IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v136y2023icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automated Vehicles: Changes in expert opinions over time

Author

Listed:
  • Kroesen, Maarten
  • Milakis, Dimitris
  • van Wee, Bert

Abstract

Innovations in transportation can contribute to reaching relevant societal objectives (e.g. reduce emissions, congestion levels and/or risks). To determine which innovations to stimulate (and which not) it is important for policy makers to assess their effects on beforehand. Expert judgement is an often-used method for this purpose. Although expert opinions can provide useful input for decision-making, these judgement are potentially subject to change, for example, due to new information becoming available or because the (academic) discussion about the innovation in question takes a new turn. Studies that explicitly study stability and change in expert judgements are rare, but highly relevant to determine the reliability of experts' assessments. To address this gap, this study assesses experts’ judgments at multiple points in time focusing on the effects of a transport innovation with potentially widespread societal implications, namely Automated Vehicles (AVs). To this end a survey was administrated to a group of experts involved in the WISE-ACT project. The results indicate that expert opinions towards this innovation are generally favorable; AVs are believed to reduce congestion delays, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic accidents. Although the consulted experts are generally quite stable in their opinions, they are becoming less optimistic about these positive effects over time. A Q-factor analysis additionally reveals two clusters of experts, one with a positive and one a negative outlook on AVs. The latter group beliefs that AVs will lower the value of travel time, thereby increasing travel demand, and, in turn, emission and congestion levels. Overall, the changing and diverging opinions among experts indicate that the transition to AVs is not necessarily regarded as a desirable one.

Suggested Citation

  • Kroesen, Maarten & Milakis, Dimitris & van Wee, Bert, 2023. "Automated Vehicles: Changes in expert opinions over time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-10.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:136:y:2023:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.03.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X23000586
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.03.005?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. Patrick A. Singleton, 2019. "Discussing the “positive utilities” of autonomous vehicles: will travellers really use their time productively?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 50-65, January.
    2. Wadud, Zia & Mattioli, Giulio, 2021. "Fully automated vehicles: A cost-based analysis of the share of ownership and mobility services, and its socio-economic determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 228-244.
    3. Rodrigo Marçal Gandia & Fabio Antonialli & Bruna Habib Cavazza & Arthur Miranda Neto & Danilo Alves de Lima & Joel Yutaka Sugano & Isabelle Nicolai & Andre Luiz Zambalde, 2019. "Autonomous vehicles: scientometric and bibliometric review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 9-28, January.
    4. Eran Feitelson & Ilan Salomon, 2004. "The Political Economy of Transport Innovations," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Michel Beuthe & Veli Himanen & Aura Reggiani & Luca Zamparini (ed.), Transport Developments and Innovations in an Evolving World, chapter 2, pages 11-26, Springer.
    5. Ralph, Kelcie & Delbosc, Alexa, 2017. "I’m multimodal, aren’t you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts’ perceptions of travel patterns," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 283-293.
    6. Tom Cohen & Clémence Cavoli, 2019. "Automated vehicles: exploring possible consequences of government (non)intervention for congestion and accessibility," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 129-151, January.
    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. Raj Bridgelall & Ryan Jones & Denver Tolliver, 2023. "Ranking Opportunities for Autonomous Trucks Using Data Mining and GIS," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Leon Booth & Victoria Farrar & Jason Thompson & Rajith Vidanaarachchi & Branislava Godic & Julie Brown & Charles Karl & Simone Pettigrew, 2023. "Anticipated Transport Choices in a World Featuring Autonomous Transport Options," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-10, July.

    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. Kassens-Noor, Eva & Dake, Dana & Decaminada, Travis & Kotval-K, Zeenat & Qu, Teresa & Wilson, Mark & Pentland, Brian, 2020. "Sociomobility of the 21st century: Autonomous vehicles, planning, and the future city," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 329-335.
    2. Fabio Antonialli & Bruna Habib Cavazza & Rodrigo Gandia & Isabelle Nicolaï & Arthur de Miranda Neto & Joel Sugano & André Luiz Zambalde, 2020. "Human or machine driving? Comparing autonomous with traditional vehicles value curves and motives to use a car," Post-Print halshs-03687616, HAL.
    3. Devon McAslan & Farah Najar Arevalo & David A. King & Thaddeus R. Miller, 2021. "Pilot project purgatory? Assessing automated vehicle pilot projects in U.S. cities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Olugbenga Oladinrin & Kasun Gomis & Wadu Mesthrige Jayantha & Lovelin Obi & Muhammad Qasim Rana, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on Aging in Place," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Tianlong Yu & Hao Yang & Xiaowei Luo & Yifeng Jiang & Xiang Wu & Jingqi Gao, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-19, December.
    7. Chris Tennant & Susan Howard & Sally Stares, 2021. "Building the UK vision of a driverless future: A Parliamentary Inquiry case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Lee, Jaehyung & Lee, Euntak & Yun, Jaewoong & Chung, Jin-Hyuk & Kim, Jinhee, 2021. "Latent heterogeneity in autonomous driving preferences and in-vehicle activities by travel distance," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Jiao Zhang & Qian Wang & Yiping Xia & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Knowledge Map of Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development: A Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-24, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Tang, Jia & Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Zhen, Feng, 2020. "How do passengers allocate and evaluate their travel time? Evidence from a survey on the Shanghai–Nanjing high speed rail corridor, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. Krabbenborg, Lizet & Molin, Eric & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2020. "Public frames in the road pricing debate: A Q-methodology study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 46-53.
    13. Wang, Fei & Zhang, Zhentai & Lin, Shoufu, 2023. "Purchase intention of Autonomous vehicles and industrial Policies: Evidence from a national survey in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    14. Bahrami, Sina & Roorda, Matthew J., 2020. "Optimal traffic management policies for mixed human and automated traffic flows," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 130-143.
    15. Macharis, Cathy & De Witte, Astrid, 2012. "The typical company car user does not exist: The case of Flemish company car drivers," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 91-98.
    16. Faber, Koen & van Lierop, Dea, 2020. "How will older adults use automated vehicles? Assessing the role of AVs in overcoming perceived mobility barriers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 353-363.
    17. Pel, Bonno & Raven, Rob & van Est, Rinie, 2020. "Transitions governance with a sense of direction: synchronization challenges in the case of the dutch ‘Driverless Car’ transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Linovski, Orly & Baker, Dwayne Marshall & Manaugh, Kevin, 2018. "Equity in practice? Evaluations of equity in planning for bus rapid transit," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 75-87.
    19. Raj, Alok & Kumar, J. Ajith & Bansal, Prateek, 2020. "A multicriteria decision making approach to study barriers to the adoption of autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 122-137.
    20. Jiawei Gui & Qunqi Wu, 2020. "Multiple Utility Analyses for Sustainable Public Transport Planning and Management: Evidence from GPS-Equipped Taxi Data in Haikou," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-46, September.

    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:trapol:v:136:y:2023:i:c:p:1-10. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.