Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) are an emerging technology expected to improve safety, efficiency, and accessibility outcomes for all road users. However, comprehensive and multi-group analyses of the technology still need to be undertaken by the government, car manufacturers, and researchers, particularly around social aspects such as justice and safety value disparities. This study explores car drivers’ and pedestrians’ perceptions of safety and justice in the current transport system and how the deployment of CAVs might disrupt them. Interviews were conducted with 30 participants in Australia, a car-dependent country. The participants were 18 car drivers and 12 pedestrians aged between 18 and 79. Participants predominantly identified as either pedestrians or car drivers, though some occasionally used the other mode. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, organised, and analysed using a reflexive thematic analysis. Three main themes were identified: (1) independence, (2) the transport system as a safety problem, and (3) the transport system as a justice problem. The analysis indicated that most participants preferred their current mode of transport due to perceived benefits and enjoyment. Car drivers often highlighted flexibility and independence, while pedestrians valued walkability and convenience. However, both groups expressed concerns about safety and justice in the current transport system, particularly regarding limited accessibility for people with disabilities and inadequate public transport. Finally, while both participants broadly supported the introduction of CAVs, many, especially pedestrians, expressed concerns about their potential to exacerbate existing disadvantages for vulnerable road users. This research finds that greater emphasis should be placed on increasing research on and planning for the impact of CAVs to ensure vulnerable groups’ concerns are addressed.

Despite the anticipated benefits, the rollout of Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs) is likely to encounter numerous challenges, including public readiness to adopt and coexist with these vehicles. This study utilised a cross-sectional survey of 384 Australian residents aged 18 to 82 (M = 42.93, SD = 15.48) to assess public perceptions and support for policies designed to enhance safety and justice in interactions between CAVs and vulnerable road users (VRUs) such as pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities. Participants evaluated 15 policies (identified through a structured, expert-informed process as a preliminary stage) across five evaluation dimensions: acceptability for improving safety within the transport system, acceptability for improving justice within the transport system, perceived improvement of safety for all VRUs, perceived improvement of justice for all VRUs, and willingness to support each policy. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, cluster analysis, and hierarchical regression models. Policies focusing on systemic improvements, such as VRU-focused infrastructure and technology enhancements, received strong public support. Public preferences align with policies promoting fairness and inclusivity, while punitive measures and VRU-burdening policies were resisted. Cluster analysis identified three groups: VRU-burdening policies (low support), VRU-centric safety policies (moderate support), and VRU-focused infrastructure and technology policies (high support). Regression analyses revealed that factors such as age, transport accessibility, and disability influenced policy support. A content analysis revealed a strong preference for prioritising public transport investment, implementing inclusive urban designs, and establishing robust ethical frameworks. The findings highlight the need for policies that prioritise VRU safety and justice in CAV deployment. Support for inclusive, non-punitive measures points to the importance of fairness and system-wide reforms. To transition toward a safer, more equitable transport system, the study suggests the potential for more radical, community-driven policies and increased transparency in CAV development.

Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) offer significant potential to enhance the transport system; however, their implementation faces numerous barriers, including safety risks, ethical dilemmas, equitable road use, and challenges surrounding technology reliability, privacy, and environmental impact. Addressing these concerns is crucial to unlocking the benefits of this technology, particularly in promoting safe and just interactions with vulnerable road users (VRUs). This study consulted fifteen key informants from academic, policy, and operational sectors globally to identify policies that would ensure responsible deployment. Through reflexive thematic analysis, seven key policy themes emerged: implementing regulation and standards; enhancing infrastructure and traffic management for effective integration; integrating with public transport; promoting value-driven approaches to policymaking; enhancing road safety; promoting shared responsibility between automated systems and VRUs; and building public trust and acceptance. Participants highlighted the importance of conservative safety designs for CAVs, advanced infrastructure for VRU-heavy areas, the implementation of reliable sensor technology, and national standards for effective traffic management. Additionally, human-centric design, particularly accessibility for people with disabilities, was reinforced. To facilitate safe and just adoption of this technology, we propose policy recommendations that governments should implement to improve interactions between CAVs and VRUs. These are framed around four key policy levers: regulation, provisions, economic incentives, and exhortation. Each lever offers distinct policy approaches that guide the sustainable development of the technology, ensuring alignment with justice and safety outcomes. Future research should prioritise understanding public perspectives and optimising automated–VRU interactions to support a more equitable transport system.

Background: Many factors are associated with pedestrian injuries and accidents. If a pedestrian is injured in an outdoor public space, we are talking about a “pedestrian fall”. Pedestrian falls are a more common cause of pedestrian injuries than traffic crashes but have received less attention and the literature on this topic is scarce. Aims and methods: The aim of this work is to describe at a general level the prevalence and consequences of pedestrian falls and injuries, to make international comparisons of pedestrian falls and to identify risk factors and not least to examine the relationships between the prevalence of falls and pedestrian risk behaviour. A total of 6,373 participants from 15 different countries were recruited to take part in this study. To collect data a questionnaire was used. To cover the risky behaviour of pedestrians we used a short version of Pedestrians Behaviour Scale (PBS). In order to identify groups of countries with a similar pedestrian transport situation, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed. The analysis produced four groups of countries based on pedestrians’ safety level, popularity of walking and GDP. Results and conclusions: As for the results, we can conclude that young people and older people are more frequently involved in falls and that women report more frequent involvement in falls than males. However, the risk of getting injured in a fall is not higher than that of men. Frequent walking is associated with a lower risk of falling while walking. In contrast to this, physical activity increases such risk. The prevalence of falls and injuries seems to be weakly related to pedestrians’ risky behaviour, thus other factors such as safety infrastructure probably play an important role.

Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) are poised to transform the transport system. However, significant uncertainties remain about their impact, particularly regarding concerns that this advanced technology might exacerbate injustices, such as safety disparities for vulnerable road users (VRUs). Therefore, understanding the potential conflicts of this technology with societal values such as justice and safety is crucial for responsible implementation. To date, no research has focused on what safety and justice in transport mean in the context of CAV deployment and how the potential benefits of CAVs can be harnessed without exacerbating the existing vulnerabilities and injustices VRUs face. This paper addresses this gap by exploring car drivers' and pedestrians' perceptions of safety and justice issues that CAVs might exacerbate using an existing theoretical framework. Employing a qualitative approach, the study delves into the nuanced aspects of these concepts. Interviews were conducted with 30 participants (40% pedestrians) in Queensland, Australia, aged between 18 and 79. These interviews were recorded, transcribed, organised, and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Three main themes emerged from the participants' discussions: (1) CAVs as a safety problem for VRUs, (2) CAVs as a justice problem for VRUs, and (3) CAVs as an alignment with societal values problem. Participants emphasised the safety challenges CAVs pose for VRUs, highlighting the need for thorough evaluation and regulatory oversight. Concerns were also raised about CAVs potentially marginalising vulnerable groups within society. Participants advocated for inclusive discussions and a justice-oriented approach to designing a comprehensive transport system to address these concerns.

As technological development towards connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) continues to rise, addressing the challenges associated with their integration is crucial, especially regarding public acceptance. This study explores the acceptability of CAVs, focusing on their potential role in enhancing safety and justice within the transport system. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse participant group, including 18 car drivers (aged 20–79, M = 48.3, SD = 18.77) and 12 pedestrians (aged 18–61, M = 36.0, SD = 12.94). Thematic analysis was employed to identify and contextualise factors influencing CAV acceptability, encompassing usefulness, ease of use, effectiveness, affordability, and social acceptability. Results emphasised safety as a top priority for both drivers and pedestrians. Trust and system reliability were also common concerns, varying with participants’ roles and transport experiences. Both drivers and pedestrians identified cost and economic benefits as significant barriers to CAV acceptance. Moreover, shared apprehensions about justice in adopting CAVs acknowledged the imperfections inherent in technological advancements. Participants supported CAVs but raised concerns about potential harm to vulnerable road users. Both car drivers and pedestrians expressed concerns that introducing CAVs could exacerbate existing injustices these road users face. This study offers valuable insights into how individual differences influence CAV acceptability, contributing to understanding their preparedness to adopt advanced automotive technologies.