Advances in autonomous vehicle technology have led to a reimagining of future urban environments. Recent efforts have looked to understand the requirements to realize these 'hybrid societies' in the future. Hamann et al. define hybrid societies as self-organizing, collective systems composed of natural and artificial parts (bio-hybrid) or human beings interacting with and through socio-technical systems. In hybrid societies, advanced automation mobility systems are entwined with more contextual information gathering, allowing for seamless integration of automation systems. Several cities like Woven by Toyota and Noem City in Saudi Arabia are focused on coexistence between humans and robots. While imagining these future cities, researchers should preempt challenges toward the coexistence of humans and AI agents. To some extent, the challenges with integrating automated mobility in our society today present a prescient warning of the emergent challenges in future hybrid societies.
Technologies enabling automation in mobility systems are becoming ubiquitous through the vast proliferation of AI and Robotics. With the ever-increasing focus on autonomous mobility, the development of these technologies is undergoing rapid progress. Several urban environments are actively testing and implementing mobility solutions that are not just personal cars but are also focused on environmentally-friendly mobility. However, their societal acceptance has not necessarily been without their challenges. The city of Paris recently banned e-scooters with 90 percent support from the residents. Some other cities have had mixed responses, with San Francisco temporarily banning scooters for a short period before reintroducing them with several restrictions. Other cities have been cautious by heavily controlling the use case for these mobilities, as observed in Portland. Additionally, the rise in delivery robots will likely increase traffic on sidewalks, which may present challenges for pedestrians. With limited space, these technologies can further complicate interactions between road users, and their lack of societal acceptance may complicate matters further. In principle, focusing exclusively on safety-related functions may not be sufficient, and it would require researchers to focus on values that can consider the challenges of societal acceptance by promoting the well-being of mobility users.
Autonomous mobility systems promise to improve sidewalk mobility modes safety, such as escooters, delivery robots, etc. However, sidewalk micromobility modes may still be human-controlled. While safety is essential for the usability of these systems, their social acceptance requires methods to ensure the benefits of these interactions are not just limited to the physical safety outcomes but also look to assess whether these allow humans to feel comfortable while interacting with hybrid traffic participants in the future.
A potential measure of such outcomes for humans in society could be the recognition of their well-being. Organizations like the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have proposed the quality of life of its individuals while considering their health, emotional well-being, and personal fulfillment within a sustainable environment as a better proxy for assessing the state of the society against traditional metrics like GDP or Income. The concept also has cultural underpinnings in Japanese culture, referred to as 'Anshin', which explains how people feel at ease under uncertain situations, as long as the situation is not drastically challenging. This feeling makes traffic participants more comfortable interacting with different road users under different circumstances as long as there is no compromise on their physical sense of safety ('Anzen').
Psychological research has several contrasting perspectives on defining and measuring wellbeing. Ryff et al., conceptualized eudaimonic well-being as achieving living through fulfilling one's potential, emphasizing personal development, a deep meaning towards life's purpose, and eventual self-realization. In contrast, Diener characterized hedonic well-being as rooted in the immediate experience of pleasure, positive emotions, and the absence of pain and negative emotions. Given the characterization of the research problem and the time scale of evaluation, both frameworks present unique perspectives to understand how individuals may feel well-being, which could be beyond the immediate state of feeling safe and secure. There has been an exploration of the overall well-being of the traffic participants. Similarly, while research in mobility and well-being presents unique perspectives on the overall experience of traffic participants, these mostly fail to characterize interactions between traffic participants and how that would impact their well-being.