Advertisement

Philosophy & Technology

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 389–403 | Cite as

Automated Vehicles and Transportation Justice

  • Shane EptingEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

Despite numerous ethical examinations of automated vehicles, philosophers have neglected to address how these technologies will affect vulnerable people. To account for this lacuna, researchers must analyze how driverless cars could hinder or help social justice. In addition to thinking through these aspects, scholars must also pay attention to the extensive moral dimensions of automated vehicles, including how they will affect the public, nonhumans, future generations, and culturally significant artifacts. If planners and engineers undertake this task, then they will have to prioritize their efforts to avoid additional harm. The author shows how employing an approach called a “complex moral assessment” can help professionals implement these technologies into existing mobility systems in a just and moral fashion.

Keywords

Automated vehicles Transportation justice Moral prioritization Complex moral assessment 

References

  1. Achenbach, J. (2015). Driverless cars are colliding with the creepy trolley problem. The Washington Post, December 29. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/12/29/will-self-driving-cars-ever-solve-the-famous-and-creepy-trolley-problem/. Accessed 24 May 2017.
  2. Attoh, K. A. (2012). The transportation disadvantaged and the right to the city in Syracuse, NewYork. The Geographical Bulletin, 53(1), 1.Google Scholar
  3. Bagloee, S., Tavana, M., Asadi, M., & Oliver, T. (2016). Autonomous vehicles: challenges, opportunities, and future implications for transportation policies. Journal Modern Transport, 24(4), 284–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bhattarai, A. (2016). How Uber Plans to put its own Drivers out of Business. Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2016/08/18/how-uber-plans-to-put-its-own-drivers-out-of-business/?utm_term=.898e81a874f7. Accessed 2 June 2017.
  6. Bouchard, M. (2015). Transportation Emerges as Crucial to Escaping Poverty. The New York Times, 7 May 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/upshot/transportation-emerges-as-crucial-to-escaping-poverty.html?_r=0. Accessed 1 July 2017.
  7. Braithwaite, J. (2004). Restorative justice and de-professionalization. The Good Society, 13(1), 28–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brooks, R. (2017). Unexpected Consequences of Self Driving Cars. http://rodneybrooks.com/unexpected-consequences-of-self-driving-cars/. Accessed 24 May 2017.
  9. Bullard, R., & Johnson, G. S. (1997). Just transportation: dismantling and class barriers to mobility. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Callicott, J. (1999). Beyond the land ethic: more essays in environmental philosophy. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cornell, E., & White, L. (2009). Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 50(1), 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Sio, F. S. (2017). Killing by autonomous vehicles and the legal doctrine of necessity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 20(2), 411–429.Google Scholar
  13. Deka, D. (2004). Social and environmental justice issues in urban transportation. In S. Hanson & G. Guiliano (Eds.), The geography of urban transportation (pp. 332–355). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  14. Driver, J. (2014). The History of Utilitarianism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), E. Zalta (ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/utilitarianism-history/.
  15. Edensor, T. (2004). Automobility and national identity: representation, geography and driving practice. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(4–5), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Epting, S. (2016a). The moral dimensions of infrastructure. Science and engineering ethics, 22(2), 435–449.Google Scholar
  17. Epting, S. (2016b). A different trolley problem: the limits of environmental justice and the promise of complex moral assessments for transportation infrastructure. Science and engineering ethics, 22(6), 1781–1795.Google Scholar
  18. Epting, S. (2017). On Moral Prioritization in Environmental Ethics: Weak Anthropocentrism for the City. Environmental Ethics, 39(2), 131–146.Google Scholar
  19. Eugensson, A., Brännström, M., Frasher, D., Rothoff, M., Solyom, S. & Robertsson, A. (2013). Environmental, safety, legal and societal implications of autonomous driving systems. In 23rd International Technical Conference of the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). Technical Paper, no. 13–0467.Google Scholar
  20. Fields, B., Renne, J., & Mills, K. (2013). From potential to practice: building a national policy framework for transportation oil reduction. In J. Renne & B. Fields (Eds.), Transport beyond oil: policy choices for a multimodal future (pp. 291–302). Washington DC: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Figueroa, R. (2006). Evaluating environmental justice claims. In Bauer, J. (Ed.), Forging environmentalism: Justice, livelihood, and contested environments (pp. 360–376). Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  22. Fol, S., & Gallez, C. (2014). Social inequalities in urban access. In E. Sclar, M. Lönnroth, & C. Wolmar (Eds.), Urban access for the 21st century: finance and governance models for transport infrastructure (pp. 46–86). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Foot, P. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review, 5, 5–15.Google Scholar
  24. Fraedrich, E., Beiker, S., & Lenz, B. (2015). Transition pathways to fully automated driving and its implications for the sociotechnical system of automobility. European Journal of Futures Research, 3(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gavrielides, T. & Artinopoulou, V. (2013). Reconstructing Restorative Justice Philosophy. Burington: Ashgate.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0307-5.
  26. Gerdes, J. C., & Thornton, S. M. (2016). Implementable ethics for autonomous vehicles. In Autonomous driving (pp. 87–102). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Gogoll, J., & Müller, J. F. (2017). Autonomous cars: in favor of a mandatory ethics setting. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(3), 681–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grabar, H. (2016). “They Can Just Take an Uber” Slate, December 14. http://www.slate.com/articles/business/metropolis/2016/12/cities_are_cutting_transportation_service_because_they_think_uber_will_fill.html. Accessed 13 July 2017.
  29. Greenblatt, J. B., & Shaheen, S. (2015). Automated vehicles, on-demand mobility, and environmental impacts. Current sustainable/renewable energy reports, 2(3), 74–81.Google Scholar
  30. Grunwald, A. (2016). Societal risk constellations for autonomous driving. Analysis, HistoricalContext and assessment. In Autonomous driving (pp. 641–663). Heidelberg: Springer Berlin.Google Scholar
  31. Hargrove, E. (1992). Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value. The Monist, 75(2), 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. James, S. P. (2015). Why old things matter. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 12(3), 313–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnstone, G. (2013). The Teachings of Restorative Justice. In T. Gavrielides & V. Artinopoulou (Eds.), Reconstructing Restorative Justice Philosophy (pp. 47–65). Burington: Ashgate.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Katinas, P. (2014). The B37 bus is back! Brooklyn Daily Eagle, July 1. http://www.brooklyneagle.com/articles/2014/7/1/b37-bus-back. Accessed 4 July 2017.
  35. King, D. (2014). 3 big challenges for planning multi-modal cities. City Lab, October 9, https://www.citylab.com/design/2014/10/3-big-challenges-for-planning-multi-modal-cities/381254/.
  36. Lau, A. (2012). Masdar City: a model of urban environmental sustainability. Social Sciences. http://www.stanford.edu/group/journal/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Lau_SocSci_2012.pdf.
  37. Lazarus, R. (2001). Highways and bi-ways for environmental justice. Cumberland Law Review, 31(3), 569–597.Google Scholar
  38. Levinson, D., Boies, A., Cao, J., & Fan, Y. (2016). The transportation futures project: planning for technology change. St. Paul: Minnesota Department of Transportation Research Services & Library https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/adc0/706dfd828864f7706d9e59f407ae09b1dfa5.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2017.Google Scholar
  39. Lin, P. (2016). Why Ethics Matters for Autonomous Cars. In Maurer, C. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous Driving (pp. 69–85). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Lin, P. (2017). Robot Cars and Fake Ethical Dilemmas. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/patricklin/2017/04/03/robot-cars-and-fake-ethical-dilemmas/#1480382913a2. Accessed 19 May 2017.
  41. Maantay, J. (2007). Asthma and air pollution in the Bronx: methodological and data considerations in using GIS for environmental justice and health research. Health and Place, 13(1), 32–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martens, K. (2016). Transport justice: designing fair transportation systems. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matthes, E. (2016). The ethics of historic preservation. Philosophy Compass, 11(12), 786–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maurer, M., Gerdes, J. C., Lenz, B., & Winner, H. (2016). Autonomous driving: technical, legal and social aspects. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  45. McFarland, M. (2015). Google’s chief of self-driving cars downplays ‘the trolley problem’. The Washington Post, December 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/12/01/googles-leader-on-self-driving-cars-downplays-the-trolley-problem/.
  46. McFarland, M. (2017). The backlash against self-driving cars officially begins. Cnn Tech, January 10. http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/10/technology/new-york-self-driving-cars-ridesharing/index.html.
  47. McLeod, S., Scheurer, J., & Curtis, C. (2017). Urban public transport: planning principles and emerging practice. Journal of Planning Literature, 32(3), 223–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mitcham, C. (1997). Engineering design research and social responsibility. In K. Shrader-Frechette & L. Westra (Eds.), Technology and values (pp. 261–278). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  49. National Conference of State Legislatures (2017). Autonomous Vehicles: Self-driving Vehicle Legislation. http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx. Accessed 4 July 2017.
  50. Nyholm, S., & Smids, J. (2016). The ethics of accident-algorithms for self-driving cars: an applied trolley problem? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 19(5), 1275–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. OPAL Environmental Justice Portland (2012). Adela’s Journey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjxebYmey44. Accessed 1 May 2017.
  52. Rodriguez, J. (2016). 45,000 Uber and Lyft drivers may now operate in SF. The San Francisco Examiner, November 7, http://www.sfexaminer.com/45000-uber-lyft-drivers-may-now-operate-san-francisco-drivers-continue-multiply/. Accessed 1 June 2017.
  53. Sangster, M. (2017). Cars are personal and link to our own identities. The Financial Times. http://ezproxy.library.unlv.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1929589343?accountid=3611.
  54. Sartre, J. (1948). Existentialism is a humanism. In P. Mairet (Trans.). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  55. Securing America’s Future Energy (2017). SAFE Analysis Shows 80 Percent of Light-Duty Autonomous Vehicles Use Alternative Fuel Powertrains. http://secureenergy.org/press/safe-analysis-shows-80-percent-light-duty-autonomous-vehicles-use-alternative-fuel-powertrains/. Accessed 4 July 2017.
  56. Shrader-Frechette, K. (1996). Individualism, holism, and environmental ethics. Ethics and the Environment, 1, 55–69.Google Scholar
  57. Taylor, M. (2016). Self-Driving Mercedes-Benzes Will Prioritize Occupant Safety over Pedestrians. Car and Driver, October 7. http://blog.caranddriver.com/self-driving-mercedes-will-prioritize-occupant-safety-over-pedestrians/. Accessed 20 April 2017.
  58. Tomer, A., Kneebone, E., Puentes, R., & Berube, A. (2011). Missed opportunity: Transit and jobs in metropolitan America. Brookings Institute. https://www.brookings.edu/research/missed-opportunity-transit-and-jobs-in-\metropolitan-america/. Accessed 13 July 2017.
  59. US Department of Transportation (2016). Federal Automated Vehicle Policy. https://www.transportation.gov/AV. Accessed 9 May 2017.
  60. US Department of Transportation (2017). Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Highlights. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/budget/281076/fiscal-year-2018-budget-highlights-book_0.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2017.
  61. US Environmental Protection Agency (2017). Environmental Impact Assessment. http://www.epa.ie/monitoringassessment/assessment/eia/.
  62. Wadud, Z., MacKenzie, D., & Lieby, P. (2016). Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon \ impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part A, 86, 1–18.Google Scholar
  63. Walker, M. (2006). Restorative justice and reparations. Journal of Social Philosophy, 37(3), 377–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Walker, J. (2009). Streetcars: an inconvenient truth. Human Transit: the professional blog of public transit consultant Jarrett Walker. http://www.humantransit.org/2009/07/streetcars-an-inconvenienttruth.html. Accessed 28 June 2016.
  65. Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2008). Moral machines: teaching robots right from wrong. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Westney, L. (2007). Intrinsic value and the permanent record: the preservation conundrum. OCLC Systems and Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 23(1), 5–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Nevada Las VegasLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations