‘We had to get out of the way’: The backlash over delivery robots

We had to get out – When John Roberts, a resident of Chicago, first spotted a delivery robot navigating the sidewalks on his street, he was struck by its novelty. “I thought they were pretty cool—like something out of a sci-fi movie,” he recalls. However, this initial fascination soon gave way to unease as the robots began to populate the city’s streets in greater numbers. During a family walk, Roberts found himself and his children scrambling to avoid the machines, which were moving with a steady, unyielding pace. “It felt like we were intruding on our own space,” he says. “We were on the sidewalk, which is meant for pedestrians, but we had to make way for these automated devices.” This moment sparked a broader reflection on the implications of integrating robots into everyday urban life, especially as their presence grows in cities across the globe.

Emergence of Autonomous Delivery Systems

Autonomous urban delivery vehicles, commonly referred to as delivery robots, have been deployed in various global cities, including the United States, the UK, Japan, South Korea, and Germany. These machines, equipped with cameras, sensors, and GPS technology, are designed to transport groceries and fast food while navigating sidewalks and streets with minimal human intervention. Proponents of the technology argue that robots offer a sustainable alternative to traditional delivery methods, reducing traffic congestion and lowering carbon emissions. According to the companies managing these systems, the robots are capable of reliably identifying obstacles, crossing streets safely, and adapting to dynamic environments in real time.

Despite these assurances, public sentiment has been divided. In some areas, residents have embraced the convenience of robotic deliveries, while in others, concerns over safety and pedestrian rights have fueled resistance. For instance, in San Francisco, local authorities have imposed restrictions to limit the robots’ access to high-traffic zones, while Toronto has banned their use entirely on sidewalks since 2021. Chicago, too, has seen localized bans, with the city restricting the machines in two small neighborhoods. These measures reflect a growing debate about how to balance innovation with the needs of pedestrians.

Public Concerns and Safety Issues

John Roberts, now a vocal critic, has launched a petition to suspend the robots’ operation across all of Chicago until safety assessments are completed and clear guidelines are established. His initiative has garnered over 4,400 signatures so far, underscoring the public’s apprehension. Roberts points to incidents where pedestrians, including children, were forced to step into streets to avoid collisions. “There have been reports of robots causing minor injuries,” he says. “One time, a safety flag on a robot was hit by a person, which is a bit ironic given their purpose.”

“I started thinking about what it would be like for us to go for a walk as a family if there were dozens of robots with lights and cameras zipping around.”

Such anecdotes highlight the perceived threat to pedestrian safety, particularly in densely populated areas. In Glendale, California, similar worries have prompted local officials to consider temporary restrictions. Councillor Ardy Kassakhian, who has been vocal about the issue, describes the situation as a mix of factors. “The increased visibility of these robots in downtown areas has raised questions about how they affect our sidewalks,” he explains. “We’re also concerned about the lack of regulatory oversight—no one consulted us before they started using the public space for deliveries.”

Kassakhian emphasizes the narrow sidewalks in Glendale, which have become battlegrounds between robots and pedestrians. He recalls witnessing a stand-off between a delivery robot and an elderly individual, as well as instances where malfunctioning machines left obstructions. “The uncertainty around who is responsible for accidents or malfunctions adds to the frustration,” he says. “We need a structured approach that includes rules, insurance, and accountability.”

Job Market Worries and Regulatory Push

While safety concerns dominate the discourse, the impact on employment is another significant issue. The Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents delivery drivers and other gig economy workers, has raised alarms about the potential displacement of human labor. Members of the union argue that the widespread adoption of robots could undermine job opportunities for thousands of workers, particularly in sectors reliant on last-mile delivery. “We’re keeping a close eye on how these technologies are affecting the labor market,” says the union, which has already communicated its concerns to the government.

Starship Technologies, the company behind many of these robots, maintains that the technology is both safe and beneficial. In a statement, the firm’s European operations director, Danny Pass, acknowledges the novelty of the concept but emphasizes its integration into daily life. “People are used to seeing robots on sidewalks now, and they’ve become part of the community,” he says. “They’re designed to be courteous and cautious, and we’ve seen them operate smoothly in multiple cities since 2018.” However, the company faces challenges in convincing skeptics of its safety record, especially after incidents of vandalism in Sheffield, where Uber Eats robots have been targeted by frustrated locals.

The backlash is not limited to sidewalks. In cities like Toronto and Chicago, regulatory measures have been taken to address the growing presence of these machines. Toronto’s ban on sidewalk use since 2021 has been a notable step, while Chicago’s localized restrictions reflect a cautious approach. Meanwhile, in the UK, where pilot programs are ongoing, the focus remains on refining regulations to ensure both safety and accessibility. “The goal is to create a framework that allows innovation without compromising public welfare,” says Kassakhian, whose council is working to establish long-term guidelines for robot usage.

As the debate continues, the question of who benefits from this shift remains contentious. While companies see robots as a way to streamline deliveries and reduce costs, residents and workers are left wondering about the trade-offs. In Glendale, the council is exploring a range of solutions, from designated zones for robots to charging fees for their operation. “We want to ensure that these technologies serve the community without displacing people or creating hazards,” says Kassakhian. The path forward, he suggests, will require collaboration between businesses, local governments, and the public to address concerns and create a balanced coexistence between humans and machines on the streets.

For now, the sidewalks remain a contested space, where the future of delivery is being shaped by both technological progress and human resistance. As cities continue to test the limits of automation, the stories of individuals like John Roberts and Ardy Kassakhian will play a crucial role in determining how these machines are integrated into the fabric of urban life. Whether the robots will be seen as a convenience or a disruption depends on the ability to address their impact on safety, space, and employment—a challenge that is far from resolved.