, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 641–675 | Cite as

Are we ready to embrace connected and self-driving vehicles? A case study of Texans

  • Prateek Bansal
  • Kara M. Kockelman


While connected, highly automated, and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) will eventually hit the roads, their success and market penetration rates depend largely on public opinions regarding benefits, concerns, and adoption of these technologies. Additionally, the introduction of these technologies is accompanied by uncertainties in their effects on the carsharing market and land use patterns, and raises the need for tolling policies to appease the travel demand induced due to the increased convenience. To these ends, this study surveyed 1088 respondents across Texas to understand their opinions about smart vehicle technologies and related decisions. The key summary statistics indicate that Texans are willing to pay (WTP) $2910, $4607, $7589, and $127 for Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4 automation and connectivity, respectively, on average. Moreover, affordability and equipment failure are Texans’ top two concerns regarding AVs. This study also estimates interval regression and ordered probit models to understand the multivariate correlation between explanatory variables, such as demographics, built-environment attributes, travel patterns, and crash histories, and response variables, including willingness to pay for CAV technologies, adoption rates of shared AVs at different pricing points, home location shift decisions, adoption timing of automation technologies, and opinions about various tolling policies. The practically significant relationships indicate that more experienced licensed drivers and older people associate lower WTP values with all new vehicle technologies. Such parameter estimates help not only in forecasting long-term adoption of CAV technologies, but also help transportation planners in understanding the characteristics of regions with high or low future-year CAV adoption levels, and subsequently, develop smart strategies in respective regions.


Connected and autonomous vehicles Ordered probit Interval regression Public opinion survey Willingness to pay 


  1. Accenture Research. Embedded software consumer pulse survey. (2011). Accessed 18 Sept 2015
  2. Anderson, J.M., Kalra, N., Stanley, K.D., Sorensen, P., Samaras, C., Olumatola, O.A.: Autonomous vehicle technology. A guide for policymakers. RAND Report. (2014). Accessed 5 March 2015
  3. Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M.: Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. In: Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting (No. 16-1871) and accepted for publication in Transportation Research Part A. (2016). Accessed 4 Sept 2015
  4. Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M., Singh, A.: Assessing public opinions of and interest in new vehicle technologies: an Austin perspective. Transp. Res. C 67, 1–14. (2016). Accessed 22 Sept 2015
  5. Burns, L., Jordan, W., Scarborough, B.: Transforming Personal Mobility. The Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York. (2013). Accessed 6 Oct 2014
  6. Casley, S.V., Jardim, A.S., Quartulli, A.M.: A study of public acceptance of autonomous cars. Bachelor of Science thesis. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA. (2013). Accessed 8 March 2015
  7. Cisco Systems. Cisco Customer Experience Research: Automotive Industry. Cisco Systems. (2013). Accessed 13 Sept 2015
  8. Chen, T.D., Kockelman, K.M., Hanna, J.P.: Operations of a shared, autonomous, electric vehicle fleet: implications of vehicle & charging infrastructure decisions. Transp. Res. A. 94, 243–254. (2016)
  9. Clark, B., Parkhurst, G., Ricci, M.: Understanding the socioeconomic adoption scenarios for autonomous vehicles: a literature review. Project Report, University of the West of England, Bristol. (2016). Accessed 4 Aug 2016
  10. Danise, A.: Women say no thanks to driverless cars, survey finds; Men say tell me more. NerdWallet: (2015). Accessed 21 Sept 2015
  11. Fagnant, D., Kockelman, K.: Environmental implications for autonomous shared vehicles using agent-based model scenarios. Transp. Res. C 40, 1–13 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fagnant, D., Kockelman, K.: Dynamic ride-sharing and optimal fleet sizing for a system of shared autonomous vehicles. Transportation. (2016)
  13. Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K., Bansal, P.: Operations of a shared autonomous vehicle fleet for the Austin, Texas market. Transp. Res. Rec. 2536, 98–106 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greenblatt, J.B., Shaheen, S.: Automated vehicles, on-demand mobility, and environmental impacts. Curr Sustain 2(3), 74–81. (2015). Accessed 2 Aug 2016
  15. Greene, W.H.: Econometric Analysis, 7th edn. Pearson Education, Boston (2012)Google Scholar
  16. Gulipalli, P.K., Kockelman, K.: Credit-based congestion pricing: a Dallas–Fort worth application. Transp. Policy 15(1), 23–32 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haboucha, C.J., Ishaq, R., Shiftan, Y. User preferences regarding autonomous vehicles: giving up your private car. Presented at the IATBR 2015—WINDSOR. Abstract retrieved from (2015). Accessed 3 Aug 2016
  18. Howard, D., Dai, D.: Public perceptions of self-driving cars: the case of Berkeley, California. Presented at the 93rd Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. (2013). Accessed 20 Sept 2015
  19. Kockelman, K.M., Li, T. Valuing the safety benefits of connected and automated vehicle technologies. In: Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting (No. 16-1468) (2016)Google Scholar
  20. KPMG. Self-driving cars: are we ready? KPMG LLP. (2013). Accessed 20 Sept 2015
  21. Krueger, R., Rashidi, T.H., Rose, J.M.: Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. C 69, 343–355 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., de Winter, J.C.F.: Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transp. Res. F 32, 127–140 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu, J., Kockelman, K., Boesch, P., Francesco, C.: Tracking a system of shared autonomous vehicles across the Austin, Texas network using agent-based simulation. Under review for presentation at the 96th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. (2016)
  24. Loeb, B., Kockelman, K., Liu, J.: Shared autonomous electric vehicle (SAEV) operations across the Austin, Texas network with a focus on charging infrastructure decisions. In: Proceedings of the 96th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board and under review for publication in Transportation Research Part C, Emerging Technologies (2016)
  25. Long, J.S., Freese, J.: Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. Stata Press, College Station (2006)Google Scholar
  26. NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey. U.S. Department of Transportation, Report DOT HS 811 059. (2008). Accessed 15 Sept 2015
  27. NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. Washington, D.C. (2013). Accessed 15 Sept 2015
  28. Power, J.D.: 2015 U.S. Tech Choice Study. J.D. Power and Associates, McGraw Hill Financial. (2015). Accessed 21 Sept 2015
  29. PUMS (Public Use Microdata Sample). United State Census Bureau: American Community Survey. (2013). Accessed 15 Sept 2015
  30. Schoettle, B., Sivak, M.: A survey of public opinion about autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the US, the UK and Australia. University of Michigan, Michigan. (2014). Accessed 4 Aug 2016
  31. Schoettle, B., Sivak, M.: Motorists’ preferences for different levels of vehicle automation. University of Michigan, Technical Report No. UMTRI-2015-22. (2015). Accessed 20 Sept 2015
  32. Sheldrick, M.: NHTSA calls for V2V technology in models built after 2020. In: Automotive Digest. (2014). Accessed 19 July 2015
  33. Tirumalachetty, S., Kockelman, K., Kumar S.: Micro-simulation models of urban regions: anticipating greenhouse gas emissions from transport and housing in Austin, Texas. In: Proceedings of the 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. (2009). Accessed 2 Aug 2016
  34. Underwood, S.E.: Automated vehicles forecast vehicle symposium opinion survey. Presented at the Automated Vehicles Symposium 2014, San Francisco, CA. (2014). Accessed 13 Sept 2015
  35. Vallet, M.: Autonomous cars: will you be a co-pilot or a passenger? (2014). Accessed 21 Sept 2015
  36. Wooldridge, J.M.: Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 5th edn. South-Western, Mason (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental EngineeringThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations