Self-driving cars once seemed beyond the realm of possibility, but they are now being piloted on city streets. Now another mobility innovation has emerged that could accelerate and complement autonomy: remote driving.
By combining sophisticated communication systems with real-time video feeds, remote-driving systems can instantly convey information about road conditions, traffic, and unexpected obstacles to off-site drivers who can control the vehicle’s braking and steering (Exhibit 1). These systems can be used in all types of on- and off-road vehicles, regardless of size.
Remote-driving systems are not yet commercially available for passenger cars; many people may not even know that they are under development. We analyzed this nascent sector to evaluate potential interest from consumers, fleets, and OEMs, as well as to understand likely use cases, market size, and essential enablers such as consumer acceptance, regulatory clarity, and insurance coverage.
Our analysis considered how remote-driving systems might enable or complement autonomous vehicles (AVs) with advanced capabilities (defined as those classified as Level 3 or above by the Society of Automotive Engineers). Both innovations are designed to provide greater convenience and freedom—two benefits that are especially important to premium car owners. Although the use of AVs might grow in the coming years, they will likely face many operating restrictions because of safety concerns and technology constraints. If AVs are also equipped with remote-driving capabilities, drivers could activate them in areas where autonomous driving is forbidden or unfeasible, thereby extending their operating range.
Broad appeal to consumers, fleets, and OEMs
Are consumers comfortable ceding vehicle control to a remote-driving system? And will they willingly pay for such services? A recent McKinsey survey of about 1,500 car owners in China, Germany, and the United States may be the first research to provide answers to such questions. Among the findings:
About 70 percent of premium car owners and 55 percent of volume car owners say they would consider using remote-driving services.
Globally, the price that car owners would be willing to pay for remote-driving services is about $53 per hour, and 40 percent of respondents are willing to pay up to $72 per hour.
Consumers estimate that they would use remote-driving services about twice weekly.
Over 70 percent of premium and 55 percent of volume car owners claim that they would consider switching to their second-favorite automotive brand if this would give them access to remote driving.
For consumers, an enabler and complement to autonomous driving
Our survey specifically asks consumers whether they prefer remote driving over autonomous driving (defined as Level 3 or above). Overall, a third of respondents say they have no preference between these transportation modes; of the remaining two-thirds, 58 percent say that they prefer remote driving over AVs. Respondents also rate remote driving higher than autonomous driving for many features, such as safety and the ability to adapt to unexpected situations.
While AVs have been under development for longer than remote-driving services, their progress has been slower than expected. A 2023 McKinsey survey of 86 decision makers in the autonomous-driving industry showed that commercial at-scale adoption timelines for multiple AV use cases, including street parking and robotaxi operation, had been pushed back by an average of two to three years compared with the timelines presented in the 2021 survey. If remote driving reaches the market before the launch of Level 3 autonomous driving for passenger cars, it would provide consumers with their first experience in a driverless vehicle.
Even when Level 3 AVs become more widely available, remote driving may remain an attractive complementary option. About 56 percent of survey respondents say they are more likely to purchase an AV if it also contains remote-driving features. Level 3 AVs equipped with remote-driving options may also face fewer operating restrictions than other AVs. For instance, they may be allowed to operate on more roads or during all weather conditions, while use of other AVs might be restricted to highway driving under good weather. Remote driving might also receive approval to serve as a backup for autonomous driving in some instances, such as failure of Level 4 systems.
When asked about specific features, such as the ability to handle emergencies, survey respondents often ranked remote driving higher than autonomous driving.
Exhibit 2 summarizes the main findings on consumer attitudes about remote driving and autonomous driving.
For businesses, a lever for increasing efficiency and reducing costs
Our survey did not specifically investigate corporate use of remote driving, but we believe that many businesses could benefit from these services. For example, when rental fleets relocate vehicles from one branch to another, they could rely on remote driving, rather than taking an on-site employee away from more pressing customer-service responsibilities. Remote driving may also be a less costly option for vehicle transport.
Many other businesses, including warehouses, agricultural operations, and defense companies, must also move vehicles frequently, either from different sites within a single location or to distant destinations. As with rental fleets, these businesses might increase efficiency and reduce costs by relying on remote drivers.
OEMs could enjoy dual benefits. Beyond incorporating remote-driving services into their operations, they could also install these features into their offerings and potentially create new revenue streams.
Greater freedom, more convenience
Our survey reveals that consumers would often be willing to summon a remote driver via a smart phone app or in-car application to gain free time or avoid tedious tasks, with the following use cases ranking high for relevancy and likelihood of use (Exhibit 3):
Valet parking. Imagine that a couple arrive home late on Sunday night to find all parking spots on their street are occupied. Instead of driving around and searching for an open space for 30 minutes, they ask a remote driver to find one and park their car. In some cases, the remote driver could get assistance from intelligent infrastructure equipped with cameras and sensors.
Vehicle maintenance. When vehicles need repairs or maintenance, car owners typically need to bring them to a service station. Using a remote driver for this task could give owners a few extra hours for work or leisure.
Remote chauffeuring. If drivers are stuck in traffic but need to attend to other matters—for example, an important phone call or a crying infant—they can activate remote-driving services. Consumers might also welcome remote chauffeuring in many other circumstances, including late night drives when they are tired, or trips to the airport, where curbside drop-off and pickup might be more convenient and less expensive than parking. While ride hailing might also be an option, remote driving could potentially be less expensive and would allow riders to use their own vehicle.
Delivery of rental vehicles or shared cars. People preparing for vacations or in a rush may prefer to have remote drivers deliver rental cars or shared vehicles, especially if the pickup site is far from their location.
Assisted mobility. People who cannot drive because of physical or mental impairments, or who have friends or family members with such impairments, could summon rental vehicles for doctor visits or other transportation needs.
Last-mile delivery. To pick up online orders from a designated location—such as a store or post office—consumers could summon a remote driver to drive to the pickup point, provided that store or postal employees are notified and can load the package into the car. Alternatively, consumers might use a dedicated remote-driving delivery service.
Refueling/recharging. This use case could be particularly valuable for drivers of electric vehicles (EVs), who might otherwise have to wait an hour or more at a charging station as they repower their vehicles. As with last-mile delivery, on-site employees at the charging station would need to know that the vehicle is expected and take the necessary steps for charging or refueling.
Market segments and sizing
We created some potential scenarios to estimate the future value of the remote-driving market based on two criteria:
anticipated user behavior (derived from survey findings about willingness to pay and other metrics)
the predicted number of vehicles on the road with technologies that enable remote driving (redundant braking and steering for most use cases)
Our analysis suggests that the remote-driving market could reach around $12 billion by 2030. With an estimated CAGR of about 5.5 percent, the market would reach a value of approximately $42 billion by 2040 (Exhibit 4). The increase in AVs would be the main driver of growth.
Remote-driving uptake may vary by vehicle segment. In our survey, about 66 percent of drivers of premium cars say they have a positive view of remote driving, compared with only 43 percent of volume-car drivers. Premium-car drivers are also more likely to give higher ratings for relevancy and likelihood of use for a range of use cases, and the average price they were willing to pay is higher than that of volume drivers. Overall, we expect that premium drivers could account for about 80 percent of remote-driving revenues. They may be overrepresented during the early years, if remote driving is approved, because they are likely to be among the first adopters. The premium segment’s contribution to total revenues may decrease over time, as more volume cars become equipped with Level 2+ or Level 3 autonomous-driving capabilities.
The market’s missing pieces
Beyond technology advances, many other factors will determine how the remote-driving market evolves, including the following:
Consumer acceptance. Our survey suggests that many people are already open to remote-driving services, but it will be important to monitor any changes in public sentiment as data from new studies become available.
Insurance coverage. If remote-driving services are approved, regulators and insurers must create clarity about liability for all stakeholders, including OEMs, the remote-driving services provider, and the remote driver. They must also conduct assessments to determine the potential for insurance coverage and appropriate policy pricing. If insurers decline to create products suitable for remote driving, service providers may have to offer them.
Safety studies and regulatory frameworks. As with autonomous driving, regulators will take a close look at remote driving before approving pilots or more widespread use. If remote driving is approved, OEMs and others will also need to note any variations worldwide to ensure that their offerings comply with all regulations. As with any innovation, new products and services may become available more quickly if regulations are fairly standard worldwide.
Although stakeholders will be juggling multiple priorities as remote-driving services advance through R&D, they might want to consider taking several steps to maintain momentum.
OEMs
OEMs that are interested in remote-driving services will continue to want to develop and refine technology requirements, often in collaboration with partners. Priorities include robust, low-latency communication networks and comprehensive cybersecurity protections that prevent outside interference. OEMs could also help build public trust through education and demonstrations that show remote driving’s benefits and document its safety.
If remote-driving services receive regulatory approval, OEMs might consider including a remote-driving option in a large part of their portfolio, potentially even making it a standard option. Given that premium drivers seem more open to remote driving, OEMs might initially focus on this segment. OEMs should also consider how to offer remote-driving services—for instance, deciding whether fees should be levied by subscription or pay-per-hour.
Related technology businesses
Companies could publicize the results of pilots—for instance, showing how remote driving can handle unexpected traffic jams on high-speed highways—to provide information that can help consumers determine if they want to use these services. In some cases, remote-driving technology businesses might accelerate progress by collaborating with OEMs, B2B companies, and fleets on their initiatives, or by asking their suppliers to include features that would enhance remote-driving capabilities.
Fleet owners
During these early days, fleet owners could compare the potential costs of remote and in-vehicle drivers to identify the best use cases. They could also gather more information on remote driving and its implications for their operations by conducting pilots with remote-driving technology providers.
Mobility has evolved more in the past decade than it has since the first automobiles hit the road. Remote-driving services could represent yet another new mobility option that might appeal to many people, especially premium-car owners. At its current estimated cost, remote-driving services could achieve scale and change how drivers use passenger vehicles. While some benefits of remote driving are similar to those of autonomous driving, our survey suggests that it could remain important even after AVs are approved, either as a backup or complementary service. OEMs that begin investigating this technology now will be well positioned to become leaders in this promising new market.