This is exploding into realms that are.........
The lighting of a runway, including the approach lights is very clear, well defined and well known. The lighting of a taxiway is completely different, and there are no approach lights. The lighting systems & colours were done this way to avoid mistaken identification. Runways have white & red lights; taxiways have blue & green. Pilots have colour-blindness tests and eye-sight tests. Added to this are NOTAMS when anything is amiss.
Pilots were expected to know these things and look out of the window and use Mk.1 eyeball to determine they were landing on an OK bit of tarmac.
Now, there are techies who are designing systems to alert ATC & crews when they are lined up with the wrong bit of tarmac. Another automatic back-up to human error. Agreed, there is a system to alert the crew when they are encroaching onto an active runway. At some very confusing airfields this seems to have saved the day a few times. However, their need might have been contributed to by non-standard lighting and lack of stop bars. (it should be difficult to cross reds).
It has been surmised that over-automation might become counter productive. Humans will stop thinking, plough on regardless, and wait for the warning system alerts to wake them up. I saw this in a young company when they transitioned from B727 to B757. The instructors were scolding the pilots to "stop scanning the overhead panel. The EICAS will tell you when something is wrong." I see it in a friend's new car with lane control, reactive braking & cruise control; his attention is reduced and he says how relaxing it is. i.e. his alertness level is reduced. I look a few cars ahead to anticipate traffic flow, not at the bumper in front of me. He sets his cruise/brake control to 3 car lengths and switches off.
If a crew can not distinguish between a well lit runway & a taxiway, at night, then I'm not sure an automatic system is the answer. That is a sticking plaster on a deeper problem.