Planning for walking and cycling in an autonomous-vehicle future

Botello, Bryan; Buehler, Ralph; Hankey, Steve; Mondschein, Andrew; Jiang, Zhiqiu

doi:10.1016/j.trip.2019.100012

Cited by 48 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the evaluation of crash avoidance possibilities, it is assumed that even if HAVs are able to identify the presence of nearby pedestrians, they are not able to assess pedestrians' intentions (e.g., intentions to cross the street). This assumption is based on the results of the literature review by Rasouli and Tsotsos [18] and the expert survey by Botello et al [22], which state that the current algorithms cannot assess pedestrians' intentions in a way that the information could be used for automated driving. Based on the assumption, the evaluation of crash avoidance is made with two approaches related to different ambitions in traffic; could a HAV in a similar crash scene instead of the driver-managed car manage to avoid the crash, if prioritizing (1) pedestrian safety or (2) efficient traffic flow?…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing Safety or Traffic Flow? Qualitative Study on Highly Automated Vehicles’ Potential to Prevent Pedestrian Crashes with Two Different Ambitions

Utriainen

Pöllänen

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interaction between drivers and pedestrians enables pedestrians to cross the street without conflicts. When highly automated vehicles (HAVs) become prevalent, interaction will change. Although HAVs manage to identify pedestrians, they may not be able to assess pedestrians' intentions. This study discusses two different ambitions: Prioritizing pedestrian safety and prioritizing efficient traffic flow; and how these two affect the possibilities to avoid fatal crashes between pedestrians and passenger cars. HAVs' hypothetical possibilities to avoid different crash scenarios are evaluated based on 40 in-depth investigated fatal pedestrian crashes, which occurred with manually-driven cars in Finland in 2014-2016. When HAVs prioritize pedestrian safety, they decrease speed near pedestrians as a precaution which affects traffic flow due to frequent decelerations. When HAVs prioritize efficient traffic flow, they only decelerate, when pedestrians are in a collision course. The study shows that neither of these approaches can be applied in all traffic environments, and all of the studied crashes would not likely be avoidable with HAVs even when prioritizing pedestrian safety. The high expectations of HAVs' safety benefits may not be realized, and in addition to safety and traffic flow, there are many other objectives in traffic which need to be considered.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing Safety or Traffic Flow? Qualitative Study on Highly Automated Vehicles’ Potential to Prevent Pedestrian Crashes with Two Different Ambitions

Utriainen

Pöllänen

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, automated driving could increase the effectiveness of cars to the detriment of public transport and non-motorized mobility. In particular, active mobility could be adversely affected, with negative consequences for health; conflicts between AVs and pedestrians and cyclists could also arise [38][39][40].…”

Section: The Impacts Of Avs On the City And The Role Of Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward Policies to Manage the Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on the City: A Visioning Exercise

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is great uncertainty about the transition from human to autonomous driving vehicles (AVs), as well as about the extent and direction of their potential impacts on the urban built environment. Planners are aware of the importance of leading this transition but are hesitant about how to proceed, and public administrations generally show a passive attitude. One of the reasons is the difficulty of defining long-term visions and identifying transition paths to achieve the desired future. The literature on AVs is growing rapidly but most of the visions proposed so far do not consider in detail how circulation and parking of AVs will (or could) be differently regulated in cities. In this study, three visions for the Italian city of Turin are proposed. The aim of these visions is to highlight how different forms of regulation of AV circulation and parking can impact on the sustainability and livability of the city. A focus group and a set of interviews with experts and stakeholders were used to validate the three visions and assess their advisability and sustainability. This visioning exercise is the first step in the development of a backcasting process.

show abstract

“…For example, once AVs are in common use, individuals may feel either safer on the roads or more concerned about being close to traffic ( Blau et al, 2018 ; Pyrialakou et al, 2020 ). It is also unknown whether the convenience of door-to-door, affordable, and shared AV services may increase or decrease the numbers of those choosing to cycle ( Botello et al, 2019 ; Truong et al, 2017 ). The limited exploratory work available to date suggests that there may be substantial declines in cycling once affordable, convenient, automated options are available ( Booth et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomous vehicles and cycling: Policy implications and management issues

Pettigrew

Nelson

Norman

2020

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cycling as a form of active transport has great benefits for individuals and society, yet prevalence rates in many countries are low. The advent of autonomous vehicles (AVs) is likely to have substantial implications for cyclists, however little is known about the nature and magnitude of the likely impacts and the resulting implications for government planning and policy. The aim of this exploratory study was to consult with a range of stakeholder groups to identify relevant issues and stimulate debate about future efforts to maximize the benefits of vehicle autonomy for cycling outcomes. Interviews were conducted with key stakeholders representing government (local, state, and federal departments responsible for transport, health, and/or infrastructure), cycling organizations, technology firms, AV manufacturing/servicing companies, trade unions, the law, insurers (public and private), transport policy consortia, and academia. The results suggest that AVs have the potential to increase cycling prevalence while reducing cycling accidents, but that a range of issues will need to be addressed to optimize these outcomes. In particular, informed decisions need to be made about the infrastructure and equipment investments that could encourage larger numbers of commuters to select cycling as their primary form of transport.

show abstract

Planning for walking and cycling in an autonomous-vehicle future

Cited by 48 publications

References 6 publications

Prioritizing Safety or Traffic Flow? Qualitative Study on Highly Automated Vehicles’ Potential to Prevent Pedestrian Crashes with Two Different Ambitions

Prioritizing Safety or Traffic Flow? Qualitative Study on Highly Automated Vehicles’ Potential to Prevent Pedestrian Crashes with Two Different Ambitions

Toward Policies to Manage the Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on the City: A Visioning Exercise

Autonomous vehicles and cycling: Policy implications and management issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About