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

  • Kapsch looks to the future
    December 16, 2014
    Colin Sowman reports from a two-day meeting where industry leaders, academics and political advisers presented their thoughts on the future of mobility. Most governments do not dare to introduce tolling systems… they are too frightened.” So said Georg Kapsch in his capacity of chief operating officer of Kapsch TrafficCom, during a forward-looking press event at the company’s headquarters in Vienna.
  • Switching Atlanta onto MaaS
    May 9, 2019
    It’s easy to talk about MaaS in the abstract – but MaaS isn’t going to work if it’s just a theory. Colin Sowman speaks to one woman about the practical benefits - and difficulties - of getting out of her car and switching to public transit in Atlanta, Georgia One of the first goals of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) inventor Sampo Hietanen is that MaaS should persuade households they don’t need a second car. This is starting to happen - even in the car-dominated US. Last year, authorities in the state of Ge
  • PTV opens software to Ukraine aid
    March 9, 2022
    Firm is giving free route planning expertise to humanitarian convoys after Russia invasion
  • Video analytics enhances urban rail safety
    December 16, 2016
    David Crawford explores some promising innovations for North American commuters. North America is experiencing a surge in commuter rail and metro development. The US now has 75 light rail and metro networks in operation; and California, in particular, is actively exploring ways of developing the state’s existing passenger rail operations into a fully integrated system.