In case you hadn’t noticed, driverless cars are not going to be neatly delivering us about the city any time soon (despite many claims to the contrary). But while city streets respond to sudden pressures of social distancing, the technology continues to develop, carving out operational niches from which to expand – driverless shuttles in retirement villages, delivery bots in selected suburbs, and autopilot features for driving on congested highways. Expanding beyond these niches will embed new forms of algorithmic decision-making into the built environment and create a new set of pressures for city streets.
How we evaluate these algorithms depends on what we want from the city streets autonomous vehicles (AVs) might operate on. If we want to prioritise urban sustainability and health then a good approach is to create street environments that are pleasant, restorative, and enjoyable. These qualities encourage walking as a mode of transport and benefit the health and well-being of the people using the streets. By using algorithms to automate interactions between vehicles and pedestrians, AVs have the potential to change a pedestrian’s experience of city streets.
Evaluations of AV impacts must consider how they might help or hinder the creation of sustainable and healthy street environments.
The movements and interactions of road users in city streets are coordinated using a mixture of infrastructure, laws, codes, conventions, communication, and negotiation. Traffic signals and road markings are often sufficient for conveying right-of-way but there are also times when right-of-way is unclear or contested. In these instances social interactions supplement the measured logic of road infrastructure and help coordinate movements. Spend a few minutes on a busy high street and you’ll probably notice this happening: pedestrians signalling and asserting their intentions to cross a road or drivers edging forwards to try and interrupt the flow of people across a side road.
Just as urban planners might try to cater for different purposes by pedestrianising shopping streets or reallocating space between modes, we can consider whether AVs should operate differently in different areas.
This poses a major challenge to AVs. To participate in these interactions they must anticipate how other road users might respond to their actions. For example, by modelling a pedestrian’s road crossing decisions an AV might better anticipate the movements of the pedestrian and their response to the actions of the AV. This allows the AV to mimic the behaviour of a human driver.
In this mimicry we can see that vehicle automation is not simply a case of removing the driver. Instead it’s about creating a new set of driving practices and behaviours. AVs will not exactly replicate human behaviour and in some ways the objective is to purposefully not replicate human behaviour – AVs, we are told, will be safer and more efficient than human drivers.
The ways in which new driving practices and behaviours could impact pedestrians and street environments need to be evaluated. To do this we can take a broader look at the impacts of vehicles on city streets and use this knowledge to inform studies of AV impacts. Here are three important aspects of city streets and road user interaction that should be accounted for in such studies:
Vehicle traffic, speeds, and noise have been found to negatively impact walking experiences. In some cases, pedestrians choose longer routes to avoid a busy road or crossing. Though the inconvenience may seem small, the outcome nonetheless limits the sustainability and health of our neighbourhoods.
Evaluating AVs in terms of their ability to help produce sustainable and healthy environments is important for understanding the potential impacts of this technology. Doing so requires developing novel metrics that take better account of pedestrian experiences. Vehicle automation is not just about removing the driver, it’s about creating a new set of driving practices and behaviours. Unlike human behaviour, the behaviour of AVs is for us to design and control. We have seen elsewhere how new technologies can negatively impact our urban environments without proper scrutiny. We must explore the effect of these new practices and behaviours on pedestrians and city streets, and in doing so ensure that the technology can be used to create the urban environments we want rather than streets that suit the technology.
Obi Thompson Sargoni is a doctoral student at University College London’s Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis.
TransportXtra is part of Landor LINKS
© 2022 TransportXtra | Landor LINKS Ltd | All Rights Reserved
Subscriptions, Magazines & Online Access Enquires
[Frequently Asked Questions]
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org | Tel: +44 (0) 20 7091 7959
Shop & Accounts Enquires
Email: email@example.com | Tel: +44 (0) 20 7091 7855
Advertising Sales & Recruitment Enquires
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org | Tel: +44 (0) 20 7091 7861
Events & Conference Enquires
Email: email@example.com | Tel: +44 (0) 20 7091 7865
Press Releases & Editorial Enquires
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org | Tel: +44 (0) 20 7091 7875
Web design sussex by Brainiac Media 2020