tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/self-driving-buses-30099/articlesSelf-driving buses – The Conversation2019-11-27T18:42:19Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1261112019-11-27T18:42:19Z2019-11-27T18:42:19ZDriverless vehicles and pedestrians don’t mix. So how do we re-arrange our cities?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/303676/original/file-20191126-112512-2id8ki.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C5%2C4000%2C2568&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Autonomous vehicles can only travel at speed at close quarters in the absence of human drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/search">posteriori/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Videos showing autonomous or self-driving vehicles weaving in and out of crossroads at speed without colliding suggest this technology will solve traffic problems. You almost never see pedestrians or cyclists in these videos. The reality is that they don’t fit.</p>
<p>The vision of autonomous traffic is either of a large convoy of vehicles just a metre apart moving along road corridors at 100km/h, or of vehicles in an urban setting where their sensors are picking up every pedestrian movement and slowing or stopping. In the first case, the vehicles form an impenetrable barrier to pedestrians or cyclists (who, like on a freeway, will probably be banned). In the second case, pedestrians and cyclists are able to ruin traffic flow and are <a href="https://theconversation.com/nothing-to-fear-how-humans-and-other-intelligent-animals-might-ruin-the-autonomous-vehicle-utopia-114504">likely to just take over streets</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4pbAI40dK0A?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">What’s missing from the demonstration of autonomous vehicles flowing through an intersection is the human element of cyclists and pedestrians.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nothing-to-fear-how-humans-and-other-intelligent-animals-might-ruin-the-autonomous-vehicle-utopia-114504">Nothing to fear? How humans (and other intelligent animals) might ruin the autonomous vehicle utopia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It occurs to me this is a really good thing for our cities. I worried that the vision some had (mostly car makers, I suspect) was of a city completely taken over by self-driving vehicles.</p>
<p>All public transport would be gone as thousands of these vehicles scattered along every street looking for on-demand passengers. Historic centres and tram corridors would be ruined and we would no longer be able to appreciate their walkable character.</p>
<p>However, we may instead be able to take the best features of autonomous mobility technology to create cities that are more productive, liveable, inclusive and sustainable.</p>
<h2>How would we do this?</h2>
<p>The first thing is to realise that for 20-30 years cities around the world have been <a href="https://islandpress.org/books/end-automobile-dependence">getting rid of cars in their centres</a> and subcentres, drawing on the ideas of urban designers like <a href="https://islandpress.org/books/cities-people">Jan Gehl</a>. This trend includes Australian cities. These centres are where the knowledge economy workers who drive innovation want to live and work. </p>
<p>Cities are not going to easily give up their cherished walkability to thousands of self-driving vehicles. Cities mostly are planning more walkable centres with even more public transport and fewer cars; they are unlikely to yield to autonomous vehicle ideology. </p>
<p>It’s more likely cities will ban self-driving vehicles from these centres, with just one small entry and exit point to enable vehicle access. Cities will not want to kill off the economic and social golden goose of walkable centres, let alone abandon climate change plans to reduce car use.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-driverless-vehicles-should-not-be-given-unchecked-access-to-our-cities-102724">Why driverless vehicles should not be given unchecked access to our cities</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The second thing is that these active walkable centres are being heavily supported by quality public transport. Fortunately, autonomous technology is also being applied to transit services such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trackless-trams-are-ready-to-replace-light-rail-103690">trackless tram</a>. These are guided but not driverless, like <a href="https://urbantransportnews.com/worlds-fastest-high-speed-driverless-bullet-train-starts-service-in-china/">high-speed rail</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-31/driverless-trains-embraced-around-the-globe-what-could-go-wrong/11155858">metros</a>, as they need drivers at times. </p>
<p>Not only could autonomous technology improve transit services, it could also take over some major road corridors that are failing at peak times. This could create an alternative rapid transit route <a href="https://theconversation.com/going-down-the-same-old-road-driverless-cars-arent-a-fix-for-our-transport-woes-50912">carrying the equivalent of six to eight lanes of traffic</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=292&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Data source: author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The ‘movement and place’ approach</h2>
<p>Around the world and in Australia, cities are looking to make roads into combined “<a href="https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/guidance/movement-and-place">movement and place</a>” sites – some places will remain highly walkable and some will be just for movement but special corridors will be for both so they<a href="https://transport.vic.gov.au/our-transport-future/movement-and-place-in-victoria">keep people and goods moving and are places for people to live, work and enjoy</a>. This approach gives priority to fast public transport using light rail or trackless trams combined with higher-density development around their stations.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/trackless-trams-v-light-rail-its-not-a-contest-both-can-improve-our-cities-125134">Trackless trams v light rail? It's not a contest – both can improve our cities</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The big issue on such corridors is how to get rid of cars so mass transit services have a fast, free lane to travel along as well as walkable station precincts to enter. Such a system would be much more efficient in traffic terms, but car users don’t easily give up their right to space.</p>
<p>However, the inherent problem with self-driving vehicles is that they will make a corridor impenetrable and travel through a dense precinct ridiculously slow and unpredictable. The politics will therefore shift towards a fast transit corridor along main roads together with walkable, car-free station precincts. </p>
<p>Self-driving cars can help make the fast corridor work as they are ideal for bringing on-demand passengers to the precincts where people can access local services and transfer to the fast transit line. This integrated service enables the best of both mobility solutions: fast and effective access, without destroying either the corridor or centres, and an on-demand local service as shown below.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Each centre will have micro-mobility options feeding into the transit system and the station precinct services. These options will provide “first mile-last mile” connectivity on demand. They include walking, electric bikes, scooters, skateboards and autonomous shuttles or cars that travel to and from the centre along a specific isolated route. </p>
<p>Certain main roads would have to be declared as clearways for autonomous electric transit, with a set of stations serving high-density centres for urban regeneration. Autonomous vehicles could reign supreme out in the suburbs that were built around the car, but would not interfere with existing or new transit corridors as well as the historic and new centres where pedestrians would reign supreme. Such is the vision of the City of Liverpool for a <a href="https://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/development/major-projects/fifteenth-avenue-smart-transit-fast-corridor">trackless tram route to Western Sydney Airport</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dowlQaebqRQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Liverpool City Council’s vision of an autonomous transit link to Western Sydney Airport.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This vision is not anti-autonomous vehicles. It is enabling innovations to serve us rather than being our master. We cannot simply give up our cities to cars just when we are learning to overcome such dependence. </p>
<p>To make the most of autonomous vehicles’ advantages and avoid the disadvantages, we must choose to shape our cities. Autonomous transit services with feed-in autonomous cars and micro-mobility can achieve the walkability and civility we need for a good city in the future. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/utopia-or-nightmare-the-answer-lies-in-how-we-embrace-self-driving-electric-and-shared-vehicles-90920">Utopia or nightmare? The answer lies in how we embrace self-driving, electric and shared vehicles</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126111/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Newman receives funding from the Sustainable Built Environment national research centre (SBEnrc) that works with some local and state governments on these issues.</span></em></p>Self-driving vehicles that constantly roam the streets looking for passengers could overwhelm cities. But, if kept in check, these vehicles could be useful for improving urban transport.Peter Newman, Professor of Sustainability, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/608112019-10-17T13:57:45Z2019-10-17T13:57:45ZDriverless cars won’t deliver a transport revolution – and the auto industry stands to lose out<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/297512/original/file-20191017-98632-i1reh4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4955%2C3562&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Would that it were so simple. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/finger-pressing-push-button-start-selfdriving-643585552?src=YRyJZKs1iv1N4-HBbvWIGg-1-3">Olivier Le Moal/Shutterstock.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The breathless hype around driverless electric vehicles once promised an urban transport “revolution”, with claims that new technologies would <a href="https://www.hertz.com/blog/automotive/driverless-vehicles-could-reduce-traffic">ease congestion</a> and eliminate harmful emissions. The potential benefits of these new technologies are stimulating both activity and anxiety in the auto industry – specifically around whether the cost of investment will be justified by profits from sales of new vehicles. </p>
<p>The initial enthusiasm for driverless vehicles has gradually subsided, as the difficulties with introducing such technologies at scale in cities become better understood. As I explain in my new book <a href="https://www.agendapub.com/books/78/driving-change">Driving Change: Travel in the 21st Century</a>, the future of the car is likely to be less exciting than many suppose. Rather than a revolution, these innovations will offer gradual change, when – and indeed if – the auto industry can make it worthwhile.</p>
<p>Of course, electric motors will help to reduce tailpipe emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants. But commercial success is likely to depend on the optimal choice of battery chemistry to maximise the car’s range, while delivering long-life, lightweight and fast recharging cells. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/dyson-car-electrifying-transport-needs-a-lot-more-than-another-high-end-vehicle-125173">recent decision</a> by British inventor James Dyson to cancel his electric car project highlights the risks for new entrants. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-cars-wont-save-the-planet-without-a-clean-energy-overhaul-they-could-increase-pollution-118012">Electric cars won't save the planet without a clean energy overhaul – they could increase pollution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Automated systems <a href="https://www.bmwux.com/bmw-performance-technology/bmw-technology/bmw-parking-assistant-complete-guide/">can already</a> relieve drivers of tasks such as parking, and may ultimately lead to driverless travel. Yet both the performance and timing of autonomous vehicles (AVs) are very uncertain – <a href="https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf">independent observers</a> predict an extended timescale for wide deployment: perhaps the 2040s to 2050s. </p>
<h2>Safety first</h2>
<p>A key task is to agree safety standards for AVs. People are willing to accept some small risk of death or injury when at the wheel of their own car, even though <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/834585/reported-road-casualties-annual-report-2018.pdf">1,784 people were killed</a> on UK roads in 2018. But when someone else in is charge – as for rail and air travel – we demand far higher standards. AVs are potentially much safer, since they could eliminate human error that is responsible for <a href="https://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/road-crashes-overview.pdf">95% of road accidents</a>. </p>
<p>Yet to demonstrate safe performance would require huge amounts of on-road testing, once the technology reaches an acceptable standard. Proponents <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2150.html">argue that</a> the best is the enemy of the good, so that AVs should be accepted for general use once they are better than a good human driver, with the expectation that their safety performance will improve as the technology is refined with increasing experience. </p>
<p>Within the auto industry, there’s <a href="https://corporate.ford.com/articles/products/autonomous-2021.html">a sense of inevitability</a> that driverless cars are the future. But there will need to be demonstrable benefits if the public is to pay the extra costs. Eliminating human taxi drivers could offer a substantial economic benefit: a robotic taxi summoned with an app is <a href="https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/03/05/why-driverless-cars-will-mostly-be-shared-not-owned">seen by some</a> as an alternative to owning your own car. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jAZWWFe4fAI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Yet the feasibility of robotaxis is far from clear, particularly in cities with historic street layouts and extensive kerbside parking, where narrow roads require negotiation between drivers going in opposite directions. Driverless vehicles are initially <a href="https://navya.tech/en/autonom-shuttle/">being deployed</a> in well-defined low-speed locations such as campuses, airports and business parks. Motorways where pedestrians and cyclists are excluded offer another likely location – yet getting to and from such dedicated roads would require navigation through populated streets, where driverless performance could be problematic. </p>
<h2>Still a tough sell</h2>
<p>Traffic congestion is the most intractable problem of the road system, reflecting an excess of demand for car travel in relation to road capacity in towns and cities where there is generally both high population density and high car ownership. Privately owned AVs could actually add to congestion, since they would travel without a passenger, for instance returning home after dropping people off, or cruising round the block while the owner is shopping.</p>
<p>Historic transport innovations have allowed step changes in the speed of travel: the railway in the 19th century, the car in the 20th. Increases in access to destinations, services, opportunities and choices made possible by such innovations have justified huge investments by manufacturers, public authorities and the travelling public.</p>
<p>By contrast, the new transport innovations will not increase the speed of travel. The car of the future will be electrically propelled, have extensive digital functionality and driverless options. But it’s unlikely to make much faster progress through traffic than the car of today. </p>
<p>These new transport innovations will not transform why and where people travel. Rather, they will offer incremental improvement to the quality of our journeys. As the auto industry switches to electric propulsion and develops driverless options, the lack of a transformational offering to car buyers could make it hard to recover the costs of development. </p>
<p>Drivers will take up these innovations if they offer good value. Now, the task of the auto industry is to drive down costs, to make their offerings more attractive – as it has always aimed to do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60811/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Metz does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Planes, trains and automobiles produced a step-change in the speed of travel – driverless and electric cars simply cannot deliver such radical improvements.David Metz, Honorary Professor of Transport Studies, UCLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1182932019-06-06T10:11:40Z2019-06-06T10:11:40ZDriverless cars: once they’re on the road, human drivers should be banned<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278303/original/file-20190606-98003-gw7xy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=53%2C26%2C6000%2C3943&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/inattentive-handsome-young-man-busy-his-1137033740?src=IBGtI7vZebhFfnhyd9Nvyw-4-22">Shutterstock.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Self-driving cars could revolutionise people’s lives. By the end of the next decade, or <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/business/elon-musk-tesla-autopilot.html">perhaps even sooner</a>, they could radically transform public spaces and liberate us from the many problems of mass car ownership. They’ll also be much better behaved than human drivers.</p>
<p>Robot drivers won’t break the speed limit, jump the lights, or park where they shouldn’t. They won’t drive under the influence of drink or drugs. They’ll never get tired or behave aggressively. They won’t be distracted by changing the music or sending a text, and they’ll never be trying to impress their mates.</p>
<p>Driverless cars could also change the face of public spaces. Private cars are very expensive items that do absolutely nothing <a href="https://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/03/10/its-true-the-typical-car-is-parked-95-percent-of-the-time/">95%</a> of the time. They are economically viable only because paying a taxi driver for all your car journeys would be even more expensive. Once cars don’t need human drivers, this cost balance should tip the other way.</p>
<p>Imagine what your town or city could look like with driverless taxis instead of private cars. Most of the <a href="https://medium.com/@buildbrewtopia/manchester-needs-fewer-parks-69ad2eac1a8d">space taken up by car parks</a> could be used for homes, offices, cafes, bars, cinemas, hotels, and swimming pools. An end to parked cars lining every street like urban cholesterol. Quicker bus journeys. Wider pavements.</p>
<p>With more space and safer roads, active transport would be more attractive. More people would travel around on bikes, skateboards, roller blades, and scooters. Driverless taxis could easily be electric, returning to depots to recharge.</p>
<p>The benefits to public health would be enormous. Our towns and cities would be vastly more pleasant places to live and breathe. Transport’s contribution to climate change would be dramatically reduced. But ensuring all these benefits presents an important ethical challenge.</p>
<h2>Dealing with emergencies</h2>
<p>Ethical concern about autonomous vehicles has so far focused on emergencies. Should a car save its passengers at the cost of killing or injuring other people? Should it swerve to avoid someone in the road if this means hitting someone on the pavement? How many people need to be saved to outweigh a bystander’s life or limb? Are <a href="https://theconversation.com/should-your-robot-driver-kill-you-to-save-a-childs-life-29926">children more important</a> than adults? And so on.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/should-your-robot-driver-kill-you-to-save-a-childs-life-29926">Should your robot driver kill you to save a child’s life?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The problem resembles philosopher <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Philippa-Foot">Philippa Foot’s</a> most famous ethical thought experiment: the trolley problem. Imagine you are driving a trolleybus. Its brakes have failed and it’s hurtling towards five people who will certainly be killed if it hits them. You can swerve it onto a side track, killing one person who otherwise would not have been affected. The question is, whether you should. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=205&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=257&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=257&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278301/original/file-20190606-98022-j2tp5g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=257&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Would you hit the switch?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem#/media/File:Trolley_problem.png">McGeddon/Wikimedia Commons.</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Philosophers debating this question have produced a dazzling array of variations. What if you are standing by the track next to someone wearing a very large backpack? Should you push that tourist under the trolley, saving five people’s lives? If you could stop the trolley only at the cost of your own life, should you do that? And so on and so on.</p>
<p>Intuitive responses to these variations tend to seem contradictory. But we learn more about our moral thinking by exploring <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-trolley-problem-mysteries-9780190247157">how they might in fact be consistent</a>. And we learn more about moral cognition by <a href="http://www.joshua-greene.net/research/moral-cognition">scanning people’s brains</a> while they consider these problems.</p>
<p>Self-driving cars have given this debate a new purpose. We have to teach these vehicles how to handle emergencies – the trolley problem just got real. At least, this is what many philosophers think. But in focusing on an existing thought experiment, they have missed the bigger picture.</p>
<h2>The real ethical challenge</h2>
<p>Engineers working on driverless cars <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/22/self-driving-cars-moral-dilemmas">tell us</a> that the safest response in any emergency is to stop. This will be even safer if the nearby cars all have robot drivers. And robot drivers would be better behaved than human ones, reducing the number of emergencies on the roads.</p>
<p>Given all the potential benefits to public health and quality of life, we should be much better off once robots take over the driving, whatever the authorities decide about emergency situations.</p>
<p>This is what gives rise to the real ethical challenge of self-driving cars. Once robot drivers are safe enough to allow onto the roads in large numbers, it seems that we should maximise their benefits by banning their <a href="https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/">dangerous</a> human counterparts from public roads.</p>
<p>There would be resistance to this, of course. Many people enjoy driving. But many people enjoy smoking, too, and this is banned in public places for the protection of non-smokers. There could be designated safe spaces for drivers to indulge their hobby without risk to other people.</p>
<p>Rights of access pose a more difficult question. There is a strong case that essential transport infrastructure should be publicly owned. And if private cars are not an option, perhaps the cost of using autonomous taxis should be proportionate to ability to pay. </p>
<p>But regardless of how we resolve these practical issues, it seems that the enormous benefits of safe, driverless taxis should lead us to remove any other kind of car from our roads.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118293/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jonathan Webber does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The real ethical challenge of driverless cars is not deciding how they respond in emergencies – it’s facing up to the failings of human drivers.Jonathan Webber, Professor of Philosophy, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/971292018-05-30T13:27:09Z2018-05-30T13:27:09ZFree public transport doesn’t add up – unless you get rid of the drivers<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220977/original/file-20180530-120514-tovdb5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C208%2C1949%2C1324&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/fras/226581663/sizes/l">FraserEliot/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The idea of free public transport has clear appeal. Cities in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-paris-transportation/paris-mulls-free-public-transport-to-reduce-pollution-idUSKBN1GW1KU">France</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/14/german-cities-to-trial-free-public-transport-to-cut-pollution">Germany</a> are already considering such proposals, to reduce traffic and air pollution. And in the UK, Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn declared that he would introduce <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43726983">free bus travel for under-25s</a>, to complement the passes already available to senior citizens. </p>
<p>But the evidence suggests that offering free public transport causes headaches for local authorities – and may not be an effective way of getting commuters to stop driving cars. Tallinn, capital of Estonia, introduced free public transport for residents in 2013. But <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11116-016-9695-5">a 2014 survey showed</a> that most of the people who switched to public transport had previously walked or cycled, rather than driven. A <a href="http://urmi.fi/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/URMI-2017-FARE-FREE-PUBLIC-TRANSPORT-IN-TALLINN.pdf">further survey in 2017</a> showed that patronage had increased by only 20% over four years. </p>
<p>In the April 2018 edition of German trade publication Stadtverkehr, Naumann claims that the only cost effective way to get car drivers to switch to public transport is to couple reasonably priced transit with severe traffic restraints. For example, in the English city of Sheffield, attractive bus fares and timetables used to keep cars out of the city centre. From the 1970s, <a href="http://www.grahamstevenson.me.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=773:british-bus-deregulation">until the service was deregulated</a> in 1986, there was simply no need for residents to drive into Sheffield. </p>
<h2>Finding the funds</h2>
<p>The biggest drawback to free public transport schemes is the lack of funds from fares to cover maintenance and upgrades. In Tallinn, for example, the city’s inadequate tram system will eventually require capital for a complete renewal – or face closure. Hasselt, a Belgian town with a population of 70,000, offered free bus travel for 16 years until 2013, but <a href="http://www.eltis.org/discover/news/hasselt-cancels-free-public-transport-after-16-years-belgium-0">eventually scrapped it</a> when costs became unsustainable. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=378&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220980/original/file-20180530-120514-hh5sf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Waiting for a bus in Hasselt.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/hasselt-belgium-people-wait-transport-statue-1075200038?src=pY0AyAgar7xnLt3l2TSzKQ-1-0">Marat Yakhin/Shutterstock.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Paris, meanwhile, has already banned the most polluting vehicles and offered free public transport for a few days each year when pollution has reached dangerous levels due to atmospheric conditions. But according to Haydock, writing in the June 2018 edition of Today’s Railways EU, traffic is rarely reduced more than 10% on these days, and the long term shift to other forms of transport is minimal.</p>
<p>In the UK, free bus travel for senior citizens <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-brutal-spending-cuts-rural-bus-services-have-reached-the-end-of-the-line-63432">has hastened the demise</a> of many rural and intercity services. Many local authorities have diverted support away from rural, evening and weekend services, to the concessionary fares budget. During <a href="http://www.foscl.org.uk/sites/foscl.org.uk/files/FoSCL%20Mag%20Feb%202017.pdf">interviews with BBC Radio 4</a>, younger people – who rely on buses to get to work or go out on the evenings and weekends – complained that services had been axed to offer senior citizens free travel during daytime on weekdays. </p>
<p>But irrespective of your age, health or prosperity, there is no point in having a free bus pass if there are no buses to use it on. As bus services are further deregulated in the UK, there will continue to be pointless oversupply on some corridors, while other areas struggle to see more than a few buses per week – if any at all.</p>
<h2>Driverless minibuses</h2>
<p>The development of <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/6/16733944/moia-vw-minivan-shuttle-ridesharing-autonomous">autonomous electric minibuses</a> could be a game changer, especially if a manufacturer is prepared to lease them on favourable terms. Local authorities could pilot a scheme whereby the bus is “hailed” by smart phone 15 to 30 minutes before departure. Indeed, tests for autonomous on-demand services are already <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/7/16615290/waymo-self-driving-safety-driver-chandler-autonomous">underway in cities across the US</a>, <a href="https://www.smmt.co.uk/2017/11/autonomous-buses-debut-cambridge/">UK</a> and <a href="https://www.thelocal.fr/20160902/france-to-roll-out-world-first-driverless-buses">Europe</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220988/original/file-20180530-120518-9hv1cp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An autonomous minibus, on trial in Toulouse.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/toulouse-france-march-13-2018-driverless-1050255878?src=mQoTnBAxxivxEoTJR4SABw-1-4">Irina Capel/Shutterstock.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Once the expensive and restrictive labour element is removed from the operating costs, there is no reason why such services could not be offered free of charge to all users. In the urban core – within a 10km radius of a city centre – these services could run 24/7. Further afield, in the suburbs, a daily service from 6am until midnight would probably be sufficient to compete with the private car. </p>
<p>Autonomous minibuses could automatically connect with city buses and trains, which would continue to be staffed and paid for by fares. The minibuses would provide a “last mile” service, taking people within easy walking distance of their destination. In urban areas, all residential and business premises would be within 200m of a minibus stop, extending to 500m in suburban areas and 1km in rural areas. </p>
<p>At off peak times, the minibuses could replace some conventional bus services to avoid the inefficiencies created when a 70 passenger bus is used to transport only ten people on an evening or Sunday service.</p>
<p>To prevent abuse of the minibuses, passengers would scan their phones on boarding to confirm the booking. If they didn’t, a penalty could be collected automatically from their phone. CCTV could identify any disruptive passengers and refuse further bookings. Meanwhile, taxis would continue to prosper from those people willing to pay for a personal door-to-door service.</p>
<p>Public transit systems, as we know them today, would struggle to deliver a sustainable free service. But there’s a real possibility that the autonomous vehicles of tomorrow could do just that.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/97129/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Disney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It might not be effective now, but the development of self-driving vehicles could be a game changer for public transport services.John Disney, Senior Lecturer, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/931322018-03-20T04:19:08Z2018-03-20T04:19:08ZWho’s to blame when driverless cars have an accident?<p>The <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43459156">news</a> that an Uber self-driving vehicle has killed a pedestrian in the US has made headlines around the world. </p>
<p>It’s a reminder that the era of self-driving cars is fast approaching. Decades of research into advanced sensors, mapping, navigation and control methods have now come to fruition and autonomous cars are starting to hit the roads in <a href="https://www.cio.com.au/article/625560/driverless-vehicle-trial-start-sydney-olympic-park/">pilot trials</a>. </p>
<p>But partial or full autonomy raises the question of who is to blame in the case of an accident involving a self-driving car? In conventional (human-driven) cars, the answer is simple: the driver is responsible because they are in control. When it comes to autonomous vehicles, it isn’t so clear cut. </p>
<p>We propose <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.05050.pdf">a blockchain-based framework</a> that uses sensor data to ascertain liability in accidents involving self-driving cars. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-must-plan-the-driverless-city-to-avoid-being-hostage-to-the-technology-revolution-75531">We must plan the driverless city to avoid being hostage to the technology revolution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The parties to an accident</h2>
<p>Uber has <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-20/uber-suspends-self-driving-car-tests-after-fatal-crash/9565586">suspended self-driving car tests</a> as US authorities gather data about the circumstances surrounding the accident, which involved a car moving in autonomous mode with an operator behind the wheel.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"975776694857474048"}"></div></p>
<p>For partially autonomous vehicles, which still involve human control, assigning liability depends on what action led to the collision and whether it was based on decisions by the driver or the vehicle. For fully autonomous vehicles, the blame can be assigned to, or shared by, one of many parties – including the manufacturer, the service centre and the vehicle owner. </p>
<p>Manufacturers could be liable in the case of a design fault, the software provider for buggy system software, or the service centre for inadequate service to the vehicle. On the other hand, negligence liability might fall to the owner for failing to implement a software update from the manufacturer, or with the manufacturer if the accident could have been prevented by a human driver. </p>
<p>In this complex web of potentially responsible parties, how can the circumstances surrounding an accident be determined?</p>
<h2>Sensor data can inform liability decisions</h2>
<p>Fortunately, autonomous vehicles are information-rich platforms thanks to the range of sensors on board that track, monitor and measure everything. Navigation sensors determine routes. Situational awareness sensors detect obstacles, follow lane marks and read traffic signs. And performance measurement monitors track critical functions like tyre pressure and oil levels.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/before-hitting-the-road-self-driving-cars-should-have-to-pass-a-driving-test-90364">Before hitting the road, self-driving cars should have to pass a driving test</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It seems an obvious solution to consider data from the vehicle sensors for liability decisions. In the event of an accident, we can readily retrieve all the sensor data to reconstruct the scene. </p>
<p>However, the reality is more complicated. The challenge in this new ecosystem is that some of the potentially liable parties may also have disproportionate control over the sensor data. There is a risk that one of these parties may alter the data to steer the liability decision in its favour, using the wireless and USB interfaces that current vehicles already support. </p>
<p>That means we must not only record tamper-free sensor data, but also any interactions with the vehicle.</p>
<h2>A blockchain-based solution can prevent tampering</h2>
<p>Blockchain technology can ensure there is untampered evidence of the conditions of an accident to inform decisions about liability. The solution we propose uses permissioned blockchain so that only the relevant parties can record and access information from sensors. </p>
<p>These parties are split into two groups. </p>
<p>The first group is the “operational partition”. It includes autonomous vehicles, manufacturers, software providers, service centres and insurance companies. It records and shares a ledger with all relevant sensor data from right before and after an accident among all the participants. </p>
<p>The blockchain framework ensures that the sensor data and records of interactions stored in the ledger cannot be changed without detection. This provides a reliable audit trail of circumstances surrounding the incident, as well as any communication between the vehicle and the participating parties immediately prior to or following the accident. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-must-plan-the-driverless-city-to-avoid-being-hostage-to-the-technology-revolution-75531">We must plan the driverless city to avoid being hostage to the technology revolution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The second group is the “decision partition”. It involves the government transport authority, legal authority and the insurance company. This group is responsible for making liability decisions based on information from the operational group. </p>
<p>The framework ensures individual vehicle owners remain anonymous to parties in the operational group. Only the decision partition has access to vehicle owner identities for final liability decisions. This contributes to maintaining user privacy while providing transparent and reliable liability decisions. </p>
<h2>Sensors are everywhere</h2>
<p>Using blockchain for trust in sensor data goes beyond driverless cars, extending to smart homes, supply chains and smart grids. In <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7917634/">smart homes</a>, sensor data can be stored in a secure blockchain to be used for evidence in insurance liability claims such as break-ins or fires. </p>
<p>Blockchain can also be used for storing auditable sensor data in <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7987376/">supply chains</a> so that consumers can trace the origin and condition of their products reliably. Finally, <a href="https://powerledger.io">smart grids</a> can benefit from peer-to-peer transactions in blockchain involving their smart meters for trusted and distributed energy trading.</p>
<p>The “internet of things” is growing exponentially, and has introduced billions of sensors into our lives, generating unprecedented volumes of data. Blockchain will deliver sensed data we can trust.</p>
<p>This technology is still under development, but with lives at stake when autonomous vehicles hit the road in increasing numbers, we must ensure that the liable party is held to account when things go wrong.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93132/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Raja Jurdak receives funding from from QLD Government, Federal Department of Environment, Gordon Moore and Betty Foundation. Raja Jurdak is a Senior Member of the IEEE</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Salil Kanhere receives funding from Australian Research Council, NSW Department of Industry, and the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science. Salil Kanhere is a Senior Member of the IEEE and ACM.</span></em></p>Sensors that monitor everything a self-driving vehicle does can help determine who is responsible in the case of an accident – the manufacturer, the service centre or the vehicle owner.Raja Jurdak, Research Group Leader, Distributed Sensing Systems, CSIROSalil S. Kanhere, Associate professor, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/884442018-01-03T11:25:06Z2018-01-03T11:25:06ZTo get the most out of self-driving cars, tap the brakes on their rollout<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199509/original/file-20171215-17848-z746fp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=700%2C1437%2C3664%2C2604&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It would be better if people weren't afraid of self-driving cars.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/self-driving-car-scared-human-face-289636868">mato181/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Every day about <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dot-releases-new-automated-driving-systems-guidance">100 people</a> die in car crashes on U.S. roads. That death toll is a major reason why both <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/selfdrive">Congress</a> and the <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dot-releases-new-automated-driving-systems-guidance">Trump administration</a> are backing automotive efforts to develop and deploy self-driving cars as quickly as possible.</p>
<p>However, officials’ eagerness far exceeds the degree to which the public views this as a serious concern, and overestimates the public’s willingness to see its driving patterns radically altered. As those of us involved in studies of technology and society have come to understand, foisting a technical fix on a <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/americans-want-humans-driverless-cars-congress-doesnt-678641">skeptical public</a> can lead to a backlash that sets back the cause indefinitely. The backlash over nuclear power and genetically modified organisms are exemplary of the problems that arise from rushing technology in the face of public fears. Public safety on the roads is too important to chance consumer backlash.</p>
<p>I recommend industry, government and consumers take a more measured and incremental approach to full autonomy. Initially emphasizing technologies that can assist human drivers – rather than the abilities of cars to drive themselves – will somewhat delay the day all those lives are saved on U.S. roads. But it will start saving some lives right away, and is more likely to avoid mass rejection of the new technology.</p>
<h2>Not so fast</h2>
<p>Most Americans are <a href="https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/2012TrafficSafetyCultureIndex.pdf">indifferent</a> to what officials and safety advocates see as a serious problem. They <a href="https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2017/12/13/16770632/university-of-evansville-aces-plane-crash">react in horror to the deaths</a> of even a few dozen passengers in a <a href="https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=21274">relatively infrequent airline crash</a> but think little about the 100 lives lost daily from driving. The rewards from driving, such as personal freedom and convenience, overwhelm fears. In fact, most people believe their driving skills are <a href="http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/when-it-comes-to-driving-most-people-think-their-skills-are-above-average.html">better than average</a>, making them more likely to think they’ll avoid the tragedies that befall others.</p>
<p>As a result, the push for autonomous driving on the basis of improved safety is a solution to a situation the public doesn’t consider a serious problem. We know from the studies of <a href="http://changingminds.org/explanations/meaning/ten_risk-perception_factors.html">psychologist Paul Slovic</a> that the public is very uncomfortable with novel technologies that cede human control to machines. This is particularly true, in a phenomenon called “<a href="https://www.caranddriver.com/features/autonomous-cars-how-safe-is-safe-enough-feature">betrayal aversion</a>,” when the benefits of technologies are overpromised and reality doesn’t appear to be consistent with those expectations. Unless self-driving cars can dramatically reduce fatalities, the public may remain skeptical.</p>
<h2>Serious safety concerns</h2>
<p>Surveys show the American public is far from sold on the safety benefits of autonomous vehicles. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center revealed that <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/10/04/americans-attitudes-toward-driverless-vehicle">more than half of the American public</a> would be worried about riding in an autonomous vehicle due to concerns over safety and the lack of control. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/10/04/automation-in-everyday-life/pi_2017-10-04_automation_3-05/"><img width="420" height="671" src="http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2017/10/03102012/PI_2017.10.04_Automation_3-05.png" class="attachment-large size-large" alt="Slight majority of Americans would not want to ride in a driverless vehicle if given the chance; safety concerns, lack of trust lead their list of concerns"></a></p>
<p>Another survey found that <a href="http://www.umich.edu/%7Eumtriswt/PDF/SWT-2016-8.pdf">only 15 percent of people</a> would prefer autonomous vehicles to traditional human-driven cars. It’s true that some groups (men, people with more education and people under 45) are less worried than others, but these differences of opinion are less significant than the overall public view. Aside from simply the fear of being in these vehicles without the option of control, much of the American public still relishes the joy of the driving experience.</p>
<p>Public fears may ease as people become familiar with self-driving cars, but this experience needs to be gained gradually over time. The mental chasm between having complete control over the vehicle to the complete absence of control is huge. <a href="http://www.consumerunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/cu-letter-on-AV-START-Act-for-Senate-markup-10-3-2017.pdf">Consumer advocates</a> are already warning public officials that federal laws and rules designed to hasten the movement to autonomy are too permissive, and risk triggering a public backlash.</p>
<p>A steady stream of crashes, both serious and minor, would simply reinforce public fears that self-driving cars are not safe. The media, sensitive to these fears, will be eager to cry betrayal when there is a contradiction between these accidents and the technology’s rationale. And politicians, wanting to be seen as protectors of public health, may promote a new “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/21/technology/self-driving-cars-washington-congress.html">Make America Drive Again</a>” movement.</p>
<p>To avoid public backlash or overreaction, industry and government should not rush, but rather move more deliberately toward deploying fully autonomous cars on U.S. roads. There is still much the industry can do in terms of cutting-edge technology to assist drivers. <a href="https://theconversation.com/some-of-the-best-parts-of-autonomous-vehicles-are-already-here-84029">Innovations such as adaptive cruise control</a> and automatic emergency braking already have <a href="http://www.consumereports.org/autonomous-driving/doubts-grow-over-fully-autonomous-car-tech/">considerable public support</a> and will work to acclimate the public to more advanced stages of driver autonomy.</p>
<p>Government and industry are right to continue inventing and innovating technologies that can contribute to autonomous vehicles. But rather than racing to get self-driving cars on U.S. roads, they should slow the rollout down to a pace the public can adjust to. That way, the safety benefits can be both real and long-lasting.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88444/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jack Barkenbus does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If government and industry overhype autonomous vehicles, the public may expect too much, be disappointed and reject the new technology.Jack Barkenbus, Visiting Scholar, Vanderbilt Institute for Energy & Environment, Vanderbilt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/879722017-12-01T00:39:23Z2017-12-01T00:39:23ZWhy Silicon Valley wants you to text and drive<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196794/original/file-20171128-28866-sv5qh1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Tech companies want to reduce conflict between texting and driving.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/texting-while-driving-car-irresponsible-man-719930443">Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As self-driving cars come closer to being common on American roads, much of the rhetoric promoting them has to do with safety. <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-data-shows-traffic-deaths-77-percent-2015">About 40,000 people die</a> on U.S. roads every year, and driver errors are linked to <a href="https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812115">more than 90 percent of crashes</a>. But many of the biggest advocates of autonomous vehicles aren’t car companies looking to improve the safety of their existing products. Huge backing for self-driving technologies is coming from Silicon Valley giants like <a href="https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/">Google</a> and <a href="https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/22/apple-research-self-driving-cars/">Apple</a>.</p>
<p>Those of us who have studied the relationship between technology and society tend to look more carefully at the motivations behind any technological push. In this case, it’s clear that in addition to addressing safety concerns, Silicon Valley firms have a strong incentive to create a new venue for increasing the use of their digital devices. Every minute people spend on their mobile phones provides data – and often money – to tech companies.</p>
<p>At present, digital devices and driving are in conflict: There are serious, often fatal, consequences when <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving">drivers use smartphones to talk or to text</a>. Regulators and safety advocates look to resolve that conflict by banning phone use while driving – as has happened in <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/cellular-phones-use-and-texting-while-driving-laws.aspx">virtually every state</a>. But the tech companies are taking a different approach. The obvious answer for Silicon Valley is creating an automobile in which continuous cellphone use no longer poses a threat to anyone.</p>
<h2>Not a new idea</h2>
<p>The idea of a car so capable a driver is not needed isn’t new. As far back as the 1950s, the Saturday Evening Post ran an illustration imagining a family playing a board game (in a convertible!) as the car conducts itself down the road. When self-driving cars actually take to the streets in large numbers, today’s families likely won’t be playing Scrabble – though Words With Friends and other mobile games are a near certainty. Every passenger is likely to be using a mobile device.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=607&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=607&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=607&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=763&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=763&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/195880/original/file-20171122-6027-1syyjk2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=763&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A self-driving car depicted in the 1950s.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Saturday Evening Post</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In recent years, the amount of time adults spend on their mobile devices (beyond actual phone calls) has grown rapidly. At the moment, it’s <a href="https://hackernoon.com/how-much-time-do-people-spend-on-their-mobile-phones-in-2017-e5f90a0b10a6">around four hours a day</a> for the average adult in the U.S. However, that rapid growth is likely to slow down as people run out of time that’s available for them to use their devices.</p>
<p>Unless, of course, there’s a new block of time that suddenly opens up. The average American now spends <a href="http://www.newsroom.aaa.com/2016/09/americans-spend-average-17600-minutes-driving-year/">about 48 minutes in a car every day</a>, a sizable opportunity for increased cellphone use.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Uj-rK8V-rik?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Chris Urmson, then director of Google’s self-driving car program, discusses Google’s efforts to advance autonomous vehicles.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Chris Urmson, former director of Google’s self-driving car project, made this interest clear in a 2016 talk, saying that autonomous vehicles offer the “exciting” possibility of creating “<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-rK8V-rik">another room for you</a>” where, among other activities, you can watch videos. The investment analysts at Morgan Stanley have talked about autonomous cars becoming a “<a href="http://www.investors.com/news/technology/apple-alphabet-could-gain-if-self-driving-cars-are-4th-video-screen/">fourth screen</a>” in Americans’ lives (in addition to the home TV, personal computer and mobile phones or tablets). Perhaps the most explicit declaration of this interest came from Jia Yueting, co-founder of the budding Chinese automaker LeEco, when he said, “We see the car in the future as <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autoshow-beijing-china-leeco-insight-idUSKCN0XL11X">an extension of the internet</a>, another entry point for us to sell web-based content and services.”</p>
<p>So as the public conversation around autonomous cars highlights the safety advantages, don’t forget the tech industry’s powerful desire for more profits, which goes well beyond simply saving us from ourselves.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87972/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jack Barkenbus does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Why do tech companies care so much about self-driving cars? If drivers no longer need to pay attention to the road, they can use their mobile devices even more.Jack Barkenbus, Visiting Scholar, Vanderbilt Institute for Energy & Environment, Vanderbilt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/840372017-10-06T00:55:30Z2017-10-06T00:55:30ZAre self-driving cars the future of mobility for disabled people?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186318/original/file-20170918-24089-1jhnwat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A self-driving shuttle at Texas A&M.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.preciouspixels.org">Swaroopa Saripalli</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Self-driving cars could revolutionize how disabled people get around their communities and even travel far from home. People who can’t see well or with physical or mental difficulties that prevent them from driving safely often rely on others – or local government or nonprofit agencies – to help them get around.</p>
<p>Autonomous vehicle technology on its own is not enough to help these people become more independent, but simultaneous advances in <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603899/machine-learning-opens-up-new-ways-to-help-disabled-people/">machine learning</a> and <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/03/23/facebook-accessibility-people-with-disabilities/82026554/">artificial intelligence</a> can enable these vehicles to understand spoken instructions, observe nearby surroundings and communicate with people. Together, these technologies can provide independent mobility with practical assistance that is specialized for each user’s abilities and needs.</p>
<p>A lot of the necessary technology already exists, at least in preliminary forms. Google has asked a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/blind-man-sets-out-alone-in-googles-driverless-car/2016/12/13/f523ef42-c13d-11e6-8422-eac61c0ef74d_story.html">blind person to test its autonomous vehicles</a>. And Microsoft recently released an app called “<a href="https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/seeing-ai/">Seeing AI</a>” that helps visually impaired people better sense and understand the world around them. “Seeing AI” uses <a href="https://theconversation.com/removing-gender-bias-from-algorithms-64721">machine learning</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/teaching-machines-to-understand-and-summarize-text-78236">natural language processing</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQLcDmfmGB0">computer vision</a> to understand the world and describe it in words to the user. </p>
<p>In the <a href="http://unmanned.tamu.edu">lab I run</a> at Texas A&M, along with the <a href="http://tti.tamu.edu">Texas A&M Transportation Institute</a>, we are developing protocols and algorithms for people with and without disabilities and autonomous vehicles to communicate with each other in words, sound and on electronic displays. Our self-driving shuttle has given rides to 124 people, totaling 60 miles of travel. We are finding that this type of service would be more helpful than current transportation options for disabled people.</p>
<h2>Paratransit today</h2>
<p>Under the <a href="https://www.ada.gov/pubs/ada.htm">Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990</a>, all public transit agencies must offer transportation services to people with physical handicaps, visual or mental conditions or injuries that prevent them from driving on their own. In most communities, this type of transport, typically called “<a href="http://nationalrtap.org/adatoolkit/ADA-Complementary-Paratransit">paratransit</a>,” is sort of like an extra-helpful taxi service run by public transit. Riders make reservations in advance for rides to, say, grocery stores and medical appointments. The vehicles are usually wheelchair-accessible and are driven by trained operators who can help riders board, find seats and get off at the right stop.</p>
<p>Like taxis, paratransit can be costly. A <a href="http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/650079.pdf">Government Accountability Office report from 2012</a> provides the only reliable nationwide estimates. Those numbers suggest that per trip, paratransit costs three to four times what mass transit costs. And the costs are increasing, as are the <a href="http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/650079.pdf">number of people</a> needing to use paratransit. At the same time, federal, state and local <a href="http://www.metro-magazine.com/resources/images/paratransit-1.pdf">funding for transit authorities has stagnated</a>.</p>
<p>In an attempt to meet some of the demand, many communities have reduced the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052403749.html">geographic areas</a> where paratransit is available and asked disabled people to use mass transit when possible. Other places have <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2016/09/16/uber-lyft-partner-with-city-to-offer-paratransit-customers-on-demand-service-in-boston/">experimented with on-demand ride-hailing services</a> like Uber and Lyft. But in many cases the drivers are not trained to help disabled people, and the vehicles are not usually wheelchair-accessible or otherwise suitable for certain riders.</p>
<h2>A possible solution</h2>
<p>Autonomous shuttles, like the one we’re testing on the Texas A&M campus, can be a solution for these problems of access and funding. We envision a fully integrated system in which users can connect to the dispatching system and create profiles that include information on their disabilities and communications preferences as well as any particular frequent destinations for trips (like a home address or a doctor’s office).</p>
<p>Then, when a rider requests a shuttle, the system would dispatch a vehicle that has any particular equipment the rider needs, like a wheelchair ramp or extra room, for instance, to allow a service dog to travel.</p>
<p>When the shuttle arrives to pick up the rider, it could scan the area with lasers, cameras and radar to create a 3-D map of the area, merging those data with traffic and geographic information from various online sources like Google Maps and Waze. Based on all of those data, it would determine an appropriate boarding spot, identifying curb cuts that let wheelchairs and walkers pass easily as well as noting potential obstacles, like trash cans out for collection. The vehicle could even send a message to the rider’s smartphone to indicate where it’s waiting, and use facial recognition to identify the correct rider before allowing the person to ride.</p>
<p>During boarding, the ride and when the rider reached the destination, the vehicle could communicate any relevant information – such as estimated arrival time or details about detours – by interacting with the rider as appropriate and listening to the responses, or by displaying text on a screen and accepting typed input. That would allow the rider and the shuttle to interact no matter what the passenger’s abilities or limitations might be.</p>
<p>In our lab we are exploring various elements of rider-assistance systems, including automated wheelchair ramps and improved seating arrangements for multiple wheelchair-using passengers. We are also studying elements that affect safety, as well as riders’ trust in the vehicles. For example, we are currently developing machine-learning algorithms that <a href="https://www.osha.gov/Publications/Safe_Driving_Practices.pdf">behave like good human drivers</a> do, mimicking how humans respond to unforeseen circumstances.</p>
<p>Self-driving cars present fundamentally new ways to think about transportation and accessibility. They have the potential to change neighborhoods and individuals’ lives – including people who are disabled and often both literally and figuratively left behind. With proper planning and research, autonomous vehicles can provide even more people with significantly more independence in their lives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84037/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Srikanth Saripalli does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Combining machine learning, artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles could revolutionize how people with disabilities get around their communities.Srikanth Saripalli, Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering, Texas A&M UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/841272017-10-03T18:45:41Z2017-10-03T18:45:41ZDriverless vehicles could bring out the best – or worst – in our cities by transforming land use<p>The convergence of <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Technology-and-the-City-Systems-applications-and-implications/Yigitcanlar/p/book/9781138826700">technology and the city</a> is seen as a possible remedy for the challenging issues of urbanisation. Autonomous vehicles are among the most popular of many <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07293682.2015.1019752">smart city solutions</a>. Also known as <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-pedal-to-the-metal-for-driverless-cars-71936">driverless car technology</a>, it could reshape our cities.</p>
<p>One recent <a href="https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf">prediction</a> is that by 2040 these vehicles will account for up to half of all road travel. A growing number of studies are exploring autonomous-vehicle-induced transport disruptions – “<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11116-017-9802-2">trip generation impacts</a>”. It’s suggested these vehicles could:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>decrease private motor vehicle ownership, congestion and air pollution;</p></li>
<li><p>increase ride sharing, road safety, access and mobility;</p></li>
<li><p>redesign or eliminate traffic signals; and</p></li>
<li><p>improve mobility for people who are “<a href="http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/7/696">transport-disadvantaged</a>”.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-pedal-to-the-metal-for-driverless-cars-71936">It’s pedal to the metal for driverless cars</a></em></p>
<hr>
<p>Less research has been done on the effects on <a href="http://fpdl.coss.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/imported/storage/original/application/abfcc477779d0bc0ea825c8011011939.pdf">urban landscapes and the development patterns</a> of our cities. Every change in transport technology – from horse cart to coal-powered train to street car to automobile – has great impacts on our cities. </p>
<p>So, what might autonomous-vehicle-induced changes look like? What are their likely rebound effects on mobility? </p>
<h2>Freeing up road space for other uses</h2>
<p>Road networks on average occupy about <a href="https://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/ch6c1en.html">30% of a city’s land area</a> in developed countries. </p>
<p>In theory, autonomous vehicles can use road networks more efficiently and thus free up some road space if trip generation rate and population growth are held constant. This space can be redesigned for a whole new spectrum of social functions, street trees, walkways or bike lanes. </p>
<p>However, it is likely these vehicles will enable previously suppressed trips to be taken. The resulting increase in traffic volume will reduce the potential to free up road space for other uses.</p>
<h2>Turning parking lots into social uses</h2>
<p>Autonomous vehicles will reduce and potentially eliminate the need for the significant amount of space <a href="https://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/ch6c1en.html">set aside for parking</a> in high-demand urban areas. </p>
<p>In these areas of high-value property, mandatory parking supply requirements will have to change. A reduction in parking lots has the potential to transform urban cores, as these spaces can be used for other activities — such as parks, more high-value activities, or affordable housing.</p>
<p>Business uplift resulting from higher-density activities is then entirely feasible (akin to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economies_of_agglomeration">agglomeration economies</a> in cities). This can create more mixed-use and transit-oriented development, accelerate a trend towards inner-city living and make these areas more efficient, productive and liveable. </p>
<h2>Redesigning building and street interfaces</h2>
<p>With an autonomous-vehicle-dominated city, buildings and development will have to adapt to new patterns of traffic flow. They will need to be designed for door-to-door services – mainly accommodating the drop-offs and pick-ups at each and every site. </p>
<p>High-volume sites will need a bespoke interface for multiple autonomous vehicles, while lower-volume sites will no longer need kerbside parking for each development. </p>
<p>This scenario offers much potential to free up kerb space for other uses. </p>
<h2>Transforming fuel stations into new land uses</h2>
<p>Autonomous vehicles are largely envisaged as electric vehicles charged at their overnight parking spaces. The implication is that eventually, once these vehicles dominate road transport, fuel stations will not be needed on the streets.</p>
<p>These locations will require remedial environmental treatment for conversion to other land uses. But once that’s done, this will open the way to alternative uses for the former fuel stations in all neighbourhoods — more convenience stores or online shopping click-and-collect locations? </p>
<p>This raises the question of what would be an optimal productive use for such high-profile, highly accessible sites.</p>
<h2>Converting domestic garage spaces in suburbia</h2>
<p>Some visions of pooled/shared ownership of autonomous vehicles suggest we will have no need to own private motor vehicles. So we will no longer need to park and garage vehicles in residential dwellings.</p>
<p>This could transform a substantial share of housing stock, with garages converted to other uses such as studios, rented short-term lodging, or granny flats. </p>
<p>In theory, driveways will no longer be needed either. These could be turned into greened front yards, spaces for children to play and residents to walk and meet their neighbours. </p>
<p>Alternatively, however, if the space once used for garages and access ways becomes available for buildings, this could exacerbate the trend toward <a href="https://theconversation.com/size-does-matter-australias-addiction-to-big-houses-is-blowing-the-energy-budget-70271">larger environmentally inefficient homes</a>.</p>
<h2>Increasing urban sprawl</h2>
<p>Autonomous vehicles have the potential to induce more urban sprawl, as more effortless travel becomes available to more people. This may lead to a rethinking of the convenience of proximity to the city and major employment centres.</p>
<p>Low-cost housing on the urban fringes has been a major driver of sprawl in cities. </p>
<p>By making travel cheaper and more convenient, autonomous vehicles might make the economics and practicality of sprawl more attractive.</p>
<h2>Changing property values, planning controls and land supply</h2>
<p>While “location, location, location” will remain relevant, autonomous vehicles should act to inflate property values in some neighbourhoods and depress values in others. </p>
<p>Easier commutes in particular will have an impact on residential property prices, and might shift preferences from properties in urban centres to those in suburban areas. </p>
<p>While suburbanisation might speed up, densification of urban cores might also be enhanced. We might see people with very distinctive lifestyles preferring these different locations.</p>
<p>Planning controls and land supply will be key instruments to control the balance between greenfield and infill developments. We need to consider how these controls are applied in this new environment to maximise social and economic benefits.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-must-plan-the-driverless-city-to-avoid-being-hostage-to-the-technology-revolution-75531">We must plan the driverless city to avoid being hostage to the technology revolution</a></em></p>
<hr>
<h2>How planners will manage the disruption of land use</h2>
<p>Through the convergence of automation, electrification and ride-sharing technologies, autonomous vehicles could significantly reshape real estate, urban development and city planning — as the automobile did in the last century. </p>
<p>This transformation also creates an opportunity for planners to make our cities more citizen-centred by bringing back the <a href="http://blogs.worldbank.org/sustainablecities/human-scale-public-urban-areas">human-scale</a> and <a href="http://www.urbanecology.org.au/topics/walkablecities.html">walkable city</a> practices that motor vehicle domination removed. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wai4ub90stQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Urbanist Jeff Speck discusses how we can make our cities more walkable and more pleasant.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>How well prepared are urban planners, however, to mitigate the disruptive impacts on our cities? Do we yet even understand what these disruptions and their implications are?</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-future-world-full-of-driverless-cars-seriously-64606">A future world full of driverless cars … seriously?</a></em></p>
<hr>
<p>Urban planning as a profession is largely unprepared for autonomous vehicles. Planners need to be aware, smart and proactive about the potential impacts, particularly in terms of the potential for renewed urban sprawl. </p>
<p>A future involving widespread use of autonomous vehicles presents both land-use opportunities and challenges. Progressive outcomes will require an objective assessment of their complex land-use, economic and community influences on our evolving cities.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84127/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s clear autonomous vehicles will disrupt our cities, their land use and planning. Whether they make urban life better or worse depends on how well we anticipate and adapt to their impacts.Tan Yigitcanlar, Associate Professor of Urban Planning and Development, Queensland University of TechnologyGraham Currie, Professor of Public Transport, Director Public Transport Research Group, Director Monash Infrastructure, Adjunct Professor, Monash Art Design and Architecture, Monash UniversityLiton Kamruzzaman, Senior Lecturer in Transport Planning, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/806652017-08-31T00:06:06Z2017-08-31T00:06:06ZSmart cities present risks, opportunities<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184076/original/file-20170830-24226-m0eci6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=523%2C781%2C4857%2C2795&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Disruptive technology is starting to transform our cities, societies and lives.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/527442925?src=2KXJNQc5drJACc2hzk8x9A-1-48&size=huge_jpg">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Emergent technologies are poised to radically change how we work and live. They will transform our cities and workplaces, shifting jobs and entrepreneurship in new directions, and spur new ways to manage our lives. All of society will be affected, up to and including how we interact with machines themselves. </p>
<p>Sophisticated machines and applications that communicate online will accelerate demand for broadband internet and challenge existing information and telecommunication norms.</p>
<p>All of this will require ongoing discussions about security, infrastructure and open-data policy and planning. We now need action. We must move past: “We know it’s coming and have to do something” to “Here is how we can implement and collaborate to make it happen.”</p>
<p>As a researcher focused on digitalization of cities for 20 years, I have authored two <a href="https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/network-society/27231">books</a> and multiple <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sylvie_Albert">articles</a>. I have led teams of consultants to develop intelligent communities across Canada, and been the chief jurist for the International Intelligent Community Awards for the last 12 years.</p>
<p>Here’s why I believe we’re about to start turning these visions into reality:</p>
<h2>Robots and AI</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/08/06/future-of-jobs/">Robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) will “permeate a large part of our daily life by 2025</a> and affect most of our industries,” according to the Pew Research Center. We see some of these changes today.</p>
<p>Robots already perform tasks as diverse as dispensing frozen yogurt in malls, monitoring rail systems and keeping millions of elevators running smoothly. IBM’s Watson AI technology is used in health care to analyze DNA and help us determine trends and future options for our health.</p>
<p>Wearable fitness devices with personal plans link us to team members to set and achieve group goals (I call these personal nagging devices). I have a robot to vacuum my floors (I love it) and I am closely watching the progress of personal robot assistants with amazing capabilities already being showcased around the world.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mI58DU1hu14?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Honda demonstrates its ASIMO robot and other technology to students in Silicon Valley. (Handout)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I’d love to have Honda’s <a href="http://asimo.honda.com/">ASIMO</a> at my faculty’s front entrance to answer questions and be a tutor for students. </p>
<h2>Mobile devices and Internet of Things</h2>
<p>Over the next five years, <a href="https://www.ericsson.com/en/mobility-report?gclid=COfm7OTG99QCFRO4wAodPn8DTg">more than a million new mobile broadband subscribers will be added per day</a> worldwide, Ericsson’s 2017 mobility report estimates. More people have multiple mobile phone subscriptions, and more will choose mobile instead of conventional wired, landline phones. </p>
<p>Desktop computer demand is now flat in contrast to growing demand for tablets, laptops, drones, smartphones and other mobile gadgets, causing broadband internet subscriptions to increase exponentially. This will strain our broadband infrastructure as we expand the Internet of Things, in which every object has a wireless chip that connects it to everything else.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3598917">number of connected objects</a> — including sensors in cars, wearable devices, electricity and gas meter readers in homes, point-of-sale terminals in businesses and drones — grew 31 per cent between 2016 and 2017, to 8.4 billion devices, according to Gartner analysts. And the number of devices is forecast to grow to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkanellos/2016/03/03/152000-smart-devices-every-minute-in-2025-idc-outlines-the-future-of-smart-things/#2ed47ace4b63">81 billion by 2025</a>, according to IDC research. </p>
<p>Demand for sensors in fixed locations such as our homes (security cameras and motion sensors, smart fridges, meter readers, etc.) continue to increase. They save money and labour, and make our lives easier and safer. </p>
<p>That volume of devices will give us a lot of data to analyze, which calls for improved policies on security and privacy as mobile sensors monitor our personal spaces and bodies for our activities and health care. </p>
<h2>Population, urban and automation growth</h2>
<p>The proportion of the <a href="http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/world-urbanization-prospects-2014.html">world’s population living in cities is expected to grow</a> from 54 per cent to 66 per cent by 2050, adding another 2.5 billion people to urban areas, the United Nations predicts. We must prepare by creating high-quality, sustainable communities through smart use of technology.</p>
<p>For example, we’re finally seeing more telework or home-based work. This has been possible for 20 years but slow to take hold, mostly due to our desire to hang on to old paradigms despite an increasing proportion of knowledge workers. Telework can limit stress on roads, families and result in decreased operating costs while lessening our carbon footprint.</p>
<p><a href="http://about.att.com/newsroom/2017_network_predictions.html">AT&T’s predictions</a> for automation, growth and change are staggering. Tasks performed by bots grew 200 per cent over the past year and are expected to triple this year. This could be scary for cities that are job creators, but bots could also improve quality of life, acting as <a href="http://www.roboticstrends.com/hub/category/personal">personal robot assistants</a>.</p>
<p>Of course, technology has good and bad sides. Drones can pose threats to privacy but also have benefits: AT&T uses them for cellphone service in disaster areas, new four-rotor “quadcopter” drones safely provide imagery to firefighters and Airbus uses drones for airplane safety inspections. </p>
<p>These applications can be extended to communities and to meet industrial challenges in many sectors. Cities concentrate talent, which will bring new innovations, and we will need them to deal with the negative effects of expanding cities and the side-effects of increased technology use.</p>
<p>These trends suggest a third industrial revolution. Are our infrastructure and policies ready for it, and our industries prepared to innovate?</p>
<h2>Are we ready for the future?</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/innovation.aspx">Conference Board of Canada identified lags in innovation</a>, with Canada ranking 13 out of 16 in our peer group of industrialized countries. Much of that evaluation was based on our use of information and communication technologies (ICT), the main element in the next wave of change. Clearly, we can do better. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184081/original/file-20170830-24226-1uoffpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=568&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tries a virtual reality headset at Ubisoft in Montreal in this 2016 file photo. Canada is pursuing policies to foster smart cities and technology super-clusters.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.cpimages.com/fotoweb/cpimages_details.pop.fwx?position=3&archiveType=ImageFolder&sorting=ModifiedTimeAsc&search=trudeau%20and%20virtual%20and%20reality&fileId=7ED4E565C8CEED27AEA6EAB315B987A8EB1B023AB80A6779EEECB0F082709652BF4B180AE6F446F48ACB7DB1B8CDE7E37BF497D18515FAB7C57815DF9C7E71E1737892DD5BA3F690925AF21DC8828E055D9B15C804EE2539B910651727E2C0824659CEF5EB788C8390A073DE337E7E5944BFA1A3CE754FBE30C93DEE5BE2959F3491F7023DF41F9FC9E96454ECEB1D24">(THE CANADIAN PRESS/Ryan Remiorz)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Canada must evolve its policies if it’s going to develop new entrepreneurial ventures, infrastructure and help its citizens to adjust to the changes while sustainably managing our cities. </p>
<p>This isn’t only a government responsibility. It requires leadership at all levels that collaboratively plans for efficient, effective and safe use of automated systems such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, driverless cars and more.</p>
<p>For example, at least 33 U.S. states have passed or are considering <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx">driverless-car legislation</a>, and Michigan had its first <a href="https://mcity.umich.edu/our-vision/fast-facts/">driverless pizza delivery</a> in a public-private partnership with MCity. In Europe, Eindhoven already has driverless buses, and fleet transport trucking will be among the first to use the technology. Some technologies and applications will evolve on their own, as Uber did, but others will need concerted planning and action to flourish. </p>
<p>Some of the most interesting machine-learning applications will only be successful if we’re more open to sharing data. As a society, that’s been difficult. Canada has some of the world’s toughest <a href="http://fightspam.gc.ca/">spam regulations (CASL)</a>, which limits our ability to use data. Most of our data is in private databases with little open access.</p>
<h2>International leadership</h2>
<p>Canada has been a leader throughout the short history of digitalization, with pilot projects in every province as early as the mid-‘90s to demonstrate what smart communities could look like.</p>
<p>Despite a lack of a strong national agenda, Canadian communities have punched far above their weight, receiving international awards from the Intelligent Community Forum every year since 2002. Now, new federal leadership and initiatives promise to reignite a Canadian vision of digitalization.</p>
<p>Ottawa recently announced a <a href="http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/plan/cities-villes-eng.html">Smart Cities Challenge</a> that could help the country improve and innovate along with technology accelerator programs and geographic “technology super-clusters.”</p>
<p>These initiatives support researchers and entrepreneurs in next-generation fields such as quantum computing, optics and materials in Waterloo. That’s good news for Canada and an opportunity to mobilize a quadruple helix of stakeholders (academia, governments, private sector, consumers) to innovate.</p>
<p>Canada will get the chance to examine all of these topics at The Global Forum on Digitalization (GF) in Winnipeg from Oct. 1 to 3. The two-day discussion and networking event with global leaders is being held in Canada for the first time in its 25-year history. It’s the perfect opportunity to show how we’re preparing for the economic transformation looming ahead.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80665/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sylvie Albert is affiliated with the University of Winnipeg. I am co-chairing the Canadian scientific team for the Global Forum on Digitalization. The main purpose of the volunteer scientific group is to identify the right canadian stakeholders to attend the Forum and contribute to its discussion. The GF is an independent body based in France and managed by ITEMS International.</span></em></p>As disruptive technology increasingly enters our lives, it demands that we rethink and reorganize all aspects of work, life, and society.Sylvie Albert, Dean, Faculty of Business & Economics, University of WinnipegLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/755312017-04-27T20:06:41Z2017-04-27T20:06:41ZWe must plan the driverless city to avoid being hostage to the technology revolution<p>Trials of autonomous cars and buses have <a href="http://intellibus.rac.com.au/">begun on the streets of Australian cities</a>. Communications companies are moving to <a href="http://themelbourneengineer.eng.unimelb.edu.au/2017/01/melbourne-launches-world-first-connected-living-transport-lab/">deploy</a> the lasers, cameras and centimetre-perfect GPS that will <a href="https://theconversation.com/city-streets-become-a-living-lab-that-could-transform-your-daily-travel-71272">enable a vehicle to navigate the streets</a> of your town or city without a driver. </p>
<p>Most research and commentary is telling us how the new machines will work, but not how they might shape our cities. The talk is of the <a href="http://2015.internationaltransportforum.org/shared-economy">benefits of new shared transport economies</a>, but these new technologies will shape our built environment in ways that are <a href="https://theconversation.com/smart-cities-does-this-mean-more-transport-disruptions-63638">not yet fully understood</a>. There’s every chance that, if mismanaged, driverless technologies will entrench the ills of car dependency. </p>
<p>As with <a href="https://theconversation.com/taxi-driver-compensation-for-uber-is-unfair-and-poorly-implemented-64354">Uber and the taxi industry</a>, public sector planners and regulators will be forced to respond to the anger of those displaced by the new products the IT and automobile industries will bring to the market. But can we afford to wait?</p>
<h2>Three competing interests</h2>
<p>Three distinct groups are giving form to the idea of driverless vehicles. Each has its own corporate proponents and target markets, and its own, often competing, demands on citizens, regulators and planners. Each will make its own demands on our streets and public spaces.</p>
<p>First, the traditional car makers are adding “driverless” features to their existing products. They have no compelling interest in changing the current individual ownership model. Their target consumer is someone who values private vehicle ownership and enjoys driving. </p>
<p>These carmakers’ challenge is to win over drivers sceptical about “their” car doing things they can’t control, whether that is behaving differently in traffic or performing unescorted journeys. But, if successful, these new cars will make driving easier and so encourage more travel and ever-expanding suburbs. </p>
<p>Second, cashed-up IT disruptors like Google and Uber see new types of vehicles and new patterns of ownership as the basis for new transport economies. They want lightweight, utilitarian “robo-taxis” owned by a corporation and rented by the trip. Travellers will use phone apps or their next-generation successors to do this. This, in the jargon, is “<a href="https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/deloitte-review/issue-20/smart-transportation-technology-mobility-as-a-service.html">mobility as a service</a>”. </p>
<p>These companies’ ambition is to carve out a large niche in competition with private cars, taxis, conventional public transport and even non-motorised transport. Fleets of shared vehicles in constant circulation can reduce the number of individually owned cars and, in particular, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/disruption-ahead-personal-mobility-is-breaking-down-old-transport-divides-70338">need for parking</a>. </p>
<p>In some circumstances, this may support more compact urban forms. But while sustainability or social objectives might be part of the pitch, the profit motive remains dominant. </p>
<p>Third, public transport operators can see opportunities and challenges in driverless technologies. Already, Vancouver reaps the benefits of lower operating costs for its driverless elevated-rail system.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XtCyiSleO1g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">In Vancouver, the train pulls into a station with no driver on board.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Savvy operators understand that new vehicle technology is only valuable if it is integrated with traditional public transport services and with cycling and walking. This means central coordination. Vitally, it also requires control of the information platforms needed to provide multimodal mobility. </p>
<p>Such levels of planning and regulation conflict with Google’s “disruptive” free-market ambitions. European operators, who are in a more powerful position in economic and social life than their Australian counterparts, are already <a href="http://www.uitp.org/autonomous-vehicles">mobilising for this contest</a>.</p>
<h2>Whatever the technology, transport needs space</h2>
<p>Many claims for the benefits of driverless technologies rely on the complete transformation of the existing vehicle fleet. But the transition will not be smooth or uniform. Autonomous vehicles will face a significant period of mixed operation with traditional vehicles. </p>
<p>Freeways are likely to be the first roads on which the new vehicles will be able to operate. Promoters of these vehicles might join forces with the conventional car lobby to demand extra lanes. This would dash the hopes of many that driverless cars will <a href="https://www.inverse.com/article/12082-the-future-of-driverless-cars-where-we-re-going-we-ll-need-more-roads">lead to reduced space</a> for mass movement of cars. </p>
<p>After the freeways, the next objective will be to bring driverless cars, trucks and buses onto city streets. This will require complex systems of sensors and cameras. </p>
<p>The ambition is to allow all users to share road space much more safely than they do today. But, if a driverless vehicle will never hit a jaywalker, what will stop every pedestrian and cyclist from simply using the street as they please? Some analysts <a href="http://news.ucsc.edu/2016/10/pedestrians-self-driving-cars.html">are predicting</a> that the new vehicles will be slower than conventional driving, partly because the current balance of fear will be upset. </p>
<p>Already active travellers are struggling to assert their <a href="https://theconversation.com/contested-spaces-virtuous-drivers-malicious-cyclists-mindset-gets-us-nowhere-73371">right to the streets</a> of Australian cities. Just imagine how much worse it would be if a dominant autonomous-vehicle fleet operator demanded widespread fencing of roadways to keep bikes and pedestrians out of the way. </p>
<p>The presence of driverless cars cannot alter the fact that space for urban transport is severely constrained. For travel within and between compact urban centres, we will need more and better high-capacity mass transit as well as first-class conditions for walking and cycling. </p>
<p>The integration of conventional public transport networks with shared autonomous vehicles, large and small, offers many opportunities for a much improved service. But that will happen only if this objective is the major focus of investment, innovation, planning and regulation. </p>
<p>Researchers and policymakers need to move rapidly to gain a holistic and systematic understanding of the multiplicity of driverless-vehicle scenarios and the potential harm that some might contain. The technologies are not an unalloyed good, and governments will need to do more than just be “<a href="http://www.premier.sa.gov.au/stephen-mullighan-news-releases/337-sa-becomes-first-australian-jurisdiction-to-allow-on-road-driverless-car-trials">open for business</a>”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75531/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Stone receives funding from the University of Melbourne for work to engage the wider community with emerging research on the governance of autonomous vehicle technologies. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Crystal Legacy receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carey Curtis and Jan Scheurer do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s every chance that, if mismanaged, driverless vehicle technologies will entrench the ills of car dependency.John Stone, Senior Lecturer in Transport Planning, The University of MelbourneCarey Curtis, Professor of City Planning and Transport, Curtin UniversityCrystal Legacy, Australian Research Council (DECRA) Fellow and Vice Chancellor's Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT UniversityJan Scheurer, Senior Research Fellow, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/702452016-12-30T21:11:36Z2016-12-30T21:11:36ZFinding trust and understanding in autonomous technologies<p>In 2016, self-driving cars went mainstream. Uber’s autonomous vehicles <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/09/14/uber-self-driving-cars-pittsburgh/">became ubiquitous</a> in neighborhoods where I live in Pittsburgh, and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/california-stops-uber-self-driving-cars_us_585bda66e4b0d9a594573319">briefly in San Francisco</a>. The U.S. Department of Transportation issued <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/AV%20policy%20guidance%20PDF.pdf">new regulatory guidance</a> for them. Countless <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf2654">papers</a> and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/technology/should-your-driverless-car-hit-a-pedestrian-to-save-your-life.html">columns</a> discussed how self-driving cars <a href="http://blog.caranddriver.com/self-driving-mercedes-will-prioritize-occupant-safety-over-pedestrians/">should</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/22/self-driving-cars-moral-dilemmas">solve</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/helping-autonomous-vehicles-and-humans-share-the-road-68044">ethical quandaries</a> when things go wrong. And, unfortunately, 2016 also saw the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fatal-crash-investigation.html">first fatality involving an autonomous vehicle</a>.</p>
<p>Autonomous technologies are rapidly spreading beyond the transportation sector, into <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aad9398">health care</a>, <a href="https://www.cybergrandchallenge.com/">advanced cyberdefense</a> and even <a href="http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/phalanx/">autonomous weapons</a>. In 2017, we’ll have to decide whether we can trust these technologies. That’s going to be much harder than we might expect.</p>
<p>Trust is complex and varied, but also a key part of our lives. We often trust technology <a href="http://jcr.sagepub.com/content/2/4/265">based on predictability</a>: I trust something if I know what it will do in a particular situation, even if I don’t know why. For example, I trust my computer because I know how it will function, including when it will break down. I stop trusting if it starts to behave differently or surprisingly. </p>
<p>In contrast, my trust in my wife is based on <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/259288">understanding her beliefs, values and personality</a>. More generally, interpersonal trust does not involve knowing exactly what the other person will do – my wife certainly surprises me sometimes! – but rather why they act as they do. And of course, we can trust someone (or something) in both ways, if we know both what they will do and why.</p>
<p>I have been exploring possible bases for our trust in self-driving cars and other autonomous technology from both ethical and psychological perspectives. These are devices, so predictability might seem like the key. Because of their autonomy, however, we need to consider the importance and value – and the challenge – of learning to trust them in the way we trust other human beings.</p>
<h2>Autonomy and predictability</h2>
<p>We want our technologies, including self-driving cars, to behave in ways we can predict and expect. Of course, these systems can be quite sensitive to the context, including other vehicles, pedestrians, weather conditions and so forth. In general, though, we might expect that a self-driving car that is repeatedly placed in the same environment should presumably behave similarly each time. But in what sense would these highly predictable cars be autonomous, rather than merely automatic?</p>
<p><a href="https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19790007441">There have</a> <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/001401399185595">been</a> <a href="http://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=823618">many</a> different <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.3.2.Beer">attempts</a> to <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a601656.pdf">define</a> <a href="http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/">autonomy</a>, but they all have this in common: Autonomous systems can make their own (substantive) decisions and plans, and thereby can act differently than expected. </p>
<p>In fact, one reason to employ autonomy (as distinct from automation) is precisely that those systems can pursue unexpected and surprising, though justifiable, courses of action. For example, <a href="https://deepmind.com/research/alphago/">DeepMind’s AlphaGo</a> won the second game of its recent Go series against Lee Sedol in part because of <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/03/googles-ai-viewed-move-no-human-understand/">a move that no human player would ever make, but was nonetheless the right move</a>. But those same surprises make it difficult to establish predictability-based trust. Strong trust based solely on predictability is arguably possible only for automated or automatic systems, precisely because they are predictable (assuming the system functions normally).</p>
<h2>Embracing surprises</h2>
<p>Of course, other people frequently surprise us, and yet we can trust them to a remarkable degree, even giving them life-and-death power over ourselves. Soldiers trust their comrades in complex, hostile environments; a patient trusts her surgeon to excise a tumor; and in a more mundane vein, my wife trusts me to drive safely. This interpersonal trust enables us to embrace the surprises, so perhaps we could develop something like interpersonal trust in self-driving cars?</p>
<p>In general, interpersonal trust requires an understanding of why someone acted in a particular way, even if you can’t predict the exact decision. My wife might not know exactly how I will drive, but she knows the kinds of reasoning I use when I’m driving. And it is actually relatively easy to understand why someone else does something, precisely because we all think and reason roughly similarly, though with different “raw ingredients” – our beliefs, desires and experiences. </p>
<p>In fact, we continually and unconsciously make inferences about other people’s beliefs and desires based on their actions, in large part by assuming that they think, reason and decide roughly as we do. All of these inferences and reasoning based on our shared (human) cognition enable us to understand someone else’s reasons, and thereby build interpersonal trust over time.</p>
<h2>Thinking like people?</h2>
<p>Autonomous technologies – self-driving cars, in particular – do not think and decide like people. There have been efforts, both <a href="http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=33607">past</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aab3050">recent</a>, to develop computer systems that think and reason like humans. However, one consistent theme of machine learning over the past two decades has been the enormous gains made precisely by not requiring our artificial intelligence systems to operate in human-like ways. Instead, machine learning algorithms and systems such as AlphaGo have often been able to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature16961">outperform human experts</a> by focusing on specific, localized problems, and then solving them quite differently than humans do.</p>
<p>As a result, attempts to interpret an autonomous technology in terms of human-like beliefs and desires can go spectacularly awry. When a human driver sees a ball in the road, most of us automatically slow down significantly, to avoid hitting a child who might be chasing after it. If we are riding in an autonomous car and see a ball roll into the street, we expect the car to recognize it, and to be prepared to stop for running children. The car might, however, see only an obstacle to be avoided. If it swerves without slowing, the humans on board might be alarmed – and a kid might be in danger.</p>
<p>Our inferences about the “beliefs” and “desires” of a self-driving car will almost surely be erroneous in important ways, precisely because the car doesn’t have any human-like beliefs or desires. We cannot develop interpersonal trust in a self-driving car simply by watching it drive, as we will not correctly infer the whys behind its actions. </p>
<p>Of course, society or marketplace customers could insist en masse that self-driving cars have human-like (psychological) features, precisely so we could understand and develop interpersonal trust in them. This strategy would give a whole new meaning to “<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118984390.ch1">human-centered design</a>,” since the systems would be designed specifically so their actions are interpretable by humans. But it would also require including novel <a href="http://stanford.edu/%7Enikmart/papers/hri16paper_CameraReady_small.pdf">algorithms</a> and <a href="http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1147&context=dissertations">techniques</a> in the self-driving car, all of which would represent a massive change from current research and development strategies for self-driving cars and other autonomous technologies.</p>
<p>Self-driving cars have the potential to radically reshape our transportation infrastructure in many beneficial ways, but only if we can trust them enough to actually use them. And ironically, the very feature that makes self-driving cars valuable – their flexible, autonomous decision-making across diverse situations – is exactly what makes it hard to trust them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70245/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Danks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The ethics and psychology of trust suggest ways we might learn to understand self-driving cars, but also show why doing so might be more challenging than we expect.David Danks, Professor of Philosophy and Psychology, Carnegie Mellon UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/636382016-08-09T04:24:11Z2016-08-09T04:24:11ZSmart cities: does this mean more transport disruptions?<p>A plethora of new and personalised ways of getting around cities are emerging – electric bikes, motorised scooters, electric vehicles, car sharing and re-interpretations of the taxi by Uber.</p>
<p>How might we realise the potential of these transport disruptions? How does the combination of culture, regulation and technology shape sustainable transport futures? The extent to which technologies align with social, political and policy norms is a critical factor in their uptake and success.</p>
<p>Technology is politically, socially and culturally mediated. Its success relies on how it relates to existing lifestyles and aspirations. Technologies need to be accommodated in the ways we want to move around cities. The most amazing technological intervention will quickly atrophy if it is disconnected from daily needs and desires.</p>
<p>Regulatory settings can impede or foster new technologies. We can make space for different ways of moving around – such as cycleways, footpaths and roads. We can <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/uber-melbourne-and-victoria-state-government-to-reform-transport-laws-to-close-loophole/news-story/d862ee0a972c49f244da2f9605e4cffd">prohibit</a> or <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/06/08/uber-legal-in-which-australian-states-crikey/">encourage</a> disruptive forces, as so starkly <a href="https://theconversation.com/uber-should-take-its-lead-from-thomas-cooks-battle-with-victorian-britain-59182">evident with Uber</a>. We can set tax and other pricing mechanisms, as incentives or disincentives for modes of transport.</p>
<p>Some argue that new technologies are so disruptive because they have no predecessor to show us the way. But examples are emerging that show us where society, regulation and technology have or have not aligned, underpinning their success or failure.</p>
<h2>Car sharing – an obedient disruption</h2>
<p>Car sharing in Australia’s inner cities has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/1-000-cars-and-no-garage-why-car-sharing-works-31179">phenomenally successful</a>. There are an estimated 50,000 car sharers across the country. </p>
<p>The disruptions of car sharing are mild: it draws on technologies and skills shared with other aspects of social life. The concept of sharing is disruptive but easily accommodated; regulation adapted quickly to the subtle shifts required. It is an obedient disruption, and this obedience is one of the pillars of its success.</p>
<p>Car sharing is technologically disruptive as it relies on smart technologies to function. It is booked online, unlocked by a smart card, automatically paid by credit card and invisibly monitored via GPS.</p>
<p>It is socially disruptive. Car sharing relies on people deferring or giving up car ownership. Importantly, it asks us to give up the emotional and cultural attachments we have to cars. Evidence is mounting that <a href="https://theconversation.com/delay-in-getting-driving-licences-opens-door-to-more-sustainable-travel-57430">millennials are swapping out the car</a> for the phone as a status symbol.</p>
<p>Car sharing does not significantly challenge regulatory frameworks or political interests. It does rely on parking space, though, and local governments have quickly developed <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08111146.2015.1077806">car-sharing policies</a> to balance the needs of sustainable transport with access to on-street and off-street parking. While providing dedicated parking space to car-share organisations has been <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/car-sharing-operators-cry-foul-as-melbourne-council-moves-to-up-parking-costs-20150723-gij72w.html">politically controversial</a>, the regulatory supports were easily identified and mobilised.</p>
<p>Car sharing is a case where the lifestyles, values, technologies and regulation are aligned – a sustainability success story.</p>
<h2>Personal mobility devices – a disruption in limbo</h2>
<p>Personal mobility devices, known as PMDs, are more disruptive and a less successful sustainable transport option thus far in Australia. These are personal, battery-powered or motorised modes of transport designed for an individual to use on footpaths or shared paths. They include <a href="http://www.segway.com/">Segway</a>, <a href="http://www.yikebike.com/">YikeBike</a> or two-wheel motorised <a href="https://www.razor.com/au/products/electric-scooters/">“Razor” scooters</a>. </p>
<p>These devices allow the rider to travel short distances quickly without physical effort. Their small size makes them easily transferable between transport. This means they can <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-unicycles-minifarthings-and-the-future-of-urban-transport-13331">bridge the “first and last mile”</a> – between home and transit and work.</p>
<p>Despite their popularity, which is visible on city streets, PMDs are unable to be <a href="http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/registration/unregistered.html">legally</a> ridden on roads, footpaths, shared paths or cycleways in most Australian states. They do not meet vehicle standards and cannot be registered or legally used on roads. </p>
<p>Most of these devices are too dissimilar from bicycles, even electric bikes, to be classed as bicycles. Motorisation and wheels also rule out their classification as a pedestrian.</p>
<p>With the exception of some devices for tourism, PMDs remain in limbo in most Australian states. There was a move in Queensland in 2013 when a <a href="http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Queensland-road-rules/Personal-mobility-devices.aspx">policy framework</a> to regulate the use of PMDs was implemented. These regulations specified what a PMD is and how/where it can be used.</p>
<p>PMDs were defined as pedestrians to be used in pedestrian environments. Strict rules applied. Riders must: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>not exceed 12 kilometres per hour; </p></li>
<li><p>be 12 years or over; and </p></li>
<li><p>wear a helmet. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>In short, regulatory settings were modified to allow these new forms of technology, though not without debate.</p>
<p>How might these means of moving about the city be accommodated or become part of ordinary transport? For these devices to be used as transport, they need to get people travelling faster than walking without compromising safety.</p>
<h2>Driverless cars – are we ready?</h2>
<p>The stuff of science fiction 50 years ago, some <a href="http://www.driverless-future.com/?page_id=384">technological optimists today predict</a> driverless cars will be in our cities within five years. Indeed, autonomous cars are already here. New cars have adaptive cruise control, lane departure warnings, collision avoidance and parking assist. </p>
<p>Robotic vehicles are increasingly common in agriculture and mining. With researchers turning their attention to the realities of life with driverless cars, regulation and social impact are once again emerging as key issues.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.au/current-projects/preparing-for-more-automated-road-and-rail-vehicles/?modeId=1064&topicId=1166">recent assessment</a> by the National Transport Commission of Australia found that 716 provisions from two conventions, 32 acts and 21 regulations need to be addressed before autonomous vehicles become commonplace. Fundamentally, legal and insurance frameworks need to rethink a driver, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/killer-robots-hit-the-road-and-the-law-has-yet-to-catch-up-49735">who is responsible</a> when there is no driver. </p>
<p>There are also considerable <a href="https://theconversation.com/data-mining-the-new-black-box-of-self-driving-cars-31685">privacy implications</a> of tracking and the ubiquitous sensing and data collection that these vehicles require. While the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-driverless-cars-still-need-driving-tests-62721">technology is almost there</a>, our policy frameworks are not quite there.</p>
<p>Research also shows that people are <a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/driverless-cars-inspire-both-fear-and-hope">not quite ready for autonomous cars</a>. Car makers are working in more sophisticated ways to ensure that autonomous cars <a href="https://theconversation.com/self-driving-cars-will-need-people-too-39835">talk to passengers</a>, telling them when they are and are not in control and what is around them.</p>
<p>Businesses, on the other hand, are increasingly ready for autonomous cars, especially through shared transport. In the US, General Motors has <a href="http://time.com/4166130/general-motors-lyft/">invested significantly</a> in <a href="http://qz.com/677394/self-driving-taxis-from-general-motors-and-lyft-will-hit-the-road-within-a-year/">ride-sharing business Lyft</a>. General Motors expects autonomous cars to be operating within ten years. </p>
<p>Uber is conducting its own <a href="http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/uber-to-trail-driverless-car-20160520-gozooh.html">trials of autonomous vehicles</a>. Increasingly, it appears that economic and social conditions are more likely to support <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5-cities-with-driverless-public-buses-on-the-streets-ri-1736146699">driverless buses</a>, at least short term.</p>
<p>Evidence is mounting that our cities, citizens, businesses and policymakers are getting ready for a future where transport technologies that are neither car nor public transport are commonplace. Mismatches remain between technology, social life and regulation, but their alignments, especially around shared transport, are proving successful.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>This article is based on an address by the author at the launch of the <a href="http://www.festivalofurbanism.com/about/">Festival of Urbanism</a> at the University of Sydney. These issues will be considered in a panel discussion, Urban Super Powers: Human-centred technology and city design of the future, at the university from 6-8pm on Thursday, August 11. For more details about this free public event, see <a href="http://www.festivalofurbanism.com/events-1/2016/6/24/urban-super-powers-human-centred-technology-and-city-design-of-the-future">here</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robyn Dowling receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>New technologies do not exist in a vacuum. To succeed, new transport technology needs to match the ways we want to move around cities and be accommodated by laws and regulations.Robyn Dowling, Professor and Associate Dean Research, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.