1. EB Workshop on eSafety Conclusions

2. 2 How do you interpret the CEDR vision with regards to your national approach? Basically in line with national strategy Uncertainty of how quickly eSafety systems are penetrating in the market and how quickly does that start to affect the infrastructure ITS deployments Most NRAs very aware of the risks to current investment and compatibility with longer term More emphasis on safety and environment More concrete, e.g. how many % fatalities reduced Relationship to wider ITS

3. 3 Which aspects do you like to highlight in this vision? Cooperation with many stakeholders Benefit of vehicle systems to real-time traffic information, traffic management and overall network operation Effects of the systems Safety Environment, especially global warming Common view of NRAs with regard to e.g. speed management

4. 4 How do you interpret the CEDR strategy with regards to your national approach? Basically OK, but challenging Stepwise development towards large-scale deployment Information media and their coherence National industry interests and focus areas Close cooperation with national stakeholders Good interaction Evaluation of systems (performance and effects) HMI and safety Agreement on need of strategy but in different phases of developing such

5. 5 Which aspects do you like to highlight in this strategy? Varying responsibility of NRAs in different countries Role of NRA must be clearer Business models CEDR as NRA spokesman – enables input also by small NRAs User and customer orientation Use of technologies currently available Cooperate with all relevant stakeholders Need for legal framework; e.g. communications Open communication layers, protocols, architecture Participation in standardisation Learning from the experiences of other countries more advanced with regard to market penetration and infrastructure

6. 6 How would your NRA like to contribute to the realisation of the strategy? Participation in eSafety Forum and its WGs Large-scale test sites Participate in standardisation Close cooperation with and within CEDR Deploy ITS e.g. within EASYWAY Monitoring and information dissemination concerning R&D projects

7. 7 Decision platform Mandate for decisions depending on type of issue –Standard CEDR internal rules to be complied to E-mail decision making –EB and GB can make decisions by e-mail O2 assistance to decision making –O2 prepares decisions for the EB and GB

8. 8 Contributing to eSafety Participation in eSafety Steering Group –Egger, van der Kroon Participation in Working groups:  Implementation Road Maps  DE, SE, BE, NO  Real Time Traffic Information (RTTI)  DE, CH  Communication  BE, NL  Security  SE  Architecture  BE, NO  ICT for Clean and Efficient Mobility  SE, FR

9. 9 Contributing to eSafety Participation in Steering Group after a CEDR eSafety Road Map has been produced –Not in the 1 March meeting –Objective to the next one after March Road Map –Vision and Strategy acceptable to all NRAs respecting their differing roles –As concrete action plan as possible So far, weak participation in the WGs –Some countries clearly more active than others –Apparently most countries still focus on more conventional NRA issues

10. 10 Flyer Should be rewritten to reflect the improved vision and strategy Should be made more appealing and interesting Clear determination of the target audience

11. 11 CEDR cooperation with Ertico ERTICO is an important player and its importance is growing Close cooperation to be aimed at ERTRAC and ERANET also valuable cooperation partners