António Moniz

A propose for this article is to present information on the emergence of the knowledge field of sociology of work and labor studies in Portugal. The period of 1974-1984 produced an interesting bibliography in the fields of social stratification, labor conflicts and social history. However, and since the mid-1980s, significant changes have emerged. There took place an increased theoretical diversity and also there was a major preoccupation with the development of a more professional teaching of the discipline. At this time, the first graduated specialists in Sociology appeared in the labor market since 1980, working in municipalities, industrial firms, public health institutions, schools, or even in research and development (R&D) units. The Portuguese association in this field (APSIOT) organized many scientific meetings, debates with unionists, managers and politicians, beside the regular publication of review “Organizações e Trabalho” (Organization and Work) since 1989. It started the diffusion of a professional culture of sociologists who associate science and their occupation concerning themselves not only with scientific quality, but also with technical competence and social responsibility. At the same time, one could assist to the participation of sociologists in the social and organizational molding of new technologies in order to promote alternative production systems.

This paper analyses the problems and trends of the introduction of anthropocentric production systems (APS) in small less industrialized member states of the European Union, specifically the case of Portugal, based on the report for the FAST-Anthropocentric Technology Assessment Project (Monitor Programme) on “Prospects and conditions for APS in Europe by the 21st century”. Research teams from all countries of the European Community, as well as researchers from USA, Japan and Australia were participating in this project. The aim of this paper is to characterize APS and to present some special considerations related to the socioeconomic factors affecting the prospects and conditions for APS in Portugal. APS is defined as a system based on the utilization of skilled human resources and flexible technology adapted to the needs of flexible and participative organization. Among socioeconomic factors, some critical aspects for the development of APS will be focused, namely technological infrastructure, management strategies, perceived impact of introduction of automated systems on the division of labor and organizational structure, educational and vocational training and social actors strategies towards industrial automation. This analysis is based on a sample of industrial firms, built up for qualitative analysis, and on case studies analysis that can be reference examples for further development of APS, and not just for economic policy purposes alone. We have also analyzed the type of existing industrial relations, the union and employer strategies and some aspects of public policies towards the introduction of new technologies in the order to understand the extent to which there exist obstacles to and favorable conditions for the diffusion of anthropocentric systems. Finally some recommendations are presented to stress the trends for the implementation and development of anthropocentric production systems in Portugal.

The results presented in this article are related to the field of investigation defined inside the European TSER project on "Information Society, Work and Generation of New Forms of Social Exclusion " (SOWING). The thematic center of the project is connected with the question of the relations that exist between the introduction of information technologies (IT) and the changes in the waged labour as well as in the organisation of work systems. The introduction of these technologies transformed specially the activities on services as well as certain branches, where great changes of the organization of work for the next future assume, which are discussed within the margin of the debate on future forms of work. The tendencies within the occupational structures indicate an individualisation of the insecurities and an opening of the occupational carreers. For these reasons, the development of the occupational carreers is more and more bound to the biographical planning. The institutionalised occupational model is changing very strongly, which in the long term will take to social and cultural changes, not only in the professional life, but also in the private life.

Due to the innovative possibilities of digital technologies, the issue of increasing automation is once again on the agenda – and not only in the industry, but also in other branches and sectors of contemporary societies. Although public and scientific discussions about automation seem to raise relevant questions of the “old” debate, such as the replacement of human labor by introducing new technologies, the authors focus here on the new contextual quality of these questions. The debate should rethink the relationship between technology and work with regard to quantitative and qualitative changes in work. In this article, our example will be the introduction of automation in industry, which has been reflected in the widely recognized study by Frey and Osborne in 2013. They estimated the expected impacts of future computerization on US labor market outcomes as very high, specifically regarding the number of jobs at risk. Surprisingly, this study was the starting point of an intensive international debate on the impact of technologies on the future of work and the role of technological change in working environments. Thus, according to the authors, “old” questions remain important, but they should be reinterpreted for “new” societal demands and expectations of future models of work.

The focus of the following article is on the use of new robotic systems in the manufacturing industry with respect to the social dimension. Since “intuitive” human–machine interaction (HMI) in robotic systems becomes a significant objective of technical progress, new models of work organization are needed. This hypothesis will be investigated through the following two aims: The first aim is to identify relevant research questions related to the potential use of robotic systems in different systems of work organization at the manufacturing shop-floor level. The second aim is to discuss the conceptualization of (old) organizational problems of human–robot interaction (HRI). In this context, the article reflects on the limits of cognitive and perceptual workload for robot operators in complex working systems. This will be particularly relevant whenever more robots with different “roles” are to be increasingly used in the manufacturing industry. The integration of such complex socio-technical systems needs further empirical and conceptual research with regard to “social” aspects of the technical dimension. Future research should, therefore, also integrate economic and societal issues to understand the full dimensions of new human–robot interaction in industry today.

Science and technology (S&T) are considered to be a central source, or at least a basic medium, of societal and industrial innovation, while innovation is conceived to basically feed the regeneration of our welfare. The suppliers of S&T in Europe as well as the users of their „products“, are confronted with a number of challenges today. We want to stress here that it was not the primary goal of our Advanced Science & Technology Policy Planning (ASTPP) Network to come up with proposals how the strategic character of European S&T policies could be strengthened. The ASTPP-network instead focuses on one aspect: the provision of strategic intelligence necessary to identify and develop strategic choices. The underlying hypothesis is that the existing body of experiences with technology foresight, technology assessment and S/T policy evaluation provides a basis for the development of an advanced S&T policy „planning“ approach by trying to enhance, interlink or even integrate the growing, but still dispersed experience in these three areas of intelligence. By „intelligent“ we mean that the inter-relatedness of S&T, industrial efforts, societal needs and political interventions becomes more transparent so that interactive collaboration between them will be facilitated.