Would self-driving vehicles increase occupant productivity?

New research by Michael Sivak and Brandon Schoettle of the University of Michigan Sustainable Worldwide Transportation indicates that currently, in the US the average occupant of a light-duty vehicle spends about an hour a day travelling—time that could potentially be put to more productive use. Indeed, increased productivity is one of the expected benefits of self-driving vehicles.
September 16, 2016 Read time: 2 mins

New research by Michael Sivak and Brandon Schoettle of the University of Michigan.

Sustainable Worldwide Transportation indicates that currently, in the US the average occupant of a light-duty vehicle spends about an hour a day travelling—time that could potentially be put to more productive use. Indeed, increased productivity is one of the expected benefits of self-driving vehicles.

The data presented in this white paper indicate that for about 62 per cent of Americans, self-driving vehicles currently are not likely to result in an improvement in productivity. This is the case because 23 per cent said they would not ride in such vehicles and 36 per cent would be so apprehensive in such vehicles that they would only watch the road. Furthermore, out of the remaining 41 per cent, around eight per cent would frequently experience some level of motion sickness—for an additional three per cent of occupants.

Of additional concern are non-traditional positions and postures being considered for occupants of self-driving vehicles (positions and postures for which current occupant protection systems are not optimised), and the behaviour in crashes of unrestrained objects being used for activities in the pursuit of increased productivity.

Consequently, the hoped-for increased productivity in self-driving vehicles would materialise only if the following are achieved: (1) an increased confidence of occupants in self-driving vehicles, which would allow them to be more interested in performing productive tasks while riding in such vehicles; (2) addressing the inherent motion-sickness problem; and (3) solving occupant-protection issues related to non-traditional seating positions and postures, and unrestrained objects becoming projectiles during crashes (or potentially being placed between the occupants and their airbags).

Also of importance is the fact that current trips in light-duty vehicles average only about 19 minutes - a rather short duration for sustained productive activity or invigorating sleep.

Location Based Systems

Related Content

  • May 13, 2024
    The real case for driverless mobility
    What will automated driving really be good for? Bern Grush of Urban Robotics Foundation offers his thoughts on the big issues around its implementation - and suggests a newly-published book might point the way forward
    Read More
  • January 30, 2012
    In-vehicle systems as enforcement enablers?
    From an enforcement perspective at least, Toyota's recent recalls over problems with accelerator pedal assemblies had a positive outcome in that for the first time a major motor manufacturer outside of the US acknowledged publicly what many have known or suspected for quite a while: that the capability exists within certain car companies to extract data from a vehicle onboard unit which can be used to help ascertain, if not prove outright, just what was happening in the vital seconds up to an accident or cr
    Read More
  • February 1, 2012
    Positive incentives an alternative to road user charging?
    The Netherlands has been looking at incentivising rush-hour avoidance. The intention is to better understand road users' motivations and find alternatives to congestion charging. Something significant needs to happen if we are to adequately address the traffic congestion and other issues caused by the ever-rising numbers of vehicles on our roads. Congestion or distance-based charging is seen as one way of managing demand and raising revenue for improvements to transport infrastructure. However, charging is
    Read More
  • December 4, 2012
    Assessing the potential of in-vehicle enforcement systems
    Jason Barnes considers the social and ethical ramifications of using in-vehicle safety technologies to fulfil enforcement functions. Although policy documents often imply close correlation between enforcement, compliance and safety – in part, as a counter to accusations that enforcement is rather more concerned with revenue generation – there is a noticeable reluctance among policy makers and auto manufacturers to exploit in-vehicle safety systems for enforcement applications. From a technical perspective t
    Read More

Highlighted Content