Policy Question & Memo - Richard Nere

Policy Question :

What actions, if any, should the government take concerning driver-less car technology? To be quite clear, the concern is military, and civilian applications of driver-less car technology.

Policy Maker Client:

In this case, the policy maker is the President of the United States.  He alone has the authority, power, and moreover, the public visibility to push the public policy agenda at the highest level of the U.S. government.  

TO: POTUS
FROM: Richard Nere
SUBJECT: Autonomous Vehicle Technology

Background:

What actions, if any, should the government take concerning driver-less car technology? To be quite clear, the concern is military, and civilian applications of driver-less car technology.  Indeed, driver-less vehicle technology is a safety innovation of the future.  In fact, a study conducted by RAND corporation expatiates on the matter discussing the advantages of the technology to include reducing crashes, decrease energy consumption, and increased mobility.  Generally speaking, the study titled, "Autonomous Vehicle Technology" presents the new technology in a favorable light.

If, however, autonomous vehicles are considered as a military technology, there are several benefits that are distinct from the civilian applications.  For instance, the short article titled, "U.S. Navy Employment Options for Unmanned Surface Vehicles" discusses benefits that are, strictly speaking, beneficial for military.  The advantages of autonomous vehicles includes the ability to interact at all levels of the sea, have a higher risk tolerance than manned systems, and finally have the potential for larger payloads or endurance.  Quite certainly, other branches of the military would have other potential benefits of this new technology.

Challenges:

1. At first, autonomous vehicle could indeed prove too expensive for implementation when first put on the market.
2. To be honest, as a corollary of autonomous vehicle technology is slashing jobs in the public, and private sector.
3. Trust is also a major concern.  Figuratively speaking, this new technology will require a leap of faith.
4. For certain, bureaucracy could hamper the progress of autonomous vehicle technology.

Policy Alternatives:

Status Quo:

The technology continues to be tested.  However, the technology falls short of full implementation without leadership on the matter.  Leadership, of course, could be either in the private or the public sector.  Real incentives are necessary to hurdle these barriers to market.

Advantages :

Avoids the political ramifications in the case the technology doesn't pan out.  Moreover, a neutral position protects elected officials from supporting the matter, as it may prove political dangerous to support a new technology that could potentially cost thousands of jobs.

Disadvantages:

In the case of military advantage this technology would put America above its peers.  For certain, then, failure to support the new technology would mean losing the competitive edge.  

Full Scale Implementation:

Political leadership provides incentives to implement the new technology.  The goal, of course, is 100% participation in the private sphere, public sphere, and in the military sphere.

Advantages:

Early adoption has foreign policy implications.  In the future, autonomous vehicle technology could be used to support foreign policy commitments.  Autonomous vehicles could save the lives of ground troops, for this reason, working assiduously toward full scale implementation is vital on the military front.

Innovative companies developing this technology win.  That is to say, this strategy would prove propitious for tech firms.  Ubiquitous autonomous vehicles is indeed a harbinger of reduced crashes, decreased energy consumption, and increase mobility.  Above all else, the American public would

Disadvantages:

In some cases, a new technology innovation is the prognosticator for unemployment in a given sector.   This technology, of course, doesn't create jobs for Americans. At any rate, the general public needs to be sanguine about full scale implementation, and in the case, this innovation doesn't deliver as promised, then the credibility of any spokesperson is hurt.

Collaboration:

The government works closely with tech firms, and american universities to work towards producing this technology for mass consumption.  This, of course, is a safe policy option, where collaboration is certainly a time for the testing of autonomous vehicle technology, and strategically planning for public use.

Advantages:

Quite clearly, this policy option is rather safe.  In fact, the testing in academia, and the private sector would substantiate the argument for Americans to adopt the new technology if successful.

Disadvantages:

Cost is a concern.  Moreover, there is the possibility the technology is a failure for wide spread implementation.

Policy Option	Efficiency	Effectiveness	Equity	Ease of political acceptablity
Full Scale	+	++++	+	+
Collaboration	+++	++	+	+++
Status Quo	++++	++++	+	++++

References:

Anderson, James M., Nidhi Kalra, Karlyn D. Stanley, Paul Sorensen, Constantine Samaras, and Oluwatobi A. Oluwatola. Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Guide for Policymakers. N.p.: n.p., 2014. Web.
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR443-1/RAND_RR443-1.pdf

Savitz, Scott, Irv Blickstein, Peter Buryk, Robert Button, Paul DeLuca, James A. Dryden, Jason Mastbaum, Jan Osburg, Philip Padilla, Amy Potter, Carter C. Price, Lloyd Thrall, Susan K. Woodward, Roland J. Yardley, and John Yurchak. U.S. Navy Employment Options for Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs). N.p.: n.p., 2013. Web.
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR384/RAND_RR384.pdf