Public Preferences of Shared Autonomous Vehicles in Developing Countries: A Cross-National Study of Pakistan and China

Abstract

Shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs) are rapidly emerging as a viable alternative form of public transportation with the potential to provide adequate and user-friendly, on-demand services without having vehicle ownership. It has been argued that SAVs could revolutionize transportation systems and our current way of life. Although SAVs are likely to be introduced in developed countries first, there is little doubt that they would also have a significant effect and enormous market in developing nations. This study aimed to investigate the factors that influence public acceptance of SAVs, as well as the current public attitude toward SAVs, in two developing countries, namely, Pakistan and China. A stated preference survey was conducted to understand respondents’ travel patterns, preferences, and sociodemographic data. A total of 910 valid responses were gathered: 551 from Lahore, Pakistan, and 359 from Dalian, China. A multinomial logit model and a mixed multinomial logit model with panel effect were used for data analysis. The results suggested that generic attributes, such as respondents’ waiting time, travel time, and travel cost were found to be significant in both cities. The results indicate that sociodemographic characteristics, such as education, income, travel frequency in a week, and people who had driver’s licenses, are significantly correlated with respondents’ interest in using SAV in Lahore. The results also showed that people who had a private car indicated a greater interest in SAVs in Dalian. The study provides a new perspective to understand the public preferences toward SAVs in developing countries with different economies and cultures, as well as a benchmark for policymakers to make effective policies for the future implementation of SAVs.

Autonomous Vehicle Adoption in Developing Countries: Futurist Insights

“…Clustered Factors (5) These factors are not effective or dependent enough to be included in the previous classifications. No definite conclusions can be drawn about these factors and their effect on the system.…”

“…The increased demand for transportation brought on by rapid urbanization exacerbates existing infrastructure constraints. Number of factors has contributed to this crisis, including a lack of investment in transportation infrastructure, an inadequate supply of public transit options, ineffective traffic management, and a general lack of technical understanding and expertise [5].…”

Analyzing Spatial Location Preference of Urban Activities with Mode-Dependent Accessibility Using Integrated Land Use–Transport Models

“…However, the literature demonstrates that these techniques have largely ignored taking into account subtle details of accessibility, such as those relating to a specific time of day or mode [17,18]. Due to rapid motorization, urbanization, and population growth, cities in developing nations face severe challenges such as traffic congestion, traffic accidents, increasing demand for land, environmental pollution, and the impact on the existing demand and supply for the transportation system, which ultimately impacts public health, city sustainability, and the country's economy [19][20][21]. Most developed countries, such as the United States and countries in Europe, have implemented integrated land use-transport models for sustainable urban planning [22,23].…”

Evaluating Locational Preference of Urban Activities with the Time-Dependent Accessibility Using Integrated Spatial Economic Models

“…The fast growth of the economy and the continuous advancement of urbanization introduces many problems and challenges to cities in both developed and developing countries alike [ 19 ]. The continuous expansion of cities, the increasing demand for land, traffic congestion, and environmental pollution have begun to constrain the development of society and the economy [ 20 ]. Among them, traffic congestion has placed enormous pressure on urban development and the residential lifestyle [ 21 ].…”