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 downside of driverless vehicles
    October 27, 2016
    Driverless cars will have a detrimental effect on congestion and security while the road safety benefits can be achieved sooner and cheaper using ADAS, argues Colin Sowman. Many Governments are consulting about the introduction of driverless vehicles and even running trials. As 70% or 80% of crashes are caused by human error, the promise of a crash-free future of driverless, self-driving or autonomous vehicles (call them what you will) is alluring, as are the claims of reduced congestion and lower emissions
  • Call for a new vision for ITS in America
    February 1, 2012
    An ITIF report published at the beginning of this year stated that America is falling behind other developed nations in terms of ITS technologies and their deployment to address safety, congestion and environmental challenges. The report asked for a stronger commitment from the US federal government (see 'Just crawling along', interview with senior ITIF analyst Stephen Ezell, ITS International March-April 2010, pp.NA1-NA2) in order to address what it sees as increasing disparities with other countries. The
  • Call for a new vision for ITS in America
    February 6, 2012
    Pete Goldin talks to Dr. Joseph Sussman, Chairman of the ITS Program Advisory Committee, about the state of intelligent transport systems in America
  • Videalert provides full time enforcement with part time workload
    March 19, 2014
    Videalert says its algorithms on automated enforcement can reduce the workload on staff while providing an effective deterrent to offenders. Colin Sowman reports. While members of the public may believe that the enforcement of parking regulations, bus lanes and box junctions has no practical benefit and is purely a money-making operation, for many authorities the opposite is true. Enforcement is a loss-making but vital exercise as illegally parked vehicles create obstructions and dangers leading to gridl