Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Synthesising the Existing Literature on the Market Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles and the External Underlying Factors

Synthesising the Existing Literature on the Market Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles and the... Hindawi Journal of Advanced Transportation Volume 2023, Article ID 6065060, 16 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6065060 Review Article Synthesising the Existing Literature on the Market Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles and the External Underlying Factors 1 2 3 4 Amin Rezaei , Mengqiu Cao , Qihao Liu, and Jonas De Vos Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland School of Architecture and Cities, University of Westminster, London, UK School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, London, UK Correspondence should be addressed to Mengqiu Cao; m.cao@westminster.ac.uk Received 23 February 2023; Revised 3 April 2023; Accepted 25 April 2023; Published 12 May 2023 Academic Editor: Jingda Wu Copyright © 2023 Amin Rezaei et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In recent years, the level of acceptance of autonomous vehicles (AVs) has changed with the advent of new sensor technologies and the proportional increase in market perception of these vehicles. Our study provides an overview of the relevant existing studies in order to consolidate current knowledge and pave the way for future studies in this area. Te paper frst reviews studies in- vestigating the market acceptance of AVs. We identify the nonbehavioural factors that account for the level of acceptance and examine these in detail by cross-referencing the results of relevant papers published between 2014 and 2021 to reach a consensus on the perceived benefts and concerns. Te fndings showed that previous studies have found legal liability, safety, privacy, security, trafc conditions, and cost to be key external factors infuencing the acceptance or rejection of AVs, and that the upsides of adopting AVs in regard to improving trafc conditions and safety outweigh the risks identifed in relation to these areas. Tis resulted in an overall weighted average of 65% market acceptance of AVs among the 11,057 people surveyed in this regard. However, the remaining respondents were not very favourably disposed towards adopting AVs because of unresolved issues related to data privacy, security breaches, and legal liability in the event of accidents. In addition, our evaluation showed that the worldwide market purchasing power for an AV, based on 2022 prices, is around $38k, which is signifcantly below the current anticipated price of $100k. Nikitas et al. [20], have warned against having unrealistic 1. Introduction expectations of AVs that cannot be fully understood until As a key component of future intelligent transport systems more extensive testing has been conducted to ensure their [1], autonomous vehicles (AVs) are likely to change travel safe operation. In this regard, Wang and Li [21] discussed behaviour, as they will have a signifcant impact on the how AVs have already started to be tested in several US modes of travel used [2–7]. Lehtonen et al. [8] pointed out states and some European and Asian countries. A study by that autonomous driving has the advantage of making using Lee and Hess [22] also showed that the US, Australia, and these vehicles more attractive than manual driving. Various Germany had taken actions relating to the safety testing of studies have identifed the benefts and risks of AVs with AVs. It is also worth mentioning that the abbreviation AV, regard to safety, trafc congestion, the number and severity which is used throughout this paper, means a fully auto- of accidents, and ofering a means of mobility to individuals mated vehicle or level 5 AV as defned by the Society of who have previously been unable to drive, such as people Automotive Engineers (SAEs) (2016) and used by the Na- with certain types of disabilities [9–18]. Li et al. [19] tional Highway Trafc Safety Association (NHTSA) [23]. emphasised that safety is the most signifcant concern in From a business point of view, if AVs are to penetrate the relation to AVs. However, some studies, such as that by transport market successfully, they must be widely accepted 2 Journal of Advanced Transportation Number of publications between 2014-2021 3 3 910 895 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Year Safety, security & privacy, traffic, costs & WTP, legal liability Acceptance of AVs Figure 1: Number of publications studied regarding AV performance and acceptance. [24]. However, the vast majority of relevant studies pub- Using survey research focusing on social psychology and lished to date, some of which are referred previously, have customer utility, Yuen et al. [28] studied the cognition mainly focused on one or more characteristics of the process that leads individuals to accept or reject AVs. Tey transportation system, such as safety, security, and trafc found that the acceptance of AVs is afected by the trust that conditions. Considerably less attention has been paid to the users have in these vehicles and their perceived value. Ekman extent to which people, or in a more general sense, the et al. [29] pointed out that it is essential to consider pro- markets, accept these vehicles and what factors infuence viding as much information as possible about AVs, such as their driving performance and safety record to improve their perceptions with regard to this matter. Tis is evi- denced by the number of publications produced over the user trust. In general, the social and behavioural studies mentioned past few years. As shown in Figure 1, between 2014 and 2021, 4,214 papers published on the Web of Science investigated previously have investigated the factors and mechanisms the performance of AVs in relation to road transport re- that drive the acceptance of AVs and why consumers are garding one or more of the characteristics mentioned pre- inclined to accept or reject these vehicles. Nonetheless, they viously. However, less than 1% (17) of the published papers were less focused on the level of acceptance, i.e., how much has explored the acceptance of AVs. It is worth noting that individuals or the market in general are willing to pay for few papers published before 2014 have investigated the and use these cars. However, some studies have evaluated adoption of AVs from a transport point of view. Although nonbehavioural factors such as safety, cost, travel time, and many studies have investigated the adoption of AVs, few mobility (trafc), relating to the AV infrastructure and AV technology [30]. Tese studies have focused on the external have quantifed it in terms of a market acceptance percentage. factors that have an impact on people’s decisions about Consequently, there is a signifcant gap in this area. As whether to adopt AVs, and most of them have used surveys the AV industry and the science behind it are advancing to conduct their investigations. Some of these survey studies rapidly, the market acceptance of AVs will need to adapt such as those by Das [31]; Hussain et al. [32]; Kim et al. [33]; accordingly. Tus, there is a need to review the benefts, and Rezaei and Caulfeld [34] have investigated one or more concerns about, and level of acceptance of AVs over time. characteristics of the infrastructure, vehicle, or trans- In recent years, a number of studies have investigated the portation system, such as safety and security, in relation to user acceptance of AVs from two perspectives. Some re- the acceptance of AVs. It is imperative to mention that behavioural studies are also required to understand more search has investigated social and behavioural factors, such as trust, attitudes, social norms, perceived value, risk, and about people’s reasoning regarding whether to accept or reject AVs; however, that is beyond the scope of the current usefulness, while other studies have explored non- behavioural or external factors. For a comprehensive review study. For a comprehensive review of the various survey of the various aspects related to social and behavioural studies investigating the acceptance of AVs, see Becker and theories that afect the acceptance of AVs, see, e.g., Fraedrich Axhausen [35]. and Lenz [25] and Jing et al. [26]. Dichabeng et al. [27] As mentioned earlier, the level of acceptance of AVs has conducted a focus group study investigating the various increased with the advent of new sensor technologies and the factors infuencing the acceptance of shared AVs. Tey knowledge that these vehicles have improved in terms of concluded that security, trust, and the quality of shared space safety, security, costs, and driving performance in road are the main factors involved in whether people are willing trafc. In order to make the most up-to-date assessment of user acceptance of AVs, this paper frst reviews studies that to accept AVs. Nastjuk et al. [24] also investigated some factors afecting the acceptance of AVs from a user per- have investigated the acceptance of AVs with regard to the various benefts and drawbacks of these vehicles. Tis is spective. Tey concluded that individual and social factors play a vital role in driving the widespread acceptance of AVs. followed by a numerical evaluation of the level of acceptance Publications Journal of Advanced Transportation 3 in the form of a percentage. Te study extracted the key in their survey were unwilling to accept AVs because of the external factors impacting on the acceptance or rejection of data recorded by them and concerns about data privacy. Legal liability is another signifcant concern and a key AVs from the studies examined in order to determine the key drivers of the acceptance level, i.e., the main reasons why factor afecting the acceptance of AVs. About 66% of the the study participants accepted or rejected the adoption of study participants were concerned about legal liability, AVs. Subsequently, we analysed the acceptance criteria by which made them reluctant to adopt AVs [15, 36, 38, 39]. reviewing 88 papers published between 2014 and 2021 to Table 1 summarises the complete list of survey studies consolidate existing knowledge regarding the factors that have investigated people’s interest in and concerns infuencing acceptance. To the best of the authors’ knowl- about AVs and how they afect their overall opinion re- edge, this has not been done in any previous studies. garding the acceptance of these vehicles. Te studies in Te remainder of this paper is organised as follows. Table 1 also calculated the percentage of participants willing Section 2 reviews the relevant previous studies and identifes to adopt AVs, thus representing the acceptance rate among the key factors resulting in acceptance or rejection of AVs. the community studied. Our review of the key benefts of and concerns about Section 3 examines these key factors in greater depth to arrive at a consensus from the results. Section 4 analyses the AVs, as outlined in Table 1, showed that legal liability, market acceptance of and buying power with regard to AVs. accidents, equipment failure, safety, trafc conditions, se- Section 5 discusses the key observations made by this study curity, cost, and privacy were the factors most frequently and situates these within the literature, and Section 6 pro- mentioned in the participants’ responses. Tese fndings vides the key conclusions regarding the aforementioned validated the study by Lee et al. [30], which showed that overview. Finally, Section 7 outlines the limitations of this concerns about safety and cost have a signifcant impact on study and ofers recommendations to pave the way for future the market acceptance of fully autonomous vehicles. Lee researchers to better utilise the results of this study and fll et al. [30] also concluded that ease of driving and driver education would positively infuence consumer acceptance the research gaps within this area. of partially autonomous vehicles; however, these factors are beyond the scope of the current study (as outlined in Section 2. Overview of the Market Acceptance 1), which focuses only on fully autonomous vehicles. On this basis, fve groups of factors were considered for further As discussed in Section 1, some studies have evaluated the factors and mechanisms that infuence the acceptance of analysis in this paper, as follows: legal liability, safety, trafc AVs but have not explicitly examined the market acceptance conditions, privacy and security, and costs, each comprising of these vehicles. Terefore, this paper targeted those studies a key theme that repeatedly occurred in the relevant studies. that have evaluated the main reasons for the market ac- In this regard, “liability” refers to the terms of use of AVs on ceptance or rejection of AVs and assessed the acceptance public roads, the group or agency responsible for accidents rate. For example, a recent survey by Rezaei and Caulfeld involving AVs, and other regulatory frameworks related to deploying these vehicles. Safety refers to equipment failures [15] of 475 Irish participants showed that only 20% were interested in adopting AVs and paying for these vehicles. by AVs, their understanding of surrounding objects, driving decisions, errors that may result in accidents or, conversely, Nonetheless, there was a general belief that AVs could potentially reduce the number of accidents, and that con- help drivers in an impaired condition, and other driving assistance that can help increase safety and reduce accidents. sequently people would feel more secure and safer driving an AV. In addition, reducing delays, queues, and trafc con- Trafc conditions refer to the features that help AVs make gestion was one of the most appealing aspects of adopting informed decisions while on the road, which may result in AVs and a signifcant reason for their acceptance by these smoother trafc fow, fewer queues, and confict points at participants [7]. However, 80% of the participants stated that intersections and therefore less congestion overall. Te more they would not be happy to adopt AVs because of privacy efcient use of existing lanes, route choices and use of issues, security breaches, and the high cost of the vehicles. parking spaces, and the capacity to drive at near-constant velocities are key features in this context. Overall, Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] found a statistical cor- relation between the security and safety of AVs and the Privacy and security refer to data recording, data sharing, data protection, data privacy, cybersecurity mea- acceptance of these vehicles. It is also worth noting that the correlation between the cost of AVs and their acceptance sures, security breaches, and cyber-attacks. Finally, cost was investigated by Howard and Dai [36]. Approximately refers to the price of AVs or technologies that can provide 65% of the individuals who participated in Howard and some (or fully) automated features in human-driven vehicles Dai’s [36] study believed that cost would be a substantial (HDVs). barrier to accepting AVs. Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] also proved this statistical correlation mentioned previously by 3. Key External Factors Influencing the applying a backward linear regression model. Adoption of AVs Data privacy and the recording of data by AVs have also been cited as one of the main reasons for their rejection or 3.1. Trafc. Briscoe [44] and Fagnant and Kockelman [45] acceptance (e.g., [15, 37]). Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] found suggested that the implementation of autonomous tech- a statistical correlation between data privacy and the overall nologies such as adaptive cruise control (ACC) and trafc level of interest in and acceptance of AVs; most participants surveillance can lead to a more streamlined fow of trafc 4 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 1: Summary of the survey studies assessed with regard to the market acceptance of AVs. Number of % Main reason (s) Main reason (s) Authors Location participants acceptance for acceptance for rejection Rezaei and Caulfeld Reduction in trafc congestion, queues, and delays and fewer Ireland 475 20 Privacy, security, cost, and legal liability [15] accidents Bansal et al. [10] US 347 80 Fewer accidents Equipment failure Israel and North Haboucha et al. [40] 721 56 Parking made easier and reliable trafc management Cost America Security issues and hacking; legal liability; safety Kyriakidis et al. [41] 109 countries 4,886 74 More appealing and comfortable than manual driving concerns Expensive, people are wary of them, and not Continental [42] US and Germany 4,100 58 Reduction in the severity of accidents sufciently reliable Howard and Dai [36] US 107 86 Safer; the convenience of not having to fnd a parking space Losing control of the vehicle; vehicle liability Help people in an impaired condition, such as those under Losing control of the vehicle and misuse by Payre et al. [43] France 421 71 the infuence of alcohol, drugs, and some medications, if they hackers have to drive in an emergency Journal of Advanced Transportation 5 Table 2: Trafc impacts of AVs that could infuence the level of market acceptance. Criteria Study Statement Zhu and Tasic [50] Reducing the number and severity of confict points at on-ramp merging areas Improving safety and efciency and making velocity control more comfortable, Zhu et al. [46] outperforming the MPC-based ACC algorithm and human drivers Rezaei and Caulfeld [16]; Cui et al. [51] Stabilising trafc fow Facilitating “grabbing the green light” at intersections, as well as helping to make Briscoe [44] decisions based on the data obtained from the infrastructure facilities Using parking assistance technology to manage parking spaces more efectively and Millard-Ball [49]; Li and Shao [52] shortening the stationary distance between each vehicle Bansal et al. [11]; NHTSA [53]; Gerdes and Tornton [54] Implementing and managing speed limits more efectively than HDVs Reducing the gaps between each car and reducing trafc congestion with Cui et al. [55] Increasing market acceptance near-constant velocities Recognising and balancing upstream and downstream trafc incidents using Li et al. [56] intelligent sensors Using combined decision-making, control, and perception approaches to make Schwarting et al. [57] informed decisions Using data from LIDAR and other vehicles and infrastructure facilities to make Levin [58] efective route choices Iglinski ´ and Babiak [59]; Howard and Dai [36] Adhering to trafc regulations Using existing intersections and lanes more efectively with shorter headways and Awal et al. [60] reducing the number of lane-changing bottlenecks Fagnant and Kockelman [45] Connecting and coordinating with other vehicles in platoons Tere may be safety issues associated with having a mixture of HDVs and AVs on Nikitas et al. [20] the roads during the frst few years of AV adoption Decreasing market acceptance Mart´ınez and Viegas [61] Increasing vehicle miles travelled by using shared AVs Fagnant and Kockelman [45] Increasing unnecessary congestion, trafc volume, vehicle miles travelled and trips 6 Journal of Advanced Transportation estimated to rise by 94% to 34.9 BPK by 2050. Such a sub- through the use of automated braking and acceleration systems. Tis results in a decrease in the constant average stantial rise in mobility demand makes safety a global public health issue that requires special attention and speed of vehicles, thereby making the calculation of travel time for AVs more accurate. Based on reinforcement consideration. learning, Zhu et al. [46] proposed a model for controlling Fagnant and Kockelman [45]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; and velocity during car following (car-following is a driving Howard and Dai [36] showed that human driver errors such behaviour model. Probably the most famous example is the as distraction, fatigue, alcohol, and drug taking are the “Wiedemann car-following model” that has ten parameters leading cause of accidents. Favaro et al. [63] verifed this or driving logics for emulating human driving behaviours, assertion with their fndings that 94% of car accidents occur which has been widely used by the trafc simulation soft- due to human driver errors. Hussain et al. [32] highlighted ware, Vissim that could be used to develop autonomous AVs’ capability to reduce human errors, and Wu et al. [64] suggested that AVs signifcantly reduce driving fatigue. driving systems with improved safety and efciency and more comfortable velocity control. Tis model performed Reducing driver errors by people under the infuence of alcohol, drugs, and medication was also recognised as better than the MPC-based ACC algorithm and out- performed human drivers. A recent case study involving a beneft of adopting AVs by 1,453 Chinese people, simulation modelling of AVs by Rezaei and Caulfeld [16] according to Qu et al. [65]. suggested that AVs may substantially afect the quality of the Papadoulis et al. [66] and Vander Laan and Sadabadi trafc fow by reducing trafc queue length and the duration [67] found that AVs would be expected to have a quicker of delays. Furthermore, the simulation study conducted by reaction time and safer driving operations than human Ye and Yamamoto [47] on the impact of AVs on road drivers. In this regard, Combs et al. [68] and Noy et al. [69] also highlighted the intelligent sensor technologies associ- capacity suggested that road capacity would increase with a more signifcant number of AVs on the road. ated with AVs that help them make informed decisions about unexpected road incidents, which has the efect of Fagnant and Kockelman’s [45] study showed that AVs have the potential to anticipate the actions of other vehicles, increasing road safety. Moreover, Li et al. [70] proposed a new decision-making algorithm that could be used by AVs such as sudden braking or decisions to accelerate. Because they have the ability to choose the best route, AVs can also to avoid collisions in various scenarios, focusing on diferent make more efcient use of road lanes, allowing them to driving style preferences. Te method they developed was operate with smaller distances between them and other reliable enough to increase driver acceptance of AVs. vehicles in a convoy. Tis ability enables vehicles to brake Katrakazas et al. [71] highlighted AVs’ capability to more smoothly and adjust their speed more efciently when identify surrounding objects more efectively than HDVs, travelling in a platoon [45]. Te study by Zhu and Ukkusuri thus reducing the number of accidents. A total of 185 professionals in the survey conducted by Rezaei and [48] verifed Fagnant and Kockelman’s [45] fndings by showing that the presence of AVs within the trafc network Caulfeld [34] also highlighted AVs’ ability to reduce the number of accidents on public roads. Te capability to safely will improve the smoothness of the trafc fow. Studies investigating parking areas and related concerns deliver freight and ofer a safe form of mobility for unli- have demonstrated that AVs have the potential to lower cenced drivers, people with certain disabilities and older parking costs and improve the utilisation of available people were also identifed as benefts of adopting AVs parking spaces in urban areas [49]. [72–74]. Overall, the benefts of adopting AVs with regard to Te studies reviewed in this section revealed that safety is trafc conditions could potentially increase the market ac- one of the key external factors infuencing the adoption of ceptance of these vehicles. Table 2 also outlines several other AVs, according to the views of potential users, many of studies that have reviewed the trafc impacts of AVs that which have been discussed above. Table 3 provides an overview of the main safety benefts of AVs and the concerns may encourage their market acceptance. However, there are some possible downsides to adopting AVs, such as the fact that may increase or decrease their market acceptance. that they could disrupt the trafc fow. For example, an increase in the number of unnecessary trips and vehicle 3.3. Privacy and Security. Although eforts have been made miles travelled (VMT) could increase trafc congestion. to assess the diferent characteristics of AVs and their Table 2 presents the trafc-related outcomes associated with possible impacts on road transportation, many questions AVs that may increase or decrease the market acceptance of remain unanswered regarding the recording of data by AVs these vehicles. and the possibility of security breaches and hacking [7]. Tis concern becomes more critical in regard to connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) as the V2X communication 3.2. Safety. Statistics from the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) have shown that system they use is likely to be a signifcant focus of cyber- security attacks against AVs [33]. Rakotonirainy et al. [77] more than 1.2 million people worldwide die in road acci- dents annually. Road accidents are the leading cause of death found evidence to suggest that a faw in the security system used by AVs could result in serious crimes, such as engaging among young people aged 15–29 [62]. Te OECD [62] data also demonstrate that the total motorised mobility in cities in the unauthorised surveillance of important individuals. was 18 billion passenger kilometres (BPKs) in 2015; this is Te majority of the 5,000 people who participated in the Journal of Advanced Transportation 7 Table 3: Te safety benefts of AVs and concerns about them that could increase or decrease their market acceptance. Criteria Study Statement Das [31] Reducing accidents with pedestrians and cyclists Rezaei and Caulfeld [15]; Rezaei and Caulfeld [34]; Hulse et al. [75]; Howard and Dai [36]; Li et al. [70]; Papadoulis et al. [66]; Bansal et al. [11]; Schoettle Increasing safety and reducing the number of accidents and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76] Increasing market Beirigo et al. [73] Increasing safety when transporting freight acceptance Noy et al. [69] Making informed decisions Laan and Sadabadi [67] Quick reaction time Chan [74] Providing safe mobility for older people and those with certain disabilities Katrakazas et al. [71] Safe identifcation of surrounding objects (humans and animals) Kyriakidis et al. [41] Removing human errors While AVs may reduce the number of accidents, they may increase their Rezaei and Caulfeld [34] severity Rezaei and Caulfeld [34]; Rakotonirainy et al. [77] Poor understanding of animals, humans, and other surrounding objects Decreasing market Software and operational failures can be caused by the coexistence of AVs and acceptance Noy et al. [69] HDVs Schoettle and Sivak [78] Driving reaction speed is not as good as human drivers Strand et al. [79] Driving performance decreases as the level of automation increases 8 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 4: Security actions and concerns that could increase or decrease the market acceptance of AVs. Criteria Study Statement Kim et al. [33]; Sheehan et al. [83] Using new techniques and methods to predict cyber-attacks Identifying the threats posed by cyber-security to AVs and considering Increasing market Macher et al. [82] countermeasures acceptance Combatting cyber-attacks proactively with the acquisition of a hybrid security Rizvi et al. [81] system Tere are some advanced forms of cyber-attack that CAVs may be unable to Pham and Xiong [80] identify or respond to; at least, no solid evidence was found to confrm that the current models are capable of doing so Decreasing market Curtis [84]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; Liu et al. [85]; Payre et al. [43]; Rezaei & Security hacking and breaches acceptance Caulfeld [15]; Sheehan et al. [83] Faife [86] Identifying the threats of vehicle kidnapping and hijacking Awareness of the growing number of potential cyber-terrorism attacks, Nikitas et al. [20] hacking, unauthorised private data sharing, and vulnerabilities Journal of Advanced Transportation 9 Several studies have investigated the public’s response to survey study conducted by Kyriakidis et al. [41] were very concerned about the potential for hacking AVs and losing the issue of legal liability in relation to autonomous vehicles [15, 36, 39, 76]. Tese research studies have found that control of their vehicles. Te survey by Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] involving 475 Irish people also verifed the observation potential users are uncertain about who would be held re- made by Kyriakidis et al. [41], showing that members of the sponsible in the event of an accident involving an auton- public, in general, worried about the secure operation of and omous vehicle. Legal liability is viewed as a major barrier to safety issues associated with AVs. the adoption of AVs by the public. Te absence of an ofcial Pham and Xiong [80] showed that autonomous systems, framework or policy regarding this issue is a common gap especially those used in CAVs, are vulnerable to cyberattacks identifed by all the relevant studies to date, making it and may also afect many other vehicles of their generation difcult to assess public concerns and manage the data and on the network as part of the infrastructure because of their information that AVs collect [11, 41, 45, 53, 88, 89]. Tis uncertainty over legal liability has raised security concerns, interconnectivity. Rizvi et al. [81] pointed out that designing a robust safety system for AVs requires a better un- such as the possibility of hacking and unauthorised tracking of AVs, which could lead to severe collisions, disruptions to derstanding of the potential vulnerabilities and threats as- sociated with them. In addition, Macher et al. [82] also the trafc network, carjacking, and even the kidnapping of highlighted certain vehicle-related cybersecurity issues, important individuals [45]. Te extent of legal responsibility which helped identify proactive defence systems and for an AV accident has yet to be determined and may be countermeasures that could be used to address them. Cui assigned to the driver, the manufacturer, or other groups and et al. [51] developed an integrated simulation platform to agencies [53]. evaluate the safety of CAV sensory systems and quantify the Several eforts have been made to establish frameworks for determining responsibility in incidents involving AVs severity of potential crashes. Cui et al. [55] concluded that not all cyber-attacks result in crashes, and when they occur, [90]. Tere has been some progress in terms of legislation and testing of AVs, particularly regarding the development the emergency braking system will probably prevent most of them. Tey also found that GPS jamming is another po- and deployment policies aimed at enhancing the practical use of AVs on public roads and evaluating their potential tential form of cyber-attack that could result in a collision, so this is an area that requires further investigation and impact on trafc and other key elements of highway development. transport [91, 92]. Several countries have already begun to Regarding the privacy of AVs, the sensors installed on create regulatory frameworks for the safe testing and use of them are programmed to collect information about the AVs. For example, Japan has refned its legal framework for vehicle and any incidents involving the vehicle’s sur- operating Level 3 AVs on public roads [93]. Lee and Hess roundings [77]. Several studies have pointed to the recording [22] found that many countries have updated their laws regarding the administration, safety testing, and operation of of data by AVs, the access to and use of data by third parties, and the tracking of individuals’ locations. Tis could result AVs. AV testing has also got underway in the US, Europe, and Asia [21]. Table 5 outlines some of the concerns and in security breaches and the hacking of AVs [15, 37]. However, Kim et al. [33] claimed that new artifcial in- advancements associated with investigations into AVs re- telligence tools and technologies could identify these threats garding liability. and protect AVs against cyber-attacks. Table 4 presents some of the actions that could help to 3.5. Costs and Willingness to Pay. Cost is a signifcant increase the security and market acceptance of AVs. Also, concern for road users with regard to the adoption of AVs detailed in table 4 are some concerns that may decrease the [39]. Neiger [95] estimated that the price of an AV could be market acceptance of these vehicles. between $70k and $100k (US dollars). Te cost of an AV will substantially afect people’s interest in purchasing one. Te study by Liu et al. [96] involving 1,355 Chinese participants 3.4. Legal Liability. Legal responsibility is a critical and showed that around 26% were not interested in AVs because widely discussed issue in regard to the integration of AVs. they were not happy to pay extra for AV technologies. Rezaei Bartolini et al. [87] divided the legal liability concerning and Caulfeld [15] found that nearly half of the 475 Irish AVs into civil, criminal, and administrative categories. people who participated in their survey would not be willing Civil liability deals with the compensation for property to pay (WTP) more than $5,900 to add automation tech- damage to third parties, criminal liability involves the nologies to their vehicles. death or injury of an individual in an accident with an AV, Table 6 summarises several other studies that surveyed and administrative liability concerns driving incidents individuals’ opinions about the WTP for AVs. that occur without proper authorisation [87]. Tese three forms of liability must be addressed and resolved before AVs can become widely adopted, as the allocation of tort 4. Market Analysis liability by law will signifcantly infuence consumer ac- ceptance of AVs. For example, the extent to which AVs are In this study, we evaluated people’s purchasing power and responsible in the case of an accident raises questions as compared it with the observed WTP for AVs; the results are the driver is no longer in control of the vehicle’s shown in Table 6. In order to do so, we collected information operation [36]. about the top 10 best-selling cars in 2022 worldwide, as 10 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 5: Advancements and concerns regarding liability that infuence the acceptance of AVs. Criteria Study Statement Providing rules for deployment and research and making advancements Increasing market acceptance De Bruyne and Werbrouck [91]; SAE [92] regarding the use of AVs on public roads Howard and Dai [36]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; Rezaei and Caulfeld [15]; Schoettle Legal liability is a primary concern identifed in most studies and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76] Decreasing market acceptance DMV [94]; NHTSA [53]; Underwood [76]; Need for regulatory frameworks to be established Howard and Dai [36]; Schoettle and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76]; To what extent should people take responsibility for AV accidents? Journal of Advanced Transportation 11 Table 6: Summary of research reviewed involving surveys of members of the public regarding WTP for AVs. Average WTP for Authors Location Number of participants adding full automation technology Morita and Managi [97] Japan 10,000 $2,470 Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] Ireland 475 $5,900 Liu et al. [96] China 1,355 $2,900 Bansal et al. [11] US 347 $7,300 Kyriakidis et al. [41] 109 countries 5,000 $10,500 Schoettle and Sivak [39] UK, US, Australia 1,533 $4,400 Schoettle and Sivak [78] Australia, UK, US, Japan, India, China 3,255 $2,400 Average WTP $5,124 shown in Table 7. For each car, the average price is provided Table 7: Top 10 best-selling cars worldwide in 2022 and the in US dollars, and the average price of the top 10 cars was average price. treated as the average price that an individual would pay to Units Makes and models Price (USD) buy a car. Tis is representative of the average purchasing sold in millions power for a car globally. It is worth mentioning that this type Toyota Corolla 1.12 $20,175 of analysis could have been conducted at the country level. Toyota RAV4 0.87 $26,525 However, as a country’s wealth and economic status can Ford F-series 0.79 $29,640 afect its citizens’ purchasing power, a global-level study was Tesla Model Y 0.76 $64,990 deemed more suitable for ascertaining the purchasing power Toyota Camry 0.68 $28,752 of people from diferent economic backgrounds. Honda CR-V 0.60 $31,100 According to Table 7, the average purchasing power for Chevrolet Silverado 0.59 $31,500 Hyundai Tucson 0.57 $29,650 individuals worldwide is $33,088 (US dollars). From the Toyota Hilux 0.56 $32,650 reviewed studies listed in Table 6, it was ascertained that the Ram pick-up 0.55 $35,900 average WTP for autonomous features to be added to an Average — $33,088 HDV is around $5,124. Adding this WTP to the average Source: statistica [98]. Survey region: worldwide. Release date: 23 purchasing power, the total price that people would be January 2023. willing to pay for an AV with fully autonomous driving features based on 2022 car prices was calculated as $38,212. to signifcantly improve the smoothness of the overall Tis is signifcantly lower than the anticipated current cost of trafc fow [44, 51], as well as the signal timing at in- approximately $100k for an AV (INSIDER, 2022) [95] which tersections [45, 60], road capacity [16, 47], and parking indicates that this could be a signifcant concern for in- management [49, 52]. However, there is a possibility that dividuals regarding their future willingness to adopt AVs. AVs could also increase congestion, trafc volume, VMT, and unnecessary trips [61, 99], which could be controlled 5. Discussion through the use of proper trafc management strategies; otherwise, these factors may diminish the benefts of AVs By evaluating the relevant papers published between 2014 with regard to improving the trafc fow, as argued and 2021, this study revealed a signifcant gap in terms of previously. investigating the market acceptance of AVs, showing that Te studies showed that AVs could have a high potential less than 1% of the Web of Science publications were con- to reduce the rate of accidents involving pedestrians and cerned with the market perception of these vehicles and cyclists [31], in addition to eliminating human error [41, 65], people’s WTP for them. reducing the overall number of accidents [9, 11, 34, 69, 75] Reviewing the studies that investigated market accep- and 2020a [18], and increasing safety by making informed tance of AVs and the factors that infuence it revealed that decisions [69, 72]. Tese potential improvements would fve transportation system characteristics play major roles in encourage more people to adopt AVs [15, 36, 39]. Never- this regard. Legal liability, safety, privacy, and security, AV theless, signifcant concerns were also identifed, indicating trafc-related outcomes, and the cost of AVs were frequently that the market remains dubious about the benefts of AVs in seen as crucial reasons for the market acceptance or rejection this respect. It is possible that AVs might not succeed in of AVs in previous survey studies. Some of these studies fulflling such tasks [78]. For instance, some people were discussed the potential benefts, while others pointed out the very concerned about the reaction speed and safe and secure potential drawbacks of AVs. operation of AVs [66, 67, 78] due to their potentially poor A further review of the 100 papers investigating the understanding of objects in their surrounding environment potential benefts and drawbacks of the key characteris- [34]. Tere was also some indication that AVs might not be tics, as the main drivers of AV acceptance, revealed that as efective at reducing the severity of any accidents as they AVs could have more potential to improve the trafc fow might be at reducing the overall number of casualties [34]. If than disrupt it. Te studies showed that AVs might be able 12 Journal of Advanced Transportation these safety concerns are not addressed, current and po- (i) Legal liability, safety, privacy, security, trafc con- tential users will be reluctant to adopt AVs for their day to ditions, and costs are key factors infuencing the day travel needs. acceptance of AVs. Software failure [11, 68], security breaches and hacking (ii) Tis study has shown that despite some speculation [15, 20, 83, 85], and car hijacking and kidnapping [86], as about the possible downsides of AVs concerning well as the disruption of trafc networks and catastrophic trafc and safety, AVs may ofer more benefts in collisions [45] were found to be the primary security con- these areas. Tese benefts were sufcient to appeal cerns regarding the adoption of AVs. Aside from these, data to 65% of the participants in the reviewed studies. recording by AVs remains a serious concern within the Tis was then calculated in terms of the weighted market. Te type of data stored by AVs, use of data by third acceptance rate of AVs in the survey studies listed in parties and tracking an individual’s location were among the Table 1 among the 11,057 individuals who partic- key concerns [100]. In this regard, Pham and Xiong [80] ipated in those studies. highlighted some advanced forms of cyber-attack that AVs (iii) 35% of the participants were reluctant to adopt AVs may be unable to identify or respond to; at least there is no because of unresolved issues related to data privacy, solid evidence available to confrm that AVs can currently do security breaches and hacking, and legal liability so. Privacy and cybersecurity, therefore, remain signifcant problems in the event of accidents. concerns that could hinder the adoption of AVs as the (iv) Te cost of AVs seems to be a signifcant barrier to drawbacks of AVs in this respect outweigh their benefts. the adoption of AVs by the market. When cost was Another area in which AVs were found to have more not an issue, the market showed greater interest in drawbacks than benefts if adopted was in relation to legal adopting these vehicles. liability. Tis was cited as a primary concern in several studies [15, 36, 39, 41, 76]. Te main reason for such con- (v) After examining the impact of vehicle automation cerns was the uncertainty about who the responsible group and automation failures on driving performance, or agency for accidents involving AVs would be [36, 39, 76] Strand et al. [79] claimed that driving performance and the lack of established regulatory frameworks in this decreases as the level of automation increases. respect [41, 53, 94]. However, a number of studies showed Correspondingly, Tennant et al. [103] observed that that advancements had been made in terms of designing people who enjoy driving are less enthusiastic regulatory frameworks for the safe testing and operation of about AVs. AVs that may pave the way for defning a full regulatory (vi) Te study showed that the price people are willing to framework in the future [21, 22, 91, 93, 101]. pay for an AV is signifcantly below the estimated Te reviewed studies showed that the average amount current price of an AV. people would be willing to pay to add AV technologies to their vehicles was $5,124. In order to evaluate the market purchasing power in greater depth, this study calculated the average price 7. Limitations and Recommendations an individual would pay to buy a car to represent the average (car) purchasing power. Tis value was found to be $33,088. We are mindful that evaluating the behavioural factors af- After adding the average purchasing power to the WTP for fecting users’ decisions about whether to adopt AVs is as AVs, the total price that people would be willing to pay for an crucial as investigating the external factors relating to the AV with fully autonomous driving features was calculated as infrastructure and manufacturing side and that not all ex- $38,212. Tis is far below the estimated current price of $100k ternal factors were examined in existing empirical studies. In (INSIDER, 2022) [15, 95, 96]; hence, it remains a signifcant this regard, it is recommended that future studies use both concern for the general market with regard to the adoption of approaches and conduct behavioural and nonbehavioural AVs. People are much more likely to be interested in pur- survey studies on the same group of participants in the form chasing an AV if it is afordable [16]. Correspondingly, some of a Delphi method or other similar techniques [104]. studies have attempted to fnd ways to minimise the generalised We acknowledge that AV studies are advancing fast and costs. By combining a locally-optimal motion planner with that technological progress in the feld may signifcantly a Markov decision process (MDP) model, Liu et al. [102] afect the market acceptance of these vehicles in the coming simulated vehicle trajectories. Te framework that they pro- years. In light of this, the current study encourages future posed reduced the trip costs of journeys made using AVs, researchers to conduct similar analyses to expand current including fuel and travel time costs, while also guaranteeing knowledge about their market acceptance. Tis could be safety. However, young men, educated individuals, people done by conducting survey studies within the car earning a higher income and those interested in driving were manufacturing industry that would involve interviewing found to be willing to pay more for AVs [96]. manufacturers to determine their preparedness and po- tential ongoing actions regarding the production of AVs at various levels of automation. Te insights gained from doing 6. Conclusions so would be of value in helping the entire AV market. Tey To conclude the research presented in this paper, the fol- would be useful in terms of determining what to expect from lowing key fndings were identifed, which add to the AVs regarding their potential benefts and drawbacks, in- existing body of work within this feld: cluding those studied in this research, regarding the latest Journal of Advanced Transportation 13 with heterogeneity in means,” Analytic Methods in Accident technological advancements. Future researchers could also Research, vol. 28, Article ID 100134, 2020. attempt to identify the acceptance level of each of the [10] P. Bansal, K. M. Kockelman, and A. Singh, “Assessing public infuencing factors from the manufacturers’ point of view opinions of and interest in new vehicle technologies: an and thus suggest possible solutions that would increase the Austin perspective,” Transportation Research Part C: overall market acceptance of AVs. Emerging Technologies, vol. 67, pp. 1–14, 2016. [11] M. K. Kim, J. H. Park, J. Oh, W. S. Lee, and D. Chung, Data Availability “Identifying and prioritizing the benefts and concerns of connected and autonomous vehicles: a comparison of in- Te data supporting the conclusions of this article can only dividual and expert perceptions,” Research in Transportation be made available for academic research. Requests to access Business & Management, vol. 32, Article ID 100438, 2019. the datasets should be directed to rezaeim@tcd.ie. [12] R. Krueger, T. H. Rashidi, and J. M. Rose, “Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles,” Transportation Research Part Conflicts of Interest C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 69, pp. 343–355, 2016. [13] I. Lijracio, S. A. Useche, J. Llamazares, and L. Montoro, Te authors declare that they have no conficts of interest. “Perceived benefts and constraints in vehicle automation: data to assess the relationship between driver’s features and Acknowledgments their attitudes towards autonomous vehicles,” Data in Brief, vol. 27, Article ID 106662, 2019. Te authors are thankful to Prof. Brian Caulfeld for his [14] W.-Y. Low, M. Cao, J. De Vos, and R. Hickman, “Te journey support and consultations. Open Access funding are enabled experience of visually impaired people on public transport in and organized by JISC. London,” Transport Policy, vol. 97, pp. 137–148, 2020. [15] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Examining public acceptance of autonomous mobility,” Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 21, References pp. 235–246, 2020a. [1] Y. Ye, X. Zhang, and J. Sun, “Automated vehicle’s behavior [16] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Simulating a transition to au- decision making using deep reinforcement learning and tonomous mobility,” Simulation Modelling Practice and high-fdelity simulation environment,” Transportation Re- Teory, vol. 106, Article ID 102175, 2021. search Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 107, pp. 155–170, [17] M. Woldeamanuel and D. Nguyen, “Perceived benefts and concerns of autonomous vehicles: an exploratory study of [2] F. S. Kovacs, S. McLeod, and C. Curtis, “Aged mobility in the millennials’ sentiments of an emerging market,” Research in era of transportation disruption: will autonomous vehicles Transportation Economics, vol. 71, pp. 44–53, 2018. address impediments to the mobility of ageing populations?” [18] H. Zhong, W. Li, M. W. Burris, A. Talebpour, and Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 20, pp. 122–132, 2020. K. C. Sinha, “Will autonomous vehicles change auto com- [3] L. Kroger, ¨ T. Kuhnimhof, and S. Trommer, “Does context muters’ value of travel time?” Transportation Research Part matter? A comparative study modelling autonomous vehicle D: Transport and Environment, vol. 83, Article ID 102303, impact on travel behaviour for Germany and the USA,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 122, [19] G. Li, Y. Yang, S. Li, X. Qu, N. Lyu, and S. E. Li, “Decision pp. 146–161, 2019. making of autonomous vehicles in lane change scenarios: [4] J. J. LaMondia, D. J. Fagnant, H. Qu, J. Barrett, and deep reinforcement learning approaches with risk aware- K. M. Kockelman, “Shifts in long-distance travel mode due to ness,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technolo- automated vehicles: statewide mode-shift simulation ex- gies, vol. 134, Article ID 103452, 103452 pages, 2022. periment and travel survey analysis,” Transportation Re- [20] A. Nikitas, E. T. Njoya, and S. Dani, “Examining the myths of search Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, connected and autonomous vehicles: analysing the pathway vol. 2566, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2016. to a driverless mobility paradigm,” International Journal of [5] K. Maeng and Y. Cho, “Who will want to use shared au- Automotive Technology and Management, vol. 19, no. 1/2, tonomous vehicle service and how much? A consumer ex- pp. 10–30, 2019. periment in South Korea,” Travel Behaviour and Society, [21] S. Wang and Z. Li, “Exploring causes and efects of auto- vol. 26, pp. 9–17, 2022. mated vehicle disengagement using statistical modeling and [6] K. Miller, S. Chng, and L. Cheah, “Understanding acceptance classifcation tree based on feld test data,” Accident Analysis of shared autonomous vehicles among people with diferent & Prevention, vol. 129, pp. 44–54, 2019. mobility and communication needs,” Travel Behaviour and [22] D. Lee and D. J. Hess, “Regulations for on-road testing of Society, vol. 29, pp. 200–210, 2022. connected and automated vehicles: assessing the potential [7] M. Rezaei, “Examining the efciency of autonomous vehicles for global safety harmonization,” Transportation Research in highway transport,” 2020, http://hdl.handle.net/2262/ Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 136, pp. 85–98, 2020. [23] Nhtsa (National Highway Trafc Safety Administration), [8] E. Lehtonen, F. Malin, T. Louw, Y. M. Lee, T. Itkonen, and “Automated vehicles for safety,” 2019, https://www.nhtsa. S. Innamaa, “Why would people want to travel more with gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety. automated cars?” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc [24] I. Nastjuk, B. Herrenkind, M. Marrone, A. B. Brendel, and Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 89, pp. 143–154, 2022. L. M. Kolbe, “What drives the acceptance of autonomous [9] S. S. Ahmed, S. S. Pantangi, U. Eker, G. Fountas, S. E. Still, and P. C. Anastasopoulos, “Analysis of safety benefts and driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end- user’s perspective,” Technological Forecasting and Social security concerns from the use of autonomous vehicles: a grouped random parameters bivariate probit approach Change, vol. 161, Article ID 120319, 2020. 14 Journal of Advanced Transportation [25] E. Fraedrich and B. Lenz, “Societal and individual acceptance [40] C. Haboucha, R. Ishaq, and Y. Shiftan, “User preferences of autonomous driving,” in Autonomous Driving, M. Maurer, regarding autonomous vehicles,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 78, pp. 37–49, 2017. J. Gerdes, B. Lenz, and H. Winner, Eds., Springer, Berlin, [41] M. Kyriakidis, R. Happee, and J. C. F. de Winter, “Public Heidelberg, 2016. opinion on automated driving: results of an international [26] P. Jing, G. Xu, Y. Chen, Y. Shi, and F. Zhan, “Te de- questionnaire among 5000 respondents,” Transportation terminants behind the acceptance of autonomous vehicles: Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 32, a systematic review,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 1719, pp. 127–140, 2015. [42] Continental, “Continental mobility study - international [27] P. Dichabeng, N. Merat, and G. Markkula, “Factors that perspective and project modules,” 2015, https://www. infuence the acceptance of future shared automated vehicles continental.com/en/press/studies-publications/continental- – a focus group study with United Kingdom drivers,” mobility-studies/mobility-study-2015/. Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Be- [43] W. Payre, J. Cestac, and P. Delhomme, “Intention to use haviour, vol. 82, pp. 121–140, 2021. a fully automated car: attitudes and a priori acceptability,” [28] K. F. Yuen, Y. D. Wong, F. Ma, and X. Wang, “Te de- Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Be- terminants of public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: an haviour, vol. 27, no. B, pp. 252–263, 2014. innovation difusion perspective,” Journal of Cleaner Pro- [44] N. Briscoe, “Audi’s new tech can help you catch green lights,” duction, vol. 270, Article ID 121904, 2020. 2019, https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/ [29] F. Ekman, M. Johansson, L.-O. Bligard, ˚ M. Karlsson, and audi-s-new-tech-can-help-you-catch-green-lights-1.380158 H. Stromberg, ¨ “Exploring automated vehicle driving styles as 5#.XG6l_1O3cFw.linkedin. a source of trust information,” Transportation Research Part [45] D. J. Fagnant and K. Kockelman, “Preparing a nation for F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 65, pp. 268–279, autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy [30] J. Lee, H. Chang, and Y. I. Park, “Infuencing factors on social and Practice, vol. 77, pp. 167–181, 2015. acceptance of autonomous vehicles and policy implications,” [46] M. Zhu, Y. Wang, Z. Pu, J. Hu, X. Wang, and R. Ke, “Safe, in Proceedings of the 2018 Portland International Conference efcient, and comfortable velocity control based on re- on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), inforcement learning for autonomous driving,” Trans- pp. 1–6, Honolulu, HI, USA, August 2018. portation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 117, [31] S. Das, “Autonomous vehicle safety: understanding per- Article ID 102662, 2020. ceptions of pedestrians and bicyclists,” Transportation Re- [47] L. Ye and T. Yamamoto, “Modeling connected and auton- search Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 81, omous vehicles in heterogeneous trafc fow,” Physica A: pp. 41–54, 2021. Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 490, [32] Q. Hussain, W. K. M. Alhajyaseen, M. Adnan, M. Almallah, pp. 269–277, 2018. A. Almukdad, and M. Alqaradawi, “Autonomous vehicles [48] F. Zhu and S. Ukkusuri, “Modeling the proactive driving between anticipation and apprehension: investigations behavior of connected vehicles: a cell-based simulation ap- through safety and security perceptions,” Transport Policy, proach: proactive driving behavior of connected vehicles,” vol. 110, pp. 440–451, 2021. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, [33] K. Kim, J. S. Kim, S. Jeong, J.-H. Park, and H. K. Kim, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 262–281, 2018. “Cybersecurity for autonomous vehicles: review of attacks [49] A. Millard-Ball, “Te autonomous vehicle parking problem,” and defense,” Computers & Security, vol. 103, Article ID Transport Policy, vol. 75, pp. 99–108, 2019. 102150, 2021. [50] J. Zhu and I. Tasic, “Safety analysis of freeway on-ramp [34] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Safety of autonomous vehicles: merging with the presence of autonomous vehicles,” Acci- what are the insights from experienced industry pro- dent Analysis & Prevention, vol. 152, Article ID 105966, 2021. fessionals?” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psy- [51] L. Cui, J. Hu, B. Park, and P. Bujanovic, “Development of chology and Behaviour, vol. 81, pp. 472–489, 2021. a simulation platform for safety impact analysis considering [35] F. Becker and K. W. Axhausen, “Literature review on surveys vehicle dynamics, sensor errors, and communication la- investigating the acceptance of automated vehicles,” Trans- tencies: assessing cooperative adaptive cruise control under portation, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1293–1306, 2017. cyber attack,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging [36] D. Howard and D. Dai, “Public perceptions of self-driving Technologies, vol. 97, pp. 1–22, 2018a, https://doi.org/10.1016/ cars: the case of berkeley, california,” Transportation Re- j.trc.2018.10.005. search Board 93rd Annual Meeting, vol. 14, pp. 1–16, 2014, [52] B. Li and Z. Shao, “A unifed motion planning method for https://trid.trb.org/view/1289421. parking an autonomous vehicle in the presence of irregularly [37] Norton Rose Fulbright, “Te privacy implications of au- placed obstacles,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 86, tonomous vehicles,” 2017, https://www.dataprotection pp. 11–20, 2015. report.com/2017/07/the-privacy-implications-of-autonomo [53] Nhtsa (National Highway Trafc Safety Administration), us-vehicles/. “Federal automated vehicles policy,” 2016, https://www. [38] Kpmg (Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler) and Car (Center transportation.gov/AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy- for Automotive Research), “Self-driving cars: the next rev- september-2016. olution,” 2012, https://www.cargroup.org/wp-content/ [54] J. C. Gerdes and S. M. Tornton, “Implementable ethics for uploads/2017/02/Self_driving-cars-Te-next-revolution.pdf. autonomous vehicles,” Autonomous Driving, Springer, [39] B. Schoettle and M. Sivak, “A survey of public opinion about Berlin, Germany, 2016. autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the us, the uk, and [55] S. Cui, B. Seibold, R. Stern, and D. B. Work, “Stabilizing australia,” 2014a, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/ trafc fow via a single autonomous vehicle: possibilities and 2027.42/108384. limitations,” in Proceedings of the 2017 2017 IEEE Intelligent Journal of Advanced Transportation 15 Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp. 1336–1341, Los Angeles, CA, vehicles in multi-scenarios,” Transportation Research Part C: USA, June 2018. Emerging Technologies, vol. 122, Article ID 102820, 2021. [56] X. Li, A. Ghiasi, Z. Xu, and X. Qu, “A piecewise trajectory [71] C. Katrakazas, M. Quddus, W. H. Chen, and L. Deka, “Real- optimization model for connected automated vehicles: exact time motion planning methods for autonomous on-road driving: state-of-the-art and future research directions,” optimization algorithm and queue propagation analysis,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 118, vol. 60, pp. 416–442, 2015. pp. 429–456, 2018. [72] M. Alghuson, K. Abdelghany, and A. Hassan, “Toward an [57] W. Schwarting, J. Alonso-Mora, and D. Rus, “Planning and integrated trafc law enforcement and network management decision-making for autonomous vehicles,” Annual Review in connected vehicle environment: conceptual model and of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 1, survey study of public acceptance,” Accident Analysis & pp. 187–210, 2018. Prevention, vol. 133, Article ID 105300, 2019. [58] M. W. Levin, “Congestion-aware system optimal route [73] B. A. Beirigo, F. Schulte, and R. R. Negenborn, “Integrating choice for shared autonomous vehicles,” Transportation people and freight transportation using shared autonomous Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 82, pp. 229–247, vehicles with compartments,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 392–397, 2018. [59] H. Iglinski ´ and M. Babiak, “Analysis of the potential of [74] C.-Y. Chan, “Advancements, prospects, and impacts of autonomous vehicles in reducing the emissions of green- automated driving systems,” International Journal of house gases in road transport,” Procedia Engineering, Transportation Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 3, vol. 192, pp. 353–358, 2017. pp. 208–216, 2017. [60] T. Awal, M. Murshed, and M. Ali, “An efcient cooperative [75] L. M. Hulse, H. Xie, and E. R. Galea, “Perceptions of au- lane-changing algorithm for sensor- and communication- tonomous vehicles: relationships with road users, risk, enabled automated vehicles,” in Proceedings of the 2015 2015 gender and age,” Safety Science, vol. 102, pp. 1–13, 2018. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp. 1328–1333, [76] S. Underwood, “Automated, connected, and electric vehicle Seoul, Korea, June 2015. systems: expert forecast and roadmap for sustainable [61] L. M. Mart´ınez and J. M. Viegas, “Assessing the impacts of transportation,” 2014, http://graham.umich.edu/media/fles/ deploying a shared self-driving urban mobility system: an LC-IA-ACE-Roadmap-Expert-Forecast-Underwood.pdf. agent-based model applied to the city of Lisbon, Portugal,” [77] A. Rakotonirainy, R. Schroeter, and A. Soro, “Tree social car International Journal of Transportation Science and Tech- visions to improve driver behaviour,” Pervasive and Mobile nology, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 13–27, 2017. Computing, vol. 14, pp. 147–160, 2014. [62] Oecd, International Transport Forum (ITF) Outlook 2017, [78] B. Schoettle and M. Sivak, “Public opinion about self-driving Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Develop- vehicles in china, india, japan, the us, the uk, and australia,” ment, Berlin, Germany, 2017. 2014, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/ [63] F. M. Favaro, ` N. Nader, S. O. Eurich, M. Tripp, and 2027.42/109433/103139.pdf?sequence=1. N. Varadaraju, “Examining accident reports involving au- [79] N. Strand, J. Nilsson, I. M. Karlsson, and L. Nilsson, “Semi- tonomous vehicles in California,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 9, automated versus highly automated driving in critical sit- Article ID e0184952, 2017. uations caused by automation failures,” Transportation Re- [64] J. Wu, H. Liao, and J.-W. Wang, “Analysis of consumer search Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 27, attitudes towards autonomous, connected, and electric ve- pp. 218–228, 2014. hicles: a survey in China,” Research in Transportation Eco- [80] M. Pham and K. Xiong, “A survey on security attacks and nomics, vol. 80, Article ID 100828, 2020. defense techniques for connected and autonomous vehicles,” [65] W. Qu, J. Xu, Y. Ge, X. Sun, and K. Zhang, “Development Computers & Security, vol. 109, Article ID 102269, 2021. and validation of a questionnaire to assess public receptivity [81] S. Rizvi, J. Willet, D. Perino, S. Marasco, and C. Condo, “A toward autonomous vehicles and its relation with the trafc threat to vehicular cyber security and the urgency for cor- safety climate in China,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, rection,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 114, pp. 100–105, vol. 128, pp. 78–86, 2019. [66] A. Papadoulis, M. Quddus, and M. Imprialou, “Evaluating [82] G. Macher, E. Armengaud, E. Brenner, and C. Kreiner, the safety impact of connected and autonomous vehicles on “Treat and risk assessment methodologies in the auto- motorways,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 124, motive domain,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 83, pp. 12–22, 2019. pp. 1288–1294, 2016. [67] Z. Vander Laan and K. F. Sadabadi, “Operational perfor- [83] B. Sheehan, F. Murphy, M. Mullins, and C. Ryan, “Con- mance of a congested corridor with lanes dedicated to au- nected and autonomous vehicles: a cyber-risk classifcation tonomous vehicle trafc,” International Journal of framework,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Transportation Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 1, Practice, vol. 124, pp. 523–536, 2019. pp. 42–52, 2017. [84] S. Curtis, “Self-driving cars can be hacked using a laser [68] T. S. Combs, L. S. Sandt, M. P. Clamann, and pointer,” 2015, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ N. C. McDonald, “Automated vehicles and pedestrian safety: news/11850373/Self-driving-cars-can-be-hacked-using-a- exploring the promise and limits of pedestrian detection,” laser-pointer.html. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 56, no. 1, [85] N. Liu, A. Nikitas, and S. Parkinson, “Exploring expert pp. 1–7, 2019. perceptions about the cyber security and privacy of con- [69] I. Y. Noy, D. Shinar, and W. J. Horrey, “Automated driving: nected and autonomous vehicles: a thematic analysis ap- safety blind spots,” Safety Science, vol. 102, pp. 68–78, 2018. proach,” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology [70] G. Li, Y. Yang, T. Zhang et al., “Risk assessment based and Behaviour, vol. 75, pp. 66–86, 2020, https://doi.org/10. collision avoidance decision-making for autonomous 1016/j.trf.2020.09.019. 16 Journal of Advanced Transportation [86] C. Faife, “Why self-driving cars could be a dream come true [104] M. Cao, C. L. Chen, and R. Hickman, “Transport emissions in Beijing: a scenario planning approach,” Proceedings of the for car thieves,” 2017, https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/ article/mgxak8/why-self-driving-cars-could-be-a-dream- Institution of Civil Engineers—Transport, vol. 170, no. 2, pp. 65–75, 2017. come-true-for-car-thieves. [87] C. Bartolini, T. Tettamanti, and I. Varga, “Critical features of autonomous road transport from the perspective of tech- nological regulation and law,” Transportation Research Procedia, vol. 27, pp. 791–798, 2017. [88] P. Bansal and K. M. Kockelman, “Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 95, pp. 49–63, 2017. [89] Ncsl, “Autonomous self-driving vehicles enacted legislation,” 2020, http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonom ous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx. [90] L. Collingwood, “Privacy implications and liability issues of autonomous vehicles,” Information and Communications Technology Law, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 32–45, 2017. [91] J. De Bruyne and J. Werbrouck, “Merging self-driving cars with the law,” Computer Law & Security Report, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1150–1153, 2018. [92] Sae, “Taxonomy and defnitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles,” 2016, https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201609/. [93] T. Imai, “Legal regulation of autonomous driving technol- ogy: current conditions and issues in Japan,” IATSS Research, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 263–267, 2019. [94] Dmv (Department of Motor Vehicles), “Autonomous ve- hicles in California - testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles for public use,” 2016, https://www.dmv.ca.gov/ portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/bkgd. [95] C. Neiger, “How much do driverless cars cost?,” 2018, http:// www.fool.com/investing/2016/08/04/how-much-do-driver less-cars-cost.aspx. [96] P. Liu, Q. Guo, F. Ren, L. Wang, and Z. Xu, “Willingness to pay for self-driving vehicles: infuences of demographic and psychological factors,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 100, pp. 306–317, 2019. [97] T. Morita and S. Managi, “Autonomous vehicles: willingness to pay and the social dilemma,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 119, Article ID 102748, 2020. [98] Statistica, Best-Selling Passenger Car Worldwide in 2022, Statistica, Hamburg, Germany, 2023. [99] S. Schwartz and K. Lee, “1706 – autonomous vehicles: good or bad for our health?” Journal of Transport & Health, vol. 5, p. S4, 2017. [100] K. Kaur and G. Rampersad, “Trust in driverless cars: in- vestigating key factors infuencing the adoption of driverless cars,” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 48, pp. 87–96, 2018. [101] F. Costantini, N. Tomopoulos, F. Steibel, A. Curl, G. Lugano, and T. Kova´cikov ˇ a, ´ “Autonomous vehicles in a GDPR era: an international comparison,” Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, vol. 5, pp. 191–213, 2020. [102] X. Liu, N. Masoud, Q. Zhu, and A. Khojandi, “A Markov Decision Process framework to incorporate network-level data in motion planning for connected and automated ve- hicles,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technol- ogies, vol. 136, Article ID 103550, 2022. [103] C. Tennant, S. Stares, and S. Howard, “Public discomfort at the prospect of autonomous vehicles: building on previous surveys to measure attitudes in 11 countries,” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 64, pp. 98–118, 2019. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Advanced Transportation Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Synthesising the Existing Literature on the Market Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles and the External Underlying Factors

Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/hindawi-publishing-corporation/synthesising-the-existing-literature-on-the-market-acceptance-of-aqklp7gM1g

References (105)

Publisher
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
ISSN
0197-6729
eISSN
2042-3195
DOI
10.1155/2023/6065060
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Hindawi Journal of Advanced Transportation Volume 2023, Article ID 6065060, 16 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6065060 Review Article Synthesising the Existing Literature on the Market Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles and the External Underlying Factors 1 2 3 4 Amin Rezaei , Mengqiu Cao , Qihao Liu, and Jonas De Vos Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland School of Architecture and Cities, University of Westminster, London, UK School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, London, UK Correspondence should be addressed to Mengqiu Cao; m.cao@westminster.ac.uk Received 23 February 2023; Revised 3 April 2023; Accepted 25 April 2023; Published 12 May 2023 Academic Editor: Jingda Wu Copyright © 2023 Amin Rezaei et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In recent years, the level of acceptance of autonomous vehicles (AVs) has changed with the advent of new sensor technologies and the proportional increase in market perception of these vehicles. Our study provides an overview of the relevant existing studies in order to consolidate current knowledge and pave the way for future studies in this area. Te paper frst reviews studies in- vestigating the market acceptance of AVs. We identify the nonbehavioural factors that account for the level of acceptance and examine these in detail by cross-referencing the results of relevant papers published between 2014 and 2021 to reach a consensus on the perceived benefts and concerns. Te fndings showed that previous studies have found legal liability, safety, privacy, security, trafc conditions, and cost to be key external factors infuencing the acceptance or rejection of AVs, and that the upsides of adopting AVs in regard to improving trafc conditions and safety outweigh the risks identifed in relation to these areas. Tis resulted in an overall weighted average of 65% market acceptance of AVs among the 11,057 people surveyed in this regard. However, the remaining respondents were not very favourably disposed towards adopting AVs because of unresolved issues related to data privacy, security breaches, and legal liability in the event of accidents. In addition, our evaluation showed that the worldwide market purchasing power for an AV, based on 2022 prices, is around $38k, which is signifcantly below the current anticipated price of $100k. Nikitas et al. [20], have warned against having unrealistic 1. Introduction expectations of AVs that cannot be fully understood until As a key component of future intelligent transport systems more extensive testing has been conducted to ensure their [1], autonomous vehicles (AVs) are likely to change travel safe operation. In this regard, Wang and Li [21] discussed behaviour, as they will have a signifcant impact on the how AVs have already started to be tested in several US modes of travel used [2–7]. Lehtonen et al. [8] pointed out states and some European and Asian countries. A study by that autonomous driving has the advantage of making using Lee and Hess [22] also showed that the US, Australia, and these vehicles more attractive than manual driving. Various Germany had taken actions relating to the safety testing of studies have identifed the benefts and risks of AVs with AVs. It is also worth mentioning that the abbreviation AV, regard to safety, trafc congestion, the number and severity which is used throughout this paper, means a fully auto- of accidents, and ofering a means of mobility to individuals mated vehicle or level 5 AV as defned by the Society of who have previously been unable to drive, such as people Automotive Engineers (SAEs) (2016) and used by the Na- with certain types of disabilities [9–18]. Li et al. [19] tional Highway Trafc Safety Association (NHTSA) [23]. emphasised that safety is the most signifcant concern in From a business point of view, if AVs are to penetrate the relation to AVs. However, some studies, such as that by transport market successfully, they must be widely accepted 2 Journal of Advanced Transportation Number of publications between 2014-2021 3 3 910 895 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Year Safety, security & privacy, traffic, costs & WTP, legal liability Acceptance of AVs Figure 1: Number of publications studied regarding AV performance and acceptance. [24]. However, the vast majority of relevant studies pub- Using survey research focusing on social psychology and lished to date, some of which are referred previously, have customer utility, Yuen et al. [28] studied the cognition mainly focused on one or more characteristics of the process that leads individuals to accept or reject AVs. Tey transportation system, such as safety, security, and trafc found that the acceptance of AVs is afected by the trust that conditions. Considerably less attention has been paid to the users have in these vehicles and their perceived value. Ekman extent to which people, or in a more general sense, the et al. [29] pointed out that it is essential to consider pro- markets, accept these vehicles and what factors infuence viding as much information as possible about AVs, such as their driving performance and safety record to improve their perceptions with regard to this matter. Tis is evi- denced by the number of publications produced over the user trust. In general, the social and behavioural studies mentioned past few years. As shown in Figure 1, between 2014 and 2021, 4,214 papers published on the Web of Science investigated previously have investigated the factors and mechanisms the performance of AVs in relation to road transport re- that drive the acceptance of AVs and why consumers are garding one or more of the characteristics mentioned pre- inclined to accept or reject these vehicles. Nonetheless, they viously. However, less than 1% (17) of the published papers were less focused on the level of acceptance, i.e., how much has explored the acceptance of AVs. It is worth noting that individuals or the market in general are willing to pay for few papers published before 2014 have investigated the and use these cars. However, some studies have evaluated adoption of AVs from a transport point of view. Although nonbehavioural factors such as safety, cost, travel time, and many studies have investigated the adoption of AVs, few mobility (trafc), relating to the AV infrastructure and AV technology [30]. Tese studies have focused on the external have quantifed it in terms of a market acceptance percentage. factors that have an impact on people’s decisions about Consequently, there is a signifcant gap in this area. As whether to adopt AVs, and most of them have used surveys the AV industry and the science behind it are advancing to conduct their investigations. Some of these survey studies rapidly, the market acceptance of AVs will need to adapt such as those by Das [31]; Hussain et al. [32]; Kim et al. [33]; accordingly. Tus, there is a need to review the benefts, and Rezaei and Caulfeld [34] have investigated one or more concerns about, and level of acceptance of AVs over time. characteristics of the infrastructure, vehicle, or trans- In recent years, a number of studies have investigated the portation system, such as safety and security, in relation to user acceptance of AVs from two perspectives. Some re- the acceptance of AVs. It is imperative to mention that behavioural studies are also required to understand more search has investigated social and behavioural factors, such as trust, attitudes, social norms, perceived value, risk, and about people’s reasoning regarding whether to accept or reject AVs; however, that is beyond the scope of the current usefulness, while other studies have explored non- behavioural or external factors. For a comprehensive review study. For a comprehensive review of the various survey of the various aspects related to social and behavioural studies investigating the acceptance of AVs, see Becker and theories that afect the acceptance of AVs, see, e.g., Fraedrich Axhausen [35]. and Lenz [25] and Jing et al. [26]. Dichabeng et al. [27] As mentioned earlier, the level of acceptance of AVs has conducted a focus group study investigating the various increased with the advent of new sensor technologies and the factors infuencing the acceptance of shared AVs. Tey knowledge that these vehicles have improved in terms of concluded that security, trust, and the quality of shared space safety, security, costs, and driving performance in road are the main factors involved in whether people are willing trafc. In order to make the most up-to-date assessment of user acceptance of AVs, this paper frst reviews studies that to accept AVs. Nastjuk et al. [24] also investigated some factors afecting the acceptance of AVs from a user per- have investigated the acceptance of AVs with regard to the various benefts and drawbacks of these vehicles. Tis is spective. Tey concluded that individual and social factors play a vital role in driving the widespread acceptance of AVs. followed by a numerical evaluation of the level of acceptance Publications Journal of Advanced Transportation 3 in the form of a percentage. Te study extracted the key in their survey were unwilling to accept AVs because of the external factors impacting on the acceptance or rejection of data recorded by them and concerns about data privacy. Legal liability is another signifcant concern and a key AVs from the studies examined in order to determine the key drivers of the acceptance level, i.e., the main reasons why factor afecting the acceptance of AVs. About 66% of the the study participants accepted or rejected the adoption of study participants were concerned about legal liability, AVs. Subsequently, we analysed the acceptance criteria by which made them reluctant to adopt AVs [15, 36, 38, 39]. reviewing 88 papers published between 2014 and 2021 to Table 1 summarises the complete list of survey studies consolidate existing knowledge regarding the factors that have investigated people’s interest in and concerns infuencing acceptance. To the best of the authors’ knowl- about AVs and how they afect their overall opinion re- edge, this has not been done in any previous studies. garding the acceptance of these vehicles. Te studies in Te remainder of this paper is organised as follows. Table 1 also calculated the percentage of participants willing Section 2 reviews the relevant previous studies and identifes to adopt AVs, thus representing the acceptance rate among the key factors resulting in acceptance or rejection of AVs. the community studied. Our review of the key benefts of and concerns about Section 3 examines these key factors in greater depth to arrive at a consensus from the results. Section 4 analyses the AVs, as outlined in Table 1, showed that legal liability, market acceptance of and buying power with regard to AVs. accidents, equipment failure, safety, trafc conditions, se- Section 5 discusses the key observations made by this study curity, cost, and privacy were the factors most frequently and situates these within the literature, and Section 6 pro- mentioned in the participants’ responses. Tese fndings vides the key conclusions regarding the aforementioned validated the study by Lee et al. [30], which showed that overview. Finally, Section 7 outlines the limitations of this concerns about safety and cost have a signifcant impact on study and ofers recommendations to pave the way for future the market acceptance of fully autonomous vehicles. Lee researchers to better utilise the results of this study and fll et al. [30] also concluded that ease of driving and driver education would positively infuence consumer acceptance the research gaps within this area. of partially autonomous vehicles; however, these factors are beyond the scope of the current study (as outlined in Section 2. Overview of the Market Acceptance 1), which focuses only on fully autonomous vehicles. On this basis, fve groups of factors were considered for further As discussed in Section 1, some studies have evaluated the factors and mechanisms that infuence the acceptance of analysis in this paper, as follows: legal liability, safety, trafc AVs but have not explicitly examined the market acceptance conditions, privacy and security, and costs, each comprising of these vehicles. Terefore, this paper targeted those studies a key theme that repeatedly occurred in the relevant studies. that have evaluated the main reasons for the market ac- In this regard, “liability” refers to the terms of use of AVs on ceptance or rejection of AVs and assessed the acceptance public roads, the group or agency responsible for accidents rate. For example, a recent survey by Rezaei and Caulfeld involving AVs, and other regulatory frameworks related to deploying these vehicles. Safety refers to equipment failures [15] of 475 Irish participants showed that only 20% were interested in adopting AVs and paying for these vehicles. by AVs, their understanding of surrounding objects, driving decisions, errors that may result in accidents or, conversely, Nonetheless, there was a general belief that AVs could potentially reduce the number of accidents, and that con- help drivers in an impaired condition, and other driving assistance that can help increase safety and reduce accidents. sequently people would feel more secure and safer driving an AV. In addition, reducing delays, queues, and trafc con- Trafc conditions refer to the features that help AVs make gestion was one of the most appealing aspects of adopting informed decisions while on the road, which may result in AVs and a signifcant reason for their acceptance by these smoother trafc fow, fewer queues, and confict points at participants [7]. However, 80% of the participants stated that intersections and therefore less congestion overall. Te more they would not be happy to adopt AVs because of privacy efcient use of existing lanes, route choices and use of issues, security breaches, and the high cost of the vehicles. parking spaces, and the capacity to drive at near-constant velocities are key features in this context. Overall, Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] found a statistical cor- relation between the security and safety of AVs and the Privacy and security refer to data recording, data sharing, data protection, data privacy, cybersecurity mea- acceptance of these vehicles. It is also worth noting that the correlation between the cost of AVs and their acceptance sures, security breaches, and cyber-attacks. Finally, cost was investigated by Howard and Dai [36]. Approximately refers to the price of AVs or technologies that can provide 65% of the individuals who participated in Howard and some (or fully) automated features in human-driven vehicles Dai’s [36] study believed that cost would be a substantial (HDVs). barrier to accepting AVs. Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] also proved this statistical correlation mentioned previously by 3. Key External Factors Influencing the applying a backward linear regression model. Adoption of AVs Data privacy and the recording of data by AVs have also been cited as one of the main reasons for their rejection or 3.1. Trafc. Briscoe [44] and Fagnant and Kockelman [45] acceptance (e.g., [15, 37]). Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] found suggested that the implementation of autonomous tech- a statistical correlation between data privacy and the overall nologies such as adaptive cruise control (ACC) and trafc level of interest in and acceptance of AVs; most participants surveillance can lead to a more streamlined fow of trafc 4 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 1: Summary of the survey studies assessed with regard to the market acceptance of AVs. Number of % Main reason (s) Main reason (s) Authors Location participants acceptance for acceptance for rejection Rezaei and Caulfeld Reduction in trafc congestion, queues, and delays and fewer Ireland 475 20 Privacy, security, cost, and legal liability [15] accidents Bansal et al. [10] US 347 80 Fewer accidents Equipment failure Israel and North Haboucha et al. [40] 721 56 Parking made easier and reliable trafc management Cost America Security issues and hacking; legal liability; safety Kyriakidis et al. [41] 109 countries 4,886 74 More appealing and comfortable than manual driving concerns Expensive, people are wary of them, and not Continental [42] US and Germany 4,100 58 Reduction in the severity of accidents sufciently reliable Howard and Dai [36] US 107 86 Safer; the convenience of not having to fnd a parking space Losing control of the vehicle; vehicle liability Help people in an impaired condition, such as those under Losing control of the vehicle and misuse by Payre et al. [43] France 421 71 the infuence of alcohol, drugs, and some medications, if they hackers have to drive in an emergency Journal of Advanced Transportation 5 Table 2: Trafc impacts of AVs that could infuence the level of market acceptance. Criteria Study Statement Zhu and Tasic [50] Reducing the number and severity of confict points at on-ramp merging areas Improving safety and efciency and making velocity control more comfortable, Zhu et al. [46] outperforming the MPC-based ACC algorithm and human drivers Rezaei and Caulfeld [16]; Cui et al. [51] Stabilising trafc fow Facilitating “grabbing the green light” at intersections, as well as helping to make Briscoe [44] decisions based on the data obtained from the infrastructure facilities Using parking assistance technology to manage parking spaces more efectively and Millard-Ball [49]; Li and Shao [52] shortening the stationary distance between each vehicle Bansal et al. [11]; NHTSA [53]; Gerdes and Tornton [54] Implementing and managing speed limits more efectively than HDVs Reducing the gaps between each car and reducing trafc congestion with Cui et al. [55] Increasing market acceptance near-constant velocities Recognising and balancing upstream and downstream trafc incidents using Li et al. [56] intelligent sensors Using combined decision-making, control, and perception approaches to make Schwarting et al. [57] informed decisions Using data from LIDAR and other vehicles and infrastructure facilities to make Levin [58] efective route choices Iglinski ´ and Babiak [59]; Howard and Dai [36] Adhering to trafc regulations Using existing intersections and lanes more efectively with shorter headways and Awal et al. [60] reducing the number of lane-changing bottlenecks Fagnant and Kockelman [45] Connecting and coordinating with other vehicles in platoons Tere may be safety issues associated with having a mixture of HDVs and AVs on Nikitas et al. [20] the roads during the frst few years of AV adoption Decreasing market acceptance Mart´ınez and Viegas [61] Increasing vehicle miles travelled by using shared AVs Fagnant and Kockelman [45] Increasing unnecessary congestion, trafc volume, vehicle miles travelled and trips 6 Journal of Advanced Transportation estimated to rise by 94% to 34.9 BPK by 2050. Such a sub- through the use of automated braking and acceleration systems. Tis results in a decrease in the constant average stantial rise in mobility demand makes safety a global public health issue that requires special attention and speed of vehicles, thereby making the calculation of travel time for AVs more accurate. Based on reinforcement consideration. learning, Zhu et al. [46] proposed a model for controlling Fagnant and Kockelman [45]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; and velocity during car following (car-following is a driving Howard and Dai [36] showed that human driver errors such behaviour model. Probably the most famous example is the as distraction, fatigue, alcohol, and drug taking are the “Wiedemann car-following model” that has ten parameters leading cause of accidents. Favaro et al. [63] verifed this or driving logics for emulating human driving behaviours, assertion with their fndings that 94% of car accidents occur which has been widely used by the trafc simulation soft- due to human driver errors. Hussain et al. [32] highlighted ware, Vissim that could be used to develop autonomous AVs’ capability to reduce human errors, and Wu et al. [64] suggested that AVs signifcantly reduce driving fatigue. driving systems with improved safety and efciency and more comfortable velocity control. Tis model performed Reducing driver errors by people under the infuence of alcohol, drugs, and medication was also recognised as better than the MPC-based ACC algorithm and out- performed human drivers. A recent case study involving a beneft of adopting AVs by 1,453 Chinese people, simulation modelling of AVs by Rezaei and Caulfeld [16] according to Qu et al. [65]. suggested that AVs may substantially afect the quality of the Papadoulis et al. [66] and Vander Laan and Sadabadi trafc fow by reducing trafc queue length and the duration [67] found that AVs would be expected to have a quicker of delays. Furthermore, the simulation study conducted by reaction time and safer driving operations than human Ye and Yamamoto [47] on the impact of AVs on road drivers. In this regard, Combs et al. [68] and Noy et al. [69] also highlighted the intelligent sensor technologies associ- capacity suggested that road capacity would increase with a more signifcant number of AVs on the road. ated with AVs that help them make informed decisions about unexpected road incidents, which has the efect of Fagnant and Kockelman’s [45] study showed that AVs have the potential to anticipate the actions of other vehicles, increasing road safety. Moreover, Li et al. [70] proposed a new decision-making algorithm that could be used by AVs such as sudden braking or decisions to accelerate. Because they have the ability to choose the best route, AVs can also to avoid collisions in various scenarios, focusing on diferent make more efcient use of road lanes, allowing them to driving style preferences. Te method they developed was operate with smaller distances between them and other reliable enough to increase driver acceptance of AVs. vehicles in a convoy. Tis ability enables vehicles to brake Katrakazas et al. [71] highlighted AVs’ capability to more smoothly and adjust their speed more efciently when identify surrounding objects more efectively than HDVs, travelling in a platoon [45]. Te study by Zhu and Ukkusuri thus reducing the number of accidents. A total of 185 professionals in the survey conducted by Rezaei and [48] verifed Fagnant and Kockelman’s [45] fndings by showing that the presence of AVs within the trafc network Caulfeld [34] also highlighted AVs’ ability to reduce the number of accidents on public roads. Te capability to safely will improve the smoothness of the trafc fow. Studies investigating parking areas and related concerns deliver freight and ofer a safe form of mobility for unli- have demonstrated that AVs have the potential to lower cenced drivers, people with certain disabilities and older parking costs and improve the utilisation of available people were also identifed as benefts of adopting AVs parking spaces in urban areas [49]. [72–74]. Overall, the benefts of adopting AVs with regard to Te studies reviewed in this section revealed that safety is trafc conditions could potentially increase the market ac- one of the key external factors infuencing the adoption of ceptance of these vehicles. Table 2 also outlines several other AVs, according to the views of potential users, many of studies that have reviewed the trafc impacts of AVs that which have been discussed above. Table 3 provides an overview of the main safety benefts of AVs and the concerns may encourage their market acceptance. However, there are some possible downsides to adopting AVs, such as the fact that may increase or decrease their market acceptance. that they could disrupt the trafc fow. For example, an increase in the number of unnecessary trips and vehicle 3.3. Privacy and Security. Although eforts have been made miles travelled (VMT) could increase trafc congestion. to assess the diferent characteristics of AVs and their Table 2 presents the trafc-related outcomes associated with possible impacts on road transportation, many questions AVs that may increase or decrease the market acceptance of remain unanswered regarding the recording of data by AVs these vehicles. and the possibility of security breaches and hacking [7]. Tis concern becomes more critical in regard to connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) as the V2X communication 3.2. Safety. Statistics from the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) have shown that system they use is likely to be a signifcant focus of cyber- security attacks against AVs [33]. Rakotonirainy et al. [77] more than 1.2 million people worldwide die in road acci- dents annually. Road accidents are the leading cause of death found evidence to suggest that a faw in the security system used by AVs could result in serious crimes, such as engaging among young people aged 15–29 [62]. Te OECD [62] data also demonstrate that the total motorised mobility in cities in the unauthorised surveillance of important individuals. was 18 billion passenger kilometres (BPKs) in 2015; this is Te majority of the 5,000 people who participated in the Journal of Advanced Transportation 7 Table 3: Te safety benefts of AVs and concerns about them that could increase or decrease their market acceptance. Criteria Study Statement Das [31] Reducing accidents with pedestrians and cyclists Rezaei and Caulfeld [15]; Rezaei and Caulfeld [34]; Hulse et al. [75]; Howard and Dai [36]; Li et al. [70]; Papadoulis et al. [66]; Bansal et al. [11]; Schoettle Increasing safety and reducing the number of accidents and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76] Increasing market Beirigo et al. [73] Increasing safety when transporting freight acceptance Noy et al. [69] Making informed decisions Laan and Sadabadi [67] Quick reaction time Chan [74] Providing safe mobility for older people and those with certain disabilities Katrakazas et al. [71] Safe identifcation of surrounding objects (humans and animals) Kyriakidis et al. [41] Removing human errors While AVs may reduce the number of accidents, they may increase their Rezaei and Caulfeld [34] severity Rezaei and Caulfeld [34]; Rakotonirainy et al. [77] Poor understanding of animals, humans, and other surrounding objects Decreasing market Software and operational failures can be caused by the coexistence of AVs and acceptance Noy et al. [69] HDVs Schoettle and Sivak [78] Driving reaction speed is not as good as human drivers Strand et al. [79] Driving performance decreases as the level of automation increases 8 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 4: Security actions and concerns that could increase or decrease the market acceptance of AVs. Criteria Study Statement Kim et al. [33]; Sheehan et al. [83] Using new techniques and methods to predict cyber-attacks Identifying the threats posed by cyber-security to AVs and considering Increasing market Macher et al. [82] countermeasures acceptance Combatting cyber-attacks proactively with the acquisition of a hybrid security Rizvi et al. [81] system Tere are some advanced forms of cyber-attack that CAVs may be unable to Pham and Xiong [80] identify or respond to; at least, no solid evidence was found to confrm that the current models are capable of doing so Decreasing market Curtis [84]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; Liu et al. [85]; Payre et al. [43]; Rezaei & Security hacking and breaches acceptance Caulfeld [15]; Sheehan et al. [83] Faife [86] Identifying the threats of vehicle kidnapping and hijacking Awareness of the growing number of potential cyber-terrorism attacks, Nikitas et al. [20] hacking, unauthorised private data sharing, and vulnerabilities Journal of Advanced Transportation 9 Several studies have investigated the public’s response to survey study conducted by Kyriakidis et al. [41] were very concerned about the potential for hacking AVs and losing the issue of legal liability in relation to autonomous vehicles [15, 36, 39, 76]. Tese research studies have found that control of their vehicles. Te survey by Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] involving 475 Irish people also verifed the observation potential users are uncertain about who would be held re- made by Kyriakidis et al. [41], showing that members of the sponsible in the event of an accident involving an auton- public, in general, worried about the secure operation of and omous vehicle. Legal liability is viewed as a major barrier to safety issues associated with AVs. the adoption of AVs by the public. Te absence of an ofcial Pham and Xiong [80] showed that autonomous systems, framework or policy regarding this issue is a common gap especially those used in CAVs, are vulnerable to cyberattacks identifed by all the relevant studies to date, making it and may also afect many other vehicles of their generation difcult to assess public concerns and manage the data and on the network as part of the infrastructure because of their information that AVs collect [11, 41, 45, 53, 88, 89]. Tis uncertainty over legal liability has raised security concerns, interconnectivity. Rizvi et al. [81] pointed out that designing a robust safety system for AVs requires a better un- such as the possibility of hacking and unauthorised tracking of AVs, which could lead to severe collisions, disruptions to derstanding of the potential vulnerabilities and threats as- sociated with them. In addition, Macher et al. [82] also the trafc network, carjacking, and even the kidnapping of highlighted certain vehicle-related cybersecurity issues, important individuals [45]. Te extent of legal responsibility which helped identify proactive defence systems and for an AV accident has yet to be determined and may be countermeasures that could be used to address them. Cui assigned to the driver, the manufacturer, or other groups and et al. [51] developed an integrated simulation platform to agencies [53]. evaluate the safety of CAV sensory systems and quantify the Several eforts have been made to establish frameworks for determining responsibility in incidents involving AVs severity of potential crashes. Cui et al. [55] concluded that not all cyber-attacks result in crashes, and when they occur, [90]. Tere has been some progress in terms of legislation and testing of AVs, particularly regarding the development the emergency braking system will probably prevent most of them. Tey also found that GPS jamming is another po- and deployment policies aimed at enhancing the practical use of AVs on public roads and evaluating their potential tential form of cyber-attack that could result in a collision, so this is an area that requires further investigation and impact on trafc and other key elements of highway development. transport [91, 92]. Several countries have already begun to Regarding the privacy of AVs, the sensors installed on create regulatory frameworks for the safe testing and use of them are programmed to collect information about the AVs. For example, Japan has refned its legal framework for vehicle and any incidents involving the vehicle’s sur- operating Level 3 AVs on public roads [93]. Lee and Hess roundings [77]. Several studies have pointed to the recording [22] found that many countries have updated their laws regarding the administration, safety testing, and operation of of data by AVs, the access to and use of data by third parties, and the tracking of individuals’ locations. Tis could result AVs. AV testing has also got underway in the US, Europe, and Asia [21]. Table 5 outlines some of the concerns and in security breaches and the hacking of AVs [15, 37]. However, Kim et al. [33] claimed that new artifcial in- advancements associated with investigations into AVs re- telligence tools and technologies could identify these threats garding liability. and protect AVs against cyber-attacks. Table 4 presents some of the actions that could help to 3.5. Costs and Willingness to Pay. Cost is a signifcant increase the security and market acceptance of AVs. Also, concern for road users with regard to the adoption of AVs detailed in table 4 are some concerns that may decrease the [39]. Neiger [95] estimated that the price of an AV could be market acceptance of these vehicles. between $70k and $100k (US dollars). Te cost of an AV will substantially afect people’s interest in purchasing one. Te study by Liu et al. [96] involving 1,355 Chinese participants 3.4. Legal Liability. Legal responsibility is a critical and showed that around 26% were not interested in AVs because widely discussed issue in regard to the integration of AVs. they were not happy to pay extra for AV technologies. Rezaei Bartolini et al. [87] divided the legal liability concerning and Caulfeld [15] found that nearly half of the 475 Irish AVs into civil, criminal, and administrative categories. people who participated in their survey would not be willing Civil liability deals with the compensation for property to pay (WTP) more than $5,900 to add automation tech- damage to third parties, criminal liability involves the nologies to their vehicles. death or injury of an individual in an accident with an AV, Table 6 summarises several other studies that surveyed and administrative liability concerns driving incidents individuals’ opinions about the WTP for AVs. that occur without proper authorisation [87]. Tese three forms of liability must be addressed and resolved before AVs can become widely adopted, as the allocation of tort 4. Market Analysis liability by law will signifcantly infuence consumer ac- ceptance of AVs. For example, the extent to which AVs are In this study, we evaluated people’s purchasing power and responsible in the case of an accident raises questions as compared it with the observed WTP for AVs; the results are the driver is no longer in control of the vehicle’s shown in Table 6. In order to do so, we collected information operation [36]. about the top 10 best-selling cars in 2022 worldwide, as 10 Journal of Advanced Transportation Table 5: Advancements and concerns regarding liability that infuence the acceptance of AVs. Criteria Study Statement Providing rules for deployment and research and making advancements Increasing market acceptance De Bruyne and Werbrouck [91]; SAE [92] regarding the use of AVs on public roads Howard and Dai [36]; Kyriakidis et al. [41]; Rezaei and Caulfeld [15]; Schoettle Legal liability is a primary concern identifed in most studies and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76] Decreasing market acceptance DMV [94]; NHTSA [53]; Underwood [76]; Need for regulatory frameworks to be established Howard and Dai [36]; Schoettle and Sivak [39]; Underwood [76]; To what extent should people take responsibility for AV accidents? Journal of Advanced Transportation 11 Table 6: Summary of research reviewed involving surveys of members of the public regarding WTP for AVs. Average WTP for Authors Location Number of participants adding full automation technology Morita and Managi [97] Japan 10,000 $2,470 Rezaei and Caulfeld [15] Ireland 475 $5,900 Liu et al. [96] China 1,355 $2,900 Bansal et al. [11] US 347 $7,300 Kyriakidis et al. [41] 109 countries 5,000 $10,500 Schoettle and Sivak [39] UK, US, Australia 1,533 $4,400 Schoettle and Sivak [78] Australia, UK, US, Japan, India, China 3,255 $2,400 Average WTP $5,124 shown in Table 7. For each car, the average price is provided Table 7: Top 10 best-selling cars worldwide in 2022 and the in US dollars, and the average price of the top 10 cars was average price. treated as the average price that an individual would pay to Units Makes and models Price (USD) buy a car. Tis is representative of the average purchasing sold in millions power for a car globally. It is worth mentioning that this type Toyota Corolla 1.12 $20,175 of analysis could have been conducted at the country level. Toyota RAV4 0.87 $26,525 However, as a country’s wealth and economic status can Ford F-series 0.79 $29,640 afect its citizens’ purchasing power, a global-level study was Tesla Model Y 0.76 $64,990 deemed more suitable for ascertaining the purchasing power Toyota Camry 0.68 $28,752 of people from diferent economic backgrounds. Honda CR-V 0.60 $31,100 According to Table 7, the average purchasing power for Chevrolet Silverado 0.59 $31,500 Hyundai Tucson 0.57 $29,650 individuals worldwide is $33,088 (US dollars). From the Toyota Hilux 0.56 $32,650 reviewed studies listed in Table 6, it was ascertained that the Ram pick-up 0.55 $35,900 average WTP for autonomous features to be added to an Average — $33,088 HDV is around $5,124. Adding this WTP to the average Source: statistica [98]. Survey region: worldwide. Release date: 23 purchasing power, the total price that people would be January 2023. willing to pay for an AV with fully autonomous driving features based on 2022 car prices was calculated as $38,212. to signifcantly improve the smoothness of the overall Tis is signifcantly lower than the anticipated current cost of trafc fow [44, 51], as well as the signal timing at in- approximately $100k for an AV (INSIDER, 2022) [95] which tersections [45, 60], road capacity [16, 47], and parking indicates that this could be a signifcant concern for in- management [49, 52]. However, there is a possibility that dividuals regarding their future willingness to adopt AVs. AVs could also increase congestion, trafc volume, VMT, and unnecessary trips [61, 99], which could be controlled 5. Discussion through the use of proper trafc management strategies; otherwise, these factors may diminish the benefts of AVs By evaluating the relevant papers published between 2014 with regard to improving the trafc fow, as argued and 2021, this study revealed a signifcant gap in terms of previously. investigating the market acceptance of AVs, showing that Te studies showed that AVs could have a high potential less than 1% of the Web of Science publications were con- to reduce the rate of accidents involving pedestrians and cerned with the market perception of these vehicles and cyclists [31], in addition to eliminating human error [41, 65], people’s WTP for them. reducing the overall number of accidents [9, 11, 34, 69, 75] Reviewing the studies that investigated market accep- and 2020a [18], and increasing safety by making informed tance of AVs and the factors that infuence it revealed that decisions [69, 72]. Tese potential improvements would fve transportation system characteristics play major roles in encourage more people to adopt AVs [15, 36, 39]. Never- this regard. Legal liability, safety, privacy, and security, AV theless, signifcant concerns were also identifed, indicating trafc-related outcomes, and the cost of AVs were frequently that the market remains dubious about the benefts of AVs in seen as crucial reasons for the market acceptance or rejection this respect. It is possible that AVs might not succeed in of AVs in previous survey studies. Some of these studies fulflling such tasks [78]. For instance, some people were discussed the potential benefts, while others pointed out the very concerned about the reaction speed and safe and secure potential drawbacks of AVs. operation of AVs [66, 67, 78] due to their potentially poor A further review of the 100 papers investigating the understanding of objects in their surrounding environment potential benefts and drawbacks of the key characteris- [34]. Tere was also some indication that AVs might not be tics, as the main drivers of AV acceptance, revealed that as efective at reducing the severity of any accidents as they AVs could have more potential to improve the trafc fow might be at reducing the overall number of casualties [34]. If than disrupt it. Te studies showed that AVs might be able 12 Journal of Advanced Transportation these safety concerns are not addressed, current and po- (i) Legal liability, safety, privacy, security, trafc con- tential users will be reluctant to adopt AVs for their day to ditions, and costs are key factors infuencing the day travel needs. acceptance of AVs. Software failure [11, 68], security breaches and hacking (ii) Tis study has shown that despite some speculation [15, 20, 83, 85], and car hijacking and kidnapping [86], as about the possible downsides of AVs concerning well as the disruption of trafc networks and catastrophic trafc and safety, AVs may ofer more benefts in collisions [45] were found to be the primary security con- these areas. Tese benefts were sufcient to appeal cerns regarding the adoption of AVs. Aside from these, data to 65% of the participants in the reviewed studies. recording by AVs remains a serious concern within the Tis was then calculated in terms of the weighted market. Te type of data stored by AVs, use of data by third acceptance rate of AVs in the survey studies listed in parties and tracking an individual’s location were among the Table 1 among the 11,057 individuals who partic- key concerns [100]. In this regard, Pham and Xiong [80] ipated in those studies. highlighted some advanced forms of cyber-attack that AVs (iii) 35% of the participants were reluctant to adopt AVs may be unable to identify or respond to; at least there is no because of unresolved issues related to data privacy, solid evidence available to confrm that AVs can currently do security breaches and hacking, and legal liability so. Privacy and cybersecurity, therefore, remain signifcant problems in the event of accidents. concerns that could hinder the adoption of AVs as the (iv) Te cost of AVs seems to be a signifcant barrier to drawbacks of AVs in this respect outweigh their benefts. the adoption of AVs by the market. When cost was Another area in which AVs were found to have more not an issue, the market showed greater interest in drawbacks than benefts if adopted was in relation to legal adopting these vehicles. liability. Tis was cited as a primary concern in several studies [15, 36, 39, 41, 76]. Te main reason for such con- (v) After examining the impact of vehicle automation cerns was the uncertainty about who the responsible group and automation failures on driving performance, or agency for accidents involving AVs would be [36, 39, 76] Strand et al. [79] claimed that driving performance and the lack of established regulatory frameworks in this decreases as the level of automation increases. respect [41, 53, 94]. However, a number of studies showed Correspondingly, Tennant et al. [103] observed that that advancements had been made in terms of designing people who enjoy driving are less enthusiastic regulatory frameworks for the safe testing and operation of about AVs. AVs that may pave the way for defning a full regulatory (vi) Te study showed that the price people are willing to framework in the future [21, 22, 91, 93, 101]. pay for an AV is signifcantly below the estimated Te reviewed studies showed that the average amount current price of an AV. people would be willing to pay to add AV technologies to their vehicles was $5,124. In order to evaluate the market purchasing power in greater depth, this study calculated the average price 7. Limitations and Recommendations an individual would pay to buy a car to represent the average (car) purchasing power. Tis value was found to be $33,088. We are mindful that evaluating the behavioural factors af- After adding the average purchasing power to the WTP for fecting users’ decisions about whether to adopt AVs is as AVs, the total price that people would be willing to pay for an crucial as investigating the external factors relating to the AV with fully autonomous driving features was calculated as infrastructure and manufacturing side and that not all ex- $38,212. Tis is far below the estimated current price of $100k ternal factors were examined in existing empirical studies. In (INSIDER, 2022) [15, 95, 96]; hence, it remains a signifcant this regard, it is recommended that future studies use both concern for the general market with regard to the adoption of approaches and conduct behavioural and nonbehavioural AVs. People are much more likely to be interested in pur- survey studies on the same group of participants in the form chasing an AV if it is afordable [16]. Correspondingly, some of a Delphi method or other similar techniques [104]. studies have attempted to fnd ways to minimise the generalised We acknowledge that AV studies are advancing fast and costs. By combining a locally-optimal motion planner with that technological progress in the feld may signifcantly a Markov decision process (MDP) model, Liu et al. [102] afect the market acceptance of these vehicles in the coming simulated vehicle trajectories. Te framework that they pro- years. In light of this, the current study encourages future posed reduced the trip costs of journeys made using AVs, researchers to conduct similar analyses to expand current including fuel and travel time costs, while also guaranteeing knowledge about their market acceptance. Tis could be safety. However, young men, educated individuals, people done by conducting survey studies within the car earning a higher income and those interested in driving were manufacturing industry that would involve interviewing found to be willing to pay more for AVs [96]. manufacturers to determine their preparedness and po- tential ongoing actions regarding the production of AVs at various levels of automation. Te insights gained from doing 6. Conclusions so would be of value in helping the entire AV market. Tey To conclude the research presented in this paper, the fol- would be useful in terms of determining what to expect from lowing key fndings were identifed, which add to the AVs regarding their potential benefts and drawbacks, in- existing body of work within this feld: cluding those studied in this research, regarding the latest Journal of Advanced Transportation 13 with heterogeneity in means,” Analytic Methods in Accident technological advancements. Future researchers could also Research, vol. 28, Article ID 100134, 2020. attempt to identify the acceptance level of each of the [10] P. Bansal, K. M. Kockelman, and A. Singh, “Assessing public infuencing factors from the manufacturers’ point of view opinions of and interest in new vehicle technologies: an and thus suggest possible solutions that would increase the Austin perspective,” Transportation Research Part C: overall market acceptance of AVs. Emerging Technologies, vol. 67, pp. 1–14, 2016. [11] M. K. Kim, J. H. Park, J. Oh, W. S. Lee, and D. Chung, Data Availability “Identifying and prioritizing the benefts and concerns of connected and autonomous vehicles: a comparison of in- Te data supporting the conclusions of this article can only dividual and expert perceptions,” Research in Transportation be made available for academic research. Requests to access Business & Management, vol. 32, Article ID 100438, 2019. the datasets should be directed to rezaeim@tcd.ie. [12] R. Krueger, T. H. Rashidi, and J. M. Rose, “Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles,” Transportation Research Part Conflicts of Interest C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 69, pp. 343–355, 2016. [13] I. Lijracio, S. A. Useche, J. Llamazares, and L. Montoro, Te authors declare that they have no conficts of interest. “Perceived benefts and constraints in vehicle automation: data to assess the relationship between driver’s features and Acknowledgments their attitudes towards autonomous vehicles,” Data in Brief, vol. 27, Article ID 106662, 2019. Te authors are thankful to Prof. Brian Caulfeld for his [14] W.-Y. Low, M. Cao, J. De Vos, and R. Hickman, “Te journey support and consultations. Open Access funding are enabled experience of visually impaired people on public transport in and organized by JISC. London,” Transport Policy, vol. 97, pp. 137–148, 2020. [15] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Examining public acceptance of autonomous mobility,” Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 21, References pp. 235–246, 2020a. [1] Y. Ye, X. Zhang, and J. Sun, “Automated vehicle’s behavior [16] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Simulating a transition to au- decision making using deep reinforcement learning and tonomous mobility,” Simulation Modelling Practice and high-fdelity simulation environment,” Transportation Re- Teory, vol. 106, Article ID 102175, 2021. search Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 107, pp. 155–170, [17] M. Woldeamanuel and D. Nguyen, “Perceived benefts and concerns of autonomous vehicles: an exploratory study of [2] F. S. Kovacs, S. McLeod, and C. Curtis, “Aged mobility in the millennials’ sentiments of an emerging market,” Research in era of transportation disruption: will autonomous vehicles Transportation Economics, vol. 71, pp. 44–53, 2018. address impediments to the mobility of ageing populations?” [18] H. Zhong, W. Li, M. W. Burris, A. Talebpour, and Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 20, pp. 122–132, 2020. K. C. Sinha, “Will autonomous vehicles change auto com- [3] L. Kroger, ¨ T. Kuhnimhof, and S. Trommer, “Does context muters’ value of travel time?” Transportation Research Part matter? A comparative study modelling autonomous vehicle D: Transport and Environment, vol. 83, Article ID 102303, impact on travel behaviour for Germany and the USA,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 122, [19] G. Li, Y. Yang, S. Li, X. Qu, N. Lyu, and S. E. Li, “Decision pp. 146–161, 2019. making of autonomous vehicles in lane change scenarios: [4] J. J. LaMondia, D. J. Fagnant, H. Qu, J. Barrett, and deep reinforcement learning approaches with risk aware- K. M. Kockelman, “Shifts in long-distance travel mode due to ness,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technolo- automated vehicles: statewide mode-shift simulation ex- gies, vol. 134, Article ID 103452, 103452 pages, 2022. periment and travel survey analysis,” Transportation Re- [20] A. Nikitas, E. T. Njoya, and S. Dani, “Examining the myths of search Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, connected and autonomous vehicles: analysing the pathway vol. 2566, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2016. to a driverless mobility paradigm,” International Journal of [5] K. Maeng and Y. Cho, “Who will want to use shared au- Automotive Technology and Management, vol. 19, no. 1/2, tonomous vehicle service and how much? A consumer ex- pp. 10–30, 2019. periment in South Korea,” Travel Behaviour and Society, [21] S. Wang and Z. Li, “Exploring causes and efects of auto- vol. 26, pp. 9–17, 2022. mated vehicle disengagement using statistical modeling and [6] K. Miller, S. Chng, and L. Cheah, “Understanding acceptance classifcation tree based on feld test data,” Accident Analysis of shared autonomous vehicles among people with diferent & Prevention, vol. 129, pp. 44–54, 2019. mobility and communication needs,” Travel Behaviour and [22] D. Lee and D. J. Hess, “Regulations for on-road testing of Society, vol. 29, pp. 200–210, 2022. connected and automated vehicles: assessing the potential [7] M. Rezaei, “Examining the efciency of autonomous vehicles for global safety harmonization,” Transportation Research in highway transport,” 2020, http://hdl.handle.net/2262/ Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 136, pp. 85–98, 2020. [23] Nhtsa (National Highway Trafc Safety Administration), [8] E. Lehtonen, F. Malin, T. Louw, Y. M. Lee, T. Itkonen, and “Automated vehicles for safety,” 2019, https://www.nhtsa. S. Innamaa, “Why would people want to travel more with gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety. automated cars?” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc [24] I. Nastjuk, B. Herrenkind, M. Marrone, A. B. Brendel, and Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 89, pp. 143–154, 2022. L. M. Kolbe, “What drives the acceptance of autonomous [9] S. S. Ahmed, S. S. Pantangi, U. Eker, G. Fountas, S. E. Still, and P. C. Anastasopoulos, “Analysis of safety benefts and driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end- user’s perspective,” Technological Forecasting and Social security concerns from the use of autonomous vehicles: a grouped random parameters bivariate probit approach Change, vol. 161, Article ID 120319, 2020. 14 Journal of Advanced Transportation [25] E. Fraedrich and B. Lenz, “Societal and individual acceptance [40] C. Haboucha, R. Ishaq, and Y. Shiftan, “User preferences of autonomous driving,” in Autonomous Driving, M. Maurer, regarding autonomous vehicles,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 78, pp. 37–49, 2017. J. Gerdes, B. Lenz, and H. Winner, Eds., Springer, Berlin, [41] M. Kyriakidis, R. Happee, and J. C. F. de Winter, “Public Heidelberg, 2016. opinion on automated driving: results of an international [26] P. Jing, G. Xu, Y. Chen, Y. Shi, and F. Zhan, “Te de- questionnaire among 5000 respondents,” Transportation terminants behind the acceptance of autonomous vehicles: Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 32, a systematic review,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 1719, pp. 127–140, 2015. [42] Continental, “Continental mobility study - international [27] P. Dichabeng, N. Merat, and G. Markkula, “Factors that perspective and project modules,” 2015, https://www. infuence the acceptance of future shared automated vehicles continental.com/en/press/studies-publications/continental- – a focus group study with United Kingdom drivers,” mobility-studies/mobility-study-2015/. Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Be- [43] W. Payre, J. Cestac, and P. Delhomme, “Intention to use haviour, vol. 82, pp. 121–140, 2021. a fully automated car: attitudes and a priori acceptability,” [28] K. F. Yuen, Y. D. Wong, F. Ma, and X. Wang, “Te de- Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Be- terminants of public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: an haviour, vol. 27, no. B, pp. 252–263, 2014. innovation difusion perspective,” Journal of Cleaner Pro- [44] N. Briscoe, “Audi’s new tech can help you catch green lights,” duction, vol. 270, Article ID 121904, 2020. 2019, https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/ [29] F. Ekman, M. Johansson, L.-O. Bligard, ˚ M. Karlsson, and audi-s-new-tech-can-help-you-catch-green-lights-1.380158 H. Stromberg, ¨ “Exploring automated vehicle driving styles as 5#.XG6l_1O3cFw.linkedin. a source of trust information,” Transportation Research Part [45] D. J. Fagnant and K. Kockelman, “Preparing a nation for F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 65, pp. 268–279, autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy [30] J. Lee, H. Chang, and Y. I. Park, “Infuencing factors on social and Practice, vol. 77, pp. 167–181, 2015. acceptance of autonomous vehicles and policy implications,” [46] M. Zhu, Y. Wang, Z. Pu, J. Hu, X. Wang, and R. Ke, “Safe, in Proceedings of the 2018 Portland International Conference efcient, and comfortable velocity control based on re- on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), inforcement learning for autonomous driving,” Trans- pp. 1–6, Honolulu, HI, USA, August 2018. portation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 117, [31] S. Das, “Autonomous vehicle safety: understanding per- Article ID 102662, 2020. ceptions of pedestrians and bicyclists,” Transportation Re- [47] L. Ye and T. Yamamoto, “Modeling connected and auton- search Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 81, omous vehicles in heterogeneous trafc fow,” Physica A: pp. 41–54, 2021. Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 490, [32] Q. Hussain, W. K. M. Alhajyaseen, M. Adnan, M. Almallah, pp. 269–277, 2018. A. Almukdad, and M. Alqaradawi, “Autonomous vehicles [48] F. Zhu and S. Ukkusuri, “Modeling the proactive driving between anticipation and apprehension: investigations behavior of connected vehicles: a cell-based simulation ap- through safety and security perceptions,” Transport Policy, proach: proactive driving behavior of connected vehicles,” vol. 110, pp. 440–451, 2021. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, [33] K. Kim, J. S. Kim, S. Jeong, J.-H. Park, and H. K. Kim, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 262–281, 2018. “Cybersecurity for autonomous vehicles: review of attacks [49] A. Millard-Ball, “Te autonomous vehicle parking problem,” and defense,” Computers & Security, vol. 103, Article ID Transport Policy, vol. 75, pp. 99–108, 2019. 102150, 2021. [50] J. Zhu and I. Tasic, “Safety analysis of freeway on-ramp [34] A. Rezaei and B. Caulfeld, “Safety of autonomous vehicles: merging with the presence of autonomous vehicles,” Acci- what are the insights from experienced industry pro- dent Analysis & Prevention, vol. 152, Article ID 105966, 2021. fessionals?” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psy- [51] L. Cui, J. Hu, B. Park, and P. Bujanovic, “Development of chology and Behaviour, vol. 81, pp. 472–489, 2021. a simulation platform for safety impact analysis considering [35] F. Becker and K. W. Axhausen, “Literature review on surveys vehicle dynamics, sensor errors, and communication la- investigating the acceptance of automated vehicles,” Trans- tencies: assessing cooperative adaptive cruise control under portation, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1293–1306, 2017. cyber attack,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging [36] D. Howard and D. Dai, “Public perceptions of self-driving Technologies, vol. 97, pp. 1–22, 2018a, https://doi.org/10.1016/ cars: the case of berkeley, california,” Transportation Re- j.trc.2018.10.005. search Board 93rd Annual Meeting, vol. 14, pp. 1–16, 2014, [52] B. Li and Z. Shao, “A unifed motion planning method for https://trid.trb.org/view/1289421. parking an autonomous vehicle in the presence of irregularly [37] Norton Rose Fulbright, “Te privacy implications of au- placed obstacles,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 86, tonomous vehicles,” 2017, https://www.dataprotection pp. 11–20, 2015. report.com/2017/07/the-privacy-implications-of-autonomo [53] Nhtsa (National Highway Trafc Safety Administration), us-vehicles/. “Federal automated vehicles policy,” 2016, https://www. [38] Kpmg (Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler) and Car (Center transportation.gov/AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy- for Automotive Research), “Self-driving cars: the next rev- september-2016. olution,” 2012, https://www.cargroup.org/wp-content/ [54] J. C. Gerdes and S. M. Tornton, “Implementable ethics for uploads/2017/02/Self_driving-cars-Te-next-revolution.pdf. autonomous vehicles,” Autonomous Driving, Springer, [39] B. Schoettle and M. Sivak, “A survey of public opinion about Berlin, Germany, 2016. autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the us, the uk, and [55] S. Cui, B. Seibold, R. Stern, and D. B. Work, “Stabilizing australia,” 2014a, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/ trafc fow via a single autonomous vehicle: possibilities and 2027.42/108384. limitations,” in Proceedings of the 2017 2017 IEEE Intelligent Journal of Advanced Transportation 15 Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp. 1336–1341, Los Angeles, CA, vehicles in multi-scenarios,” Transportation Research Part C: USA, June 2018. Emerging Technologies, vol. 122, Article ID 102820, 2021. [56] X. Li, A. Ghiasi, Z. Xu, and X. Qu, “A piecewise trajectory [71] C. Katrakazas, M. Quddus, W. H. Chen, and L. Deka, “Real- optimization model for connected automated vehicles: exact time motion planning methods for autonomous on-road driving: state-of-the-art and future research directions,” optimization algorithm and queue propagation analysis,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 118, vol. 60, pp. 416–442, 2015. pp. 429–456, 2018. [72] M. Alghuson, K. Abdelghany, and A. Hassan, “Toward an [57] W. Schwarting, J. Alonso-Mora, and D. Rus, “Planning and integrated trafc law enforcement and network management decision-making for autonomous vehicles,” Annual Review in connected vehicle environment: conceptual model and of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 1, survey study of public acceptance,” Accident Analysis & pp. 187–210, 2018. Prevention, vol. 133, Article ID 105300, 2019. [58] M. W. Levin, “Congestion-aware system optimal route [73] B. A. Beirigo, F. Schulte, and R. R. Negenborn, “Integrating choice for shared autonomous vehicles,” Transportation people and freight transportation using shared autonomous Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 82, pp. 229–247, vehicles with compartments,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 392–397, 2018. [59] H. Iglinski ´ and M. Babiak, “Analysis of the potential of [74] C.-Y. Chan, “Advancements, prospects, and impacts of autonomous vehicles in reducing the emissions of green- automated driving systems,” International Journal of house gases in road transport,” Procedia Engineering, Transportation Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 3, vol. 192, pp. 353–358, 2017. pp. 208–216, 2017. [60] T. Awal, M. Murshed, and M. Ali, “An efcient cooperative [75] L. M. Hulse, H. Xie, and E. R. Galea, “Perceptions of au- lane-changing algorithm for sensor- and communication- tonomous vehicles: relationships with road users, risk, enabled automated vehicles,” in Proceedings of the 2015 2015 gender and age,” Safety Science, vol. 102, pp. 1–13, 2018. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp. 1328–1333, [76] S. Underwood, “Automated, connected, and electric vehicle Seoul, Korea, June 2015. systems: expert forecast and roadmap for sustainable [61] L. M. Mart´ınez and J. M. Viegas, “Assessing the impacts of transportation,” 2014, http://graham.umich.edu/media/fles/ deploying a shared self-driving urban mobility system: an LC-IA-ACE-Roadmap-Expert-Forecast-Underwood.pdf. agent-based model applied to the city of Lisbon, Portugal,” [77] A. Rakotonirainy, R. Schroeter, and A. Soro, “Tree social car International Journal of Transportation Science and Tech- visions to improve driver behaviour,” Pervasive and Mobile nology, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 13–27, 2017. Computing, vol. 14, pp. 147–160, 2014. [62] Oecd, International Transport Forum (ITF) Outlook 2017, [78] B. Schoettle and M. Sivak, “Public opinion about self-driving Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Develop- vehicles in china, india, japan, the us, the uk, and australia,” ment, Berlin, Germany, 2017. 2014, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/ [63] F. M. Favaro, ` N. Nader, S. O. Eurich, M. Tripp, and 2027.42/109433/103139.pdf?sequence=1. N. Varadaraju, “Examining accident reports involving au- [79] N. Strand, J. Nilsson, I. M. Karlsson, and L. Nilsson, “Semi- tonomous vehicles in California,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 9, automated versus highly automated driving in critical sit- Article ID e0184952, 2017. uations caused by automation failures,” Transportation Re- [64] J. Wu, H. Liao, and J.-W. Wang, “Analysis of consumer search Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 27, attitudes towards autonomous, connected, and electric ve- pp. 218–228, 2014. hicles: a survey in China,” Research in Transportation Eco- [80] M. Pham and K. Xiong, “A survey on security attacks and nomics, vol. 80, Article ID 100828, 2020. defense techniques for connected and autonomous vehicles,” [65] W. Qu, J. Xu, Y. Ge, X. Sun, and K. Zhang, “Development Computers & Security, vol. 109, Article ID 102269, 2021. and validation of a questionnaire to assess public receptivity [81] S. Rizvi, J. Willet, D. Perino, S. Marasco, and C. Condo, “A toward autonomous vehicles and its relation with the trafc threat to vehicular cyber security and the urgency for cor- safety climate in China,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, rection,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 114, pp. 100–105, vol. 128, pp. 78–86, 2019. [66] A. Papadoulis, M. Quddus, and M. Imprialou, “Evaluating [82] G. Macher, E. Armengaud, E. Brenner, and C. Kreiner, the safety impact of connected and autonomous vehicles on “Treat and risk assessment methodologies in the auto- motorways,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 124, motive domain,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 83, pp. 12–22, 2019. pp. 1288–1294, 2016. [67] Z. Vander Laan and K. F. Sadabadi, “Operational perfor- [83] B. Sheehan, F. Murphy, M. Mullins, and C. Ryan, “Con- mance of a congested corridor with lanes dedicated to au- nected and autonomous vehicles: a cyber-risk classifcation tonomous vehicle trafc,” International Journal of framework,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Transportation Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 1, Practice, vol. 124, pp. 523–536, 2019. pp. 42–52, 2017. [84] S. Curtis, “Self-driving cars can be hacked using a laser [68] T. S. Combs, L. S. Sandt, M. P. Clamann, and pointer,” 2015, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ N. C. McDonald, “Automated vehicles and pedestrian safety: news/11850373/Self-driving-cars-can-be-hacked-using-a- exploring the promise and limits of pedestrian detection,” laser-pointer.html. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 56, no. 1, [85] N. Liu, A. Nikitas, and S. Parkinson, “Exploring expert pp. 1–7, 2019. perceptions about the cyber security and privacy of con- [69] I. Y. Noy, D. Shinar, and W. J. Horrey, “Automated driving: nected and autonomous vehicles: a thematic analysis ap- safety blind spots,” Safety Science, vol. 102, pp. 68–78, 2018. proach,” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology [70] G. Li, Y. Yang, T. Zhang et al., “Risk assessment based and Behaviour, vol. 75, pp. 66–86, 2020, https://doi.org/10. collision avoidance decision-making for autonomous 1016/j.trf.2020.09.019. 16 Journal of Advanced Transportation [86] C. Faife, “Why self-driving cars could be a dream come true [104] M. Cao, C. L. Chen, and R. Hickman, “Transport emissions in Beijing: a scenario planning approach,” Proceedings of the for car thieves,” 2017, https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/ article/mgxak8/why-self-driving-cars-could-be-a-dream- Institution of Civil Engineers—Transport, vol. 170, no. 2, pp. 65–75, 2017. come-true-for-car-thieves. [87] C. Bartolini, T. Tettamanti, and I. Varga, “Critical features of autonomous road transport from the perspective of tech- nological regulation and law,” Transportation Research Procedia, vol. 27, pp. 791–798, 2017. [88] P. Bansal and K. M. Kockelman, “Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 95, pp. 49–63, 2017. [89] Ncsl, “Autonomous self-driving vehicles enacted legislation,” 2020, http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonom ous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx. [90] L. Collingwood, “Privacy implications and liability issues of autonomous vehicles,” Information and Communications Technology Law, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 32–45, 2017. [91] J. De Bruyne and J. Werbrouck, “Merging self-driving cars with the law,” Computer Law & Security Report, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1150–1153, 2018. [92] Sae, “Taxonomy and defnitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles,” 2016, https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201609/. [93] T. Imai, “Legal regulation of autonomous driving technol- ogy: current conditions and issues in Japan,” IATSS Research, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 263–267, 2019. [94] Dmv (Department of Motor Vehicles), “Autonomous ve- hicles in California - testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles for public use,” 2016, https://www.dmv.ca.gov/ portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/bkgd. [95] C. Neiger, “How much do driverless cars cost?,” 2018, http:// www.fool.com/investing/2016/08/04/how-much-do-driver less-cars-cost.aspx. [96] P. Liu, Q. Guo, F. Ren, L. Wang, and Z. Xu, “Willingness to pay for self-driving vehicles: infuences of demographic and psychological factors,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 100, pp. 306–317, 2019. [97] T. Morita and S. Managi, “Autonomous vehicles: willingness to pay and the social dilemma,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 119, Article ID 102748, 2020. [98] Statistica, Best-Selling Passenger Car Worldwide in 2022, Statistica, Hamburg, Germany, 2023. [99] S. Schwartz and K. Lee, “1706 – autonomous vehicles: good or bad for our health?” Journal of Transport & Health, vol. 5, p. S4, 2017. [100] K. Kaur and G. Rampersad, “Trust in driverless cars: in- vestigating key factors infuencing the adoption of driverless cars,” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 48, pp. 87–96, 2018. [101] F. Costantini, N. Tomopoulos, F. Steibel, A. Curl, G. Lugano, and T. Kova´cikov ˇ a, ´ “Autonomous vehicles in a GDPR era: an international comparison,” Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, vol. 5, pp. 191–213, 2020. [102] X. Liu, N. Masoud, Q. Zhu, and A. Khojandi, “A Markov Decision Process framework to incorporate network-level data in motion planning for connected and automated ve- hicles,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technol- ogies, vol. 136, Article ID 103550, 2022. [103] C. Tennant, S. Stares, and S. Howard, “Public discomfort at the prospect of autonomous vehicles: building on previous surveys to measure attitudes in 11 countries,” Transportation Research Part F: Trafc Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 64, pp. 98–118, 2019.

Journal

Journal of Advanced Transportation – Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Published: May 12, 2023

There are no references for this article.