Skip to main content

Comment: ‘Sleepwalk into a new dawn? No thanks’

We need a grown-up discussion about the possible societal effects of driverless vehicles
October 19, 2021 Read time: 2 mins
Adam Hill, ITS International editor

Technological advances inevitably bring change. In many ways, this is positive. The list of inventions which have improved human existence, from the wheel onwards, is long and distinguished.

The ITS industry thrives on innovation – yet it is surely possible to suggest that not all technology is good for us. Parents may often feel this when they see how long teenagers spend looking at their screens. Having said that, good luck trying to take a smartphone off a teenager.

The idea of autonomous vehicles (AVs) is attractive. We can do it, so we will do it. But are there downsides to AVs? Leaving aside the thorny issue of their integration into existing traffic, are there other considerations we should be worried about? One of the arguments which is often made for AVs is their potential contribution to road safety, removing human error.

But are there other ways in which AVs could lead to more deaths and destroy more lives than their manual counterparts? My esteemed predecessor as editor of ITS International, Colin Sowman, argues that there are. In this issue of ITS International he outlines his thinking, looking at the human cost of greater automation in the transport industry. The potential for a rise in suicides – particularly among young men – is chief among his worries.

Not everyone will agree with this assessment. But at present, it is not even a point of view which is getting much of an airing.

If he is right, does that mean we should halt development of AVs? No, absolutely not. Does it mean we should ask more questions about the societal impact of AVs? Yes, definitely.

You can make a lot of claims for AVs, but saying they are an ally in the movement towards sustainable transportation may not be one of them. At a time when there is genuine, and justified, concern about greenhouse gas emissions, does it make sense to develop products which may bring the level of vehicle occupancy down to less than one?

AVs cannot be blamed for society’s problems – after all, there are hardly any on the road yet.

But to simply sleepwalk into a promised bright new dawn without pausing to have a grown-up discussion about the possible downsides? That would suggest we’ve learned nothing.

Related Content

  • The problem of mass transit ridership post-Covid 19
    June 9, 2020
    Several pillars of Mobility as a Service – notably public transit, ride-share and micromobility – are under pressure as ridership plummets.
  • Roadside infrastructure key to in-vehicle deployment
    November 28, 2013
    The implementation of in-vehicle systems will require multilateral cooperation, as Honda’s Sue Bai explains to Colin Sowman. Vehicle manufacturers will shape the future direction of in-vehicle ITS systems, but they can’t do it on their own. So to find out what they see on the horizon, and the obstacles they face, ITS International spoke to Sue Bai, principal engineer in the Automobile Technology Research Department with Honda R&D Americas. Not only does she play an important role in Honda’s US-based ITS
  • Q&A: Samuel Johnson, IBTTA
    February 18, 2020
    Samuel Johnson, chief operations officer for the Transportation Corridor Agencies in Orange County, California - and 2020 IBTTA president - talks about his background and career...
  • Advanced booking: what are transportation leaders reading?
    August 21, 2023
    There’s never been more information available to us via online platforms, rolling TV news and social media channels. In this environment, does the old-fashioned book still have something to offer? We asked a few transportation leaders what they were reading…