Autonomous vehicles, popularly known as self-driving cars, have the potential to transform travel behavior. However, existing analyses have ignored strategic interactions with other road users. In this article, I use game theory to analyze the interactions between pedestrians and autonomous vehicles, with a focus on yielding at crosswalks. Because autonomous vehicles will be risk-averse, the model suggests that pedestrians will be able to behave with impunity, and autonomous vehicles may facilitate a shift toward pedestrian-oriented urban neighborhoods. At the same time, autonomous vehicle adoption may be hampered by their strategic disadvantage that slows them down in urban traffic.
BjørnskauT.2015. “The Zebra Crossing Game—Using Game Theory to Explain a Discrepancy between Road User Behaviour and Traffic Rules.” Safety Science, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.10.007.
3.
ChenP.WuC.ZhuS.2016. “Interaction between Vehicles and Pedestrians at Uncontrolled Mid-block Crosswalks.” Safety Science82:68–76.
4.
ColmanA. M.2013. Game Theory and Its Applications in the Social and Biological Sciences, 2nd ed.London: Routledge.
5.
DiMentoJ. F.EllisC.2013. Changing Lanes: Visions and Histories of Urban Freeways. Cambridge: MIT Press.
6.
FagnantD. J.KockelmanK.2015. “Preparing a Nation for Autonomous Vehicles: Opportunities, Barriers and Policy Recommendations.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice77:167–81.
7.
GehlJ.2011. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space, 6th ed.Washington, DC: Island Press.
8.
GuerraE.2016. “Planning for Cars That Drive Themselves: Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Regional Transportation Plans, and Autonomous Vehicles,” Journal of Planning Education and Research36 (2): 210–24.
9.
HarrellW. A.1992. “Driver Response to a Disabled Pedestrian Using a Dangerous Crosswalk.” Journal of Environmental Psychology12 (4): 345–54.
10.
HeinrichsD.CyganskiR.2015. “Automated Driving: How It Could Enter Our Cities and How This Might Affect Our Mobility Decisions.” disP - The Planning Review51 (2): 74–79.
11.
Van HoutenR.2011. “Pedestrians.” In Handbook of Traffic Psychology, edited by PorterB. E., 353–65. London: Elsevier.
12.
KarndacharukA.WilsonD. J.DunnR.2014. “A Review of the Evolution of Shared (Street) Space Concepts in Urban Environments.” Transport Reviews34 (2): 190–220.
LevinsonD.KrizekK.2015. The End of Traffic and the Future of Transport. Kindle Editions.
16.
MarchantG. E.LindorR. A.2012. “Coming Collision between Autonomous Vehicles and the Liability System.” Santa Clara Law Review52 (4): 1321–40.
17.
MilakisD.van AremB.van WeeB.2015. Policy and Society Related Implications of Automated Driving: A Review of Literature and Directions for Future Research. Working Paper, Delft University of Technology.
RichtelM.DoughertyC.2015. “Google’s Driverless Cars Run into Problem: Cars with Drivers.” The New York Times, September1, 2015.
20.
RogersA.2016. “Welcome to the Metastructure: The New Internet of Transportation.” Wired, January2016.
21.
SalamatiK.SchroederB. J.GeruschatD. R.RouphailN. M.2013. “Event-Based Modeling of Driver Yielding Behavior to Pedestrians at Two-Lane Roundabout Approaches.” Transportation Research Record2389:1–11.
22.
SchellingT. C.1956. “An Essay on Bargaining.” The American Economic Review46 (3): 281–306.
23.
SchneiderR. J.SandersR. L.2015. “Pedestrian Safety Practitioners’ Perspectives of Driver Yielding Behavior across North America.” Transportation Research Record2519:39–50.
24.
SouthworthM.Ben-JosephE.2003. Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities, 2nd ed.Washington, DC: Island Press.
25.
VanderbiltT.2008. Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us). New York: Knopf.
26.
WadudZ.MacKenzieD.LeibyP.2016. “Help or Hindrance? The Travel, Energy and Carbon Impacts of Highly Automated Vehicles.” Transportation Research Part A86:1–18.
27.
ZhangW.GuhathakurtaS.FangJ.ZhangG.2015. “Exploring the Impact of Shared Autonomous Vehicles on Urban Parking Demand: An Agent-based Simulation Approach.” Sustainable Cities and Society19:34–45.
