What’s in a ban?

Following in the footsteps of several other European countries, the UK government has proposed banning the use of hand-held mobile phones in cars. A proposal sent out in August 2002 for comments by 25 November received a flood of responses. We are now in the quiet period of reflection, with an announcement likely in late March/early April 2003.

Eight EU countries, including Denmark, Germany, Italy and Spain, have already banned use of hand-held mobiles in cars. Portugal has gone further and banned use of handsfree units as well. Others like Finland, France, Netherlands and Sweden have yet to decide, but now it’s the UK’s turn. The government would have liked to include handsfree use in the ban, but came to the conclusion that this was unenforceable in practice.

The proposal therefore only covers use of hand-held mobiles and the intention is that the new law should apply in all circumstances other than when the car is parked and with the engine off. This would mean that the prohibition would apply even if a car is paused at traffic lights or stopped in a temporary traffic jam or even in very slow-moving traffic. No phoning using your hand-held mobile to say you’re going to be late for a meeting, then. No phoning home using it to say you’re stuck in traffic either. Drivers regularly queuing on the UK’s M25 might particularly want to note that one. 

While handsfree use will not be prohibited, the definition of what constitutes “handsfree” bears some examination. The use of a hand-held phone with an earphone and microphone using either a wired or wireless connection would not be classed as true handsfree and would therefore also be banned. The argument is that the phone still needs to be held in the hand to operate it, so it isn’t true handsfree. On the face of it, then, Bluetooth headsets will also be banned.

There might be a wrinkle to this though. Bluetooth headsets can also incorporate a control for receiving calls. We’ll have to see if that gets round the problem. 

Where’s the evidence?

It’s a foregone conclusion that a lot of us use mobiles while we’re driving. Also, the more mobiles there are and the more they get used, the more likely they are to be used while we’re driving. The evidence is also growing that doing so increases the chances of having an accident.

For example, the results of research in Canada in 1997 suggested that mobile phone use quadruples the chances of an accident during the period of a call and that the enhanced hazard period extends for several minutes afterwards. The researchers admitted that it was difficult to compare exposures and that the baseline from which the quadrupling of risk was calculated may not have been stable. However, they revisited their work in 2001 and confirmed their earlier findings.

Interestingly, though, other evidence also seems to suggest that the chances of an accident may be almost as high with handsfree units as they are with hand-helds.

In principle, there appear to be two different types of driver distraction – physical and so-called cognitive. When using a hand-held phone, drivers must take one hand off the steering wheel to hold and operate the phone. They must also take their eyes off the road, at least momentarily, to pick up and put down the phone and dial numbers. While using the hand-held, the driver must continue to steer, change gear, use indicators, and so on with only one hand. That’s physical distraction.

Having to concentrate on a conversation and on driving at the same time is a cognitive distraction. It seems that dividing attention between two different tasks means that they both get done worse. It can be argued that talking on a handsfree unit is similar to talking to a passenger in the car. Evidence suggests this is not the case, though, perhaps because of the visual communication clues that accompany a face-to-face conversation and because a passenger can see the traffic situation and adapt the conversation accordingly.

Several experiments have reinforced this view. One such at the University of Utah showed that those engaged in mobile phone conversations missed twice as many simulated traffic signals as when they were not talking on the phone. They also took longer to react to those signals that they did detect. Further, these deficits were equivalent for both hand-held and handsfree mobile phone users. That was in the US, though, where the driving experience is probably more benign and therefore physical distraction might be less than in Europe.

Then there are other distractions. Dealing with children while driving, changing CDs, tuning radios. How do these compare with using a phone? Not enough research exists yet to say.

Impact on Telematics?

It is cognitive distraction that’s the real worry. Physical distraction can be dealt with. On the face of it, the banning of hand-helds is likely to increase the use of handsfree units and also the use of new technologies like voice recognition. Bluetooth-enabled hand-helds that can interwork with fixed handsfree installations in cars are also likely to win out.

However, if the result of the ban is that drivers think they are safe with handsfree units and fit them in large quantities, they might be more tempted to use them than they were with hand-helds and we may ultimately end up with more mobile-related accidents in the long run. Drivers will need to be made aware of the risks.

It is also ironic that many proposed telematics services, ostensibly coupled with safety and the prospect of reducing accidents and congestion, may also be distracting especially if the driver needs to process information rapidly or talk to an operator. Exploiting the communications links used in Intelligent Transport System applications for non-driving related purposes such as provision of information on local facilities, mobile telephony or internet access may also increase this distraction risk. Although ITS providers are developing voice-activated systems with the aim of reducing driver distraction, it is not clear yet that these do actually reduce distraction significantly.

Employers to take note

The ban is not intended just for voice use. The intention is for the new regulation to prohibit the use of hand-held mobile phones or other similar hand-held devices that permit 2-way communication, whether the medium is speech, text or other forms of data. It is difficult if not impossible to create exceptions to this sort of rule, so it would inevitably also apply to hand-helds used by the police and other emergency services, fleet operations and even taxi services.

Although it would include equipment such as radio microphones, there is no intention to prohibit the use of in-vehicle equipment that has been designed to support the driving task. Therefore, although the new regulation should apply generally to the drivers of buses and coaches (presumably therefore including commentaries for tourists), there is no desire to interfere with the provision that allows use of a microphone while driving to make an announcement to passengers in an emergency using the in-vehicle loudspeaker system.

Employers will also need to be wary. Should staff issued with mobiles use them in their cars? If so, should they be suitably equipped? Even then, what if they have an accident while using a handsfree phone? If a mobile or handsfree unit was issued by the employer but without clear guidance on when not to use it, the employer might be liable.

A simple ban on use of mobiles in cars may have not-so-simple ramifications.

 © e-principles 2003

Robin Duke-Woolley

For details about our new report on the wireless M2M market click here