Self-Driving Cars: Science and Policy Regulations

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Benefit for the Public Despite Accidents
Allocation of Risk
Required Information for Customers
Data Necessary for Investors
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Technology has shaped the present-day world, and many things, which previously existed only in science fiction books, have become part of everyday reality. The next incredible invention that is about to enter peoples daily routine is a self-driven vehicle. The first driverless cars are already being tested under human supervision, but it will probably take a few decades for such vehicles to be marketed on a broad scale (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). Since the emergence of self-driving cars for a wide use appears to be only a matter of time, the public is concerned about several issues related to the proliferation of such machines. Scientists dispute about the ethical side of this innovation, namely, whether self-driving cars are safer than those operated by humans. Policy regulators argue over the question of who should be responsible for car crashes involving driverless vehicles. Further, potential consumers and investors are interested in what opportunities self-driving cars have to offer them. This paper aims at shedding light on the mentioned issues. Research into driverless vehicles shows that they may potentially benefit humanity by reducing the risk of accidents.

Benefit for the Public Despite Accidents

One of the primary concerns about self-driving cars is whether they will benefit the public despite accidents and violations related to the introduction of the new technology. In order to answer this question, scientists often compare the safety of human-driven cars and that of driverless vehicles for both drivers and pedestrians. According to Sparrow and Howard (2017), people driving cars cause deaths of 1.25 million individuals per year around the world, and 90% of all car accidents result from human errors and behaviors. Self-driving vehicles could decrease the rate of accidents by approximately 90%, thus saving more than 30,000 lives and preventing numerous crash-related injuries in America (U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform [ILR], 2018). Bob Lutz, the chairman of General Motors, explains this by the fact that the autonomous car doesnt drink, doesnt do drugs, doesnt text while driving, and doesnt get road rage. Autonomous cars dont race other autonomous cars, and they dont go to sleep (as cited in ILR, 2018, p. 1). Therefore, driverless cars that do not require human intervention in the driving process would definitely benefit the public.

However, the current state of technology development allows for producing cars that need human supervision in certain cases. Out of six levels of automation, which range from 0 to 5, present-day self-driving vehicles have level 3 or 4 (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). It implies that most control is transferred to the vehicle, but the driver should watch the situation on the road and be prepared to take action (Ryan, 2019). The problem is that ordinary people tend to stop paying attention to tasks that are irrelevant to them at the moment (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). Therefore, they are likely to be distracted from the road while driving an autonomous vehicle. It will take a driver at least 2 seconds to regain awareness of the traffic situation and respond, but, frequently, it may take more than half a minute (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). Furthermore, once driverless vehicles are considered quite reliable, peoples driving skills will worsen, which will prevent them from handling emergencies on the road effectively (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). Thus, as long as driverless cars require human intervention, their widespread use will apparently bring little benefit.

As soon as self-driving cars gain the highest level of autonomy, they will become a much safer means of transportation than human-driven cars due to the elimination of human errors. Autonomous vehicles may benefit the public not only in terms of safety. Driverless cars may also reduce traffic congestion and increase road capacity fivefold (Davis, 2016). Since self-driving vehicles are going to be equipped with electric engines, their use will also contribute to saving the environment from air pollution (Ryan, 2019). The new technology may positively affect economics since people will be able to devote time to work while sitting in a driverless car or surf the Internet, thus increasing the revenue of digital media (Davis, 2016). Furthermore, autonomous vehicles will be available for children, elderly and disabled people, as well as other individuals restricted from driving human-driven cars, which will facilitate the process of transportation for them (Sparrow & Howard, 2017). Thus, although at the beginning of the widespread use of self-driving cars, accidents and violations stemming from the introduction of new technology may occur, in the long run, this innovation will benefit the public.

Allocation of Risk

The development of driverless vehicles has made policy regulators think about who should be responsible for the accidents involving such cars. With vehicles having level 0-2 automation, this question does not arise since the car movement is completely under human control (Ryan, 2019). However, at higher levels of automation difficulties emerge because the vehicle takes at least part of control over the situation on the road. Most current laws regulating road traffic utilize the term driver that is defined as a person who drives or is in actual physical control of a vehicle (Davis, 2016, para. 25). In the case of driverless cars, this term becomes hardly applicable, which will make the enforcement of laws using it more complicated (Davis, 2016). Hence, the adjustment of legislation to the new technology requires redefining key terms in the first place.

In some states, governments have already passed some laws regarding self-driving cars. For example, in Nevada and California, the term operator was introduced into laws, which was defined as the person behind the controls or who causes the technology to engage (ILR, 2018, p. 4). The law in these states makes the operator liable for any road accident involving an autonomous vehicle (ILR, 2018). However, there is an opinion that automakers should be responsible for accidents that involve cars manufactured by them (ILR, 2018). For example, knowing that the vehicle can drive on its own, a person may engage in reading or fall asleep, thus being not able to intervene when a dangerous situation occurs on the road. Nevertheless, in such cases, manufacturers should not be liable for car crashes because, although they cannot prevent all the accidents, they still offer technology that is safer than non-autonomous vehicles (ILR, 2018). Therefore, it should be recommended that automakers should not be responsible for car crashes that happened because of operators negligence.

Yet, the American Association for Justice (AAJ) would not agree with this recommendation. It asserts that even though driverless vehicles can make a significant contribution to public safety, manufacturers should be liable for any car accident involving autonomous vehicles (ILR, 2018). However, if companies developing driverless cars will be blamed for all car crashes, even those occurring due to peoples negligence, it may hinder the future technology advancements (ILR, 2018). Therefore, the recommended allocation of risks may be that automakers should be liable only for accidents, in which the car itself caused damage, for example, in the case of equipment malfunction.

At the beginning of the new technology implementation, state and federal legislatures should perform the allocation of risks. So far, NHTSA has developed guidelines for manufacturers as to the design, safety, and performance requirements of autonomous cars, while making state governments responsible for regulating human drivers and the operation of driverless cars (ILR, 2018). Hence, federal and state authorities should lay the foundation for autonomous vehicles legislation and define the basic principles of liability in this field. However, when driverless cars become widespread, there will be more work for courts. Since lawmakers cannot predict all the possible accidents that may involve self-driving vehicles, courts will have to decide on the liability in specific cases, thus establishing precedents and improving autonomous vehicles legislation.

Required Information for Customers

Driverless cars are still a novelty for many people, so potential customers may need more information about such vehicles before buying them. The first thing to consider is whether it makes sense to buy a car rather than rent it. Experts say that by 2030, people will have shifted from the model of car ownership to mobility as a service (Silver, 2017, para. 9). The next concern is the type of motor that a vehicle possesses. So far, not all automobiles are electric due to the large oil industry, but the oncoming development of lithium-ion solid-state batteries can significantly increase the number of electric cars (Silver, 2017). Customers will still be required to pass driving tests, but they will be different (Silver, 2017). New tests will make sure that drivers know how to operate a particular system used in their driverless cars (Silver, 2017). Buyers will also need insurance as car owners, the terms of which may be specified by manufacturers (Silver, 2017). It is also necessary to know that driverless vehicles can be hacked (Silver, 2017). However, automakers are likely to take measures to handle security breaches.

Data Necessary for Investors

The development of driverless cars has attracted the attention of investors to the automotive industry. For example, in 2017, there were 190 investments in companies developing autonomous vehicles, and the total amount of investments was more than $4.4 billion (Krpata, Ferrari, & Geiger, 2019). Before investing in the driverless vehicle industry, investors should consider terms of intellectual property agreements between their preferred company and its partners (Krpata et al., 2019). Furthermore, they should pay attention to how the company deals with security issues related to the use of software in autonomous vehicles. (Krpata et al., 2019). Potential investors have to be aware of the policy regulations regarding the issues with driverless vehicles and watch how the company follows them (Krpata et al., 2019). Finally, it is necessary to make sure that the company protects its technical and confidential information so that it does not fall into the hands of competitors (Krpata et al., 2019). Autonomous vehicles are a new industry, so potential investors should get familiar with its features before making investments.

Conclusion

In conclusion, self-driving cars are the latest development that is going to change the way people move along the roads. Despite accidents that are inevitable at the early stage of the new technology introduction, autonomous vehicles will benefit the public in terms of safety, road capacity, environmental improvement, and economic gains. Driverless cars make policy regulators concern about the allocation of risks, and it may be recommended that automakers should not be liable for accidents occurred because of drivers negligence. There are still many issues related to autonomous vehicles, such as insufficient regulations and the possibility of security breaches. However, further development of this new technology is likely to bring the world to a safer future.

References

Davis, K. (2016). Preparing for a future with autonomous vehicles.The Police Chief, 83. Web.

Krpata, K. C., Ferrari, J., & Geiger, M. (2019). The race to autonomy: Investor considerations for investments in autonomous vehicle companies. Web.

Ryan, M. (2019). The future of transportation: Ethical, legal, social and economic impacts of self-driving vehicles in the year 2025.Science and Engineering Ethics. Web.

Silver, J. (2017).Twelve things you need to know about driverless cars. Web.

Sparrow, R., & Howard, M. (2017). When human beings are like drunk robots: Driverless vehicles, ethics, and the future of transport. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 80, 206-215.

U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. (2018). Torts of the future: Autonomous vehicles. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!