Automated Vehicles and People Living with a Disability: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions for Sustainable Mobility
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Opportunities for PLWD Based on Different AV Transport Modes
3.1.1. Personal AVs
3.1.2. Shared and Public Autonomous Transport
3.1.3. Influence of Automation Levels on User Expectations
3.2. Expected Benefits and Key Concerns
3.2.1. Anticipated Benefits
3.2.2. Main Concerns
3.3. Legal and Regulatory Considerations
3.3.1. Licensing and Regulatory Barriers
3.3.2. Employment and Work Accessibility
3.3.3. Privacy and Data Security
3.3.4. Policy and Regulatory Scenarios
3.4. Social Participation and Inclusion
3.4.1. Enhancing Mobility and Independence
3.4.2. Trust and Public Perception
3.5. Factors Influencing Adoption and Willingness to Use AVs
3.5.1. General Impressions of AVs Among PLWD
3.5.2. Pedestrian Interaction and Safety Considerations
3.5.3. Variability in Willingness to Use AVs Depending on Disability and Profile
3.5.4. Impact of First Interaction with AVs
3.6. Design Recommendations for Accessible AVs
3.6.1. Improving Vehicle Accessibility
3.6.2. Developing Appropriate Internal Human–Machine Interfaces
3.6.3. External HMIs and Pedestrian Safety
4. Discussion
4.1. AV as an Opportunity for PLWD
4.2. Challenges
4.3. Limitations and Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
AV | Automated vehicle |
eHMI | External human–machine interface |
HMI | Human–machine interface |
PLWD | People living with disability |
UWB | Ultra-wideband |
Appendix A
Authors | Country | Theme | Design | Impairment | AV Type | Nb Participant | Main Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agriesti et al. (2020) [57] | Finland | AVs’ impact on mobility and urban environment | Scenario-based approach | Not specified | Shared and private AVs | Not applicable | A positive influence of shared and private AV deployment on PLWD mobility is foreseen. |
Alessandrini et al. (2015) [25] | Italy | AV opportunities | Position paper | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | AVs would allow PLWD to use cars by removing the need to drive, and increase their comfort with smoother riding. |
Azizi Soldouz et al. (2020) [68] | Canada | PLWD’s views about AVs | Web-based survey | Visual impairment | Connected AVs | 352 | AVs are viewed to improve the independence of traveling by 78.30% of participants. Willingness to use and trust are affected by sociodemographic factors, mobility habits, past experiences, and concerns related to AVs. |
Bennett et al. (2019) [75] | UK | PLWD’s views about AVs | Interview | Ambulatory impairment | Driverless vehicles | 400 with ambulatory impairment 353 without impairment | Most frequent topics associated with AVs are different for participants without impairment (driver behavior (44%); unattractiveness (18%); software and control problems (21%); futuristic (17%)) and participants with ambulatory impairment (AVs are dangerous (30%); ambivalence (34%); AVs are helpful (36%)). Positive views about AVs positively influence willingness to travel in an AV. |
Bennett et al. (2019) [76] | UK | PLWD’s views about AVs | Interview | Intellectual impairment | Driverless vehicles | 177 | Most frequent topic associated with AVs: freedom (46%); fear (34%); curiosity (20%). Positive views about AVs positively influence willingness to travel in an AV. |
Bennett et al. (2020) [77] | UK | PLWD’s views about AVs | Interview | Visual impairment | Driverless vehicles | 211 | Most frequent topic associated with AVs: hope (37%); skepticism (24%); safety concerns (21%); affordability of AVs (18%). Positive views about AVs positively influence willingness to travel in an AV. |
Bennett and Vijaygopal, (2024) [64] | UK | Mobility and transportation technology needs of people with disabilities | Imagination workshop | People with ambulatory disabilities | Autonomous vehicles | 661 people with ambulatory disabilities | Self-reliant users favor assistive technologies that enhance independence, while older individuals with lower technology interest prefer familiar solutions. The study highlights the need for targeted marketing strategies and policy adaptations to address diverse mobility needs, emphasizing the growing demand for AV-integrated accessibility features and assistive technologies. |
Brewer and Kameswaran, (2018) [86] | USA | AV HMI | Design-based focus group | Visual impairment | Level 3 and Level 4 AVs | 15 | Design sessions to create an audio and a tactile artifact aimed at helping visually impaired drivers avoid an obstacle in the case of a controlled transition. Expressed interest in being able to interact naturally with the vehicle (i.e., talking to the vehicle naturally as if it were a human). |
Brinkley et al. [40] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Online survey | Visual impairment | Self-driving vehicles | 516 | Potential benefits are more frequently evaluated as likely to occur: reduction of crashes, reduced crash severity, improved fuel economy. Most frequent concerns regarding AVs: equipment failure, system confusion in unexpected situations, interaction with pedestrians. |
Brinkley et al. (2019) [90] | USA | AV HMI | Open road evaluation of an HMI | Visual impairment | Level 5 AV private or shared | 20 | Successful test of an interface designed to address potential issues relating to safety, cost, reliability, navigation, and accident response. |
Brinkley et al. (2020) [38] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Survey and focus groups | Blind visual impairment | Partially and fully autonomous vehicles | 516 (survey), 38 (focus groups) | Participants were generally positive about AVs but had concerns about accessibility, trust, and user interface. Suggested improvements in navigation and feedback systems to enhance usability and independence. |
Brinkley et al. (2018) [90] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Focus group | Visual impairment | Self-driving vehicles | 38 | AVs identified as a way of improving independence and saving time. Concerns about: safety, reliability, affordability of purchase and repair, interaction with conventional vehicles, not being considered during AV development, giving AVs parking guidance, orienting at the destination, finding AVs on return in a crowded space, verifying the arrival at the correct location, not having situation awareness during operation, seeking help in case of an accident, legal liability in case of an accident, and regulation preventing AVs from operating. Preferred interaction modalities with AVs: speech interaction and with smartphones. |
Brinkley et al. (2022) [91] | USA | AVs interaction | Literature review | Various disabilities, including mobility, visual, and cognitive impairments | Not applicable | The study highlights major accessibility barriers in current autonomous vehicle interfaces, such as reliance on touchscreens, lack of multimodal interactions, and inadequate voice-based controls. It emphasizes the need for inclusive HMIs that incorporate voice commands, haptic feedback, and gesture-based controls to better accommodate users with diverse disabilities. | |
Castillo et al. (2014) [89] | Brazil | AV HMI | Laboratory test of an algorithm | Physical impairment | “Unmanned autonomous car with a high level of autonomy” | 6 with physical impairment 13 without physical impairment | Development of a brain computer interface aiming at allowing AV users with physical impairment to choose a vehicle destination. |
Colley et al. (2019) [102] | Germany | eHMI | Literature review | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | Most of the publications about eHMI include only visual information, which could hinder communication with visually impaired pedestrians. |
Colley et al. (2020) [105] | Germany | eHMI | Virtual reality and interviews | Visual impairment | Not specified | 6 | Test of eHMI conveying auditory information or tactile information via smartphone. Preferences towards explicit messages from AV, spoken texts, and standardized messages across manufacturers. |
Cordts et al. (2021) [51] | USA | Accessibility needs and use preferences | Survey | Ambulatory, self-care, independent living, cognitive, hearing, and visual impairments | “Vehicles that can drive themselves without a human driver” | 468 | Most requested accessibility technologies: electronic display (49.4%); navigation app (45.3%); ramp/wheelchair access (40.4%). AVs most likely to be used as: paratransit (52.6%); personalized transport (48.1%); ridesharing service (32.5%). |
Costa et al. (2018) [37] | Portugal | Universal design and automation in vehicles | Scoping review | Not specified | From Level 0 to Level 5 | Not applicable | AVs from Level 4 would improve PLWD mobility. |
Deka & Brown, (2021) [69] | USA | Safety perception of AVs | Telephone survey | Users of mobility devices | Fully automated vehicles | 7.6% with ambulatory impairment among 1001 respondents | General population expect AVs to help people with ambulatory impairment, while people with ambulatory impairment expect AVs to decrease their safety as pedestrians. |
Dicianno et al. (2021) [23] | USA | AVs and accessibility for PLWD | Literature review | Various disabilities, including visual, cognitive, hearing, and mobility impairments | Automated vehicles | Not applicable | The research identified gaps in AV accessibility for people with disabilities and emphasized the need for universal design. It recommended conducting participatory studies and adjusting policies to improve usability. |
Emory et al., (2022) [58] | USA | AV policy | Literature review | Not specified | Shared and non-shared AVs | Not applicable | Literature review of policies aiming at equity in AV deployment, implying PLWD relates to vehicles’ physical accessibility and specific pricing. |
Epting, (2021) [48] | USA | Moral significance of AVs | Literature review | Not specified | Automated buses | Not applicable | In some cases, it would be beneficial to keep a driver or a service agent on board to provide care to PLWD. |
Etminani-Ghasrodashti et al. (2021) [53] | USA | PLWD’s view about AVs | Focus group | Physical impairment Visual impairment | Shared shuttles | 20 without impairment 4 with physical or visual impairment | Accessibility equipment requested: accessible payment system, information on the booking app about the exact pick-up point and its accessibility, mat on the floor to prevent guide dogs from sliding, option to adjust the pick-up point to accommodate needs, accessible built environment, and trained operators. |
Ferati et al. (2018) [81] | Norway | AV HMI | Position paper | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | Advocate for the use of universal design principles for the design of in-vehicle interaction. |
Fink et al. (2021) [61] | USA | AV policy, accessibility, and future directions | Literature review | Visual impairment | Fully autonomous vehicles | Not applicable | Current AV policies fail to adequately address the accessibility needs of blind and visually impaired users, increasing the risk of exclusion due to discriminatory regulations. The study recommends strengthening protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act, implementing universal design principles, and integrating smartphone-based multimodal interactions to enhance accessibility and user autonomy. |
Fink, Alsamsam et al. (2023) [62] | USA | User needs in fully autonomous ridesharing | Survey | Visual impairment | Fully Autonomous Vehicles | 187 participants with visual impairment | Users prefer less social interaction in fully autonomous vehicles compared to human-operated rideshares, but they still want to collaborate and provide input during the ride. Key needs include real-time updates on route progress, vehicle behavior, and destination information, with a strong preference for natural language interfaces over haptic feedback. |
Fink, Doore et al. (2023) [63] | USA | User-driven design of the Autonomous Vehicle Assistant to enable you to find your way around and get on board. | Survey and user interviews | Visual impairment | Fully Autonomous Vehicles | 90 participants included in the survey, and 14 blind and visually impaired individuals participated in the interviews. | The Autonomous Vehicle Assistant could be a good solution to allow people with visual impairment to find their way around, and get on board, and improve their autonomy. |
Goggin (2019) [46] | Australia | Communication surrounding AVs | Communication analysis | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | AVs associated with PLWD have been used in communication about AV development. |
Golbabaei et al. (2020) [72] | Australia | AV acceptance and intention to use | Systematic review of the literature | Mobility impairment | Fully autonomous vehicles | Not applicable | The intention to use AVs is higher for PLWD. |
Golbabaei et al. (2024) [45] | Australia | Designing and developing accessible autonomous vehicles | Systematic review of the literature | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | AVs could significantly improve mobility and inclusion for PLWD by enhancing access to work, healthcare, and social activities. The study recommends universal design principles, multimodal interaction (audio, tactile, visual), financial subsidies, and specialized AVs to ensure equitable transport solutions. |
Goralzik et al. (2022) [32] | Europe (21 countries) | Accessibility assessment of shared mobility services | Survey | Visual impairment Mobility impairment Multiple disabilities | Shared mobility services (ride pooling, microtransit, robotaxis, motorbike taxis, e-scooter sharing, bike sharing) | 553 individuals with disabilities | Microtransit, robotaxis, and ride pooling had the highest accessibility ratings, while motorbike taxis, e-scooter sharing, and bike sharing were seen as least accessible. None of the shared mobility services fully met the access needs of disabled users in their current form. |
Guerrero-Ibañez et al. (2023) [67] | Spain | Assistive self-driving car networks for disabled road users, developing a model using deep learning and wireless communication | Descriptive study with an experimental design | Visual impairment Hearing impairment Mobility impairment | Self-driving vehicles | Not applicable | Proposed a framework integrating assistive technology into self-driving vehicles to improve interaction with disabled pedestrians by developing a hand gesture recognition model and a disabled user identification system using wearable devices. |
Harkin et al. (2024) [66] | Germany | Perception of AVs | Focus group | People with walking disabilities | Not specified | 22 participants, including 3 people with walking disabilities | AVs are positively perceived due to their rule-abiding and cautious driving behavior, but concerns expressed about the lack of explicit communication and increased risks in mixed traffic (AVs and conventional vehicles). |
Harper et al. (2016) [60] | USA | Travel increase estimation | Miles traveled estimation | Adults with a “medical condition that makes it hard to travel” | Not specified | Not applicable | Estimation of an increase of 2.5% of miles traveled by adults with a medical condition making it hard to travel; their mobility increased with AVs to the level of the non-restricted population. |
Hwang et al. (2020) [39] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Focus group | Visual impairment Physical impairment | On-demand public transport | 13 with visual impairment 11 with physical impairment 9 transit services experts | AVs perceived as a way to increase freedom of travel and decrease traveling costs. Concerns about safety, accessibility, and adverse effects. |
Hwang & Kim, (2023) [47] | South Korea | Factors influencing the choice of autonomous vehicle transportation services | Survey | Visual impairment Physical impairment | Fully autonomous vehicles) for public transportation | 110 with physical disabilities and 36 with visual impairment | Individuals with disabilities who had a negative experience with public transit were more likely to prefer autonomous vehicle transportation services. The presence of an onboard human attendant significantly increased trust and the likelihood of choosing autonomous vehicles. |
Hwang et al. (2021) [56] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Focus groups and survey | Visual impairment Physical impairment | Fully autonomous vehicles) for public transportation | 150 individuals with disabilities (various physical and visual impairments) and 72 transportation professionals, policy makers, and caregivers | People with disabilities had high acceptance of AVs but emphasized accessibility, safety, and reliability concerns. They expressed frustration with current public transit services and saw AVs as a potential solution. |
Jeon et al. (2016) [36] | USA | AV challenges and opportunities | Position paper | Visual, auditory, cognitive, motor impairments | Low-speed urban shuttles | Not applicable | Impact of AVs on PLWD’s mobility would differ according to the level of automation, being higher for Levels 4 and 5. |
Kacperski et al. (2024) [44] | Germany | AV acceptance | Survey | Visual impairment | Connected and autonomous vehicle Level 5 | 114 with visual impairments and 117 without visual impairments | More positive AV attitudes in participants with visual impairments compared to those without visual impairments, mainly due to higher hopes for independence and optimistic views on safety and sustainability. |
Kassens-noor et al. (2020) [74] | USA | Willingness to use AVs | Onboard intercept survey | Mobility impairment | Autonomous buses and shuttles | 271 with mobility impairment among 1468 respondents | People with mobility impairment are less willing to ride AVs. |
Kassens-noor et al. (2021) [65] | USA | Perception and willingness to use AVs | Onboard intercept survey | Visual impairment, Mobility impairment | Autonomous buses and shuttles | 1861 public transit users in Michigan (40% with special needs) | People with special needs rely more on public transit. Visually impaired individuals are more willing to use public AVs, while those with mobility disabilities have concerns about safety and trust in automation. |
Kempapidis et al. (2020) [79] | UK | User experience | On-road experiment | Visual, coordination, dexterity, hearing, speech, and mobility impairments Chronic illness Other disabilities | Automated shuttles | 228 visual impairment, 3 chronic illness, 12 coordination or dexterity impairment, 16 hearing or speech difficulty, 60 mobility-related disability, 136 other disabilities, among a total of 419 | Positive experience and positive emotions during a journey on board an automated shuttle. |
Khan et al. (2022) [31] | USA | Planning AV introduction in current paratransit services | Modeling | PLWD eligible to paratransit | Shared AVs | Not applicable | A shared AV fleet, including accessible vehicles, could complement the actual paratransit system. |
Klinich et al. (2022) [83] | USA | Securement systems for wheelchair users | Literature review | Wheelchair users | Shuttles | Not applicable | Current wheelchair security systems are not all compatible with shared AVs. |
Kutela et al. (2025) [78] | USA | Impact of AVs on independence | Nationwide survey (Bayesian Network Analysis) | Not specified | Not specified | 4642 | AVs could enhance the independence of people with disabilities. Concerns include accessibility, system reliability, and affordability, which impact willingness to adopt AVs. The study recommends inclusive design, financial incentives, and policy measures to ensure AV accessibility for PLWD. |
Kuzio, (2021) [27] | USA | Legal framework surrounding AV use by PLWD | Legal analysis | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | AVs could increase PLWD’s mobility as they can be ridden like a regular car without the need to be able to drive and could make paratransit more flexible and cheaper. |
Mandujano Nava et al. (2017) [87] | Mexico | AV interior design | Design concept creation | Wheelchair users | “Modular mobile vehicle, autonomous and manually operated” | Not applicable | Description of the process of designing the concept of AVs allowing the boarding of wheelchair users. |
Martin, (2018) [29] | USA | AVs’ impact on social justice and environmental sustainability | Ecosocial parameters analysis | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | AV could increase PLWD’s mobility because they can be ridden like a regular car without the need to be able to drive, thanks to a loosening of driving restrictions. |
Miller et al. (2022) [34] | Singapore | Acceptance of shared AVs and communication needs | Survey and focused group discussions | Blindness Deafness Mobility impairments Autism | Shared AVs in public transport | 300 (survey), 53 (focus groups) | People with disabilities had positive attitudes toward shared autonomous vehicles but highlighted concerns about safety, accessibility, and trust. Essential features include live intercoms, visual/auditory cues, and wheelchair-friendly access. |
Ohnemus & Perl, (2016) [30] | Canada | AVs’ effect on land use | Position paper based | ‘Disabled elderly’ ‘Disabled’ | Shared and non-shared AVs | Not applicable | Disabled elderly would be more inclined to adopt shared AVs compared to private AVs as it would have a lower cost and risk. Shared AVs would offer an additional mobility option to PLWD unable to travel with fixed-route transit. |
Papa & Ferreira, (2018) [59] | UK | Societal consequences of AVs deployment | Scenario-based approach | “People with some form of health condition, disability, and visual impairment” | Fully automated vehicles | Not applicable | PLWD could benefit from AVs and digital technology associated with AVs as they could travel without the need to operate a vehicle and would benefit from the monitoring of their health status on board. |
Park et al. (2023) [54] | USA | AV interface | Phone interviews and focus group meetings | Older adults with cognitive impairment | AVs Level 5 | 14 with cognitive impairment and 9 caregivers | The AV interface could be customized based on the severity of cognitive impairment, use familiar terminology, include reminders, and adopt a navigation app-like design (e.g., Google Maps), with seamless page transitions for ease of use by individuals with cognitive impairments. |
Patel et al. (2021) [52] | USA | PLWD’s views about AVs | Focus group | Visual impairment Physical impairment | AVs integrated into the public transportation system | 3 with visual impairment 1 with physical impairment | Participants expressed accommodation needs related to the accessibility of equipment, the booking app, the built environment, and onboard assistance. |
Petrovic et al. (2022) [33] | Serbia | Perspective of the driving status | Survey | Physical impairment | AVs in public transport | 160 (80 drivers and 80 non-drivers with physical disabilities) | Non-drivers with physical disabilities are more likely to use autonomous vehicles than drivers. Trust, accessibility, and attitudes significantly impact AV acceptance. |
Ranjbar et al. (2022) [55] | Sweden | Vibrotactile guidance for trips with AVs | Case study using Wizard-of-Oz simulated AV | Hearing Visual impairment | Simulated AV (Wizard-of-Oz) | 15 (5 blind, 5 deafblind, 5 deaf participants) | Vibrotactile guidance improved independent navigation before, during, and after the trip. Participants valued technology but suggested enhancements such as different vibration intensities for critical information. |
Robert, (2021) [104] | USA | Interaction with AVs | Model presentation | Not specified | AVs from Level 4 | Not applicable | Need to be more inclusive in the view of human characteristics when designing interactions with AVs. |
Roundtree et al. (2020) [101] | USA | eHMI | Design guidelines based on a literature review about crossing behavior | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | Design guidelines related to the way AV intent should be communicated, messages’ sensorial modalities, visual displays’ position, messages conveyed, and message format. |
Son et al. (2019) [88] | Korea | AV HMI | AV HMI | Auditory impairment Visual impairment | “Fully autonomous vehicles” | Not applicable | Technical design of an interface meant to inform visually and auditory impaired users about vehicle self-diagnosis. |
Sultan & Thomas, (2020) [70] | UK | PLWD’s views about AVs | Focus group | People with epilepsy | “Fully autonomous vehicles” operated without a driving license | 8 people with epilepsy or caregivers | Concerns in case of a seizure and the stigma about being identified as epileptic AVs identified as a way to improve independence and freedom from licensing, and allowing the user to adapt more easily to treatment to reduce side effects. |
Sundararajan et al. (2019) [80] | USA | Recommendations and requirements for AV accessibility | Panel discussion | Not specified | Not specified | Not applicable | Advocate for the use of universal design principles, considering the accessibility of the built environment, cooperation towards standards, policies, and regulation for accessibility. |
Tabattanon & D’Souza, (2021) [82] | USA | AVs interior accessibility | Guidelines analysis Expert recommendation Accessibility testing | Mobility impairment | Automated shuttles | 40 | Accessibility constraints should be considered early in the design process. |
Tabattanon et al. (2019) [85] | USA | AV interior accessibility | Systematic review of the literature | Mobility impairment | Automated shuttles | Not applicable | Creation of a Web-based repository gathering publications about transport accessibility to PLWD and elderly adults. |
Tabattanon et al. (2021) [84] | USA | AV interior accessibility | Mock-up testing with participants | Wheelchair users | Automated shuttles | 6 | Presentation of a shuttle’s full-scale mock-up used to evaluate vehicle accessibility for wheelchair users. |
Wang et al. (2021) [73] | Canada | Willingness to pay for AVs | Stated preference survey | Person with a disabled family member | Ride-hailing, shared or private vehicles with automation from 0 to 5 | 190 | Having a disabled family member is associated with a higher willingness to pay for an AV. |
Wu et al. (2021) [28] | USA | AVs’ impact on mobility | Literature review of mobility behavior | Not specified | AV of high and full automation not requiring a driver’s license | Not applicable | AVs could increase PLWD’s mobility as they could be ridden like a regular car without the need to be able to drive. |
Zmud et al. (2016) [71] | USA | Intention to use AVs | Online survey | “Travel-restrictive medical condition” | Level 5 private or shared vehicles | 556 respondents, of whom 2% had a travel-restrictive medical condition | Being impaired is associated with an increased intention to use AVs. |
References
- World Health Organization. Disability. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health (accessed on 8 April 2025).
- United Nation. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 2006. Available online: https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2025).
- Fougeyrollas, P.; Boucher, N.; Edwards, G.; Grenier, Y.; Noreau, L. The Disability Creation Process Model: A Comprehensive Explanation of Disabling Situations as a Guide to Developing Policy and Service Programs. Scand. J. Disabil. Res. 2019, 21, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velho, R. Transport Accessibility for Wheelchair Users: A Qualitative Analysis of Inclusion and Health. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 2019, 8, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwanen, T.; Lucas, K.; Akyelken, N.; Cisternas Solsona, D.; Carrasco, J.-A.; Neutens, T. Rethinking the Links between Social Exclusion and Transport Disadvantage through the Lens of Social Capital. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 74, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nation. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 28 March 2025).
- Kenyon, S.; Lyons, G.; Rafferty, J. Transport and Social Exclusion: Investigating the Possibility of Promoting Inclusion through Virtual Mobility. J. Transp. Geogr. 2002, 10, 207–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bezyak, J.L.; Sabella, S.A.; Gattis, R.H. Public Transportation: An Investigation of Barriers for People with Disabilities. J. Disabil. Policy Stud. 2017, 28, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Chowdhury, S. Investigating the Barriers in a Typical Journey by Public Transport Users with Disabilities. J. Transp. Health 2018, 10, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stjernborg, V. Accessibility for All in Public Transport and the Overlooked (Social) Dimension—A Case Study of Stockholm. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sze, N.N.; Christensen, K.M. Access to Urban Transportation System for Individuals with Disabilities. IATSS Res. 2017, 41, 66–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visnes Øksenholt, K.; Aarhaug, J. Public Transport and People with Impairments—Exploring Non-Use of Public Transport through the Case of Oslo, Norway. Disabil. Soc. 2018, 33, 1280–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasfi, R.; Steinmetz-Wood, M.; Levinson, D. Measuring the Transportation Needs of People with Developmental Disabilities: A Means to Social Inclusion. Disabil. Health J. 2017, 10, 356–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bascom, G.W.; Christensen, K.M. The Impacts of Limited Transportation Access on Persons with Disabilities’ Social Participation. J. Transp. Health 2017, 7, 227–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corran, P.; Steinbach, R.; Saunders, L.; Green, J. Age, Disability and Everyday Mobility in London: An Analysis of the Correlates of ‘Non-Travel’ in Travel Diary Data. J. Transp. Health 2018, 8, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, C.-Y. Advancements, Prospects, and Impacts of Automated Driving Systems. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 2017, 6, 208–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SAE. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles. Available online: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201609/ (accessed on 8 April 2025).
- Hiratsuka, T. France’s Valeo Testing Level 4 Self-Driving Technology in Japan. Nikkei Asia. 2021. Available online: https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Automobiles/France-s-Valeo-testing-Level-4-self-driving-technology-in-Japan (accessed on 19 February 2025).
- SHOW Project SHared Automation Operating Models for Worldwide Adoption. 2020. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/875530 (accessed on 19 February 2025).
- Chen, Q.; Xie, Y.; Guo, S.; Bai, J.; Shu, Q. Sensing System of Environmental Perception Technologies for Driverless Vehicle: A Review of State of the Art and Challenges. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2021, 319, 112566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manchon, J.B.; Bueno, M.; Navarro, J. From Manual to Automated Driving: How Does Trust Evolve? Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 2021, 22, 528–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Techer, F.; Ojeda, L.; Barat, D.; Marteau, J.-Y.; Rampillon, F.; Feron, S.; Dogan, E. Anger and Highly Automated Driving in Urban Areas: The Role of Time Pressure. Transp. Res. Part F 2019, 64, 353–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dicianno, B.E.; Sivakanthan, S.; Sundaram, S.A.; Satpute, S.; Kulich, H.; Powers, E.; Deepak, N.; Russell, R.; Cooper, R.; Cooper, R.A. Systematic Review: Automated Vehicles and Services for People with Disabilities. Neurosci. Lett. 2021, 761, 136103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bramer, W.M.; Rethlefsen, M.L.; Kleijnen, J.; Franco, O.H. Optimal Database Combinations for Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews: A Prospective Exploratory Study. Syst. Rev. 2017, 6, 245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alessandrini, A.; Campagna, A.; Site, P.D.; Filippi, F.; Persia, L. Automated Vehicles and the Rethinking of Mobility and Cities. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 5, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hancock, P.A.; Kajaks, T.; Caird, J.K.; Chignell, M.H.; Mizobuchi, S.; Burns, P.C.; Feng, J.; Fernie, G.R.; Lavallière, M.; Noy, I.Y.; et al. Challenges to Human Drivers in Increasingly Automated Vehicles. Hum. Factors 2020, 62, 310–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuzio, J. Autonomous Vehicles and Paratransit: Examining the Protective Framework of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2021, 9, 1130–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Cao, J.; Douma, F. The Impacts of Vehicle Automation on Transport-Disadvantaged People. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021, 11, 100447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, G. An Ecosocial Frame for Autonomous Vehicles. Capital. Nat. Social. 2018, 30, 55–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohnemus, M.; Perl, A. Shared Autonomous Vehicles: Catalyst of New Mobility for the Last Mile? Built Environ. 2016, 42, 589–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.A.; Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R.; Shahmoradi, A.; Kermanshachi, S.; Rosenberger, J.M.; Foss, A. Integrating Shared Autonomous Vehicles into Existing Transportation Services: Evidence from a Paratransit Service in Arlington, Texas. Int. J. Civ. Eng. 2022, 20, 601–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goralzik, A.; König, A.; Alčiauskaitė, L.; Hatzakis, T. Shared Mobility Services: An Accessibility Assessment from the Perspective of People with Disabilities. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2022, 14, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrović, Đ.; Mijailović, R.M.; Pešić, D. Persons with Physical Disabilities and Autonomous Vehicles: The Perspective of the Driving Status. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2022, 164, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, K.; Chng, S.; Cheah, L. Understanding Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles among People with Different Mobility and Communication Needs. Travel Behav. Soc. 2022, 29, 200–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milakis, D.; van Wee, B. Chapter 4—Implications of Vehicle Automation for Accessibility and Social Inclusion of People on Low Income, People with Physical and Sensory Disabilities, and Older People. In Demand for Emerging Transportation Systems; Antoniou, C., Efthymiou, D., Chaniotakis, E., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 61–73. ISBN 978-0-12-815018-4. [Google Scholar]
- Jeon, M.; Politis, I.; Shladover, S.E.; Sutter, C.; Terken, J.M.B.; Poppinga, B. Towards Life-Long Mobility: Accessible Transportation with Automation. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 24–26 October 2016; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 203–208. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, S.; Costa, N.; Simões, P.; Ribeiro, N.; Arezes, P. Tackling Autonomous Driving Challenges—How the Design of Autonomous Vehicles Is Mirroring Universal Design. In Proceedings of the Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction, Washington, DC, USA, 24–28 July 2019; Nunes, I.L., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 134–145. [Google Scholar]
- Brinkley, J.; Huff, E.W.; Posadas, B.; Woodward, J.; Daily, S.B.; Gilbert, J.E. Exploring the Needs, Preferences, and Concerns of Persons with Visual Impairments Regarding Autonomous Vehicles. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 2020, 13, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, J.; Li, W.; Stough, L.; Lee, C.; Turnbull, K. A Focus Group Study on the Potential of Autonomous Vehicles as a Viable Transportation Option: Perspectives from People with Disabilities and Public Transit Agencies. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2020, 70, 260–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brinkley, J.; Daily, S.B.; Gilbert, J.E. A Survey of Visually Impaired Consumers about Self-Driving Vehicles. J. Technol. Pers. Disabil. 2018, 6, 274–283. [Google Scholar]
- Tirachini, A.; Antoniou, C. The Economics of Automated Public Transport: Effects on Operator Cost, Travel Time, Fare and Subsidy. Econ. Transp. 2020, 21, 100151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Du, M.; Chen, Q. Impact of Connected and Autonomous Vehicles on Traffic Efficiency and Safety of an On-Ramp. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2021, 113, 102374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumakoshi, Y.; Hanabusa, H.; Oguchi, T. Impacts of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: Tradeoff between Parking Demand Reduction and Congestion Increase. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021, 12, 100482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kacperski, C.; Kutzner, F.; Vogel, T. Comparing Autonomous Vehicle Acceptance of German Residents with and without Visual Impairments. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 2024, 19, 2869–2879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Golbabaei, F.; Dwyer, J.; Gomez, R.; Peterson, A.; Cocks, K.; Bubke, A.; Paz, A. Enabling Mobility and Inclusion: Designing Accessible Autonomous Vehicles for People with Disabilities. Cities 2024, 154, 105333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goggin, G. Cars and Contemporary Communication | Disability, Connected Cars, and Communication. Int. J. Commun. 2019, 13, 26. [Google Scholar]
- Hwang, J.; Kim, S. Autonomous Vehicle Transportation Service for People with Disabilities: Policy Recommendations Based on the Evidence from Hybrid Choice Model. J. Transp. Geogr. 2023, 106, 103499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Epting, S. Ethical Requirements for Transport Systems with Automated Buses. Technol. Soc. 2021, 64, 101506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradshaw-Martin, H.; Easton, C. Autonomous or ‘Driverless’ Cars and Disability: A Legal and Ethical Analysis. Eur. J. Curr. Leg. Issues 2014, 20. [Google Scholar]
- Francis, L.P. Disability and Automation: The Promise of Cars That Automate Driving Functions. J. Health Care Law Policy 2018, 20, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordts, P.; Cotten, S.R.; Qu, T.; Bush, T.R. Mobility Challenges and Perceptions of Autonomous Vehicles for Individuals with Physical Disabilities. Disabil. Health J. 2021, 14, 101131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Patel, R.K.; Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R.; Kermanshachi, S.; Rosenberger, J.M.; Weinreich, D. Exploring Preferences towards Integrating the Autonomous Vehicles with the Current Microtransit Services: A Disability Focus Group Study. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Transportation and Development 2021, Virtual Conference, 8–10 June 2021; American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA, USA, 2021; pp. 355–366. [Google Scholar]
- Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R.; Patel, R.K.; Kermanshachi, S.; Rosenberger, J.M.; Weinreich, D.; Foss, A. Integration of Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAVs) into Existing Transportation Services: A Focus Group Study. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021, 12, 100481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Zahabi, M.; Blanchard, S.; Zheng, X.; Ory, M.; Benden, M. A Novel Autonomous Vehicle Interface for Older Adults with Cognitive Impairment. Appl. Ergon. 2023, 113, 104080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ranjbar, P.; Krishnakumari, P.K.; Andersson, J.; Klingegård, M. Vibrotactile Guidance for Trips with Autonomous Vehicles for Persons with Blindness, Deafblindness, and Deafness. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2022, 15, 100630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, J.; Li, W.; Stough, L.M.; Lee, C.; Turnbull, K. People with Disabilities’ Perceptions of Autonomous Vehicles as a Viable Transportation Option to Improve Mobility: An Exploratory Study Using Mixed Methods. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2021, 15, 924–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agriesti, S.; Brevi, F.; Gandini, P.; Marchionni, G.; Parmar, R.; Ponti, M.; Studer, L. Impact of Driverless Vehicles on Urban Environment and Future Mobility. Transp. Res. Procedia 2020, 49, 44–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emory, K.; Douma, F.; Cao, J. Autonomous Vehicle Policies with Equity Implications: Patterns and Gaps. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2022, 13, 100521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papa, E.; Ferreira, A. Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harper, C.D.; Hendrickson, C.T.; Mangones, S.; Samaras, C. Estimating Potential Increases in Travel with Autonomous Vehicles for the Non-Driving, Elderly and People with Travel-Restrictive Medical Conditions. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2016, 72, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fink, P.D.S.; Holz, J.A.; Giudice, N.A. Fully Autonomous Vehicles for People with Visual Impairment: Policy, Accessibility, and Future Directions. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 2021, 14, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fink, P.D.S.; Alsamsam, M.; Brown, J.R.; Kindler, H.D.; Giudice, N.A. Give Us Something to Chauffeur It: Exploring User Needs in Traditional and Fully Autonomous Ridesharing for People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2023, 98, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fink, P.D.S.; Doore, S.A.; Lin, X.; Maring, M.; Zhao, P.; Nygaard, A.; Beals, G.; Corey, R.R.; Perry, R.J.; Freund, K.; et al. The Autonomous Vehicle Assistant (AVA): Emerging Technology Design Supporting Blind and Visually Impaired Travelers in Autonomous Transportation. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2023, 179, 103125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, R.; Vijaygopal, R. Exploring Mobility and Transportation Technology Futures for People with Ambulatory Disabilities: A Science Fiction Prototype. Technovation 2024, 133, 103001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassens-Noor, E.; Cai, M.; Kotval-Karamchandani, Z.; Decaminada, T. Autonomous Vehicles and Mobility for People with Special Needs. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 150, 385–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harkin, K.A.; Harkin, A.M.; Gögel, C.; Schade, J.; Petzoldt, T. How Do Vulnerable Road Users Evaluate Automated Vehicles in Urban Traffic? A Focus Group Study with Pedestrians, Cyclists, e-Scooter Riders, Older Adults, and People with Walking Disabilities. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2024, 104, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerrero-Ibañez, J.; Contreras-Castillo, J.; Amezcua-Valdovinos, I.; Reyes-Muñoz, A. Assistive Self-Driving Car Networks to Provide Safe Road Ecosystems for Disabled Road Users. Machines 2023, 11, 967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azizi Soldouz, S.; Hasnine, M.S.; Sukhai, M.; Nurul Habib, K. Looking through the Perceptions of Blinds: Potential Impacts of Connected Autonomous Vehicles on Pedestrians with Visual Impairment. Transp. Res. Rec. 2020, 2674, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deka, D.; Brown, C.T. Self-Perception and General Perception of the Safety Impact of Autonomous Vehicles on Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and People with Ambulatory Disability. J. Transp. Technol. 2021, 11, 357–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sultan, M.; Thomas, R.H. Self-Driving Cars: A Qualitative Study into the Opportunities, Challenges and Perceived Acceptability for People with Epilepsy. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2020, 91, 781–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zmud, J.; Sener, I.N.; Wagner, J. Self-Driving Vehicles: Determinants of Adoption and Conditions of Usage. Transp. Res. Rec. 2016, 2565, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golbabaei, F.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Paz, A.; Bunker, J. Individual Predictors of Autonomous Vehicle Public Acceptance and Intention to Use: A Systematic Review of the Literature. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, K.; Salehin, M.F.; Nurul Habib, K. A Discrete Choice Experiment on Consumer’s Willingness-to-Pay for Vehicle Automation in the Greater Toronto Area. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 149, 12–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassens-Noor, E.; Kotval-Karamchandani, Z.; Cai, M. Willingness to Ride and Perceptions of Autonomous Public Transit. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 138, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, R.; Vijaygopal, R.; Kottasz, R. Attitudes towards Autonomous Vehicles among People with Physical Disabilities. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 127, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, R.; Vijaygopal, R.; Kottasz, R. Willingness of People with Mental Health Disabilities to Travel in Driverless Vehicles. J. Transp. Health 2019, 12, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, R.; Vijaygopal, R.; Kottasz, R. Willingness of People Who Are Blind to Accept Autonomous Vehicles: An Empirical Investigation. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2020, 69, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kutela, B.; Tamakloe, R.; Novat, N.; Kodi, J.H.; Kinero, A.; Shita, H. Will the Widespread Driverless Passenger Vehicles Help the Elderly and People with Disabilities Live More Independently? Insights from a Nationwide Survey. Cities 2025, 159, 105755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kempapidis, T.; Castle, C.L.; Fairchild, R.G.; Hussain, S.F.; Cash, A.T.G.; Gomes, R.S.M. A Scientific Evaluation of Autonomous Vehicle User Experience on Sighted and Visually Impaired Passengers Based on FACS (Facial Analysis Coding System) and a User Experience Questionnaire. J. Transp. Health 2020, 19, 100906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sundararajan, S.; Yousuf, M.; Omay, M.; Steinfeld, A.; Owens, J.M. Automated Vehicles (AVs) for People with Disabilities. In Road Vehicle Automation 5; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 85–90. ISBN 978-3-319-94896-6. [Google Scholar]
- Ferati, M.; Murano, P.; Anthony Giannoumis, G. Universal Design of User Interfaces in Self-Driving Cars. In Advances in Design for Inclusion, Proceedings of the AHFE 2018 International Conference on Design for Inclusion, Orlando, FL, USA, 21–25 July 2018; Di Bucchianico, G., Kercher, P.F., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 220–228. [Google Scholar]
- Tabattanon, K.; D’Souza, C. Accessibility Retrofit of a Shared Automated Vehicle: Challenges and Lessons Learned. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2021, 65, 385–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klinich, K.D.; Manary, M.A.; Orton, N.R.; Boyle, K.J.; Hu, J. A Literature Review of Wheelchair Transportation Safety Relevant to Automated Vehicles. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tabattanon, K.; Schuler, P.T.; D’Souza, C. Investigating Inclusive Design of Shared Automated Vehicles with Full-Scale Modeling. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2021, 64, 965–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tabattanon, K.; Sandhu, N.; D’Souza, C. Accessible Design of Low-Speed Automated Shuttles: A Brief Review of Lessons Learned from Public Transit. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2019, 63, 526–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brewer, R.N.; Kameswaran, V. Understanding the Power of Control in Autonomous Vehicles for People with Vision Impairment. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Galway, Ireland, 22–24 October 2018; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 185–197. [Google Scholar]
- Mandujano Nava, A.; Alejo, V.; Cabrera, M.; Enríquez, V. Conceptual Design of an Auxiliary Autonomous Vehicle for Disabilities People. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2017, 865, 518–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Son, S.; Jeong, Y.; Lee, B. An Audification and Visualization System (AVS) of an Autonomous Vehicle for Blind and Deaf People Based on Deep Learning. Sensors 2019, 19, 5035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castillo, J.; Müller, S.; Caicedo, E.; De Souza, A.F.; Bastos, T. Proposal of a Brain Computer Interface to Command an Autonomous Car. In Proceedings of the 5th ISSNIP-IEEE Biosignals and Biorobotics Conference (2014): Biosignals and Robotics for Better and Safer Living (BRC), Salvador, Brazil, 26–28 May 2014; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Brinkley, J.; Posadas, B.; Sherman, I.; Daily, S.B.; Gilbert, J.E. An Open Road Evaluation of a Self-Driving Vehicle Human–Machine Interface Designed for Visually Impaired Users. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2019, 35, 1018–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brinkley, J.; Huff, E.W.; Enam, M.A. Transforming Transportation in the Pursuit of Barrier Free Mobility: The State-of-the-Art in Autonomous Vehicle Interaction Technologies for People with Disabilities. In Proceedings of the Annual ICT Accessibility Testing Symposium, Online, 16–18 May 2022; pp. 11–26. [Google Scholar]
- Cœugnet, S.; Cahour, B.; Kraiem, S. Risk-Taking, Emotions and Socio-Cognitive Dynamics of Pedestrian Street-Crossing Decision-Making in the City. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2019, 65, 141–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Miguel, M.Á.; Fuchshuber, D.; Hussein, A.; Olaverri-Monreal, C. Perceived Pedestrian Safety: Public Interaction with Driverless Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Paris, France, 9–12 June 2019; pp. 90–95. [Google Scholar]
- Rasouli, A.; Kotseruba, I.; Tsotsos, J.K. Understanding Pedestrian Behavior in Complex Traffic Scenes. IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh. 2018, 3, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sucha, M.; Dostal, D.; Risser, R. Pedestrian-Driver Communication and Decision Strategies at Marked Crossings. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2017, 102, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ackermann, C.; Beggiato, M.; Schubert, S.; Krems, J.F. An Experimental Study to Investigate Design and Assessment Criteria: What Is Important for Communication between Pedestrians and Automated Vehicles? Appl. Ergon. 2019, 75, 272–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clamann, M.; Aubert, M.; Cummings, M.L. Evaluation of Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication Displays for Autonomous Vehicles; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Eisma, Y.B.; van Bergen, S.; ter Brake, S.M.; Hensen, M.T.T.; Tempelaar, W.J.; de Winter, J.C.F. External Human–Machine Interfaces: The Effect of Display Location on Crossing Intentions and Eye Movements. Information 2020, 11, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahadevan, K.; Somanath, S.; Sharlin, E. Communicating Awareness and Intent in Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Métayer, N.; Coeugnet, S. Improving the Experience in the Pedestrian’s Interaction with an Autonomous Vehicle: An Ergonomic Comparison of External HMI. Appl. Ergon. 2021, 96, 103478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Roundtree, K.A.; Hattrup, S.; Swaminathan, J.; Zerbel, N.; Klow, J.; Shitole, V.; Fallatah, A.; Khanna, R.; Adams, J.A. Inclusive Design Guidance: External Autonomous Vehicle Interfaces. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2020, 64, 1054–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colley, M.; Walch, M.; Gugenheimer, J.; Rukzio, E. Including People with Impairments from the Start: External Communication of Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings, Salzburg, Austria, 30 November–2 December 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 307–314. [Google Scholar]
- Dey, D.; Habibovic, A.; Löcken, A.; Wintersberger, P.; Pfleging, B.; Riener, A.; Martens, M.; Terken, J. Taming the eHMI Jungle: A Classification Taxonomy to Guide, Compare, and Assess the Design Principles of Automated Vehicles’ External Human-Machine Interfaces. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020, 7, 100174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robert, L.P. Contextualizing Human—Automated Vehicle Interactions: A Socio-Ecological Framework. Robotics 2021, 10, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colley, M.; Walch, M.; Gugenheimer, J.; Askari, A.; Rukzio, E. Towards Inclusive External Communication of Autonomous Vehicles for Pedestrians with Vision Impairments; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2020; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Bjerkan, K.Y.; Øvstedal, L.R. Functional Requirements for Inclusive Transport. Transportation 2020, 47, 1177–1198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Category | Main Challenges | References |
---|---|---|
Infrastructure and Vehicles | Inaccessible transport systems and vehicles (e.g., lack of ramps, lifts, securement systems) | [4,8,9,10,11,12] |
Geographic Coverage | Absence of public transport in certain residential or rural areas | [12,13] |
Service Limitations | Inconsistent availability and performance of adapted or paratransit services | [8,14] |
Trip Planning and Usability | Barriers in accessing and using booking systems, real-time info, or complex navigation routes | [5,7,9,10] |
Dependence on Assistance | Strong reliance on caregivers or family for daily transport needs | [14,15] |
Social Participation | Restricted participation in work, healthcare, and social activities due to poor mobility access | [5,7,13,14,15] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yousfi, E.; Jacquet, T.; Métayer, N. Automated Vehicles and People Living with a Disability: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions for Sustainable Mobility. Sustainability 2025, 17, 5941. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17135941
Yousfi E, Jacquet T, Métayer N. Automated Vehicles and People Living with a Disability: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions for Sustainable Mobility. Sustainability. 2025; 17(13):5941. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17135941
Chicago/Turabian StyleYousfi, Elsa, Thomas Jacquet, and Natacha Métayer. 2025. "Automated Vehicles and People Living with a Disability: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions for Sustainable Mobility" Sustainability 17, no. 13: 5941. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17135941
APA StyleYousfi, E., Jacquet, T., & Métayer, N. (2025). Automated Vehicles and People Living with a Disability: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions for Sustainable Mobility. Sustainability, 17(13), 5941. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17135941