The politics and imaginary of 'autonomous vehicles': a participatory journey

This research investigates alternative mobility futures expressed by participants in European group futuring activities. These diverse perspectives offer critical insights into technocratic understandings of technology and AI, providing space for alternative visions. The study involved citizens and stakeholders whose voices are often marginalized in CAV discussions, contributing their perspectives on urban planning, mobility, sustainability, safety, and economic prosperity. The research highlights the gaps and complexities within the discourse promoting a universal vision for the future of urban mobility, focusing on citizens' imaginaries, values, expectations, insights, and visions. The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) conducted this participatory pilot project on CAVs, focusing on social and ethical implications within the context of European policy-making. This project, part of the H2020 NewHorrizon project, employed Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) inspired governance modalities through Social Lab experiments. This specific Social Lab aimed to assess the potential implications and societal expectations of CAVs and explored mobility narratives, ethical considerations, and concerns. The project included in-depth stakeholder interviews and group sessions (Futures Making Ateliers) engaging ordinary citizens. It investigated whether a broader RRI approach (Engagement, Ethics, and Governance) could enhance policy design. The study questioned the imaginaries promoted by industries, challenging their future mobility proposals and exploring alternative imaginaries with participants. The analysis started by examining narratives justifying CAV proposals, anchored in the 2018 Communication of the Commission COM(2018) 237, aiming to deconstruct the social and political purpose of CAVs and explore alternative mobility futures with citizens. Through deconstruction of existing discourse and critical analysis of CAV promises, participants imagined new directions for mobility futures. In the Futures Making Ateliers, CAVs served as a 'MacGuffin,' a device framing participants' exploration of alternative mobility futures. The research is informed by Science and Technology Studies (STS), post-normal science (PNS), anticipatory governance, and digital and design anthropology. PNS, particularly relevant to complex, uncertain, value-laden, high-stakes issues, necessitates engaging an extended peer community in knowledge production. Digital anthropology emphasizes the often-overlooked sensory and embodied ways of knowing and learning in everyday experience, especially concerning emerging technologies. The study challenges the 'user acceptance' framework which views lack of acceptance as an obstacle to innovation, favoring exploration of alternative visions. The research questions whether the social promises of CAVs depend on factors beyond technological promises and whether these promises can be realized through technological innovation alone.

The paper draws on several theoretical frameworks and existing research. Science and Technology Studies (STS) provides a critical lens for examining the interplay between science, technology, and society. Post-normal science (PNS) is utilized to address the complexities and uncertainties inherent in the development and implementation of CAVs. The concept of anticipatory governance informs the approach to data collection and analysis, with a focus on assessing possible futures and informing policy-making. Digital and design anthropology contribute methodologies for researching digital culture, tools, and infrastructures, emphasizing the sensory and embodied aspects of human interaction with technology. The work of Bijker, Hughes, and Pinch on the social construction of technological systems highlights the inherent human influence in shaping technology and its trajectory. The authors also cite research by Cefkin on the human-machine relationship in autonomous vehicles, Dant's analysis of the car as a social being, and Brown and Laurier's examination of driving as a social activity. Existing literature emphasizing the social promises of CAVs (e.g., increased safety, sustainability, and accessibility) are critically examined alongside the potential limitations and uncertainties associated with these promises. The research challenges the assumption that technological advancement will automatically lead to societal acceptance and benefit.

The pilot project employed a mixed-methods approach combining narrative analysis, semi-structured interviews, and participatory Futures Making Ateliers (FMAs). Narrative analysis of core texts (books, articles, news) identified social and ethical issues, technological promises, and technical challenges associated with CAVs. This analysis established a framework used in subsequent citizen engagement activities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine stakeholders from the technology and automobile sectors, representing diverse fields (ITS, engineering, infrastructure, safety, research). Interviews were analyzed using a coding framework addressing technological promises and challenges, user acceptance and experience, governance, connectivity and autonomy, and energy and sustainability. Interviewees remained anonymous (Interviewee A-I). Eight FMAs were held across Europe (Italy, Portugal, Belgium), engaging 148 participants with diverse backgrounds from various European countries. FMAs, lasting 3 hours (except those during EU Regions Week), involved activities influenced by material deliberation, using objects (demonstrations, card games, Lego) to make discussions accessible and inclusive. 'CAV Cards' –visual depictions of CAVs and related issues—were created to stimulate discussions. Activities included 'Narratives of Mobility' (responding to statements from the European Commission's Communication on Automated Mobility), 'Vehicles of the Future' (creating Lego vehicles to address mobility problems), and 'Imagining a Neighbourhood' (illustrating future mobility scenarios). The FMA transcripts were analyzed using a coding framework covering technological promises and challenges, user experience, social and ethical issues, governance, connectivity and autonomy, and energy and sustainability. Additional analysis focused on types of vehicles, energy sources, ownership models, and utterance frequencies. The aim wasn't representativeness but a deeper understanding of issues and critical engagement with research questions.

The analysis revealed a disconnect between the technological and social promises of CAVs promoted by industry and policymakers, and the concerns and expectations of citizens. Interviews with industry stakeholders highlighted uncertainties regarding the ability to deliver on technological promises, such as increased safety, sustainability, and accessibility. Stakeholders questioned the feasibility of rapid, widespread adoption of CAV technology, noting the time required for technology integration into existing vehicle fleets and the lack of alignment in incentives to promote shared ownership. Concerns were expressed about the lack of citizen and city-official voices in the current discourse and the assumption of automatic user acceptance. The European Commission's communication on automated mobility, the study found, reproduced industry narratives, emphasizing the reduction of road fatalities ('Vision Zero') and improvements in air quality and urban planning. FMAs revealed citizen skepticism toward the plausibility and desirability of CAV promises. Participants questioned the notion of eliminating the 'human factor' in driving, emphasizing the role of human judgment and awareness in accident prevention. Concerns were raised about the potential impact on user agency and liability in case of accidents. Participants also expressed apprehension about data privacy and security risks associated with CAVs. Their discussions focused on technological limitations and the need for adequate governance frameworks. Participants also questioned the need for increased mobility, suggesting alternative solutions such as changing work patterns and urban design. In the Lego vehicle and future neighbourhood activities, participants highlighted the need for multimodal, versatile, flexible, and accessible vehicles, emphasizing shared ownership and addressing issues such as inefficiency of public transport, congestion, accessibility, pollution, climate change, space limitations, and safety. Alternative energy sources, particularly renewable options, were favored over fossil fuels. Several groups aimed to minimize the need for vehicles altogether. Concerns regarding safety focused on hacking and mixed driving scenarios rather than accident prevention alone. Participants frequently emphasized safety, sustainability, accessibility, resource management, data and privacy rights, economic benefits, and maintenance of user agency in their visions of the future. The overall findings show that the CAVs served as a springboard for participants to imagine and develop alternative mobility futures and solutions.

The study's findings challenge the dominant narratives surrounding CAVs, questioning the assumption that technological solutions automatically translate to societal benefits. The disconnect between industry and policymaker promises and citizen concerns highlights the need for greater inclusivity and participatory approaches in policy development. The study underscores the limitations of focusing solely on technological advancements without considering broader social, ethical, and environmental implications. The use of CAVs as a 'MacGuffin' in the FMAs prompted diverse imaginaries of mobility, showcasing the potential of citizen engagement to generate innovative solutions beyond the confines of prevailing technological narratives. The research emphasizes the importance of considering citizens' lived experiences, values, and priorities in shaping the future of mobility and technology development.

This research demonstrates the critical need for engaging citizens in the early stages of policy development regarding emerging technologies. The study's findings challenge prevailing narratives about technological innovation and show that current policy discussions on CAVs may not adequately address real mobility problems. The participatory methodologies employed revealed diverse imaginaries of mobility futures, suggesting alternative solutions focused on sustainable practices, shared resources, and changes in urban infrastructure. Future research should explore the implementation of participatory approaches in policy-making and further investigate the social, ethical, and environmental implications of CAVs and other emerging technologies. The study highlights the importance of moving beyond technology-centric solutions and adopting a more holistic and participatory approach to addressing mobility challenges.

The study's findings are based on a limited number of interviews and FMAs, which might not fully represent the diversity of views across Europe. The self-selection of participants in the FMAs might also introduce bias into the results. The research focused on a specific set of technological and social promises of CAVs and the timeframe of data collection predated the COVID-19 pandemic, which might have impacted mobility behaviors and perspectives. Despite these limitations, the study offers valuable insights into the diverse imaginaries of mobility and the critical role of citizen engagement in shaping the future of transportation.