Shared Automated Vehicles (SAVs) hold great promise for the future of urban mobility. Automated ride-sharing services are expected to alleviate traffic congestion, reduce traffic emissions, and significantly improve road safety by combining advanced connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV) technology with the ride and/or car-sharing concept. These benefits, however, are highly dependent on the deployment concept of the service and environment including network characteristics, CAV technology, traffic compositions, population acceptance, etc. This study aims to assess the mobility and environmental impacts of introducing a door-to-door automated ride-sharing (ARS) service under different deployment scenarios. Two calibrated and validated city-scale networks with different characteristics were used: a suburban area in the Greater Manchester (UK) and a city-centre area in Leicester (UK). An optimisation technique for the vehicle routing problem was developed to efficiently operate ARS at a network-level. The customers' preference for individual and shared rides with Willingness to Share (WTS) was investigated to gain a better understanding of the performance indicators (i.e., delay, travel time, speed, kilometres-driven and emissions) The introduction of ARS was investigated under two deployment scenarios: 1) mixed with conventional human-driven vehicles (HDVs) and 2) mixed with HDVs with varying CAV market penetration rates. Findings suggest that introducing ARS can adversely impact mobility and the environment under mixed traffic, especially in suburban areas, and the benefits of an automated ride-sharing system are highly dependent on WTS. The findings will assist local authorities in formulating automated ride-sharing policies to manage the traffic on roads.

Mobility and environmental benefits of Green Light Optimal Speed Advisory (GLOSA) systems have been reported by many previous research studies, however, there is insufficient knowledge on the safety implications of such an application. For safe deployment of GLOSA system, it is most critical to identify and address potential safety issues in the design process. It can be argued that implementation of GLOSA system can improve safety by reducing traffic conflicts associated with the interrupted traffic flow at signalised intersections. However, more research findings are needed from field and simulation based studies to evaluate the impacts on safety under a variety of real-world scenarios. As part of the LEVITATE (Societal Level Impacts of Connected and Automated Vehicles) project under European Union's Horizon 2020 Programme, the main objective of this study is to examine the safety impacts of GLOSA under mixed traffic compositions with varying market penetration rates (MPR) of connected and automated vehicles (CAVs). A calibrated and validated microsimulation model (developed in Aimsun) of the greater Manchester area was used for this study where three signalised intersections in a corridor were identified for implementing GLOSA system. An improved algorithm was developed by identifying the potential issues/limitations in some of the GLOSA algorithms found in literature. Behaviours of CAVs were modelled based on the findings of a comprehensive literature review. Safety analysis was performed through processing the simulated vehicular trajectories in the surrogate safety assessment model (SSAM) by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The surrogate safety assessment results showed small improvement in safety with the GLOSA implementation at multiple intersections in the test network only at low MPR (20%) scenarios of CAVs, as compared to the respective without GLOSA scenarios. No or rather slightly lower improvement in safety was observed with GLOSA implementation under mixed fleet scenarios with 40 % or higher 1st Generation or 2nd Generation CAVs, as compared to the respective scenarios without GLOSA. The implementation of GLOSA system was also found to have some impact on the traffic conflict types (although not consistent across all MPR scenarios), where rear-end conflicts were found to decrease while a slight increase was observed in lane-change conflicts.

Cooperative, Connected and Automated Mobility (CCAM) enabled by Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) has potential to change future transport systems. The findings from previous studies suggest that these technologies will improve traffic flow, reduce travel time and delays. Furthermore, these CAVs will be safer compared to existing vehicles. As these vehicles may have the ability to travel at a higher speed and with shorter headways, it has been argued that infrastructure-based measures are required to optimise traffic flow and road user comfort. One of these measures is the use of a dedicated lane for CAVs on urban highways and arterials and constitutes the focus of this research. As the potential impact on safety is unclear, the present study aims to evaluate the safety impacts of dedicated lanes for CAVs. A calibrated and validated microsimulation model developed in AIMSUN was used to simulate and produce safety results. These results were analysed with the help of the Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM). The model includes human-driven vehicles (HDVs), 1st generation and 2nd generation autonomous vehicles (AVs) with different sets of parameters leading to different movement behaviour. The model uses a variety of cases in which a dedicated lane is provided at different type of lanes (inner and outer) of highways to understand the safety effects. The model also tries to understand the minimum required market penetration rate (MPR) of CAVs for a better movement of traffic on dedicated lanes. It was observed in the models that although at low penetration rates of CAVs (around 20%) dedicated lanes might not be advantageous, a reduction of 53% to 58% in traffic conflicts is achieved with the introduction of dedicated lanes in high CAV MPRs. In addition, traffic crashes estimated from traffic conflicts are reduced up to 48% with the CAVs. The simulation results revealed that with dedicated lane, the combination of 40-40-20 (i.e., 40% human-driven – 40% 1st generation AVs– 20% 2nd generation AVs) could be the optimum MPR for CAVs to achieve the best safety benefits. The findings in this study provide useful insight into the safety impacts of dedicated lanes for CAVs and could be used to develop a policy support tool for local authorities and practitioners.