IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v8y2021i1d10.1057_s41599-021-00882-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building the UK vision of a driverless future: A Parliamentary Inquiry case study

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Tennant

    (London School of Economics and Political Science
    University College London)

  • Susan Howard

    (Independent researcher)

  • Sally Stares

    (City, University of London)

Abstract

The UK Government has endorsed the case for autonomous vehicle (AV) technology and its economic benefits in its industrial strategies since 2013. In late 2016 the Science and Technology Committee in the House of Lords (the legislature’s upper chamber) conducted an Inquiry into the policy. We conduct a content analysis of the text corpus of the Inquiry. Drawing from theories of sociotechnical change we explore how it contributes to building a vision of a future AV world embedded in a national economic and technological project. The technology is framed as a solution to societal grand challenges and the Inquiry corpus is dominated by actors committed to the project. Alternative visions, including sceptical interpretations, are present in the corpus, but rare, reflecting the selection process for contributions to the Inquiry. Predominantly, the corpus represents the public as deficient: dangerous drivers, unaware of promised benefits and unduly anxious about the unfamiliar. Their views are marginal in this Parliamentary Inquiry’s findings. AV technology is one of several possible means to pursue wider mobility policy goals of greater safety, affordability, access and sustainability. Our analysis suggests that the pursuit of an AV future risks becoming a goal in itself instead of a means to these broader societal goals.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00882-y
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00882-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-021-00882-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-021-00882-y?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. Floridea Di Ciommo & Yoram Shiftan, 2017. "Transport equity analysis," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 139-151, March.
    2. Flink, Tim & Kaldewey, David, 2018. "The new production of legitimacy: STI policy discourses beyond the contract metaphor," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 14-22.
    3. Engels, Franziska & Wentland, Alexander & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2019. "Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Bergman, Noam & Schwanen, Tim & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2017. "Imagined people, behaviour and future mobility: Insights from visions of electric vehicles and car clubs in the United Kingdom," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 165-173.
    5. Engels, Franziska & Wentland, Alexander & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2019. "Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(9), pages 1-11.
    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.
    7. Ely, Adrian & Van Zwanenberg, Patrick & Stirling, Andrew, 2014. "Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 505-518.
    8. Debbie Hopkins & Tim Schwanen, 2018. "Automated Mobility Transitions: Governing Processes in the UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, March.
    9. Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
    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. Jack Stilgoe & Miloš Mladenović, 2022. "The politics of autonomous vehicles," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-6, December.

    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. 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).
    2. Pel, Bonno & Haxeltine, Alex & Avelino, Flor & Dumitru, Adina & Kemp, René & Bauler, Tom & Kunze, Iris & Dorland, Jens & Wittmayer, Julia & Jørgensen, Michael Søgaard, 2020. "Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: A relational framework and 12 propositions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    3. Ran Sun & James Nolan & Suren Kulshreshtha, 2022. "Agent-based modeling of policy induced agri-environmental technology adoption," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-26, August.
    4. Smith, Göran & Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard, 2023. "Public-private MaaS: Unchallenged assumptions and issues of conflict in Sweden," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. José Miguel Aguilera & Felipe Larraín, 2021. "Natural laboratories in emerging countries and comparative advantages in science: Evidence from Chile," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(6), pages 732-753, November.
    6. Su-Yen Chen & Hsin-Yu Kuo & Chiachun Lee, 2020. "Preparing Society for Automated Vehicles: Perceptions of the Importance and Urgency of Emerging Issues of Governance, Regulations, and Wider Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Katharina Greve & Riccardo De Vita & Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2021. "Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.
    9. Toffolini, Quentin & Hannachi, Mourad & Capitaine, Mathieu & Cerf, Marianne, 2023. "Ideal-types of experimentation practices in agricultural Living Labs: Various appropriations of an open innovation model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    10. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    11. Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. & Wentland, Alexander & Ruge, Luise, 2023. "Understanding regional innovation cultures: Narratives, directionality, and conservative innovation in Bavaria," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    12. Hannes Thees & Harald Pechlaner & Natalie Olbrich & Arne Schuhbert, 2020. "The Living Lab as a Tool to Promote Residents’ Participation in Destination Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-27, February.
    13. Inés Aquilué & Angélica Caicedo & Joan Moreno & Miquel Estrada & Laia Pagès, 2021. "A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    14. Helena Sustar & Miloš N. Mladenović & Moshe Givoni, 2020. "The Landscape of Envisioning and Speculative Design Methods for Sustainable Mobility Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-24, March.
    15. Guridi, Jose A. & Pertuze, Julio A. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2020. "Natural laboratories as policy instruments for technological learning and institutional capacity building: The case of Chile's astronomy cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    16. Quentin Toffolini & Mathieu Capitaine & Mourad Hannachi & Marianne Cerf, 2021. "Implementing agricultural living labs that renew actors’ roles within existing innovation systems: A case study in France [La mise en œuvre de living labs qui renouvellent les rôles des acteurs au ," Post-Print hal-03412682, HAL.
    17. Nguyen, Huong Thu & Marques, Pilar & Benneworth, Paul, 2022. "Living labs: Challenging and changing the smart city power relations?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    18. Anil Engez & Seppo Leminen & Leena Aarikka-Stenroos, 2021. "Urban Living Lab as a Circular Economy Ecosystem: Advancing Environmental Sustainability through Economic Value, Material, and Knowledge Flows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    19. Ola Michalec & Cian O’Donovan & Mehdi Sobhani, 2021. "What is robotics made of? The interdisciplinary politics of robotics research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Ruhrort, Lisa, 2020. "Reassessing the Role of Shared Mobility Services in a Transport Transition: Can They Contribute the Rise of an Alternative Socio-Technical Regime of Mobility?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(19), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00882-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.