Commercial Use of Drones, Thesis Paper Example

Introduction

Several researchers are currently engaged in a debate regarding the legality and safety of unmanned aerial devices, or drones. At the same time, commercial companies are discovering the new technology to make their services and deliveries more customer-focused. The main goal of the below literature review is to reveal whether or not drones represent the technology of the future, and can increase customers’ buying experiences. While the below literature review is only focusing on the commercial use of drones, the author would like to compare the development of the technology in other areas of air delivery, where unmanned aerial devices have a potential.

The Benefits of Commercial Drones

According to an article by Turza, there are many benefits associated with the emerging industry of commercial drones. First of all, finally Americans can think about drones as tools to improve customer service and shopping experiences, instead of the devices that remotely destroy far away towns in wars. The drone manufacturing industry is likely to create an economic boost for the Western civilization, and this will result in higher GDP. Today, when people are looking at the disappearing and receding industries, those that have the potential to expand in the next few decades should be supported by the government (Turza). The author argues that “policymakers, primarily the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) and state governments, should proactively craft a practical legal framework for the integration of commercial drones” (Turza, 320). The author further states that the public perception of drones is highly influenced by their recent utilization by the U.S. Military against terrorist targets.

First of all, there is no common name for the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV-s), and the public knows them as “drones”, associated with military action. Therefore, there is a confusion in the research community about the definition of each type of flying vehicle. Drones can be categorized based on size, purpose, distance covered, flying altitude, or technology. As Turza (319) defines these new types of vehicles: “Drones are simply remotely piloted planes, helicopters, or any other type of aircraft that function without an onboard pilot”. For the purpose of simplicity, the author of the current literature review would like to use the above definition when referring to drones in general. The first time the U.S. public became aware of the existence of the drone technology was in the 90-s when the military started to use them in overseas operations. The author (Turza, 324) makes an important remark: “No one should confuse commercial drones, which are privately owned and used for private purposes, with military and law enforcement drones”. The main difference between military and commercial drones is the ownership and purpose. Obviously, commercial drones are not owned and regulated by the government, and they are not able to fire missiles.

The main challenges ahead of companies planning to use drones for delivery are related to the lack and underdevelopment of related aviation legislation.

Another review created in the United Kingdom by the Royal Aeronautical Society (Hayward)  reviews the potential development routes of unmanned aerial vehicle technology. Companies around the world are quickly embarking on the journey of developing reliable and cost-effective technologies. While the United States is still the market leader in the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) market, Israel also has some advanced research centers, mainly focusing on drones developed for military defense. Europe, at the same time, only accounts for 4 percent of the market. Russia and Poland are mentioned as new entrants in thee drone market, as well as Turkey. This indicates that many companies worldwide can now see an opportunity in developing UAV technology not only for military purposes, but also potentially for commercial use. Regarding the civil market use of drones, the study finds that the technology has a double use potential. First, it can be used for production and operation, while delivery of products could be done in a more effective, and potentially greener manner. The authors call for increased collaboration among European companies to share research and development results in order to develop strategies for protecting the airspace the civil safety, while supporting companies in developing new markets.

The overview of the current state of research and development in UAE vehicles technology, published five years after Hayward’s report, in 2015 (Canis) for the Congressional Research Service in the United States reviews the current state of the industry, with particular focus on the regulatory issues. As of 2015, the use of drones in American airspace for commercial use is prohibited by law. Research test sites, marked on the map of Appendix C, however, exist. The primary reason for prohibition is that there is a lack of regulation controlling the airspace use, and there is little or no evidence for their safety. A few exemptions for the commercial use of drones exist, however, such as real estate, construction, oil and gas, or agriculture related business activities. In some areas of Alaska, the use of UAS is allowed, though.

Today, according to Canis, 89 companies manufacture drones for hobbyists and businesses. According to the Federal Aviation Administration, by 2020 there could be as many as 30.000 commercial and civil drones in the U.S. airspace. There are, however, several challenges associated with allowing these vehicles into the air, and companies, as well as legislators are vary of the risks taken by companies applying the new technology. At the same time, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), in the following ten years, the emerging industry could help create around 100.000 new jobs, and increase the GDP of the United States significantly. Therefore, before making a final decision about drones for commercial use, the government of the United States needs to seek collaboration with researchers, companies, and aviation regulatory bodies to test the safety and effectiveness of drones. Without collaboration among different stakeholders, an agreement cannot be achieved, and the U.S. economy will lose out on potential growth that can be achieved through supporting the emerging industry. The Munich Reinsurance America report of May 2015 confirms that “at this point, retailers’ plans for using drones for delivery is logistically hampered by a lack of advanced systems that are needed to prevent midair collisions or flight failure”. That statement calls for a revision of companies’ approaches and policies related to testing, collaboration, and development of technologies. Large retailers could be missing out on supply chain improvement and increased profitability if they do not work alongside with aviation and government organizations to align their technologies with the requirements. Likewise, governments could miss out on increased profits associated with retailers’ higher taxable income.

The Research of Drone Delivery

There are different main parts of drones, often manufactured separately, according to Canis: the frame, speed controllers, motors, batteries, flight controller devices, radio receivers, and propellers. In order to make the most out of the use of drones, companies also need to ensure that they are made of durable materials, and their software is safe enough, so third parties are not able to change the route of the device. The current price of a commercial use drone, according to Canis is around $10.000. A simple unmanned aerial system is shown in Appendix A.  However, as the market opens up and the regulatory boundaries are removed, it is expected that competition among manufacturers to create cheaper and more reliable vehicles will increase. Commercial designs usually have at least 6 blade rotors and longer lasting batteries.

Canis, however, reviewing the potential growth of drone commercial use predicts that by 2019 the supporting delivery services of online retail, local stores, restaurants, legal papers, and medical supplies will be fully developed. The author’s market forecast states that in 2015 a total revenue of 3.3 billion dollars will be generated from the sales of military, civil, and commercial drones sales. The breakthrough year for non-military use drones is predicted to be 2015 by Deloitte. The market demand decline for military purpose drones will soon be compensated with increased commercial and civil demand. For this, however, regulators need to be convinced that the devices are both safe and effective.

Austin (3) makes an important distinction between drones and other unmanned vehicles as follows: “A drone aircraft will be required to fly out of sight of the operator, but has zero intelligence, merely being launched into a pre-programmed mission on a pre-programmed course and a return to base”. Therefore, drones for commercial purposes should be programmed to deliver goods instead of collecting data and surveillance footage. This is one of the main concern of regulators regarding the introduction of unmanned delivery drones in the airspace. An UAV, unlike a drone would have some independent intelligence that would make it capable of communicating with the controller, and send images. There are several types of UAV-s listed by Austin, based on size, capacity, flying distance and altitude, such as the MUAV or Mini UAV, which can fly a distance of up to 30 kilometer, and can have several civilian applications. The TUAV, on the other hand, or a medium range tactical UAV is smaller than regular military  devices, but can be operated from the land. The drones that are most suitable for delivering retailers’ good have a medium range, can handle take off and landing vertically, and have a software that provides a precision operation.

One of the reasons why Austin believes that drones should be introduced in civilian and commercial aviation is based on the low operation costs.

The future of UAV-s is described by Austin as questionable, due to the public concern about the safety of these devices in the airspace. In order to create a framework for legislation, it is important to determine an airworthiness benchmark for drones, which will require not only research and testing, but also a collaboration among researchers, aviation experts, manufacturers, and legislators. The main principle of legislation, according to Austin’s study is that unmanned aircraft and delivery devices need to be seen, and have the ability to sense and avoid other objects in the airspace. One of the main challenges of the above principle is that unmanned aircraft and drones, just like the ones proposed to be introduced by large retail and logistic companies are much smaller than regular air vehicles, therefore, they are harder to detect visually. On radars, their infrared images are also smaller, and harder to spot. For increasing visibility, the author recommends that the drones will be equipped with flashing beacons or lights, Further, many current regulations (to be discussed below) require manufacturers to equip their devices with a “sense and avoid” system. However, no clear benchmarks currently exist to determine the level of effectiveness of these systems. Without testing the drones in real life situations, it is hard to determine the level that provides other air vehicles the maximum protection for potential collision. As Austin (248) confirms: “An assessment has to be made as to the commercial viability of transporting a system overseas for demonstration, noting also that a communication system of different frequency and/or format may have to be developed to operate in another region”. Creating a test demonstration in regulated airspace, however, has its challenges. This means that without gaining permission for testing, companies will not be able to convince their customers to purchase the new technology, and this will slow down the development of the industry.

Legislation

According to Canis, one of the latest developments of the technology is that the “FAA announced a notice of proposed rulemaking in February 2015 that would permit UAS weighing less than 55 pounds to fly in limited circumstances and locations during the daytime, as long as there is a visual line of sight between the UAS and its operator, who would have to meet FAA standards and pass tests”.  (Canis, 2).

This movement could potentially open a market for testing and development for many companies currently developing drones, as well as retailers like Amazon, DHL, among others. This regulation could also allow enough data to be collected by the aviation industry to make further rulings about the commercial use of drones.

Currently, there is a need for companies to gain a Special Airworthiness Certificate before they would be allowed in the airspace (Canis).

Legislation in the United States

Canis provides an updated overview of the legislation regarding unmanned vehicles below the weight of 55 pounds in the United States. The new law regulates the operation time, and requires an operator to be assigned to each vehicle. According to the text of the new law proposed in February 2015, the drones would be limited to fly only in daylight, and this would impose some limitations on the commercial utilization of the vehicles. One of the main benefits of the legislation is that it clarifies flying height limits, as well as the required certifications for both vehicles and operators. Still, the finalized rules related to commercial drones are not expected to be released until 2016-2017, which will significantly delay the development of related technologies.

Indeed, the report states that large e-commerce companies were forced to conduct testing abroad, due to the lack of clear regulations related to commercial drones, just like Amazon researching and testing the technology in Canada, and Google using the Australian airspace. The lack of clear regulation and regulatory framework, therefore, can hinder countries’ international competitiveness.

The importance of the “sense and avoid” management technology is emphasized by policymakers in the United States, just like in other countries. The main concern of the FAA is to avoid accidental damage to buildings and other flying aircraft. Therefore, the main principle of current and proposed regulations is collision avoidance. The main problem is that the development of “sense and avoid” technologies is at an early stage, and is withheld by the lack of regulation.  From 2020, all aircraft are required to have an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast  system, however, the existing technologies are too large and too expensive to be integrated into commercial drone technologies (Canis). Nasa is leading research to help integrate drones into the current regulatory and technological system, however, according to Canis (14), the main challenge is that  “it will be necessary to establish the technology and infrastructure for a UAS traffic management system for low-altitude airspace”.

United Kingdom Legislation

The Birmingham Policy Commission’s 2014 overview of the regulation of drones in the United Kingdom (14) states that “Everything about drone technology is contested: its novelty, legality, morality, utility, and future development”. The main challenge identified by the authors of the study is that unmanned aircraft are treated differently by legislators than manned flying vehicles. At the same time, many drones still have operators, or manual override of the program, and the controller monitors the movement of the object in the airspace most of the time. This means that drones are likely to be less dangerous than the public might consider them. In the United Kingdom, the commonly used name for drones is “Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems”, signifying the fact that the aircraft are still controlled and monitored, and are not simply flying around the airspace. The classification of different RPAS is found in Appendix B. Unfortunately, based on the predictions of the researchers, several policy challenges will take many years to overcome. The authors also state that policymakers need to intensify their efforts to create and improve legislation surrounding drones for many reasons. First: it would allow a new technology to rapidly expand. By allowing the testing of these vehicles for commercial purposes, researchers could discover new methods to utilize them in humanitarian aid organizations and disaster prevention/relief. Further, it would allow researchers to discover methods to make existing drones safer and more efficient, by developing smaller and more effective sensors, and smaller, lighter frames and more intelligent software.

There is, according to the report (Birmingham Policy Commission), currently a debate among policymakers regarding the future directions of research and legislation. While most of the discussions are focused around the legality of deploying armed drones for protection and abroad for military purposes, some of the researchers look beyond this particular use of unmanned aircraft. Several ethical issues surround the military and civilian use of drones, and they are focused around the potential capabilities of these vehicles to collect surveillance data, or distribute dangerous chemicals/weapons.

Regarding the civil and commercial use of drones, the authors (Birmingham Policy Commission, 72) state that this area’s development “has so far been held back by Civil Aviation safety regulations, but that is likely to change and we can expect a rapid growth in civil RPA use thereafter”. The future regulation is currently being reviewed and developed by a joint commission in the United Kingdom and the European Union, consisting of the Department of Transport and the Autonomous Systems Technology Related Airborne Evaluation & Assessment Consortium. The main concern related to the civil and commercial use of drones is their impact on airspace congestion and interference with domestic air traffic. As  smaller drones are harder to detect, if their number significantly increases suddenly, this would create a challenge for airspace controllers and aircraft navigators alike. The “see and avoid” rule is currently in operation in the United Kingdom, designed to reduce the risk of collision and interference. Pilots who operate the aircraft remotely are required to have a license, while drones must have an airworthiness certificate. The authors, however, conclude that in commercial drone operation, the training and experience expectations and regulations are much lower than in the military use of drones.

There is also a potential risk of airspace misuse by drones (Birmingham Policy Commission). Even commercial drones can become dangerous weapons in the wrong hands, according to government officials, and this means that they need to be regulated, monitored, and controlled. It is, therefore, an urgent issue to deal with regulatory issues as soon as possible for two reasons. First, it would make the deployment of drones in the airspace (military, civil, and commercial use alike) safer. Secondly, it would allow the related industries develop faster, making Great Britain more competitive in the international marketplace. The main task ahead of politicians is to establish a regulatory framework that covers all potential scenarios and uses of aircraft, in order to pave the way for companies working on researching new technologies.

Singapore – Recent Developments in Legislation

The current legislative framework in Singapore is based on certain, well outlined restrictions related to the application of drones in the airspace. According to the Singapore Law Blog, reviewing the related regulations as of October 2015, restrictions are in place, and this opens up new opportunities for companies that can comply with the regulations. Small unmanned aircraft in Singapore can be flown below the altitude of 200 feet, when used for research or recreational purposes. They are, however, not allowed near aerodromes (5 km radius), or restricted danger areas. The legislation of Singapore also identifies some absolute no-fly zones in the country.

Operators of drones have a duty to fly safely. Drones need to be flown in a manner that they are not likely to endanger property, other aircraft, or persons. This wording of the legislation, however, is by itself unclear, and is hard to argue should an accident happen involving drones. Further restrictions include the prohibition to take photographs of restricted and protected areas, flying over the above areas, or carrying dangerous materials. Drones are not allowed to discharge anything while flying. Finally, they should not disturb or interfere with special events.

Singapore’s Air Navigation Order (1992) imposes a weight limit of 7 kilograms, no speed limits, a height restriction of 200 feet, and a requirement for permission if the drone is above the weight limit, has a different flying altitude from the one described by the legislation, or would like to enter restricted zones. In contrast, in the United Kingdom, the weight limit is 20 kilograms, and the height limit is defined as 400 feet vertically and 500 feet horizontally. Permission is always needed if the drone is used for paid for commercial activity. In Australia, the same permission rules apply as in the United Kingdom, however, the area restriction states that the drones should be more than 5 kilometers from aerodromes and 30 meters from people. This would restrict the capabilities of retail companies to deliver their goods through unmanned devices, as packages would need to be dropped at least 30 meters from homes. In Hong Kong, the weight limit is set at 7 kilograms, and the highest flying altitude is 300 feet. In India, some states of Morocco, Thailand, and the UAE, outright ban is in effect for all unmanned aerial vehicles (Singapore Law Blog).

The main justification of the current legislation in Singapore is summarized by Professor Chen, quoted by the Singapore Law Blog (4): “the image of an object of not insignificant weight dropping from the sky… will always have a visceral effect, especially if the drone is flown over a densely populated and/or culturally valuable place”

Several legislative reforms have been proposed by Professor Chen (Singapore Law Blog) include the increase of the weight limit from 7 kilograms, expanding the vertical limits, speed limits, and adding training and certification requirements for the operators.

A recent Sidleu Austin policy review of 2015 examined the policy and legal issues surrounding the commercial use of drones in Singapore and Hong Kong. The authors found that the main challenge of the drone delivery implementation for companies is that “there are no laws specifically targeting the use of drones that invade people’s personal spaces”. Without these regulations, many serious concerns related to the operation of drones in common and private airspace can arise. The Data Protection Act of Singapore states that special permission is needed to take photographs and collect surveillance data about private and personal spaces. The law does not cover public spaces. Privacy concerns are serious when considering the scenario depicted by the author of the review: if the drone accidentally took a photo of a woman undressing, this would constitute to a criminal offense. However, it is questionable who could be prosecuted: the operator, the manufacturer, of the owner of the drone? As a summary, the report concludes that often the pace of technology is faster than the speed of policy-making, and this results in several “gray areas” to appear related to the new industry. Uncertainties will exist until regulatory bodies are able to address all the new scenarios related to the introduction of drones to the Singaporean airspace.

Challenges and Concerns

According to the Drones Survey by Munich RE created in 2015, the main concerns related to the new technology are invasion of privacy (69%), inadequate insurance (12%), personal injury (11%), and property damage (8%). The integration of drones into the airspace system of a country has several legislative and technological challenges. Further, there is a lack of training material and framework for airspace controllers to enable them to identify and navigate aircraft. The training requirements for companies and personnel operating the devices is also under-developed. It is likely that the government agencies will require drone manufacturers to provide basic operation training for companies and their personnel when selling the vehicles.

According to Deloitte, between June and November 2014 there were 25 reported near misses involving drones, and some were potentially dangerous, involving passenger planes. The number of unreported dangerous situations can only be estimated. In the United States and Singapore, it might be beneficial to look at the existing permission and operation certificate regulations in the United Kingdom. The Civil Aviation Authority does allow commercial drones in the airspace, provided that they are under 20 kilograms of weight, and are in a safe distance from populated areas and buildings. Operators, however, need to pass a theory and practical test, similar to the one that is required for a driving license.

One of the main concerns today related to the commercial utilization of drones is related to privacy. There is currently a debate among researchers and policymakers, arguing that the surveillance capacities of unmanned vehicles are generally greater than manned aircraft, while other researchers state that there is no difference. The security concern related to the surveillance and privacy needs to be addressed by adequate policies.

Rule talks about the growing controversy surrounding domestic drones. The main issue that the author highlights in his research is related to the ambiguity of law, which has been covered in the previous part of the current paper. Rule also talks about another area of privacy concerns, namely aerial trespassing. Currently, there are no regulations related to drones’  permissions over private or commercial properties, and this can cause several problems. While drones currently used and tested have the capability to take off and land horizontally, and deliver parcels at a high accuracy, what happens if neighbors complain about the drones, or GPS systems are not reliable enough? Would parcels be dropped to the wrong location? Further, if delivery needs to be done 30 yards away from people, this will mean that unauthorized people would be able to collect the parcel. Signed for deliveries would not be possible, therefore, retail companies would face a security challenge. There is currently no clarification regarding landowners’ airspace rights that would make deliveries by drone feasible and covered by law. Liability issues might also arise due to the use of airspace, fault in delivery systems, GPS, or accidental release of parcels prior to landing. The above are only a few problematic areas of drone delivery by retailers that need to be addressed by legislators.

As Rule (187) confirms: “laws clarifying landowner airspace rights should define these rights as extending all the way up to the navigable airspace line of 500 feet above-ground in most locations”. The challenging nature of the above proposed law is clearly visible. One proposed solution would be to exclude low altitude airspace (below 500 feet) from legislation, and allow retail companies to carry out testing in that altitude, recording accuracy, safety, and reliability statistics. Another potential solution would be to create drone corridors or pathways that deliberately avoid the routes taken by commercial or military aircraft. Given the altitude of the delivery drones, however, this would require too much research, and an extreme utilization of financial resources. The Landowners’ rights waiver that is proposed by the author, however, – according to many researchers and experts  – would leave the industry somewhat unregulated and too liberal. Looking ten or fifteen years ahead, when potentially more than ten companies would use the same low-altitude airspace and navigate drones, the problem is more visible. What happens if – by accident  – two companies attempt to deliver a parcel to the same location at the same time, and the navigation systems of the two retailers are not compatible?

The Aerospace Industries Association lists some of the main misconceptions related to drones that have a hindering effect on public acceptance and the liberalization of the technology. Without addressing these misconceptions, it is impossible to create a positive environment for further industrial development. The author would like to below review the related public and political misconceptions.

The first common myth is that unmanned vehicles in the air pose increased danger on people on earth and other aircraft. In reality, technologies are currently being developed to enable remote operators to have the same situational awareness as an on board pilot. The “sense and avoid” technology, previously mentioned as required by most governments to issue a permission is advanced enough to make the drones “fit to fly”. Secondly, the public believes that drones are most suited for military use. However, unmanned vehicles have been utilized for humanitarian, environmental, and other rescue operations for many decades with success. The surveillance of hurricanes, for example, is common among researchers, as they can avoid putting individuals in danger while collecting important data about weather systems and conditions. The agricultural use of drones should not be neglected, either. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs lists some of the main uses of drones for humanitarian projects, such as real time situation monitoring, search and rescue, mapping of areas, as well as logistics and package delivery. If drones have been proven to be effective delivering humanitarian aids to hard to access areas and those without an infrastructure, they can certainly be utilized in making customers’ deliveries more effective and faster, too.

Another common myth is that currently the market for commercial drones is too small, and the manufacturing of the vehicles is not likely to be profitable for a long time. However, as The Aerospace Industries Association confirms, in 2012 alone there were more than 1500 drones built worldwide, and the demand for the devices is likely to increase rapidly, dependent on the legislation that surrounds their operation.

Still, the most common concern related to unmanned aerial systems is the protection of privacy. Many believe that these vehicles impose an increased privacy threat to the population and the government, as it has been revealed in the country-specific policy analysis above. As manned aerial vehicles are just as capable of surveillance missions as drones, it is likely that most of the countries will already have applicable and interchangeable legislation restricting the risks of privacy intrusion. Therefore, just because there is a possibility for privacy breach, it is not evident that it would happen, if drones were regulated the same way as other aircraft.

The Deloitte study created in 2015 states that during early testing phases of introducing drones crashes are extremely common. Therefore, without allowing companies to carry out tests in restricted and controlled airspace, safety improvements cannot be achieved. Flying drones, on the other hand, is a challenging task, and personnel is likely to need advanced training. Due to the lack of related experience, training programs are scarce or non-existent. Companies need to develop  accredited training for their personnel,  but the training will need to comply with regulation, which currently does not exist. It is, indeed, a Catch 22 situation.

As a conclusion, the main concerns over drone utilization in general are related to public safety and liability. These seem to be the most important policy areas that need to be addressed first by legislators.

Feasibility

The Munich Re America Survey of 2015 revealed the public perception of the future development within commercial drone utilization. According to the results, 48 percent of the respondents believed that it would take 5-10 years for drones to become a common practice for businesses (more than 60 percent of companies using the new technology). 37 percent predicted this to happen in less than 5 years, and 10 stated it will be more than ten years wait. 5 percent of respondents believed that it would never happen.

The Royal Aeronautical Society called the new technology related to unmanned aerial systems as a real transformation of transport, delivery, and humanitarian work. The industrial systems that support the development of new vehicles and navigation units are currently under development.

While, according to Deloitte, enterprises are likely to utilize drones by dozens, they are not likely to invest into large scale operations. This is mainly because of the lack of information related to the effectiveness, running cost, and reliability of the new technology. Supporting testing and research would make the economy grow faster and increase the safety of operation, reducing the risks related to potential accidents and privacy breaches.

Stolaroff’s 2014 review states that there is a need for a life cycle assessment of commercial drone delivery before developing further policies. In 2014, retail companies, including Amazon and Google were lobbying for regulatory changes to make drones allowed in the US. airspace. The author also emphasizes that regulators need to balance the interest of the public and government and the potential benefits of commercial delivery drone operations. Further, limited studies or estimations exist related to the potential implications of air delivery on road congestion, pollution levels of large cities, and without these estimates, policymakers cannot make an informed decision.

Implications for Further Research

One of the main challenges related to drone policies in the future is the lack of research.  Stolaroff concludes that without knowing potential the environmental and economic impact of allowing drones in the US airspace, it is hard to determine whether or not the privacy risks are worth to take. The main questions the author asks are related to energy efficiency and green technology. The above, indeed, can be some of the hidden benefits of the new technologies. Batteries (in particular those that are operated by solar panels) will be likely to have a lower carbon footprint than road vehicles. Still, the manufacturing and operation of the aerial vehicles will have an environmental impact that cannot be estimated at the moment.  The authors state that while most designs of drones created for parcel delivery are powered by batteries, the public expects companies to introduce fossil fueled vehicles in the future, if they are proven to be more economical.

The above concern does not only need to be addressed by regulators, but also requires a consultation among manufacturers, researchers, designers, operators, and policymakers. Further, it is important that the public opinion and concerns are heard regarding to both the economic and environmental concerns related to drones for retail package delivery. The author advises researchers and policymakers to create a life cycle assessment as soon as possible to address the above questions and gray areas. Without clarifying the future direction of developing unmanned aerial vehicle delivery technology, no long term plans can be made by governments and retail companies. While lobbying for more liberal legislation is one solution, if it is not backed up by careful analysis, it can be viewed as a simply political matter. As Stolaroff (4) states: “A thoughtful analysis of the issue now may encourage regulators to preclude such models in upcoming rules”.

Deloitte’s study predicts that in 2015 the base of non-military drones that cost  over $200 can exceed one million units. This prediction has a great significance. If that many units will exist by the end of the year, it might be already too late for policymakers to make a ruling on the legality and the permission requirements of these vehicles. Indeed. Drones are already in the airspace, used for landscape photography, or other activities. News footage can now be created using drones, without the need of flying over dangerous terrain. While drones are not likely to become mass market consumable sin the near future, the technology behind them makes them extremely suitable for certain missions that are related to companies’ supply chains. Apart from delivering customer orders placed on Amazon’s or Google’s websites, companies could automate their logistics and  make their supply chains more effective through drone deliveries.

The main feasibility issue related to customer deliveries, as it has already been covered shortly, is security. As some parcels paid for online require a signature of the customer upon delivery, given the likely scenario of restricting landing areas away from populated areas, would not be possible. Unmanned vehicles will also need human support, and this means that they might not be cost-effective when first implemented by companies. The liability insurance of drones is also a question that would need to be addressed by insurance companies, due to the lack of experience and track record. Drone delivery of parcels is only likely to be cost-effective when it comes to high value and low weight items. Deloitte estimates the cost of this type of delivery at $8-12 per 10 kilometers.

Conclusion

It has been revealed that countries that are withholding permission from companies to utilize their drones in their airspace do not only slow down the technological development and the improvement of a new economy, but also hinder their country’s competitiveness on the global market. It is likely that countries where legislation clearly identifying the conditions of permission and air-worthiness will come out as winners in the international competition. The governments will be able to see new jobs created due to the increased demand, and increase their tax income. For a clear legislation to be created, however, collaboration is needed. Instead of simply lobbying for market liberalization, company leaders should invest into research that proves that the benefits of commercial drones are significantly higher than the risks they carry. The above review of related research, policies, and potential implementation areas has revealed that for the currently struggling world economy, a new industry related to manufacturing, developing, and navigating drones in the commercial sector could open up a new avenue towards recovery. As it has been confirmed by the  Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, thousands of new jobs could be created if the new technology was supported by policymakers.

Another potential benefit of allowing drones in European, Asian, and American airspace could be more testing data for further utilization of unmanned aerial systems. Retail companies’ experience with drone delivery effectiveness and punctuality could be shared with humanitarian organizations, who could use the research findings to improve their operations and benefit potentially millions of people in disaster-struck areas. Delaying legislation for commercial drones would be a mistake for any country, and legislators need to work on creating new channels and methods of collaboration and information sharing to ensure that their country remains competitive in the emerging economy.

Works Cited

Aerospace Industries Association. “Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Perceptions & Potential.  2015. Web.

Austin, Reg. Unmanned aircraft systems: UAVS design, development and deployment. Vol. 54. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.

Birmingham Policy Commission. “The security impact of drones: Challenges and opportunities for the UK.” University of Birmingham (2014).

Canis, B. “Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS): Commercial Outlook for a New Industry” Congressional Research Service. 2015. Web.

Deloitte. “Drones: High Profile and Niche. 2015. Web.

Hayward, Keith. “Unmanned aerial vehicles: a new industrial system.” Royal Aeronautical Society Discussion Paper (2010).

Munich RE. “Focus On: Drones and the Commercial Sector” 2015. Web.

Rule, T. “Airspace In An Age Of Drones” Boston University Law Review. Vol.  95: 155. 2015. Web.

Sidley Austin. “Legal Issues Surrounding the Use of Commercial Drones in Hong Kong and Singapore”. 2015. Web.

Singapore Law Blog. “A Morning with “Drones” – Report on the SMU CLE Seminar on “Using “Drones” in Singapore: An Analysis of the Unmanned Aircraft (Public Safety and Security) Act 2015”. 2015. Web. (http://www.singaporelawblog.sg/blog/article/143)

Stolaroff, J. K. “The Need for a Life Cycle Assessment of Drone-Based Commercial Package Delivery” U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 2014. Web.

Turza, N. “Dr. Dronelove: How We Should All Learn To Stop Worrying And Love Commercial Drones” North Carolina Journal Of Law & Technology. 15 N.C. J.L. & Tech. On. 319 (2014). Web.

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Humanitarian Response. Occassional Paper. 2014. Web.