C-ITS Platform WG8: Public Acceptance 1st Meeting: 5 May 2015, 14:00 17:00

Transcription

1 C-ITS Platform WG8: Public Acceptance 1st Meeting: 5 May 2015, 14:00 17:00 Venue: Philippe Le Bon 3, Room 3.45, Brussels Executive Summary During this first meeting on Public Acceptance, the group discussed the multi-level challenges of the topic and raised several issues for consideration in future meetings. As immediate actions for the next working group meeting, it was agreed to produce a draft mapping of the relevant stakeholders and a list of potential questions concerning public acceptance to be addressed to other C-ITS platform groups. [To be noted that the C-ITS Plenary Session of 6 May made a strong call in favour of a broad representativeness of all players in WG 8. Public acceptance being a prerequisite of C-ITS deployment, the entire value chain can and should contribute to the topic, starting already with mapping the issues at stake.] Action List Nr. Action Responsible 1 Mapping the stakeholders All working group members 2 Drafting possible questions to address to other working groups to be discussed and finalised in the next WG meeting. All working group members. 1. Opening of the meeting and adoption of the agenda () welcomed all participants and invited them to briefly present themselves. The agenda was adopted by all the participants and is included in ANNEX I. 2. Presentations and general discussion on the scope of the Working Group. The first presentation was given by a member of the working group. The title of the presentation was "Increasing Public Acceptance of C-ITS". The presentation highlighted, among others: public acceptance challenges, the importance of considering different categories of users, and the connection of this working group to the other working groups of the C-ITS platform. Another member presented the scoping note on public acceptance that he had prepared for the working group. The scoping note was based on a literature search for published work on studies and surveys on user acceptance. Following the presentations some of the following questions were raised from the participants for further reflection: - What is the specific output expected from this WG? - In what context should the output be framed?

2 - Is there a particular timeline for when the output should be delivered? - In terms of stakeholder representation in this WG, are there any relevant actors missing? - What is the added value of this WG in relation to the other WGs in the C-ITS platform? - How may this WG best generate this added value? 3. Discussion on various aspects of public acceptance. Subsequently, the discussion of the group was focused on the following topics. Definition of Public Acceptance One participant wanted to include "willingness to buy" into the working definition of public acceptance "willingness to use the system". Another participant noted that one can adopt a processperception concerning the user with the following steps: 1. The user becomes aware that a system exists, 2. The user doesn t have any negative feelings towards the system, 3. The user is willing to use the system 4. The user is willing to pay for obtaining the system. Every step in this process would require a different depth of information for the user. No definite conclusion on definition of public acceptance was reached; the working group will return to the topic in future meetings. User categories It was agreed that from a user-centred perspective, C-ITS means very little. It was noted that the potential users of C-ITS are not only drivers but also other users of the network infrastructure. Therefore, the group agreed, it is important to think in terms of what the benefits of C-ITS are to different user groups. Examples of user groups to consider are: - Public authorities - Drivers - General public - Road Infrastructure Managers - Vulnerable Road Users Before reaching deployment, it was mentioned that acceptance is necessary across different user categories; from the consumer who buys the product to the public sector who invests into the system. The group agreed to map the stakeholder categories by the next meeting. Challenges for Public Acceptance One challenge is that a low level of awareness hinders deployment. A logical conclusion seems to be that public awareness is an important step in obtaining public acceptance. The public often takes benefits for granted and it would be difficult to develop a future one-size-fits-all campaign as there are many factors to take into account like different user groups and variation across Member States (cultural, geographical etc.). Therefore, a more decentralized approach might be worth considering. Other important points for reflection are costs, scalability and trust. It needs to be explored how to ensure a development of trust within the group of early adopters that the systems will continue to exist. The systems on the market need to be smart enough so that the early adopters in Day 1 applications are satisfied enough to adopt the Day 2 applications. Studies on Public Acceptance Public acceptance has been treated extensively within the academic research field and in Field Operation Trials (FOT). Studies can be split into three stages where in the first stage, a group is confronted to C-ITS merely on a descriptive level. At a second stage, they are allowed to test the 2

3 system in a secure environment with a monitoring person supporting the test. In the third stage, the technology is taken into real-life situations. It seems that people are positive to C-ITS in the first two stages, while a drop is noted in the third stage as one participant remarked. Methodology Possible methods to increase awareness were discussed such as whether it was better to redefine 'C- ITS' for end users in order to better understand the concept, or by taking a few concrete examples of Day1 services and applications in order to better explain the concrete benefits of C-ITS to the end users. It was concluded that in the end, the user doesn t care how the technology operates but what benefit it gives and at what cost. One participant underlined the important role of media in creating awareness amongst public. Another participant noted that there are other means of raising awareness, such as billboards or advertisement on public transport. Concerns were raised that this WG could turn into a marketing group instead of focusing on policy recommendations. No definite conclusion on methodology was reached at this stage. 4. Conclusion and further steps. The group agreed on the following steps to take before the next meeting, where it will revisit several of the points raised for further reflection during this first meeting. - Questions to other WGs should be sent to the Chair until 31st of May. - The group agreed to develop a document with relevant user groups, input should be sent by 19 May. 3

4 Annex I: Agenda Agenda Venue: Rue Philippe Le Bon 3, room 3.45 (Metro Maalbeek) Meeting of Tuesday 5 May Welcome and adoption of the agenda 2. Introduction to the topic of Public Acceptance - Presentation on "Increasing Public Acceptance of C-ITS" - Presentation on Public Acceptance of C-ITS 3. Discussion on acceptance related concepts: - Increasing public awareness of C-ITS technologies - Mapping of factors influencing acceptance - Mapping of user groups and services 4. Conclusion, follow up and next meeting 4

5 Annex II: List of participants Name Frank Fickel Natalia de Estevan-Ubeda Eric Sampson Eric Kenis Hecht, Christoph Hennes Fischer Georgios Tzamalis Maria Aflayate Sara Lindberg Organization IAV GmbH Transport for London Independent Vlaamse Overheid - Dept Mobility & Public Works ADAC e.v. Yamaha 5