Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Accessibility Approach
3. The Scenario-Based Methodology Used to Identify Critical Decisions
4. Two Scenarios for Autonomous Vehicles and Their Accessibility Implications
4.1. The Optimistic Scenario
4.1.1. The Mobility Component
4.1.2. The Land Use Component
4.1.3. The Temporal Component
4.1.4. The Individual Component
4.2. The Pessimistic Scenario
4.2.1. The Mobility Component
4.2.2. The Land Use Component
4.2.3. The Temporal Component
4.2.4. The Individual Component
5. Discussion: Identification of Critical Decisions
6. Conclusions and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- SAE International. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles; SAE International: Hong Kong, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Litman, T. Autonomous Vehicle Implementation Predictions: Implications for Transport Planning; Transport Policy Institute: Victoria, BC, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Cavoli, C.; Phillips, B.; Cohen, T.; Jones, P. Social and Behavioural Questions Associated with Automated Vehicles: A Literature Review; Department for Transport: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, T.; Cavoli, C. Automation of the Driving Task, Some Possible Consequences and Governance Challenges; ITF Discussion Paper 07/2017; OECD/ITF: Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, J.M.; Kalra, N.; Stanley, K.D.; Sorensen, P.; Samaras, C.; Oluwatola, O.A. Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Guide for Policymakers; RAND Coorperation: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Gruel, W.; Stanford, J.M. Assessing the long-term effects of autonomous vehicles: A speculative approach. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 13, 18–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milakis, D.; van Arem, B.; van Wee, B. Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2017, 21, 324–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegener, M.; Fürst, F. Land-Use Transport Interaction: State of the Art. Deliverable 2a of the Project TRANSLAND (Integration of Transport and Land Use Planning) of the 4th RTD Framework Programme of the European Commission, Dortmund, Germany, 1999. Available online: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1434678 (accessed on 9 January 2018).
- Urry, J. The ‘System’ of Automobility. Theory Cult. Soc. 2004, 21, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department for Transport (DfT). The Pathway to Driverless Cars: Summary Report and Action Plan; Department for Transport: London, UK, 2015.
- Morozov, E. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism; Public Affairs: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Wadud, Z.; MacKenzie, D.; Leiby, P. Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 86, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papa, E.; Lauwers, D. Mobility governance in smart cities of the future. In Adaptive Mobility: A New Policy and Research Agenda on Mobility in Horizontal Metropolis; Boelens, L., Lauwers, D., Witlox, F., Eds.; In-Planning: Groningen, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 177–190. [Google Scholar]
- Geurs, K.T.; van Wee, B. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. J. Transp. Geogr. 2004, 12, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, W.G. How Accessibility Shapes Land Use. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1959, 25, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingram, D.R. The Concept of Accessibility: A Search for an Operational Form. Reg. Stud. 1971, 5, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wachs, M.; Kumagai, T.G. Physical Accessibility as a Social Indicator. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 1973, 7, 437–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalvi, M.Q.; Martin, K.M. The Measurement of Accessibility: Some Preliminary Results. Transportation 1976, 5, 17–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, J.M.; Dumble, P.L.; Wigan, M.R. Accessibility Indicators for Transport Planning. Transp. Res. A 1979, 13A, 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirie, G.H. Measuring Accessibility: A review and proposal. Environ. Plan. A 1979, 11, 299–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kenyon, S. Understanding social exclusion and social inclusion. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers; ICE Publishing: London, UK, 2003; Volume 156, pp. 97–104. [Google Scholar]
- Black, W.R. An unpopular essay on transportation. J. Transp. Geogr. 2001, 9, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, A.; Beukers, E.; Te Brömmelstroet, M. Accessibility is gold, mobility is not: A proposal for the improvement of transport-related Dutch Cost-Benefit Analysis. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2012, 39, 683–697. [Google Scholar]
- Handy, S. Accessibility-vs. Mobility-Enhancing Strategies for Addressing Automobile Dependence in the U.S. Available online: http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/handy/ECMT_report.pdf (accessed on 9 January 2018).
- Ferreira, A.; Batey, P. Re-thinking accessibility planning: A multi-layer conceptual framework and its policy implications. Town Plan. Rev. 2007, 78, 429–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pernestål Brenden, A.; Kristoffersson, I.; Mattsson, L.G. Future Scenarios for Self-Driving Vehicles in Sweden; KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockolm, Sweden, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Millard-Ball, A. Pedestrians, autonomous vehicles, and cities. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2016, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milakis, D.; Snelder, M.; van Arem, B.; van Wee, B.; Correia, G. Development of Automated Vehicles in the Netherlands: Scenarios for 2030 and 2050; Delft University of Technology: Delft, The Netherlands, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Townsend, A. Re-Programming Mobility: The Digital Transformation of Transportation in the United States; Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Pearman, A.D. Scenario construction for transportation planning. Transp. Plan. Technol. 1988, 12, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, H.; Marshall, R. Utilitarianism’s Bad Breath? A Re-Evaluation of the Public Interest Justification for Planning. Plan. Theory 2002, 1, 163–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banister, D.; Hickman, R. Transport futures: Thinking the unthinkable. Transp. Policy 2013, 29, 283–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shoup, D. Cruising for parking. Transp. Policy 2006, 13, 479–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shoup, D. Cruising for parking. Access 2007, 30, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alessandrini, A.; Campagna, A.; Delle Site, P.; Filippi, F.; Persia, L. Automated Vehicles and the Rethinking of Mobility and Cities. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 5, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lyons, G.; Jain, J.; Holley, D. The use of travel time by rail passengers in Great Britain. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2007, 41, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, B. Leave the driving to it. Am. Sci. 2011, 99, 362–366. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, B. Human Error as a Cause of Vehicle Crashes. 2013. Available online: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/human-error-cause-vehicle-crashes (accessed on 30 November 2017).
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2015; U.S. Department of Transportation—National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
- European Commission (E.C.). Road Safety Evolution in the EU. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/files/pdf/observatory/historical_evol.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2017).
- Sibley, D. Geographies of Exclusion; Routledge: London, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Bradbury, A.; Tomilnson, P.; Millington, A. Understanding the evolution of community severance and its consequences on mobility and social cohesion over the past century. In Proceedings of the European Transport Conference (ETC), Leiden, The Netherlands, 17–19 October 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Anciaes, P.R.; Jones, P.; Mindell, J.S. Community severance: Where is it found and at what cost? Transp. Rev. 2016, 36, 293–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hills, P. What is induced traffic? Transportation 1996, 23, 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, T.; Jones, P.; Cavoli, C. Social and Behavioural Questions Associated with Automated Vehicles: Scoping Study by UCL Transport Institute; Final Report; Department for Transport: London, UK, 2016.
- Bain, L.; Gray, B.; Rodgers, D. Living Streets: Strategies for Crafting Public Space; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Karndacharuk, A.; Wilson, D.J.; Dunn, R. A review of the evolution of shared (street) space concepts in urban environments. Transp. Rev. 2014, 34, 190–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fagnant, D.; Kockelman, K. Preparing a Nation for Autonomous Vehicles: Opportunities, Barriers and Policy Recommendations; Eno Center for Transportation: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kyriakidis, M.; Happee, R.; de Winter, J. Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transp. Res. Part F 2015, 32, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodall, N. Ethical decision making during automated vehicle crashes. J. Transp. Res. Board 2014, 2424, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coca-Vila, I. Self-driving cars in dilemmatic situations: An approach based on the theory of justification in criminal law. In Criminal Law and Philosophy; Springer Netherlands: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Kesselring, S. The mobile risk society. In Tracing Mobilities: Towards a Cosmopolitan Perspective; Canzler, W., Kaufmann, V., Kesselring, S., Eds.; Ashgate: London, UK, 2008; pp. 77–102. [Google Scholar]
- Bilger, B. Auto correct: Has the self-driving car at last arrived. The New Yorker, 25 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
- White, M. The “arms race” on American roads: The effect of sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks on traffic safety. J. Law Econ. 2004, 47, 333–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sallis, J.; Cerin, E.; Conway, T.; Adams, M.; Frank, L.; Pratt, M.; Davey, R. Physical activity in relation to urban environments in 14 cities worldwide: A cross-sectional study. Lancet 2016, 387, 2207–2217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reis, R.S.; Salvo, D.; Ogilvie, D.; Lambert, E.V.; Goenka, S.; Brownson, R.C. Scaling up physical activity interventions worldwide: Stepping up to larger and smarter approaches to get people moving. Lancet 2016, 388, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pucher, J.; Buehler, R. Walking and Cycling for Healthy Cities. Built Environ. 2010, 36, 391–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nye, D.E. Technology Matters: Questions to Live with; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Bertolini, L. Evolutionary urban transportation planning: An exploration. Environ. Plan. A 2007, 39, 1998–2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Critical Decisions Themes | Optimistic Outcome | Pessimistic Outcome |
---|---|---|
Sharing | AVs will not be primarily advertised and sold as private property for those who can afford it. Instead, the notion of automated car sharing will be promoted from the start. | AVs will be promoted by developers as private property for the elites who can afford them. It will be seen first as luxury items and this will create negative path-dependency during several decades. |
Social exclusion | The use of AVs will be open to a vast share of the population due to policies aimed at fighting social exclusion potentially induced by transport automation. Measures will be considered to avoid the creation of circumstances where AVs become compulsory replacements for conventional homes as people will not be able to pay for a car and a house mortgage. | The use of AVs will be exclusive to those with the ability and willingness to pay for what will be considered a privileged mode of transport. Conversely, vulnerable societal groups will be encouraged to use AVs as a place to live and travel under constant scrutiny. |
Environmental sustainability | The development and implementation of AVs will be regulated taking into account strong environmental concerns. | AVs will be developed and implemented with little concern for sustainability. Marketing campaigns will distract people from environmental issues and focus their attention on individual benefits associated with automated transport. |
Automated cooperation | The operating systems of AVs will be programmed using as guidelines cooperative, altruistic and ethical principles. | The operating systems of AVs will be programmed using as guidelines competitive, aggressive and defensive principles. |
Public transport | Public transport services will be protected and sponsored by National and Local policies so that the (probable) high appeal of AVs does not exclude these public services from the transport system. | National and local policies focus on AVs too much and fail to support public transport providers against the competition represented by AVs. As a result, public transport becomes increasingly marginalised and ceases to operate in a growing number of places. |
Inter-modal traffic regulations | AVs will be programmed to respect unconditionally all forms of human life. Instead of focusing on which lives should be saved in the case of accidents involving AVs, the focus will be on changing traffic regulations to make accidents less likely (e.g., through lower speeds). Pedestrians and other vulnerable road users will be protected by the spirit of the law. | The debate on inter-modal traffic regulations will focus on the value of human lives when taking into account characteristics of individual road users. First these characteristics will be age and probability of survival, but later on will be characteristics such as income, quality of insurance coverage, citizenship status, and criminal record. The rights of users of AVs will be protected by the spirit of the law. |
Network information systems | Investments will be made so that all AVs can use network data to make more sustainable and efficient decisions regarding route choice and parking at a fleet level. | There will be little to no developments dedicated to co-creating public information systems that will facilitate overall efficiency and sustainability at fleet level and as a result vehicles will be equipped (or not) with information gathering devices based on the willingness and ability to pay off their users. |
Sensitive data management | Personal data and all forms of information that might be used against individuals or organisations will be carefully managed or not recorded, and always with the purpose of providing for the needs of vulnerable individuals or in the name of the public interest. | Growing quantities of data will be stored and used for commercial or societal control purposes. AVs will be understood as data extraction devices, making it compulsory for their users to reveal increasingly larger and more sensitive private information. |
Parking | Parking policies will facilitate the conversion of no longer needed parking places into new recreational, green, and building areas, or into transport infrastructures for active modes of transport. | Parking policies will remain as they are, that is, when not in use AVs will use on-road parking spaces and existing parking areas that consume highly desirable land that could be used for more sustainable or social purposes. |
Land use policies | The built environment will be seen as a place to live and experience quality of life. Mobility will be seen as something that should promote quality of life. These guiding principles will be unchanged in the face of pressures coming from enthusiasts of AVs. | The built environment will be reshaped to accommodate the complex and ever-increasing needs of AVs and their users against the needs of other social groups. |
Transport network design | Transport networks will be designed in ways that will be safe for all. In urban settings there will be great care to provide for the needs of sustainable transport modes. | Transport networks will experience massive restructuring to accommodate the unique needs of AVs. Other transport modes will not see a comparable level of protection and investment. |
© 2018 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Papa, E.; Ferreira, A. Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2010005
Papa E, Ferreira A. Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions. Urban Science. 2018; 2(1):5. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2010005
Chicago/Turabian StylePapa, Enrica, and António Ferreira. 2018. "Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions" Urban Science 2, no. 1: 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2010005