Digital driver support for abnormal transports This report describes how the management of permits for abnormal transports could be improved through the development of a mobile digital support system. Insights have been gathered from several existing solutions in other countries as well as technology providers active in Sweden. Together with interviews and workshops with local and national government officials and industry representatives they form the basis of an analysis of digitalization and policy requirements for consideration in an ongoing mission to make abnormal transport permits more efficient led by the Swedish Transport Administration. The project was funded by the Swedish Transport Administration.

 The purpose of case 6 of the Drive Sweden Policy Lab 2023-25 is to examine the scope of an independent assessment in trials with automated road vehicles. The Swedish Transport Agency's regulations and general advice on permission to conduct trials with automated vehicles have recently been amended by adding a general advice that the applicant´s risk assessment should in certain cases be supplemented with a statement from an independent assessor regarding traffic safety (TSFS 2021:4, last amended by TSFS 2022:82). The regulation enables trials with automated vehicles in Sweden since 2017 and clarifies the circumstances under which it is reasonable safe to conduct trials with such vehicles. In the beginning of 2023, a policy lab was initiated with Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, and Austrian actors, which acts as a platform for collaborative policy development by relevant actors facing a common policy related challenge. Vehicle manufacturers, transport providers and operators, authorities, potential assessors, and applied research examine together the scope of independent assessments for trials with automated vehicles. The policy lab generates guidelines for independent assessments by clarifying and exemplifying the application and scope of such assessments in trials with automated vehicles. The policy lab considers knowledge and previous experiences from other transport sectors, from various countries with independent assessment already in place and from relevant EU and UNECE regulations, such as the requirements of independent assessment for the international market e.g., for a type-approval in the EU (ADS compliance assessment) or the proposed process for audits from the working group Validation Methods for Automated Driving as part of WP29. Drive Sweden Policy Lab case 6 is partly financed by Sweden´s innovation agency Vinnova, through its strategic innovation program Drive Sweden, and partly by the project parties.

As 3D-printing, or Additive Manufacturing (AM) continues to evolve, it raises legal questions related to intellectual property rights (IPR), product safety, environmental compliance, and various other legal domains. This report explores the legal implications of distributed manufacturing of spare parts introduced by AM over the supply chain within EU.

The legal review identifies key challenges within a traditional supply chain framework, highlighting areas with high (hot) and low (cold) legal implications. A heat map reveals that distributed additive manufacturing (AM) introduces pervasive legal considerations across all stages of the supply chain, emphasizing Intellectual Property (IP), Environmental Compliance, Cybersecurity, Consumer Protection, and Recycling.

Research & Development, High focus on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and regulatory compliance (e.g., CE marking) to ensure originality, safety, and adherence to standards.

Manufacturing, Moderate implications involving Environmental Reporting, Work

Environment, IP and Cybersecurity to manage compliance across decentralized facilities.

Transport, High concerns related to Export Control, and Cybersecurity, particularly for

safeguarding digital files during transmission.

Warehouse, Moderate focus on Packaging and Labeling to meet diverse regional standards.

Sales, Low implications, mainly centered on Tax Compliance across jurisdictions.

Customer, Medium implications tied to Warranties, Insurance, and Consumer Protection laws to address quality and liability.

End-of-Life, Recycling obligations present moderate legal challenges due to the complexity of tracking and complying with varied regulations in distributed setups.

To effectively address the legal implications of distributed manufacturing and AM, it is advisable to begin with non-critical parts, using them as a focal point for ongoing analysis and iteration throughout the transition. By developing a structured method for assessing spare parts from a legal perspective, organizations can save time and resources while also laying the groundwork for potential automation of the evaluation process.

The GeoSence project, which is part of the Joint Programme Initiative (JPI) Urban Europe, aims to provide an overview of the current state of the art and showcase practical applications of geofencing. The project partners come from Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the UK and is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 programme under the ERA-NET Cofound Urban Accessibility and Connectivity. Geofencing is defined as a virtual boundary in a specific geographical location, either fixed or dynamic. The GeoSence project focuses on improving urban transport by using geofencing methods for traffic planning and management. In this report, we examine the policies that support these solutions, while also identifying barriers and opportunities for smarter regulation. Our research focuses primarily on Munich, looking at issues such as parking, restricted areas, and data collection from e-scooter operators. Many European cities are struggling with problems associated with e-scooters, such as dangerous driving and inappropriate parking. In Munich, geofencing technology has been tested as a solution to address these issues and improve road safety, particularly for pedestrians. The city's main objective was to improve road safety for all road users, especially pedestrians. By reducing inappropriate parking, the city also expected to increase public acceptance of e-scooters. As a first step in dealing with this new form of mobility, the city's initial response included the creation of 30 dedicated parking zones in 2020 and 2021 and a voluntary commitment with mobility service providers to regulate this new form of mobility. By joining the GeoSence project, the city wanted to explore geofencing as a solution to the persistent road safety problems caused mainly by poorly parked e-scooters. With GeoSence, Munich was able to monitor and optimise the use of parking zones, improve parking and road safety, and prevent drunk driving. To define the case studies, the city collected data from e-scooter operators, including parking start and end times, vehicle types and GPS coordinates. This data was used to identify parking hotspots and plan further parking infrastructure, as well as to evaluate the use of existing parking infrastructure. Three different case studies were conducted to evaluate new parking policies based on geofencing. The first case study focused on parking e-scooters in 43 dedicated zones in Munich's old town. The second focused on the optimisation of parking in 30 existing zones outside the historic centre of the old town of Munich. Finally, the third case study introduced a new parking concept for the Oktoberfest events in 2022 and 2023. This temporary concept included designated zones and time-based usage restrictions. The results showed an increased concentration of e-scooters in the designated zones, improving the parking situation. Since GeoSence has demonstrated the success of the measures to improve the parking of e-scooters across the city, in November 2023 the City Council also mandated the Department of Mobility and the Department of Construction to create a citywide network of parking zones for shared micro-mobility services by 2026. This will build on the experience of the pilot concept for such parking facilities in the old town. In cooperation with mobility providers, no-parking zones of 100 metres will be set up around each parking space. The municipality is also working on a concept to manage the use of electric scooters during major events. To monitor compliance, geofencing tools will continue to collect data, while the results of GeoSence will be used to develop smart policies. The city's own MDAS project will provide dedicated monitoring data and analysis to make the implementation of the new parking zones and policies more effective. In the GeoSence project, the city of Munich combined contracts, public procurement, and regulation. The city entered into voluntary data-sharing agreements with operators, procured a data-sharing platform, and then used the data for better and smarter regulation. Better and smarter regulation is about moving away from a linear sequence of independent steps to a cycle of interlinked, mutually reinforcing steps. The idea is that regulation will be more effective and that citizens will have a better understanding of the rules and be more involved in creating new rules. We live in an ever-changing world, and with better and smarter regulation, our society will adapt more easily to new technologies. Rules also need to be future-proof and resilient, so that our society can adapt if necessary. Rules must also not hamper technological development and innovation. Better and smarter regulation also means making rules easier to understand and reducing administrative burdens for citizens and businesses. To achieve regulatory coherence and coordination, it's important for countries and cities to share their experiences. E-scooter regulations vary across the EU, with Swedish cities having the ability to regulate speed while German cities do not. Munich is leading the way in improving regulatory practices through geofencing, which helps build capacity and competence. In the case study regarding the use of e-scooters during the Oktoberfest, Munich demonstrated its dynamic and responsive regulation by adapting rules to human behaviour and using a risk-based approach. Geofencing is proving to be essential in the development of adaptive and informed regulation. Effective regulation also requires collaboration with stakeholders and the collection of robust, high-quality data. Munich's transition to evidence-based and smart regulation involved building trust with e-scooter operators and investing in a data platform. The city recognises the importance of training staff and involving stakeholders in transparent regulatory processes. Future challenges include ensuring public participation in data-driven decision-making and continuously evaluating and improving the regulatory framework. Geofencing is therefore proving to be essential in developing adaptive and informed regulation.

The city of Gothenburg public procured geofencing technology and did a pilot during fall 2022 with geofenced service trips vehicles (retrofitted). This report investigates the challenges and opportunities associated with procuring geofencing technology, addressing aspects such as needs, market analysis, risk, alternative solutions, legislative framework, and much more based on lessons learned from the pilot. Geofencing, defined as the creation of virtual boundaries to monitor, inform, and control traffic using electronic communication technologies or predefined boundaries within vehicles, lacks standardization and comprises various technical solutions. Its functionality depends on digital mapping, vehicle tracking methods like GNSS, onboard equipment, real-time connectivity, and additional databases for traffic rules. Geofencing offers degrees of control, from informing and alerting drivers about speed limits to actively restricting vehicle speed, with possibilities for static, dynamic, and smart adaptations. Applications range from enhancing traffic safety by alerting drivers and controlling vehicle speed to improving transport efficiency through optimized route selection and environmental benefits by reducing emissions and noise pollution. However, regulatory challenges persist, such as the absence of type-approved geofencing equipment and the need to define functional requirements rather than specific technologies in legal frameworks, presenting both opportunities and obstacles for its implementation in road traffic management and procurement processes. The first step in public procurement involves laying the groundwork by comprehensively understanding the buying organization's needs and market capabilities to meet them. The city identified key goals such as safe travel and driver assistance. The city explored existing agreements and engaged operators for a geofencing pilot to address speed compliance and traffic safety concerns, alongside researching market options and risks associated with third-party equipment installation and data privacy. Alternatives like ISA and ADAS were considered but deemed insufficient. In the second step the procurement is carried out, which includes tasks such as producing procurement documents, advertising, evaluating tenders, and ultimately selecting a supplier. The city procured the geofencing technology by direct public procurement and used a traditional public procurement to get hold of vehicles and drivers. In the third step of the public procurement implementation is in focus on, executing the pilot and evaluating its outcomes, particularly concerning geofencing technology. Challenges arose during implementation, including difficulties in accurately mapping zones to individual vehicles due to problems with the speed box installed. The city of Gothenburg learned valuable lessons, highlighting the importance of direct communication with drivers, verifying technology before widespread adoption, and close collaboration between all stakeholders. Despite challenges, the pilot provided valuable data and insights, with recommendations offered for future geofencing initiatives, emphasizing early supplier dialogue, thorough testing, user experience understanding, and involving relevant stakeholders from the outset. In this report insights, advice and lessons learned are also shared. Technical hurdles include the lack of standardized geofencing, difficulty in retrofitting diverse vehicle fleets, and limited market availability. Organizational challenges encompass the need for a needs-driven approach, internal and external collaboration, and balancing technology with user acceptance. Concerns about data privacy and driver behaviour emerge, requiring careful navigation of GDPR regulations. Strategically deciding the city's role in IT-solutions, data collection, and responsibility for vehicle behaviour poses business-related challenges. The report concludes that while geofencing technology isn't yet ready for full-scale implementation, further pilots are necessary for development. Future work involves exploring alternative solutions, enhancing internal processes, and conducting larger pilots to advance understanding and implementation of geofencing technology.

The use of Policy Lab processes has been growing in Sweden and other countries to accelerate the adaptation of regulations to emerging technologies. Policy Lab facilitates active collaboration between relevant authorities, companies, and stakeholders through interactive and iterative methods based on Design Thinking principles. This approach bridges the gap between the legislative domain responsible for developing regulatory frameworks and the innovative companies that create solutions for emerging markets using new technologies and opportunities. In our study, we applied Policy Lab processes to the EU Taxonomy Regulation to identify challenges and opportunities related to chemical safety and usage for manufacturers of complex products. The EU Taxonomy Regulation, along with its delegated acts, represent a serious effort to establish standardized sustainability reporting within EU. However, it is still in its early stages and lacks maturity. Moreover, certain ambiguities within the regulation currently prevent a comprehensive comparison of companies due to the development of other legislations. Addressing these gaps depends on the future development of, for example, REACH. Our conclusion is that the EU Taxonomy Regulation is part of a larger “movement” that reflects the policymakers’ intentions. This intention also includes increased data sharing at a significantly different level compared to current practices. In the long run, the shift will enable authorities to access the data and develop new legislations. Our specific focus was on the objective of pollution prevention and control regarding the use and presence of hazardous substances listed in Appendix C of the EU Taxonomy Regulation. According to Appendix C, activities must not lead to the manufacture, placing on the market or use of listed substances, whether on their own, in mixture or in articles. Regarding listed substances, reference is made to existing EU legislation that regulates hazardous substances within the EU. The most challenging aspect in Appendix C is point (g), which aims to identify substances, whether alone, in mixtures, or in articles, that meet the criteria set out in Article 57 of REACH but are not yet included in the Candidate list. Our workshops, interviews, and literature review confirmed that the main challenge in meeting the criteria of Appendix C, specifically point (g) is the need to enhance transparency and traceability throughout supply chains. Overcoming these challenges requires addressing barriers, such as the lack of a harmonized regulatory framework across the value chain, the need for faster identification and restriction of hazardous substances, and the reinforcement of stronger enforcement measures. The enabling of full declaration of the hazardous properties and functions of the substances, while considering the balance between information disclosure and protecting trade secrets, would reduce the need for extensive tracking of substance of very high concern along the value chain. To improve communication along the value chain and identify data gaps while protecting trade secrets, workshop participants have proposed the use of a user-friendly interface based on traffic light scenario. This interface would serve as a filter mechanism, allowing product manufacturers to establish specific criteria for material suppliers to respond to. The objective is to enhance communication, establish criteria, and effectively identify data gaps. While the SCIP database ensures accessibility of information on articles containing substances from the Candidate List above 0.1 w/w%, it is limited to hazardous substances on that list. This means that hazardous substances not listed in the Candidate List may not be covered by the database. The EU Commission has proposed the implementation of a digital product passport to enhance information sharing about products and their supply chain, including substances of concern. Our study is conducted under the Mistra SafeChem program, where screening tools for hazard and exposure assessment of substances are currently being developed. These tools aim to provide screening data for direct decision-making based on the Defined Approach (DA). These screening tools have the potential to contribute to filling data gaps during the early design phases of complex products, particularly when screening for multiple material alternatives.

Geofenced heavy trucks to protect bridges at crossings allowing higher weight on frozen roads Winter is our friend. When the road body is deep frozen it can handle more weight than during the rest of the year. However, the bridges are not affected by the cold weather, and they are therefore still vulnerable to increased loads. How can we allow increased loads on frozen roads while ensuring protection of the bridges? In this report, we share our insights from a project with the idea of using geofencing to protect the bridges. The geofencing technology ensures that the truck drives at a lower speed over the bridge and the bridge can withstand loads up to 74 tons since decreased speed reduces dynamic loads. If the road keeper can get guarantees that all heavy trucks drive at a low speed over the bridge, heavier traffic can be accommodated. This technology would of course also be beneficial to use across bridges in Europe regardless of the climate. ' The project “Frozen roads and 74 tons”, paid by the Swedish Transport Administration, consisted of three parts. One part was a pilot study during winter 22/23 demonstrating trucks from AB Volvo and Scania loaded with 74 tons using geofencing when the trucks passed over weak bridges. A speed limit, i.e. 50 km/h, was imposed in a zone around each bridge, whose coordinates were stored in the digital map accessible through the trucks’ Fleet Management System. Two different geofencing technologies were tested: on the one hand Scania’s system with “active” geofencing, where the truck was programmed to maintain the allowed speed over the bridge and calculated and implemented this itself (the driver could, however, override this by pushing the gas pedal to the floor); on the other hand AB Volvo’s system with “passive” geofencing, where the driver received a warning message when approaching the zone and would then slow down if necessary. The drivers were interviewed before and after the pilot about their experience. The results from the pilot showed that if the technology is verified, the truck will do the right thing and is on the right road network when the technology is activated. The drivers also liked geofencing. Geofences thus work in practice. The second part of the project was about quantifying the societal benefits of using geofencing. More efficient planning, control and follow-up can lower costs, reduce environmental impact, and increase traffic safety. Calculations in the project show that about 12 percent of timber transports in Norrland use frozen roads. They can benefit from the technology and if the technology is introduced, the industry would make savings of the equivalent of SEK 15 million / year and reduced energy use equivalent to 280 cubic meter diesel. At national level, this corresponds to an energy efficiency potential of 0.12 percent. The third part of the project was about policy and regulation. Can we use the current legislation, or do we need new legislation to scale the use of geofencing across bridges? How can we ensure compliance? How can we share data? How can we handle EU trade barriers? In the report, we have suggestions for policy and legislation to implement the geofencing technology to protect sensitive bridges. Our analysis shows that it is possible with today's regulations for an authority to introduce regulations on geofences. Such rules should preferably be based on functional requirements and a system of self-monitoring.

Autonomous follower truck convoy (AFTC) is a concept that addresses the major shortage of truck drivers and increasing transport costs. The AFTC concept can be described as a vehicle convoy concept consisting of two or more vehicles where the first, lead vehicle has a human driver and where the following vehicles in the convoy are driverless. The argument is made that this technology is less technically complex than single autonomous vehicles and targets higher economic values compared to driver-assisted platooning functions. The contribution of this paper is a viability study of the AFTC concept. The conclusions from the study are that the concept viability depends on the continuous evolvement of three main factors. The emergence of autonomous capabilities, legal frameworks, and logistics actors’ interest in adapting current processes and infrastructure to meet the operational limitations of the concept.

In this report, we have compiled our learnings and experiences of working with Policy Lab. Policy Labs have come about as an answer to the question "Can you work with policy and regulatory development in a better way than today?". Our answer to the question is a yes. Our hope with the report is that others will become interested and start their own Policy Lab. Abroad, there are many Policy Labs, but in Sweden there are only a few, which is why we believe there is room for more. There is not a given way to work with Policy Labs once and for all, but each Policy Lab is unique based on its context. Sweden's innovation agency Vinnova defines Policy Labs as follows: "Policy Labs can be explained as a group of actors with different competencies who want to develop a regulatory framework. In the Policy Lab, they use a set of user-centric methods and competencies to test, experiment, and learn in policy development."1 In our Policy Lab, we have worked in various research projects to: 1. analyse challenges/problems that arise between innovations, technology, market, and regulations, 2. develop one or more workable solutions and 3. interact with relevant actors to determine the next steps. What distinguishes our Policy Lab is that we never “own” the issue or solution. We must therefore always work with other actors who can take the results further. Our goal is to enable and skill people. This means that for us it is important to work concretely with real problems and needs owners and preferably test different solutions. We focus on the here and now perspective and not on what the future will look like in 10 years. It is about taking the next step forward towards the future, not creating the best rule, but instead creating the next rule. We also work consistently agile and use design as a method for problem solving. This means that the way we organize our work in the Policy Lab is circular and not linear. When it comes to using design as a method for problem solving, we use the concepts of "design thinking" and "double diamond". For us, it is also important that the members of the Policy Lab have different backgrounds and skills depending on what is needed in the individual project....

Autonomous delivery vehicles – what kind of vehicles are they and does it matter? The project GLAD – Goods deliveries during the last mile of self-driving vehicles explores how tomorrow's small autonomous delivery vehicles (ADV) could operate in the transport system. The goal of the GLAD project is to develop knowledge about the needs and challenges of such vehicles in Sweden before they are in real operation. In the project, there are several work packages that work with different challenges in relation to ADV. To explore these issues, the project has developed a prototype of an ADV, which is based on a vehicle which today is classified as a three-wheeled moped. But designed as an ADV it could be a different kind of vehicle. One result from one of the work packages in the project is that ADVs driving on public roads should maintain the same speed as other traffic to avoid critical traffic situations. This means that ADVs should be able to drive at a maximum speed of 70 km/h. Another requirement is that the ADVs should be able of carrying a load of 500 kg. These requirements are a conclusion from interviews with drivers of small manually driven delivery vehicles about how they experience today's traffic situations, from which type of road they use and how they use their vehicles. The purpose of this report is to identify obstacles and opportunities from a regulatory perspective to implement ADVs in Sweden in a safe way. Rules that may affect the development of ADVs are, for example, whether they are covered by the Machinery Directive or whether they should be type approved. Other rules concern license plates, motor liability insurance, where the vehicles may be driven and driving license requirements. The aim of the legislations is to create a safe vehicle to use. After a review of existing regulations, it is closest at hand that future ADVs, based on the requirements set in the project, are classified as a 4-wheel heavy motorcycle for the transport of goods. The vehicle also needs a type-approval. It can be argued that an ADV with that weight and speed will have a lot to prove from a safety perspective in a type-approval process and that a market introduction is therefore further away in time. If the speed requirements are lowered instead i.e., maximum of 30 km/h, it could be classified as a motor tool. The advantage of motor tools is that these must be CE-marked by the manufacturer, which in turn means that they have a shorter time to market because the process does not involve a type-approval agency.