Are Self Driving Cars Safe as Early Data Suggests? - IEEE SpectrumIEEE.orgIEEE XploreIEEE StandardsIEEE Job SiteMore SitesSign InJoin IEEEThe Growing Proof That Autonomous Cars Save LivesShareFOR THE TECHNOLOGY INSIDERSearch: Explore by topicAerospaceAIBiomedicalClimate TechComputingConsumer ElectronicsEnergyHistory of TechnologyRoboticsSemiconductorsTelecommunicationsTransportation
IEEE Spectrum
FOR THE TECHNOLOGY INSIDERTopicsAerospaceAIBiomedicalClimate TechComputingConsumer ElectronicsEnergyHistory of TechnologyRoboticsSemiconductorsTelecommunicationsTransportationSectionsFeaturesNewsOpinionCareersDIYEngineering ResourcesMoreNewslettersSpecial ReportsCollectionsExplainersTop Programming LanguagesRobots Guide ↗IEEE Job Site ↗For IEEE MembersCurrent IssueMagazine ArchiveThe InstituteThe Institute ArchiveFor IEEE MembersCurrent IssueMagazine ArchiveThe InstituteThe Institute ArchiveIEEE SpectrumAbout UsContact UsReprints & Permissions ↗Advertising ↗Follow IEEE SpectrumSupport IEEE SpectrumIEEE Spectrum is the flagship publication of the IEEE — the world’s largest professional organization devoted to engineering and applied sciences. Our articles, videos, and infographics inform our readers about developments in technology, engineering, and science.SubscribeAbout IEEEContact & SupportAccessibilityNondiscrimination PolicyTermsIEEE Privacy PolicyCookie PreferencesAd Privacy Options© Copyright 2026 IEEE — All rights reserved. A public charity, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity.
Enjoy more free content and benefits by creating an account

Saving articles to read later requires an IEEE Spectrum account

The Institute content is only available for members

Downloading full PDF issues is exclusive for IEEE Members

Downloading this e-book is exclusive for IEEE Members

Access to
Spectrum
's Digital Edition is exclusive for IEEE Members

Following topics is a feature exclusive for IEEE Members

Adding your response to an article requires an IEEE Spectrum account

Create an account to access more content and features on
IEEE Spectrum
, including the ability to save articles to read later, download Spectrum Collections, and participate in
conversations with readers and editors. For more exclusive content and features, consider
Joining IEEE
.

Join the world’s largest professional organization devoted to engineering and applied sciences and get access to
all of Spectrum’s articles, archives, PDF downloads, and other benefits.
Learn more about IEEE →
Join the world’s largest professional organization devoted to engineering and applied sciences and get access to
this e-book plus all of
IEEE Spectrum’s
articles, archives, PDF downloads, and other benefits.
Learn more about IEEE →CREATE AN ACCOUNTSIGN INJOIN IEEESIGN INCloseAccess Thousands of Articles — Completely Free
Create an account and get exclusive content and features:
Save articles, download collections,
and
post comments
— all free! For full access and benefits,

subscribe

to Spectrum.
CREATE AN ACCOUNTSIGN INTransportationMagazineArticle
The Growing Proof That Autonomous Cars Save Lives
Self-driving tech could prevent 580,000 deaths every yearLawrence Ulrich08 Sep 20264 min readLawrence Ulrich is an award-winning auto writer and former chief auto critic at The New York Times and The Detroit Free Press.Video captured by Rivian technicians shows, in red, areas scanned by lidar during a test drive.
Rivian
Plenty of people remain spooked by autonomous vehicles, or AVs. Some experts and policymakers have cautioned that AVs won’t necessarily make roads safer. When it comes to partial or full autonomy, the picture isn’t entirely clear, in part because there aren’t enough self-driving cars to make meaningful apples-to-apples comparisons.Yet mounting research suggests that self-driving cars crash significantly less often than people, and with far fewer injuries. Evidence also shows that advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and other building blocks of autonomy—some of which are already mandated on every new car—are also reducing occupant and pedestrian injuries and deaths, along with insurance claims.On the ADAS front, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems that recognize people in front of the car cut pedestrian crashes by 27 percent. Those AEB systems are mandated for all light vehicles in the U.S. by 2029, and more than 90 percent of new models already comply under a voluntary automakers’ agreement. A separate IIHS study found that automated braking greatly reduced rear-end crashes, by 50 percent, and their injuries by 56 percent. The Highway Loss Data Institute found that cars with AEB alone showed a 13 percent drop in property-damage claims. Cars that bundled ADAS features, including automatic braking for pedestrians, adaptive cruise control, and lane-departure warnings, saw claims reductions up to 39 percent.Move to Level 4 autonomy, and Waymo says its robotaxis have now given 20 million paid rides over 220 million miles, the equivalent of 250 lifetimes of driving. In March, Waymo’s independent study showed 92 percent fewer fatal or serious-injury crashes, a 13-fold reduction versus human drivers in comparable city environments. That included 92 percent fewer pedestrian injuries, 83 percent fewer crashes with airbag deployments, and 82 percent fewer crashes with any injuries whatsoever. That included a 96 percent reduction in injury-causing crashes at intersections, among the deadliest environments for any automobile.How Does Limited Fair-Weather Data Compare to Traditional Crash Statistics?A key question is whether Waymo’s robotaxis, currently limited to fair-weather operation in a handful of cities in the U.S., are directly comparable to humans driving a wider variety of roads in much more variable conditions.The IIHS is looking to dig deeper by cleaning up often-incomplete data. Researchers estimate roughly half of human crashes go unreported, and up to one-third of injury accidents, because drivers hope to avoid insurance price hikes. That potentially skews safety numbers in favor of human drivers. And while Waymo leads the industry in transparency, and robotaxi operators are required to report even the tiniest scrape to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), not every company voluntarily reports their total miles driven.Related: Rivian’s Gambit for Full AutonomyThe IIHS’s latest July study flatly stated that automated cars crash less often than people. But it also sought clarity by creating a more-reliable category of “police-reportable crashes.” It then compared crash rates of human-driven cars against Waymo taxis in San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Austin. Waymo’s Jaguar I-Pace taxis traveled about 50 million driverless miles over the study period, versus 222 billion human miles in the same cities.In a potential boost for public trust, the study generally supported Waymo’s own findings. Waymo taxis were involved in 68 percent fewer crashes overall than human drivers: 76 percent lower in Phoenix, 71 percent in LA, and 35 percent in San Francisco. A 4 percent higher Waymo rate in Austin may reflect an extremely small sample size. Significantly, Waymo’s injury crashes were still 81 percent lower on a per-mile basis.The industry and its supporters continue to press the safety advantages of autonomous vehicles that never get drunk, drowsy, or distracted. Yet for this fledgling AV industry, there are still no national performance or safety standards. A crazy quilt of state or local regulations can allow or prohibit their deployment. That balkanized approach makes it harder to compare crash rates, according to the IIHS, which is calling for better federal reporting standards.A posting on the IIHS website quotes the institute’s director of statistical services, Eric Teoh: “Those are encouraging signs for the future of driverless vehicles.” Teoh, who was also the lead author of the institute’s study, added that “Now we need to get the data-collection system right, so that we can ensure that level of safety continues as these technologies become more prevalent.”Amazon’s Zoox Gets an Exemption for its RobotaxisOn July 30, in a move seen as fast-tracking the tech’s deployment, NHTSA granted Zoox, a subsidiary of Amazon, the first-ever exemption from certain motor-vehicle safety standards. That will allow commercial operation of Zoox’s toaster-shaped robotaxis, which have no steering wheel or pedals aboard. The agency determined that Zoox’s purpose-built robotaxi “would provide an equivalent level of safety” as a compliant vehicle, thereby satisfying the standard for an exemption.On that final day of the SAE’s Automated Transportation Symposium, NHTSA also announced a partnership with SAE Industry Technologies to develop the nation’s first performance and competency standards for AVs, via a three-year, $5 million “A2SCEND” consortium.Some doctors and health professionals are arguing that policymakers need to stop viewing self-driving cars as a tech moonshot but rather as a critical public-health intervention. Jonathan Slotkin, a neurosurgeon, makes a powerful case for the medical and societal benefits of AVs. Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health say that highlighting the social value of AVs is critical to driving public trust and adoption.Consider that roughly 40,000 people in the U.S., including more than 7,000 pedestrians, are killed each year in roadway accidents. About 1.16 million people die in roadway crashes around the world, making them the leading cause of death for children and young adults between the ages of 5 and 29. Cutting that by even 50 percent—let alone the 90 percent reductions suggested by some studies—would save 580,000 lives a year. That social and economic gain would dwarf that of seat-belt adoption or anti–drunk driving campaigns.This article was updated on 08 September 2026.From Your Site ArticlesWhy It’s Time to Get Optimistic About Self-Driving Cars ›What Self-Driving Cars Tell Us About AI Risks ›Related Articles Around the WebOpinion | The Data on Self-Driving Cars Is Clear. We Have to Change Course. ›The evolving safety and policy challenges of self-driving cars | Brookings ›autonomous vehiclesdriving safetyself driving vehiclesself drivingadvanced-driver-assistanceLawrence UlrichLawrence Ulrich is an award-winning auto writer and former chief auto critic at The New York Times and The Detroit Free Press.The Conversation (2)Roland Kwee08 Sep, 2026
LS
Great Tech! But let's look at the underlying problem. According to Wikipedia, the US has a yearly traffic death rate of 14.2 per 100,000 people, but the UK just 2.6, NL 4.1, EU 6.7. There are clearly ways to save lives without super modern AVs.1
Reply

Hide replies
Roland Kwee08 Sep, 2026
LS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rateShow More RepliesAINews
AI Models Are Watermarking Text—Will You Notice?
8h6 min readRoboticsSponsored Article
Protecting Dynamic Industrial Robot Cable Carriers
03 Sep 20263 min readTransportationMagazineFeature
Rivian’s Gambit for Full Autonomy
08 Sep 202613 min read
Related Stories
TransportationAINewsJournal Watch
Self-Driving Cars Could Someday Take Requests
AINewsTransportationJournal Watch
AI Models Pinpoint Errors in Autonomous Driving
TransportationNews
Driverless Buses Provide New Routes for Robotaxi Tech

Research suggests that self-driving technology offers significant potential for saving lives, with estimates indicating that autonomous vehicles could prevent 580,000 deaths annually. While some experts and policymakers remain cautious about guaranteed safety, mounting evidence indicates that autonomous systems and related building blocks, such as advanced driver assistance systems, are actively reducing injuries and fatalities among occupants and pedestrians, alongside insurance claims. For instance, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that automatic emergency braking systems reduce pedestrian crashes by twenty-seven percent, and automated braking reduces rear-end collisions by fifty percent, leading to a sixty-six percent reduction in injuries. Furthermore, vehicles that integrate multiple advanced features, including automatic braking for pedestrians and adaptive cruise control, have demonstrated reductions in property damage claims by up to thirty-nine percent.

When comparing autonomous vehicle performance to human drivers, studies involving Waymo robotaxis have provided compelling data. Waymo’s independent study indicated a reduction of ninety-two percent in fatal or serious-injury crashes compared to human drivers in comparable city environments, including an eighty-three percent reduction in pedestrian injuries and an eighty-two percent reduction in crashes involving any injuries. This superior safety performance is supported by the fact that autonomous systems do not experience human limitations such as intoxication, drowsiness, or distraction.

A critical challenge in establishing a direct safety comparison lies in the variable conditions under which testing occurs. Researchers note that data collection often suffers from incompleteness, as estimates suggest that roughly half of human crashes go unreported, and up to one-third of injury accidents are not reported due to drivers avoiding insurance implications, which may skew safety statistics in favor of human drivers. Although Waymo taxis have operated over twenty million paid rides, equivalent to two hundred fifty lifetimes of driving, in specific metropolitan areas, the data suggests lower crash rates for autonomous taxi services compared to human drivers. For example, in Phoenix, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, Waymo taxis were involved in sixty-eight percent fewer overall crashes than human drivers.

Despite these encouraging findings, the deployment of autonomous vehicles faces hurdles related to regulatory standardization. The balkanized approach of state and local regulations complicates the comparison of crash rates, prompting calls for better federal reporting standards, as noted by the Institute for Highway Safety. Furthermore, the path toward full autonomy requires establishing national performance and safety standards, which is why the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has partnered with the Society of Automotive Engineers to develop performance standards through a consortium. This regulatory framework is necessary to ensure that safety gains continue as these technologies advance.

Beyond immediate crash statistics, there is an argument for viewing autonomous vehicles as a public health intervention rather than merely a technological advancement. Health professionals and researchers emphasize the substantial societal benefit of reducing roadway accidents, noting that mitigating traffic-related deaths could save hundreds of thousands of lives. Highlighting this social value is considered crucial for fostering public trust and achieving widespread adoption of self-driving technologies. Consequently, there is a growing consensus that focusing on the overarching public health gain, rather than solely on the technological "moonshot," is essential for driving the necessary policy changes and public acceptance for widespread autonomous vehicle integration.