How the federal government can better support robotics implementation in the manufacturing sector through a national robotics strategy.
The manufacturing industry has been grappling with a lack of skilled labour for some time. A recent push from policymakers to address this gap through investment in training is merely the first attempt to identify a solution for a problem many businesses have faced since their inception. The realities of the skilled labour gap and productivity crisis are clear: there is not enough personnel to fill these crucial roles.
Where the human solution is lacking, however, the robotic solution can succeed. One proven method of addressing the lack of skilled labour is introducing automation into the manufacturing process, eliminating the need for humans to complete the repetitive, mundane or dangerous tasks necessary to keep the business running and freeing up their time to address more complex problems.
This method has proven successful in countries including Germany, Japan, and Sweden, all of whom have a manufacturing sector that accounts for approximately 28 per cent of GDP, very similar to Canada. In Germany, approximately 84 per cent of manufacturing companies have integrated some form of robotics or automation into their operations, reported the International Trade Administration. In Japan, that number is 80 per cent and in Sweden somewhere between 70 to 80 per cent.
In Canada? 42 per cent.
Where’s the problem?
Despite having a robust manufacturing sector and a surplus of home-grown innovators in the robotics sector, we are lagging behind. What separates Canada from these other countries is not the capability to integrate these solutions, but rather the support from the government required to do so.
“If I had to give a grade right now for robotics readiness, I’d give it a C+. But I want to be really clear that it’s not about a lack of talent or potential or technological ability,” said Hallie Siegel, chief executive officer of the Canadian Robotics Council.
“I see Canada as the student in the class that has a lot of natural inherent ability, but who’s underperforming. Because the system around them isn’t supporting them properly, it’s not giving them the right tools or attention and encouragement,” Siegel said.
A major difference between the majority of global leaders in robotics and Canada is a coordinated national strategy outlined by the federal government to support manufacturing organizations throughout the adoption process.
Germany has the Robotics Research Action Plan and High-Tech Strategy 2025, which both focus on enhancing robotics research and development, Japan has the New Robot Strategy as part of their larger Society 5.0 concept, the United Kingdom recently introduced their Smart Machines Strategy 2035 with the goal of transforming into a global leader in robotics and the United States has the National Strategy for U.S. Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing.
In contrast, Canada employs a decentralized ecosystem of programs, clusters and other agencies to promote robotics adoption in the manufacturing sector. Some of these players include Next Generation Manufacturing Canada, the Strategic Innovation Fund, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and more.
The question, then, is does a singular voice and message from the top really move the needle? Søren Elmer Kristensen, chief executive officer of Odense Robotics, Demark’s robot and drone cluster, said his country’s national strategy, launched in 2020, has been integral in sending a message to the private sector that the government is serious about robotics adoption and will support these businesses as they embark on their integration journey, building the trust and confidence manufacturing leadership needs to take the leap.
“Leadership from the top, strong political will and strategic focus from the government are essential to align regulation, funding, education and industry initiatives, making sure all parts of the ecosystem pull in the same direction,” Kristensen said.
That level of trust, as demonstrated by our rate of robotics adoption, is severely lacking in Canada on a national level. Siegel highlighted some cities including Mississauga, Brampton, Waterloo and Edmonton who are introducing industrial strategies, but agreed the gap at the federal level was holding back Canada’s manufacturing sector.
“Canada ranks seventh in the world for service robotics manufacturers and fifth on a per capita basis. We punch above our weight in robotics talent and exports, but misaligned policy and investment is holding us back from putting that expertise to work at home.”
Recent developments
With the election of Mark Carney as prime minister in April, there has been some roundabout change in the governments approach to robotics, namely through the introduction of Evan Solomon as the minister of artificial intelligence and digital innovation in May 2025.
This emphasis on AI will, in theory, lead directly to further investment in the hardware application of AI solutions, namely, robotics. But Siegel would like to see that investment be more defined.
“We need to empower the new AI ministry with a clear mandate for physical AI. Unlike software-only AI, adopting robotics has higher upfront costs and needs more patient capital,” she said.
“Allocating a portion of existing AI funding towards robotics, and making it an explicit national priority, just as our government has done for quantum computing and clean tech, would send a strong signal to manufacturers that they’ll get the right supports to adopt and innovate,” Siegel said. “The irony is that robotics offers a quicker path to return on investment than quantum or cleantech, making it a better value for taxpayers.”
Kristensen noted that when the investment is defined in the public sector, it creates more engagement in the private sector, leading to further funding and the potential for innovation.
Ideal outcome
If the government decided to move forward with a national robotics strategy, what would it look like? For Siegel, a big part of what this framework needs to accomplish is an updated understanding of robotics, recognizing its capability to enable cross-sectoral growth not in the future, but right now.
“Our current national policy still classifies robotics as an emerging technology, but that framework is from 2019, and there are plenty of commercial solutions ready right now,” she said.
“The government needs a more nuanced definition of robotics if it’s going to effectively support industry to adopt and innovate in this space,” Siegel said.
That redefinition would come with the promotion of advanced manufacturing, highlighting the exciting industry opportunities to encourage younger talent to move into and stay in the field. It would also require an investment in workforce training programs to upskill personnel and prepare them to work alongside robotics, stemming the fear of job loss and encouraging technology adoption.
Developing that trust is key, reported Kristensen, who said the level of acceptance of robotics in Denmark is as high as it is because personnel had the opportunity to work alongside robotics and see the possibilities provided.
“When we’re looking at the manufacturing floor, we see a high level of trust because we have had quite a long tradition of robotics in Odense,” he said, referencing the introduction of robotics to the city’s shipyard over 40 years ago. “We also have the support from labour unions who see they’re [robots] are there to support their work and not replace them.”
Future outlook
Prime Minister Carney’s government will table its first budget in October, so there is still a possibility a robotics strategy is on the way.
Siegel highlighted two possible paths the government could move down, with only one leading to a positive outcome.
“I see two scenarios. One of them is business as usual, carrying on thinking that the same policies and strategies that we’ve had are going to achieve different results, and they won’t,” she said.
“The second scenario is that we act now to get Canadian manufacturers the supports they need to automate. While many worry that we’re behind, I use that C+ as a warning to get people moving.
“All the ingredients are here for Canada to be a global leader in this space, and it will create resilience across the whole manufacturing ecosystem and beyond, Siegel said. “We can do these things. I totally believe it.”
