Most Russians do not see robotization as a threat to employment. According to an April 2025 survey, more than 80% of respondents believe that the labor market is successfully adapting to changes, and the disappearance of old professions is compensated by the emergence of new ones.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
A survey conducted among 1,000 Russians showed that society is aware of the dual nature of automation: it carries not only risks, but also new opportunities. The results of the study were presented at the Forum of Mining Industry Leaders as part of the MiningWorld Russia 2025 exhibition.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
The survey was organized by the Forum organizing committee and the Tsifra company, one of the leaders in the field of industrial IT. In addition to attitudes towards robotization, the study touched upon the topics of unmanned vehicles, automation of work processes, as well as barriers and incentives for the introduction of new technologies.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
Almost 70% of participants expect structural changes in the labor market, where some professions will become a thing of the past, while others will appear. Only 13.4% are confident that adaptation will take place without losses, and 18.8% are still afraid of mass layoffs.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
A separate set of questions concerned unmanned vehicles. Most respondents have a positive view of it, but 53% doubt its safety. About 9% are strongly against autonomous cars.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
When it comes to automating work tasks, only 9.8% are already actively using such solutions. However, 74% are either trying them or planning to implement them in the future. The remaining 23% believe that their work cannot be automated.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
The main obstacles to robotization were identified by respondents as high cost (57.3%), lack of specialists (54.4%) and user distrust (48.3%). Problems with legislation and digital infrastructure were also noted.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
Development drivers include progress in AI, industry demands, government support and the desire of businesses to reduce costs.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
The study confirmed that Russians generally have a positive assessment of the prospects for robotization, but are aware of the challenges associated with it. The key is to adapt to change and use new technologies wisely.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n
Source: nedradv.ru<\/sub><\/p>\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Most Russians do not see robotization as a threat to employment. According to an April 2025 survey, more than 80% of respondents believe that the labor market is successfully adapting to changes, and the disappearance of old professions is compensated by the emergence of new ones. A survey conducted among 1,000 Russian<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":15702,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"Robotization and work: 80% of Russians are confident in the adaptation of the labor market","_seopress_titles_desc":"A 2025 survey showed: 80% of Russians are confident that the labor market will adapt to robotization. Unmanned vehicles, automation and implementation barriers.","_seopress_robots_index":"","_seopress_analysis_target_kw":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[319,391],"class_list":["post-60060","news","type-news","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","category-karera","tag-avtomatizacziya-i-robotizacziya","tag-trudoustrojstvo-i-rynok-truda"],"acf":[],"pbg_featured_image_src":{"full":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport.webp",1280,640,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-150x150.webp",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-300x150.webp",300,150,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-768x384.webp",768,384,true],"large":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-1024x512.webp",1024,512,true],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport.webp",1280,640,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport.webp",1280,640,false],"bricks_large_16x9":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-1200x640.webp",1200,640,true],"bricks_large":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-1200x600.webp",1200,600,true],"bricks_large_square":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-1200x640.webp",1200,640,true],"bricks_medium":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-600x300.webp",600,300,true],"bricks_medium_square":["https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/robotizaciya-opros-bespilotnyj-transport-600x600.webp",600,600,true]},"pbg_author_info":{"display_name":"Lyubov Cherkasova","author_link":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/author\/amourallis\/","author_img":false},"pbg_comment_info":" No Comments","pbg_excerpt":"Most Russians do not see robotization as a threat to employment. According to an April 2025 survey, more than 80% of respondents believe that the labor market is successfully adapting to changes, and the disappearance of old professions is compensated by the emergence of new ones. A survey conducted among 1,000 Russian","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/60060","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/news"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60060"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/60060\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15702"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60060"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60060"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geoconversation.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}