IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i21p9166-d439920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Human Operators in Safety Perception of AV Deployment—Insights from a Large European Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Miltos Kyriakidis

    (Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul-Scherrer Institute, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland)

  • Jaka Sodnik

    (ICT Department, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Kristina Stojmenova

    (ICT Department, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Arnór B. Elvarsson

    (Infrastructure Management Consultants, 8008 Zürich, Switzerland)

  • Cristina Pronello

    (Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Politecnico di Torino, 10125 Torino, Italy
    Université de Technologie de Compiègne, Sorbonne Universités, EA 7284 AVENUES, 60200 Compiègne, France)

  • Nikolas Thomopoulos

    (Department of Tourism and Transport, School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK)

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles are anticipated to play an important role on future mobility offering encouraging solutions to today’s transport problems. However, concerns of the public, which can affect the AVs’ uptake, are yet to be addressed. This study presents relevant findings of an online survey in eight European countries. First, 1639 responses were collected in Spring 2020 on people’s commute, preferred transport mode, willingness to use AVs and demographic details. Data was analyzed for the entire dataset and for vulnerable road users in particular. Results re-confirm the long-lasting discourse on the importance of safety on the acceptance of AVs. Spearman correlations show that age, gender, education level and number of household members have an impact on how people may be using or allowing their children to use the technology, e.g., with or without the presence of a human supervisor in the vehicle. Results on vulnerable road users show the same trend. The elderly would travel in AVs with the presence of a human supervisor. People with disabilities have the same proclivity, however their reactions were more conservative. Next to safety, reliability, affordability, cost, driving pleasure and household size may also impact the uptake of AVs and shall be considered when designing relevant policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Miltos Kyriakidis & Jaka Sodnik & Kristina Stojmenova & Arnór B. Elvarsson & Cristina Pronello & Nikolas Thomopoulos, 2020. "The Role of Human Operators in Safety Perception of AV Deployment—Insights from a Large European Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9166-:d:439920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9166/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9166/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greenblatt, Jeffery & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2015. "Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility and Environmental Impacts," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt23r1h80t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    2. Shelly Etzioni & Jamil Hamadneh & Arnór B. Elvarsson & Domokos Esztergár-Kiss & Milena Djukanovic & Stelios N. Neophytou & Jaka Sodnik & Amalia Polydoropoulou & Ioannis Tsouros & Cristina Pronello & N, 2020. "Modeling Cross-National Differences in Automated Vehicle Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Cristina Pronello & Cristian Camusso, 2011. "Travellers’ profiles definition using statistical multivariate analysis of attitudinal variables," Post-Print halshs-01084027, HAL.
    4. Wadud, Zia & MacKenzie, Don & Leiby, Paul, 2016. "Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-18.
    5. Elvik, Rune, 2020. "The demand for automated vehicles: A synthesis of willingness-to-pay surveys," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 23(C).
    6. David A. Hensher, 2020. "What might Covid-19 mean for mobility as a service (MaaS)?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 551-556, July.
    7. Cohen, Scott A. & Hopkins, Debbie, 2019. "Autonomous vehicles and the future of urban tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 33-42.
    8. Nikolas Thomopoulos & Gillian Harrison, 2016. "An ethical assessment of low carbon vehicles using cost benefit analysis," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 16(3), pages 227-247.
    9. Pronello, Cristina & Camusso, Cristian, 2011. "Travellers’ profiles definition using statistical multivariate analysis of attitudinal variables," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1294-1308.
    10. Jia Guo & Yusak Susilo & Constantinos Antoniou & Anna Pernestål Brenden, 2020. "Influence of Individual Perceptions on the Decision to Adopt Automated Bus Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-13, August.
    11. Alexandros Nikitas & Eric Tchouamou Njoya & Samir Dani, 2019. "Examining the myths of connected and autonomous vehicles: analysing the pathway to a driverless mobility paradigm," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 19(1/2), pages 10-30.
    12. Bennett, Roger & Vijaygopal, Rohini & Kottasz, Rita, 2019. "Attitudes towards autonomous vehicles among people with physical disabilities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 1-17.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaobei Jiang & Wenlin Yu & Wenjie Li & Jiawen Guo & Xizheng Chen & Hongwei Guo & Wuhong Wang & Tao Chen, 2021. "Factors Affecting the Acceptance and Willingness-to-Pay of End-Users: A Survey Analysis on Automated Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Dadashzadeh, Nima & Woods, Lee & Ouelhadj, Djamila & Thomopoulos, Nikolas & Kamargianni, Maria & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2022. "Mobility as a Service Inclusion Index (MaaSINI): Evaluation of inclusivity in MaaS systems and policy recommendations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 191-202.
    3. Liliana Andrei & Oana Luca & Florian Gaman, 2022. "Insights from User Preferences on Automated Vehicles: Influence of Socio-Demographic Factors on Value of Time in Romania Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Liliana Andrei & Mihaela Hermina Negulescu & Oana Luca, 2022. "Premises for the Future Deployment of Automated and Connected Transport in Romania Considering Citizens’ Perceptions and Attitudes towards Automated Vehicles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, February.
    5. Amalia Polydoropoulou & Ioannis Tsouros & Nikolas Thomopoulos & Cristina Pronello & Arnór Elvarsson & Haraldur Sigþórsson & Nima Dadashzadeh & Kristina Stojmenova & Jaka Sodnik & Stelios Neophytou & D, 2021. "Who Is Willing to Share Their AV? Insights about Gender Differences among Seven Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Ming Yan & Zijun Lin & Peng Lu & Mansu Wang & Lucia Rampino & Giandomenico Caruso, 2023. "Speculative Exploration on Future Sustainable Human-Machine Interface Design in Automated Shuttle Buses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-29, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roberto Battistini & Luca Mantecchini & Maria Nadia Postorino, 2020. "Users’ Acceptance of Connected and Automated Shuttles for Tourism Purposes: A Survey Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Shelly Etzioni & Jamil Hamadneh & Arnór B. Elvarsson & Domokos Esztergár-Kiss & Milena Djukanovic & Stelios N. Neophytou & Jaka Sodnik & Amalia Polydoropoulou & Ioannis Tsouros & Cristina Pronello & N, 2020. "Modeling Cross-National Differences in Automated Vehicle Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Pi, Dawei & Xue, Pengyu & Wang, Weihua & Xie, Boyuan & Wang, Hongliang & Wang, Xianhui & Yin, Guodong, 2023. "Automotive platoon energy-saving: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    4. Ziakopoulos, Apostolos & Oikonomou, Maria G. & Vlahogianni, Eleni I. & Yannis, George, 2021. "Quantifying the implementation impacts of a point to point automated urban shuttle service in a large-scale network," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 233-244.
    5. Moneim Massar & Imran Reza & Syed Masiur Rahman & Sheikh Muhammad Habib Abdullah & Arshad Jamal & Fahad Saleh Al-Ismail, 2021. "Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Positive or Negative?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-23, May.
    6. Thomas Klinger & Martin Lanzendorf, 2016. "Moving between mobility cultures: what affects the travel behavior of new residents?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 243-271, March.
    7. Chankrajang, Thanyaporn & Muttarak, Raya, 2017. "Green Returns to Education: Does Schooling Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviours? Evidence from Thailand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 434-448.
    8. Jia, Ning & Li, Liying & Ling, Shuai & Ma, Shoufeng & Yao, Wang, 2018. "Influence of attitudinal and low-carbon factors on behavioral intention of commuting mode choice – A cross-city study in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 108-118.
    9. Sun, Shichao & Duan, Zhengyu, 2019. "Modeling passengers’ loyalty to public transit in a two-dimensional framework: A case study in Xiamen, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    10. Jing Yu Pan & Dothang Truong, 2021. "Low cost carriers in China: passenger segmentation, controllability, and airline selection," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1587-1612, August.
    11. Du, Manqing & Zhang, Tingru & Liu, Jinting & Xu, Zhigang & Liu, Peng, 2022. "Rumors in the air? Exploring public misconceptions about automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 237-252.
    12. Scott B. Kelley & Bradley W. Lane & John M. DeCicco, 2019. "Pumping the Brakes on Robot Cars: Current Urban Traveler Willingness to Consider Driverless Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    13. Xing, Yingying & Zhou, Huiyu & Han, Xiao & Zhang, Meng & Lu, Jian, 2022. "What influences vulnerable road users’ perceptions of autonomous vehicles? A comparative analysis of the 2017 and 2019 Pittsburgh surveys," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Haustein, Sonja & Nielsen, Thomas A. Sick, 2016. "European mobility cultures: A survey-based cluster analysis across 28 European countries," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 173-180.
    15. Iacobucci, Riccardo & McLellan, Benjamin & Tezuka, Tetsuo, 2018. "Modeling shared autonomous electric vehicles: Potential for transport and power grid integration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 148-163.
    16. Sun, Shichao & Xu, Lingyu & Yao, Yukun & Duan, Zhengyu, 2021. "Investigating the determinants to retain spurious-loyalty passengers: A data-fusion based approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 70-83.
    17. Paula Vasquez-Henriquez & Eduardo Graells-Garrido & Diego Caro, 2020. "Tweets on the Go: Gender Differences in Transport Perception and Its Discussion on Social Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    18. Xuemei Fu & Zhicai Juan, 2017. "Accommodating preference heterogeneity in commuting mode choice: an empirical investigation in Shaoxing, China," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 434-448, May.
    19. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson, 2016. "Mobility and the Sharing Economy: Potential to Overcome First- and Last-Mile Public Transit Connections," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt8042k3d7, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    20. Haiyan Zhu & Hongzhi Guan & Yan Han & Wanying Li, 2019. "A Study of Tourists’ Holiday Rush-Hour Avoidance Travel Behavior Considering Psychographic Segmentation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9166-:d:439920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.