Page - (000616) - in Autonomes Fahren - Technische, rechtliche und gesellschaftliche Aspekte

59527.1 Introduction agencies that decline to establish safety requirements for automated vehicles merely leave this task to judges and juries after incidents have occurred. The consequences of action or inaction are as stark as they are uncertain. Regulatory acts or omissions could cost lives in the near term by delaying or raising the price of auto- mation technologies [28]. But they could also save lives in the longer term by protecting broad classes of innovation from the potential reputational damage that early tragedies or controversies could inflict. Charting the currents of abstract social gain and concrete human loss from vehicle automation requires appreciating the risks that regulation presents as well as those that it addresses. This chapter first considers the nature of risk, the nature of regulation, and the challenge of regulating – in a broad sense – the increasing automation of motor vehicles. It then introduces four pairs of potential strategies to respond to this challenge, as summarized in Table 27.1 (above). These strategies are not exhaustive. They may be unnecessary. And they may be in- sufficient. Some are obvious, some are unconventional, and some may well be both. Their purpose is to advance discussion of the proper role of the public sector – legislatures, admin- istrative agencies, and courts – in addressing automation’s challenges and opportunities. 27.1.2 What Is Risk? Risk can mean so many things that, without context, it means not much at all. Broadly, “[t]he risk of a particular harm is the product of the probability of that harm and the severity of that harm; the risk of an act or omission is the sum of the risks of the particular associated harms” [20]. This actual risk, however, is merely theoretical: No actor can comprehensively inventory all associated harms or accurately determine their probabilities and magnitudes. In practice, actual risk is therefore simplified into assessed and perceived risk. Assessed risk reflects a methodical attempt to objectively describe all significant harms within a defined system; this system might contemplate a broad range of harms, as in the case of an environmental impact statement, or a more narrow range, as in the case of a functional Table 27.1 Potential Regulatory Strategies Ensure sufficient compensation for those who are injured Expand public insurance Facilitate private insurance Force information-sharing by the private sector to enhance regulation Privilege the concrete Delegate the safety case Simplify both the technical and the regulatory challenges in coordination Limit the duration of risk Exclude the extreme Raise the playing field for conventional actors along with automated systems Reject the status quo Embrace enterprise liability