Drone policies must balance privacy, innovation as use grows

By KATE COIL

TT&C Assistant Editor

As drone use increases by the public, governments, and private businesses, state and local policies around drone usage are being shaped by a debate. The protection of personal privacy and data is up against concerns for public safety and economic development tied into emerging technology.  

Dr. Xuhong Su is a professor of public administration in the University of Tennessee’s Baker School of Public Policy and Public Affairs and has worked with other researchers to track drone use, policies, and regulation. Su shared her findings insight at a workshop at the Tennessee Municipal League’s 86th annual Conference and Expo in Kingsport.  

“This is a new field, and so much is ongoing,” Su said. “There is a lot of noise, and we are still amid the journey searching for certainty. Dones have a huge business market. The FAA predicts the drone industry will be worth $40 billion five years from now. There are roughly 23 million drones flying above our heads, whether we notice them or not. You see them flying at events like the World Cup or by emergency departments looking for the source of a fire or a missing person.” 

With more companies like Amazon and Walmart exploring drone delivery, Su said concerns have emerged over personal privacy and property, who is managing drones, how high or low drones are allowed to fly, and what is being done with data drones collect.  

SETTING THE FRAMEWORK 

The cornerstone of drone policy and regulatory framework begins with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Su said FAA policy is relied upon to establish uniform drone performance and safety standards for the marketplace, set a federal registration and tracking system to build drone information system infrastructure, and impose restrictions on drones that protect federal assets and interests. 

In 2016, the FAA put into effect a national regulatory framework governing commercial drone operations that covers flight rules, pilot and licensing requirements, and safety compliance.  

Meanwhile, Su said it has largely been left up to individual states to determine how to set up privacy and safety rules, clarify airspace rights, and establish state registration and licensing programs. Between 2013 and 2025, Su said she and her research team tracked policies implemented by 47 states and analyzed 110 regulatory documents. Tennessee has six state-level statutes concerning drones.  

One major exception is the state of New York, which has opted to let local governments pass their own regulations rather than make state rules. Two other states – New Mexico and Massachusetts – have not implemented any state-level drone policies yet. 

“The state's typical responsibility is often to set up privacy and safety rules,” Su said. “They answer questions like should a drone be able to fly 10 feet above your house or 50 feet above or how much noise drones are able to make. Amazon is lobbying heavily right now to allow their drones to fly beyond the visual line of sight, basically meaning drones can automatically fly anywhere. If they are allowed to do that – and they can do it 24 hours, seven days a week – and you can hear all of those delivery drones flying, people are concerned what that might mean for their quality of life.” 

Counterbalancing citizen concerns over noise and privacy is the economic impact drones generate. Su said a lot of states have directed their policy toward encouraging drone usage and development, such as Virginia giving subsidies for drone manufacturers and Alabama prompting drone pilot education. Arkansas has the friendliest policies toward commercial drone operation, likely buoyed by Walmart’s economic impact and lobbying.  

SHAPING POLICY 

The first wave of legislation Su and her team tracked was implemented between 2015 and 2018. A second wave came between 2023 and 2025, which Su said was largely in response to concerns raised and loopholes that need to be closed in the first slate of drone legislation as well as the increased usage of drones that came during the pandemic.  

As drones have become mainstream, Su said more concerns have been raised.  

“Most states are wrestling with how law enforcement uses drones because this is a powerful technology, and it needs to be reined into protect the public, privacy, individual well-being, and society,” Su said. “A lot of states are concerned that rogue entities will use drones to spy on critical infrastructure such as schools, mines, the electric grid, and oil refineries. The definition of critical infrastructure also varies across different states.” 

While the Supreme Court had previously ruled that airspace is not private property and therefore anything seen from airspace is not a privacy violation, the 400 feet and below altitude drones are allowed to fly at has created a murky legal area.  

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was conducting flyovers to monitor water quality,” Su said. “On one of these flyovers, they detected some marijuana plants being grown. The company was then fined for illegally growing marijuana. The company said the EPA’s use of the drone violated their privacy. There is now a question about what happens if a drone is flying for another purpose, and it exposes something illegal happening.” 

 Out of all of these types of legislation, Su and her team identified six major categories of legislation and regulations of drone usage, including:  

• Law enforcement and surveillance restrictions 
• Privacy and property protections 
• Weaponization and harm prevention 
• Enabling mechanisms 
• State and local pre-emption 
• Critical infrastructure and correctional facility applications 

Su said Tennessee's regulations tend to focus on privacy and infrastructure concerns but also explore economic benefits of drones, like most states in the southeast. States in the north and midwest tend to have policies focusing on civil liberties, weaponization, and safety while western states are largely focused on pre-emption.  

Drone policy at large tends to lag behind what is happening in the field, and Su said city and county-level policies are not as common as state-level drone regulations. Of the 100 most populated cities in the U.S., 60% have some type of local drone ordinance. These ordinances often fill gaps in state law.  

However, Su said states and cities can come into conflict over drone policy.  

“The drone industry – particularly those big delivery companies – don’t want to deal with every city having its own ordinance,” she said. “There is a battle between states who want to centralize drone regulation and local governments who want to decentralize it. States want to create statewide markets to attract more development, but cities want to have more say on how drones are regulated.” 

EMERGING CHALLENGES 

As states experiment and learn from their own drone policies and those implemented by neighboring states, Su said regulations are likely to get more specific and rely less on political viewpoints.  

Instead, she said drone policy is undergoing what is known as professionalization, meaning more emphasis is being put on the advice of experts in the field, economic impact, and regulations being pushed by lobbyists. 

One emerging challenge is that municipalities and first responders need funding in order to utilize drones. Many governments that are behind in drone policy and usage cannot afford to purchase and maintain drones, hire a trained operator, or the insurance and liability costs. 

Su said cities also need to navigate issues such as what happens if a city-owned drone damages private property, ensuring their drones obey state and federal regulations, and what data they are required to maintain and for how long. This can be difficult when few individuals are trained on drone operational rules.  

The use of drones by government entities and businesses faces an uphill battle with public opinion. Su said municipalities using drones must engage with the community to increase citizen support. 

Policy decisions showing that municipalities are addressing concerns can help citizens embrace usage. Su said preliminary findings indicate citizens are more likely to support drone use by municipalities if it is framed in a public safety context; if there are active,accessible, and updated policies employees utilizing drones must follow; and if there is a way for citizens to file grievances if they feel their privacy has been violated or a drone has been used improperly.  

Communities should also be thinking about how the growth of drone delivery may impact them.  

“Businesses have been running aggressive campaigns to change regulations,” Su said. “While drone delivery isn’t as efficient or operating at an optimal level, these companies have so much vested interest that they will do everything to push it forward. In the future, we may even see house design changed based on drone delivery.”