Business Surveillance

lable at ScienceDirect

Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e90

Contents lists avai

Technology in Society

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ techsoc

The societal impact of commercial drones

Bharat Rao*, Ashwin Goutham Gopi, Romana Maione NYU Tandon School of Engineering, Brooklyn, NY, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history: Received 22 December 2015 Received in revised form 26 February 2016 Accepted 26 February 2016 Available online 15 March 2016

Keywords: Drones UAVs Commercial drones Business models Privacy Security

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Rao).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.02.009 0160-791X/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

The use of drones or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in commercial applications has the potential to dramatically alter several industries, and, in the process, change our attitudes and behaviors regarding their impact on our daily lives. The emergence of drones challenges traditional notions of safety, security, privacy, ownership, liability, and regulation. With their ability to collect data and transport loads, drones are re-shaping the way we think and feel about our physical environment. However, they also burdened with the perception as being surveillance equipment, and their commercial use has been criticizied by both individuals and activist organizations. In parallel, drones have been legitimized by regulations and licenses from federal agencies, are used by companies for surveying, inspecting, and imaging, and their technological development are driven by active communities of hobbyists and enthusiasts. This tension presents unique challenges to their integration in the currently existing public, governmental and private infrastructure. In this paper, we will take a look at a few of these issues to understand how drones in- fluence society, and present reccomendations for practitioners, policy makers, and reseachers studying this phenomenon.

© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The advent of new and emerging technologies has broad eco- nomic, social and personal impacts [1]. Most commonly, they in- fluence practice, the way we do things, perform tasks, achieve goals, etc., while creating new capabilities and possibilities for ac- tion [2]. The Internet, for instance, did not just allow us to share information faster and cheaper; it completely changed the way we conceive of and use information. Usually, these changes are not just related to the features of the technology, but also how we interpret their usability. Rather than the technology itself, it is our use of it that affects our perception, and thus our behavior [3]. In this paper, we consider how an emerging technology, commercial unmanned aerial vehicles, more commonly known as drones, affects us by challenging some of our societal values and beliefs. In particular, we argue that the way this technology is currently used has an impact on our conception of safety and security, privacy and ownership, individual and commercial liability, and the effectiveness and process of governmental regulation. Drones are thus becoming increasingly important in the fields of science, technology, and society.

Traditionally, discussions around UAVs have been centered on their use in military surveillance and active combat. Since their emergence, the use of UAVs in combat zones has been heavily debated, and the conversation has been focused on their ethics, effectiveness, transparency and legality [4]. Despite multiple criti- cisms from human rights organizations, their judicial use has been upheld by many of the world's governments. The official stance of governments is that drones prevent causalities by providing accu- rate surveillance information and precision strike capabilities, while their opponents emphasize their inability to discern between intended and unintended targets [5]. Increasing discussion has also focused on the use of drones over domestic airspace for the purpose of surveillance in the interest of national and local security. The dialog closely mirrors that of combat drones, as it is the same issues of ethics and privacy that shape the conversation [6]. This is particularly reflected in journals of law, ethics and technology policy as there been multiple articles that have described various issues regarding the use of drones over domestic skies [7].

In this paper, we focus on a related but slightly different phe- nomenon: the emergence of commercial drones. These drones are designed, built and used by individuals, businesses, and organiza- tions. Though commercial drones owe much of their development to their military counterparts, most designs do not resemble the larger and more expensive surveillance drones [7]. Commercial drones typically are built on a small platform, use cheap and easily

Fig. 1. Structure of a commercial drone. Source: http://wise.ece.cmu.edu/redmine/attachments/download/88/drk-parts.png

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e9084

available components, and can lift only an average of 4 pounds [8]. They emerge primarily from the work of UAV and quad copter enthusiasts, and their creations have historically not been the subject of scrutiny, usually due to their small numbers and lack of public interest.

Drones have the ability to carry multiple sensors, transmitters, and imaging equipment. As the use of drones continues to prolif- erate, they will impact industries ranging from entertainment to agriculture, from construction to delivery markets [4]. Their use in Hollywood film production has already been legitimized through the creation and use of specialized high-definition imaging drones. Civilian UAVs have the potential of becoming a dominant infra- structural platform. Not only are they cheap and easily available, they can be deployed across many industries to perform complex, expensive and dangerous tasks [9]. Currently, short battery life and the lack of proper regulation (and enforcement) remain the two major limitations for their rapid adoption.

Several organizational and industrial standards associations have been created to either design drones and or to support their integration with existing infrastructure. They have developed new and uniquemarket-focused applications and service platforms, and have influenced the social perception of this technology and its associated business models. This somewhat inevitable growth of drone-based businesses seems destined to transform consumer behavior as well as reshape our notions freedom and responsibility [10]. In the following sections, we will look at how this technology was developed, how it was adopted, and how it is used in individual and commercial applications. It will provide an overview of what drones are, how they have come to be, and how they are perceived and used today. We will then use discourse analysis to explore the impact that drones have had on various societal aspects, and pro- vide recommendations for practitioners, policy makers, and re- searchers studying this new phenomenon.

2. Background

The definition of UAVs, commonly known as drones, is rather broad. This is understandable considering the wide range of con- figurations that exist. In practice, any aerial vehicle that does not rely on an on-board human operator for flight, either autonomously or remotely operated, is considered a UAV [9]. UAVs range in size from large military drones with a wingspan of nearly 200 feet to commercially available inch-wide micro drones. Their ranges of flight vary, with some commercial drones being confined to a few feet away around the operator to advancedmilitary drones that can fly for over 17,000 miles without having to land. Likewise, there is a huge variation in their maximum flight altitude, which can be anything from a few feet to a maximum of 65,000 feet [10].

Most commercially available drones today follow a similar design (refer Fig. 1). The basic design has a microcontroller that acts as a flight control, usually with four but up to eight motors and propellers, a radio receiver, electronic speed control, and a battery, built on a light plastic or metal frame [11]. In addition, gyroscopes and other sensors are added to increase the mid-air stability of the drone and a GPS device can be used for navigation. Most hobbyist drones also carry a camera for aerial imagery, and a gimbal for added image stability. Additionally, other sensors can be attached, though there is a trade off with increased functionality and weight [11]. DJI, 3DRobotics and Parrot are some of the leading hardware manufacturers, and their sales includes both assembled drones and drone components [10].

2.1. Development

The development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) is

primarily rooted in military research. Though it was initially conceived as a weaponized vehicle for the purpose of reducing the risk to human operators in hostile territory, the technology, capa- bilities, and use of UAVs have since evolved to include surveillance and the collection of data [11]. The shift from exclusively military drones to civilian application can be traced to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 [12]. In the broad rescue effort that followed, military drones equipped with accurate infrared cameras were widely recognized as a useful field asset. This led to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) first issuing certificates to allow M7RQ series military drones to be used over civilian skies in 2006 [13]. Since then, drones have entered the mainstream market after years of development in the open source and maker com- munities. For example, 3DRobotics, one of the leading drones manufacturer, began in 2009 with ArduPilot, an open source autopilot platform based on the Arduino [14]. Likewise, DJI and Parrot have open source hardware and software projects where a community of enthusiasts is invited to join the development pro- cess. Though most of the development initially was in hardware, there has also been amajor improvement in autopilot software that allows autonomous flight. An example is Openpilot, a project that aims to create universal autopilot software that can be used to fly civilian drones for humanitarian, academic, and hobbyist applica- tions [15].

The development of drones draws a parallel to that of other emerging technologies, like 3D printers. By creating and providing access to development tools, drone manufacturers have invited the open source community to their design process. Since the open source projects consisted of geographically distributed commu- nities, most of the designs were created digitally using modeling software. This made it easy to share, test, and modify the designs [16]. 3D printers also played an important role in this process as they allowed rapid prototyping and manufacture of drone com- ponents. In fact, the 3D files containing the design of certain parts are available online for anyone to download and print for free [17]. The drone manufacturers utilize the passion and expertise of the community to create technology that best serves their need. The availability of support, knowledge, and access to resources pro- vided by the community has greatly helped in reducing the barriers to entry for new drone hobbyists and amateur developers [18].

In addition to manufacturers, drone-related services have emerged as a new business in this area. These services take many forms, the simplest being the provision of drone assembly, main- tenance, and repair [19]. Rental services for drones have also pop- ped up in many cities, and they allow individuals and companies access to drones on an hourly or daily basis. These rental drones are

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e90 85

used for television and film production, real estate marketing, construction and inspection, architectural photography, and photography for events [18]. The third type of services use drones to perform surveillance and inspection on the behalf of their clients, and is common in the agricultural industry. These companies own a fleet of drones and are required to have an FAA license to fly in domestic air space [17]. The final category of services is drone brokers, and they do not own drones at all. Rather, they act as a marketplace to connect people who own and operate drones to clients who usually only require aerial photographs and survey data [20].

The global expenditure on commercial drones in 2014 stood at $700 million, with DJI being the market leader, followed by Parrot and 3DRobotics [21]. It has been predicted that the market for drones is expected to increase to $1 billion by 2018, and $1.7 billion by 2015 [10]. In addition, a fast growing segment is the DIY market, where the sales are primarily in components [21]. The market size of drone related services are also predicted to match that of hard- ware sales within the next three years. The cost of these drones can range from a minimum of $50 for micro drones and a standard DJI Phantom for $699, to the high-end Intuitive Aerial Aerigon that costs up to $250,000 and is used to shoot high-resolution videos for film production [10]. This wide price-range represents the diversity of capabilities in commercially available drones, and in the following segment, we will take a look at the most common applications.

2.2. Commercial applications

In the commercial space, drones are viewed as platforms for sensors of any kind, and they have been used primarily for sur- veillance and inspection [4]. Today, drones are being used to survey crops, in search and rescue operations, to count wild life and keep track of animal population, in land surveying, to survey forest fires, and to inspect oil pipelines, power lines and other remote infra- structure [6]. Their ability to carry heavy equipment has been leveraged for spraying crops in large farms and delivering food, medical supplies and drugs to inaccessible locations [9].

The most common application for consumer and hobbyist drones is aerial photography. Consumer drones are currently available with in-built cameras or modular arrangements allowing the installation of lightweight devices [4]. Under current FAA reg- ulations, they also can fly only up to 400 ft and typically require to be controlled in real time by a human pilot during take off and landing, as well as monitoring unexpected obstacles [9]. However, evenwith these restrictions, they offer an astonishingly wide range of application, offering solutions to different segments of the market. Though the regulation specifies that drones in domestic airspace can only be flown within line of sight, remote flying is currently possible by using on-board cameras to stream live video and sensor feedback to smartphones, laptops, or in-built screens on controllers [6].

Drone manufacturers, service providers, and platform in- tegrators are seriously considering the business potential across these application types. The representation of drones in popular media has diversified from military drones to consumer ones, and this reflects the growing demand in the market [6]. These would change the industry landscape in terms of safety, speed and consequently costs. For example, drones are currently disrupting the use of helicopters by performing similar functions without endangering the people flying in it while costing around a tenth of the price [22]. The application of drones in large factories to transport payloads is being explored. In addition, thanks to the proximity at which the UAV can operate, and its limited noise compared to a real aircraft, it can be deployed for stealthier

operations, such as detecting wildlife. Many industries including law enforcement, movie and news

production, and construction are using drones instead of manned aircraft for their operations. Finally, there have been efforts to develop a delivery drone able to transport loads up to 5 pounds are widely known. During the last twenty years, the spread of the Internet as a commerce platform has allowed firms to gain more visibility, reduce costs and the distribution footprint, and thus effectively leave the brick and mortar environment [9]. However, the logistics and distribution infrastructure is still dependent on ground and air transportation. Drones enable a new form of transportation and delivery and thus can completely change the ground rules: Amazon Prime Air, DHL and Google are pioneers in exploring the new type of delivery mechanism. Amazon has declared that once the service will be fully deployed they will be able to deliver more than 80% of their goods through air [23].

Thus, we see that science, technology, politics, social move- ments, and commerce have shaped the design, development and use of commercial drones. The argument can be made that in turn, drones too have had an effect on these aspects of society. The processes behind these changes have been widely explored in the field of science, technology, and society, and we now turn the lens to this particular emerging technology. In order to do so, we analyzed of the debate surrounding the development and use of drones. In the subsequent sections, we present the methodology and findings of our study, followed by recommendations for prac- titioners in this field and researchers studying this phenomenon.

3. Methodology

Understanding a subject as extensive as the relationship be- tween technology and society requires a suitably broad approach. Thus, we performed a discourse analysis of various documents in order to investigate how various stakeholders perceived commer- cial UAVs. Discourse is a comprehensive concept that includes any practice by which individuals imbue reality with meaning [24]. Though it is found in a wide range of forms (e.g. rituals, myths, customs), we are interested in verbal discourse in textual form. Particularly, we looked at spontaneous discourse, which subjects generate in their everyday lives. These take the form of articles, blogs, books, public records, announcements, reports, or indeed any text produced by an individual or organization [25]. Since in- dividual and group action is largely guided by socially produced and shared patterns, the knowledge of this inter subjectivity helps us understand the social order [26].

In the field of commercial drones, we considered various stakeholders such as governmental regulatory organizations, judi- cial bodies, research institutes, public policy organizations, drone manufacturers, technology developers, service providers, news organizations, insurance companies, non profits acting in public interest, activists for privacy, activists for and against drones, public and private establishment drone users, and individual users. We used an aggregate corpus of ninety-six articles published between 2001 and 2015, accessed through academic and non-academic databases and search-engines. We considered the text produced by these stakeholders as the object, and used content analysis to make inferences. The text was then divided and coded based on the origin, purpose, and content. Finally, the inferences were classified into three schemes that represented the facets of society, and one that represented the governmental response. We present the findings in the following sections. Though it is not meant to be an exhaustive list of all of UAV's effects on contemporary society, it provides a comprehensive overview of the observable social con- structs that have been influenced by commercial drones.

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e9086

4. Societal impact of commercial drones

Based on our analysis of the discourse surrounding drones, we identify three broad classes of issues that need further attention. The first one is safety and security, and it relates to personal and property damage, as well as attacks on the drones themselves. Next, we will discuss the particular effects that drones have had on our conception of civilian airspace. Third is privacy and ownership, and this is in regards to the data collected by the drones. Fourth, we discuss personal and commercial liability, which evokes questions about the responsibility undertaken by drone operators. In the following sections, we will briefly examine each of these issues in more detail and delineate the broad concerns, as well as potential ways of addressing them. Finally, wewill take a look at the attempts by governments to regulate this industry, and the challenges they have faced.

4.1. Safety and security

Safety, the freedom from harm, and security, the freedom from fear of harm, are basic human rights that are guaranteed and pro- tected by the constitutions of most nations. Currently, the use of drones in civilian airspace has triggered concerns about the chal- lenges to these basic rights. These concerns are directed towards both the technology and the user. Concerns regarding the tech- nology center around the battery life lift capacity, airworthiness, and reliability of the drones. The primary criticismwith the flying of commercial drones over public space is that small mistakes could result in crashes that threaten the health, well-being and property of the public. Furthermore, if they crash into public infrastructure such as electricity poles, or wanders into airports and other pro- tected airspaces, they could result in dangerous scenarios that put lives in danger.

These fears are not unfounded as there have been cases of such incidents that have been reported. Currently, there are a few issues that challenge the security of drones in flight. Drone navigation units are vulnerable to two different kinds of attacks on their GPS. ‘Spoofing’ entails the sending of strong (but fake) GPS signals to- wards a drone, so that it is essentially “hijacked” instead of following its programmed directions. The drone can then be manipulated to crash or be flown to the attacker's location. This would make it possible for a drone operator to be held responsible for the consequences of the “spoofed” drone since it is very difficult to prove the origin of the navigation signals.

It wasn't until 2014 that a successful spoofing attack was con- ducted against a drone, by a researcher at a Department of Homeland Security facility. This controlled but sophisticated attack was achieved with $1000 worth of equipment. For now, military GPS uses encryption that renders it invulnerable to any known spoofing attack, but still leaves it still susceptible to ‘jamming.’ In a jamming attack, the drone is overwhelmed with signals to the GPS antenna. The encryption ensures that no fake signal is mistaken for the true one, but the true signal cannot get through either. Unin- tended collisions seem to be unavoidable in such scenarios, espe- cially in an unregulated environment. There have been several incidents that have caused substantial losses without the owners of the devices being found [27].

Aside from attacks on the navigation of the drone itself, there is the security of the payload being carried: for example, one can imagine several logistical challenges faced by drone delivery ser- vices that are being envisioned (e.g. by Amazon). Likewise, the in- tentions of drone operators have been called into question, as currently, there is not regulation that controls the payload that is carried on the drones. Critics have speculated that drones could theoretically be used to conduct attacks on a civilian population,

though no cases have been reported thus far. In fact, currently available commercial drones lack the lift capacity to carry any equipment capable of creating damage, yet it is important to note that their lift capacities have been improving over the last decade.

4.2. Interference with commercial aviation

The Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) is the primary institution responsible for the classification of civilian air space within the domestic boundaries of the United States. Currently, the usage of UAVs is mostly restricted to Class G airspace, which extends up to 600 feet from ground level. If maintaining radio communications with air traffic controllers, they are allowed to fly up to 18,000 feet. However, there are a few restrictions on the type of aircraft, and rules for their operation. Only UAVs weighing less than 55 pounds can be used, and though they do not require an airworthiness certificate, they must be provided safe in the case of inspections. Commercial drones can only be flown within the operator's line of sight, and they may not use the on-board cameras as their primary medium of sight. They are restricted to an airspeed of 100 mph, can only be flown at daytime, and when there is a minimum of three miles of weather visibility. Most importantly, they must yield the right-of-way to any other aircraft irrespective of whether it is manned or unmanned [23].

However, the operators do not always follow these regulations, and this has resulted in multiple incidents involving UAVs and manned flights over civilian air space. Though there have not yet been confirmed cases of accidents, the FAA is currently investi- gating multiple cases of possible collisions. In the last two years, there have been almost 900 instances of uncertified UAVs flying over controlled airspaces without prior certification. These cases were most often reported mid-flight by commercial airlines and general aviation pilots. Air traffic controllers also reported spotting drones over flight paths and having to divert or ground aircraft. Multiple aviation authorities in are currently tackling these issues in a global scale, though there are currently very few initiatives that directly tackle the problem [27].

The FAA has two approaches to ensuring the safety of manned aircraft. The first is a community outreach program to educate operators on the safety regulations and best practices while flying UAVs. This program is a joint effort by the Association for Un- manned Vehicle Systems International, the Small UAV Coalition, and the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA). They provide guidelines for three categories of operators: recreational users, businesses, and public entities. By translating the FAA regulations into actionable information, they hope to prevent unsafe practices that result in interference with commercial and general aviation flights. The second approach is to enforce these rules by fining and seizing drones from offending operators; especially those who breach controlled airspaces. This strategy has already taken into effect; and in late 2015 the FAA fined a startup company $1.9 million for 65 violations of highly restricted airspaces [28].

However, these approaches have been criticized for not effec- tively preventing accidents, and there have been proposals from the private sector to use technology to restrict UAV flight within a five- mile radius of airports. The first is the geo-fencing approach, where UAV manufacturers can build a feature into the GPS so that it automatically prevents drones from entering restricted airspaces. It also uses real-time data to prevent unlicensed flight over large public gatherings such as sporting events and flight shows. How- ever, these can only be applied to more advanced UAVs and not to simpler models that lack GPS. The second approach that is being tested is to install signal jammers around airports that can disable drones that enter controlled airspaces. However, this approach is more expensive, and difficult to implement, given that the

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e90 87

infrastructure needs to be placed around a five mile radius of the airport [29]. In a later section, we will discuss the regulatory at- tempts to ensure safety, and how users perceive it.

4.3. Privacy and ownership

Outside of the military and commercial environment, the in- formation carried by cameras and sensors on drones operating in the consumer space may be even more valuable to attackers and easier to target. If a private UAV is compromised, it is difficult for the owner to detect the leak of information, and ensure the security of the information as well as claims on ownership. These attacks aren't hypothetical, either: an investigation prompted by a handful of documented cases of militants in Iraq who apparently captured videos on their laptops revealed that a piece of $26 off-the-shelf software was capable of intercepting feeds from US military drones [28,29]. Currently, even themilitary isn't capable of securing its videos from such attacks, and therefore foolproof security is not yet expected of police forces, private firms, or consumers using drones.

This problem only gets more complicated as device endurance improves and their costs decrease, giving the opportunity to any individual engaging in episodic or persistent surveillance at the expenses of others' “reasonable expectation of privacy”. As a matter of fact, the traditional notion of privacy itself is under threat: “the state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people” will have to be defended not only from obvious and detectable threats such as people nearby or objects on the ground, but also from quiet and distant flying objects as well. This also raises the issue of airspace over private property and standards and expec- tations for its protection. In a public space such as a park or on a street, the reasonable expectation of privacy does not apply. Therefore, since a person is present in a public place, there is also not legal basis to make a claim of a breach of their privacy.

The same argument also extends up to an extent, to private property that is visible from public spaces. However, these laws assume that sight is confined to the eye-level. Drones disrupt the expectations of reasonable privacy since they are operated in a public place, yet can capture images and sound from that aren't traditionally available to the public. This gap in the law allows for the possibility of unwarranted surveillance without fear of reper- cussion. Current privacy laws stat that it is illegal to record the interior of a home or a privately owned building, even if the camera is placed outside. This creates uncertainty since even if the drone is being flown within eyesight and over the private property of the operator; there is the possibility of being in violation of privacy laws since it provides a monitoring capability that is not yet legitimated by the law.

4.4. Personal and commercial liability

Drones now face complex coverage and liability issues in regards to insuring their commercial use. These problems arise from the complexity of various factors such as the different types of accidents, procedures for air control, and uncertain privacy laws. Insurance companies are yet to develop insurance plans for UAVs, and there is very little guidelines or precedent to follow. Personal injury and the invasion of privacy are the most important issues, considering that many UAVs fly over habited regions. In order to judge a case of personal injury, insurance companies need access to a vast amount of information. They need the location of take off and landing, flight path, intent of flight, altitude, etc. Likewise, for breach of privacy, the insurance companies need to take into consideration the drone's ability to collect a massive quantity of data, which can either be stored on board or transmitted to a

remote device. Moreover, it is very difficult to prove the intention behind the collection and use of data.

Currently existing FAA guidelines are not specific enough to dictate the coverage policy for personal and commercial liability, invasion of privacy, personal injury or property damage. Commer- cial liability should include financial loss since many drone com- panies are still in the startup phase. The property coverage also should include the processes of production, assembly and whole- saling. Likewise, rather than just focusing on the finished product, it is important to realize that most drones are modular and could be comprised of independently sourced components. Even more confusion arises from the lack of a strict definition of a drone. Currently, due to the broad range of standards and applications, drones could be classified as quad copters, model aircraft, or even light aircraft. This lack of categorization makes it challenging to properly assess the coverage policies since each class of aircraft has its own set of guidelines.

5. Regulation e attempts and challenge

Regulations for military and civilian drones application differ considerably. Military drones, which have existed for a while, have regulations developed over time to cover only a very limited set of activities in a specific and controlled airspace. The broad applica- tions of civilian drones, and their relatively small impact if compromised, have appreciably clogged and therefore delayed regulations related to the commercial and private environment. This effect has been exacerbated by the open source development of the technology, which makes it difficult to keep track of the changes. Thus, as often happens, technology already far outpaced the regulatory process. This has implications for the widespread acceptance and adoption of drones as a viable platform.

For the private use of drones there are two key factors that concern people: privacy and safety. While drone-filmed videos and footage are positively portrayed by the popular media and are a source of entertainment on the Internet, they are also fostering an active debate about their lawfulness and questionable behavior. Since there is no clear regulation to follow, drones have been freely hovering in public places, causing discomfort and controversial reactions by the oversight agencies involved [30,31]. The use of drones is not yet regulated in order to insure individual property rights and safety. There is more than one stakeholder involved in this process: the government at the federal, state and city/town levels, drone manufacturers, software vendors, as well as end-users all have their own motivations. Typically, as in other emerging technology-based products, the customers want choice and access, businesses want to manufacture and sell products unhindered while meeting customer needs, and the regulatory and law enforcement agencies need to have confidence in the regulations themselves as well as their ability to enforce violations.

Both governmental and business entities are actively working to improve the technology in order to safely integrate drones. In 2012, Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, with a view to formulating guidelines for airspace use by civilian Drones. In February 2015, the FAA consequently proposed a simple approval process that any firm interested to fly drones for commercial pur- poses could follow. This proposed process would be necessary for the deployment of any UAV under 55 pounds, and operators would be required to pass the same written exam (that had a validity of two years) vetted by the Transportation Security Administration for private pilots. These pilots would need to obtain a certificate from the agency and respect the safety requirements [32,33] of flying below 500 feet during daytime, within eyesight, away from private property, and should remain least 5 miles from the closest airport.

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and the

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e9088

International Bureau together with the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau have been putting efforts to secure GPS Protection and improve Receiver Performance. As of now, drone makers have carried out the main improvements, as they seek to improve the wireless link between drones and operators and to enable the de- vices to sense and avoid obstacles automatically. For example, DJI Innovations, a leading drone-maker, has already implemented in its latest product design a GPS-based localization that would prevent the aircraft from flying over 500 feet, and from getting into restricted airspace, e.g., around and over airports. However, the technology has proliferated into mass use and it is not clear that these rules will completely prevent accidents and close calls. Washington-based DroneShield LLC has installed about 200 of its audio-based detection systemsworldwide over the past 18months, including around prisons, government buildings and power plants. Resilient Solutions Ltd., in Alexandria, Va., is working with a Eu- ropean defense contractor to develop a sophisticated system that can detect and track a drone and identify whether it is a threat [34].

From a privacy perspective, the issue is intricate since the line between private and public can no longer be defined by physical boundaries. Furthermore, there are concerns over effect on sover- eignty since a commercial drone flown over international airspace or the airspace of another country, could be viewed as a threat to national security. The International Civil Aviation Organization explicitly empowers individual national agencies to set their own regulations [35]. In Europe, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is contemplating the possibility of shifting the responsibility of regulation from each Member State to a co-regulatory approach that would reduce resource constraints, but at the same timewould increase the risk of backlash caused by the curtailment of enforcement powers and stakeholder engagement [36].

In the US, the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems In- ternational, which represents the UAV industry, recently developed and released a “Code of Conduct” e generic rules in order to observe current privacy and liberty rights and to avoid accidents e but it is not clear how these rules will be enforced [37]. Similarly, the FAA has been trying to create separate, and less-demanding rules for unmanned aircraft weighing less than five pounds. The proposal explicitly notes that agency officials have the right to pursue hobbyists and other recreational users if they are found to operate devices in a “reckless manner”. Currently, these rules affect recreational use of drones, the use of which is already permitted as long as users obey safe-operating requirements, and hence they fail to deal with privacy issues. The FAA has never handled privacy concerns before, and the rapid adoption of civilian drones is chal- lenging the organization. This challenge has hampered the FAA for years and is evident in their constant postponement of a definitive ruling [38,39]. The Government Accountability Office reported a lack of “consensus of opinion”, stating that the FAA will not create new rules before 2017 [40].

In December 2015, the FAA passed a federal law requiring all drones weighing over 250 g and their users to be registered online [41]. Taking effect on the 21st of that month, the lawwas justified in the interest of privacy and public safety and security as they re- ported 1133 cases of unsafe use. The law is posited to counteract a “market failure” which includes the increasing number of UAVs, possibilities of technical failure, and the lack of users' experience. It is currently applicable to individuals and not companies, thus only affecting recreational users and hobbyists. As a result, a user without a certificate or a flying an unregistered drone, even on their own property, would result in civil and criminal sanctions including fines and imprisonment. Though it is not possible to predict if this law would effectively reduce the number of accidents, commu- nities of drones enthusiasts and activism groups have already denounced it. These criticisms challenge the FAA's assumptions

about drones and their operators, the extent and effectiveness of the sanctions, the vagueness of definitions, the privacy and usage of the collected information, and the legitimacy of a federal organi- zation's authority over domestic activities. As of the February of 2016, over 342,000 individuals have registered; primarily to avoid the large fines proposed by the FAA.

6. Discussion and implications

When it comes to drones is it possible to divide the population into two main categories: those who can be defined as UAVs en- thusiasts, looking forward to use them either for private or com- mercial use; and thosewho believe these devices are a threat - with the potential of endangering their freedoms as well as daily activ- ities. Despite the huge improvements that drones can provide, the public is skeptical: a recent surveys on a sample of 2405 US citizen's shows that 42% disapprove private ownership of drones, mostly because of privacy concerns [42]. Many have questioned the recent FAA rules on commercial drones, suggesting that rules will adversely affect small drone based businesses, as well as question their clarity. The lag between meaningful and enforceable regula- tion compared to the pace of development of new devices, is creating more confusion. For example, in the aforementioned sur- vey, most of the respondent are basically unaware of existing regulation (30% of them believe FAA is not regulating class G airspace, which is below 1200 feet), are confused about which certificate is needed to operate a drone (the Certificate of Autho- rization COA, Exemption, Waiver etc. [43]), and what those certif- icates imply, since the rules does not cover all potential situations.

Forty-seven percent of the companies surveyed in the report state they have been operating in Class G airspace evenwithout the regulation in place, which means that potentially they are already exposing civilian to the threats they would like to avoid, and 62% are currently flying without commercial liability insurance for their UAVs. This also raises questions about the potential implications for the insurance industry. Currently, there are not policies available, though they are in the process of being developed to cover such contingencies. Another 47% of respondents state that they are postponing the creation of jobs since they are not sure whether the regulation would make the industry favorable or not, and 61% would be willing not to start their operations, or to shut down the one that already exists if the regulations are perceived to be unfa- vorable [44].

In fact, there is some evidence that delays in developing a clear framework have prompted several private manned aircraft frequently operate without flight plans around working areas to capture images above sites without asking for approval prior to taking off, even if those operations are currently in violation of FAA policy. Thus, on one hand private users are not at all regulated and can create potential safety issues while on the other hand com- mercial development is criminalized [45]. The ability to enter pri- vate property undetected and to record information that can be streamed live originates significant opportunities for privacy breaches. Generally speaking, the risk of UAV usage as every other technology for illegal activities is unavoidable. However, since existing guidelines and rules overlook the possibility of a hard-to- notice flying camera widely available to masses, they also in- crease the potential for misuse.

As mentioned above, many countries have already started the process to adapt their regulations to address safety and technical issues. Nevertheless those arrangements do not engage in fixing the most imperative problem created by drone technology: faulty pri- vacy and surveillance regulations. Even Australia, which is one of the pioneers of the use of drones for commercial activities, has recently pointed out the inappropriateness of its Commonwealth

Table 1 Challenges and solutions.

Challenges Issues Current approach Limitations Solutions

Safety Airworthiness of UAV Inspection and Certification Motivates, but does not ensure safety Leverage hobbyist communities to develop maintenance support

Unsafe practices Voluntary education on general safety tips

Does not address individual users and UAV systems

Work with open source developers to create educational simulations

Security Jamming and Spoofing Addressed under property law Leaves UAVs open to manipulation Collaborate with manufacturers to encrypt signals

Malicious usage Post hoc legal action Difficulty in proving intent Record flight data Airspace

interference Lack of awareness Community outreach programs Difficult to measure effectiveness Build awareness during set-up process Restricting flight Signal Jammers Expensive to implement Develop in-built geo-fencing

Privacy Blurring of private and public space

Reasonable expectation of privacy

Limited to tele-imaging systems Incorporate on-board cameras into tele-viewing

Flight over private property Addressed under trespassing laws

Does not consider violation of airspace

Create local residential no-fly zones

Ownership of data

Illegitimate surveillance Post hoc investigation Vagueness in privacy laws regarding UAVs

Consider remote viewing in privacy laws

Collection, storage, and usage of private data

Addressed under intrusion of solitude torts

Difficulty in identifying instances of privacy breaches

Create systems to report misuse

Liability Determination of liability Traditional investigation Unavailability of relevant information

Usage of flight data

Estimation of damages Addressed under injury torts Lack of clear guidelines regarding UAVs

Extend FAA liability regulation to UAVs

Regulation Administration of rules Coordinated by local law enforcement agencies

Disjoint local, state, and federal laws Create concise and contextual framework

Managing registrations Threat of legal action if unregistered

Issues with privacy and usage of data Encrypt data and disclose release requests

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e90 89

Privacy Act, that does not cover collection and use of personal in- formation by private citizens and small businesses [46]. Further- more at this time, traditional enforcement appears weak and expensive and new infrastructures need to be established. It is paramount to first update the current definition of privacy and finds new ways to guarantee its protection balancing freedom of expression, open justice, public safety and national security. Given the current fuzziness of directions, businesses will face difficulties in lawfully developing hardware and software solutions to exploit the huge industry potential. Another critical aspect of integrating the UAVs in the National Airspace System is law enforcement, which is currently ineffective and expensive.

Untrustworthiness creates huge resistance to new technologies: away to sensitizemasses to dronemisuse consequences is to assign accountability and liability. As for now in the US, only broad general guidelines have been provided for evidence collection and oper- ator/witness identification and interviews in the case of UAV- related accidents [47]. However, since UAV can cause physical damages as cars do, it seems legitimate to hypothesize the intro- duction of compulsory specific insurance plans that would create a registry of devices to link each and every sold one to its owner to help to assign responsibilities for illegal activities. Furthermore, as for now each jurisdiction is empowered to determine its own rules they will eventually cause inconsistency across contiguous regions and Countries. Ideally, standards have to be set throughout governmental and private organizations as well as across Countries. Also, in order to be valid to protect the interest of privacy as long as possible they should not be strictly related to the single technology. Some directions on how the aforementioned goals can be achieved are summarized in Table 1.

7. Contributions & conclusion

The rapid evolution of drones for civilian applications has created several challenges: regulatory, safety, privacy, security, and the uncertain landscape for new business models. The paper shows that there are several bottlenecks that are hampering more rapid adoption of drones, including regulatory and enforcement clarity

and lag, cultural perceptions or misconceptions of what drones are and what they can do, as well as significant challenges that can be thrown up by a more rapid proliferation of drones. As the popula- tion of civilian drones and their users expands globally, the risk of accidents both digital and physical are destined to multiply. The Internet revolutionized personal computing thanks to a confluence of technical, social, regulatory and cultural trends and efforts. The future success of civilian drones depends on the ability of varied stakeholders to reconsider how this emerging technology platform can be best harnessed to serve the broad interests of society.

References

[1] W.E. Bijker, J. Law, Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Socio- technical Change, MIT Press, 1992.

[2] H. Mackay, G. Gillespie, Extending the social shaping of technology approach: ideology and appropriation, Soc. Stud. Sci. 22 (4) (1992) 685e716.

[3] U. Schultze, W.J. Orlikowski, A practice perspective on technology-mediated network relations: the use of internet-based self-serve technologies, Inf. Syst. Res. 15 (1) (2004) 87e106.

[4] P. Finn, Domestic Use of Aerial Drones by Law Enforcement Likely to Prompt Privacy Debate, Washington Post, 2011, p. 22.

[5] C. Oudes, W. Zwijnenburg, Does Unmanned Make Unacceptable? Exploring the Debate on Using Drones and Robots in Warfare, IKV Pax Christi, 2011.

[6] R.L. Finn, D. Wright, Unmanned aircraft systems: surveillance, ethics and privacy in civil applications, Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 28 (2) (2012) 184e194.

[7] R.M. Thompson, Drones in Domestic Surveillance Operations: Fourth Amendment Implications and Legislative Responses, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2012, September.

[8] R. Austin, Unmanned Aircraft Systems: UAVS Design, Development and Deployment vol. 54, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.

[9] L.R. Newcome, Unmanned Aviation: a Brief History of Unmanned Aerial Ve- hicles, AIAA, 2004.

[10] S. O'Brien, Drone Startups Swoop Up Millions, 2015, January 7. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/07/technology/ghost- drone/.

[11] M.L. Cummings, S. Bruni, S. Mercier, P.J. Mitchell, Automation Architecture for Single Operator, Multiple UAV Command and Control, Massachusetts Inst Of Tech Cambridge, 2007.

[12] A. Robinson, FAA Authorizes Predators to Seek Survivors, US Air Force Ar- chives, 2006.

[13] J. Craighead, R. Murphy, J. Burke, B. Goldiez, A survey of commercial & open source unmanned vehicle simulators, in: Robotics and Automation, 2007 IEEE International Conference on, IEEE, 2007, April, pp. 852e857.

[14] M.P. Deseilligny, I. Clery, Apero, an open source bundle adjusment software for automatic calibration and orientation of set of images. ISPRS-International

B. Rao et al. / Technology in Society 45 (2016) 83e9090

Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 38 (2011) 5. [15] H. Chao, Y. Cao, Y. Chen, Autopilots for small unmanned aerial vehicles: a

survey, Int. J. Control, Autom. Syst. 8 (1) (2010) 36e44. [16] P. Marks, 3D printing takes off with the world's first printed plane, New Sci.

211 (2823) (2011) 17e18. [17] N.A. Ahmed, J.R. Page, Manufacture of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for

advanced project design using 3D printing technology, Appl. Mech. Mater. 397 (2013, November) 970e980.

[18] I. Maza, K. Kondak, M. Bernard, A. Ollero, Multi-UAV cooperation and control for load transportation and deployment, J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 57 (1e4) (2010) 417e449.

[19] J.T.K. Ping, A.E. Ling, T.J. Quan, C.Y. Dat, Generic unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for civilian application-A feasibility assessment and market survey on civilian application for aerial imaging, in: Sustainable Utilization and Devel- opment in Engineering and Technology (STUDENT), 2012 IEEE Conference on, IEEE, 2012, October, pp. 289e294.

[20] C. Jacques, Led by Agriculture, Market for Commercial Drones Will Reach $1.7 Billion in 2025, 2014, October 14. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http:// www.luxresearchinc.com/news-and-events/press-releases/read/led- agriculture-market-commercial-drones-will-reach-17-billion.

[21] V. Klochkov, A. Nikitova, A simplified approach to economic efficiency analysis of UAV pipeline surveillance, Transp. Eng. 27 (2008) 172e180.

[22] P. Paganini, Privacy and Security Issues for the Usage of Civil DroneseInfoSec Resources, 2014, April 25. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://resources. infosecinstitute.com/privacy-security-issues-usage-civil-drones/.

[23] M. Lega, A.F. Accardo, Index of risk and safety objectives for civil UAVs, in: AIAA 2nd “Unmanned Unlimited” Systems, Technologies, and Oper- ationsdaerospace, Land, and Sea Conference and Workshop & Exhibit, San Diego (CA)eUSA, 2003, September, pp. 15e18.

[24] J.P. Gee, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, Rout- ledge, 2014.

[25] M.W. Jørgensen, L.J. Phillips, Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, Sage, 2002.

[26] A. Schutz, On the methodology of the social sciences, Probl. Soc. Real. (1962) 3e47.

[27] M.J. Boyle, The race for drones, Orbis 59 (1) (2015) 76e94. [28] Chow, E., Cuadra, A., &Whitlock, C. (2014, June 20). Retrieved October 8, 2015,

from https://www.uavdach.org/News/Missbrauch/2014-06-20Fallen from the skies_ drone crashes database - Washington Post.pdf.

[29] A. Cuadra, C. Whitlock, How Drones Are Controlled, 2014, June 20. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/ national/drone-crashes/how-drones-work/.

[30] J. Serna, As hobby drone use increases, so do concerns about privacy, security, 2014, June 21. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.latimes.com/ local/la-me-drone-hobbyist-20140622-story.html.

[31] C. Schlag, New privacy battle: how the expanding use of drones continues to erode our concept of privacy and privacy rights, Pitt. J. Tech. L. Pol'y 13 (2012)

i. [32] J. Nicas, A. Pasztor, FAA Proposes Rules to Allow Commercial Drone Flights in

U.S, 2015, February 15. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.wsj. com/articles/obama-issues-privacy-rules-for-government-drones-in-u-s- 1424015402.

[33] FAA, Small UAS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), 2015, February 15. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, https://www.faa.gov/uas/nprm/.

[34] J. Nicas, Criminals, Terrorists Find Uses for Drones, Raising Concerns, 2015, January 28. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.wsj.com/articles/ criminals-terrorists-find-uses-for-drones-raising-concerns-1422494268.

[35] R. Clarke, L.B. Moses, The regulation of civilian drones' impacts on public safety, Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 30 (3) (2014) 263e285.

[36] Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, Code of Conduct, 2015. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.auvsi.org/conduct.

[37] S. Beasley, A. Levin, FAA Fails to Meet 2014 Goal for Proposed Drone Regu- lations, 2014, December 31. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www. bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-31/faa-fails-to-meet-2014-goal-for- proposed-drone-regulations.

[38] C. Whitlock, FAA Will Miss Deadline to Integrate Drones in U.S. Skies, 2014, June 30. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, https://www.washingtonpost.com/ world/national-security/faa-will-miss-deadline-to-integrate-drones-in-us- skies-report-says/2014/06/30/fd58e8e2-007f-11e4-b8ff-89afd3fad6bd_story. html.

[39] A.E. Holton, S. Lawson, C. Love, Unmanned aerial vehicles: opportunities, barriers, and the future of “drone journalism”, J. Pract. (2014) 1e17 (ahead-of- print).

[40] FAA.gov, Unmanned Aircraft Systems, 2015. Retrieved December 16, 2015, from, https://www.faa.gov/uas/.

[41] FAA.gov, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Registration, N.p, 2015. Web. 16 Dec. 2015.

[42] Reuters Ipsos, Ipsos/Reuters Poll: Drones, 2015, February 5. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx? id¼6749.

[43] J. Rupprecht, Drones: Their Many Civilian Uses and the U.S. Laws Surrounding Them, 2015.

[44] S. Anand, Domestic use of unmanned aircraft systems: an evaluation of policy constraints and the role of industry consensus standards, ASTM Stand. News 35 (9) (2007) 30.

[45] G. Crovitz, The Grinch Who Stole… Drones, 2014, December 28. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from, http://www.wsj.com/articles/l-gordon-crovitz-the- grinch-who-stole-drones-1419811476.

[46] G. Christensen, Eyes in the sky: Inquiry into Drones and the Regulation of Air Safety and Privacy, 2014. Australia's House of Representatives Standing Commitee on Social Policy.

[47] FAA, Law Enforcement Guidance for Suspected Unauthorized Uas Operations, 2014. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from: https://www.faa.gov/uas/ regulations_policies/media/FAA_UAS-PO_LEA_Guidance.pdf.