Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by Mashrur Chowdhury

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Fig. 4. State authority acceptance of ITS application by different agencies in 2005.

Figure 4 State authority acceptance of ITS application by different agencies in 2005.

Related Figures (7)

Fig. 1. States responding to survey (a) 2005 (Conway and Walton, 2010) and (b) 2010.
Fig. 1. States responding to survey (a) 2005 (Conway and Walton, 2010) and (b) 2010.
Fig. 3. Proposed leadership in recording publicly-captured surveillance information in 2010.
Fig. 3. Proposed leadership in recording publicly-captured surveillance information in 2010.
Frequency of phrases in respondent definitions. Table 1 Interestingly, enforcement authorities in 2005 identified use of tolling data for these applications to be a violation of pri- vacy less frequently than use of GPS tracking. Only 18% of states identified use of tolling data to locate a vehicle during rou- tine operations or to monitor routes to violate driver privacy, and fewer (11%) considered use of this data to monitor speeds or hours of operation to be a violation. No states considered use of this data to locate a stolen vehicle to be a violation of privacy. The 2010 findings indicate that there has been a trend of declining privacy concerns with electronic toll collection and that most have been resolved due to high rates of user acceptance.
Frequency of phrases in respondent definitions. Table 1 Interestingly, enforcement authorities in 2005 identified use of tolling data for these applications to be a violation of pri- vacy less frequently than use of GPS tracking. Only 18% of states identified use of tolling data to locate a vehicle during rou- tine operations or to monitor routes to violate driver privacy, and fewer (11%) considered use of this data to monitor speeds or hours of operation to be a violation. No states considered use of this data to locate a stolen vehicle to be a violation of privacy. The 2010 findings indicate that there has been a trend of declining privacy concerns with electronic toll collection and that most have been resolved due to high rates of user acceptance.
Fig. 5. States identification of appropriate secondary use of tolling data in 2005.
Fig. 5. States identification of appropriate secondary use of tolling data in 2005.
Fig. 6. Key privacy issues to implementing vehicle-mile-traveled tolling in 2010.
Fig. 6. Key privacy issues to implementing vehicle-mile-traveled tolling in 2010.
Fig. 7. Best approaches to protecting privacy while using ITS per 2010 survey.
Fig. 7. Best approaches to protecting privacy while using ITS per 2010 survey.
Related topics:
EngineeringIntelligent Transportation SystemsPublic Policy
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved