Business modelling and deployment of cooperative safety systems Tom Alkim (Rijkswaterstaat)
description
Transcript of Business modelling and deployment of cooperative safety systems Tom Alkim (Rijkswaterstaat)
1
SAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOT
Business modelling and deployment of
cooperative safety systems
Tom Alkim (Rijkswaterstaat)
Freek Faber (TNO)
2
Content
• SAFESPOT• SAFESPOT business models• Discussion business models• SAFESPOT deployment• Discussion deployment• SAFESPOT decision making process
3
SAFESPOT
The SAFESPOT CONCEPT: from the autonomous intelligent vehicle…
… to intelligent Cooperative Systems
4
SAFESPOT
• Safety applications– Intersection safety application– Local hazard warning– Speed assistance
• SP 6: BLADE – Business models, Legal Analysis and DEployment
5
Business models
Business modelling tasks in BLADE:
6.6.1. Preliminary definition
6.6.2. Ranking
6.6.3 Selection
• 10 business models• Example of a value web• Roles of the road operators
6
Spectrum of the business models
V2IV2V
several services
single SAFESPOT service
public financing
private financing
Navigationsystems
7
10 business models
(*) Due the high costs, the “SAFESPOT Plus” configuration with only “Public reliance” has been considered as not ecomical feasible.
8
AF=SAFESPOT System After MarketW = Cost EquipmentT=IncentivesF=FundingE= SAFESPOT ComponentsS= SpecificationR=Rules/Legislative FrameworkM=Financial Contribution
Business model example
Public Authorities
Insurances
SafespotAfter Sale Support
Driver
Automotive &Infrustructure
Supplier
Map Provider
OEM(car maker)
Road Operator
C2C,ACEA,CLEPA, ASECAPINSTITUTIONS Stakeholders (SF base)
Additional Stakeholders (SF plus)
E
SF System
EAF
AF
E
Flow of Products
Customer
Support
Flow of Services
W
F
F
FF
T
T
F
M
F
F
FM
M
W
Financial Flow
SSS
R
R R
R
R
Flow of Information
Sheet 9
9
Government strategies
Economic Governance Role
Public service Infrastructure Own consumption
Innovation Management Public Rules Projects
Economic Instrument Permits, quota, concessions
Fees, taxes or subsidizing
Bonds, rights, support
Governance Impact Input Throughput Output Outcome
Innovation Specs Simple Easy Quick Frugal Broad A-political
Government Driver Frustration Crisis New prevention
New results
New technology
Moral imperative
21 april 2023Mattieu Nuijten
• Sweet talk• Public money• Legislation• Partner in value chain
10
Legal AspectsLegal Aspects
DeploymentDeployment
Business modelsBusiness models
Governance Impact
21 april 2023Mattieu Nuijten
Efficiency of process
Economy
Cost effectiveness of policy
Effectivity
InputResources,
€
ThroughputProcess,
Production
OutputProductsServices
OutcomeEffect,Results
Standards on:•Human capital•Financial•Resources
Standards on:•Installations•Facilities•Emissions•Process, Production
Standards on:•Quality•Productspecs•Services
Standards on:•Welfare•Immission•Hinderance•Safety
11
Business models discussion
• The goal of the discussion is to verify our view on the role of the road operator in cooperative safety systems
– determine on which of the business models we should focus– determine which roles in the deployment road operators and
public authorities could have
12
Business models discussion
• Public involvement can accelerate the deployment of cooperative safety systems– E.g. by providing bandwidth, enforcing standard, subsidies,
being a launching customer
• Without public involvement cooperative safety systems will not take of– Minimum penetration will not be achieved due to market
imperfection
• Cooperative safety applications are not the responsibility of the road operators
13
Business models discussion
• Other investments in road safety are more effective then cooperative safety systems
• Safety has no priority for road operator in relation to throughput
• Road operators should have a quality standard for road safety
14
Business models discussion
Which roles of road operators in our business models are actually considered by road operators?• Participate in R&D (road side equipment)• Subsidize the system in start-up phase• Public service provider (operate road side infrastructure)• Content provider (provide traffic/safety information)• Monitoring (generate traffic information)• Regulate quality standards• Public support (awareness campaigns)• Enforce mandatory equipment
15
Business models discussion
Which development is in the best interest of the road operators?• public financing vs. private financing• Standalone safety applications vs. combined with other
applications• V2V vs. V2I
What other factors are important?
V2IV2V
several services
single SAFESPOT service
public financing
private financing
Navigationsystems
V2IV2V
several services
single SAFESPOT service
public financing
private financing
Navigationsystems
16
Deployment
Deployment and business models
Different views of the future rather than one! (scenario approach)
Time 2009 2020
Penetration
Proof of Concept Scenarios 2020
21 april 2023
17
Scenarios in the Deployment Programme
Base scenario
• Current situation• Critical uncertainties• Driving forces• Key Dimensions• Plot• Image of the future
Scenarios
• Current situation• Critical uncertainties• Driving forces• Key Dimensions• Plot• Image of the future
Scenarios
• Driving forces• Uncertainties• Scenario variables• Plot• Textual image of the future recommended
actions for main
stakeholders
deployment challenges
from different perspectives
Business modelling
Assessment and
evaluation
Risk and legal analysis
organisational architecture
WP 6.6
WP 6.3
WP 6.4
WP 6.5
Input Output
WP 6.7 Deployment Programme
18
STOF model
Organisation
Service
Finance
Technology
Driving forces
19
Political importance of
road safety
Economic growth Technological
developments
Socio-cultural developments
Safety effects
Penetration rates
Geographical coverage
Government involvement
Compatibility
Regulation
Quality of service
Market demand
Privacyconcerns
Allocation of liability
Organisational
complexity
System costs
Synergy with other in-car
systems
FunctionalityTechnical feasibility
+
-/+
+
+
++
-/++/-
-
+
+
+
+++
+
+
+
+
+-
+
-+
+
+
End user price
-
+/-
User acceptance
Financing
-+-
+/-
+
+
-/+
+
20
synergy
gov.strategy
penetration
compatibility
geogr. cov.
financing
quality of service
liability
effects
organisation
system costs
legislation
privacy concerns
business model
Critical uncertaintiesU
ncer
tain
ty
Influence
21
Deployment scenarios
BIG BROTHER IS GUARDING YOU
big bangsafe spots
in-car platform
SAFESPOT platform
private
public
A SAFE STARTDOES THE JOB
ITS REVOLUTION
22
Deployment programme
The result of the scenario approach is a deployment programme which contains:
Scenarios• End state in 2020 (short story & picture)• Timeline with milestones• Deployment challenges
Interpretation• Recommended actions for main stakeholders• If, possible: reflection on the scenarios by different stakeholders
23
Discussion deployment
• Are the scenario dimension indeed the critical uncertainties?– SAFESPOT platform vs. combined platform– Hotspot vs. European coverage– Full functionality vs. increasing functionality
• Which other critical uncertainties are relevant/missing?
24
Discussion deployment
• Which scenarios are likely to occur? Rank from 1 (most likely) to 8 (less likely)
nr Scenario name dimension 1 dimension 2 dimension 31 big brother is guarding you SAFESPOT big bang public2 we want safety! SAFESPOT big bang private3 a safe start does half the job SAFESPOT safe spots public4 safety for sale SAFESPOT safe spots private5 societal quantity rebate in-car big bang public6 ITS revolution in-car big bang private7 extended traffic management in-car safe spots public8 in-car added value in cities in-car safe spots private
25
Discussion deployment
• Which scenarios are preferred? Rank from 1 (most preferred) to 8 (less preferred)
nr Scenario name dimension 1 dimension 2 dimension 31 big brother is guarding you SAFESPOT big bang public2 we want safety! SAFESPOT big bang private3 a safe start does half the job SAFESPOT safe spots public4 safety for sale SAFESPOT safe spots private5 societal quantity rebate in-car big bang public6 ITS revolution in-car big bang private7 extended traffic management in-car safe spots public8 in-car added value in cities in-car safe spots private
26
27
Decision making process
• Implementation requires a decision making process• Process management approach• Structure of the arenas• Some examples of roles for road operators
ALS HIER TIJD VOOR IS
28
Decision making process
12SAFESPOT IP 2nd Review May, 14-15, 2008 , Orbassano
WP6.4: Decision making process
Agenda
Agenda
Agenda Agenda
B
C
A
E
Agenda
FD
AgendaDeploymentetc.
StakeholderpersuasionCommunicationBusiness modelsetc.
ModularityLiabilityPrivacyetc.
StandardisationPerformanceQualityUser/HMIEtc.
LegislationLiabilityPrivacyetc.
ModularityLiabilityPrivacyetc.
29
Decision making arenas
• Technical arena• Legal arena• Deployment arena• Business modelling arena• ..
30
31
•BACKUP SLIDES
32
Business models discussion
1. Which instruments are road operators able and willing to use?
33
Business models discussion
1. Which instruments are road operators able and willing to use?
34
Effectiveness of measure according to infra providers
Source: Annex to Benchmarking study on activities on promoting and deploying Intelligent Vehicle Safety Systems in the EU
35
Effectiveness of measure according to driver associations
Source: Annex to Benchmarking study on activities on promoting and deploying Intelligent Vehicle Safety Systems in the EU
36Source: Annex to Benchmarking study on activities on promoting and deploying Intelligent Vehicle Safety Systems in the EU
37
Measure by public authorities
38
Business modelling discussion - KLAD
• Cost/benefit analysis; “profit” is in improved traffic safety, how to monetarise?
• Invest in traditional measures (infra, driver, vehicle, enforcement) to improve traffic safety or willing to invest in additional measures (the SAFESPOT system)
• Dilemma: investing in SAFESPOT system is only feasible when traditional measures are sufficiently deployed (quick wins), this means that the additional “profit” is much harder to get