Publication

This feasibility study was financed by SAFER’s Idea Exploration Programme and carried out in collaboration between Scania CV and Guidance to Zero. The overall aim was to increase knowledge and understanding of fleet managers*1and truck drivers awareness, acceptance and use of active safety systems in heavy vehicles. 

Heavy goods transport is overrepresented in serious road accidents, placing significant attention on the sector. European legislation has become increasingly stringent, most recently through the General Safety Regulation Step 2, which came into force in July 2024. However, regulatory compliance alone is not sufficient to achieve a high level of road safety. A range of advanced safety features beyond legal requirements are available and can be specified in vehicles. Safety performance has also gained increased visibility through Euro NCAP’s Safer Trucks programme. 

While the growing number of safety features is positive, their life-saving potential depends on user understanding, trust and correct usage. This study therefore explores the gap between technological availability and practical adoption. Road safety is highly valued among both fleet managers and drivers who participated in the study. Almost all respondents believe that road safety will increase in importance over the next 2–3 years. 

Knowledge of available systems and their intended function is a prerequisite for effective use. This is relevant not only for drivers — who interact directly with the systems — but also for fleet managers, who specify vehicles and follow up on system usage. 

The study identified a significant information gap: 

• Between manufacturers and fleet managers
• Between manufacturers/fleet managers and drivers 

Information is often obtained through local sales representatives, particularly for fleet managers. However, information is rarely perceived as proactively provided; instead, it must be requested or is discovered after vehicle delivery. The vehicle handover is considered a crucial opportunity to explain safety features, yet drivers are not always involved directly in this process. As a result, important information may not reach the end user. 

Among drivers, “learning by doing” is common. When given time to explore and adapt to systems, acceptance tends to increase. However, patience varies, and some features are not appreciated in all situations. Participants provided several suggestions for improving information and follow-up. 

Continuous communication and behavioural follow-up were highlighted as important. “Nudging” was frequently mentioned as an effective method, as one-time information is easily lost in information overload.

Regarding specific systems: 

• Warning systems for vulnerable road users are generally appreciated, although excessive alerts can create perceived information overload.
• Adaptive cruise control is highly valued, as it supports speed compliance and safe following distances. But it can be improved for instance when coming into a roundabout.
• Lane support systems and Advanced Emergency Braking (AEB) receive mixed reactions. Lane support systems are often considered to place the truck wrongly and not suitable on narrow curvy roads. While AEB is generally appreciated, false activations can occur and may create dangerous situations. Some drivers have learned to anticipate high-risk scenarios for false activation and temporarily deactivate the system.
• Alcohol interlocks (alco-locks) represent an interesting case. While some fleet managers perceive resistance, drivers with experience of the system tend to support it — often suggesting it should be mandatory. Resistance appears more common among those without firsthand experience. 

Overall, the study highlights that the effectiveness of safety technology depends not only on technical performance but also on communication, trust, training and structured follow-up. Bridging the information gap between manufacturers, fleet managers and drivers is essential to unlocking the full safety potential of available systems.