Abstract
ABSTRACT It is often assumed, at least implicitly, that responsible governance of automated vehicles (AVs) requires more knowledge about the future development of the innovation and its potential consequences. In this context, technology assessment (TA) studies often refer to the so-called Collingridge-dilemma. This paper argues that, at least in the German case, a lack of knowledge in the sense of the Collingridge-dilemma is not the central challenge for the governance of AVs. The argument is developed on the basis of different types of knowledge for TA recently introduced by Armin Grunwald. The paper shows that responsible governance of AVs requires more normative and hermeneutic knowledge to better understand the directionality of the current system. More important than focusing on the possible consequences of AVs is a better understanding of how to overcome existing obstacles to the development of a broadly shared vision with effective goals for the German mobility sector.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.