Thursday, August 31, 2017

Something fishy about robots!

In my classes, I use plenty of contemporary examples in order to highlight the rapidly changing economic geography that makes our lives so fascinating.  Of course, not all students like my approach.  In her review of my teaching, one student wrote in the university's evaluation process that the "class is completely worthless and Sriram Khe should not be allowed to teach the way he does."  "Sriram and his shitty teaching style" made it hard for her to learn, she wrote.

Different strokes for different folks, eh!

I am sure that I will use during this academic year the example of the sushi robot; too bad if a student will not understand and appreciate its significance.

Sushi, which I have never even tasted, has been one of my favorite examples when discussing the geographic diffusion of culture.  Now, keep in mind that food is not merely cultural but has market value too.  Sushi can now be found in practically every grocery store in the US.  In the store next to mine, there is a sushi table where two chefs can be found rolling the sushi.

Sushi is not "native" to this land; it came from elsewhere.  Like how the chicken tikka masala is not native to the UK.  We live in an exciting world of awesome food possibilities.  Sushi, when first introduced in the US, was not a hit.  American consumers gasped at the very idea of raw fish.  And then Breakfast Club happened.  The rest, as they say, is history.

The making of sushi, too, has been automated.
Suzumo Machinery Co.’s robots are used by about 70,000 customers around the world, ranging from sushi chains to factories, and account for about 70 percent of the market for the equipment at restaurants, according to Suzumo’s estimates. Kaiten sushi, also known as conveyor-belt sushi, has become a $6 billion industry in Japan alone, partly thanks to Suzuki’s invention.
Cheap sushi “couldn’t have happened without our machines,” says Ikuya Oneda, who succeeded Suzuki as Suzumo president in 2004, a year before the founder died, and took over his life’s work. “You can certainly say that.”
So much of what we eat these days is a result of machines doing the work.  A while ago, I watched a video in which a creative Indian had mechanized most of the vadai making.  I am not sure if that became a hit in India.  But, it is only a matter of time before vadais become products of full automation, after which a few restaurants will advertise "traditional, hand-made" vadais.

Of course, sushi robots were met with resistance in Japan.
In 1976, sushi was still largely a food for special occasions. It was mostly sold through a legion of small restaurants, where artisan chefs dispensed morsels with no price tags and charged how they saw fit.
Not surprisingly, those chefs were up in arms when they heard about Suzumo’s plan. In their view, it took 10 years to train someone to make sushi. No machine could possibly do the job.
We humans hate change.  We are wired to be conservatives.   That is how we survived in the wild.  But then we humans are also quick to adapt to changes--once we see the benefits of change.
Suzumo stuck with the task, and two years later the sushi chefs finally said the machine was usable. In 1981, the company completed its first robot, which formed sushi rice into balls called nigiri. These days, it offers 28 different sushi machines.
“What they’ve done is allow kaiten restaurants to democratize and make good Japanese food affordable and accessible,” says Robin Rowland, chairman and chief executive officer of Yo!, a U.K. sushi chain with almost 100 restaurants globally.
And, thus, the conveyer-belt  sushi that we have seen, where people point to which box they want.  Further, in a market system, customers know what they want, especially if the price is right:
Already, about three-quarters of Japanese people say that when they eat sushi, it’s from a conveyor belt, according to a survey published by fishery company Maruha Nichiro Corp. in March. Almost half of them choose which restaurant based on price.
I tell ya, whether students find all these to be awesome or shitty, I have a great time understanding this fascinating world through my preferred framework.


2 comments:

Ramesh said...

No; very few vadais are made from machinery. And the day when most restaurants have machine made vadais is certainly not in my lifetime.

The case for automation is not so easy in India. Because of abundant supply of labour, the Indian talent for jugaad and the relatively low wages, automation comes slower to India. It will come, for sure, but at a much slower pace, allowing the society some leeway to adapt.

Automation has made very little strides in food preparation in India. Even in gigantic food kitchens such as Tirupati laddu, there's still a fair bit of manual preparation. Its all simple economics. Automation is much more costly than employing labour in most food preparation tasks.

There's a lesson to learn for your country. A large proportion of the automation problem you have is simply because you have driven wages to ridiculous levels (courtesy loony left). Your wages have to have some comparison to global levels - you cannot say that your society is different and therefore it "deserves" unsustainable wage levels. If you have reasonably competitive wage levels (and competitive productivity - your low skill productivity levels are abysmal), then you can slow down both export of jobs as well as automation. And that buys you precious time to adapt. But I'm afraid, your horse has long bolted; ours is still in the stables.

Sriram Khé said...

Our horse has bolted, yes.
Your horse is still in the stables, yes--but it is malnourished and abused.
Our lives--as horse-riders--are without any problems!

I agree with most of what you write ... except the part about the low productivity of the low-skilled. This is one of the issues that I often talk, write about. Not everybody is capable enough to compete in the labor market. And, whatever we might be relatively good at might not be rewarded with decent wages in the marketplace. Whether we like it or not, the market rewards a brain surgeon with plenty more $$$ than what it pays a landscape worker who mows the lawn. So, do we owe this low-productivity low-skilled person anything? If we do, how much do we owe him?

Whether it is India, or the US, or Japan, we all need to re-work a new kind of social contract that is appropriate for the new conditions of the 21st century. The contract has to be contextual--it simply cannot be the same in India and the US because our horses are in different conditions.