Safety first, safety’s choice: regulating unmanned aircraft and an illusion of choice

To ensure the safe, secure and sustainable integration of unmanned aircraft (drones) into society, authorities are revoking, amending and introducing laws to govern this diverse and growing sector. Two main approaches have been utilised from the different regulatory approaches that are available to regulators. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has, for example, stated that 18 out of the 19 Annexes to the Convention on International Civil Aviation 1944 will be amended. ICAO is integrating the specific drone requirements into the existing requirements. On the other hand, the EU has opted to issue drone-specific Regulations, as opposed to weaving drones into the existing EU acquis. Therefore, the EU is differentiating the drone requirements from the existing regulatory system. These early regulatory steps are focused on ensuring an acceptable level of safety. This has, however, had the consequence of determining the wider regulatory approach. While the choice of regulatory approach can be seen as either an integrated or differentiated one, this is a superficial conclusion. There is an illusion of choice; drones are aircraft and shall be regulated as such. As operations become more prevalent and complex, it becomes relevant to assess the impact of this regulatory approach – which is rooted in the safety domain – on other regulated areas. This paper analyses these regulatory approaches, whether the regulators had a choice and what are the wider consequences, in order to draw conclusions and provide implementable recommendations.