such as multilateral trade agreements, the interests of entrepreneurs and intellectual property rights.
Paul acknowledges the radical changes that are predicted for machine intelligence and autonomous decision making. The definition of ‘people’ under the law will be questioned and there will be ongoing debate about whether machines can have rights or be held legally responsible. He calls for the need of ‘rational debate, leading to a sound law and policy strategy to position Australia to benefit from the impending technological innovations, whilst minimising the inevitable risks.’ If the laws are reactive and not pre-emptive they may impede change. There will be unexpected system effects, but as his paper demonstrates many issues are predictable.
The article concludes by reminding us that ‘the law is not only a way of regulating relations between people, or between people and organisations. It is also a means by which to shape society, and an important aspect of society is technological innovation. Technology itself also shapes society at the same time as it delivers narrow functional benefits.’
Paul’s article can be found here: – https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/11/6/1153
