Who Wants an Automated Vehicle?

Thurlow, David A.; Sawyer, Ben D. · 2022 · Crossref

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-6684-3694-3.ch044

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This chapter examines the societal implications of "New Mobility," a term encompassing advancements in vehicle automation, electrification, data connectivity, and digital sharing. The authors argue that while these technologies promise to revolutionize transportation, their ultimate impact is not determined solely by engineering but by the competing interests of various social groups. The research is motivated by the urgent need to include public and community interests in the development of these technologies, as the current trajectory risks increasing energy use, environmental costs, and social inequity. Drawing on Science and Technology Studies (STS), the paper frames the development of automated vehicles (AVs) as a process shaped by "sociotechnical imaginaries"—collectively held visions of the future held by different stakeholders. The analysis identifies five primary groups shaping AV deployment: automobile manufacturers, technology companies, ride-hailing firms, land developers, and regulatory bodies. Automobile manufacturers, exemplified by Volvo, promote private ownership and comfort, envisioning vehicles that allow users to choose between driving and relaxing. Technology companies like Google and Apple envision a future without human drivers, motivated by safety, accessibility, and the economic incentive to capture user attention and data. Ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft advocate for a shift from ownership to ride-buying, driven by the desire to eliminate driver costs, which constitute half of their expenses. Land developers see opportunities in both urban densification, by reducing parking requirements, and suburban expansion, by making long commutes more tolerable. Regulatory groups hold divergent priorities, with some agencies accelerating innovation while others focus on safety and equity. The authors detail four major societal impacts of these competing visions. First, AVs may significantly increase Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) through induced demand, zero-occupancy "deadheading" by robotaxis, and the displacement of public transit and active transportation. Second, automation threatens millions of jobs, particularly in trucking and taxi services, as well as ancillary industries like auto repair and insurance. Third, the technology raises concerns regarding social equity and privacy; benefits may accrue primarily to the wealthy, while lower-cost options for others may involve poor service quality and extensive surveillance through vehicle-mounted cameras. Finally, safety improvements are not immediate; due to the slow penetration of AVs, significant safety gains may not occur until 2040–2050. Furthermore, ethical dilemmas regarding how AVs prioritize lives in collision scenarios may create consumer resistance. The significance of this work lies in its argument that positive outcomes are not guaranteed and that the current development path is heavily influenced by commercial interests rather than public good. The authors conclude that communities must actively engage to set their own goals for transportation, balancing individual convenience with collective interests to avoid unintended negative consequences such as congestion, inequality, and privacy erosion.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• acceptance adoption
• driverless ads