Trust and resilient autonomous driving systems

  • Adam HenschkeEmail author
Original Paper


Autonomous vehicles, and the larger socio-technical systems that they are a part of are likely to have a deep and lasting impact on our societies. Trust is a key value that will play a role in the development of autonomous driving systems. This paper suggests that trust of autonomous driving systems will impact the ways that these systems are taken up, the norms and laws that guide them and the design of the systems themselves. Further to this, in order to have autonomous driving systems that are worthy of our trust, we need a superstructure of oversight and a process that designs trust into these systems from the outset. Rather than banning or avoiding all autonomous vehicles should a tragedy occur, despite these systems having some level of risk, we want resilient systems that can survive tragedies, and indeed, improve from them. I will argue that trust plays a role in developing these resilient systems.


Trust Autonomous vehicles Autonomous vehicle systems Resilience Internet of things 



This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1522240. Preliminary research on this topic was conducted as a Visiting Researcher at the Brocher Foundation (Switzerland) He thanks the European Research Council and the Australian National University ‘Grand Challenge’, which have provided generous support under awards Advanced Grant project on Collective Responsibility and Counterterrorism and the ‘Our Health In Our Hands’ grant, respectively. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, the Brocher Foundation, the European Research Council or the Australian National University.


  1. Allhoff, F., & Henschke, A. (2018). The Internet of things: Foundational ethical issues. Internet of Things,1–2, 55–66. Scholar
  2. Borenstein, J., Herkert, J. R., & Miller, K. W. (2017). Self-driving cars and engineering ethics: The need for a system level analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics. Scholar
  3. Clapp, J. D., Baker, A. S., Litwack, S. D., Sloan, D. M., & Beck, J. G. (2014). Properties of the driving behavior survey among individuals with motor vehicle accident-related posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders,28(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, D. D., & Blumenthal, M. S. (2011). The end-to-end argument and application design: The role of trust. Federal Communications Law Journal,63(2), 357.Google Scholar
  5. Coeckelbergh, M. (2012). Can we trust robots? Ethics and Information Technology,14(1), 53–60. Scholar
  6. Coeckelbergh, M. (2016). Responsibility and the moral phenomenology of using self-driving cars. Applied Artificial Intelligence,30(8), 748–757. Scholar
  7. Cummings, D. M. (2016). Embedded software under the courtroom microscope: A case study of the Toyota unintended acceleration trial. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine,35(4), 76–84. Scholar
  8. Darling, K. (2017). Who’s Johnny? Anthropomorphic framing in human–robot interaction, integration, and policy. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & R. Jenkins (Eds.), Robot ethics 2.0: From autonomous cars to artificial intelligence. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Darling, K., Nandy, P., & Breazeal, C. (2015). Empathic concern and the effect of stories in human–robot interaction. In Proceedings of the IEEE international workshop on robot and human communication (ROMAN).Google Scholar
  10. Färber, B. (2016). Communication and communication problems between autonomous vehicles and human drivers. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 125–147). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Frewer, L. J., Miles, S., & Marsh, R. (2002). The media and genetically modified foods: Evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis,22(4), 701–711. Scholar
  12. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Glencoe, IL: Free Press Paperbacks.Google Scholar
  13. Henschke, A., & Ford, S. B. (2016). Cybersecurity, trustworthiness and resilient systems: Guiding values for policy. Journal of Cyber Policy. Scholar
  14. Hevelke, A., & Nida-rümelin, J. (2015). Responsibility for crashes of autonomous vehicles: An ethical analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics,21(3), 619–630. Scholar
  15. Himmelreich, J. (2018). Never mind the trolley: The ethics of autonomous vehicles in mundane situations. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. Scholar
  16. Jones, K. (1996). Trust as an affective attitude. Ethics,107(1), 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., et al. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis,8(2), 177–187. Scholar
  18. Lang, J. T., & Hallman, W. K. (2005). Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States. Risk Analysis,25(5), 1241–1252. Scholar
  19. Levin, S. (2018). ‘Uber should be shut down’: Friends of self driving car crash victim seek justice. The Guardian, 20 March.Google Scholar
  20. Lin, P. (2016). Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 69–85). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Maurer, M. (2016). Introduction. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 1–8). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. McLeod, C. (2015). Trust. Retrieved April 15, 2016 from
  23. Nyholm, S. (2018a). Attributing agency to automated systems: Reflections on human–robot collaborations and responsibility-loci. Science and Engineering Ethics,24(4), 1201–1219. Scholar
  24. Nyholm, S. (2018b). The ethics of crashes with self-driving cars: A roadmap, I. Philosophy Compass,13(7), e12507. Scholar
  25. Nyholm, S. (2018c). The ethics of crashes with self-driving cars: A roadmap, II. Philosophy Compass,13(7), e12506. Scholar
  26. Nyholm, S. (2018d). Teaching & learning guide for: The ethics of crashes with self-driving cars: A roadmap, I–II. Philosophy Compass,13(7), e12508. Scholar
  27. Nyholm, S., & Smids, J. (2018). Automated cars meet human drivers: Responsible human-robot coordination and the ethics of mixed traffic. Ethics and Information Technology. Scholar
  28. Poppo, L., & Schepker, D. J. (2010). Repairing public trust in organizations. Corporate Reputation Review,13(2), 124–141. Scholar
  29. Poppo, L., & Schepker, D. J. (2014). The repair of public trust following controllable or uncontrollable organizational failures: A conceptual framework. In J. D. Harris, B. Moriarty, & A. C. Wicks (Eds.), Public trust in business (pp. 326–360). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Purves, D., Jenkins, R., & Strawser, B. J. (2015). Autonomous machines, moral judgment, and acting for the right reasons. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice,18(4), 851–872. Scholar
  31. Reschka, A. (2016). Safety concept for autonomous vehicles. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 473–496). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Reuters. (2018). Uber settles with family of woman killed by self-driving car. The Guardian, 29 March.
  33. Rhodes, C. (2016). Democratic business ethics: Volkswagen’s emissions scandal and the disruption of corporate sovereignty. Organization Studies,37(10), 1501–1518. Scholar
  34. Roff, H. M. (2013). Killing in war: Responsibility, liability, and lethal autonomous robots. In F. Allhoff, N. G. Evans, & A. Henschke (Eds.), Routledge handbook of ethics and war: Just war in the 21st century. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Said, C. (2018). Uber puts the brakes on testing robot cars in california after arizona fatality. San Francisco Chronicle, 27 March.
  36. Simpson, T. W. (2012). What is trust? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly,93(4), 550–569. Scholar
  37. T.S. (2018). Why uber’s self-driving car killed a pedestrian. The Economist, 29 March.
  38. UNIDR. (2014). Framing discussions on the weaponization of increasingly autonomous technologies. Geneva: United Nations Institute For Disarmament Research.Google Scholar
  39. Uslaner, P. (2002). The moral foundations of trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vallor, S. (2017). Artificial intelligence and public trust. Ethics of technology: The future agenda (4TU Ethics), University of Twente, Enschede, 12 June.Google Scholar
  41. Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vlasic, B., & Apuzzo, M. (2014). Toyota is fined $1.2 billion for concealing safety defects. The New York Times, 19 March.
  43. Wagner, M., & Koopman, P. (2015). A philosophy for developing trust in self-driving cars. In G. Meyer & S. Beiker (Eds.), Road vehicle automation (Vol. 2, pp. 163–171). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whitfield, S. C., Rosa, E. A., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2009). The future of nuclear power: Value orientations and risk perception. Risk Analysis,29(3), 425–437. Scholar
  45. Winkle, T. (2016). Safety benefits of automated vehicles: Extended findings from accident research for development, validation and testing. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 335–364). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  46. Wolf, I. (2016). The interaction between humans and autonomous agents. In M. Maurer, J. C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous driving: Technical, legal and social aspects (pp. 103–124). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  47. World Health Organization. (2015). Global status report on road safety 2015. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  48. Yadron, D., & Tynan, D. (2016). Tesla driver dies in first fatal crash while using autopilot mode. The Guardian, 1 July.
  49. Zhang, X., Zhao, X., Du, H., & Rong, J. (2014). A study on the effects of fatigue driving and drunk driving on drivers’ physical characteristics. Traffic Injury Prevention,15(8), 801–808. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Security CollegeAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Delft University of TechnologyThe HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations