Safety and liability of field robots better regulated than expected

safety field robots — The Lely Exos mowing and feeding robot in operation for summer stall feeding. Meanwhile, more robots have started working in open fields. But how are the safety and liability of field robots regulated? – Photo: Herbert Wiggerman

With the international rise of field robots, the question in many countries arises whether the safety and liability of these machines are properly regulated. The answer is: yes. Although absolute safety does not exist, regulations are in place. A Dutch perspective.

The Netherlands is not yet flooded with field robots, but their presence is undeniable. Notable examples include the Farmdroid FD20, which autonomously sows and weeds, the iQuus retrofit kit that enables conventional tractors to operate autonomously, and the AgBot T2, an autonomous traction robot.

The AgBot will be tested on an arable farm under the NPPL (National Precision Agriculture Testing Ground) programme in 2025. A standard tractor equipped with iQuus will again tour various farms this year. In dairy farming, the Lely Exos mowing and feeding robot is already in use for summer stall feeding. More field robots are now operational, with others on the way.

Are unmanned field robots allowed on farmland?

The key question is whether unmanned field robots are permitted in open fields. Are safety measures sufficient, and who is liable if something goes wrong?

2 opposing views circulate in practice. One claims that nothing is regulated for field robots, so nothing is allowed, with robots merely being tolerated as long as they do not enter public roads. The other asserts that since no specific regulations exist, everything is allowed.

The Farmdroid FD20 autonomously sows and weeds crops such as sugar beets, chicory, and onions, operating day and night." – Photo: Peter Roek

The reality is more nuanced: there are regulations, and field robots are permitted in agricultural fields. The general answer to whether a tractor or other equipment may operate unmanned in a field is: yes.

Geofence and obstacle protection

The 2 most crucial safety features of a field robot are its digital geofence and obstacle detection systems. In theory, these ensure human safety.

Before deploying a robot, RTK GPS maps the specific field and all fixed objects. The robot then follows programmed operations. Obstacle protection ensures the field robot stops or slows down upon encountering unexpected obstacles. Sensors, cameras, and radar-like LiDAR systems help detect obstacles. To prevent the robot from misidentifying attached implements as obstacles, they must be precisely measured beforehand, as is the case with the AgBot.

Unexpected Stops Due to Tall Grass

Obstacle detection can sometimes be overly sensitive. During an iQuus demonstration tour in 2024, the tractor stopped for an unusually tall blade of grass. Dutch arable farmer Marijn Vermuë plans to test the AgBot T2 on his farm next season and wonders how it will handle the Kvik-up weeder behind it. The weeder’s tines throw soil and weed parts into the air. Heavy soil particles settle quickly, while weed roots land on the surface to dry out. Will the sensors misinterpret airborne clumps of soil and weeds as obstacles? And how can this be adjusted without compromising safety?

Only the operator is allowed in the field

Only the operator is allowed in the field where the robot is working. This individual understands the system and has a remote control with an emergency stop. Simply placing “no entry” signs does not justify reducing machine safety standards.

The Agbot tractor robot from Agxeed autonomously performs tasks such as weeding and seeding.

Machine regulation also covers field robots

Under the European Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC (set to become the European Machinery Regulation in 2027), field robots are subject to the same rules as other machines.

Manufacturers must provide a CE marking (Conformité Européenne) and a detailed user manual to demonstrate safe operation. The CE mark signifies compliance with European safety, health, and environmental protection standards. It is mandatory for specific product categories sold in the EU, even if manufactured elsewhere.

Coen van Gulijk, safety scientist at the Dutch research institute TNO, warns against purchasing uncertified products: “Not every trader is diligent about ensuring proper CE certification. If something goes wrong and the certification is inadequate, it leads to serious issues.”

Absolute safety does not exist

While CE certification ensures compliance with safety regulations, absolute safety is unattainable. “No machine is 100% safe,” says Erik Pekkeriet, program manager for Vision & Robotics at Wageningen University & Research. “Take a chainsaw, for example. It has a two-handed operation system and a chain brake, and users are required to wear gloves, chainsaw pants, and safety glasses. These measures minimise risk but do not eliminate it.”

CE marking becomes invalid after modifications

Pekkeriet highlights a critical liability condition: the CE marking applies only to the machine in its original state. “If a user modifies the machine, they assume the role of manufacturer and become responsible for CE certification. Farmers often customize machinery to meet their needs, but re-certification is rare.”

The issue becomes more complex for highly sophisticated machines with greater safety risks, especially emerging technologies like field robots. “Ensuring safety and liability is crucial,” says Luco Hetebrij, mechanical engineer at GPX Solutions. “A single accident could damage the reputation of this emerging industry.”

GPX Solutions produces and supplies iQuus Autonomy, which converts standard tractors into autonomous machines. “Our iQuus retrofit kit carries a CE marking, but when installed on a tractor, the certification technically becomes void,” says Hetebrij. “That’s why we have an external party inspect the system post-installation, re-certifying the entire setup.”

Extensive safety documentation

The safety documentation behind a field robot’s CE certification is far more extensive than that of simpler machinery. Pieter Rooijakkers, product trainer at AgXeed, manufacturer of the AgBot, states, “For our AgBot, the documentation is a thick manual detailing safe operation.”

Rooijakkers acknowledges the importance of safety and reliability in the early adoption phase of autonomous field robots. “ISO standards ensure compliance with safety guidelines. Safety is paramount. Every component contributes to maintaining a secure work environment and fostering trust among farmers. By providing a safe working environment, farmers can confidently delegate tasks to the AgBot, allowing them to focus on other work while the robot performs its duties safely.”