Influencing the uptake of in-vehicle safety technologies and quantifying impacts
This project aims to improve our understanding of in-vehicle safety technology adoption and how these trends influence killed or seriously injured (KSIs) causalities on the Strategic Road Network (SRN).
The project responds to evidence gaps highlighted in our previous Road to Zero Harm research, where assumptions on usage and effectiveness were previously found to be uncertain, outdated or not specific to SRN conditions. It generated evidence to support more accurate safety forecasting and inform strategies to encourage uptake of technologies that have the greatest potential to improve safety.
There was previously lack of reliable national evidence on how prevalent vehicle safety technologies are, how they are used in practice and how this real-world use influences collision risk.
Previous evidence relied on older national-level estimates that do not reflect current behaviour, and uptake varies widely, with some drivers disabling technologies due to usability concerns.
Limited understanding of actual usage patterns and user acceptance reduces confidence in forecasting their safety impact and limited the ability to determine which technologies or user groups offer the greatest potential for safety improvements.
Objectives
Improve understanding of real-world performance and effectiveness of key in vehicle safety technologies.
Assess uptake patterns, user acceptance issues and behavioural factors that influence technology use.
Identify which user groups and technologies have the greatest potential to improve safety.
Provide evidence to support strategies that encourage uptake of technologies most likely to reduce deaths and serious injuries.
Success criteria
Clearer evidence describing real-world effectiveness of priority in-vehicle technologies.
Improved understanding of uptake, acceptance and usage behaviours across different driver groups.
Insight into which users and technologies offer the greatest safety benefit on the SRN.
Clear articulation of considerations for influencing uptake to support future modelling and strategy development.
How the project supports National Highways KPIs
Safety improves through stronger evidence on how in vehicle technologies influence collision likelihood and severity, supporting more accurate forecasting.
Efficiency improves by enabling more targeted and cost-effective interventions that focus on technologies offering the greatest Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) saving potential.
The approach
The project built on findings from our previous Road to Zero Harm research by reviewing available evidence on the usage and effectiveness of in vehicle safety technologies. This included assessing assumptions used in earlier modelling, many of which were based on older research that did not account for SRN-specific factors such as road type, traffic mix and speed environment.
The research examined trends in technology uptake in new vehicle sales and explored user acceptance issues, including evidence that some drivers disable systems they find intrusive.
Engagement with National Highways specialists helped identify where assumptions lacked robustness and where improved evidence could most meaningfully strengthen forecasting.
The work also examined public perception and user segmentation to understand who benefits most from using these technologies and where barriers to uptake persist. This established a clearer evidence base to inform future modelling changes and shaped the priorities for follow on work beyond this year.
Project obstacles and how they were addressed
The project faced several challenges arising from limited contemporary evidence and uncertain usage patterns. Existing effectiveness estimates were derived from older research undertaken for European regulation and were not specific to SRN conditions. Lack of reliable data on uptake and real-world use had prevented inclusion of in-vehicle technologies in relevant previous research.
Anecdotal public reporting also highlighted usability and acceptance issues, including drivers switching off certain systems, contributing to uncertainty about true safety impact. These challenges underscored the need for more robust and SRN-specific evidence.
- Outdated effectiveness evidence was addressed by reviewing and updating the list of relevant technologies and associated evidence.
- Limited insight into uptake trends was mitigated by forecasting adoption across vehicle types, purchaser groups and technology categories.
- User acceptance issues were examined through segmentation and perception research to identify barriers and motivators of use.
- Lack of SRN-specific differentiation was managed by identifying where future analyses could incorporate road type and traffic-specific variation.
Outcomes and impact
The project has strengthened National Highways understanding of how in-vehicle safety technologies are adopted and used, and how real-world performance differs from existing modelling assumptions.
It clarified which technologies and user groups have the greatest potential to influence safety outcomes and highlighted where reliance on older or non-SRN specific evidence limits confidence in forecasting.
These insights provided a more informed foundation, shaping priorities for future research and safety programmes.
Key outcomes include:
- Clearer evidence on real-world effectiveness of priority in vehicle technologies.
- Improved understanding of uptake, user acceptance and usage patterns, including reasons for system deactivation.
- Insight into user groups most likely to benefit, such as specific driver profiles or vehicle types.
- Better visibility of modelling limitations, supporting future updates to Road to Zero Harm research.
User and stakeholder outcomes
The project provided analysts, policy teams and safety specialists with clearer visibility of how in vehicle technologies are used in practice and where current assumptions lack robustness.
Stakeholder feedback from Road to Zero Harm consultations highlighted limitations of outdated evidence across the sector, uncertain usage patterns and barriers to driver acceptance. By addressing these considerations and identifying priority user groups and technologies, the project improved the foundations for future analyses and safety programmes.
Key insights and learning
The project highlighted where gaps in effectiveness evidence, user behaviour understanding and uptake data reduce confidence in forecasting the safety contribution of in vehicle technologies. It showed that real-world use often differs materially from assumed use and that user acceptance plays a critical role in determining a technology’s safety impact. The work also clarified which areas should be prioritised for future research to further improve the relevant sector-wide evidence.
- Real-world usage does not always match assumed usage, strengthening the need for updated effectiveness evidence.
- User acceptance issues influence safety outcomes, with some drivers disabling systems they find intrusive.
- Some technologies and user groups offer greater safety potential, making targeted uptake strategies important.
- More granular SRN-specific evidence is required to improve modelling accuracy.
- Further research is needed to refine modelling inputs and inform future intervention strategies.
Future value and next steps
The next phase will build on this year’s findings by assessing the costs, benefits and feasibility of mechanisms that could accelerate the uptake of in-vehicle safety technologies. The work will involve identifying practical policy levers and engaging with potential action owners to understand options for implementation. This will support updates to the Road to Zero Harm roadmap and model by providing clearer evidence on which interventions could deliver meaningful safety impacts.
- Assessing the costs, benefits and feasibility of policy levers such as legislative or regulatory changes, insurance discounts and tax incentives.
- Working with industry and specialists to co-develop practical implementation strategies.
- Identifying which interventions should be incorporated into the Road to Zero Harm roadmap and model.
- Supporting further evidence improvements by clarifying how different interventions could influence uptake and safety outcomes.
