Economic effects of automated vehicles
Abstract
Connected and fully automated or autonomous vehicles (CAVs) may soon dominate the automotive industry. Once CAVs are sufficiently reliable and affordable, they will penetrate markets and thereby generate economic ripple effects throughout industries. This paper synthesizes and expands on existing analyses of the economic effects of CAVs in the United States across 13 industries and the overall economy. CAVs will soon be central to the automotive industry, with software composing a greater share of vehicle value than previously. The number of vehicles purchased each year may fall because of vehicle sharing, but rising travel distances may increase vehicle sales. The opportunity for heavy-truck drivers to do other work or rest during long drives may lower freight costs and increase capacity. Personal transport may shift toward shared autonomous vehicle fleet use, reducing that of taxis, buses, and other forms of group travel. Fewer collisions and more law-abiding vehicles will lower demand for auto repair, traffic police, medical, insurance, and legal services. CAVs will also lead to new methods for managing travel demand and the repurposing of curbside and off-street parking and will generate major savings from productivity gains during hands-free travel and reduction of pain and suffering costs from crashes. If CAVs eventually capture a large share of the automotive market, they are estimated to have economic impacts of $1.2 trillion or $3,800 per American per year. This pape…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Technology firms may be the highest beneficiary of autonomous vehicle development.
“Clements & Kockelman (2017) express that technology firms may be the highest beneficiary of autonomous vehicle development”
From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Clements & Kockelman, 2017
Development of SAVs can decrease revenue in auto repair shops, medical industry, insurance companies and legal services.
“Clements & Kockelman (2017) indicate that development of SAVs can also decrease revenue in auto repair shops, medical industry, insurance companies and legal services.”
From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Clements & Kockelman, 2017
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 6 · Cited by 245
- Authors
- Clements, L. M., & Kockelman, K. M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kockelman, Kara M.
- ORCID
- Kockelman, Kara M.
- Venue
- Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 2606
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 106-114
- ISSN
- 0361-1981 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-4052
- OpenAlex
- W2757963268
- Cited by
- 245
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 13.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Transportation Systems and Logistics
- Keywords
- connected and automated vehicles, economic impact, automotive industry, vehicle sharing, shipping costs, truck drivers, shared autonomous vehicles, collision reduction, insurance demand, travel demand management
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review