Insights from the Survey of Advanced Technology
In an age defined by innovation and technological
advancement, robotics stands at the forefront of transformative change.
Robotics is a field that involves the design, construction, operation, and use
of intelligent robots capable of performing complex tasks, enhancing
productivity, and even augmenting human capabilities.
While it is widely acknowledged that robots significantly improve productivity in critical sectorsNote , their impact
extends beyond efficiency. Robots are also capable of addressing some of
society’s most urgent challenges. For instance, they excel in performing tasks
in hazardous environments, such as disaster zones or the depths of the sea, all
without jeopardizing human lives. Moreover, they are ushering in a
transformative era of precision surgeries, diagnostics, and patient care. They also
play a pivotal role in the field of space exploration, contributing to our
expanding understanding of the universe. Some examples of robots used in space
exporation from NASA are Perseverance, Curiosity (both Mars rovers), A-PUFFER
(an autonomous pop-up flat folding explorer robot), and BRUIE (a buoyant rover
for under ice exploration). The development of rovers with new capabilities is
made possible with the advancement of other technologies such as sensors,
control systems, and materials science.
Canada has a nascent robotics ecosystem, clustered around
nearly 300 companies, with the majority being small and at an early stage of
development, that faces challenges in thriving in an environment of limited
domestic adoptionNote .
In 2023, Canada was ranked 15 th among the top 20 countries for
industrial robotics adoption by the International Federation of RoboticsNote . This places
Canada behind countries like Thailand (14th), Turkey (13th),
Spain (12th), Singapore (10th) and Mexico (9th),
and highlights that Canada faces a critical obstacle to the long-term
development of this ecosystem. In 2019, Canada ranked 12th in robot
installations in the manufacturing sector behind the United States (3rd)
and Mexico (9th). Adoption of robotics in the Canadian manufacturing
sector is mainly driven by the automotive sector. From 2016 to 2019, Canada’s
robot density (robots installed per 10,000 employees) in the manufacturing
sector grew about half as much as the United States in the same time frame. When
removing the automotive sector from the analysis, the gap in robot density
between Canada and the United States was even largerNote .
Despite the relatively low adoption rate, Dixon (2020) demonstrated
that Canadian firms that embraced robotics technologies increased their productivity
and, on average, grew their workforce by nearly 20%Note . This suggests
that robotics adoption could help to address the skilled labour shortage in
Canada.
Failure to capitalize on these opportunities can hamper the
country’s economic potential and place Canadian businesses at a disadvantage in
the global marketplace, hindering innovation and job creation. This analysis
uses the Survey of Advanced Technology (SAT) to examine and characterize the
adoption of robotics technologies, the performance of robotics technologies
adopters, the challenges encountered during the adoption process, and the
strategies employed to overcome these challenges.
Robotics technologies adoption
In 2022, 2.0% of Canadian
enterprises in industries covered by the SAT adopted robotics technologiesNote . While an
additional 0.6% of the enterprises planned to adopt robotics technologies in
the upcoming two years, 1.0% acknowledged the technologies were applicable to
their business but they did not plan to introduce them and 94.7% reported that
the technologies were not relevant to their business. This means that a small
fraction of the Canadian economy has used robotics or sees the potential in
robotics.
Among the 2% of enterprises that adopted robotics
technologiesNote ,
73.0% exclusively sourced them from external providers, while 7.4% opted for in-house
development for own use in their operations and the remaining 19.6% utilized a combination
of external procurement and in-house development.
Ontario had the highest proportion of enterprises that
adopted robotics technologies (3.0%), followed by Québec (2.2%), the Atlantic
region (1.4%)Note
and the North and the West regions (0.9%)Note
which recorded the highest proportion of enterprises (81.5%) that acquired
robotics technologies exclusively from external sources and the lowest
proportion of enterprises (2.3%) that opted for internal development. Québec, on the other hand, registered the largest
proportion of enterprises developing robotics technologies exclusively
internally (15.0%), almost three times higher than in Ontario (5.1%) and two and a
half times higher than the Atlantic region (6.0%).
Data table for Chart 1
The Atlantic region | Quebec | Ontario | The North and the West regions | |
---|---|---|---|---|
adoption rate in percentage | ||||
Notes: The bars represent the percentage of enterprises that adopted robotics technologies at any point in time. Adoption is captured either through internal development strategy or external sourcing strategy or a mix of both strategies.
Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Custom data. |
||||
External procurement | 76.7 | 64.9 | 74.3 | 81.5 |
In-house development | 6.0 | 15.0 | 5.1 | 2.3 |
Mix of external procurement and in-house development | 17.3 | 20.1 | 20.6 | 16.1 |
Large enterprises had the highest robotics technologies adoption
rate (9.1%)Note .
Their adoption rate was nearly twice that of medium-sized enterprises (5.3%)
and six times higher than the rate for small enterprises (1.6%).
Large enterprises (76.6%) were also the most likely to
acquire robotics technology from an external source and the least likely to
develop robotics in-house exclusively (3.3%). Internally developed own-use
robotics was championed by medium-sized enterprises (12.1%), almost two times
higher than that of small enterprises (7.1%), and four times higher than that
of large enterprises.
Data table for Chart 2
Small | Medium | Large | |
---|---|---|---|
adoption rate in percentage | |||
Notes: i. The bars represent the percentage of enterprises that adopted robotics technologies at any point in time. Adoption is captured either through internal development strategy or external sourcing strategy or a mix of both strategies. ii. In the Survey of Advanced Technology 2022, enterprise size is determined by the total number of employees. Small enterprises employ from 10 to 99 employees, medium sized enterprises from 100 to 249 employees and large enterprises have more than 250 employees. Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Custom data. |
|||
External procurement | 73.6 | 66.3 | 76.6 |
In-house development | 7.1 | 12.1 | 3.3 |
Mix of external procurement and in-house development | 19.2 | 21.6 | 20.0 |
Manufacturers were the biggest users of robotics
technologies (8.4%), with an adoption rate almost 3 times higher than the next
leading industry sector. Retail trade (3.3%) and utilities (3.1%) followed with
a distant 2nd and 3rd highest adoption rates. In
comparison, professional, scientific and technical services recorded the lowest
adoption rate (0.1%).
Data table for Chart 3
Industry | Adoption rate in percentage |
---|---|
Notes: The bars represent the percentage of enterprises that adopted robotics technologies at any point in time. Adoption is captured either through internal development or external sourcing or both.
Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Custom data. |
|
Manufacturing | 8.4 |
Retail trade | 3.3 |
Utilities | 3.1 |
Agriculture | 2.8 |
Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction | 2.2 |
Finance and insurance | 2.2 |
Wholesale trade | 1.8 |
Health care and social assistance | 1.0 |
Transportation and warehousing | 0.9 |
Information and cultural industries | 0.4 |
Other sectors | 0.2 |
Professional, scientific and technical services | 0.1 |
Within the manufacturing sector, robotics technologies
adoption was most prevalent in food manufacturing (11.4%), transportation
equipment manufacturing, including motor vehicles manufacturing (11.4%), plastics
and rubber products manufacturing (10.9%) and machinery manufacturing (10.8%).
Data table for Chart 4
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) | Adoption rate in percentage |
---|---|
Notes: The bars represent the percentage of enterprises within the manufacturing sector that adopted robotics technologies at any point in time. Adoption is captured either through internal development for own use in production or external sourcing or both.
Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Custom data. |
|
Food manufacturing | 11.4 |
Transportation equipment manufacturing | 11.4 |
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing | 10.9 |
Machinery manufacturing | 10.8 |
Primary metal manufacturing, computer and electronic product manufacturing and electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing | 10.8 |
Paper manufacturing and petroleum and coal product manufacturing | 9.8 |
Fabricated metal product manufacturing | 9.6 |
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing | 9.4 |
Wood product manufacturing | 6.1 |
Furniture and related product manufacturing | 5.4 |
Miscellaneous manufacturing | 5.1 |
Chemical manufacturing | 3.7 |
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing | 3.6 |
Textile mills, textile product mills, clothing manufacturing, leather and allied product manufacturing | 2.1 |
Printing and related support activities | 1.9 |
The adoption rate of robotics technologies differed by age
of business. Businesses over 17 years old were more likely to adopt robotics
technologies compared to those aged less than 17 years old which had an adoption
rate below the national average of 2.0%Note .
The adoption rate peaked at 3.7% for enterprises aged between 17 and 27 years
old, and came in at 2.7% for enterprises older than 27 years old. These two age
groups, while constituting half of all enterprises, accounted for 77.1% of the
adopters. Specifically, 47.0% of adopters belonged to enterprises aged between
17 and 27 years old, while 30.1% came from enterprises older than 27 years old.
Data table for Chart 5
Share in total population | Share in total robotics adopters | Adoption rate | |
---|---|---|---|
percentage | |||
Notes: The enterprises were split into four age groups, where each group accounted for 25% of the extrapolated population; referred to in the chart as the share in total population. The blue scattered dots represent the adoption rate within each enterprise age group. The light red bars represent the share of each enterprise age group in total robotics technologies adopters.
Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Custom data. |
|||
Enterprise age below 8 years old | 25.0 | 13.4 | 1.1 |
Between 8 and 17 years old | 25.0 | 9.5 | 0.7 |
Between 17 and 27 years old | 25.0 | 47.0 | 3.7 |
Above 27 years old | 25.0 | 30.1 | 2.7 |
Performance of robotics technologies adopters
Over three-quarters (77.7%) of Robotics adopters were
innovative, meaning they introduced a new or improved product onto the market, or
they implemented a new or improved business process. This compared to an
innovation rate of 42.9% for enterprises that did not adopt robotics
technologies.
Higher productivity is also evident with robotics technologies
adopters. While constituting 2.0% of the business population, adopters of
robotics technologies accounted for 7.5% of total employment and 11.5% of total
revenue in the economyNote .
This is more marked the larger the business. Large-sized enterprises adopting
robotics technologies accounted for 12.8% of employment and 16.4% of revenue, medium-sized
enterprizes accounted for 5.7% of employment and 7.6% of revenue and
small-sized businesses’ contribution to total employment was 2.2% and to total
revenue 2.7%.
Obstacles and disincentives to robotics technologies
adoption and measures taken to reduce them
Lack of skills is a significant obstacle in advanced
technology adoption. Over three in five (61.7%) businesses that adopted at
least one advanced technology reported difficulty recruiting qualified staff as
a significant obstacle.
Of the 2.0% of businesses that adopted robotics technologies
in the Survey of Advanced Technology, approximately one quarter (25.2%) of
businesses reported difficulty recruiting qualified staff as a significant
obstacleNote .
While over two fifths (42.0%) of businesses reported offering training as
needed to attempt to reduce obstacles to adoption.
A lower proportion of small enterprises took measures to
reduce obstacles of adopting robotics technology than large enterprises,
despite reporting obstacles to robotics adoption at a similar proportion to
large enterprises. Over one in five small and large enterprises reported
difficulty recruiting qualified staff (23.1% and 28.8% respectively) while
68.2% of large enterprises offered training as needed to reduce obstacles
compared to 34.7% of small enterprises who adopted robotics.
A higher proportion of enterprises in Atlantic Canada
reported significant obstacles to robotics technologies adoption than in other
regions in Canada. Atlantic Canada was also more inclined to use measures
outside of the most implemented measures to address obstacles. Just over one in
five enterprises in Atlantic Canada (21.1%) implemented performance bonuses
compared to the other regions where less than one in ten (8.8% in Ontario, 8.3%
in the North and West regions, and 6.6% in Quebec) enterprises implemented
performance bonuses to reduce obstacles to robotics adoption.
Acknowledgements:
The
authors would like to thank colleagues from Statistics Canada for their advice
and comments on an earlier version of this paper.
Annex:
Obstacle | All sizes | Large | Medium | Small |
---|---|---|---|---|
percent | ||||
Note(s): Numbers in this table represent the percentages of enterprises that rated the obstacle as 4 or 5 on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 meaning not significant and 5 being very significant.
Source(s): Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022, Custom tabulation |
||||
Difficulty in recruiting qualified staff | 25.2 | 28.8 | 42.3 | 23.1 |
Low return on investment or long payback period | 21.4 | 22.8 | 19.7 | 21.4 |
Lack of employee training | 20.2 | 25 | 36.1 | 18.1 |
Difficulty in accessing financial support | 19.6 | 15.4 | 19.3 | 20 |
Difficulty in integrating new advanced technologies with existing systems, standards and processes | 19.5 | 26.4 | 20.3 | 18.8 |
Employees’ resistance to change | 17 | 18.7 | 26.4 | 15.9 |
Challenges in identifying appropriate technologies | 15.2 | 21.6 | 18.7 | 14.3 |
Difficulty in accessing non-financial support | 13.8 | 14.2 | 16.5 | 13.4 |
Disruption of production for the integration of new technologies | 13.5 | 20.3 | 24.4 | 11.8 |
Determining how new technologies will positively impact the business | 13.3 | 18.2 | 13.9 | 12.7 |
Customer resistance | 9.6 | 6.5 | 6.5 | 10.2 |
Decisions made elsewhere in the organization and not in the enterprise itself | 8.3 | 13.1 | 8.4 | 7.9 |
Ensuring Security and Privacy of data | 7.9 | 16 | 10 | 6.9 |
Regulatory constraints or uncertainties | 7.7 | 10.3 | 8.7 | 7.4 |
Obstacle | Atlantic Canada | Québec | Ontario | North & West regions |
---|---|---|---|---|
percent | ||||
Note(s): Numbers in this table represent the percentages of enterprises that rated the obstacle as 4 or 5 on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 meaning not significant and 5 being very significant.
Source(s): Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022, Custom tabulation |
||||
Difficulty in recruiting qualified staff | 48.2 | 41.3 | 19.5 | 18.9 |
Difficulty in integrating new advanced technologies with existing systems, standards and processes | 43.1 | 28.8 | 12.3 | 19.8 |
Lack of employee training | 38.4 | 33.9 | 18.9 | 10.2 |
Low return on investment or long payback period | 36.2 | 30.8 | 14.8 | 21.9 |
Difficulty in accessing financial support | 35.6 | 26.5 | 13.5 | 21.2 |
Disruption of production for the integration of new technologies | 34.2 | 22 | 10.8 | 8.5 |
Employees’ resistance to change | 33 | 28.4 | 12.2 | 13.6 |
Difficulty in accessing non-financial support | 31.3 | 19.7 | 5.2 | 18.8 |
Determining how new technologies will positively impact the business | 29.9 | 22 | 10.3 | 9.3 |
Ensuring Security and Privacy of data | 25.6 | 13.1 | 6 | 4.6 |
Challenges in identifying appropriate technologies | 22.2 | 24.3 | 11.4 | 13.1 |
Customer resistance | 19.9 | 16.1 | 5.3 | 9.7 |
Regulatory constraints or uncertainties | 15.7 | 14.9 | 3 | 8 |
Decisions made elsewhere in the organization and not in the enterprise itself | 6.8 | 10 | 6 | 10.2 |
Measure | All Sizes | Large | Medium | Small |
---|---|---|---|---|
percent | ||||
Note(s): The numbers in the table represent the proportion of enterprises that used the measure to reduce obstacles to adoption of robotics.
Source: Survey of advanced technology, 2022. Table 27-10-0393-01 |
||||
Offer training as needed for the needs of the organization | 42.0 | 68.2 | 60.4 | 34.7 |
No measures were taken | 40.6 | 15.8 | 18.5 | 48.3 |
Calling in consultants or subcontracting for short-term needs | 31.5 | 63.3 | 46.3 | 23.9 |
Improved working conditions | 24.7 | 37.4 | 28.2 | 22.1 |
Collaborating with other companies or non-profit organizations | 13.9 | 17.0 | 19.8 | 12.4 |
College, CEGEP and university recruitment | 9.2 | 20.9 | 9.2 | 7.3 |
Performance bonuses | 8.6 | 14.6 | 8.9 | 7.6 |
Seeking support from professional organizations | 6.9 | 12.3 | 7.4 | 6.0 |
Seeking government support | 6.1 | 5.3 | 7.4 | 6.0 |
Collaborating with colleges, CEGEPs, universities or research institutions | 5.5 | 12.3 | 16.1 | 2.5 |
Collaborating with government research organizations | 3.1 | 2.0 | 11.5 | 1.8 |
Acquiring another Canadian enterprise that had already developed the required advanced technology | 1.5 | 4.3 | 0.2 | 1.2 |
Acquiring another foreign enterprise that had already developed the required advanced technology | 0.8 | 0.9 | 2.4 | 0.6 |
Measure | Atlantic Canada | Québec | Ontario | North & West regions |
---|---|---|---|---|
percent | ||||
Note(s) : The numbers in the table represent the proportion of enterprises that used the measure to reduce obstacles to adoption of robotics technologies.
Source: Survey of Advanced Technology, 2022. Table 27-10-0393-01. |
||||
Offer training as needed for the needs of the organization | 58.1 | 56.8 | 36.9 | 32.9 |
Calling in consultants or subcontracting for short-term needs | 49.0 | 37.6 | 24.2 | 44.9 |
Improved working conditions | 35.2 | 29.6 | 23.6 | 18.1 |
No measures were taken | 26.2 | 19.3 | 52.9 | 33.0 |
Collaborating with other companies or non-profit organizations | 24.9 | 5.1 | 11.5 | 35.9 |
Performance bonuses | 21.1 | 6.6 | 8.8 | 8.3 |
College, CEGEP and university recruitment | 13.1 | 12.5 | 9.3 | 2.1 |
Seeking government support | 12.2 | 9.4 | 5.0 | 3.3 |
Collaborating with colleges, CEGEPs, universities or research institutions | 11.6 | 3.5 | 6.7 | 2.8 |
Collaborating with government research organizations | 6.8 | 6.4 | 1.9 | 0.9 |
Seeking support from professional organizations | 4.3 | 7.6 | 5.9 | 10.4 |
Acquiring another Canadian enterprise that had already developed the required advanced technology | 0.0 | 0.2 | 2.1 | 1.5 |
Acquiring another foreign enterprise that had already developed the required advanced technology | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 0.0 |
link