Societal Risk Constellations for Autonomous Driving. Analysis, Historical Context and Assessment

Grunwald, Armin

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-48847-8_30

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What is presumed here is that a system, freed of human intervention to the greatest possible extent, would run error free. However, further automation will increase the coupling between the car and the transportation system; distributing the act of driving among different instances, human actors, and non-human actors will bring about so-called constellations of collective inter-agency, which are also highly error-prone (Perrow, 1984; Rammert, 2014) with regard to autonomous driving: (Grunwald, 2016: 645–648). The attempt to eliminate the risk arising from the “human factor” in the mobility system gives rise to risks evolving from closely coupled, complex, and hybrid systems.…”

Section: Findings: Responsibility Acceptance Rationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsibility, rationality, and acceptance: How future users of autonomous driving are constructed in stakeholders’ sociotechnical imaginaries

Graf

Sonnberger

2019

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although autonomous driving is expected to provide a solution for various mobility-related issues, ideas on how the technology will actually unfold are vague. Nevertheless, stakeholders in the field hold expectations about the technology and the future users. With very few exceptions, so far research does not focus on these expectations as social constructions of individuals and publics. In addition, these perceptions play only a minor role in the technology-centered debate. Thus, to bring these perceptions to light and to analyze their implications, we draw on the sociotechnical imaginaries approach to reconstruct stakeholders’ views of future users and publics. We perform a qualitative content analysis and show that imaginaries unfold along the themes of responsibility for the process of driving, rationality in decision-making, and acceptance for emerging technologies. We discuss how the themes relate to each other, what role science plays, and what implications follow from the respective stakeholders’ views.

show abstract

Section: Findings: Responsibility Acceptance Rationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsibility, rationality, and acceptance: How future users of autonomous driving are constructed in stakeholders’ sociotechnical imaginaries

Graf

Sonnberger

2019

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assessments, therefore, depend on whether people enter into the risk voluntarily or not, whether they feel a personal benefit, and whether the risk is natural or manmade. Moreover, risk perception depends on risk communication ( 9 , 12 , 13 ).…”

Section: Fundamental Safety Requirements and Current Road Safetymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first two groups are the users of the vehicle and the potentially involved accident partner, who could be any individual traffic participant. Grunwald explains that the reason for the different views on accepted risk of the two groups results from the benefits the groups get ( 9 ). The third group is society.…”

Section: Safety Requirements Of Different Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is the EU policy of Vision Zero (7), which demands zero victims in traffic, but there are also concepts that promote the introduction of automated vehicles because with the knowledge and the data from the mileage recorded in the market, the systems can be improved faster and lives saved (8). We also know that acceptance of risk depends on the individual benefit (9). These statements raise some questions:…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Macroscopic Safety Requirements for Highly Automated Driving

Junietz

Steininger

Winner

2019

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The common expectation for highly automated vehicles (HAVs) is that an introduction will lead to increased road safety and a reduction in traffic fatalities—at least in relation to the mileage. However, quantizing the safety requirements is still in discussion. This paper analyzes the risk acceptance in other fields and applies the safety level on today’s traffic to derive references for acceptable risks. The focus is on macroscopic safety requirements, meaning accident rates per mileage, and not the behavior in individual driving situations. It was concluded that the acceptable risk varies according to the group involved and with the field share of automated vehicles. Increased safety of conventional driving in the future could lead to higher requirements as well. We also point out that it is not guaranteed that the given acceptable risk levels will also accepted by the user, because factors other than the accident statistics are relevant. However, as none of these risk levels can be proven before introduction, the monitoring of vehicles in the field is suggested. Despite increased research efforts in safety validation, uncertainty surrounding the safety of HAVs will remain at the time of introduction. Different introduction and risk management strategies are briefly introduced.

show abstract

“…It may take governments sufficient time to arrange the infrastructure for autonomous vehicles to perform optimally [14][15][16]. For autonomous vehicles to be accepted socially and legally, there has to be a reliable safety net for humans to rely on [17,18]. The most worrying of these limitations, nevertheless, is the danger of accidents resulting from autonomous vehicles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review on Limitations of Autonomous Driving and Its Impact on Accidents and Collisions

Chougule,

Chamola,

Sam

et al. 2024

IEEE Open J. Veh. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of autonomous driving represents a pivotal milestone in the evolution of the transportation system, integrating seamlessly into the daily lives of individuals due to its array of advantages over conventional vehicles. However, selfdriving cars pose numerous challenges contributing to accidents and injuries annually. This paper aims to comprehensively examine the limitations inherent in autonomous driving and their consequential impact on accidents and collisions. Using data from the DMV, NMVCCS, and NHTSA, the paper reveals the key factors behind self-driving car accidents. It delves into prevalent limitations faced by self-driving cars, encompassing issues like adverse weather conditions, susceptibility to hacking, data security concerns, technological efficacy, testing and validation intricacies, information handling, and connectivity glitches. By meticulously analyzing reported accidents involving self-driving cars during the period spanning 2019 to 2022, the research evaluates statistical data pertaining to fatalities and injuries across diverse accident classifications. Additionally, the paper delves into the ethical and regulatory dimensions associated with autonomous driving, accentuating the legal complexities that arise from accidents involving self-driving vehicles. This review assists researchers and professionals by identifying current autonomous driving limitations and offering insights for safer adoption. Addressing these limitations through research can transform transportation systems for the better.

show abstract

Societal Risk Constellations for Autonomous Driving. Analysis, Historical Context and Assessment

Cited by 12 publications

References 8 publications

Responsibility, rationality, and acceptance: How future users of autonomous driving are constructed in stakeholders’ sociotechnical imaginaries

Responsibility, rationality, and acceptance: How future users of autonomous driving are constructed in stakeholders’ sociotechnical imaginaries

Macroscopic Safety Requirements for Highly Automated Driving

A Comprehensive Review on Limitations of Autonomous Driving and Its Impact on Accidents and Collisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About