1. The promise and hype regarding automated driving and MaaS 6 -- 1.1 The promise 6 -- 1.2 What do we mean by the term 'automated driving'? 9 -- 1.3 The hype 11 -- 2 Automated Driving levels 27 -- 2.1 SAE J3016 27 -- 2.2 The Significance of Operational Design Domain (ODD 38 -- 2.3 Deprecated terms 39 -- 2.4 No relative merit 40 -- 2.5 Mutually Exclusive Levels 40 -- 2.6 J3016 Limitations 41 -- 2.7 Actors in the automated vehicle paradigm 42 -- 2.8 Other functions 49 -- 2.8.1 Regulation data access 49 -- 3 The current reality 51 -- 3.1 UNECE WP 29 51 -- 3.2 Social acceptance 53 -- 3.3 SMMT 53 -- 3.4 Other observations 54 -- 3.5 The European Commission 55 -- 3.6 Legislation 56 -- 3.7 Subsidiarity 57 -- 3.8 Viewpoints 57 -- 4 Automated Driving Paradigms 60 -- 4.1 OECD 60 -- 4.4 Communications evolution 60 -- 4.2 Cooperative ITS 62 -- 4.3 The C-ITS Platform 65 -- 4.5 Holistic approach 67 -- 4.6 It won't happen quickly 68 -- 4.7 Implications of fully automated vehicles 69 -- 5 The MaaS Paradigm 81 -- 5.1 Purist definition for MaaS 81 -- 5.2 Vehicle manufacturer perspective for MaaS 81 -- 5.3 Traditional transport service provider perspective for MaaS 82 -- 5.4 MaaS from the perspective of the MaaS Broker 82 -- 5.5 MaaS as a tool for Social Engineering 87 -- 5.6 MaaS experience to date 89 -- 5.7 MaaS and Covid-19 89 -- 6 Challenges facing automated driving 93 -- 7 Potential problems hindering the instantiation of MaaS 98 -- 7.1 Root causes of obstacles 98 -- 7.2 Level of community readiness 98 -- 7.3 Level of Social Engineering readiness 99 -- 7.4 Perception of risks 101 -- 7.5 Level of market readiness 101 -- 7.6 Level of Software solution readiness 103 -- 7.7 Training 103 -- 7.8 Timing 103 -- 7.9 Institutional & Governance 103 -- 8 Potential solutions to overcoming barriers to automated driving 106 -- 8.1 Vehicle manufacturers flawed paradigm of the automated vehicle 106 -- 8.2 Vehicle manufacturers using different paradigms for competitive advantage 107 -- 8.3 Road operator's responsibilities 110 -- 8.4 New modes of transport and new mobility services must be safe and secure by design 118 -- 8.5 How other road users interact with AVs 119 -- 8.6 Automated vehicles will have to be able to identify and consistently respond to different forms of communication 119 -- 8.7 AV's by themselves will not necessarily be smarter than conventional vehicles 122 -- 8.8 Congestion levels will not drop significantly 124 -- 8.9 Automated vehicles will release unsatiated demand 125 -- 8.10 Safety and some operational data must be freely shared 128 -- 8.11 Mixed AV and conventional traffic 128 -- 8.12 AV Acceptability 129 -- 8.13 Low latency communication 130 -- 8.14 Roads could be allocated exclusively to AVs 133 -- 8.15 Automated and connected vehicles bring new requirements 135 -- 8.16 Cybersecurity 136 -- 8.17 Changing speed limits and even getting signs put up can take years 141 -- 8.18 Political decisions needed 142 -- 8.19 Role of government 143 -- 8.20 Fallback to driver 149 -- 8.21 Range of services supported 156 -- 8.21.1 Services that can be instantiated without the support of the local infrastructure 157 -- 8.21.2 Services that can only be provided using data/information from the local infrastructure 158 -- 8.21.3 Services that can be enhanced/improved/extended by using data/information from the local infrastructure 158 -- 8.21.4 The HARTS architecture with reference to C-ITS platform Day/Day 1.5 services 160 -- 8.22 Young drivers and experience 197 -- 8.23 Liability 198 -- 8.24 Level 5 may take a long time to instantiate 203 -- 9 Potential solutions to overcoming barriers to MaaS 205 -- 9.1 Addressing General issues 205 -- 9.2 Essentials to enable MaaS 206 -- 9.2.1 Trust 207 -- 9.2.2 Impartiality 207 -- 9.2.3 Cooperation 208 -- 9.2.4 Integration services 208 -- 9.2.5 Commercial agreements 209 -- 9.2.6 Data protection 210 -- 9.2.7 Solid Governance model 211 -- 9.3 Removing Obstacles to MaaS 217 -- 9.3 Innovative enablers for MaaS 218 -- 10 The C-ART innovation 220 -- 10.1 Overview 220 -- 10.2 Policy context 221 -- 10.3 Key conclusions 222 -- 10.4 C-ART scenarios 223 -- 10.4.1 Short to medium term scenario (2020-2030): C-ART 2030 223 -- 10.4.2 Medium to long term scenario (2030-2050): C-ART 2050 224 -- 10.4.3 Town planning as a consequence of C-ART 224 -- 10.4.4 An assessment of C-ART 225 -- 10.4.5 Technology principles and architecture behind C-ART 225 -- 10. 4.6 The C-ART framework 228 -- 10.4.7 Some observations on Project C-ART 231 -- 11 Potential solutions to instantiate AVs and MaaS: Managed Architecture for Transportation Optimisation (MOAT) 233 -- 11.1 Managed not controlled 233 -- 11.2 High level Actors in the MOAT architecture 235 -- 11.2.1 Traveller Group (Traveller) 235 -- 11.2.2 Subscriber (Subscriber) 235 -- 11.2.3 Travel Service Provider (TSP) 236 -- 11.2.4 AV operator (AVO) 236 -- 11.2.6 Travel Information Provider (TIP) 236 -- 11.2.7 Traffic Management Centre (TMC) 236 -- 11.2.8 Travel Optimisation Service (TOS) 236 -- 11.3 MOAT from the subscriber / user perspective 237 -- 11.4 MOAT from the Travel Service Provider perspective 239 -- 11.4.1 Operate user interface (UI) 239 -- 11.4.2 Receive request from subscriber 239 -- 11.4.3 Characterise request options 239 -- 11.4.4 Calculate viable travel options 239 -- 11.4.5 Confirm options to subscriber 239 -- 11.4.6 Receive subscriber selection 240 -- 11.4.7 Fulfil travel arrangements 240 -- 11.4.8 Provide confirmation to subscriber 240 -- 11.4.9 Monitor/Manage progress of journey 240 -- 11.4.10 Acknowledge end of journey 240 -- 11.4.11 Process administration requirement 240 -- 11.4.12 Delete personal data 240 -- 11.5 MOAT from the road operator perspective 240 -- 11.6 MOAT from the AV operator (AVO) perspective 241 -- 11.7 MOAT from the Travel Optimisation Service (TOS) perspective 242 -- 11.8 MOAT from the Traffic Management Centre (TMC) perspective 243 -- 11.9 MOAT from the Travel Information Provider (TIP) perspective 243 -- 11.10 MOAT and privacy 243 -- 11.11 The MOAT overview architecture 243 -- 11.12 The MOAT systems architecture 244 -- 12 The Business Case for MaaS 247 -- 12.1 The Challenge 247 -- 12.3 The Solution 247 -- 12.4 The Outlook 248 -- 13 The Business Case for Automated Vehicles 248 -- 13.1 The Challenge 248 -- 13.3 The Solution 249 -- 13.4 The Outlook 250 -- 14 Timescales to successful implementation 251 -- 14.1 Caveat 251 -- 14.2 Phased MOAT 252 -- 14.3 Timescales MaaS 253 -- 14.4 Timescales for Automated Vehicles 253 -- 14.5 The first half of the Twentieth Century 255 -- 14.6 The second half of the twentieth Century 255 -- 14.7 2000 -- 2009 256 -- 14.8 2010-2019 257 -- 14.9 2020 -- 2029 259 -- 14.10 2030 -- 2039 260 -- 14.11 2040 -- 2050 260 -- 14.12 2050-2060 261 -- 14.13 In summary 261 Bibliography 262.