IB Questionbank

User interface language: English | Español

Date	May 2019	Marks available	12	Reference code	19M.3.HL.TZ0.4
Level	HL	Paper	3 (model questions)	Time zone	no time zone
Command term	Recommend	Question number	4	Adapted from	N/A

Question

Students should be provided with the pre-release document ahead of the May 2019 HL paper 3 examination, this can be found under the "Your tests" tab > supplemental materials > May 2019 HL paper 3 pre-release document: AV.

Mobility challenges for the elderly, young, disadvantaged, and handicapped.

Source 1: Miketon

Miketon is a small town with a population of 5000. It has one taxi company with two drivers who are about to retire. There are no plans for the taxi company to continue. The town council is aware that this will create problems for the elderly citizens who live in the community. The council predicts that this problem will grow, as there are increasing numbers of elderly people retiring to the area.

Miketon is 20 km from the regional centre, Towbro, which has a population of 300 000. As a result of this closeness, it is also popular with young families, as it is within commuting* distance (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Map showing the locations of Miketon and Towbro

The loss of the taxi service and an infrequent bus service to Towbro will create problems for both the elderly, who need access to the hospital, and for teenagers who wish to attend cultural and sporting events in Towbro.

* Commuting: to travel some distance between one's home and place of work on a regular basis.

Source 2: Miketon Town Council

Miketon Town Council wants to solve this problem and has two suggestions they will put forward at the next council meeting.

A fleet of autonomous vehicles is purchased by the council that could be used by anyone in the town at a subsidized rate. All bookings would be made through the council website or the council transport app. The autonomous vehicles would easily cover the distances between the regional centre and other locations.
A ride-share company is invited to start operations in Miketon. To entice companies and local drivers to participate, the council would subsidize the trips by paying a surcharge (an amount added to the fare), which would be credited to the ride-share drivers and company.

Both suggestions have advantages as well as limitations.

Source 3: Readiness for autonomous vehicles

Each country can be graded using criteria that determine how ready it is for autonomous vehicles. The grade can be either very ready, ready, or not ready. Four of the criteria used to determine the readiness of the country in which Miketon is located are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Criteria and scores for the country in which Miketon is located

Source 4: A pilot study of a ride-sharing scheme called Rideshare

The findings of the Rideshare pilot scheme (see Figure 3), show that by carefully designing the integration of ride sharing with public transport services, the ride-sharing scheme can be successful to a significant extent.

Figure 3 Rideshare board

Three features of the Rideshare pilot scheme were:

It was developed and implemented with the support of the local council and citizens.
Ride-sharing notice boards with information about the services were placed at local bus stops and in railway stations to promote the use of these services in an integrated way.
The pricing strategy ensured that ride sharing was so expensive that it deterred people from using it and not too cheap that it stopped people using public transport.

With reference to the stimulus material above and to your own inquiries, recommend the digital intervention(s) that the council should choose to address the challenge of ensuring mobility associated with living in towns such as Miketon.

Markscheme

The candidate must evaluate both interventions using the criteria in the guide and the information from the sources to support the recommendation made.

Answers may include:

Evaluation of the use of autonomous vehicles

Equity:

The capabilities of autonomous vehicles address the needs of both the young, the elderly, and people with disabilities for efficient and effective transport (inclusion). However, the individual needs may not be fully and effectively satisfied, and the efficiency of autonomous vehicles might not be as desired as outlined in some of the other evaluation points.

Acceptability:

The country scores very ready in the acceptance criterion (Source 3).
The citizens would need to learn about and accept being in autonomous vehicles, which have not completely proven themselves. A publicity campaign might be needed.
Citizens may not wish their children to travel without adult supervision (trust, values).

Cost:

Council subsidies will make autonomous vehicles cost effective for citizens (Source 2)
The initial cost of each autonomous vehicle is significant, and the ongoing maintenance costs need to be considered as well, including petrol. The costs of repairs and insurance also need to be considered, as well as the cost of a depot for the autonomous vehicles to be stored in when not being used.
Setting up and maintaining the booking app/website needs to be paid for.
The use of an autonomous vehicle could be paid to the council by the users based on a range of factors, such as distance, time to wait, etc.
The cost of road infrastructure to suit the use of autonomous vehicles would need to be considered and could be significant.

Feasibility:

The autonomous vehicles would easily cover the distances required to the regional centre and other locations (Source 2) (systems).
The country ranks fourth with laws which makes it feasible to operate autonomous vehicles on the roads (Source 3) (systems).
Technically, there is widespread 5G in the country, but this may not be fully in the rural areas (Source 3) (systems).
Technically, the use of autonomous vehicles is still not fully worked out yet (systems, values).
Socially, the acceptance of autonomous vehicles can be an issue for some, as outlined above.
Politically, the use of autonomous vehicles will need to pass the council meeting, where the other negative evaluation points will need to be addressed (policies).

Innovation:

There is a pool of IT professionals to support autonomous vehicles in the country (Source 3).
The road infrastructure has been developed to accommodate autonomous vehicles, and data is collected (Source 3).
The use of new digital technology that has not been fully developed to the ideal of a level 5 autonomous vehicle might be too innovative for citizens. There is the potential that the current autonomous vehicles may not be developed enough to be reliable for the task they need to do, as many of the recent versions only operate at level 2.

Ethics:

The ethical issues associated with the decision-making processes of the artificial intelligence controlling autonomous vehicles have not fully been worked out technically (systems) and legally in places that have trialled them (values).

Evaluation of a ride-sharing scheme

Equity:

The capabilities of a ride-sharing scheme would address the needs of the young, the elderly, and people with disabilities for efficient (time, cost [money, materials, people] and effort and effective [achieves desired results]) transport (access, inclusion).
However, the detailed needs may not fully be satisfied, and the efficiency of the scheme might not be as desired as outlined in some of the other evaluation points.

Acceptability:

The citizens should not have any issues using the ride-sharing scheme, as it is similar to riding in a taxi (Source 4).
Citizens have probably used ride-sharing schemes in other cities.
Children are not comfortable with their parents being able to track their movements if they are using the family account (trust, confidence).
Parents may not be comfortable with their children using ride-sharing schemes, as the drivers are strangers (trust, confidence).

Cost:

The cost of this intervention is mainly about subsidizing the payment of each trip to keep it manageable for citizens and to ensure that enough ride-share cars are available for use (Source 2).
Pricing strategies have been carefully considered (Source 4).
The payment could be made at regular intervals when billed by the ride-share company.
The cars are purchased and maintained by the owners; the cost of the app is maintained by the ride-share company; the maintenance is paid for by the owner of the car.

Feasibility:

Rideshare can make use of existing noticeboards at bus stops (Source 4).
Technically, the implementation of a ride-sharing scheme is relatively easy, as they are popular in larger cities. The app and the cars/drivers have worked well elsewhere (systems).
Socially, the acceptance of the ride-sharing scheme should be good, as it is widely accepted in other places.
Politically, the implementation of a ride-sharing scheme will need to pass the council meeting (policies); it should pass, as the major issue is money to subsidize the scheme but the council seems to be prepared to spend money on both schemes (Source 2).

Innovation:

The approach is not significantly innovative and not a major change to the use of the taxis that were available previously (change). Ride-share companies have been around for a significant amount of time and have proven to be effective and efficient.

Ethics:

The legal and ethical issues associated with ride-share drivers are being worked out in a range of places around the world and will need to be considered by the council, such as the timing and hours of work, the level of payment, the rating of drivers, and the responsibilities of drivers and passengers.

The recommendation:

Using the evaluations of each intervention, the response needs to recommend one or the other, or a combination of both.
The recommendation needs to explicitly balance the evaluations against each other in order to support the recommendation and satisfy the requirement that possible trade-offs and implications have been considered.
The trade-offs and implications will need to consider which of the evaluation points is more important than the others.

Keywords: change, power, systems, values, ethics, data, privacy, policies, app, trust, automation, reliability, accessibility, regulations, laws, access, inclusion, infrastructure, equity, acceptability, cost, feasibility, innovations, technological determinism.

Please refer to the HL paper 3 question 4 markbands when awarding marks. These can be found under the "Your tests" tab > supplemental materials > Digital society markbands and guidance document.