IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v125y2019icp139-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Self-driving vehicles: Are people willing to trade risks for environmental benefits?

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Peng
  • Ma, Yanjiao
  • Zuo, Yaqing

Abstract

Mass adoption of self-driving vehicles (SDVs) is predicted to have a profound effect on the environment. Here, we present three studies (N = 1258) that examine the impact of the environmental benefits (EB) of SDVs on individuals’ acceptance of their risks, and their willingness to ride (WTR) in them. Two types of SDVs were presented: SDVs with a clear mention of positive EB information (“EB-enhanced SDVs”) and SDVs without the mention of positive EB information (“normal SDVs”). Study 1 and Study 2 found that participants expressed higher risk acceptance and WTR regarding EB-enhanced SDVs. Further, Study 2 reported that higher trust in EB-enhanced SDVs, rather than lower negative affect associated with EB-enhanced SDVs, accounted for the participants’ higher risk acceptance and WTR. Study 3 observed that the participants’ acceptable risk of EB-enhanced SDVs was greater than that of normal SDVs in magnitude, although not significant. If SDVs can achieve the purported EB, the public may be willing to tolerate their risks more. Highlighting the environmental advantages of SDVs and increasing public trust in them are likely to be useful strategies for increasing societal acceptance of SDVs.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Peng & Ma, Yanjiao & Zuo, Yaqing, 2019. "Self-driving vehicles: Are people willing to trade risks for environmental benefits?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 139-149.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:125:y:2019:i:c:p:139-149
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.05.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856418314848
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2019.05.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ., 2018. "Why consumers wear sports gear," Chapters, in: Sports Economics Uncut, chapter 1, pages 1-17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "How Safe Is Safe Enough for Self‐Driving Vehicles?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 315-325, February.
    3. Huang, Lei & He, Ruoying & Yang, Qianqi & Chen, Jin & Zhou, Ying & Hammitt, James K. & Lu, Xi & Bi, Jun & Liu, Yang, 2018. "The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 294-301.
    4. Wadud, Zia & MacKenzie, Don & Leiby, Paul, 2016. "Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-18.
    5. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    6. Kunreuther, Howard & Easterling, Douglas, 1990. "Are Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 252-256, May.
    7. Barkenbus, Jack N., 2010. "Eco-driving: An overlooked climate change initiative," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 762-769, February.
    8. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    9. Hengstler, Monika & Enkel, Ellen & Duelli, Selina, 2016. "Applied artificial intelligence and trust—The case of autonomous vehicles and medical assistance devices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 105-120.
    10. Jeffery B. Greenblatt & Samveg Saxena, 2015. "Autonomous taxis could greatly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions of US light-duty vehicles," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 860-863, September.
    11. Oecd, 2018. "Consumer policy and the smart home," OECD Digital Economy Papers 268, OECD Publishing.
    12. Irfan Ullah & Abbas Ullah Jan & Atta Ullah Shah, Ghaffar Ali & Muhammad Fayaz, 2018. "The Systems of Consumer Demand Analysis: A Review," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 1(4), pages 107-112, March.
    13. Liu, Peng & Zhang, Yawen & He, Zhen, 2019. "The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 341-347.
    14. Hohenberger, Christoph & Spörrle, Matthias & Welpe, Isabell M., 2016. "How and why do men and women differ in their willingness to use automated cars? The influence of emotions across different age groups," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 374-385.
    15. Fagnant, Daniel J. & Kockelman, Kara, 2015. "Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 167-181.
    16. Anania, Emily C. & Rice, Stephen & Walters, Nathan W. & Pierce, Matthew & Winter, Scott R. & Milner, Mattie N., 2018. "The effects of positive and negative information on consumers’ willingness to ride in a driverless vehicle," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 218-224.
    17. Hohenberger, Christoph & Spörrle, Matthias & Welpe, Isabell M., 2017. "Not fearless, but self-enhanced: The effects of anxiety on the willingness to use autonomous cars depend on individual levels of self-enhancement," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 40-52.
    18. Oyedele, Adesegun & Simpson, Penny M., 2018. "Streaming apps: What consumers value," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 296-304.
    19. Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Haustein, Sonja, 2018. "On sceptics and enthusiasts: What are the expectations towards self-driving cars?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 49-55.
    20. Chen, Yuche & Gonder, Jeffrey & Young, Stanley & Wood, Eric, 2019. "Quantifying autonomous vehicles national fuel consumption impacts: A data-rich approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 134-145.
    21. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "Public Acceptance of Fully Automated Driving: Effects of Social Trust and Risk/Benefit Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 326-341, February.
    22. Michael Siegrist & Bernadette Sütterlin, 2014. "Human and Nature‐Caused Hazards: The Affect Heuristic Causes Biased Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1482-1494, August.
    23. Oecd, 2018. "Consumer product safety in the Internet of Things," OECD Digital Economy Papers 267, OECD Publishing.
    24. Lawless, Martina & Morgenroth, Edgar, 2018. "Brexit and Irish Consumers," Quarterly Economic Commentary: Special Articles, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    25. Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch, 2017. "The Role of Affect in Attitude Formation toward New Technologies: The Case of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2289-2304, December.
    26. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    27. Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2017. "Psychological roadblocks to the adoption of self-driving vehicles," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(10), pages 694-696, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liu, Peng & Xu, Zhigang, 2020. "Public attitude toward self-driving vehicles on public roads: Direct experience changed ambivalent people to be more positive," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Wu, Jingwen & Liao, Hua & Wang, Jin-Wei, 2020. "Analysis of consumer attitudes towards autonomous, connected, and electric vehicles: A survey in China," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Limin Tan & Changxi Ma & Xuecai Xu & Jin Xu, 2019. "Choice Behavior of Autonomous Vehicles Based on Logistic Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Qian, Lixian & Yin, Juelin & Huang, Youlin & Liang, Ya, 2023. "The role of values and ethics in influencing consumers’ intention to use autonomous vehicle hailing services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Liu, Peng, 2020. "Positive, negative, ambivalent, or indifferent? Exploring the structure of public attitudes toward self-driving vehicles on public roads," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 27-38.
    6. Yoganathan, Vignesh & Osburg, Victoria-Sophie, 2024. "Heterogenous evaluations of autonomous vehicle services: An extended theoretical framework and empirical evidence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    7. Huiqian Sun & Peng Jing & Mengxuan Zhao & Yuexia Chen & Fengping Zhan & Yuji Shi, 2020. "Research on the Mode Choice Intention of the Elderly for Autonomous Vehicles Based on the Extended Ecological Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Peng & Xu, Zhigang & Zhao, Xiangmo, 2019. "Road tests of self-driving vehicles: Affective and cognitive pathways in acceptance formation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 354-369.
    2. Peng Jing & Gang Xu & Yuexia Chen & Yuji Shi & Fengping Zhan, 2020. "The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Xing, Yingying & Zhou, Huiyu & Han, Xiao & Zhang, Meng & Lu, Jian, 2022. "What influences vulnerable road users’ perceptions of autonomous vehicles? A comparative analysis of the 2017 and 2019 Pittsburgh surveys," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    4. Young, Jeffrey S., 2021. "Measuring palatability as a linear combination of nutrient levels in food items," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    5. Nastjuk, Ilja & Herrenkind, Bernd & Marrone, Mauricio & Brendel, Alfred Benedikt & Kolbe, Lutz M., 2020. "What drives the acceptance of autonomous driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end-user's perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Liu, Peng, 2020. "Positive, negative, ambivalent, or indifferent? Exploring the structure of public attitudes toward self-driving vehicles on public roads," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 27-38.
    7. Qian, Lixian & Yin, Juelin & Huang, Youlin & Liang, Ya, 2023. "The role of values and ethics in influencing consumers’ intention to use autonomous vehicle hailing services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    8. Foroughi, Behzad & Nhan, Pham Viet & Iranmanesh, Mohammad & Ghobakhloo, Morteza & Nilashi, Mehrbakhsh & Yadegaridehkordi, Elaheh, 2023. "Determinants of intention to use autonomous vehicles: Findings from PLS-SEM and ANFIS," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Liu, Peng & Zhang, Yawen & He, Zhen, 2019. "The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 341-347.
    10. Guo, Yuntao & Souders, Dustin & Labi, Samuel & Peeta, Srinivas & Benedyk, Irina & Li, Yujie, 2021. "Paving the way for autonomous Vehicles: Understanding autonomous vehicle adoption and vehicle fuel choice under user heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 364-398.
    11. Schweitzer, Nicola & Hofmann, Rupert & Meinheit, Andreas, 2019. "Strategic customer foresight: From research to strategic decision-making using the example of highly automated vehicles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 49-65.
    12. Martina Raue & Lisa A. D'Ambrosio & Carley Ward & Chaiwoo Lee & Claire Jacquillat & Joseph F. Coughlin, 2019. "The Influence of Feelings While Driving Regular Cars on the Perception and Acceptance of Self‐Driving Cars," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 358-374, February.
    13. Kevin Ankney, 2021. "Do Credit Constraints Explain the Energy Efficiency Gap? Evidence from the U.S. New Vehicle Market," Working Papers gueconwpa~21-21-17, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
    14. Pettigrew, Simone & Dana, Liyuwork Mitiku & Norman, Richard, 2019. "Clusters of potential autonomous vehicles users according to propensity to use individual versus shared vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 13-20.
    15. Ishant Sharma & Sabyasachee Mishra, 2023. "Ranking preferences towards adopting autonomous vehicles based on peer inputs and advertisements," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 2139-2192, December.
    16. Du, Manqing & Zhang, Tingru & Liu, Jinting & Xu, Zhigang & Liu, Peng, 2022. "Rumors in the air? Exploring public misconceptions about automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 237-252.
    17. Skeete, Jean-Paul, 2018. "Level 5 autonomy: The new face of disruption in road transport," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 22-34.
    18. Michael Siegrist & Joseph Árvai, 2020. "Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2191-2206, November.
    19. Yukari Jessica Tham & Takaaki Hashimoto & Kaori Karasawa, 2022. "Underlying dimensions of benefit and risk perception and their effects on people’s acceptance of conditionally/fully automated vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1715-1736, December.
    20. Liu, Feiqi & Zhao, Fuquan & Liu, Zongwei & Hao, Han, 2019. "Can autonomous vehicle reduce greenhouse gas emissions? A country-level evaluation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 462-473.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:125:y:2019:i:c:p:139-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.