Self-driving cars will not replace the experience – they will support people by releasing precious time and raising safety, and herein lie the opportunities for society.
Abstract
Today, the advanced state of technology within the automotive industry raises questions about ethics in the context of autonomous driving, and the ongoing development shows that private transport could face an enormous change. This article examines the negative aspects of traffic and manually-driven vehicles in private transport in modern societies, and how passengers would benefit from autonomous driving. Facing the current development of technology, one conclusion is that manual driving is an anachronism and will be replaced. By explaining the risks and inefficient characteristics of the current traffic components based on data, the paper shows the high potential for optimisation.
Starting with a general look at the purposes of driving in the first part and the state of development, the second part focuses on the significant amounts of time and money people lose by traffic delays, combined with the risks to health and life. In the third part and the outlook, the article explains why technological trends, even unusual ones, are not rejected by the population, and why an adaption is most likely to happen. Key findings are that inefficient traffic is burdened with enormous costs for society in relation to manual driving. It is pointed out that an open and solution-oriented attitude fosters the adaption of autonomous driving. Ethics are not discussed primary as they are seen as a part of early development in the production of autonomous vehicles, and the article refers specifically to a scenario of fully-developed and autonomously-steered vehicles.
Why manual driving is an anachronism and true autonomous driving is a key to better living conditions within society
Author: Jan T. Szolnoki | Editor: Claire McGrath
Introduction
Cars and driving are entrenched parts of modern society and daily life. Although the core mechanics of steering a car have been established for over one hundred years, private transport is at a cusp of change – manual driving is dangerous, inefficient, and time-consuming, and although autonomous vehicles need further development and acceptance, a broad introduction of truly autonomous vehicles will release an enormous amount of resources for humans and their daily life. To avoid misunderstandings, two main purposes of traveling must first be explained. According to Floridi (2019), people travel to reach a destination – here, the focus lies on the movement –, or they travel on a trip, where the intention is the experience itself. Floridi illustrates this aspect by pointing out that people would, most likely, not decide on a luxury sports car just to move from A to B. Self-driving cars will not replace the experience – they will support people by releasing precious time and raising safety, and herein lie the opportunities for society.
Automated driving is a general term that is divided into several grades. Each grade depends on the amount of technical support the driver receives via devices and assistants. In the article, self-driving cars and automated driving will address Level 5 of driving automation according to The Society of Automotive Engineers (2014), which means that the human passenger never has to take action during the journey. Furthermore, this article does not focus strongly on the ethical subject of machine-based decisions, because related problems belong to the early developing stage within the trend and will, most likely, be solved when true autonomous systems are fully established.
Manual driving is an anachronism
Considering the current development and technological possibilities, manual driving is an anachronism. The earliest cars as well as modern vehicles require(d) drivers to accelerate, to slow down, to steer, to observe their surroundings, and to communicate with other drivers. From a technical point of view, the driver now becomes superfluous: Sensors with LIDAR, RADAR, and LASER technology observe the neighbouring cars and potential obstacles, and cameras with picture-analysing algorithms are capable of recognising passengers, traffic signs, or wild animals crossing a street in real time.
In varying levels of quality, these and more assistants are currently available in cars of the medium to premium price segment, in combination with long-established technologies such as lane-keeping assistants, ABS, and cruise control. Via the link to the drive, control over the vehicle can be managed fully by the machine. Other sectors, which are not directly related at first glance, show notable and relevant developments, too. The ever-increasing processing power of microchips enables the implementation of complex but necessary software. A modern state-of-the-art graphics card provides the equivalent processing power of all computers combined only a few decades ago. Significant progress has been made in the development of self-regulating systems – a modern drone from the consumer market is capable of automatically heading for a position, avoiding obstacles, and maintaining a stable position in the air permanently. The recent breakthrough in computing with neural networks led to the development of enhanced algorithms, also made possible by named processing power, which finally serves to improve self-regulating systems, and – all combined – to build cars that have all the necessary attributes to drive autonomously.
While these aspects seem to portray a theoretical background with a hypothetical outlook only, a deeper look into the industry illustrates their relevance. Brands such as MAN, Mercedes, TESLA, Uber, and Volvo are commonly known due to daily media, but there are many companies that are focusing on inventing autonomous vehicles or developing and providing technology which is needed for autonomous driving, e.g. ABB, Cruise, Luminar Technologies, Microsoft, Motional, NVIDIA, Pony.AI, and Zoox.
Manual driving is inefficient and dangerous
Analysing car travel in regards to reaching a destination shows that manual driving is highly inefficient. As soon as cars come together, traffic arises. Modern traffic is managed by traffic lights, crossings, traffic signs, and mandatory rules – all set up and optimised for human drivers and therefore inefficient, because they permanently interrupt fluent traffic or slow down cars, and are limited by the response times of the human body and by the traffic management models upon which the traffic lights and street infrastructure are based. To avoid reaching the wrong conclusion, one has to acknowledge that the causes of an inefficient traffic system are not the human limitations and the technical components alone, but also the sheer amount of people using cars individually. Combined, both accumulate, leading to noticeable harm to individuals and society as a whole.
Extensive data collected by INRIX (Pishue 2023, 13–23) show that in Germany, the economic damage caused by traffic delays in the year 2022 was € 3.9 billion, and it was $ 81 billion in the United States. In a ranking of 25 cities, five had a delay per driver and year of over 100 hours – starting with 107 hours in Rome and topped by 156 hours in London. The individual average time loss in Germany for the year 2022 was 40 hours, and it was 51 hours in the United States. Due to a correlation of delay time and additional individual costs, London was in the top ranks with £ 1,377 per driver per year and outranked by several cities of the United States such as New York City ($ 1,976) or Chicago ($ 2,618). While these numbers outline the huge amount of monetary resources lost, a closer look at the day-to-day situation within cities highlights the potential for improvement in a more tangible way.
Although tempo limits for cities are a permanent source of discourse and debate, especially in the political context, the actual data shows that even cities with a fast average tempo fail to exeed a Downtown Speed of 30 km/h. The definition of Downtown Speed according to INRIX is “The speed at which a driver can expect to travel one mile into the central business district during AM peak hours” (Pishue 2023, 11). In 2022, the Downton Speed of Cologne was 27 km/h, the Downtown Speed of Munich, London, and New York City was 18 km/h. The INRIX report examines traffic delays only, which means that all previous numbers describe additional costs. The fundamental amount of time people spend driving is significantly higher: Taking the United States as an example, in 2021, 245 million drivers spent 91 billion hours behind the steering wheel – on average, one hour per person per day (Tefft 2022, 1). Despite all presented data, one cannot deny that modern life, society and the economy would be impossible in its current form without personal transport. In Germany, the gross value added depending on traffic is quantified at € 88 billion in 2010 (Statistisches Bundesamt 2013, 5). Nevertheless, the high potential for freeing-up time should have become obvious.
While pure economical disadvantages can seem to be a necessary evil, accidents are a more serious aspect. Although individual traffic enables a highly functional economy and society, manual driving is dangerous and a burden. In 2021, Germans generated a traffic volume of 686 billion vehicle kilometres, leading to 2,562 road deaths (ITF 2022, 15, 30). In 2023, about 2.4 million accidents were recorded, 361,134 persons injured, and 2,788 fatalities1. The utilitarian thought that approximately 4 road deaths per billion vehicle kilometres must be accepted to maintain modern society is refuted when examining the causes of accidents. According to Statistisches Bundesamt, 90 % of such accidents are caused by human error (2013, 38). Typical causes are not highly complex situations, but minor inattention and mistakes, for example, while turning, driving backwards, starting or stopping the vehicle, and, in general, driving at inadequate driving speeds.
The assumption that autonomous vehicles will be implemented only when fully developed, leads to the conclusion that most accidents are avoidable and pointless. Additional to the risks to health or life, there is an ecological dimension, too. Numerous studies examine the socio-economic costs of congestion and stop-and-go driving, coming to the conclusion that participants as well as third parties are affected in a way that traffic must be optimised – opening its own field for research, which would extend beyond the scope of this paper.
People are open to future technology and keen to adapt
Although the stage of development is early, the subject is discussed intensely, and several problems need to be resolved, acceptance will arguably come. In their study about the acceptance of autonomous driving, Fraedrich and Lenz (2016, 636) state that new technologies are not rejected per se, especially in Germany, where devices and gear are part of daily life. In terms of the media, an important finding was that the reactions on the topic vary, depending on the character of aspects occurring in the content: Advantageous information gained more positive feedback, while risks, issues, or disadvantageous aspects led to a more negative reaction (2016, 631–633). Most of the positive statements related to safety, reliability, comfort, and traffic optimisation, while most of the negative statements referred to social consequences, data misuse, and technical infrastructure (2016, 631).
In general, most statements could be found within the law and liability context, followed by thoughts about driving, ownership, and design. Compared, these findings are underpinned by data from the Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index (Threlfall 2018, 42–50): There is a strong correlation between the implementation of related technology and acceptance. Countries, which are leading in topics such as policy and legislation, technology and innovation, infrastructure, and with people living in test areas, show a high consumer acceptance. This underlines the importance of a solution-oriented dialogue and attitude.
Progress has never been preventable, and curiosity about inventions and science fiction has been entrenched in pop culture far over 100 years. Jules Verne’s most renowned books Journey to the Centre of the Earth (1864), 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1869), and Around the World in Eighty Days (1872) tell stories about strong characters and fascinating, futuristic machines or visionary undertakings at the same time. Isaac Asimov dedicated a significant part of his writing to the conflicts between intelligent machines and humanity. K.I.T.T., a car equipped with enhanced devices and artificial intelligence, was a core element of Knight Rider, a British television show, popular in the 1980s, and unknowingly predicted the future. With Blade Runner (1982), Ridley Scott created a film classic, illustrating the dilemmas humans could face in consequence of their technological creations.
The history of the car itself shows that new technologies mostly come with initial difficulties which are outgrown during the product cycle, and its genesis did not stop when the safety belt, airbags, or indicators were introduced. The most burning questions relate to automated, machine-based decisions in life-threatening situations. While there are innumerable possible scenarios, all have in common that they are variations of the trolley dilemma. At one point, humans must code guidelines into the firmware of the vehicle on which decision to make, even when the death of a person is inevitable and lifes must be weighed. This would be a legitimate argument, especially because delegating the responsibility to the machine without the chance to intervene is a yet unknown situation. Nevertheless, the key could be found in the technological design: If autonomous vehicles were built in a way that the probability of calamities converges to zero, a heavily discussed issue would become a niche scenario. The size of the industry and the importance of the subject lead to plentiful publications about safety, risks, and legal aspects, all embedded in an ecosystem of networks, panels, and frameworks, which raises the opportunity to find solutions for burning questions quickly; at least, in the long term.
The outcome – what it means for society
Most people with a driving license in Germany learned manual gear shifting, and driving a car is, in varying intensities, part of their whole lifes. The system is familiar and established. Nevertheless, gadgets and trends which facilitate an easier life tend to spread quickly. An autonomous driving system is the most convenient way of traveling by car and is a continuation of such established aids as cruise control and lane-keeping assistants, and is an analogy to the computer, which replaced the typewriter and slide rule. While autonomous vehicles offer a more convenient travelling experience and modern technology can save lifes, the most interesting aspect is the saved time.
When the potato was introduced to European agriculture in the 16th century, a societal revolution was the result, because due to the energy density and the opulence of the crop, it was easier to provide people with food, and more citizens had the chance to specialise in other professions. Facing the billions of hours of time people could spend otherwise, a noticeable effect must be expected. Even if productivity did not rise because people preferred leisure time over additional working time whilst travelling, there would nonetheless be a positive outcome: The population would simply become more relaxed due to the additional regeneration time, resulting in a relief of the health care system and in positive side effects on private life and job. In a scenario in which people use their time effectively, new ideas would foster creative and business projects, gaining a socio-economic outcome over the long term. The advantages are too strong to be ignored.
1DESTATIS, Press release No. 160 of 21st April 2023
Bibliography
Floridi, Luciano. 2019. “Autonomous Vehicles: From Whether and When to Where and How”. Philosophy & Technology. 32, 569–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-019–00384‑5
Fraederich, Eva and Barbara Lenz. 2016. “Societal and Individual Acceptance of Autonomous Driving”. In: Autonomous Driving, edited by Markus Maurer, J. Christian Gerdes, Barbara Lenz, Hermann Winner (eds.).. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3‑662–48847-8_29
Gebru, Biniam, Lydia Zeleke, Daniel Blankson, Mahmoud Nabil, Shamila Nateghi, Abdollah Homaifar, and Edward Tunstel. 2022. “A Review on Human–Machine Trust Evaluation: Human-Centric and Machine-Centric Perspectives”. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON HUMAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS, VOL. 52, NO. 5. DOI: 10.1109/THMS.2022.3144956.
ITF. 2022. Road Safety Annual Report 2022. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Maurer, M., J. Christian Gerdes, Barbara Lenz, Hermann Winner (eds.). Autonomous Driving. 2016. 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3‑662–48847-8_29
Pishue, Bob. 2023. 2022 INRIX Global Traffic Scorecard. INRIX. https://inrix.com/scorecard/
Statistisches Bundesamt. 2013. Verkehr auf einen Blick. Order number: 0080006–13900‑1. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Branchen-Unternehmen/Transport-Verkehr/Publikationen/Downloads-Querschnitt/broschuere-verkehr-blick-0080006139004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
Tefft, Brian C. 2022. American Driving Survey: 2020–2021. Research Brief. Washington, D.C.: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
Threlfall, Richard. 2018. Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index. KPMG International. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2018/01/avri.pdf