IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v64y2021ics0160791x20312653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public acceptance of drone applications in a highly urbanized environment

Author

Listed:
  • Lin Tan, Lynn Kai
  • Lim, Beng Chong
  • Park, Guihyun
  • Low, Kin Huat
  • Seng Yeo, Victor Chuan

Abstract

Human societies are constantly affected by advancement in technologies. Could drone application be the next game changer? Building on the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) model, we conducted a study to examine public perceptions of drone application in a South East Asian city state. While there are a number of common findings with past research, we were able to extend the understanding of drone application in urban areas with the following findings. First, using two knowledge tests, we were able to confirm that the majority of the public seems to have a good understanding of what a drone is. Second, acceptance levels towards drones did significantly differ depending on the context of use. Industrial areas had the highest acceptance level, followed by recreational areas and commercial areas while residential areas had the lowest acceptance level. Finally, different factors may be responsible for the varying levels of acceptance across the different contexts. We provided preliminary evidence that two factors – fears and concerns, and perceived potential benefits – affected the public acceptance levels differently depending on the contexts of drone applications. We concluded with implications for future research and policy makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Lin Tan, Lynn Kai & Lim, Beng Chong & Park, Guihyun & Low, Kin Huat & Seng Yeo, Victor Chuan, 2021. "Public acceptance of drone applications in a highly urbanized environment," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:64:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x20312653
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X20312653
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101462?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anania, Emily C. & Rice, Stephen & Pierce, Matthew & Winter, Scott R. & Capps, John & Walters, Nathan W. & Milner, Mattie N., 2019. "Public support for police drone missions depends on political affiliation and neighborhood demographics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 95-103.
    2. Aydin, Burchan, 2019. "Public acceptance of drones: Knowledge, attitudes, and practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    3. Komasová, Sarah & Tesař, Jakub & Soukup, Petr, 2020. "Perception of drone related risks in Czech society," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    4. Mostafavi, Ali & Abraham, Dulcy & Vives, Antonio, 2014. "Exploratory analysis of public perceptions of innovative financing for infrastructure systems in the U.S," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 10-23.
    5. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    6. Reece A. Clothier & Dominique A. Greer & Duncan G. Greer & Amisha M. Mehta, 2015. "Risk Perception and the Public Acceptance of Drones," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(6), pages 1167-1183, June.
    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. Pang, Bizhao & Hu, Xinting & Dai, Wei & Low, Kin Huat, 2022. "UAV path optimization with an integrated cost assessment model considering third-party risks in metropolitan environments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Sabino, Hullysses & Almeida, Rodrigo V.S. & Moraes, Lucas Baptista de & Silva, Walber Paschoal da & Guerra, Raphael & Malcher, Carlos & Passos, Diego & Passos, Fernanda G.O., 2022. "A systematic literature review on the main factors for public acceptance of drones," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Henderson, Isaac Levi & Shelley, Andrew, 2023. "Examining unmanned aircraft user compliance with Civil Aviation Rules: The case of New Zealand," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 176-185.
    4. Kähler, Svantje T. & Abben, Thomas & Luna-Rodriguez, Aquiles & Tomat, Miriam & Jacobsen, Thomas, 2022. "An assessment of the acceptance and aesthetics of UAVs and helicopters through an experiment and a survey," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    5. Smith, Angela & Dickinson, Janet E. & Marsden, Greg & Cherrett, Tom & Oakey, Andrew & Grote, Matt, 2022. "Public acceptance of the use of drones for logistics: The state of play and moving towards more informed debate," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    6. Koh, Le Yi & Lee, Jia Yi & Wang, Xueqin & Yuen, Kum Fai, 2023. "Urban drone adoption: Addressing technological, privacy and task–technology fit concerns," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    7. Nyaaba, Albert Apotele & Ayamga, Matthew, 2021. "Intricacies of medical drones in healthcare delivery: Implications for Africa," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    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. Sabino, Hullysses & Almeida, Rodrigo V.S. & Moraes, Lucas Baptista de & Silva, Walber Paschoal da & Guerra, Raphael & Malcher, Carlos & Passos, Diego & Passos, Fernanda G.O., 2022. "A systematic literature review on the main factors for public acceptance of drones," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    2. Del-Real, Cristina & Díaz-Fernández, Antonio M., 2021. "Lifeguards in the sky: Examining the public acceptance of beach-rescue drones," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Smith, Angela & Dickinson, Janet E. & Marsden, Greg & Cherrett, Tom & Oakey, Andrew & Grote, Matt, 2022. "Public acceptance of the use of drones for logistics: The state of play and moving towards more informed debate," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    4. Osakwe, Christian Nedu & Hudik, Marek & Říha, David & Stros, Michael & Ramayah, T., 2022. "Critical factors characterizing consumers’ intentions to use drones for last-mile delivery: Does delivery risk matter?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    5. Merkert, Rico & Bushell, James, 2020. "Managing the drone revolution: A systematic literature review into the current use of airborne drones and future strategic directions for their effective control," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Decker, Christopher & Chiambaretto, Paul, 2022. "Economic policy choices and trade-offs for Unmanned aircraft systems Traffic Management (UTM): Insights from Europe and the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 40-58.
    7. Koh, Le Yi & Lee, Jia Yi & Wang, Xueqin & Yuen, Kum Fai, 2023. "Urban drone adoption: Addressing technological, privacy and task–technology fit concerns," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    8. Henderson, Isaac Levi & Shelley, Andrew, 2023. "Examining unmanned aircraft user compliance with Civil Aviation Rules: The case of New Zealand," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 176-185.
    9. Aditya Kamat & Saket Shanker & Akhilesh Barve & Kamalakanta Muduli & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Sunil Luthra, 2022. "Uncovering interrelationships between barriers to unmanned aerial vehicles in humanitarian logistics," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1134-1160, December.
    10. Aydin, Burchan, 2019. "Public acceptance of drones: Knowledge, attitudes, and practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Upham, Dr Paul & Sovacool, Prof Benjamin & Ghosh, Dr Bipashyee, 2022. "Just transitions for industrial decarbonisation: A framework for innovation, participation, and justice," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    12. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    13. Dutrénit, Gabriela & Natera, José Miguel & Puchet Anyul, Martín & Vera-Cruz, Alexandre O., 2019. "Development profiles and accumulation of technological capabilities in Latin America," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 396-412.
    14. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    15. Steinar Andresen & G. Kristin Rosendal & Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2018. "Regulating the invisible: interaction between the EU and Norway in managing nano-risks," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 513-528, August.
    16. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    17. Genus, Audley & Iskandarova, Marfuga, 2018. "Responsible innovation: its institutionalisation and a critique," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Sauermann, Henry & Vohland, Katrin & Antoniou, Vyron & Balázs, Bálint & Göbel, Claudia & Karatzas, Kostas & Mooney, Peter & Perelló, Josep & Ponti, Marisa & Samson, Roeland & Winter, Silvia, 2020. "Citizen science and sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    19. Wachenheim, Cheryl & Fan, Linfeng & Zheng, Shi, 2021. "Adoption of unmanned aerial vehicles for pesticide application: Role of social network, resource endowment, and perceptions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    20. Lee, Changju & Bae, Bumjoon & Lee, Yu Lim & Pak, Tae-Young, 2023. "Societal acceptance of urban air mobility based on the technology adoption framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    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:eee:teinso:v:64:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x20312653. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.