As automated driving systems (ADS) rapidly transition from a futuristic concept to a reality, the legal landscape must evolve to meet the critical challenge of ensuring public safety. The ADS signifies that the hardware and software can perform all driving tasks in a specific environment. The current development of ADS promises to revolutionise transportation, offering benefits such as reduced traffic congestion and improved mobility for all. These advancements come with significant ethical and legal responsibilities, particularly in how we regulate these systems to prioritize the preservation of human life.
This blog will explore three areas: the implementation of safety measures, the ethical design of decision-making algorithms, and the establishment of emergency protocols. Together, these elements form the foundation for a regulatory framework that not only embraces technological innovation but also upholds the value of human life.
1. Safety Measures: Sensor Systems and Redundancy Mechanisms
Effective regulation of ADS involves the enforcement of safety measures. The sensor systems are at the heart of an automated vehicle’s ability to navigate safely in complex environments. Technologies such as LiDAR[1], radar, GNSS[2] sensors and stereo cameras[3] provide the vehicle with a detailed, understanding of its surroundings in real time.
It is important to recognise that no technology is entirely fail-safe. This is why redundancy mechanisms are equally essential. Redundancy in ADS means having multiple layers of backup systems that can take over in case a primary system fails. For example, if a vehicle’s primary sensor system malfunctions, a secondary system must be capable of immediately stepping in to ensure continued safe operation. This redundancy is crucial for preventing accidents caused by unexpected system failures.
The Vienna Convention on Road Traffic requires “ever-present” driver inside the vehicle[4] and recognises the impact of new technologies on human rights, resulting in more frequent amendments. This involves the driver’s ability to sustain control of their vehicle and adapt the vehicle to the traffic conditions when the system fails.
2. Decision-Making Algorithms: Prioritizing Pedestrian Safety and Minimizing Collision Impact
One of the most significant ethical challenges in ADS development is the design of decision-making algorithms. These algorithms dictate how should the automated vehicle react when a fatal accident appears unavoidable. The ethical design of these algorithms must give the highest priority to the protection of human life.
In 2022, the European Commission presented an Implementing Regulation on ADS, incorporating this priority as a key component.[5] In situations where an unavoidable risk to human life is present, the ADS must be programmed to operate without any bias or discrimination based on the personal characteristics of individuals. In particular, it cannot be programmed to assign different values to human lives on the basis of factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, disability, or other personal attributes. Moreover, the protection of human life outside the fully automated vehicle must not be subordinated to the preservation of life within the vehicle itself. This principle upholds the equal value of all human life, irrespective of proximity to the vehicle. Furthermore, the ADS must give priority to the vulnerability of road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. This requires the adoption of avoidance or mitigation strategies that account for their greater susceptibility to harm in the event of an accident. This framework guarantees that ethical considerations direct the decision-making processes of ADS, thereby reinforcing a legal obligation to safeguard the most vulnerable individuals while adhering to the fundamental principle of equal protection of life, irrespective of individual status or circumstances.
In practice, this means that ADS algorithms must be capable of making split-second decisions that minimize harm in critical situations. For instance, if a collision is inevitable, the system should be programmed to choose a course of action that results in the least possible injury or loss of life. This could involve swerving to avoid a pedestrian, even if it means risking minor damage to the vehicle or its passengers. These decisions, often referred to as “the molly problem” scenarios[6] in ethics, must be handled transparently and consistently to reflect societal values around the preservation of life. By integrating ethical considerations into their core, these algorithms ensure that the ADS makes decisions aligned with the fundamental principle of preserving life.
3. Emergency Protocols
Even with advanced safety measures and ethical decision-making algorithms, there will be moments when an automated vehicle faces an unavoidable emergency. Quick response can save lives.
Accoriding to the ISO 23793 Standard[7], which outlines requirements for the safe operation of ADS, rapid deceleration protocols are a critical component of these emergency measures. These protocols enable the vehicle to quickly reduce its speed when an imminent collision is detected, thereby minimizing the force of impact. The ability to decelerate safely can significantly reduce the severity of accidents, protecting both the passengers and those outside the vehicle.
Minimum risk manoeuvres (MRM) are another essential aspect of emergency protocols. When a collision cannot be avoided by stopping alone, the ADS should be able to swerve or steer to avoid or reduce the impact. ISO 23793 Standard also provides guidelines for executing these MRMs, ensuring that the vehicle performs evasive action while maintaining the highest possible level of safety.
In addition to the aforementioned built-in safety protocols, it is essential to implement first responder protocols in order to effectively manage post-incident scenarios. These protocols have been developed with the objective of ensuring that first responders, such as police, firefighters, and paramedics, are able to interact safely and effectively with automated vehicles in the event of an accident or an unforeseen technical failure. A number of companies, including Toyota[8] and Waymo[9], have developed comprehensive guidelines to assist emergency (first) responders in safely interacting with automated vehicles. These protocols, which often involve automatic vehicle shutdowns, emergency information displays, and communication systems, ensure that responders can secure the scene, access passengers, and deactivate the vehicle’s systems if needed. This is followed by best practice from the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium, a consortium of major representatives of the automotive industry.[10]
When critical situations arise, emergency protocols are the last line of defense in preventing accidents or mitigating their severity. Rapid deceleration, a key protocol, allows the ADS to quickly reduce speed when an obstacle is detected, thereby lowering the chances of a collision. In scenarios where stopping is not enough, MRM become essential.
A Legal and Ethical Mandate
As we look to the future of transportation, the integration of automated driving systems presents both incredible opportunities and profound challenges. The legal community, in particular, bears a significant responsibility in shaping the regulatory frameworks that will govern these systems. At the core of this obligation is the necessity to prioritise the preservation of human life in all aspects of ADS regulation.
By implementing comprehensive safety, establishing ethical decision-making algorithms, and developing robust emergency protocols, it is possible to ensure that automated vehicles are not only technologically advanced but also aligned with our most important societal values.
The transition to automated driving is not just about embracing new technology, it is about doing so in a way that enhances safety, upholds ethical standards, and saves lives. This is not just a technological challenge, it is a moral and legal imperative that must guide the future of automated driving. The ethical aspect of regulating ADSs is as important as the technical. It is about protecting human life in the age of automatisation.
The blog was originally posted on Medium: https://medium.com/driverless-law/top-priority-protecting-life-as-a-regulatory-imperative-03c6b6547218
[1] A technology that uses laser light to measure distance. It helps the vehicle “see” its surroundings by creating a detailed 3D map, similar to how bats use echolocation.
[2] Global Navigation Satellite System
[3] The stereo camera compares the two images to figure out how far away objects are, just like our brain uses both eyes to judge depth.
[4] Art. 8 Para. 1,5 of the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic.
[5] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426 of 5 August 2022 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards uniform procedures and technical specifications for the type- approval of the automated driving system (ADS) of fully automated vehicles.
[6] An alternative conceptualisation of “the trolley problem” in the context of automated transport, as a result of the ITU-T Focus Group on AI for Autonomous and Assisted Driving. An ethical dilemma used to discuss difficult decisions. To illustrate, consider a scenario in which a vehicle is faced with the choice of either striking one individual or swerving and colliding with another.
[7] ISO 23793–1:2024. Intelligent transport systems — Minimal risk manoeuvre (MRM) for automated driving — Part 1: Framework, straight-stop and in-lane stop.
[8]https://assets.ctfassets.net/8byw6jksp7h2/JQvhvx355JwTuEYElVEam/e282d3e40b69ec5931295060060921c1/Aurora_First_Responders_Guide__Toyota_Sienna_Hybrid.pdf
[9] https://waymo.com/firstresponders/
[10] AVSC Best Practice for First Responder Interactions with Fleet-Managed Automated Driving System-Dedicated Vehicles (ADS-DVs).