Introducere-Apendix-EU Survey

Special Eurobarometer
European
Commission
Use of Intelligent Systems

in Vehicles
Fieldwork: June - July 2006

Publication: December 2006
Special Eurobarometer 267 / Wave 65.4 – TNS Opinion & Social
This survey was requested by Directorate General Information Society and Media and
coordinated by Directorate General Communication
This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission.
The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.
Special EUROBAROMETER 267 “USE OF INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS IN VEHICLES”
Table of contents
PRESENTATION .......................................................................................... 2
1. EU CITIZENS’ DRIVING PATTERNS .......................................................... 4
1.1 The Average European Driver...................................................................4

1.2 Differences between countries and respondent groups .................................5
1.2.1 Drivers and non-drivers .....................................................................5
1.2.2 The car fleet.....................................................................................8
1.2.3 Europeans’ driving habits ................................................................. 11
2. FACTORS EFFECTING THE CHOICE OF CAR ............................................ 13
3. PERCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEMS ............................... 17
3.1 Perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle systems .................................... 19

3.2 Focus on data privacy issues .................................................................. 41
3.3 Factors discouraging having intelligent systems in a car ............................. 47
4. INFORMATION SOURCES....................................................................... 49
5. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES...................................................... 52
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 55
ANNEXES
Technical note
Questionnaire
Data tables
-1-
PRESENTATION
There are an estimated 375 million road users within the EU. Every year, over 1.4
million road accidents result in over 40,000 fatalities and 1.7 million injured1.
Moreover, the rising volumes of traffic cause problems such as congestion of the
main roads and harmful effects on the environment and public health.
Improving road safety, guaranteeing the efficiency of transport and making
driving more economic and thus more environmentally friendly are the key
challenges posed to road traffic today.
These challenges are truly pan-European: they affect all 25 Member States and call
for a European-level solution. The intensity of these problems varies from country to
country due to different levels of infrastructure and vehicle safety, driver behaviour
and composition of the car fleet which in turn requires even deeper co-operation
between all stake holders towards more harmonised regulations and infrastructures
throughout Europe.
There are several ways to tackle the problems, among others intelligent vehicle
systems, caused by the increasing volume of traffic:
1) Educating and training the drivers
2) Enforcing road safety rules
3) Improving the physical road infrastructure
4) Improving vehicle safety e.g. by encouraging the use of Intelligent Systems in
vehicles
This Special Eurobarometer report tackles the issue of Intelligent Systems in vehicles.
The eSafety initiative was launched in 2002 recognising the potential of using
intelligent vehicle systems in order to increase road safety2. It is a joint industry-
public sector initiative of the European Commission and the relevant European
industries and other stakeholders. Its objective is to improve road safety and road
transport efficiency through Intelligent Vehicle Safety systems.
As its latest action, the European Commission presented “The Intelligent Car
Initiative”3 in February 2006. This Communication tackles the reasons that slow down
the use of intelligent systems. It is based on three pillars:
• To coordinate and support the work of relevant stakeholders
• To support research and development
• To increase public awareness of these systems that is the main motivation
behind this study.
All proposed actions are based on a multi-stakeholder forum - the EC, the
automotive industry, public authorities, the mobile communications industry,
information technology sectors, road authorities etc. - because encouraging the use of
intelligent systems cannot and should not depend on private business only.
All the systems described in this report have a considerable potential to save lives
but most of them have a limited market share or are not yet introduced to the
market for various reasons. There are legal, budgetary and administrative barriers to
be overcome. There is a need for stronger customer demand and a higher level of
awareness of these safety functions. Finally, the highly competitive situation and high
manufacturing costs lead to a situation where these systems are offered only for high
range cars i.e. to a limited consumer group.
1
COM(2006)59 “Raising awareness of ICT for Smarter, Safer and Cleaner Vehicles”
2
Read more in http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/esafety/index_en.htm
3
More about The Intelligent Car Initiative in
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/esafety/esafety_what_s_new/index_en.htm
-2-
Against this background, DG Information Society and Media launched this

Eurobarometer study that covered all 25 Member States. 24,815 citizens4 were
interviewed face to face between 7 June and 12 July 2006 about their perception of
intelligent vehicle systems and their usefulness.
This report consists of five chapters dealing with the following themes:
• EU citizens driving patterns: identifying potential user groups of intelligent
vehicle systems;
• Factors effecting the choice of car: which factors Europeans consider if they
were to buy a car;
• Perceptions of intelligent vehicle systems: desirability and perceived
usefulness of intelligent vehicle systems;
• Preferred information sources: who Europeans trust to give them
information about intelligent vehicle systems;
• The role of public authorities: which actions the public authorities are
expected to carry out in order to encourage the use of intelligent vehicle
systems.
The results presented in this report are analysed in terms of the European average5
and then considered on a country-by-country basis. Differences between the old and
the new Member States and geographical areas are described when applicable. Also,
special focus is laid on the most populous Member States that also have the largest
numbers of vehicles and, therefore, are of greatest interest when it comes to
intelligent vehicle systems. Some brief comments are made on the socio-demographic
variables of citizens of the European Union.6
Moreover, questions QE2-QE5 concerning the profile of drivers were systematically

cross tabulated with questions QE6-QE12 in order to see whether Europeans’
driving patterns have an effect on their perception of intelligent vehicle
systems.
When interpreting the results it should be taken into account that the sample
included EU citizens aged 15 and more even if the minimum age to have a driving
licence is, with a few exceptions, 18 within the EU
However, questions concerning driving habits (QE2-QE6) are asked only in the
group of those who drive which excludes respondents under 18 except 26 persons
who indicate that they drive a car.
Questions concerning perceptions of intelligent vehicle systems (QE7-QE12) are
analysed in the total sample in order to present also the opinion of citizens that are
potential users of intelligent vehicle systems in the future.
Finally, high non-response rates are observed for some questions asking for
respondents’ opinions on intelligent vehicle systems (QE7-QE12). This is particularly
true for countries where fewer respondents have a driving licence and they
therefore presumably have difficulties in forming opinion on this topic.
Consequently, in question QE8 both responses of the total sample and of those who
answered to this question are presented.
4
The study covers the population of the respective nationalities of the European Union Member States, resident
in each of the Member States and aged 15 years and over.
5
The EU25 averages are weighted according to the size of population of each Member State
6
In some cases, due to the rounding of figures, displayed sums can show a difference of one point with the
sum of the individual cells.
-3-
1. EU CITIZENS’ DRIVING PATTERNS
This first chapter describes EU citizens’ driving habits and characterises the car
fleet in Europe. The results are first discussed at European level and then
differences between countries, socio-demographic categories and in terms of
driving patterns are presented.
Source questionnaire: QE1-QE67
1.1 The Average European Driver
QE1 Please tell which of the following QE4 How would you best describe the size
situations applies to you. (MULTIPLE of the car you usually use? - % EU25
ANSWERS POSSIBLE) - % EU25
You drive your

57% Medium-sized
own car 48%
car
You do not
C ity car/Small
have a driving 29% 27%
car
license
You have a
driving licence Big sized car 12%
9%
but you rarely
or never drive Family car
(People 9%
You drive carrier)
someone 5%
else’s car
SUV 2%
You drive a
company/fleet 4%
car Sport car 1%
0% 60% 0% 60%
QE5 Did you get the car you usually use QE6 And how old is this car now? By this I mean
new or second hand? - % EU25
the number of years since first registration. (DO
NOT READ OUT) - % EU
Second hand 53%

More than 10 years old 19%
6 to 10 years old 28%
4 to 5 years old 19%

New 46% 3 years old 12%
2 years old 10%
1 year old 6%
DK 1% Less than 1 year old 5%
DK 1%
0% 60% 0% 30%
An average European drives his/her own car (57%) which is most often medium-
sized (48%) or a small car (27%). Europeans buy second hand (53%) and new
cars (46%) fairly equally but the car fleet appears to be rather old (66% 4 years+)
than new (33% up to 3 years old). About a half of EU citizens (47%) have a car older
than six years since the first registration.
7
N.B. Question QE1 was asked to all and questions QE2-QE6 were asked from those who drive.
-4-
QE2 Thinking in terms of how you drive on a QE3 How many kilometres do you drive per
weekly basis would you say that you mainly year? - % EU25
drive…? - % EU25
Less than 5.000 km 15%
On urban roads 44%

From 5.000 to less than 10.000 km 27%
From 10.000 to less than 15.000

23%
km
On rural roads 22%
15%
km
On motorways
and other fast 13% 9%
km
highways
4%
2 or 3 of these km
equally 22%
(SPONTANEOUS) 50.000 km or more 2%
0% 50% 0% 30%
Half of EU citizens (50%) drive between 5,000 and 15,000 km per year, mostly on
urban roads (44%). Only 6% of respondents indicate that they drive more than
30.000 km per year.
1.2 Differences between countries and respondent groups
There are significant differences between countries, markedly between the old
and the new Member States, and respondent groups, when it comes to those
who have or do not have a driving licence and in terms of the ownership, size and
age of their cars.
Briefly, it can be said that significantly fewer citizens in the new Member States have a
driving licence and, therefore, own a car compared to those residing in the EU15.
Respondents in the new Member States tend to also drive older cars and buy them
second hand while respondents in the EU15 tend to more often have a car aged less
than 6 years and buy their car as new.
1.2.1 Drivers and non-drivers
Source questionnaire: QE1
Firstly, respondents who live in the 15 old Member States are significantly
more likely to have a driving licence (75%) than their counterparts in the new
Member States (53%). Consequently, while the majority of Latvians (59%),
Hungarians (52%), Lithuanians (52%) and Poles (51%) do not have a driving licence,
this is the case only for 16% of citizens of Luxembourg and Sweden. It is also more
common in the new Member States that a respondent has a driving licence but he/she
drives rarely or never (14% against 8% in the EU15).
Out of the old Member States, citizens of southern Europe – Greece (43%), Spain
(42%) and Portugal (41%) - state slightly more frequently that they do not have a
driving licence.
-5-
In France (79%), Italy (82%), Germany (79%) and the United Kingdom (71%) – the
four most populous countries of the EU – the share of those who have a driving licence
is equal or above the EU average (71%).
In consequence, respondents in the EU15 more often drive their own car (61%
against 34% in the NMS). This difference is marked in the country by country analysis:
while three quarters of citizens of Luxembourg (75%) have their own car this is the
case only for a quarter of Latvians (25%).
69% of French, 65% of Italians, 64% of Germans and 59% of Brits drive their own car
compared to the EU average (57%).
Slovenia is the only new Member State where the share of those who have a driving
licence (76%) and those who drive their own car (67%) is above the EU average.
- Respondents in the EU15 are significantly more likely to have

a driving licence -
QE1 Please tell which of the following situations applies to you. (MULTIPLE ANSWERS POSSIBLE)
You drive a You drive You have a driving
You drive your You do not have
company/fleet someone licence but you rarely
own car a driving license
car else’s car or never drive
LU 75% 4% 9% 3% 16%
CY 71% 7% 10% 3% 18%
FR 69% 6% 6% 8% 21%
SI 67% 4% 5% 7% 23%
SE 66% 10% 12% 10% 16%
IT 65% 5% 7% 7% 18%
BE 64% 8% 7% 7% 19%
DE 64% 3% 5% 10% 21%
IE 64% 1% 4% 2% 29%
NL 64% 8% 4% 8% 21%
AT 61% 4% 6% 12% 20%
DK 60% 9% 8% 14% 19%
FI 60% 6% 6% 9% 24%
UK 59% 5% 7% 7% 29%
EU25 57% 4% 5% 9% 29%
MT 55% 4% 6% 6% 37%
PT 50% 3% 2% 5% 41%
ES 48% 2% 2% 7% 42%
EL 44% 2% 4% 9% 43%
CZ 41% 6% 8% 15% 35%
EE 35% 7% 6% 12% 46%
LT 34% 3% 3% 10% 52%
SK 34% 6% 5% 20% 41%
PL 31% 3% 4% 14% 51%
HU 30% 3% 3% 13% 52%
LV 25% 5% 4% 10% 59%
EU15 61% 4% 5% 8% 25%

NMS 34% 4% 4% 14% 47%
When it comes to socio demographic categories8, men (16% no driving licence), those
aged 25-54 (19-21%), those who have a higher level of education (15% of those
who studied at least until aged 20) and those who are in a managerial position or
self-employed (around 10% no driving licence) are most likely to have a driving
licence.
8
The base of these socio-demographic figures includes respondents aged 18 and more.
-6-
Also the location of residence appears to influence whether a respondent has a

driving licence since 35% of those who live in a large town do not have one whereas
this is the case for only 11% of respondents living in rural areas.
In turn, women (41% no driving licence), young respondents (40% of those aged 18-
24) and, in parallel, students (35%), the elderly (41% of those aged 55+), those with
a low level of education (48%), pensioners (45%), house persons (46%) and the
unemployed (45%) state most often that they do not have a driving licence.
Finally, when the focus is turned on the ownership of cars, not surprisingly it appears
to be connected with gender, the socio-economic status and age: 68% of males,
64% of those aged 25-54, 68% of those with a high level of education, 78% of the
self-employed and 76% of managers drive their own car. In these categories,
respondents are also significantly more likely to drive a company/fleet car.
Of note is that out of those driving a company car, over half (54%) also drive their
own car.
-7-
1.2.2 The car fleet
Source questionnaire: QE4-QE6
- Most Europeans drive a small or a medium sized car –
QE4 How would you best describe the size of the car you usually use? -
% country
Medium-sized car C ity car/Small car Big sized car
Family car (People carrier) Sport car SUV
Other (SPONTANEOUS) DK
LT 60% 12% 12% 13%
SK 59% 25% 6% 8%
EE 58% 16% 10% 9%
PL 54% 27% 13% 4%
IE 54% 26% 12%
DE 54% 26% 9% 8%
AT 53% 25% 14% 6%
SI 52% 29% 12% 5%
FI 51% 13% 14% 13% 5%
HU 51% 31% 9% 7%
LV 51% 12% 19% 14%
CZ 51% 27% 7% 13%
IT 50% 27% 11% 9%
EL 50% 21% 13% 9%
ES 48% 28% 14% 5%
DK 48% 21% 14% 14%
EU25 48% 27% 12% 9%
NL 47% 24% 8% 16%

SE 45% 14% 29% 8%
CY 45% 21% 11% 5% 14%
UK 43% 25% 16% 10%
PT 43% 42% 9% 5%
BE 43% 22% 16% 13%
LU 42% 23% 13% 14% 6%
MT 41% 28% 14% 13%
FR 40% 37% 10% 11%
0% 50% 100%
A great majority of Europeans drive either a medium sized car (48%) or a

small car (27%). There are no significant differences between the old and new
Member States in terms of the size of car, although citizens of new countries have
slightly more often a medium sized car.
In the four most populous counties, the largest share of citizens drive a medium sized
car (54% in Germany, 50% in Italy, 43% in the United Kingdom and 40% in France).
42% of Portuguese and 37% of French drivers use a city car/a small car while 29% of
Swedes state that they are driving a big car and 16% of Dutch respondents have a
family car. As the new generation active safety features are at present mainly
installed in the high-end range of vehicles, they are not yet available to a
large share of EU citizens.
-8-
- Europeans tend to buy second hand cars and the average age of their car is
around 4-5 years-
QE5 Did you get the car you QE6 And how old is this car now? By this I mean the number of years
usually use new or second since first registration. (DO NOT READ OUT)
hand?
Less than 1 2 3 4 to 5 6 to 10 More than
Second
New 1 year year years years years years 10 years
hand
old old old old old old old
ES 77% 22% LU 13% 11% 13% 13% 17% 24% 8%
EL 75% 25% IE 9% 10% 14% 14% 21% 27% 4%
LU 74% 26% BE 8% 7% 10% 11% 20% 29% 15%
IT 69% 30% DK 7% 5% 8% 8% 12% 34% 25%
MT 65% 35% IT 7% 9% 13% 19% 19% 23% 9%
BE 58% 41% FI 7% 5% 8% 9% 12% 28% 30%
SK 49% 51% FR 6% 4% 7% 6% 17% 33% 27%
AT 48% 50% CY 6% 3% 6% 8% 18% 29% 28%
PT 48% 50% SE 6% 5% 6% 8% 13% 31% 29%
EU25 46% 53% EU25 5% 6% 10% 12% 19% 28% 19%
SI 45% 54% DE 5% 6% 12% 13% 18% 27% 18%
DE 43% 57% EL 5% 7% 9% 12% 20% 24% 24%
CY 42% 57% ES 5% 8% 14% 15% 20% 22% 13%
DK 41% 58% NL 5% 5% 7% 10% 20% 35% 18%
CZ 37% 62% PT 5% 5% 6% 8% 22% 29% 24%
HU 36% 61% UK 5% 5% 9% 13% 23% 30% 14%
IE 35% 64% EE 4% 2% 4% 8% 9% 30% 43%
FR 34% 66% HU 4% 5% 9% 11% 15% 27% 29%
SE 34% 65% MT 4% 4% 6% 7% 12% 37% 28%
NL 33% 67% SI 4% 4% 8% 10% 19% 33% 21%
FI 33% 66% SK 4% 4% 6% 12% 21% 29% 25%
UK 33% 67% LV 3% 1% 2% 3% 4% 24% 62%
PL 25% 73% AT 3% 6% 19% 20% 26% 19% 6%
EE 18% 81% CZ 2% 2% 7% 11% 23% 32% 23%
LV 11% 89% LT 2% 1% 0% 1% 3% 20% 72%
LT 4% 95% PL 2% 2% 5% 3% 14% 38% 34%
EU15 48% 51% EU15 6% 6% 11% 13% 19% 28% 17%

NMS 31% 68% NMS 3% 3% 6% 7% 16% 33% 32%
The dichotomy between the new and old Member States reappears when we
examine the age of cars and whether cars were bought new or second hand: 48%
of citizens of the old Member States have bought their car new while only 31% of
respondents in the new Member States have done so.
At country level, three quarters of Spaniards (77%), Greeks (75%) and Luxembourgish
citizens (74%) have bought their car as new while 95% of Lithuanians and 89% of
Latvians have bought their car second hand. Citizens of Germany, France and the
United Kingdom tend to buy they car second hand while Italians get their car more
often new.
When it comes to the age of cars, 65% of cars used in the new Member States are
older than 6 years while this is the case for 45% of cars in the old EU15. Also, it is
worth noting that 72% of the car fleet in Lithuania and 62% in Latvia is over 10 years
old while only 4% of Irish and 6% of Austrian drivers drive a car of this age. While
60% of French drivers drive a car older than 6 years, this is the case for 45% of
Germans, 44% of British and 32% of Italians.
-9-
In general, it can be pointed out that:
• Company cars are more likely to be big sized than the cars that respondents
own. Company cars also tend to be newer.
• Those who have bought their car new have most often purchased a medium
sized car. Second hand cars tend to be small cars.
• Small cars are likely to be older than medium or big sized cars.
• Most of the cars that were bought as new are now aged between 3-5 years
while 68% of cars bought second hand are aged over 6 years.
Again, the size of car, its age and whether it was bought second hand or new appears
to depend on gender and socio-economic factors:
• Small car drivers: Young respondents (43%) and, in parallel, students (43%),
females (38%) and house persons (35%);
• Medium sized car drivers: Fairly equally driven across the sample, especially
by males and elderly respondents;
• Big car drivers: More likely aged 25 and over, male, with a high level of
education, self-employed or in a managerial position. Corresponds to the group
most likely to drive a company car since 22% of company cars are big sized
cars;
• Respondents buying a new car: The older the respondent is, the more likely
he/she buys a new car (27% in the youngest age group against 59% in the age
group of 55+). Of the occupation groups, the self-employed (55%), managers
(48%) and retired respondents (60%) are most likely to have bought a new
car.
• Respondents buying a second hand car: The respondents that are most
likely to buy a second hand car are young and still studying (70% of the young,
64% of students). Also, not surprisingly the unemployed (68%) tend to buy a
used car instead of a new one.
• Respondents having a newer car (1-5 years old): Those aged 25-54 are
slightly more likely to have a newer car than their younger and older
counterparts. This is also the case for those who have a higher level of
education and for the self-employed and managers. However, in this group the
car is most often 4 to 5 years old. Well educated respondents, the self-
employed and managers are slightly more likely to have a “brand new“ car not
more than a year old.
• Respondents having an older car (6 years+): The unemployed most often

have an old car (61%), followed by manual workers (53%), young respondents
(54%) and students (52%) as well as elderly respondents (50%) and, in
parallel, pensioners (53%).
- 10 -
1.2.3 Europeans’ driving habits
- Most Europeans drive on urban roads or on

a mixture of large and small roads -
QE2 Thinking in term on how you drive on a weekly basis would you say
that you mainly drive…? - % country
On urban roads On motorways and other fast highways
On rural roads 2 or 3 of these equally (SPONTANEOUS)
IT 71% 16% 10%

LT 69% 10% 18%
PL 60% 13% 23%
UK 54% 10% 21% 15%
SK 51% 9% 18% 21%
CY 51% 17% 28%
LV 48% 7% 18% 26%
FI 45% 16% 23% 16%
SI 45% 6% 13% 36%
EL 45% 13% 39%
EU25 44% 13% 22% 22%
CZ 42% 10% 30% 18%

HU 41% 7% 24% 26%
FR 35% 12% 32% 21%
ES 34% 18% 14% 34%
NL 33% 34% 27% 7%
IE 32% 12% 30% 26%
DE 31% 10% 30% 28%
AT 28% 9% 28% 35%
PT 27% 11% 24% 37%
MT 27% 22% 49%
DK 26% 14% 33% 28%
BE 25% 15% 37% 23%
EE 24% 7% 25% 43%
SE 23% 11% 42% 23%
LU 18% 19% 37% 25%
0% 50% 100%
Respondents in the old Member States (14%) state that they drive far more
often on motorways and other fast highways than the citizens of NMS (6%). In
this group, 34% of Dutch respondents indicate that they drive mostly in these roads
while only 3% of Polish respondents state the same. Otherwise, the differences
between these country groupings remain modest.
It can be pointed out that in 15 of the 25 countries polled, including Italy, the United
Kingdom, France and Germany, the largest share of citizens say that they mainly use
urban roads.
When it comes to the number of kilometres driven each year, there are no
striking differences between countries. Roughly, it can be said that the citizens of
- 11 -
Greece (31% more than 20.000 km), Estonia (30%), Latvia (28%) and Luxembourg
(28%) drive slightly more annually than their fellow EU citizens. Most Germans (58%),
Italians (55%), French (51%) and British (47%) drive between 5.000 and 15.000 km
annually.
QE3 How many kilometres do you drive per year?

From From From
Less More
5.000 to 10.000 to From 15.000 20.000 to
than than
less than less than to less than less than
5.000 30.000
10.000 15.000 20.000 km 30.000
km km
km km km
EL 9% 22% 22% 17% 15% 16%
LV 19% 19% 16% 16% 13% 15%
EE 13% 23% 19% 13% 16% 14%
PT 18% 22% 16% 13% 11% 14%
LT 22% 27% 16% 9% 9% 13%
SK 25% 24% 16% 13% 8% 13%
NL 17% 25% 19% 15% 11% 12%
CY 12% 30% 17% 10% 10% 11%
FI 15% 24% 19% 15% 15% 11%
BE 13% 25% 21% 15% 16% 10%
SE 22% 17% 21% 16% 11% 10%
CZ 20% 27% 17% 15% 11% 9%
DK 12% 21% 22% 18% 16% 9%
LU 14% 19% 16% 18% 19% 9%
HU 22% 23% 21% 16% 9% 9%
PL 23% 27% 19% 11% 8% 9%
UK 15% 26% 21% 20% 8% 7%
EU25 15% 27% 23% 15% 9% 6%
ES 18% 23% 22% 14% 7% 6%
IE 11% 22% 23% 22% 15% 6%
MT 8% 19% 14% 6% 5% 6%
SI 15% 26% 26% 15% 11% 6%
DE 14% 34% 24% 13% 9% 5%
FR 17% 28% 23% 14% 10% 5%
IT 11% 27% 28% 18% 8% 4%
AT 11% 30% 26% 15% 9% 4%
Men drive significantly more (65% 10,000+ km per year) compared to women (39%).
This is also the case for those who are most likely to be in working life i.e. aged 25-39
(60%), managers (71%) and the self-employed (68%).
Those who drive a lot are more likely to drive a bigger and newer car, a
company/fleet car and to use motorways and other fast highways.
- 12 -
2. FACTORS EFFECTING THE CHOICE OF CAR
This second chapter examines which factors EU citizens consider as important

when they are buying a car. Respondents were presented with a list of factors and
asked to rank three factors apart from the price which would persuade them to choose
one model over another.

- Safety matters for Europeans -
QE7 Suppose you were to buy a car today, be it new or second hand,
which factors, apart from the price, would make you lean towards one
model over another? - % TOTAL EU25
Safety 54%
Fuel consumption 53%
C omfort 25%
Engine performance 22%
Durability/robustness 21%
Aesthetics 19%
Servicing cost 15%
Space inside 15%
Environmentally clean 14%
Reputation of mark\ brand 12%
Resale value 5%
Number of seats 5%
Level and availability of equipment 4%
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 2%
Not applicable (SPONTANEOUS) 7%
DK 4%
0% 60%
When looking at the total results, two qualities of a car, safety (54%) and fuel
consumption (53%), top by far the ranking of criteria for choosing one car model
over another. “Convenience” factors, such as comfort (25%) and engine
performance (22%) follow far behind.
When the proposed factors are ranked, a quarter of respondents name safety (24%)
as the factor they would consider first if they were to buy a car while 18% would
consider fuel consumption as the primary factor. When the factors given the second
highest importance are considered, 23% of respondents mention fuel consumption
while every fifth citizen (20%) refers to safety.
In brief, safety is the most important factor that EU citizens would take into
account if they were to buy a car but most would consider fuel consumption in
parallel. Europeans do not appear to give much importance to other factors listed
here when choosing a car.
However, it can be pointed out that when the factors related to costs of
having and maintaining a car, i.e. fuel consumption, servicing costs and resale
value, are considered together this integrated cost factor appears most
important. The impact of fuel consumption in particular is easily understandable in
the light of current fuel prices: the crude oil price per barrel has hit the new record in
the year 2006 which is almost four times higher than at the beginning of the year
2002.
- 13 -
- Fuel consumption is considered in parallel with safety -
QE7 Suppose you were to buy a car today, be it new or second hand, which
factors, apart from the price, would make you lean towards one model over
another? - % EU25
Thirdly Secondly Firstly
24%
Safety 20%
14%
18%
Fuel consumption 23%
17%
10%
Engine performance 7%
7%
8%
Aesthetics 6%
6%
7%
C omfort 10%
10%
6%
Durability/ robustness 9%
9%
5%
Space inside 6%
5%
Reputation of mark/ 4%
4%
brand 5%
3%
Environmentally clean 5%
7%
2%
Servicing cost 5%
9%
1%
Resale value 2%
3%
1%
Number of seats 2%
3%
Level and availability of 1%

2%
equipment 2%
0% 30%
At country level, in 20 out of 25 countries polled, the majority of citizens name
safety as the first factor that would affect their decision if they were to buy a car.
This is especially the case in Greece (45%) and Cyprus (43%).
Respondents in the rest of the countries rank fuel consumption as the first criterion
when choosing a car. The highest share of respondents in Malta (34%), Germany
(26%), Estonia (23%), Latvia (23%) and Lithuania (21%) mention fuel consumption
as the first factor they would take into account if they were to buy a car.
When we focus on the second factor, fuel consumption becomes the most often
mentioned function in 19 Member States, although safety is still considered to be
an important criterion. When asked about the third factor, respondents still mention
most often fuel consumption and safety but also more frequently servicing costs.
- 14 -
When these results are considered as a whole i.e. when adding up all given
answers, safety receives the highest number of mentions in 14 countries, in
particular in Greece (76%) and Cyprus (72%), while citizens of 11 countries,
specifically in Malta (71%), Slovakia (69%) and Germany (68%), refer most often to
fuel consumption as a main criterion when choosing a car.
QE7 Suppose you were to buy a car today, be it new or second hand, which factors, apart from the price, would make you lean towards
one model over another?
Firstly Secondly Thirdly TOTAL
Fuel Fuel Fuel Servicing Fuel
Safety Safety Safety Safety
consumption consumption consumption cost consumption
EU25 24% 18% 23% 20% 17% 14% 9% 54% 53%
BE 24% 15% 20% 24% 18% 12% 8% 59% 51%
CZ 21% 17% 23% 20% 17% 12% 10% 49% 52%
DK 28% 16% 23% 20% 19% 13% 8% 59% 56%
DE 25% 26% 28% 19% 17% 13% 12% 55% 68%
EE 11% 23% 23% 18% 19% 12% 14% 33% 52%
EL 45% 4% 13% 21% 13% 11% 15% 76% 29%
ES 28% 9% 21% 22% 17% 12% 11% 56% 40%
FR 21% 18% 20% 21% 17% 13% 11% 52% 52%
IE 25% 13% 18% 19% 18% 11% 5% 53% 46%
IT 21% 17% 21% 20% 19% 15% 6% 54% 55%
CY 43% 9% 24% 20% 19% 11% 14% 72% 48%
LV 16% 23% 24% 17% 19% 14% 14% 40% 57%
LT 11% 21% 23% 16% 19% 14% 8% 37% 58%
LU 29% 14% 21% 18% 17% 12% 9% 59% 52%
HU 22% 16% 31% 18% 19% 16% 19% 49% 56%
MT 11% 34% 23% 15% 18% 16% 6% 39% 71%
NL 21% 10% 15% 20% 14% 14% 2% 52% 38%
AT 21% 20% 24% 16% 16% 13% 9% 47% 55%
PL 26% 22% 28% 21% 18% 14% 9% 55% 60%
PT 28% 16% 23% 21% 19% 14% 11% 58% 53%
SI 35% 17% 25% 22% 18% 11% 19% 66% 57%
SK 34% 23% 30% 23% 19% 13% 13% 68% 69%
FI 33% 16% 23% 19% 16% 10% 10% 60% 53%
SE 34% 20% 24% 20% 19% 13% 7% 66% 61%
UK 16% 16% 19% 18% 17% 17% 6% 46% 46%
There are no striking differences between socio-demographic categories or in terms of

driving habits but certain preferences can be identified between the groups.
When the factor ranked as first is considered, females and those who have small
children are slightly more concerned about safety than their counterparts. In turn,
males, those who live alone or have no children as well those aged 15-24 are relatively
less concerned about this factor, although all these groups mention most often safety.
Fuel consumption is mentioned fairly equally across the sample.
“Convenience” factors such as engine performance are most often mentioned by

men and those aged 15-24 in parallel with students. Young respondents also more
often pay attention to aesthetics than their older counterparts.
- 15 -
Considering the future road users aged 15-17, the largest share considers safety
as the primary criterion (24%), followed by engine performance (17%) and aesthetics
(18%). This youngest group of respondents does not pay much attention to fuel
consumption (7%).
When it comes to driving patterns, safety is most appreciated by those who drive
less than 10,000 km per year and by those who have bought their car as new.
Those who drive a lot and a big sized car regard engine performance as a first factor
more often than their counterparts.
Fuel consumption is considered to be slightly more important by those who drive a

small car and have bought their car second hand.
* * *
In conclusion, there appears to be demand, and thus, a market for intelligent

safety vehicle systems since their aim is first to enhance safety and secondly
decrease fuel consumption by making driving more economic and efficient.
The following chapters examine EU citizens’ perceptions of individual safety systems

and also reasons for their reluctance to have these systems in their car.
- 16 -
3. PERCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEMS
This third chapter introduces a group of intelligent safety systems that are either
already in use or under development. These systems aim at increasing safety
and security on one hand, and facilitating navigation and routing on the other. The
selection of the list of systems here is based on the final report of the eSafety Forum’s
“Implementation Road Map Working Group”9.
This working group identified and ranked relevant systems for which introduction to
the market is in process or would be possible in the very near future i.e. by 2010. The
systems were classified according to whether they are vehicle based systems or
infrastructure related systems which require interaction between the vehicle and
the infrastructure aiming at sending, receiving, processing and storing various
information (telematic systems).
Considering the list below, numbers 1-6 and 10 are vehicle based systems whereas
numbers 7-9 require interaction between the vehicle and infrastructure (telematic
systems). ABS is not included in the working group’s proposition since it is already
widely used but was taken here in order to provide contrast between a system that is
already widely in use and less familiar systems.
Respondents were presented with the following systems:

1. ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking System: system preventing the blocking of the wheels when
breaking and thus allowing the car to stay on track.
First taken in use in cars in late 1970's. Now 91% of new vehicles are equipped with ABS
and the penetration rate is 66% in the whole vehicle park in Europe.
2. ESP, Electronic Stability Program: system stabilising the vehicle and preventing skidding in
critical situations.
Based on ABS, detects the onset of a slide and automatically applies the brakes to
individual wheels to correct the slide and prevent spinning. First used in 1995, in 2005 the
penetration rate is 40% in new cars.
3. Blind Spot Monitoring System: system warning the driver about nearby obstacles in the blind
spot.
Since 2004 available in some new vehicles but on an early stage of deployment.
4. Adaptive Head Lights: system moving headlights when turning into bends and adjusting the
luminous intensity in order to avoid dazzling.
Available as an option in several European Models.
5. Obstacle and collision warning: system detecting potential collisions with other vehicles or
obstacles based on current speed.
Available as an option in several European models.
6. Lane departure warning system: system warning the driver when unintentionally leaving the
lane.
Available for commercial vehicles as an extra fitment for several years, for passenger
vehicles some models available in 2005.
7. eCall, Emergency call system: system automatically calling the local emergency authorities
and instantly transferring to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data
when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident and thus reducing the time for the rescue
services to arrive
The aim is to equip all new vehicles with eCall system starting 2010.
8. Real time traffic and travel information: system providing real time information about the
road network such as traffic jams and weather conditions allowing drivers to choose an
alternative itinerary.
9. Speed Alert: system detecting local speed limits on all types of roads and warning driver if they
exceed these.
10. Monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver: system warning the driver in case of
drowsiness, distraction or carelessness.
9
See more in http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/esafety/forum/roadmaps/index_en.htm
- 17 -
In the following sub-chapters we examine EU citizens’ perception of the usefulness

of these systems10 and the reasons which put them off buying a vehicle equipped
with these kinds of intelligent safety vehicle systems. Moreover, a closer look is given
to eCall and real time traffic and travel information and whether respondents
consider them as an intrusion into drivers’ privacy.
10
The results concerning each system are presented both for the total sample and for those who answered
to the question because it can be anticipated that respondents who spontaneously replied either “don’t
know” or “not applicable” are most often those who do not drive a car and therefore have difficulties with
forming an opinion on intelligent vehicle systems.
- 18 -
3.1 Perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle systems
- There is no doubt about the perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle

systems -
QE8 I will read out a list of car safety systems, some of which already
exist and others which are currently under development. For each of
these systems, please tell me which of the following statements best
corresponds to your opinion. - % EU25
It is a useful system and you would like to have it on your next car
It is not a useful system but you would like to have it on your next car
It is a useful system but you would not like to have it on you next car
It is not a useful system and you would not like to have it on your next car
Not applicable (SPONTANEOUS)
DK
1. ABS, Anti-Lock
73% 7% 9% 6%
Breaking System
2. ESP, Electronic
65% 12% 4% 9% 7%
Stability Program
7. Ecall, Emergency call

59% 16% 6% 9% 7%
system
3. Blind Spot Monitoring

57% 4% 17% 6% 9% 7%
System
10. Monitoring the state

53% 20% 8% 9% 7%
of vigilance of the driver
4. Adaptive Head Lights 53% 4% 17% 10% 9% 7%
5. Obstacle and collision

52% 4% 19% 9% 9% 7%
warning
8. Real time traffic and

50% 4% 21% 9% 9% 6%
travel information
9. Speed Alert 49% 4% 20% 11% 9% 6%
6. Lane departure
47% 5% 20% 13% 9% 7%
warning system
0% 50% 100%
The majority of EU citizens would like to have each of the ten intelligent
vehicle systems presented here in their new car. The share ranges from 75%
concerning ABS to 52% concerning lane departure warning system.
Most EU citizens also perceive these ten systems presented here as useful, the
percentage ranging from 80% for ABS to 67% for lane departure warning systems.
Probably due to its familiarity, three quarters (75%) would like to have ABS in their
car. The clear majority would also have a car equipped with an Electronic Stability
Program (68%), eCall (62%) and a Blind Spot Monitoring System (61%).
It is worth noting that there are still a reasonable number of respondents who
do not want to have some of these systems (e.g. lane departure warning
system, speed alert or real time traffic and travel information) in their car or
do not recognise them as an improvement to the security or comfort of
driving. This could be due to the fact that these systems are not yet on the market.
Reasons related to privacy issues discussed in chapter 3.2 could also explain their
reluctance to have intelligent safety systems.
- 19 -
This is especially the case for the lane departure warning system: 20% of respondents
perceive it as useful but would not like to have it in their car and 13% do not see any
benefit in having this kind of system.
Concerning the overall acceptance of these systems, there are no clear differences
between countries. When the whole sample is considered, it appears that
respondents in the NMS are slightly more reluctant to have these systems. However,
this is mainly due to the lower share of respondents that drive in the new Member
States and therefore do not have an opinion on these systems and this difference
disappears when only those who drive are considered.
Roughly it can be said that respondents in Greece and Cyprus, two countries that have
a high number of road fatalities in relation to their population, are the most supportive
for the use of these systems, followed by Swedish, Luxembourgish and Belgian
citizens, while respondents in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Germany are slightly
more reluctant to have these systems in their new car.
When it comes to the socio-demographic groupings, some minor distinctions can be

made:
Males, those who have a higher level of education and respondents with small
children indicate slightly more often on average that they consider these safety
systems as useful and would like to have them in their new car.
Considering driving patterns, not surprisingly those who drive appreciate these
systems more often than those who have no personal experience of driving. Also,
those who drive a high number of kilometres per year and have bought a new
car appear to accept these systems slightly more often than those who drive less and
own a second hand car.
On the other hand, respondents who indicate that they drive a small car or a second
hand car are less likely to consider these systems as useful and worth having in their
car.
Finally, it should be noted that the number of respondents stating that these questions
are not applicable in their situation or that they do not know reflects the driving
patterns of each country i.e. in countries where a reasonable share of respondents do
not hold a driving licence, many respondents choose these options.
- 20 -
- The majority of respondents in every Member State would like to have ABS
in their new car -
QE8.1 For each of these systems, please tell me which of the following
statements best corresponds to your opinion: ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking
It is a useful system and System
you would- %
likecountry
to have it on your next car
DK
SE 88% 4% 5%
LU 85% 4% 4% 4%
EL 85% 4% 5%
DK 84% 4% 7%
BE 83% 7% 4%
NL 79% 7% 5%
CY 79% 5% 8% 7%
FI 78% 9% 6%
DE 78% 8% 5% 5%
FR 76% 4% 6% 4% 5% 5%
SI 78% 6% 9% 6%
UK 74% 4% 17%
EU25 73% 7% 9% 6%
IE 72% 6% 15%
MT 70% 4% 4% 9% 10%
IT 66% 6% 13% 4% 4% 8%
SK 68% 14 % 5% 9%
PT 68% 4% 18% 8%
PL 68% 4% 18% 8%
AT 66% 12% 5% 12%
LT 66% 7% 4% 19%
ES 65% 7% 13% 13%
CZ 63% 16% 7% 10%
LV 60% 4% 22% 10%
EE 60% 6% 18% 12%
HU 58% 10% 4% 17% 7%
0% 50% 100%
The Anti-Lock Breaking system was first introduced in cars in the late 70’s and today it
is widely used and familiar to respondents since 66% of vehicles are equipped with
ABS at present. Most likely due to its familiarity, the majority of respondents in
each country perceive the Anti-Lock Breaking System as useful and would like
to have it in their car. Citizens of Sweden (89%), Luxembourg (87%), Greece
(87%), Denmark (85%) and Belgium (85%) would, almost without exception, buy a
car equipped with ABS if they were to get a new car.
- 21 -
Citizens in the most populous Member States, except Italy, would want to have the
ABS system in their new car more often than Europeans on average: Germany (80%),
France (80%), and the United Kingdom (75%).
RESPONDENTS HAVING ANSWERED: QE8.1 For each of these systems,
please tell me which of the following statements best corresponds to your
opinion: ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking System - % country
SE 96%
PT 93% 5%
PL 92% 5%
LU 92% 4%
EL 92% 4%
CY 92% 6%
DK 92% 5%
UK 91% 5%
IE 91% 4%
SI 91% 7%
LV 89% 6%
BE 87% 8%
MT 86% 4% 5% 5%
FR 85% 5% 7% 4%
ES 88% 9%
EU25 86% 9%
EE 87% 8% 4%
NL 86% 8% 4%
LT 86% 9%
DE 86% 9%
FI 85% 10%
AT 80% 15%
SK 79% 16%
HU 78% 14% 6%
IT 74% 6% 15% 4%
CZ 76% 19%
0% 50% 100%
When the results are considered for those respondents who answered to this question,
it is observed that the great majority in each country would have ABS in their new car.
The highest numbers of those who would not want to have this system are observed in
the Czech Republic (22%), Hungary (20%) and Italy (19%).
- 22 -
- Also ESP is an appreciated safety system by the majority of citizens in each

Member State -
statements best corresponds to your opinion: ESP, Electronic Stability
Program - % country
DK
EL 80% 9% 5%
SE 76% 10% 4% 7%
CY 74% 9% 8% 7%
BE 71% 16% 5% 4 %
FI 71% 15% 4% 6%
LU 70% 10% 5% 4 % 9%
DK 70% 10% 5% 8% 4%
NL 69% 16% 4% 5%
IT 64% 7% 15% 4% 8%
SI 68% 11% 8% 8%
LT 68% 7% 4% 17%
IE 68% 7% 6% 15%
DE 68% 13% 5% 5% 6%
FR 65% 13% 7% 5% 6%
SK 66% 16% 5% 10%
EU25 65% 12% 4% 9% 7%
PT 66% 6% 18% 9%
UK 65% 9% 5% 16%
PL 63% 6% 18% 10%
MT 62% 7% 6% 9% 13%
ES 60% 8% 13% 14%
AT 59% 16% 5% 15%
CZ 56% 23% 6% 10%
LV 58% 5% 22% 10%
EE 53% 9% 4% 19% 14%
HU 52% 14% 5% 17% 9%
0% 50% 100%
The Electronic Stability Program also has a reasonable penetration rate, 40%, in
new cars today. The majority of respondents in each country think that ESP is
useful and they would like to have this system if they were to buy a car. The
same group of countries as in the question concerning ABS are found above the EU
average here: 81% of Greeks, 77% Swedish and 76% of Cypriots would like to have
ESP in their new car.
- 23 -
Italian (71%), German (70%), French (69%) and British (67%) respondents are all
found close to the EU average (68%) when it comes to the willingness to have ESP in
their new car.

opinion: ESP, Electronic Stability Program - % country
PT 90% 8%
PL 87% 9%
IE 86% 9%
EL 87% 10%
LT 86% 9%
LV 86% 4% 8%
CY 86% 10%
SE 85% 11%
ES 83% 11%
SI 81% 4% 13%
MT 80% 4% 7% 9%
LU 80% 4% 5% 11%
UK 80% 6% 11%
DK 79% 4% 6% 12%
EU25 78% 4% 5% 14%
EE 79% 7% 14%
FI 78% 4% 16%
SK 77% 18%
IT 72% 8% 17%
DE 77% 6% 15%
NL 75% 4% 18%
BE 75% 5% 16%
FR 73% 5% 8% 14%
AT 73% 20%
HU 71% 7% 20%
CZ 66% 27%
0% 50% 100%
Again, when only those respondents who answered to this question are taken into
account, it is observed that the great majority of citizens in each Member State would
like to have ESP in their new car.
On the other hand, citizens of the Czech Republic (30%), Hungary (27%) and Austria
(24%) appear most reluctant to have this system.
- 24 -
- Blind Spot Monitoring system provokes less enthusiasm but is still widely
appreciated -
statements best corresponds to your opinion: Blind Spot Monitoring
System: system warning the driver about nearby obstacles in the blind
spot - % country
DK
BE 71% 4% 14% 7%
CY 67% 15% 8% 6%
EL 65% 4% 17% 5% 5%
LT 66% 9% 4% 16%
DK 62% 6% 13% 6% 9%
FR 62% 5% 14% 10% 4% 5%
SI 62% 14% 6% 7% 7%
IE 62% 11% 7% 16%
PT 62% 8% 18% 9%
LU 59% 5% 15% 9% 5% 7%
SE 59% 4% 20% 4% 4% 9%
NL 60% 23% 8% 5%
UK 59% 13% 8% 16%
DE 59% 20% 7% 5% 6%
EU25 57% 4% 17% 6% 9% 7%
MT 57% 13% 5% 10% 14%

PL 55% 10% 17% 11%
AT 55% 17% 5% 6% 14%
ES 54% 4% 12% 13% 15%
IT 49% 6% 24% 8% 9%
LV 50% 9% 23% 13%
FI 49% 28% 11% 6% 4 %
SK 45% 5% 26% 5% 5% 14%
EE 47% 12% 5% 19% 15%
HU 44% 20% 6% 17% 9%
CZ 41% 35% 5% 7% 10%
0% 50% 100%
Also the blind spot monitoring system enjoys the confidence of most
Europeans and the majority of respondents in 21 of the 25 countries polled
would like to have it in their new car.
However, However, 40% of citizens of Czech Republic and 39% of Finns would not like
to have it in their next car. This result implies that despite its advantages this system
is not perceived to be necessary to the same extent as ABS or ESP.
Well over half of French (67%), Brits (62%), Germans (62%) and Italians (55%)
would like to have blind spot monitoring system in their new car.
- 25 -

opinion: Blind Spot Monitoring System: system warning the driver about
nearby obstacles in the blind spot - % country
PT 85% 11%
LT 83% 11% 4%
IE 79% 14%
PL 77% 4% 15% 5%
LV 78% 14% 5%
CY 78% 17%
ES 75% 5% 16% 4%
BE 74% 4% 15% 7%
DK 71% 7% 14% 7%
MT 74% 18% 6%
SI 73% 16% 7%
EL 71% 5% 19% 6%
UK 72% 16% 9%
EE 72% 19% 8%
AT 69% 4% 21% 6%
SE 68% 5% 23% 4%
FR 68% 5% 16% 11%

LU 67% 6% 17% 11%
EU25 68% 4% 20% 8%
DE 67% 4% 22% 7%
NL 65% 24% 8%
HU 59% 5% 27% 9%
IT 56% 7% 28% 9%
SK 56% 6% 32% 6%
FI 54% 31% 12%
CZ 49% 4% 42% 5%
0% 50% 100%
Again, an analysis in the group of those who answered to this question shows that, in
many countries, there is a reasonable number of respondents who would not want to
have this systems in their new car. This share reaches 25% in the United Kingdom,
27% in France, 29% in Germany and 37% in Italy.
- 26 -
- Adaptive headlights and obstacle and collision warning system receive

moderate support –
QE8.4 Please tell me which of the following statements best corresponds
to your opinion: Adaptive Head Lights: system moving headlights when
turning into bends and adjusting the luminous intensity in order to avoid
dazzling - % country
DK
CY 67% 13% 4% 8% 6%
LT 66% 8% 4% 4% 17%
SI 64% 13% 5% 7% 7%
EL 62% 5% 19% 5% 5%
IE 60% 4% 11% 7% 15%
PT 61% 9% 18% 10%
UK 58% 12% 9% 17%
MT 57% 11% 6% 10% 13%
PL 57% 9% 4% 17% 10%
ES 56% 9% 4% 13% 15%
DK 54% 5% 16% 10% 9% 5%
BE 53% 5% 20% 17%
EU25 53% 4% 17% 10% 9% 7%
IT 50% 7% 22% 9% 4% 8%
LV 55% 7% 4% 23% 11%
DE 53% 22% 11% 5% 6%
SE 52% 4% 24% 7% 5% 8%
SK 50% 5% 24% 5% 5% 11%
FR 49% 5% 18% 18% 5% 5%
LU 46% 6% 16% 18% 6% 9%
AT 47% 22% 8% 6% 15%
NL 46% 4% 22% 20% 5%
EE 47% 13% 6% 18% 14%
HU 42% 4% 21% 6% 18% 8%
FI 41% 5% 28% 16% 6% 4 %
CZ 39% 34% 8% 6% 10%
0% 50% 100%
Most Europeans perceive adaptive head lights as a useful system and a

desirable piece of equipment in their car (53%). Half or more of respondents in
21 countries would like to have this system in their new car, Cypriots again topping the
graph (69%). It can be observed that all Southern European countries except Italy are
above the EU average in this respect.
The majority of citizens of the United Kingdom (61%), Italy (57%), Germany (56%)
and France (54%) would like to have this system in their new car.
- 27 -
RESPONDENTS HAVING ANSWERED: QE8.4 Please tell me which of the

following statements best corresponds...: Adaptive Head Lights: system
moving headlights when turning into bends and adjusting the luminous
intensity in order to avoid dazzling - % country
PT 84% 12%
LT 83% 10% 5%
LV 82% 11% 5%
PL 79% 12% 6%
IE 77% 5% 14%
ES 77% 5% 13% 6%
CY 78% 15% 5%
SI 74% 4% 16% 6%
MT 74% 15% 8%
UK 71% 14% 11%
EL 68% 6% 21% 5%
EE 70% 19% 9%
DK 63% 6% 19% 12%
EU25 63% 5% 21% 11%
SK 60% 6% 29% 6%
IT 57% 8% 25% 10%
DE 60% 25% 12%
SE 59% 4% 28% 9%
AT 59% 4% 27% 10%
HU 57% 6% 29% 8%
BE 55% 6% 21% 18%
FR 54% 6% 20% 20%
LU 53% 7% 19% 21%
NL 50% 5% 24% 22%
FI 46% 6% 31% 18%
CZ 47% 41% 9%
0% 50% 100%
Again, when the results are considered for those who replied to this question, in
several countries, opposition to this system appears high, especially in the Czech
Republic (50%) and Finland (49%). In the United Kingdom, this share constitutes a
quarter of those who replied and, in Italy (35%), Germany (37%) and France (40%),
well over a third of respondents.
- 28 -

to your opinion: Obstacle and collision warning: system detecting
potential collisions with other vehicles or obstacles based on current
speed- % country
DK
CY 72% 10% 8% 6%
EL 69% 4% 16% 5%
LT 66% 10% 4% 4% 16%
PT 63% 8% 18% 8%
SI 61% 4% 15% 6% 7% 7%
IE 59% 4% 12% 7% 16%
SE 57% 4% 22% 7% 4% 7%
SK 55% 4% 21% 4% 5% 11%
PL 54% 12% 4% 17% 10%
LU 54% 16% 14% 5% 7%
FR 54% 5% 17% 14% 5% 6%
DK 54% 9% 16% 8% 8% 6%
ES 53% 13% 4% 13% 14%
BE 53% 5% 24% 15%
MT 52% 15% 5% 9% 16%
IT 52% 7% 24% 7% 8%
EU25 52% 4% 19% 9% 9% 7%
UK 51% 17% 11% 16%

DE 51% 24% 11% 5% 6%
NL 48% 24% 18% 5%
LV 48% 11% 6% 23% 11%
EE 47% 12% 8% 19% 14%
HU 46% 20% 6% 17% 7%
FI 41% 5% 27% 18% 6%
AT 41% 4% 24% 11% 7% 13%
CZ 37% 4% 33% 9% 6% 10%
0% 50% 100%
The obstacle and collision warning system is appreciated by the largest

number of respondents in each Member State: they both perceive it as useful and
would like to have it in their car if they were to buy a new one. Greeks and Cypriots
are most in favour of this system in their cars.
Considering the four most populous Member States, the majority would have this
system in their new car, the share reaching 59% in France and Italy and 54% in the
United Kingdom and Germany.
- 29 -

following statements best corresponds to your opinion: Obstacle and
collision warning: system detecting potential collisions with other
vehicles or obstacles based on current speed- % country
PT 86% 11%
CY 84% 11% 4%
LT 82% 12% 5%
IE 76% 5% 15% 4%
EL 75% 5% 17% 4%
PL 74% 4% 17% 5%
ES 72% 5% 18% 5%
SI 71% 5% 17% 6%
DK 63% 11% 18% 9%
LV 72% 17% 9%
MT 70% 21% 7%
EE 70% 18% 12%
SK 65% 5% 25% 4%
EU25 62% 5% 23% 10%
SE 63% 4% 25% 8%
IT 58% 8% 27% 8%
FR 60% 6% 19% 15%
UK 62% 4% 21% 13%
LU 62% 4% 18% 16%
HU 61% 4% 26% 8%
BE 55% 5% 25% 16%
DE 57% 27% 12%
AT 52% 5% 29% 14%
NL 52% 26% 20%
FI 45% 5% 30% 20%
CZ 44% 5% 40% 11%
0% 50% 100%
In the group of those who answered to this question, it can be again noted that
citizens of the Czech Republic (51%) and Finland (50%) are most reluctant to have
obstacle and collision warning in their new car. In Germany (39%), Italy (35%),
France (34%) and the United Kingdom (34%), this share constitutes over a third of
those who responded.
- 30 -
- The lane departure warning system is least valued by Europeans –

to your opinion: Lane departure warning system: system warning the
driver when unintentionally leaving the lane- % country
DK
CY 67% 14% 4% 8% 6%
EL 66% 17% 6% 5%
PT 62% 9% 19% 8%
ES 58% 8% 13% 13%
LT 57% 13% 7% 4% 16%
SI 55% 5% 15% 10% 7% 8%
PL 55% 10% 6% 17% 9%
IE 51% 5% 14% 6% 8% 16%
MT 52% 14% 7% 10% 14%
DK 48% 7% 18% 13% 8% 5%
SK 47% 7% 24% 7% 5% 11%
FR 47% 6% 17% 20% 4% 5%
EU25 47% 5% 20% 13% 9% 7%
SE 46% 5% 26% 11% 7%

IT 44% 7% 24% 14% 4% 7%
UK 44% 5% 18% 15% 16%
BE 44% 5% 26% 21% 4%
EE 47% 13% 7% 19% 13%

DE 43% 30% 13% 5% 6%
LU 40% 6% 21% 22% 5% 6%
LV 40% 14% 11% 22% 11%
HU 38% 22% 11% 18% 9%
AT 36% 24% 15% 7% 14%
FI 34% 5% 27% 25% 6%
CZ 31% 4% 35% 12% 6% 11%
NL 29% 5% 30% 29% 6%
0% 50% 100%
Two most important causes of accidents are lane changes and involuntary lane
departure. Notwithstanding, this system receives the most divided response among
EU citizens. Even if the largest share of respondents in 14 countries would like to
have it in their car if they were to buy one, a substantial number would not have
this system even if they consider it to be useful.
- 31 -

following statements best corresponds to your opinion: Lane departure
warning system: system warning the driver when unintentionally leaving
the lane- % country
PT 84% 12%
ES 80% 5% 12% 4%
CY 78% 16% 5%
PL 75% 4% 13% 8%
LT 72% 4% 16% 9%
EL 71% 4% 19% 7%
IE 67% 6% 18% 8%
MT 68% 4% 19% 10%
EE 69% 19% 10%
SI 65% 6% 17% 12%
DK 55% 9% 21% 15%
SK 55% 8% 29% 8%
LV 59% 21% 17%
EU25 55% 5% 24% 15%
UK 54% 6% 22% 18%

FR 52% 7% 19% 23%
SE 52% 5% 30% 13%
IT 49% 8% 27% 16%
HU 51% 4% 29% 15%
DE 48% 4% 34% 14%
LU 45% 7% 24% 24%
BE 46% 5% 27% 22%
AT 46% 4% 31% 19%
FI 38% 5% 30% 27%
CZ 38% 5% 43% 15%
NL 31% 5% 32% 32%
0% 50% 100%
When focusing on the group of those having answered, it can be observed that in three
countries (Finland, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands) the majority of
respondents would not get a lane departure warning system if they were to buy a new
car.
In the Member States with largest populations (Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom
and France), the majority of those who responded to this question would like to have
the system in their new car. However, the share of those who would not varies
between 40% in the UK and 48% in Germany.
- 32 -
- The majority of respondents in each country would have eCall

in their new car -
to your opinion: Ecall, Emergency call system - % country
DK
EL 79% 9% 5%
SE 70% 5% 12% 4% 6%
CY 73% 10% 8% 5%
BE 71% 16% 6% 4 %
DK 62% 10% 11% 5% 8% 4%
SI 67% 4% 12% 4% 7% 7%
LU 67% 4% 10% 7% 5% 6%
FR 66% 4% 14% 8% 5% 5%
LT 67% 10% 15%
IE 63% 8% 8% 16%
UK 62% 12% 5% 16%
PT 63% 8% 19% 9%
PL 61% 8% 18% 10%
SK 59% 4% 19% 5% 10%
IT 56% 7% 19% 7% 4% 8%
MT 60% 12% 4% 10% 13%
EU25 59% 16% 6% 9% 7%
ES 58% 12% 14% 13%

FI 55% 25% 8% 6%
LV 56% 8% 22% 10%
NL 54% 25% 11% 5%
HU 54% 15% 4% 17% 7%
CZ 54% 25% 6% 10%
DE 53% 24% 9% 5% 6%
EE 53% 12% 4% 19% 13%
AT 47% 4% 22% 7% 6% 13%
0% 50% 100%
eCall receives fairly unanimous support among EU citizens with the highest
number of respondents in each Member State except Austria perceiving this safety
system as useful and being willing to have this equipment in their new car. Again,
Greeks (79%) and Cypriots (73%) are most frequently of this view.
70% of French, 65% of British, 63% Italian and 56% of German respondents would
like to have this system in their new car.
- 33 -

following statements best corresponds to your opinion: Ecall, Emergency
call system - % country
PT 88% 11%
EL 85% 10%
PL 84% 11%
CY 84% 11%
LT 83% 12% 4%
IE 83% 11% 4%
LV 83% 12% 4%
SE 78% 5% 13% 4%
SI 78% 4% 14% 4%
DK 71% 11% 12% 6%

ES 78% 17%
MT 78% 15% 5%
LU 75% 5% 12% 8%
UK 76% 15% 6%
EE 76% 17% 5%
BE 74% 16% 6%
FR 73% 4% 15% 8%
HU 72% 20% 5%
EU25 70% 4% 19% 7%
SK 69% 5% 22% 4%
IT 63% 8% 21% 8%
CZ 64% 30%
FI 61% 28% 9%
DE 60% 27% 10%
AT 58% 5% 27% 9%
NL 58% 27% 12%
0% 50% 100%
When only those respondents who answered are considered, it can be noted that a
significant majority in each country would like to have eCall in their new car.
However, in Germany the share of those who would reject this system reaches 37%
and 29% in Italy respectively.
- 34 -
- Half of Europeans would have a system providing real time traffic and travel
information in their new car due to its usefulness –
to your opinion: Real time traffic and travel information: system
providing real time information about the road network - % country
DK
EL 66% 5% 17% 5% 5%
SI 67% 12% 4% 7% 7%
BE 63% 4% 21% 8% 4%
DK 62% 5% 16% 6% 8%
LT 62% 12% 4% 16%
CY 62% 17% 6% 8% 6%
PT 61% 11% 18% 8%
PL 59% 9% 17% 9%
UK 56% 16% 7% 16%
LU 54% 5% 17% 12% 6% 6%
SE 54% 4% 27% 5% 4 % 5%
MT 54% 13% 6% 11% 14%
IE 53% 4% 15% 5% 8% 15%
SK 51% 6% 23% 5% 5% 10%
NL 53% 26% 10% 6%
ES 52% 4% 14% 14% 14%
EU25 50% 4% 21% 9% 9% 6%
FR 47% 6% 17% 20% 5% 5%

IT 45% 8% 25% 10% 4% 7%
LV 49% 11% 5% 23% 11%
EE 47% 15% 6% 19% 13%
FI 45% 4% 29% 14% 5%
HU 43% 23% 6% 18% 8%
DE 40% 4% 30% 15% 6% 5%
CZ 40% 4% 34% 7% 6% 10%
AT 37% 6% 26% 9% 8% 15%
0% 50% 100%
Most Europeans perceive real time traffic and travel information to be a useful system
and would like to have it in their new car if they were to buy one. Greeks (71%) and
Slovenians (70%) top the table with most respondents being willing to have this
system in their new car.
The majority of Brits (59%), French (53%) and Italians (53%) would have real time
traffic and travel information system. On the other hand, in Germany the largest share
of respondents (45%) is not willing to have this system and 20% of French do not see
the advantages of this system at all.
- 35 -

following statements best corresponds to your opinion: Real time traffic
and travel information: system providing real time information about the
road network - % country
PT 83% 14%
PL 81% 13% 4%
SI 77% 4% 14% 5%
LT 77% 4% 15% 5%
ES 71% 6% 19% 5%
LV 74% 17% 7%
EL 71% 5% 18% 6%
MT 71% 4% 17% 8%
IE 70% 5% 19% 6%
DK 70% 5% 18% 7%
CY 71% 19% 7%
UK 68% 4% 20% 8%
EE 68% 21% 8%
BE 66% 4% 22% 8%
LU 62% 5% 19% 14%
SK 59% 7% 27% 6%
SE 60% 4% 30% 6%
EU25 59% 5% 24% 11%
HU 58% 30% 8%
NL 57% 29% 11%
IT 51% 9% 29% 11%
FR 52% 7% 19% 22%
AT 48% 7% 33% 12%
FI 49% 4% 32% 15%
CZ 47% 4% 40% 8%
DE 45% 5% 34% 16%
0% 50% 100%
When the results are considered for those having answered, it is observed that the
majority in each country, except Germany, would have this system in their new car.
In Germany, the opinion is divided with 50% of respondent saying that they would
have this system and another 50% saying that they would not.
- 36 -
- Along with the lane departure warning system, speed alert divides
European opinion –
to your opinion: Speed Alert: system detecting local speed limits on all
types of roads and warning driver if they exceed these - % country
DK
CY 71% 12% 8% 6%
SI 61% 17% 6% 7% 6%
IE 61% 11% 4% 7% 14%
EL 59% 5% 21% 8% 5%
FR 57% 6% 15% 13% 4% 5%
UK 58% 14% 9% 16%
ES 57% 11% 14% 12%
PT 58% 11% 20% 8%
LT 56% 14% 7% 4% 16%
MT 55% 15% 6% 11% 11%
BE 53% 4% 25% 14%
SE 50% 6% 26% 10% 5%
SK 49% 6% 26% 4% 5% 10%
PL 50% 15% 6% 18% 8%
EU25 49% 4% 20% 11% 9% 6%
IT 46% 7% 26% 10% 4% 7%

DK 47% 4% 26% 10% 9%
LU 43% 7% 18% 22% 5% 5%
LV 44% 13% 8% 22% 10%
NL 41% 27% 23% 5%
FI 39% 4% 29% 21% 5%
AT 39% 4% 25% 12% 6% 14%
EE 41% 18% 8% 19% 13%
DE 39% 28% 18% 6% 6%
HU 37% 4% 24% 10% 18% 7%
CZ 31% 4% 35% 14% 6% 10%
0% 50% 100%
Along with the lane departure warning system, speed alert divides European opinion:
even if most respondents consider it useful, a significant share would not
want to have it in their new car.
Furthermore, 63% of French and 60% of British respondents would like to have speed
alert in their new car. On the contrary, the largest share of Germans (46%) would not
be willing to have speed alert in their new car.
- 37 -

following statements best corresponds to your opinion: Speed Alert:
system detecting local speed limits on all types of roads and warning
driver if they exceed these - % country
CY 82% 14%
PT 81% 15%
IE 78% 14% 5%
ES 77% 4% 15% 4%
UK 70% 17% 11%

SI 70% 4% 19% 7%
MT 70% 19% 7%
LT 70% 18% 9%
PL 68% 21% 8%
LV 65% 4% 20% 12%
EL 63% 5% 22% 9%
FR 62% 6% 17% 14%
EE 60% 26% 12%
SK 58% 7% 31% 5%
EU25 58% 5% 24% 13%
BE 56% 4% 26% 14%

SE 55% 6% 28% 11%
DK 54% 5% 30% 11%
IT 52% 8% 29% 12%
AT 49% 6% 31% 15%
HU 49% 5% 32% 14%
LU 48% 7% 20% 25%
NL 44% 29% 25%
DE 44% 4% 31% 20%
FI 42% 4% 32% 22%
CZ 36% 5% 42% 16%
0% 50% 100%
In the group of those who answered to this question, it is observed that the majority of
respondents in every country, except the Netherlands, Germany, Finland and the
Czech Republic, would have speed alert in their new car.
In Germany, 51% would not have speed alert system even if 3 in 5 respondents in the
German sample consider it to be a useful system. A quarter of respondents in the
Netherlands and Luxembourg do not see any advantages in this system.
- 38 -
- A relative majority of respondents in each country would have a system

monitoring the vigilance of the driver in their new car
because its usefulness –
to your opinion: Monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver: system
warning the driver in case of drowsiness, distraction or carelessness
- % country
DK
EL 80% 9% 6%
CY 78% 6% 8% 5%
LT 65% 11% 4% 15%
SE 60% 7% 16% 8% 4% 5%
SI 61% 4% 16% 6% 7% 7%
PT 62% 8% 19% 8%
IE 62% 11% 4% 8% 15%
SK 59% 4% 19% 5% 10%
MT 60% 11% 5% 10% 13%
FR 58% 4% 18% 11% 5% 5%
BE 58% 24% 10%
PL 57% 10% 4% 18% 9%
ES 57% 12% 13% 12%
IT 54% 5% 21% 9% 4% 7%
LU 53% 5% 15% 16% 6% 6%
UK 53% 17% 9% 16%
EU25 53% 20% 8% 9% 7%
DK 44% 10% 18% 15% 9% 4%
LV 49% 11% 5% 22% 11%

EE 48% 15% 5% 19% 12%
DE 46% 28% 12% 5% 6%
FI 45% 32% 13% 6%
HU 44% 20% 9% 17% 7%
NL 44% 31% 15% 5%
AT 41% 4% 26% 10% 6% 13%
CZ 41% 35% 6% 5% 9%
0% 50% 100%
A system that monitors the state and vigilance of the driver is also welcomed
by most Europeans. Again, Greeks (81%) and Cypriots (79%) are most enthusiastic
while 62% of French and 59% of Italians would like to have this system in their car.
Germans (49%) are again found below the EU average.
- 39 -

following statements best corresponds...: Monitoring the state of
vigilance of the driver: system warning the driver in case of drowsiness,
distraction or carelessness - % country
CY 90% 7%
EL 87% 10%
PT 85% 12%
IE 80% 14% 5%
PL 78% 4% 14% 5%
LT 79% 13% 5%
MT 77% 14% 6%
ES 76% 4% 16% 4%
LV 73% 16% 8%
SI 70% 5% 18% 7%
SK 69% 5% 22% 4%
SE 66% 7% 18% 9%
EE 70% 21% 8%
UK 65% 4% 21% 11%
FR 64% 4% 20% 12%
EU25 63% 4% 23% 10%
IT 61% 6% 24% 10%

LU 60% 5% 17% 18%
BE 60% 4% 25% 11%
HU 58% 4% 26% 12%
DK 51% 11% 21% 17%
AT 51% 5% 32% 12%
DE 52% 32% 13%
FI 49% 35% 14%
CZ 49% 41% 7%
NL 48% 34% 16%
0% 50% 100%
When the results are analysed for those having answered to this question, it is
observed that a share equal to or more than half of respondents in each country would
be willing to have a system monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver in their new
car.
This is the case for 69% of British, 68% of French, 67% of Italian and 55% of German
respondents.
- 40 -
3.2 Focus on data privacy issues
After examining the perceived usefulness and desirability of various intelligent vehicle
systems, a closer focus was placed on eCall and real time traffic and travel information
systems. Both systems involve exchanging information between the vehicle and
the infrastructure (emergency response and traffic management centers) and
could therefore be considered as an intrusion into drivers’ privacy. Respondents were
asked to what extent they find these systems inconvenient.
QE12a Cars can be equipped with an emergency call system which
automatically calls the local emergency authorities when the vehicle is
involved in a serious accident...Do you personally regard this as… -
% country
You do not consider it as an inconvenience as far as you are concerned
A minor inconvenience compared with the usefulness of the system
A real risk of intrusion that would deter you from having such a system
None of these (SPONTANEOUS)
DK
DK 61% 21% 5% 4 % 9%
SE 58% 28% 7% 5%
BE 56% 32% 7%
PT 55% 22% 7% 4% 12%
EL 53% 28% 12% 4%
NL 52% 30% 9% 6%
LU 52% 24% 9% 12%
ES 52% 15% 5% 8% 20%
CY 51% 28% 7% 11%
FR 50% 30% 10% 8%
SK 49% 32% 5% 4 % 10%
SI 46% 30% 9% 10% 6%
HU 46% 19% 10% 10% 15%
AT 46% 24% 11% 5% 13%
IT 45% 32% 7% 9% 6%
EU25 45% 28% 10% 6% 11%
FI 44% 39% 10% 4%
MT 43% 20% 13% 4% 20%

EE 41% 20% 5% 5% 29%
UK 40% 32% 11% 9% 9%
PL 39% 26% 9% 6% 19%
CZ 39% 36% 8% 7% 10%
LV 38% 22% 8% 9% 24%
LT 38% 28% 10% 5% 20%
IE 37% 30% 8% 7% 18%
DE 37% 31% 16% 7% 9%
0% 50% 100%
11
Half of the respondents were asked question QE12a: “Cars can be equipped with an emergency call
system which automatically calls the local emergency authorities when the vehicle is involved in a serious
accident. This system instantly transfers to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data
and thereby reduces the time for the rescue services to arrive. Some people might consider this system as
an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…?” and half QE12 b: “QE12b Cars can be
equipped with an in-built system collecting information such as their location or speed, in order to produce
real time traffic information. Some people might consider this system as an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do
you personally regard this as…?”.
- 41 -
- A great majority of respondents do not consider eCall to represent a real risk

of intrusion in comparison with its usefulness–
In every country polled, the largest share of citizens do not regard the eCall
safety system as inconvenient (45%) and in 9 countries this share constitutes the
absolute majority. Those respondents who are likely to perceive the safety systems
presented before (in sub-chapter 3.1) as useful also appear to consider eCall as no
inconvenience at all with Danes topping the graph (61%), followed by Swedes (58%)
and Belgians (56%).
Even if a substantial share (28%) regards eCall as a minor inconvenience, they

consider that its advantages would outnumber its disadvantages. Finnish
respondents (39%) in particular are of this view. The number of those who consider
eCall as a real risk of intrusion remains low (10%), the share reaching its highest level
of 16% in Germany.
QE8.7 WOULD HAVE eCall WOULD NOT HAVE eCall*

QE12a Cars can be equipped with an emergency call system which automatically calls the local
emergency authorities when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident. This system instantly
transfers to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data and thereby reduces the
time for the rescue services to arrive. Some people might consider this system as an intrusion on
driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…?
A minor Not an A minor Not an
A real risk A real risk
inconvenience inconvenience inconvenience inconvenience
EU 25 8% 31% 54% 19% 33% 37%
DK 3% 21% 72% 18% 29% 45%
PT 8% 24% 63% 7% 33% 53%
NL 4% 31% 63% 17% 34% 44%
SE 5% 31% 62% 17% 22% 58%
BE 5% 31% 62% 12% 40% 44%
HU 10% 23% 60% 19% 21% 51%
ES 6% 17% 59% 5% 24% 55%
EE 5% 28% 59% 9% 33% 39%
LU 10% 25% 59% 12% 29% 43%
AT 6% 29% 58% 19% 22% 43%
EL 11% 29% 56% 23% 32% 43%
FR 9% 33% 56% 16% 35% 45%
SK 3% 35% 55% 11% 34% 47%
IT 6% 32% 55% 8% 43% 30%
SI 6% 31% 55% 23% 37% 26%
MT 14% 24% 54% 21% 21% 36%
CY 9% 32% 54% 7% 31% 52%
LV 11% 28% 54% 8% 35% 35%
FI 7% 40% 51% 18% 41% 38%
PL 8% 31% 50% 15% 35% 37%
UK 10% 37% 49% 22% 37% 34%
CZ 4% 41% 49% 16% 36% 34%
LT 10% 31% 47% 27% 42% 24%
DE 9% 36% 45% 32% 28% 28%
IE 6% 37% 44% 28% 20% 31%
* In every country, except NL, FI and DE, the
sample size is smaller than 150 respondents. Due
to small bases, reliable statistical analysis is not
possible and these results should be considered
with care.
- 42 -
Those respondents who would like to have eCall in their new car (QE8.7) rarely
consider this system to be a real risk (8%) and the majority of this group does not
perceive it as a risk at all (54%).
On the other hand, those who would not want to have eCall if they were to buy a car,
consider this system to be a real risk significantly more often (19%). However, even in
this group of respondents the largest share regards eCall as not an inconvenience at all
(37%). These patterns apply also at country level.
- The majority of Europeans do not consider real time traffic information as an

inconvenience or they regard it as only slightly inconvenient -
QE12b Cars can be equipped with an in-built system collecting
information such as their location or speed, in order to produce real time
traffic information. Do you personally regard this as…?
% country
You do not consider it as an inconvenience as far as your are concerned
A minor inconvenience compared with the usefulness of the system
A real risk of intrusion that would deter you from having such a system
DK
CY 54% 22% 9% 5% 11%
EL 50% 25% 16% 6%
PT 46% 26% 9% 6% 13%
BE 46% 33% 15% 4%
ES 44% 16% 9% 10% 21%

AT 43% 18% 13% 8% 18%
DK 43% 28% 18% 8%
SE 42% 27% 23% 6%
SK 42% 31% 15% 5% 7%
SI 40% 31% 12% 12% 6%
MT 40% 15% 12% 30%
HU 40% 23% 8% 13% 16%
IT 39% 31% 10% 8% 12%
NL 38% 33% 21% 4% 5%
PL 36% 24% 12% 7% 22%
LU 36% 31% 19% 3% 11%
EU25 35% 29% 18% 7% 12%
LV 33% 22% 13% 10% 22%

FR 33% 32% 26% 7%
EE 33% 22% 14% 4% 27%
LT 32% 25% 13% 6% 24%
FI 31% 39% 23% 5%
CZ 30% 32% 19% 8% 11%
UK 27% 35% 21% 9% 8%
IE 27% 31% 16% 4% 21%
DE 27% 29% 25% 7% 11%
0% 50% 100%
- 43 -
The system that provides real time traffic information is less welcomed by EU
citizens, even if the largest share in each country either perceive it as being no
inconvenience at all (35%) or as a minor inconvenience (29%).
Cypriots (54% no inconvenience), Greeks (50%), Portuguese (46%) and Belgians

(46%) – citizens of countries that support intelligent vehicle systems in general -
appreciate this system the most.
The share of those who consider the real time traffic information system as a minor
inconvenience outnumber those who perceive it as no inconvenience at all in five
countries. Again, Finnish respondents (39%) in particular are of this view.
It is worth noting that compared to eCall, there are significantly more

respondents who consider this system as an intrusion and would not like to have
it in their car. This is especially the case for French (26%) and German (25%)
respondents. In the French case, this could be explained by the tighter regulation of
traffic that has been introduced lately.
Thus, it can be said that when the action of submitting information about the location,
speed and functions of car concerns emergency situations such as accidents and is
directly related to safety, this information exchange is highly acceptable. If the
system is used for gathering and distributing real time information about traffic
conditions etc., respondents are somewhat more reluctant to have it but a great
majority still considers it to be useful.
- 44 -
WOULD HAVE REAL TIME TRAFFIC WOULD NOT HAVE REAL TIME TRAFFIC
QE8.8 INFORMATION SYSTEM INFORMATION SYSTEM*
QE12b Cars can be equipped with an in-built system collecting information such as their location or
speed, in order to produce real time traffic information. Some people might consider this system as an
intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…?
A minor Not an A minor Not an
A real risk A real risk
inconvenience inconvenience inconvenience inconvenience
EU 25 18% 32% 41% 24% 32% 34%
MT 14% 17% 59% 23% 19% 29%
CY 9% 26% 57% 4% 19% 68%
EL 17% 25% 54% 16% 37% 42%
PT 12% 28% 52% 9% 41% 43%
HU 9% 28% 52% 14% 30% 44%
ES 11% 17% 51% 14% 23% 38%
AT 15% 20% 51% 15% 20% 48%
EE 14% 29% 49% 27% 30% 29%
PL 12% 30% 48% 20% 36% 34%
BE 15% 35% 47% 15% 32% 47%
DK 17% 31% 47% 25% 27% 44%
SI 12% 34% 44% 16% 34% 32%
SK 13% 37% 44% 22% 30% 45%
IT 10% 37% 44% 12% 28% 39%
SE 21% 32% 43% 35% 24% 41%
LV 17% 31% 43% 23% 29% 41%
LU 19% 30% 43% 25% 36% 31%
NL 20% 36% 41% 24% 32% 37%
LT 15% 31% 39% 19% 26% 31%
CZ 18% 38% 38% 25% 35% 28%
FR 26% 34% 38% 30% 35% 31%
IE 15% 36% 35% 26% 38% 25%
UK 22% 42% 32% 30% 38% 29%
FI 26% 41% 31% 23% 41% 34%
DE 26% 31% 28% 30% 32% 29%
* In every country, except FR, NL, SE, CZ, SK,
DE, the sample size is smaller than 150
respondents. Due to small bases, reliable
statistical analysis is not possible and these
results should be considered with care.
Again, there is a link between willingness to have real time traffic information system
and perceived inconvenience: those who would like to have this system in their new
car do not regard it as an inconvenience as often as those who would not like to have
it. This pattern applies at country level as well with a few exceptions: in Germany and
the United Kingdom, the largest share of those who would like to have this system
regard it as a minor inconvenience while in 21 of 25 countries polled the highest
number consider this system to be no inconvenience at all.
- 45 -
The socio-demographic analysis reveals some minor discrepancies between categories

concerning in particular Real time traffic information system. eCall appears to inspire
confidence fairly equally regardless of gender, age or occupation.
When it comes to real time traffic information systems, males tend to somewhat
more often perceive these systems as a minor inconvenience or a real risk than
females. Also young respondents in parallel with students appear to find this
system somewhat more intrusive than their older counterparts.
This observation could be considered in relation to the finding that these groups
appear to be in general less concerned about safety if they were to buy a car (Chapter
2).
On the other hand, those respondents who have bought their car new are
significantly less likely to perceive this system as intrusive than those who
bought their car second hand.
- 46 -
3.3 Factors discouraging having intelligent systems in a car
- Intelligent vehicle systems are considered to be expensive -
QE9a+b Which reason would put you off having these safety systems in
your car? - % EU25
Secondly Firstly TOTAL
51%
It's too expensive to buy 34%
19%
24%
Fear of unreliable electronic systems 11%
16%
Reduces driver’s responsiveness alertness by 23%
13%
creating an artificial feeling of being protected 12%
22%
It's too expensive to service 4%
21%
19%
Fear of excessive visual and sound warnings 9%
11%
It’s difficult to understand how these safety 12%
5%
systems work 8%
11%
Undermines driver’s freedom 7%
4%
4%
C ars are already safe enough 2%
3%
2%
1%
In the context of intelligent vehicle systems enjoying a reasonable support among EU

citizens, it is interesting to know the reasons why, according to them, the penetration
rate i.e. the demand of most of these systems remains low.
The reported reasons discouraging EU citizens from purchasing intelligent vehicle

systems are first of all related to the costs of having (51%) and servicing (22%) them
and then to their possibly distracting effect on the driver in terms of false feelings of
security (23%) or malfunction of electronic systems (24%).
The high costs of these kinds of systems appears to be the main factor
preventing EU citizens from having them in their car. 34% of respondents name the
purchasing costs as the first reason that puts them off having these safety systems in
their car and a further 4% mentions servicing costs. Furthermore, the expense of
servicing a car (21%) equipped with these kind systems becomes most important
factor when the reasons that are ranked second are observed.
Fear of unreliable electronic systems (11%) and an artificial feeling of being protected
(13%) follow after.
- 47 -
It is worth noting that respondents do not appear to question the need to

improve the safety of cars since only 4% mention that cars are already safe enough
as a reason for being not willing to have intelligent safety systems in their car.
QE9 Which reason would put you off having these safety systems in your car? - TOTAL
It’s difficult
Reduces driver’s
Fear of to
Fear of responsiveness Cars are
It's too It's too excessive understand Undermines
unreliable alertness by already Other
expensive expensive visual and how these driver’s DK
electronic creating an safe (SPONT.)
to buy to service sound safety freedom
systems artificial feeling of enough
warnings systems
being protected
work
EU25 51% 24% 23% 22% 19% 12% 11% 4% 2% 13%
BE 61% 26% 27% 15% 29% 10% 15% 8% 1% 3%
CZ 70% 16% 17% 30% 8% 14% 6% 7% 2% 10%
DK 39% 35% 39% 20% 21% 8% 13% 4% 3% 7%
DE 53% 25% 29% 18% 22% 13% 8% 5% 2% 11%
EE 34% 22% 23% 18% 10% 11% 11% 6% 1% 30%
EL 75% 16% 15% 42% 8% 15% 9% 6% 3% 3%
ES 41% 13% 9% 28% 11% 12% 9% 4% 2% 32%
FR 49% 38% 26% 16% 18% 13% 13% 6% 1% 7%
IE 43% 29% 20% 16% 15% 20% 22% 4% 1% 14%
IT 54% 25% 17% 29% 27% 16% 11% 4% 1% 7%
CY 58% 18% 15% 41% 18% 10% 11% 2% 1% 12%
LV 42% 20% 25% 22% 10% 12% 12% 2% - 25%
LT 46% 20% 20% 27% 15% 14% 14% 4% 2% 17%
LU 43% 27% 26% 17% 19% 13% 13% 9% 1% 11%
HU 54% 16% 18% 30% 11% 12% 8% 4% 2% 20%
MT 45% 21% 15% 29% 18% 13% 13% 5% 1% 18%
NL 46% 22% 43% 14% 24% 8% 17% 6% 3% 6%
AT 49% 26% 27% 17% 22% 17% 13% 5% 2% 9%
PL 50% 19% 17% 25% 19% 11% 10% 2% 1% 21%
PT 60% 15% 10% 35% 16% 16% 5% 4% - 17%
SI 58% 21% 17% 32% 10% 12% 8% 5% 6% 7%
SK 57% 24% 25% 18% 17% 17% 15% 7% 0% 9%
FI 33% 33% 43% 17% 23% 11% 12% 5% 4% 6%
SE 47% 29% 45% 19% 20% 10% 9% 4% 1% 6%
UK 47% 26% 29% 19% 17% 9% 13% 3% 4% 14%
When the total number of mentions is considered, in every country polled, with
two exceptions, the high price of having these extra systems in a car is mentioned
most often, especially in Greece (75%) and the Czech Republic (70%). In Finland, the
highest share of respondents state that the feeling of false security created by these
systems makes them reluctant to have them in their car (43%). In Denmark, an
equal share (39%) refer to the false feeling of being protected and the price as a
reason for not having intelligent vehicle systems.
There are no significant discrepancies between socio-demographic groups or in terms

of driving patterns. It can be pointed out that males are somewhat more concerned
about the costs of buying and servicing these systems than females which can be
related to the fact that males can be expected to be more likely to buy a car. This is
also the case for those who drive their own car and thus they are probably more
aware of the extra costs these systems might bring.
- 48 -
4. INFORMATION SOURCES
- Europeans trust specialised sources to give them information about
intelligent vehicle systems-
As the eSafety Forum has asserted, consumers tend not to be aware of the
existence of many intelligent safety systems12. In order to distribute information
about these systems, it is useful to know from which sources they expect to get
reliable and unbiased information. This fourth chapter depicts the most trusted
information sources when it comes to intelligent car safety systems.
QE10 Suppose you were looking for information about these car safety
systems. Who would you most trust? (ROTATE – MAX. 3 ANSWERS)
- % EU25
Automobile clubs 30%
C ar manufacturers 29%
C onsumer associations 26%
The specialised media (specialised press,

25%
specialised TV programmes, and specialised radio
C ar dealers 22%
Family and friends 18%
Insurance companies 9%
The media in general 9%
Public authorities 7%
Driving schools 6%
Would never look for such information, not

8%
interested (SPONTANEOUS)
DK 6%
0% 35%
A preliminary analysis of the results gives an impression that EU citizens would trust
specialised sources to give them information about intelligent security
systems: 30% name automobile clubs as a reliable source and 29% car
manufacturers. Consumer associations (26%) and specialised media (25%) follow
next. Only 8% of EU citizens spontaneously state that they would never look for such
information.
It is worth noticing that some of these information sources are directly related to a
certain target group. For example, only 6% of the total sample mention driving schools
while 16% of respondents aged 15-24, the group that is most likely to attend a driving
school, would trust this source.
12
The Final Report and Recommendations of the User Outreach Working Group (2006)
- 49 -
QE10 Suppose you were looking for information about these car safety systems. Who would you most trust? (ROTATE – MAX. 3
ANSWERS)
The
specialised
media
(specialised
Would never
press,
Family look for such
Automobile Car Consumer specialised Car Insurance
and information, not DK
clubs manufacturers associations TV dealers companies
friends interested
programmes,
(SPONTANEOUS)
and
specialised
radio
programmes)
EU25 30% 29% 26% 25% 22% 18% 9% 8% 6%
BE 27% 30% 31% 22% 39% 19% 16% 4% 1%
CZ 20% 41% 15% 30% 34% 15% 4% 7% 4%
DK 64% 17% 33% 25% 12% 19% 15% 4% 4%
DE 54% 28% 33% 33% 17% 15% 4% 5% 4%
EE 10% 22% 13% 16% 9% 11% 17% 8% 24%
EL 12% 59% 14% 31% 24% 23% 8% 7% 1%
ES 9% 18% 14% 13% 29% 21% 5% 11% 15%
FR 23% 33% 47% 24% 32% 19% 18% 5% 4%
IE 32% 42% 25% 23% 22% 21% 17% 3% 9%
IT 11% 29% 17% 23% 34% 16% 5% 5% 6%
CY 18% 52% 27% 26% 18% 24% 16% 12% 1%
LV 15% 35% 7% 18% 15% 22% 9% 14% 12%
LT 19% 45% 13% 23% 10% 19% 9% 3% 14%
LU 61% 23% 18% 26% 30% 13% 14% 2% 2%
HU 15% 26% 14% 17% 22% 19% 7% 18% 10%
MT 8% 42% 15% 13% 22% 29% 10% 7% 7%
NL 59% 14% 55% 28% 9% 17% 11% 3% 4%
AT 61% 25% 26% 21% 21% 16% 5% 5% 8%
PL 17% 30% 9% 26% 15% 22% 7% 11% 10%
PT 31% 32% 17% 13% 27% 15% 8% 14% 10%
SI 30% 34% 12% 28% 24% 29% 3% 9% 2%
SK 26% 57% 23% 35% 28% 24% 8% 5% 4%
FI 24% 39% 20% 38% 17% 14% 16% 4% 4%
SE 49% 25% 47% 35% 9% 17% 36% 2% 2%
UK 39% 28% 22% 21% 10% 20% 12% 14% 4%
= Mentioned most often = mentioned second most often
In 14 out of 25 countries polled, car manufacturers are mentioned most often as a

reliable source of information. Greek (59%) and Slovakian (57%) respondents in
particular trust this source of information. Automobile clubs are mentioned most
often in 7 countries, especially in Denmark (64%) and Austria (61%).
The highest share of respondents in France mention consumer associations (47%),

while in Belgium (39%), Italy (34%) and Spain (29%) car dealers enjoy the
confidence of the largest share of citizens.
- 50 -
Respondents were given the opportunity to name three sources that they trust the
most. Males and managers are significantly more likely to name several
sources of information they would trust and have most confidence in specialised
sources such as automobile clubs. Females, on the other hand, would turn more
often to a friend or a family member in order to get information about car safety
systems.
At the EU level, it can be observed that those who have bought a new car have
more faith in car dealers (29%) than those who bought their car second hand
(21%). The EU average is 22%.
This places responsibility on car dealers since most of these security systems are
available only in recent models that are more often sold as new. It can be also seen to
break some stereotypical conceptions concerning car dealers as not being a reliable
source of information.
- 51 -
5. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
This last chapter discusses the preferred measures public authorities should take
if they wish to encourage the development of these car safety systems. Respondents
were asked to name one action that they consider to be the best in terms of promoting
the development of intelligent car safety systems.
- Tax incentives are considered to be the best way to promote the use of
intelligent vehicle systems -
QE11 If the public authorities would like to encourage the development of

these car safety systems, in your opinion, which of the following would be
the most preferable action? - % EU25
Offer tax incentives for cars equipped with these

37%
systems
Inform through large scale communication
16%
campaigns
Promote technological research and development
15%
in this field
Impose car safety regulations making such
15%
systems mandatory by law
None of these (SPONTANEOUS) 5%
DK 11%
EU citizens appear to prefer “soft” steering methods in terms of financial

incentives and awareness raising to normative actions such as legislation
when it come to encouraging the use of intelligent car safety systems.
The most preferred action is not surprising in the light of the reasons respondents
give for putting them off having intelligent vehicle systems in their car, namely price.
37% consider offering tax incentives for cars equipped with these systems as
the most preferable action. In chapter 3.3 it was observed that 51% of respondents
mention that the price of these safety systems would make them reluctant to have
them.
Despite only 7% of respondents naming public authorities as a trustworthy source of

information (Chapter 4), 16% think that large scale communication campaigns
for promoting these car safety systems would be the most preferable action. Promoting
technical research and development and making the use of these systems mandatory
by legislation follow next, both at 15%.
- 52 -
QE11 If the public authorities would like to encourage the development of

these car safety systems, in your opinion, which of the following would be
the most preferable action? - % EU25
Offer tax incentives for cars equipped with these systems

Inform through large scale communication campaigns
Impose car safety regulations making such systems mandatory by law
Promote technological research and development in this field
Other (SPONTANEOUS)
DK
FI 58% 11% 11% 13% 5%

SI 49% 7% 12% 14% 8% 7%
BE 49% 17% 14% 13% 4%
NL 46% 9% 17% 18% 6%

IT 44% 16% 16% 12% 4% 8%
EL 44% 19% 17% 11% 4% 4%
LU 43% 14% 15% 16% 6% 6%

SE 42% 8% 11% 31% 5%
DE 42% 12% 16% 14% 6% 10%
DK 42% 9% 21% 18% 8%
AT 38% 16% 14% 12% 5% 14%
FR 38% 18% 18% 17% 6%
SK 37% 16% 14% 22% 4% 7%
EU25 37% 16% 15% 15% 5% 11%
UK 35% 11% 15% 18% 11% 10%

PL 35% 15% 10% 18% 4% 17%
IE 34% 18% 19% 10% 16%
CZ 34% 23% 12% 19% 4% 9%
LT 33% 10% 8% 21% 4% 24%
HU 31% 14% 12% 17% 9% 17%
EE 31% 11% 10% 15% 5% 29%
LV 30% 18% 9% 16% 6% 20%
CY 30% 27% 16% 12% 14%
PT 29% 30% 16% 5% 17%
MT 22% 38% 12% 9% 19%
ES 17% 32% 12% 12% 23%
0% 50% 100%
Overall, in 22 of 25 countries polled, the largest share of respondents name

tax incentives as the preferred action, the share ranging from 58% in Finland to 30%
in Cyprus. Citizens of Malta (38%), Spain (32%) and Portugal (30%) opt most often
for information campaigns and almost a third of Swedish respondents (31%) mention
research and development.
Considering the country groupings, we can once again observe some differences
between the old and new Member States: respondents living in the 15 old Member
States mention more often tax incentives than respondents in the 10 new countries
who in turn favour slightly more often research and development.
- 53 -
When looking at the socio-demographic categories, we can distinguish the groups who
are most likely to support tax incentives:
Men, those aged 25-54, those who have a higher level of education, managers
and other white collar workers outnumber their counterparts in supporting tax
incentives aimed at encouraging the development of intelligent car safety systems.
This is also the group that was previously observed to drive more often and more
kilometres per year.
Regarding the respondents’ driving habits, there are no significant differences except
those linked to socio-demographic discrepancies i.e. those who drive a company car
and drive more than 20,000 km per year are most likely to name tax incentives as
their preferred action that public authorities should take to encourage the development
of intelligent car safety systems.
- 54 -
CONCLUSION
The following general conclusions can be drawn based on the results of this study:
There is a demand for intelligent systems in vehicles.

• Firstly, safety matters to EU citizens. 54% of respondents would consider
safety if they were to choose one car over another. A quarter (24%) rank
safety as the first criteria if they were to buy a car.
• In parallel, fuel consumption is considered to be an important factor when
buying a car (53%). In fact, when all cost factors (fuel consumption,
servicing costs, resale value) are considered together, they appear to
constitute the most important factor.
• Thirdly, a comparative majority of Europeans perceive all the intelligent
vehicle systems presented in this study as useful and would like to have
them in their new car. The anti-lock breaking system (ABS 73%) and the
electric stability program (ESP 65%) in particular are highly appreciated,
which is most likely related to their familiarity among EU citizens.
• Also, eCall, a telematic system that requires information exchange
between the car and the infrastructure, is well appreciated by respondents
even if this system is not widely in use yet and it could be considered as an
intrusion into drivers’ privacy
However, there are several factors that can be seen to complicate a full-scale
implementation of both the already existing and new intelligent safety systems:
The conditions for promoting/using intelligent vehicle systems vary

significantly from one country to another.
• There are significant discrepancies between the new and old Member States
in terms of driving patterns. Citizens in the EU15 more often have a driving
licence and own their car than citizens of NMS. They also drive newer cars
and buy their car as new more often.
• Concerning the Member States with a high potential of markets for
intelligent systems, it is observed that French, Italian and British
respondents are close to an average European buyer in their opinions while
Germans appear more reluctant when it comes to willingness to have
intelligent systems in their car.
The potential user group of intelligent vehicle systems appears to be limited.

• As most of the intelligent vehicle systems covered in this survey are
available only in the high-end range cars and in newest models, they are
not available for a large proportion of Europeans. Gender and socio-
economic status appear to be the most distinctive indicators.
• Males, those with a high level of education, those in a managerial position or
the self-employed have most often a driving licence and drive a big or a
medium sized car that is between 1-5 years old. They are also more likely to
appreciate intelligent systems in their car. The elderly tend to buy a new car
but they also more rarely change their car.
- 55 -
The costs of these systems are considered to be too high.

• The main reason for not having these systems is their price. The majority of
respondents (51%) find them too expensive to have in their car. A
reasonable proportion of people are also concerned about the false feeling of
being protected (23%) and unreliable functioning of these systems (24%).
Acceptance of intelligent vehicle systems is not evenly distributed between

various systems and different respondent groups.
• Respondents tend to appreciate most systems they are familiar with and
systems directly related to safety. 73% perceive ABS as a useful system and
would like to have it in their car and 65% appreciate electronic stability
programs. On the other hand, only 47% would like to have lane departure
warning systems in their cars despite involuntary lane departure being one
of the major causes of accidents.
• eCall is a well-accepted system (62% would like to have it) while 54% of
respondents would like to have a real time traffic information system. This
difference in acceptance might be explained by the extent to which these
systems are considered as an intrusion into driver’s privacy: 45% of
respondents do not consider eCall as an intrusion at all while 35% say the
same about real time traffic information.
• Concerning eCall and real time traffic information system, it is observed that
those who would like to have either of these systems in their new car also
think more often that they do not cause them inconvenience while those
who are not interested in having these system tend to more often regard
them as a minor inconvenience or a real risk.
• Males and those who have a higher level of education as well as those who
drive a lot and have bought a new car - the categories that are also likely to
belong to the group of potential users of intelligent vehicle systems – tend
to consider these systems more useful while those who indicate that they
drive a small car or a second hand car are slightly less likely to consider
these systems worth having in their car. In other words, the group that
appears to have limited access to these systems also appreciates them less.
Finally, EU citizens trust professional/specialised information sources and

expect positive incentives from the public authorities.
• Most EU citizens would trust automobile groups (30%) and car
manufactures (29%) to give them information about intelligent vehicle
systems followed by consumer associations (26%) and the specialised
media (25%).
• Respondents appear to prefer “soft” steering methods in terms of financial
incentives and awareness raising to normative actions such as legislation
when it comes to actions that the public authorities should take to
encourage the development of intelligent vehicle systems. Tax incentives for
cars equipped with these systems would be appreciated by 37% of
respondents, followed by information distribution through large scale
communication campaigns at 16%.
- 56 -
ANNEXES
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
SPECIAL EUROBAROMETER N°267
“Use of Intelligent Systems in Vehicles”
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Between the 7th of June and the 12th of July 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, a consortium created between Taylor Nelson
Sofres and EOS Gallup Europe, carried out wave 65.4 of the EUROBAROMETER, on request of the EUROPEAN
COMMISSION, Directorate-General Communication, “Public Opinion and Media Monitoring”.
The SPECIAL EUROBAROMETER N°267 is part of wave 65.4 and covers the population of the respective nationalities
of the European Union Member States, resident in each of the Member States and aged 15 years and over. The basic
sample design applied in all states is a multi-stage, random (probability) one. In each country, a number of sampling
points was drawn with probability proportional to population size (for a total coverage of the country) and to
population density.
In order to do so, the sampling points were drawn systematically from each of the "administrative regional units",
after stratification by individual unit and type of area. They thus represent the whole territory of the countries
surveyed according to the EUROSTAT NUTS II (or equivalent) and according to the distribution of the resident
population of the respective nationalities in terms of metropolitan, urban and rural areas. In each of the selected
sampling points, a starting address was drawn, at random. Further addresses (every Nth address) were selected by
standard "random route" procedures, from the initial address. In each household, the respondent was drawn, at
random (following the "closest birthday rule"). All interviews were conducted face-to-face in people's homes and in
the appropriate national language. As far as the data capture is concerned, CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal
Interview) was used in those countries where this technique was available.
POPULATIO
N° FIELDWORK
ABBREVIATIONS COUNTRIES INSTITUTES N
INTERVIEWS DATES
15+
BE Belgium TNS Dimarso 1.032 14/06/2006 05/07/2006 8.598.982
CZ Czech Rep. TNS Aisa 1.011 13/06/2006 02/07/2006 8.571.710
DK Denmark TNS Gallup DK 1.045 12/06/2006 10/07/2006 4.380.063
DE Germany TNS Infratest 1.570 13/06/2006 08/07/2006 64.174.295
EE Estonia Emor 1.004 09/06/2006 03/07/2006 887.094
EL Greece TNS ICAP 1.000 12/06/2006 08/07/2006 8.674.230
TNS
ES Spain 1.012 11/06/2006 08/07/2006 35.882.820
Demoscopia
FR France TNS Sofres 1.009 13/06/2006 10/07/2006 44.010.619
IE Ireland TNS MRBI 1.000 07/06/2006 05/07/2006 3.089.775
IT Italy TNS Abacus 1.019 09/06/2006 10/07/2006 49.208.000
Rep. of
CY Synovate 504 07/06/2006 04/07/2006 552.213
Cyprus
LV Latvia TNS Latvia 1.019 13/06/2006 12/07/2006 1.394.351
TNS Gallup
LT Lithuania 1.004 13/06/2006 04/07/2006 2.803.661
Lithuania
LU Luxembourg TNS ILReS 506 07/06/2006 04/07/2006 367.199
HU Hungary TNS Hungary 1.015 10/06/2006 30/06/2006 8.503.379
MT Malta MISCO 500 09/06/2006 06/07/2006 322.917
NL Netherlands TNS NIPO 1.019 10/06/2006 04/07/2006 13.242.328
Österreichisches
AT Austria 1.000 08/06/2006 02/07/2006 6.679.444
Gallup-Institut
PL Poland TNS OBOP 1.000 10/06/2006 04/07/2006 31.610.437
PT Portugal TNS EUROTESTE 1.011 09/06/2006 07/07/2006 8.080.915
SI Slovenia RM PLUS 1.027 10/06/2006 10/07/2006 1.663.869
SK Slovakia TNS AISA SK 1.143 13/06/2006 29/06/2006 4.316.438
FI Finland TNS Gallup Oy 1.031 07/06/2006 06/07/2006 4.279.286
SE Sweden TNS GALLUP 1.002 13/06/2006 10/07/2006 7.376.680
United
UK TNS UK 1.313 08/06/2006 08/07/2006 47.685.578
Kingdom
TOTAL 24.796 07/06/2006 12/07/2006 1.663.869
For each country a comparison between the sample and the universe was carried out. The Universe description was
derived from Eurostat population data or from national statistics offices. For all countries surveyed, a national
weighting procedure, using marginal and intercellular weighting, was carried out based on this Universe description.
In all countries, gender, age, region and size of locality were introduced in the iteration procedure. For international
weighting (i.e. EU averages), TNS Opinion & Social applies the official population figures as provided by EUROSTAT or
national statistic offices. The total population figures for input in this post-weighting procedure are listed above.
Readers are reminded that survey results are estimations, the accuracy of which, everything being equal, rests upon
the sample size and upon the observed percentage. With samples of about 1,000 interviews, the real percentages
vary within the following confidence limits:
Observed percentages 10% or 90% 20% or 80% 30% or 70% 40% or 60% 50%
Confidence limits ± 1.9 points ± 2.5 points ± 2.7 points ± 3.0 points ± 3.1 points
QUESTIONNAIRE
Let's move on to another topic. Parlons maintenant d'un autre sujet.
ASK QE ONLY IN EU25 - BG and RO GO TO QF1 POSER QE UNIQUEMENT EN UE25 - BG et RO ALLER EN QF1
QE1 Please tell which of the following situations applies to you. QE1 Pourriez-vous me dire lesquelles des situations suivantes s’appliquent à vous.
(SHOW CARD – READ OUT – MULTIPLE ANSWERS POSSIBLE) (MONTRER CARTE – LIRE – PLUSIEURS REPONSES POSSIBLES)
You drive your own car 1, Vous conduisez votre propre voiture 1,
You drive a company\ fleet car 2, Vous conduisez une voiture de société 2,
You drive someone else’s car 3, Vous conduisez la voiture de quelqu’un d’autre 3,
You have a driving licence but you rarely or never drive Vous êtes titulaire d’un permis de conduire mais vous conduisez rarement
4, ou jamais 4,
You do not have a driving licence 5, Vous n’êtes pas titulaire d’un permis de conduire 5,
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 6, Autre (SPONTANE) 6,
DK 7, NSP 7,
NEW NEW
ASK QE2 to QE6 IF "DRIVE", CODE 1 to 3 in QE1 - OTHERS GO TO QE7 POSER QE2 à QE6 SI "CONDUIT", CODE 1 à 3 en QE1 - LES AUTRES ALLER EN QE7
QE2 Thinking in terms of how you drive on a weekly basis would you say that you mainly drive…? QE2 En considérant une semaine normale, diriez-vous que vous conduisez principalement … ?
(READ OUT – ONE ANSWER ONLY) (LIRE – UNE SEULE REPONSE)
On motorways and other fast highways 1 Sur des autoroutes et autres voies rapides 1
On urban roads 2 En ville 2
On rural roads 3 Sur des routes de campagne 3
2 or 3 of these equally (SPONTANEOUS) 4 2 ou 3 de celles-ci autant l’une que l’autre (SPONTANE) 4
DK 5 NSP 5
NEW NEW
QuestionnaireEB654COMMcompletENFR 34/57 07/06/2006

QE3 How many kilometres do you drive per year? QE3 Combien de kilomètres conduisez-vous par an ?
(READ OUT – ONE ANSWER ONLY) (LIRE – UNE SEULE REPONSE)
Less than 5.000 km 1 Moins de 5.000 km 1

From 5.000 to less than 10.000 km 2 De 5.000 à moins de 10.000 km 2
50.000 km or more 7 50.000 km ou plus 7
DK 8 NSP 8
NEW NEW
QE4 How would you best describe the size of the car you usually use? QE4 Comment décririez-vous la taille de la voiture que vous conduisez habituellement ?
(SHOW CARD WITH PICTURES OF CARS AND DESCRIPTION – ONE ANSWER ONLY) (MONTRER CARTE AVEC PHOTOS ET DESCRIPTION – UNE SEULE REPONSE)
City car\ Small car 1 Une voiture citadine\ petite voiture 1

Medium-sized car 2 Une voiture de taille moyenne 2
Big sized car 3 Une grande voiture 3
Family car (People carrier) 4 Une voiture familiale (Monospace) 4
Sport car 5 Une voiture de sport 5
SUV 6 Un 4x4 6
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 7 Autre (SPONTANE) 7
DK 8 NSP 8
NEW NEW

QE5 Did you get the car you usually use new or second hand? QE5 La voiture que vous utilisez habituellement, l’avez-vous eue neuve ou d’occasion ?
(IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT OWN THE CAR ASK IF OWNER GOT IT NEW) (SI LE REPONDANT N’EST PAS PERSONNELLEMENT PROPRIETAIRE DE LA VOITURE
DEMANDER SI LE PROPRIETAIRE L’A EUE NEUVE OU D’OCCASION)
New 1 Neuve 1
Second hand 2 D’occasion 2
DK 3 NSP 3
NEW NEW
QE6 And how old is this car now? By this I mean the number of years since first registration. QE6 Aujourd'hui, quel âge a cette voiture ? Par cela j’entends le nombre d’années depuis sa
première immatriculation.
(DO NOT READ OUT – CODE USING THE LIST BELOW – ONE ANSWER ONLY) (NE PAS LIRE – CODER DANS LA LISTE CI-DESSOUS – UNE SEULE REPONSE)
Less than 1 year old 1 Moins d’un an 1

1 year old 2 1 an 2
2 years old 3 2 ans 3
3 years old 4 3 ans 4
4 to 5 years old 5 4 à 5 ans 5
6 to 10 years old 6 6 à 10 ans 6
More than 10 years old 7 Plus de 10 ans 7
DK 8 NSP 8
NEW NEW

ASK ALL IN EU25 A TOUS EN UE25
QE7a Suppose you were to buy a car today, be it new or second hand, which factors, apart from the QE7a Supposons que vous vous apprêtiez à acheter une voiture neuve ou d’occasion aujourd’hui,
price, would make you lean towards one model over another? Firstly? quels sont les facteurs, mis à part le prix, qui vous feraient choisir un modèle plutôt qu’un
autre ? En premier ?
QE7b And secondly? QE7b Et en deuxième ?
QE7c And thirdly? QE7c Et en troisième ?
(SHOW CARD – ONE ANSWER PER COLUMN) (MONTRER CARTE – UNE SEULE REPONSE PAR COLONNE)
(READ OUT) QE7a QE7b QE7c (LIRE) QE7a QE7b QE7c

FIRSTLY SECONDL THIRDLY EN EN EN
Y PREMIER DEUXIEM TROISIEM
E E
Engine performance 1 1 1 La performance moteur 1 1 1
Aesthetics 2 2 2 L’esthétisme 2 2 2
Space inside 3 3 3 Le volume intérieur 3 3 3
Comfort 4 4 4 Le confort 4 4 4
Safety 5 5 5 La sécurité 5 5 5
Durability\ robustness 6 6 6 La solidité\ robustesse 6 6 6
Fuel consumption 7 7 7 La consommation de carburant 7 7 7
Level and availability of equipment 8 8 8 Le niveau et la disponibilité d’équipements 8 8 8
Reputation of mark\ brand 9 9 9 La réputation de la marque 9 9 9
Environmentally clean 10 10 10 Le respect de l’environnement 10 10 10
Number of seats 11 11 11 Le nombre de places 11 11 11
Resale value 12 12 12 La valeur de revente 12 12 12
Servicing cost 13 13 13 Le coût à l’entretien 13 13 13
Not applicable (SPONTANEOUS) 14 14 14 Pas applicable (SPONTANE) 14 14 14
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 15 15 15 Autre (SPONTANE) 15 15 15
DK 16 16 16 NSP 16 16 16
NEW NEW

QE8 I will read out a list of car safety systems, some of which already exist and others which are QE8 Je vais maintenant vous énumérer une liste de systèmes de sécurité pour voitures, dont
currently under development. For each of these systems, please tell me which of the following certains existent déjà et d’autres sont en cours de développement. Pour chacun de ces
statements best corresponds to your opinion. systèmes, pourriez-vous me dire lequel correspond le mieux à votre opinion.
(SHOW CARD WITH ITEMS AND DEFINITIONS AND SHOW CARD WITH SCALE – ONE (MONTRER CARTE AVEC REPONSES ET DEFINITIONS AINSI QUE L’ECHELLE – UNE
ANSWER PER LINE) REPONSE PAR LIGNE)
(READ OUT – TOP BOTTOM ROTATION) It is It is It is It is Not DK (LIRE – ROTATION HAUT EN BAS) Ce Ce C’est C’est Pas NSP
not a not a a a appli n’est n’est un un appli
usef usef usef usef cabl pas pas systè systè cabl
ul ul ul ul e un un me me e
syste syste syste syste (SP systè systè utile utile (SP
m m m m ONT me me mais et ONT
and but but and ANE utile utile vous vous ANE
you you you you OUS et mais ne voud )
woul woul woul woul ) vous vous voud riez
d not d d not d ne voud riez que
like like like like voud riez pas votre
to to to to riez que que proc
have have have have pas votre votre hain
it on it on it on it on que proc proc e
your your you your votre hain hain voitu
next next next next proc e e re en
car car car car hain voitu voitu soit
e re en re en équi
voitu soit soit pée
re en équi équi
soit pée pée
équi
pée
1 ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking System: system preventing 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 ABS, Système antiblocage : système empêchant le 1 2 3 4 5 6
the blocking of the wheels when breaking and thus blocage des roues lors d’un freinage brusque et
allowing the car to stay on track permettant ainsi le maintien du véhicule sur la route
2 ESP, Electronic Stability Program: system stabilising 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 ESP, Système électronique de stabilité : Système de 1 2 3 4 5 6
the vehicle and preventing skidding in critical stabilisation du véhicule qui l’empêche de déraper
situations dans des situations critiques

3 Blind Spot Monitoring System: system warning the 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 Système de surveillance des angles morts : système 1 2 3 4 5 6
driver about nearby obstacles in the blind spot alertant le conducteur de la présence d’un obstacle
dans l’angle mort
4 Adaptive Head Lights: system moving headlights 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 Projecteurs auto-directionnels : système 1 2 3 4 5 6
when turning into bends and adjusting the luminous d’orientation des phares dans les virages et de
intensity in order to avoid dazzling réglage de l’intensité lumineuse pour éviter
l’éblouissement
5 Obstacle and collision warning: system detecting 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 Alerte de risque de collision : système détectant les 1 2 3 4 5 6
potential collisions with other vehicles or obstacles risques de collision avec d’autres véhicules ou
based on current speed obstacles en fonction de la vitesse
6 Lane departure warning system: system warning the 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 Alerte de franchissement de ligne : système qui 1 2 3 4 5 6
driver when unintentionally leaving the lane alerte le conducteur lorsqu’il quitte involontairement
sa bande de circulation
7 Ecall, Emergency call system: system automatically 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ecall, appel électronique d’urgence : système 1 2 3 4 5 6
calling the local emergency authorities and instantly appelant automatiquement les services de secours
transferring to them accurate vehicle position and locaux quand le véhicule est impliqué dans un
other accident related data when the vehicle is accident grave et transmettant instantanément la
involved in a serious accident and thus reducing the position actuelle du véhicule et les autres
time for the rescue services to arrive informations relatives à l’accident, réduisant ainsi le
temps mis par les secours pour arriver
8 Real time traffic and travel information: system 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Système en temps réel d’information et de 1 2 3 4 5 6
providing real time information about the road navigation : système donnant des informations en
network such as traffic jams and weather conditions, temps réel sur les réseaux routiers tels que des
allowing to choose an alternative itinerary bouchons et des conditions météorologiques,
permettant de choisir un itinéraire alternatif
9 Speed Alert: system detecting local speed limits on 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 Alerte de vitesse : système détectant les limitations 1 2 3 4 5 6
all types of roads and warning driver if they exceed de vitesse sur tout type de route et alertant le
these conducteur s’il\ elle est en excès de vitesse
10 Monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver: system 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 Surveillance de l’état du conducteur : système 1 2 3 4 5 6
warning the driver in case of drowsiness, distraction alertant le conducteur en cas de somnolence, de
or carelessness distraction ou d’inattention
NEW NEW

QE9a Which of the following factors would most put you off having these kind of safety systems in QE9a Parmi les raisons suivantes, laquelle vous dissuaderait le plus d’accepter ces systèmes de
your car? Firstly? sécurité dans votre voiture ? En premier ?
QE9b And secondly? QE9b Et en deuxième ?
(SHOW CARD – ONE ANSWER PER COLUMN) (MONTRER CARTE – UNE REPONSE PAR COLONNE)
(READ OUT) QE9a QE9b (LIRE) QE9a QE9b

FIRSTLY SECONDLY EN PREMIER EN DEUXIEME
Undermines driver’s freedom 1 1 Cela réduit la liberté du conducteur 1 1
Reduces driver’s responsiveness and alertness by 2 2 Cela réduit la réactivité et la vigilance du conducteur par la 2 2
creating an artificial feeling of being protected création d’un sentiment de sécurité artificiel
Fear of excessive visual and sound warnings 3 3 La crainte d'alertes sonores et visuelles excessives 3 3
Fear of unreliable electronic systems 4 4 La crainte que les systèmes électroniques soient peu 4 4
fiables
It’s difficult to understand how these safety systems work 5 5 Il est difficile de comprendre le fonctionnement de ces 5 5
systèmes électroniques
It's too expensive to buy 6 6 C'est trop cher à l’achat 6 6
It's too expensive to service 7 7 C'est trop cher à l’entretien 7 7
Cars are already safe enough 8 8 Les voitures sont déjà suffisamment sûres 8 8
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 9 9 Autre (SPONTANE) 9 9
DK 10 10 NSP 10 10
NEW NEW

QE10 Suppose you were looking for information about these car safety systems. Who would you QE10 Supposons que vous cherchiez des informations sur ces systèmes de sécurité. A qui feriez-
most trust? vous le plus confiance ?
(SHOW CARD – READ OUT – ROTATE – MAX. 3 ANSWERS) (MONTRER CARTE – LIRE – ROTATION – MAX. 3 REPONSES)
Public authorities 1, Les autorités publiques 1,

Car manufacturers 2, Les fabricants de voitures 2,
Automobile clubs (USE APPROPRIATE NAME IN EACH COUNTRY) 3, Les clubs automobiles (ADAPTER LOCALEMENT) 3,
Consumer associations 4, Les associations de consommateurs 4,
The media in general 5, Les médias en général 5,
The specialised media (specialised press, specialised TV programmes, and Les médias spécialisés (presse ou programmes télé ou programmes radio
specialised radio programmes) 6, spécialisés) 6,
Car dealers 7, Les concessionnaires 7,
Driving schools 8, Les auto-écoles 8,
Insurance companies 9, Les compagnies d’assurance 9,
Family and friends 10, La famille et les amis 10,
Would never look for such information, not interested (SPONTANEOUS) Ne cherche jamais ce genre d’information, n’est pas intéressé(e)
11, (SPONTANE) 11,
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 12, Autre (SPONTANE) 12,
DK 13, NSP 13,
NEW NEW
QE11 If the public authorities would like to encourage the development of these car safety systems, QE11 Si les autorités publiques voulaient encourager le développement de ces systèmes de
in your opinion, which of the following would be the most preferable action? sécurité pour voitures, à votre avis, quelle action parmi les suivantes serait la plus
souhaitable ?
(SHOW CARD – READ OUT – ONE ANSWER ONLY) (MONTRER CARTE – LIRE – UNE SEULE REPONSE)
Inform through large scale communication campaigns 1 Informer par de grandes campagnes de communication 1
Offer tax incentives for cars equipped with these systems Offrir des avantages fiscaux pour les voitures équipées de ces systèmes
2 2
Impose car safety regulations making such systems mandatory by law Imposer une législation sur la sécurité des voitures rendant de tels
3 systèmes légalement obligatoires 3
Promote technological research and development in this field 4 Promouvoir la recherche et le développement dans ce domaine 4
None of these (SPONTANEOUS) 5 Aucun de ceux-ci (SPONTANE) 5
Other (SPONTANEOUS) 6 Autre (SPONTANE) 6
DK 7 NSP 7
NEW NEW

ASK QE12a ONLY TO SPLIT A POSER QE12a UNIQUEMENT AU SPLIT A
QE12a Cars can be equipped with an emergency call system which automatically calls the local QE12a Les voitures peuvent être équipées d’un système d'appel d'urgence appelant
emergency authorities when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident. This system instantly automatiquement les services de secours locaux quand le véhicule est impliqué dans un
transfers to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data and thereby accident grave. Ce système transmet instantanément la position actuelle du véhicule et les
reduces the time for the rescue services to arrive. Some people might consider this system as autres informations relatives à l’accident, réduisant ainsi le temps mis par les secours pour
an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…? arriver. Certaines personnes peuvent considérer ce système comme une intrusion dans la vie
privée du conducteur. Personnellement, considérez-vous cela comme … ?
A real risk of intrusion that would deter you from having such a system Un véritable risque d'intrusion qui vous découragerait de posséder un tel
1 système 1
A minor inconvenience compared with the usefulness of the system 2 Un inconvénient mineur comparé à l’utilité de ce système 2
You do not consider it as an inconvenience as far as you are concerned Vous considérez que ce n'est pas un inconvénient en ce qui vous concerne
3 3
DK 5 NSP 5
NEW NEW
ASK QE12b ONLY TO SPLIT B POSER QE12b UNIQUEMENT AU SPLIT B
QE12b Cars can be equipped with an in-built system collecting information such as their location or QE12b Les voitures peuvent être équipées d’un système intégré qui collecte des informations, telles
speed, in order to produce real time traffic information. Some people might consider this que leurs coordonnées géographiques et leur vitesse, afin d’obtenir des informations sur la
system as an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…? circulation en temps réel. Certaines personnes pourraient considérer ce système comme une
intrusion dans la vie privée du conducteur. Personnellement, considérez-vous cela comme
…?
A real risk of intrusion that would deter you from having such a system Un véritable risque d'intrusion qui vous découragerait d’avoir un tel système
1 1
A minor inconvenience compared with the usefulness of the system 2 Un inconvénient mineur comparé à l’utilité de ce système 2
You do not consider it as an inconvenience as far as you are concerned Vous considérez que ce n'est pas un inconvénient en ce qui vous concerne
3 3
DK 5 NSP 5
NEW NEW

TABLES
QE1 Please tell which of the following situations applies to you. (MULTIPLE ANSWERS POSSIBLE)
You have a driving

You drive your own You drive a You drive someone You do not have a Other
TOTAL licence but you rarely DK
car company\ fleet car else’s car driving license (SPONTANEOUS)
or never drive
UE25 EU25 24796 57% 4% 5% 9% 29% 0% 0%
BE 1032 64% 8% 7% 7% 19% 1% 0%
CZ 1011 41% 6% 8% 15% 35% 0% -
DK 1045 60% 9% 8% 14% 19% 1% -
D-W 1053 65% 2% 5% 10% 20% 1% 0%
DE 1570 64% 3% 5% 10% 21% 0% 0%
D-E 517 58% 4% 4% 12% 25% 0% 0%
EE 1004 35% 7% 6% 12% 46% 0% 0%
EL 1000 44% 2% 4% 9% 43% 0% -
ES 1012 48% 2% 2% 7% 42% 1% 0%
FR 1009 69% 6% 6% 8% 21% 0% 0%
IE 1000 64% 1% 4% 2% 29% 1% 1%
IT 1019 65% 5% 7% 7% 18% 0% 0%
CY 504 71% 7% 10% 3% 18% 2% 0%
LV 1019 25% 5% 4% 10% 59% - 1%
LT 1004 34% 3% 3% 10% 52% 0% 1%
LU 506 75% 4% 9% 3% 16% 1% -
HU 1015 30% 3% 3% 13% 52% 1% 0%
MT 500 55% 4% 6% 6% 37% - -
NL 1019 64% 8% 4% 8% 21% 1% -
AT 1000 61% 4% 6% 12% 20% 1% 0%
PL 1000 31% 3% 4% 14% 51% 0% 0%
PT 1011 50% 3% 2% 5% 41% - 1%
SI 1027 67% 4% 5% 7% 23% 1% -
SK 1143 34% 6% 5% 20% 41% 1% 1%
FI 1031 60% 6% 6% 9% 24% 1% -
SE 1002 66% 10% 12% 10% 16% 0% 0%
UK 1313 59% 5% 7% 7% 29% 0% 0%
QE2 Thinking in term on how you drive on a weekly basis would you say that you mainly drive…?
(IF 'DRIVE', CODE 1 TO 3 IN QE1)

On motorways and other fast 2 or 3 of these equally
TOTAL On urban roads On rural roads DK
highways (SPONTANEOUS)
UE25 EU25 15357 13% 44% 22% 22% 0%
BE 756 15% 25% 37% 23% 0%
CZ 510 10% 42% 30% 18% -
DK 707 14% 26% 33% 28% 0%
D-W 742 11% 30% 32% 27% 0%
DE 1086 10% 31% 30% 28% 0%
D-E 331 8% 36% 25% 31% -
EE 419 7% 24% 25% 43% 1%
EL 481 13% 45% 3% 39% 0%
ES 505 18% 34% 14% 34% -
FR 719 12% 35% 32% 21% -
IE 672 12% 32% 30% 26% 0%
IT 764 16% 71% 3% 10% -
CY 384 17% 51% 4% 28% -
LV 313 7% 48% 18% 26% -
LT 373 10% 69% 18% 2% -
LU 406 19% 18% 37% 25% 0%
HU 341 7% 41% 24% 26% 0%
MT 284 22% 27% 2% 49% -
NL 730 34% 33% 27% 7% -
AT 682 9% 28% 28% 35% 0%
PL 353 3% 60% 13% 23% 0%
PT 537 11% 27% 24% 37% 0%
SI 721 6% 45% 13% 36% -
SK 454 9% 51% 18% 21% 1%
FI 682 16% 45% 23% 16% 0%
SE 754 11% 23% 42% 23% 0%
UK 828 10% 54% 21% 15% 0%
QE3 How many kilometres do you drive per year?
From 5.000 to less From 10.000 to less From 15.000 to less From 20.000 to less From 30.000 to less
TOTAL Less than 5.000 km 50.000 km or more DK
than 10.000 km than 15.000 km than 20.000 km than 30.000 km than 50.000 km
UE25 EU25 15357 15% 27% 23% 15% 9% 4% 2% 3%
BE 756 13% 25% 21% 15% 16% 7% 3% 0%
CZ 510 20% 27% 17% 15% 11% 5% 4% 2%
DK 707 12% 21% 22% 18% 16% 6% 3% 1%
D-W 742 15% 33% 25% 13% 9% 3% 1% 1%
DE 1086 14% 34% 24% 13% 9% 3% 2% 1%
D-E 331 8% 39% 22% 14% 11% 4% 2% 0%
EE 419 13% 23% 19% 13% 16% 6% 8% 2%
EL 481 9% 22% 22% 17% 15% 9% 7% -
ES 505 18% 23% 22% 14% 7% 2% 4% 10%
FR 719 17% 28% 23% 14% 10% 3% 2% 3%
IE 672 11% 22% 23% 22% 15% 4% 2% 2%
IT 764 11% 27% 28% 18% 8% 3% 1% 3%
CY 384 12% 30% 17% 10% 10% 6% 5% 10%
LV 313 19% 19% 16% 16% 13% 6% 9% 2%
LT 373 22% 27% 16% 9% 9% 7% 6% 4%
LU 406 14% 19% 16% 18% 19% 7% 2% 5%
HU 341 22% 23% 21% 16% 9% 5% 4% 0%
MT 284 8% 19% 14% 6% 5% 4% 2% 42%
NL 730 17% 25% 19% 15% 11% 9% 3% 1%
AT 682 11% 30% 26% 15% 9% 3% 1% 5%
PL 353 23% 27% 19% 11% 8% 6% 3% 3%
PT 537 18% 22% 16% 13% 11% 8% 6% 6%
SI 721 15% 26% 26% 15% 11% 5% 1% 1%
SK 454 25% 24% 16% 13% 8% 9% 4% 1%
FI 682 15% 24% 19% 15% 15% 7% 4% 1%
SE 754 22% 17% 21% 16% 11% 7% 3% 3%
UK 828 15% 26% 21% 20% 8% 5% 2% 2%
QE4 How would you best describe the size of the car you usually use?

Family car (People Other
TOTAL City car\ Small car Medium-sized car Big sized car Sport car SUV DK
carrier) (SPONTANEOUS)
UE25 EU25 15357 27% 48% 12% 9% 1% 2% 1% 0%
BE 756 22% 43% 16% 13% 1% 4% 1% -
CZ 510 27% 51% 7% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0%
DK 707 21% 48% 14% 14% - 3% 0% -
D-W 742 26% 53% 9% 9% 1% 1% 1% 0%
DE 1086 26% 54% 9% 8% 1% 1% 1% 0%
D-E 331 26% 58% 7% 7% 1% 1% 1% -
EE 419 16% 58% 10% 9% 1% 3% 2% 1%
EL 481 21% 50% 13% 9% 2% 3% 2% -
ES 505 28% 48% 14% 5% 1% 2% 2% -
FR 719 37% 40% 10% 11% 1% 1% 0% -
IE 672 26% 54% 12% 3% 1% 3% 2% 0%
IT 764 27% 50% 11% 9% 1% 2% 1% 0%
CY 384 21% 45% 11% 5% 3% 14% 1% 0%
LV 313 12% 51% 19% 14% 1% 3% - -
LT 373 12% 60% 12% 13% 0% 2% 1% -
LU 406 23% 42% 13% 14% 3% 6% 0% -
HU 341 31% 51% 9% 7% - - 1% 1%
MT 284 28% 41% 14% 13% 1% 4% 0% -
NL 730 24% 47% 8% 16% 1% 3% 2% -
AT 682 25% 53% 14% 6% 1% 1% 0% 0%
PL 353 27% 54% 13% 4% - 0% 1% -
PT 537 42% 43% 9% 5% - 1% - 0%
SI 721 29% 52% 12% 5% 1% 1% 1% -
SK 454 25% 59% 6% 8% 1% 0% 1% -
FI 682 13% 51% 14% 13% 1% 5% 2% -
SE 754 14% 45% 29% 8% 0% 3% 1% -
UK 828 25% 43% 16% 10% 2% 4% 0% 0%
QE5 Did you get the car you usually use new or second hand?

TOTAL New Second hand DK
UE25 EU25 15357 46% 53% 1%
BE 756 58% 41% 0%
CZ 510 37% 62% 1%
DK 707 41% 58% 1%
D-W 742 42% 58% 0%
DE 1086 43% 57% 1%
D-E 331 47% 52% 1%
EE 419 18% 81% 1%
EL 481 75% 25% 1%
ES 505 77% 22% 1%
FR 719 34% 66% 0%
IE 672 35% 64% 1%
IT 764 69% 30% 1%
CY 384 42% 57% 0%
LV 313 11% 89% -
LT 373 4% 95% 1%
LU 406 74% 26% 0%
HU 341 36% 61% 3%
MT 284 65% 35% 0%
NL 730 33% 67% -
AT 682 48% 50% 2%
PL 353 25% 73% 1%
PT 537 48% 50% 2%
SI 721 45% 54% 0%
SK 454 49% 51% 0%
FI 682 33% 66% 1%
SE 754 34% 65% 1%
UK 828 33% 67% 0%
QE6 And how old is this car now? By this I mean the number of years since first registration. (DO NOT READ OUT)

More than 10 years
TOTAL Less than 1 year old 1 year old 2 years old 3 years old 4 to 5 years old 6 to 10 years old DK
old
UE25 EU25 15357 5% 6% 10% 12% 19% 28% 19% 1%
BE 756 8% 7% 10% 11% 20% 29% 15% 0%
CZ 510 2% 2% 7% 11% 23% 32% 23% 1%
DK 707 7% 5% 8% 8% 12% 34% 25% 1%
D-W 742 5% 7% 12% 13% 17% 27% 19% 0%
DE 1086 5% 6% 12% 13% 18% 27% 18% 0%
D-E 331 4% 5% 10% 15% 22% 28% 16% 1%
EE 419 4% 2% 4% 8% 9% 30% 43% 1%
EL 481 5% 7% 9% 12% 20% 24% 24% -
ES 505 5% 8% 14% 15% 20% 22% 13% 3%
FR 719 6% 4% 7% 6% 17% 33% 27% 0%
IE 672 9% 10% 14% 14% 21% 27% 4% 1%
IT 764 7% 9% 13% 19% 19% 23% 9% 2%
CY 384 6% 3% 6% 8% 18% 29% 28% 1%
LV 313 3% 1% 2% 3% 4% 24% 62% 1%
LT 373 2% 1% 0% 1% 3% 20% 72% 1%
LU 406 13% 11% 13% 13% 17% 24% 8% 1%
HU 341 4% 5% 9% 11% 15% 27% 29% 1%
MT 284 4% 4% 6% 7% 12% 37% 28% 2%
NL 730 5% 5% 7% 10% 20% 35% 18% 0%
AT 682 3% 6% 19% 20% 26% 19% 6% 1%
PL 353 2% 2% 5% 3% 14% 38% 34% 1%
PT 537 5% 5% 6% 8% 22% 29% 24% 1%
SI 721 4% 4% 8% 10% 19% 33% 21% 0%
SK 454 4% 4% 6% 12% 21% 29% 25% 0%
FI 682 7% 5% 8% 9% 12% 28% 30% 1%
SE 754 6% 5% 6% 8% 13% 31% 29% 1%
UK 828 5% 5% 9% 13% 23% 30% 14% 0%
QE7a Suppose you were to buy a car today, be it new or second hand, which factors, apart from the price, would make you lean towards one model over another? Firstly?
Fuel consumption
(SPONTANEOUS)
(SPONTANEOUS)
Number of seats
Environmentally
Not applicable
Servicing cost
availability of
Reputation of
mark\ brand
performance
Resale value
Space inside
Durability\
robustness
equipment
Aesthetics
Level and
Comfort
Engine
Safety
Other
clean
DK
TOTAL
UE25 EU25 24796 10% 8% 5% 7% 24% 6% 18% 1% 4% 3% 1% 1% 2% 6% 1% 4%

BE 1032 7% 11% 9% 13% 24% 5% 15% - 4% 3% 2% 0% 2% 3% 2% 0%
CZ 1011 8% 9% 4% 6% 21% 13% 17% 1% 4% 1% 0% 2% 4% 6% 1% 4%
DK 1045 6% 9% 8% 6% 28% 8% 16% 1% 2% 7% 1% 2% 1% 4% 0% 1%
D-W 1053 7% 9% 7% 3% 25% 7% 26% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 2% 5% 1% 2%
DE 1570 7% 9% 7% 3% 25% 7% 26% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 2% 5% 1% 2%
D-E 517 7% 9% 6% 3% 28% 5% 25% 2% 1% 3% 1% 0% 2% 5% 1% 3%
EE 1004 7% 1% 3% 8% 11% 10% 23% 0% 4% 0% 1% 0% 2% 21% 1% 7%
EL 1000 17% 7% 1% 3% 45% 7% 4% 0% 6% 1% 0% 0% 3% 3% 0% 1%
ES 1012 17% 6% 2% 6% 28% 2% 9% 1% 5% 2% 0% 0% 3% 5% 1% 12%
FR 1009 7% 9% 5% 12% 21% 6% 18% 0% 3% 5% 3% 1% 3% 4% 1% 3%
IE 1000 15% 2% 5% 10% 25% 4% 13% 1% 9% 1% 1% 2% 0% 3% 2% 6%
IT 1019 16% 16% 6% 8% 21% 6% 17% 1% 2% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 4%
CY 504 18% 6% 2% 6% 43% 1% 9% 1% 3% 1% - 1% 1% 7% - 1%
LV 1019 11% 7% 1% 6% 16% 4% 23% 2% 4% 0% 1% 0% 3% 15% - 6%
LT 1004 18% 10% 1% 8% 11% 9% 21% 2% 3% 1% 0% 1% 2% 2% 0% 11%
LU 506 8% 10% 12% 7% 29% 3% 14% 0% 2% 3% 2% - 4% 2% 2% 1%
HU 1015 7% 5% 4% 2% 22% 1% 16% 1% 5% 1% 2% 2% 12% 13% 1% 7%
MT 500 14% 3% 5% 8% 11% 5% 34% 2% 5% 2% - 2% 1% 5% 0% 4%
NL 1019 5% 16% 14% 9% 21% 5% 10% 1% 4% 4% 2% 1% - 6% 1% 1%
AT 1000 13% 5% 6% 7% 21% 6% 20% 1% 4% 1% 1% 0% 1% 4% 2% 7%
PL 1000 6% 4% 2% 9% 26% 7% 22% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 1% 13% 1% 3%
PT 1011 12% 4% 4% 7% 28% 4% 16% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 4% 9% 1% 5%
SI 1027 11% 9% 3% 8% 35% 2% 17% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 4% 4% 1% 2%
SK 1143 13% 8% 2% 4% 34% 0% 23% 0% 5% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 5%
FI 1031 6% 3% 7% 6% 33% 11% 16% 1% 3% 3% 3% 1% 1% 5% 1% 1%
SE 1002 5% 6% 6% 8% 34% 7% 20% 0% 3% 6% 1% 0% 1% 2% 1% 1%
UK 1313 11% 3% 6% 7% 16% 4% 16% 1% 8% 5% 3% 1% 1% 14% 2% 2%
QE7b And secondly?
Fuel consumption
(SPONTANEOUS)
(SPONTANEOUS)
Number of seats
Environmentally
Not applicable
Servicing cost
availability of
Reputation of
mark\ brand
performance
Resale value
Space inside
Durability\
robustness
equipment
Aesthetics
Level and
Comfort
Engine
Safety
Other
clean
DK
TOTAL
UE25 EU25 22261 7% 6% 6% 10% 20% 9% 23% 2% 4% 5% 2% 2% 5% 0% 0% 1%

BE 1001 4% 6% 5% 15% 24% 7% 20% 2% 3% 5% 3% 0% 5% 0% 0% -
CZ 914 6% 6% 4% 6% 20% 15% 23% 2% 4% 3% 1% 2% 8% 0% 0% 1%
DK 991 5% 8% 6% 8% 20% 8% 23% 2% 2% 9% 2% 2% 6% 0% 1% 0%
D-W 979 5% 6% 6% 6% 18% 10% 28% 2% 2% 9% 2% 2% 5% 0% 0% 0%
DE 1459 5% 6% 6% 6% 19% 10% 28% 1% 2% 8% 1% 2% 5% 0% 0% 0%
D-E 478 6% 5% 7% 5% 22% 8% 28% 1% 1% 7% 1% 2% 6% - 1% 0%
EE 721 6% 1% 4% 13% 18% 14% 23% 3% 4% 1% 3% 1% 7% 0% 1% 1%
EL 958 12% 6% 3% 5% 21% 13% 13% 1% 8% 3% 2% 1% 10% 0% 0% 0%
ES 837 12% 4% 5% 12% 22% 5% 21% 3% 6% 2% 1% 1% 5% - 0% 2%
FR 939 3% 5% 5% 15% 21% 8% 20% 1% 4% 9% 3% 1% 6% 0% 0% 1%
IE 909 8% 2% 7% 15% 19% 7% 18% 2% 9% 3% 2% 6% 2% 0% 0% 0%
IT 967 7% 9% 8% 10% 20% 11% 21% 2% 3% 2% 1% 1% 4% - 0% 0%
CY 463 8% 6% 6% 9% 20% 8% 24% 4% 4% 2% 2% 2% 5% - 1% 0%
LV 808 7% 9% 2% 14% 17% 8% 24% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 10% - - 0%
LT 870 12% 9% 2% 14% 16% 11% 23% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 5% - - 1%
LU 493 6% 8% 8% 14% 18% 3% 21% 1% 4% 10% 3% 1% 2% - 1% 0%
HU 815 6% 6% 3% 4% 18% 2% 31% 2% 7% 2% 2% 1% 14% 0% 0% 0%
MT 457 8% 5% 10% 12% 15% 12% 23% 1% 5% 4% 1% 1% 3% - 0% 1%
NL 951 6% 10% 11% 10% 20% 10% 15% 1% 3% 7% 3% 2% 1% 0% 1% 0%
AT 889 7% 4% 5% 12% 16% 12% 24% 3% 5% 3% 1% 2% 4% 0% 1% 0%
PL 834 4% 7% 2% 10% 21% 13% 28% 1% 5% 2% 1% 2% 3% 0% 0% 1%
PT 875 8% 6% 4% 11% 21% 10% 23% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 5% - - 1%
SI 963 5% 7% 2% 9% 22% 5% 25% 3% 3% 4% 1% 1% 9% - 1% 4%
SK 1064 10% 6% 4% 7% 23% 2% 30% 2% 6% 3% 1% 0% 5% - 1% 1%
FI 973 6% 4% 6% 9% 19% 12% 23% 3% 3% 5% 2% 3% 4% 0% 0% 1%
SE 974 3% 5% 7% 11% 20% 9% 24% 1% 3% 9% 2% 1% 4% - 0% 0%
UK 1101 9% 3% 8% 12% 18% 5% 19% 1% 5% 7% 4% 2% 4% 1% 1% 1%
QE7c And thirdly?
Fuel consumption
(SPONTANEOUS)
(SPONTANEOUS)
Number of seats
Environmentally
Not applicable
Servicing cost
availability of
Reputation of
mark\ brand
performance
Resale value
Space inside
Durability\
robustness
equipment
Aesthetics
Level and
Comfort
Engine
Safety
Other
clean
DK
TOTAL
UE25 EU25 22086 7% 6% 5% 10% 14% 9% 17% 2% 5% 7% 3% 3% 9% 0% 0% 1%

BE 998 3% 9% 6% 12% 12% 7% 18% 2% 6% 9% 5% 2% 8% 0% 1% 0%
CZ 907 5% 5% 5% 8% 12% 17% 17% 4% 6% 5% 2% 3% 10% - 0% 1%
DK 988 3% 8% 6% 8% 13% 8% 19% 4% 4% 12% 3% 5% 8% 0% 0% 0%
D-W 977 5% 7% 7% 6% 13% 10% 16% 2% 2% 11% 2% 5% 12% 0% 1% 1%
DE 1456 5% 7% 7% 6% 13% 10% 17% 2% 1% 11% 2% 5% 12% 0% 1% 1%
D-E 478 5% 7% 6% 7% 15% 10% 19% 2% 1% 11% 1% 4% 11% - 0% 1%
EE 712 4% 2% 3% 11% 12% 11% 19% 3% 8% 5% 4% 3% 14% - 0% 1%
EL 952 10% 6% 4% 5% 11% 11% 13% 2% 10% 6% 2% 3% 15% - 0% 1%
ES 824 12% 6% 4% 14% 12% 7% 17% 3% 5% 3% 1% 2% 11% - 1% 2%
FR 929 5% 5% 4% 11% 13% 9% 17% 2% 5% 11% 4% 1% 11% - - 3%
IE 903 7% 1% 6% 14% 11% 7% 18% 5% 9% 3% 2% 9% 5% 0% 0% 2%
IT 962 7% 8% 5% 11% 15% 11% 19% 2% 5% 4% 2% 2% 6% 0% 0% 0%
CY 462 7% 5% 5% 7% 11% 6% 19% 5% 5% 5% 6% 4% 14% 0% - 1%
LV 804 7% 8% 1% 10% 14% 9% 19% 4% 5% 3% 4% 1% 14% - - 1%
LT 862 11% 11% 2% 11% 14% 10% 19% 3% 4% 3% 1% 1% 8% - - 2%
LU 492 8% 7% 7% 8% 12% 5% 17% 3% 4% 9% 5% 2% 9% 0% 2% 1%
HU 810 7% 6% 2% 5% 16% 3% 19% 4% 7% 6% 5% 1% 19% - - 0%
MT 450 9% 3% 9% 10% 16% 6% 18% 2% 8% 5% 2% 3% 6% 0% - 3%
NL 945 5% 8% 11% 11% 14% 11% 14% 1% 5% 9% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 1%
AT 886 7% 3% 5% 9% 13% 11% 16% 4% 7% 6% 2% 5% 9% 0% 1% 1%
PL 825 3% 6% 4% 13% 14% 12% 18% 3% 6% 6% 2% 3% 9% 0% 0% 1%
PT 871 7% 5% 6% 12% 14% 7% 19% 2% 5% 5% 4% 1% 11% 0% 0% 1%
SI 928 3% 5% 2% 7% 11% 6% 18% 6% 3% 7% 2% 3% 19% 0% 1% 7%
SK 1059 9% 9% 5% 10% 13% 1% 19% 3% 7% 6% 2% 2% 13% - 0% 0%
FI 967 6% 3% 6% 8% 10% 14% 16% 5% 5% 7% 2% 6% 10% 0% 1% 1%
SE 973 5% 8% 6% 11% 13% 9% 19% 2% 4% 10% 1% 4% 7% - 0% 1%
UK 1085 8% 3% 6% 12% 17% 5% 17% 2% 8% 7% 3% 3% 6% 1% 0% 1%
QE7a+b+c Factors would influence you when buying a car (new or secondhand)? - TOTAL
Engine performance
Fuel consumption
(SPONTANEOUS)
(SPONTANEOUS)
Number of seats
Environmentally
Not applicable
Servicing cost
availability of
Reputation of
mark\ brand
Resale value
Space inside
Durability\
robustness
equipment
Aesthetics
Level and
Comfort
Safety
Other
clean
DK
TOTAL
UE25 EU25 24796 22% 19% 15% 25% 54% 21% 53% 4% 12% 14% 5% 5% 15% 7% 2% 4%
BE 1032 13% 26% 20% 40% 59% 18% 51% 4% 13% 16% 10% 3% 15% 3% 3% 0%
CZ 1011 19% 20% 12% 19% 49% 41% 52% 6% 13% 7% 3% 7% 20% 6% 1% 4%
DK 1045 14% 23% 19% 21% 59% 22% 56% 7% 8% 27% 6% 8% 14% 4% 1% 1%
D-W 1053 16% 21% 19% 14% 53% 25% 67% 4% 4% 22% 4% 7% 18% 5% 2% 2%
DE 1570 16% 21% 19% 14% 55% 25% 68% 4% 4% 21% 4% 7% 17% 5% 2% 2%
D-E 517 17% 20% 18% 14% 63% 22% 68% 5% 3% 20% 2% 6% 17% 5% 2% 3%
EE 1004 14% 3% 8% 25% 33% 28% 52% 5% 12% 5% 6% 3% 17% 21% 1% 7%
EL 1000 38% 19% 8% 13% 76% 30% 29% 4% 23% 10% 4% 5% 27% 3% 1% 1%
ES 1012 36% 14% 10% 28% 56% 12% 40% 6% 15% 6% 1% 3% 16% 5% 2% 12%
FR 1009 14% 18% 13% 35% 52% 21% 52% 2% 11% 24% 9% 3% 19% 4% 1% 3%
IE 1000 28% 5% 17% 37% 53% 17% 46% 8% 25% 6% 6% 16% 6% 3% 2% 6%
IT 1019 29% 32% 19% 28% 54% 27% 55% 5% 9% 7% 3% 3% 11% 2% 2% 4%
CY 504 31% 16% 12% 20% 72% 14% 48% 9% 12% 8% 7% 6% 19% 7% 1% 1%
LV 1019 22% 20% 3% 26% 40% 18% 57% 6% 11% 4% 6% 1% 21% 15% - 6%
LT 1004 38% 27% 5% 29% 37% 27% 58% 6% 7% 5% 2% 2% 13% 2% 0% 11%
LU 506 21% 25% 27% 29% 59% 11% 52% 4% 10% 22% 10% 3% 14% 2% 4% 1%
HU 1015 17% 15% 8% 9% 49% 5% 56% 5% 16% 7% 7% 5% 38% 13% 1% 7%
MT 500 28% 9% 22% 28% 39% 21% 71% 5% 17% 11% 2% 6% 10% 5% 0% 4%
NL 1019 15% 33% 34% 30% 52% 24% 38% 2% 12% 18% 9% 5% 3% 6% 3% 1%
AT 1000 26% 11% 15% 26% 47% 27% 55% 6% 16% 9% 4% 7% 14% 4% 2% 7%
PL 1000 12% 14% 7% 28% 55% 28% 60% 3% 13% 7% 3% 4% 11% 14% 1% 3%
PT 1011 25% 13% 12% 27% 58% 19% 53% 4% 10% 9% 6% 3% 18% 9% 1% 5%
SI 1027 18% 20% 7% 23% 66% 11% 57% 10% 7% 11% 3% 4% 30% 4% 3% 2%
SK 1143 31% 22% 10% 20% 68% 4% 69% 4% 17% 9% 3% 3% 18% 2% 2% 5%
FI 1031 18% 9% 18% 21% 60% 35% 53% 8% 10% 15% 7% 10% 14% 5% 2% 1%
SE 1002 13% 18% 18% 28% 66% 24% 61% 2% 10% 25% 4% 6% 12% 2% 1% 1%
UK 1313 26% 8% 18% 26% 46% 13% 46% 4% 19% 16% 9% 6% 9% 15% 2% 2%
QE8.1 I will read out a list of car safety systems, some of which already exist and others which are currently under development. For each of these systems, please tell me which of the following statements best corresponds to your opinion.
ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking System: system preventing the blocking of the wheels when breaking and thus allowing the car to stay on track
It is not a useful system
It is not a useful system It is a useful system but It is a useful system and
and you would not like Not applicable
TOTAL but you would like to you would not like to you would like to have it DK
to have it on your next (SPONTANEOUS)
have it on your next car have it on you next car on your next car
car
UE25 EU25 24796 2% 2% 7% 73% 9% 6%
BE 1032 2% 2% 7% 83% 4% 1%
CZ 1011 2% 2% 16% 63% 7% 10%
DK 1045 2% 1% 4% 84% 7% 2%
D-W 1053 3% 2% 9% 77% 4% 5%
DE 1570 2% 2% 8% 78% 5% 5%
D-E 517 2% 2% 5% 80% 6% 5%
EE 1004 3% 0% 6% 60% 18% 12%
EL 1000 2% 2% 4% 85% 5% 2%
ES 1012 2% 1% 7% 65% 13% 13%
FR 1009 4% 4% 6% 76% 5% 5%
IE 1000 2% 1% 3% 72% 6% 15%
IT 1019 4% 6% 13% 66% 4% 8%
CY 504 1% 1% 5% 79% 8% 7%
LV 1019 2% 1% 4% 60% 22% 10%
LT 1004 2% 2% 7% 66% 4% 19%
LU 506 1% 2% 4% 85% 4% 4%
HU 1015 4% 2% 10% 58% 17% 7%
MT 500 4% 3% 4% 70% 9% 10%
NL 1019 3% 2% 7% 79% 5% 3%
AT 1000 2% 2% 12% 66% 5% 12%
PL 1000 1% 1% 4% 68% 18% 8%
PT 1011 1% 1% 4% 68% 18% 8%
SI 1027 1% 1% 6% 78% 9% 6%
SK 1143 1% 3% 14% 68% 5% 9%
FI 1031 2% 2% 9% 78% 6% 3%
SE 1002 0% 1% 3% 88% 4% 5%
UK 1313 2% 1% 4% 74% 17% 2%
ABS, Anti-Lock Breaking System: system preventing the blocking of the wheels when breaking and thus allowing the car to stay on track
Adjusted base : respondents having answered

car
UE25 EU25 21005 3% 3% 9% 86% - -
BE 983 3% 3% 8% 87% - -
CZ 839 3% 2% 19% 76% - -
DK 945 2% 1% 5% 92% - -
D-W 952 3% 2% 10% 86% - -
DE 1415 3% 2% 9% 86% - -
D-E 461 2% 2% 6% 90% - -
EE 697 4% 1% 8% 87% - -
EL 927 2% 2% 4% 92% - -
ES 745 2% 1% 9% 88% - -
FR 912 4% 5% 7% 85% - -
IE 789 3% 2% 4% 91% - -
IT 903 4% 6% 15% 74% - -
CY 431 1% 1% 6% 92% - -
LV 689 3% 1% 6% 89% - -
LT 772 3% 2% 9% 86% - -
LU 465 1% 2% 4% 92% - -
HU 765 6% 3% 14% 78% - -
MT 407 5% 4% 5% 86% - -
NL 933 4% 2% 8% 86% - -
AT 828 3% 3% 15% 80% - -
PL 742 2% 2% 5% 92% - -
PT 741 1% 2% 5% 93% - -
SI 873 1% 1% 7% 91% - -
SK 980 2% 3% 16% 79% - -
FI 939 2% 2% 10% 85% - -
SE 918 0% 1% 3% 96% - -
UK 1071 2% 2% 5% 91% - -
ESP, Electronic Stability Program: system stabilising the vehicle and preventing skidding in critical situations
car
UE25 EU25 24796 4% 3% 12% 65% 9% 7%
BE 1032 5% 3% 16% 71% 4% 1%
CZ 1011 3% 3% 23% 56% 6% 10%
DK 1045 5% 3% 10% 70% 8% 4%
D-W 1053 5% 2% 14% 68% 4% 7%
DE 1570 5% 2% 13% 68% 5% 6%
D-E 517 5% 1% 10% 71% 7% 5%
EE 1004 4% 1% 9% 53% 19% 14%
EL 1000 2% 1% 9% 80% 5% 3%
ES 1012 2% 2% 8% 60% 13% 14%
FR 1009 7% 4% 13% 65% 5% 6%
IE 1000 2% 2% 7% 68% 6% 15%
IT 1019 2% 7% 15% 64% 4% 8%
CY 504 1% 2% 9% 74% 8% 7%
LV 1019 3% 1% 5% 58% 22% 10%
LT 1004 2% 2% 7% 68% 4% 17%
LU 506 5% 3% 10% 70% 4% 9%
HU 1015 5% 2% 14% 52% 17% 9%
MT 500 6% 3% 7% 62% 9% 13%
NL 1019 4% 3% 16% 69% 5% 3%
AT 1000 3% 3% 16% 59% 5% 15%
PL 1000 1% 2% 6% 63% 18% 10%
PT 1011 1% 1% 6% 66% 18% 9%
SI 1027 3% 2% 11% 68% 8% 8%
SK 1143 2% 2% 16% 66% 5% 10%
FI 1031 4% 2% 15% 71% 6% 3%
SE 1002 2% 1% 10% 76% 4% 7%
UK 1313 5% 2% 9% 65% 16% 2%
ESP, Electronic Stability Program: system stabilising the vehicle and preventing skidding in critical situations

car
UE25 EU25 20778 5% 4% 14% 78% - -
BE 984 5% 3% 16% 75% - -
CZ 853 3% 3% 27% 66% - -
DK 921 6% 4% 12% 79% - -
D-W 938 6% 2% 16% 76% - -
DE 1393 6% 2% 15% 77% - -
D-E 452 6% 1% 12% 81% - -
EE 680 7% 1% 14% 79% - -
EL 924 2% 1% 10% 87% - -
ES 734 2% 3% 11% 83% - -
FR 896 8% 5% 14% 73% - -
IE 790 2% 3% 9% 86% - -
IT 900 3% 8% 17% 72% - -
CY 432 1% 2% 10% 86% - -
LV 687 4% 2% 8% 86% - -
LT 796 3% 2% 9% 86% - -
LU 440 5% 4% 11% 80% - -
HU 746 7% 3% 20% 71% - -
MT 390 7% 4% 9% 80% - -
NL 935 4% 3% 18% 75% - -
AT 806 4% 3% 20% 73% - -
PL 721 2% 2% 9% 87% - -
PT 739 1% 1% 8% 90% - -
SI 868 4% 3% 13% 81% - -
SK 975 2% 3% 18% 77% - -
FI 940 4% 2% 16% 78% - -
SE 894 3% 1% 11% 85% - -
UK 1070 6% 3% 11% 80% - -
Blind Spot Monitoring System: system warning the driver about nearby obstacles in the blind spot
car
UE25 EU25 24796 6% 4% 17% 57% 9% 7%
BE 1032 7% 4% 14% 71% 3% 1%
CZ 1011 5% 3% 35% 41% 7% 10%
DK 1045 6% 6% 13% 62% 9% 3%
D-W 1053 6% 4% 21% 58% 5% 6%
DE 1570 7% 3% 20% 59% 5% 6%
D-E 517 7% 2% 16% 62% 6% 7%
EE 1004 5% 1% 12% 47% 19% 15%
EL 1000 5% 4% 17% 65% 5% 3%
ES 1012 3% 4% 12% 54% 13% 15%
FR 1009 10% 5% 14% 62% 4% 5%
IE 1000 2% 3% 11% 62% 7% 16%
IT 1019 8% 6% 24% 49% 3% 9%
CY 504 2% 2% 15% 67% 8% 6%
LV 1019 3% 2% 9% 50% 23% 13%
LT 1004 3% 2% 9% 66% 4% 16%
LU 506 9% 5% 15% 59% 5% 7%
HU 1015 6% 3% 20% 44% 17% 9%
MT 500 5% 2% 13% 57% 10% 14%
NL 1019 8% 2% 23% 60% 5% 2%
AT 1000 5% 3% 17% 55% 6% 14%
PL 1000 3% 3% 10% 55% 17% 11%
PT 1011 1% 2% 8% 62% 18% 9%
SI 1027 6% 3% 14% 62% 7% 7%
SK 1143 5% 5% 26% 45% 5% 14%
FI 1031 11% 3% 28% 49% 6% 4%
SE 1002 4% 4% 20% 59% 4% 9%
UK 1313 8% 3% 13% 59% 16% 2%
Blind Spot Monitoring System: system warning the driver about nearby obstacles in the blind spot

car
UE25 EU25 20769 8% 4% 20% 68% - -
BE 990 7% 4% 15% 74% - -
CZ 839 5% 4% 42% 49% - -
DK 912 7% 7% 14% 71% - -
D-W 938 7% 4% 23% 65% - -
DE 1392 7% 4% 22% 67% - -
D-E 450 8% 2% 18% 71% - -
EE 659 8% 2% 19% 72% - -
EL 915 6% 5% 19% 71% - -
ES 733 4% 5% 16% 75% - -
FR 914 11% 5% 16% 68% - -
IE 777 3% 3% 14% 79% - -
IT 892 9% 7% 28% 56% - -
CY 434 2% 2% 17% 78% - -
LV 657 5% 2% 14% 78% - -
LT 805 4% 2% 11% 83% - -
LU 447 11% 6% 17% 67% - -
HU 748 9% 5% 27% 59% - -
MT 383 6% 3% 18% 74% - -
NL 949 8% 2% 24% 65% - -
AT 798 6% 4% 21% 69% - -
PL 716 5% 4% 15% 77% - -
PT 743 1% 3% 11% 85% - -
SI 875 7% 4% 16% 73% - -
SK 931 6% 6% 32% 56% - -
FI 934 12% 3% 31% 54% - -
SE 875 4% 5% 23% 68% - -
UK 1073 9% 3% 16% 72% - -
Adaptive Head Lights: system moving headlights when turning into bends and adjusting the luminous intensity in order to avoid dazzling
car
UE25 EU25 24796 10% 4% 17% 53% 9% 7%
BE 1032 17% 5% 20% 53% 3% 1%
CZ 1011 8% 3% 34% 39% 6% 10%
DK 1045 10% 5% 16% 54% 9% 5%
D-W 1053 11% 3% 23% 51% 5% 6%
DE 1570 11% 3% 22% 53% 5% 6%
D-E 517 10% 2% 17% 59% 6% 6%
EE 1004 6% 1% 13% 47% 18% 14%
EL 1000 5% 5% 19% 62% 5% 3%
ES 1012 4% 3% 9% 56% 13% 15%
FR 1009 18% 5% 18% 49% 5% 5%
IE 1000 3% 4% 11% 60% 7% 15%
IT 1019 9% 7% 22% 50% 4% 8%
CY 504 4% 2% 13% 67% 8% 6%
LV 1019 4% 1% 7% 55% 23% 11%
LT 1004 4% 1% 8% 66% 4% 17%
LU 506 18% 6% 16% 46% 6% 9%
HU 1015 6% 4% 21% 42% 18% 8%
MT 500 6% 3% 11% 57% 10% 13%
NL 1019 20% 4% 22% 46% 5% 3%
AT 1000 8% 3% 22% 47% 6% 15%
PL 1000 4% 2% 9% 57% 17% 10%
PT 1011 1% 1% 9% 61% 18% 10%
SI 1027 5% 3% 13% 64% 7% 7%
SK 1143 5% 5% 24% 50% 5% 11%
FI 1031 16% 5% 28% 41% 6% 4%
SE 1002 7% 4% 24% 52% 5% 8%
UK 1313 9% 3% 12% 58% 17% 2%
Adaptive Head Lights: system moving headlights when turning into bends and adjusting the luminous intensity in order to avoid dazzling

car
UE25 EU25 20751 11% 5% 21% 63% - -
BE 986 18% 6% 21% 55% - -
CZ 847 9% 3% 41% 47% - -
DK 900 12% 6% 19% 63% - -
D-W 931 12% 4% 26% 58% - -
DE 1387 12% 3% 25% 60% - -
D-E 456 12% 2% 20% 66% - -
EE 677 9% 2% 19% 70% - -
EL 919 5% 6% 21% 68% - -
ES 733 6% 5% 13% 77% - -
FR 911 20% 6% 20% 54% - -
IE 781 3% 5% 14% 77% - -
IT 898 10% 8% 25% 57% - -
CY 432 5% 2% 15% 78% - -
LV 681 5% 2% 11% 82% - -
LT 791 5% 1% 10% 83% - -
LU 434 21% 7% 19% 53% - -
HU 746 8% 6% 29% 57% - -
MT 383 8% 3% 15% 74% - -
NL 935 22% 5% 24% 50% - -
AT 795 10% 4% 27% 59% - -
PL 724 6% 3% 12% 79% - -
PT 732 2% 2% 12% 84% - -
SI 880 6% 4% 16% 74% - -
SK 961 6% 6% 29% 60% - -
FI 931 18% 6% 31% 46% - -
SE 876 9% 4% 28% 59% - -
UK 1065 11% 3% 14% 71% - -
Obstacle and collision warning: system detecting potential collisions with other vehicles or obstacles based on current speed
car
UE25 EU25 24796 9% 4% 19% 52% 9% 7%
BE 1032 15% 5% 24% 53% 3% 1%
CZ 1011 9% 4% 33% 37% 6% 10%
DK 1045 8% 9% 16% 54% 8% 6%
D-W 1053 11% 3% 24% 50% 5% 6%
DE 1570 11% 3% 24% 51% 5% 6%
D-E 517 9% 1% 23% 53% 6% 7%
EE 1004 8% 1% 12% 47% 19% 14%
EL 1000 3% 4% 16% 69% 5% 3%
ES 1012 4% 3% 13% 53% 13% 14%
FR 1009 14% 5% 17% 54% 5% 6%
IE 1000 3% 4% 12% 59% 7% 16%
IT 1019 7% 7% 24% 52% 3% 8%
CY 504 3% 1% 10% 72% 8% 6%
LV 1019 6% 1% 11% 48% 23% 11%
LT 1004 4% 1% 10% 66% 4% 16%
LU 506 14% 3% 16% 54% 5% 7%
HU 1015 6% 3% 20% 46% 17% 7%
MT 500 5% 2% 15% 52% 9% 16%
NL 1019 18% 3% 24% 48% 5% 3%
AT 1000 11% 4% 24% 41% 7% 13%
PL 1000 4% 3% 12% 54% 17% 10%
PT 1011 1% 1% 8% 63% 18% 8%
SI 1027 6% 4% 15% 61% 7% 7%
SK 1143 4% 4% 21% 55% 5% 11%
FI 1031 18% 5% 27% 41% 6% 3%
SE 1002 7% 4% 22% 57% 4% 7%
UK 1313 11% 3% 17% 51% 16% 3%
Obstacle and collision warning: system detecting potential collisions with other vehicles or obstacles based on current speed

car
UE25 EU25 20849 10% 5% 23% 62% - -
BE 989 16% 5% 25% 55% - -
CZ 845 11% 5% 40% 44% - -
DK 903 9% 11% 18% 63% - -
D-W 940 13% 4% 27% 56% - -
DE 1393 12% 3% 27% 57% - -
D-E 447 11% 1% 26% 62% - -
EE 674 12% 1% 18% 70% - -
EL 922 4% 5% 17% 75% - -
ES 740 5% 5% 18% 72% - -
FR 905 15% 6% 19% 60% - -
IE 773 4% 5% 15% 76% - -
IT 903 8% 8% 27% 58% - -
CY 435 4% 1% 11% 84% - -
LV 678 9% 2% 17% 72% - -
LT 801 5% 1% 12% 82% - -
LU 443 16% 4% 18% 62% - -
HU 763 8% 4% 26% 61% - -
MT 375 7% 3% 21% 70% - -
NL 942 20% 3% 26% 52% - -
AT 803 14% 5% 29% 52% - -
PL 727 5% 4% 17% 74% - -
PT 742 1% 2% 11% 86% - -
SI 882 6% 5% 17% 71% - -
SK 957 4% 5% 25% 65% - -
FI 941 20% 5% 30% 45% - -
SE 896 8% 4% 25% 63% - -
UK 1071 13% 4% 21% 62% - -
Lane departure warning system: system warning the driver when unintentionally leaving the lane
car
UE25 EU25 24796 13% 5% 20% 47% 9% 7%
BE 1032 21% 5% 26% 44% 4% 1%
CZ 1011 12% 4% 35% 31% 6% 11%
DK 1045 13% 7% 18% 48% 8% 5%
D-W 1053 13% 4% 31% 41% 5% 6%
DE 1570 13% 3% 30% 43% 5% 6%
D-E 517 12% 3% 24% 49% 6% 6%
EE 1004 7% 1% 13% 47% 19% 13%
EL 1000 6% 3% 17% 66% 5% 2%
ES 1012 3% 4% 8% 58% 13% 13%
FR 1009 20% 6% 17% 47% 4% 5%
IE 1000 6% 5% 14% 51% 8% 16%
IT 1019 14% 7% 24% 44% 4% 7%
CY 504 4% 2% 14% 67% 8% 6%
LV 1019 11% 2% 14% 40% 22% 11%
LT 1004 7% 3% 13% 57% 4% 16%
LU 506 22% 6% 21% 40% 5% 6%
HU 1015 11% 3% 22% 38% 18% 9%
MT 500 7% 3% 14% 52% 10% 14%
NL 1019 29% 5% 30% 29% 6% 2%
AT 1000 15% 3% 24% 36% 7% 14%
PL 1000 6% 3% 10% 55% 17% 9%
PT 1011 2% 1% 9% 62% 19% 8%
SI 1027 10% 5% 15% 55% 7% 8%
SK 1143 7% 7% 24% 47% 5% 11%
FI 1031 25% 5% 27% 34% 6% 3%
SE 1002 11% 5% 26% 46% 4% 7%
UK 1313 15% 5% 18% 44% 16% 2%
Lane departure warning system: system warning the driver when unintentionally leaving the lane

car
UE25 EU25 20901 15% 5% 24% 55% - -
BE 986 22% 5% 27% 46% - -
CZ 839 15% 5% 43% 38% - -
DK 909 15% 9% 21% 55% - -
D-W 939 15% 4% 35% 46% - -
DE 1396 14% 4% 34% 48% - -
D-E 454 13% 3% 28% 56% - -
EE 680 10% 2% 19% 69% - -
EL 926 7% 4% 19% 71% - -
ES 741 4% 5% 12% 80% - -
FR 913 23% 7% 19% 52% - -
IE 756 8% 6% 18% 67% - -
IT 913 16% 8% 27% 49% - -
CY 436 5% 2% 16% 78% - -
LV 681 17% 3% 21% 59% - -
LT 802 9% 4% 16% 72% - -
LU 451 24% 7% 24% 45% - -
HU 748 15% 4% 29% 51% - -
MT 381 10% 4% 19% 68% - -
NL 940 32% 5% 32% 31% - -
AT 789 19% 4% 31% 46% - -
PL 735 8% 4% 13% 75% - -
PT 739 3% 1% 12% 84% - -
SI 871 12% 6% 17% 65% - -
SK 964 8% 8% 29% 55% - -
FI 940 27% 5% 30% 38% - -
SE 886 13% 5% 30% 52% - -
UK 1070 18% 6% 22% 54% - -
Ecall, Emergency call system: system automatically calling the local emergency authorities and instantly transferring to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident and thus
reducing the time for the rescue services to arrive
car
UE25 EU25 24796 6% 3% 16% 59% 9% 7%
BE 1032 6% 3% 16% 71% 4% 1%
CZ 1011 3% 2% 25% 54% 6% 10%
DK 1045 5% 10% 11% 62% 8% 4%
D-W 1053 10% 3% 25% 51% 5% 6%
DE 1570 9% 3% 24% 53% 5% 6%
D-E 517 6% 2% 18% 59% 7% 7%
EE 1004 4% 1% 12% 53% 19% 13%
EL 1000 2% 2% 9% 79% 5% 2%
ES 1012 2% 2% 12% 58% 14% 13%
FR 1009 8% 4% 14% 66% 5% 5%
IE 1000 3% 2% 8% 63% 8% 16%
IT 1019 7% 7% 19% 56% 4% 8%
CY 504 3% 1% 10% 73% 8% 5%
LV 1019 2% 1% 8% 56% 22% 10%
LT 1004 3% 2% 10% 67% 3% 15%
LU 506 7% 4% 10% 67% 5% 6%
HU 1015 4% 2% 15% 54% 17% 7%
MT 500 4% 2% 12% 60% 10% 13%
NL 1019 11% 3% 25% 54% 5% 2%
AT 1000 7% 4% 22% 47% 6% 13%
PL 1000 2% 2% 8% 61% 18% 10%
PT 1011 0% 1% 8% 63% 19% 9%
SI 1027 4% 4% 12% 67% 7% 7%
SK 1143 3% 4% 19% 59% 5% 10%
FI 1031 8% 3% 25% 55% 6% 3%
SE 1002 4% 5% 12% 70% 3% 6%
UK 1313 5% 3% 12% 62% 16% 2%
Ecall, Emergency call system: system automatically calling the local emergency authorities and instantly transferring to them accurate vehicle position and other accident related data when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident and thus
reducing the time for the rescue services to arrive

car
UE25 EU25 20903 7% 4% 19% 70% - -
BE 986 6% 3% 16% 74% - -
CZ 855 3% 3% 30% 64% - -
DK 917 6% 11% 12% 71% - -
D-W 939 11% 3% 28% 57% - -
DE 1390 10% 3% 27% 60% - -
D-E 445 7% 3% 21% 69% - -
EE 691 5% 1% 17% 76% - -
EL 926 2% 2% 10% 85% - -
ES 744 2% 3% 17% 78% - -
FR 913 8% 4% 15% 73% - -
IE 765 4% 2% 11% 83% - -
IT 903 8% 8% 21% 63% - -
CY 439 3% 1% 11% 84% - -
LV 691 4% 1% 12% 83% - -
LT 821 4% 2% 12% 83% - -
LU 447 8% 5% 12% 75% - -
HU 766 5% 3% 20% 72% - -
MT 387 5% 2% 15% 78% - -
NL 942 12% 3% 27% 58% - -
AT 810 9% 5% 27% 58% - -
PL 725 2% 3% 11% 84% - -
PT 733 0% 1% 11% 88% - -
SI 886 4% 4% 14% 78% - -
SK 971 4% 5% 22% 69% - -
FI 938 9% 3% 28% 61% - -
SE 907 4% 5% 13% 78% - -
UK 1075 6% 3% 15% 76% - -
Real time traffic and travel information: system providing real time information about the road network such as traffic jams and weather conditions allowing to choose an alternative itinerary
car
UE25 EU25 24796 9% 4% 21% 50% 9% 6%
BE 1032 8% 4% 21% 63% 4% 1%
CZ 1011 7% 4% 34% 40% 6% 10%
DK 1045 6% 5% 16% 62% 8% 3%
D-W 1053 15% 5% 30% 40% 5% 5%
DE 1570 15% 4% 30% 40% 6% 5%
D-E 517 13% 3% 28% 42% 8% 6%
EE 1004 6% 2% 15% 47% 19% 13%
EL 1000 5% 5% 17% 66% 5% 2%
ES 1012 3% 4% 14% 52% 14% 14%
FR 1009 20% 6% 17% 47% 5% 5%
IE 1000 5% 4% 15% 53% 8% 15%
IT 1019 10% 8% 25% 45% 4% 7%
CY 504 6% 2% 17% 62% 8% 6%
LV 1019 5% 2% 11% 49% 23% 11%
LT 1004 4% 3% 12% 62% 3% 16%
LU 506 12% 5% 17% 54% 6% 6%
HU 1015 6% 3% 23% 43% 18% 8%
MT 500 6% 3% 13% 54% 11% 14%
NL 1019 10% 3% 26% 53% 6% 2%
AT 1000 9% 6% 26% 37% 8% 15%
PL 1000 3% 1% 9% 59% 17% 9%
PT 1011 1% 1% 11% 61% 18% 8%
SI 1027 4% 3% 12% 67% 7% 7%
SK 1143 5% 6% 23% 51% 5% 10%
FI 1031 14% 4% 29% 45% 5% 3%
SE 1002 5% 4% 27% 54% 4% 5%
UK 1313 7% 3% 16% 56% 16% 2%
Real time traffic and travel information: system providing real time information about the road network such as traffic jams and weather conditions allowing to choose an alternative itinerary

car
UE25 EU25 20911 11% 5% 24% 59% - -
BE 988 8% 4% 22% 66% - -
CZ 855 8% 4% 40% 47% - -
DK 928 7% 5% 18% 70% - -
D-W 943 17% 5% 34% 44% - -
DE 1395 16% 5% 34% 45% - -
D-E 445 15% 3% 33% 49% - -
EE 686 8% 2% 21% 68% - -
EL 923 6% 5% 18% 71% - -
ES 735 5% 6% 19% 71% - -
FR 912 22% 7% 19% 52% - -
IE 767 6% 5% 19% 70% - -
IT 906 11% 9% 29% 51% - -
CY 435 7% 3% 19% 71% - -
LV 678 7% 2% 17% 74% - -
LT 811 5% 4% 15% 77% - -
LU 445 14% 5% 19% 62% - -
HU 757 8% 3% 30% 58% - -
MT 377 8% 4% 17% 71% - -
NL 938 11% 3% 29% 57% - -
AT 777 12% 7% 33% 48% - -
PL 736 4% 2% 13% 81% - -
PT 740 1% 1% 14% 83% - -
SI 883 5% 4% 14% 77% - -
SK 973 6% 7% 27% 59% - -
FI 946 15% 4% 32% 49% - -
SE 910 6% 4% 30% 60% - -
UK 1076 8% 4% 20% 68% - -
Speed Alert: system detecting local speed limits on all types of roads and warning driver if they exceed these
car
UE25 EU25 24796 11% 4% 20% 49% 9% 6%
BE 1032 14% 4% 25% 53% 3% 1%
CZ 1011 14% 4% 35% 31% 6% 10%
DK 1045 10% 4% 26% 47% 9% 3%
D-W 1053 18% 4% 29% 38% 5% 6%
DE 1570 18% 3% 28% 39% 6% 6%
D-E 517 20% 2% 25% 42% 7% 5%
EE 1004 8% 1% 18% 41% 19% 13%
EL 1000 8% 5% 21% 59% 5% 2%
ES 1012 3% 3% 11% 57% 14% 12%
FR 1009 13% 6% 15% 57% 4% 5%
IE 1000 4% 3% 11% 61% 7% 14%
IT 1019 10% 7% 26% 46% 4% 7%
CY 504 3% 1% 12% 71% 8% 6%
LV 1019 8% 2% 13% 44% 22% 10%
LT 1004 7% 3% 14% 56% 4% 16%
LU 506 22% 7% 18% 43% 5% 5%
HU 1015 10% 4% 24% 37% 18% 7%
MT 500 6% 3% 15% 55% 11% 11%
NL 1019 23% 3% 27% 41% 5% 1%
AT 1000 12% 4% 25% 39% 6% 14%
PL 1000 6% 3% 15% 50% 18% 8%
PT 1011 2% 1% 11% 58% 20% 8%
SI 1027 6% 3% 17% 61% 7% 6%
SK 1143 4% 6% 26% 49% 5% 10%
FI 1031 21% 4% 29% 39% 5% 2%
SE 1002 10% 6% 26% 50% 3% 5%
UK 1313 9% 2% 14% 58% 16% 2%
Speed Alert: system detecting local speed limits on all types of roads and warning driver if they exceed these

car
UE25 EU25 20995 13% 5% 24% 58% - -
BE 989 14% 4% 26% 56% - -
CZ 847 16% 5% 42% 36% - -
DK 913 11% 5% 30% 54% - -
D-W 931 20% 4% 32% 43% - -
DE 1388 20% 4% 31% 44% - -
D-E 457 22% 2% 28% 48% - -
EE 686 12% 2% 26% 60% - -
EL 926 9% 5% 22% 63% - -
ES 751 4% 4% 15% 77% - -
FR 915 14% 6% 17% 62% - -
IE 786 5% 3% 14% 78% - -
IT 913 12% 8% 29% 52% - -
CY 437 3% 1% 14% 82% - -
LV 691 12% 4% 20% 65% - -
LT 809 9% 3% 18% 70% - -
LU 456 25% 7% 20% 48% - -
HU 759 14% 5% 32% 49% - -
MT 390 7% 3% 19% 70% - -
NL 950 25% 3% 29% 44% - -
AT 799 15% 6% 31% 49% - -
PL 737 8% 4% 21% 68% - -
PT 732 2% 2% 15% 81% - -
SI 891 7% 4% 19% 70% - -
SK 975 5% 7% 31% 58% - -
FI 950 22% 4% 32% 42% - -
SE 919 11% 6% 28% 55% - -
UK 1079 11% 3% 17% 70% - -
Monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver: system warning the driver in case of drowsiness, distraction or carelessness
car
UE25 EU25 24796 8% 3% 20% 53% 9% 7%
BE 1032 10% 3% 24% 58% 3% 1%
CZ 1011 6% 2% 35% 41% 5% 9%
DK 1045 15% 10% 18% 44% 9% 4%
D-W 1053 12% 3% 29% 44% 5% 6%
DE 1570 12% 3% 28% 46% 5% 6%
D-E 517 9% 2% 26% 51% 7% 6%
EE 1004 5% 1% 15% 48% 19% 12%
EL 1000 2% 1% 9% 80% 6% 2%
ES 1012 3% 3% 12% 57% 13% 12%
FR 1009 11% 4% 18% 58% 5% 5%
IE 1000 4% 1% 11% 62% 8% 15%
IT 1019 9% 5% 21% 54% 4% 7%
CY 504 1% 1% 6% 78% 8% 5%
LV 1019 5% 2% 11% 49% 22% 11%
LT 1004 4% 2% 11% 65% 3% 15%
LU 506 16% 5% 15% 53% 6% 6%
HU 1015 9% 3% 20% 44% 17% 7%
MT 500 5% 2% 11% 60% 10% 13%
NL 1019 15% 2% 31% 44% 5% 2%
AT 1000 10% 4% 26% 41% 6% 13%
PL 1000 4% 3% 10% 57% 18% 9%
PT 1011 1% 1% 8% 62% 19% 8%
SI 1027 6% 4% 16% 61% 7% 7%
SK 1143 3% 4% 19% 59% 5% 10%
FI 1031 13% 2% 32% 45% 6% 3%
SE 1002 8% 7% 16% 60% 4% 5%
UK 1313 9% 3% 17% 53% 16% 2%
Monitoring the state of vigilance of the driver: system warning the driver in case of drowsiness, distraction or carelessness

car
UE25 EU25 20918 10% 4% 23% 63% - -
BE 990 11% 4% 25% 60% - -
CZ 862 7% 3% 41% 49% - -
DK 911 17% 11% 21% 51% - -
D-W 937 14% 4% 33% 50% - -
DE 1392 13% 3% 32% 52% - -
D-E 453 10% 2% 29% 58% - -
EE 691 8% 1% 21% 70% - -
EL 920 2% 2% 10% 87% - -
ES 755 4% 4% 16% 76% - -
FR 907 12% 4% 20% 64% - -
IE 775 5% 2% 14% 80% - -
IT 899 10% 6% 24% 61% - -
CY 437 2% 1% 7% 90% - -
LV 690 8% 3% 16% 73% - -
LT 818 5% 2% 13% 79% - -
LU 449 18% 5% 17% 60% - -
HU 766 12% 4% 26% 58% - -
MT 385 6% 3% 14% 77% - -
NL 944 16% 2% 34% 48% - -
AT 811 12% 5% 32% 51% - -
PL 727 5% 4% 14% 78% - -
PT 733 2% 1% 12% 85% - -
SI 890 7% 5% 18% 70% - -
SK 975 4% 5% 22% 69% - -
FI 948 14% 3% 35% 49% - -
SE 911 9% 7% 18% 66% - -
UK 1075 11% 4% 21% 65% - -
QE9a Which of the following factors would most put you off having these kind of safety systems in your car? Firstly?
Reduces driver’s
responsiveness
Fear of Fear of It’s difficult to
alertness by It's too
Undermines excessive visual unreliable understand how It's too Cars are already Other
TOTAL creating an expensive to DK
driver’s freedom and sound electronic these safety expensive to buy safe enough (SPONTANEOUS)
artificial feeling service
warnings systems systems work
of being
protected
UE25 EU25 24796 7% 13% 9% 11% 5% 34% 4% 2% 1% 13%

BE 1032 8% 16% 13% 11% 3% 40% 2% 4% 1% 3%
CZ 1011 3% 8% 4% 5% 6% 57% 3% 4% 1% 10%
DK 1045 8% 23% 10% 18% 3% 23% 4% 2% 2% 7%
D-W 1053 6% 17% 9% 9% 6% 35% 3% 3% 1% 11%
DE 1570 5% 17% 10% 9% 5% 36% 3% 3% 1% 11%
D-E 517 4% 16% 10% 9% 4% 43% 3% 2% 1% 8%
EE 1004 6% 14% 5% 10% 4% 23% 4% 3% 1% 30%
EL 1000 5% 8% 4% 7% 6% 57% 5% 3% 3% 3%
ES 1012 6% 5% 6% 6% 6% 28% 8% 2% 1% 32%
FR 1009 9% 16% 9% 20% 4% 29% 3% 3% 1% 7%
IE 1000 15% 9% 7% 14% 8% 27% 3% 2% 1% 14%
IT 1019 6% 9% 14% 12% 6% 37% 8% 1% 1% 7%
CY 504 8% 10% 8% 7% 4% 44% 6% 1% 1% 12%
LV 1019 8% 16% 4% 8% 5% 27% 5% 1% - 25%
LT 1004 8% 10% 7% 10% 4% 33% 7% 2% 1% 17%
LU 506 9% 16% 9% 12% 6% 27% 3% 6% 1% 11%
HU 1015 4% 9% 5% 7% 4% 39% 7% 2% 2% 20%
MT 500 8% 7% 10% 11% 5% 30% 8% 2% 1% 18%
NL 1019 9% 25% 10% 8% 3% 32% 2% 3% 2% 6%
AT 1000 7% 11% 11% 12% 8% 33% 2% 3% 1% 9%
PL 1000 7% 9% 9% 8% 5% 35% 5% 1% 1% 21%
PT 1011 4% 5% 9% 7% 8% 43% 5% 2% - 17%
SI 1027 5% 12% 6% 10% 6% 40% 6% 2% 5% 7%
SK 1143 11% 14% 8% 9% 7% 35% 4% 3% 0% 9%
FI 1031 6% 30% 11% 13% 5% 20% 4% 2% 4% 6%
SE 1002 6% 28% 9% 10% 4% 32% 2% 2% 1% 6%
UK 1313 8% 17% 8% 11% 3% 32% 3% 1% 3% 14%
QE9b And secondly?
Reduces driver’s
responsiveness
Undermines excessive visual unreliable understand how It's too Cars are already
TOTAL creating an expensive to Other (SPONTANEOUS) DK
driver’s freedom and sound electronic these safety expensive to buy safe enough
of being
protected
UE25 EU25 21620 4% 12% 11% 16% 8% 19% 21% 3% 1% 5%

BE 1003 7% 12% 16% 15% 7% 21% 14% 4% 1% 3%
CZ 907 3% 10% 5% 12% 9% 15% 31% 3% 0% 11%
DK 970 5% 17% 12% 18% 6% 18% 16% 2% 2% 3%
D-W 935 3% 14% 14% 19% 8% 18% 16% 2% 1% 5%
DE 1405 3% 14% 14% 18% 8% 19% 17% 2% 1% 5%
D-E 476 2% 14% 14% 14% 7% 22% 20% 2% 2% 5%
EE 701 7% 14% 7% 17% 10% 16% 20% 4% 0% 6%
EL 973 3% 7% 5% 9% 9% 19% 38% 4% 2% 4%
ES 688 5% 5% 7% 10% 9% 19% 30% 3% 1% 10%
FR 942 4% 11% 10% 19% 9% 22% 15% 3% 0% 7%
IE 864 8% 12% 9% 17% 13% 18% 15% 3% 1% 4%
IT 950 5% 9% 13% 14% 11% 18% 23% 3% 1% 3%
CY 445 3% 6% 11% 13% 7% 16% 40% 1% 0% 1%
LV 764 4% 12% 7% 16% 9% 20% 23% 1% - 7%
LT 833 6% 11% 9% 12% 11% 17% 24% 2% 0% 7%
LU 453 5% 11% 11% 17% 8% 18% 16% 4% 1% 10%
HU 809 5% 11% 8% 11% 10% 19% 28% 3% 1% 5%
MT 411 6% 10% 10% 12% 10% 18% 25% 3% - 6%
NL 962 9% 19% 15% 15% 5% 15% 12% 3% 2% 4%
AT 905 6% 17% 12% 15% 9% 18% 16% 2% 1% 4%
PL 786 4% 10% 13% 14% 7% 20% 25% 1% 1% 4%
PT 836 1% 6% 9% 10% 10% 20% 35% 2% - 7%
SI 959 3% 6% 4% 11% 6% 18% 28% 3% 1% 19%
SK 1036 5% 11% 10% 16% 11% 24% 16% 5% 0% 2%
FI 964 7% 14% 14% 22% 7% 14% 14% 4% 3% 3%
SE 941 4% 17% 12% 21% 7% 15% 18% 2% 1% 3%
UK 1133 5% 15% 10% 17% 6% 18% 18% 2% 3% 5%
QE9a+b Which reason would put you off having these safety systems in your car? - TOTAL
Reduces driver’s
responsiveness
Undermines excessive visual unreliable understand how It's too Cars are already Other
TOTAL creating an expensive to DK
driver’s freedom and sound electronic these safety expensive to buy safe enough (SPONTANEOUS)
of being
protected
UE25 EU25 24796 11% 23% 19% 24% 12% 51% 22% 4% 2% 13%
BE 1032 15% 27% 29% 26% 10% 61% 15% 8% 1% 3%
CZ 1011 6% 17% 8% 16% 14% 70% 30% 7% 2% 10%
DK 1045 13% 39% 21% 35% 8% 39% 20% 4% 3% 7%
D-W 1053 8% 29% 22% 26% 13% 51% 17% 5% 1% 11%
DE 1570 8% 29% 22% 25% 13% 53% 18% 5% 2% 11%
D-E 517 6% 28% 23% 22% 10% 63% 21% 4% 2% 8%
EE 1004 11% 23% 10% 22% 11% 34% 18% 6% 1% 30%
EL 1000 9% 15% 8% 16% 15% 75% 42% 6% 3% 3%
ES 1012 9% 9% 11% 13% 12% 41% 28% 4% 2% 32%
FR 1009 13% 26% 18% 38% 13% 49% 16% 6% 1% 7%
IE 1000 22% 20% 15% 29% 20% 43% 16% 4% 1% 14%
IT 1019 11% 17% 27% 25% 16% 54% 29% 4% 1% 7%
CY 504 11% 15% 18% 18% 10% 58% 41% 2% 1% 12%
LV 1019 12% 25% 10% 20% 12% 42% 22% 2% - 25%
LT 1004 14% 20% 15% 20% 14% 46% 27% 4% 2% 17%
LU 506 13% 26% 19% 27% 13% 43% 17% 9% 1% 11%
HU 1015 8% 18% 11% 16% 12% 54% 30% 4% 2% 20%
MT 500 13% 15% 18% 21% 13% 45% 29% 5% 1% 18%
NL 1019 17% 43% 24% 22% 8% 46% 14% 6% 3% 6%
AT 1000 13% 27% 22% 26% 17% 49% 17% 5% 2% 9%
PL 1000 10% 17% 19% 19% 11% 50% 25% 2% 1% 21%
PT 1011 5% 10% 16% 15% 16% 60% 35% 4% - 17%
SI 1027 8% 17% 10% 21% 12% 58% 32% 5% 6% 7%
SK 1143 15% 25% 17% 24% 17% 57% 18% 7% 0% 9%
FI 1031 12% 43% 23% 33% 11% 33% 17% 5% 4% 6%
SE 1002 9% 45% 20% 29% 10% 47% 19% 4% 1% 6%
UK 1313 13% 29% 17% 26% 9% 47% 19% 3% 4% 14%
QE10 Suppose you were looking for information about these car safety systems. Who would you most trust? (ROTATE – MAX. 3 ANSWERS)
TV programmes, and specialised

(specialised press, specialised
information, not interested

Would never look for such
Other (SPONTANEOUS)
Consumer associations
The specialised media
Insurance companies
The media in general
radio programmes)
Car manufacturers
Family and friends

Public authorities
Automobile clubs
(SPONTANEOUS)
Driving schools
Car dealers
DK
TOTAL
UE25 EU25 24796 7% 29% 30% 26% 9% 25% 22% 6% 9% 18% 8% 1% 6%

BE 1032 7% 30% 27% 31% 10% 22% 39% 10% 16% 19% 4% 2% 1%
CZ 1011 1% 41% 20% 15% 8% 30% 34% 4% 4% 15% 7% 1% 4%
DK 1045 22% 17% 64% 33% 7% 25% 12% 5% 15% 19% 4% 1% 4%
D-W 1053 4% 28% 54% 33% 8% 33% 16% 7% 4% 15% 5% 1% 4%
DE 1570 4% 28% 54% 33% 7% 33% 17% 7% 4% 15% 5% 1% 4%
D-E 517 4% 29% 57% 33% 4% 35% 19% 6% 6% 14% 4% 1% 3%
EE 1004 15% 22% 10% 13% 19% 16% 9% 11% 17% 11% 8% 1% 24%
EL 1000 10% 59% 12% 14% 13% 31% 24% 8% 8% 23% 7% 1% 1%
ES 1012 5% 18% 9% 14% 12% 13% 29% 4% 5% 21% 11% 1% 15%
FR 1009 12% 33% 23% 47% 5% 24% 32% 7% 18% 19% 5% 1% 4%
IE 1000 16% 42% 32% 25% 16% 23% 22% 7% 17% 21% 3% 1% 9%
IT 1019 6% 29% 11% 17% 13% 23% 34% 4% 5% 16% 5% 2% 6%
CY 504 15% 52% 18% 27% 8% 26% 18% 6% 16% 24% 12% 2% 1%
LV 1019 4% 35% 15% 7% 8% 18% 15% 6% 9% 22% 14% 2% 12%
LT 1004 1% 45% 19% 13% 9% 23% 10% 8% 9% 19% 3% 1% 14%
LU 506 9% 23% 61% 18% 7% 26% 30% 8% 14% 13% 2% 3% 2%
HU 1015 8% 26% 15% 14% 6% 17% 22% 3% 7% 19% 18% 1% 10%
MT 500 15% 42% 8% 15% 14% 13% 22% 9% 10% 29% 7% 1% 7%
NL 1019 11% 14% 59% 55% 6% 28% 9% 3% 11% 17% 3% 1% 4%
AT 1000 9% 25% 61% 26% 12% 21% 21% 5% 5% 16% 5% 0% 8%
PL 1000 2% 30% 17% 9% 8% 26% 15% 5% 7% 22% 11% 0% 10%
PT 1011 9% 32% 31% 17% 14% 13% 27% 10% 8% 15% 14% 1% 10%
SI 1027 2% 34% 30% 12% 7% 28% 24% 4% 3% 29% 9% 2% 2%
SK 1143 2% 57% 26% 23% 10% 35% 28% 5% 8% 24% 5% 0% 4%
FI 1031 28% 39% 24% 20% 8% 38% 17% 8% 16% 14% 4% 2% 4%
SE 1002 18% 25% 49% 47% 7% 35% 9% 6% 36% 17% 2% 0% 2%
UK 1313 7% 28% 39% 22% 5% 21% 10% 8% 12% 20% 14% 1% 4%
QE11 If the public authorities would like to encourage the development of these car safety systems, in your opinion, which of the following would be the most preferable action?
Promote
Impose car safety
Inform through large Offer tax incentives technological
regulations making None of these Other
TOTAL scale communication for cars equipped research and DK
such systems (SPONTANEOUS) (SPONTANEOUS)
campaigns with these systems development in this
mandatory by law
field
UE25 EU25 24796 16% 37% 15% 15% 5% 1% 11%
BE 1032 17% 49% 14% 13% 4% 1% 2%
CZ 1011 23% 34% 12% 19% 4% 0% 9%
DK 1045 9% 42% 21% 18% 3% 0% 8%
D-W 1053 12% 41% 15% 13% 7% 1% 11%
DE 1570 12% 42% 16% 14% 6% 1% 10%
D-E 517 9% 45% 18% 15% 4% 1% 7%
EE 1004 11% 31% 10% 15% 5% 1% 29%
EL 1000 19% 44% 17% 11% 4% 1% 4%
ES 1012 32% 17% 12% 12% 3% 1% 23%
FR 1009 18% 38% 18% 17% 2% 1% 6%
IE 1000 18% 34% 19% 10% 3% - 16%
IT 1019 16% 44% 16% 12% 4% 1% 8%
CY 504 27% 30% 16% 12% 1% 0% 14%
LV 1019 18% 30% 9% 16% 6% - 20%
LT 1004 10% 33% 8% 21% 4% 0% 24%
LU 506 14% 43% 15% 16% 6% - 6%
HU 1015 14% 31% 12% 17% 9% 0% 17%
MT 500 38% 22% 12% 9% 1% - 19%
NL 1019 9% 46% 17% 18% 3% 0% 6%
AT 1000 16% 38% 14% 12% 5% 1% 14%
PL 1000 15% 35% 10% 18% 4% 0% 17%
PT 1011 30% 29% 16% 5% 3% 0% 17%
SI 1027 7% 49% 12% 14% 8% 3% 7%
SK 1143 16% 37% 14% 22% 4% 1% 7%
FI 1031 11% 58% 11% 13% 1% 1% 5%
SE 1002 8% 42% 11% 31% 1% 1% 5%
UK 1313 11% 35% 15% 18% 11% 0% 10%
QE12a Cars can be equipped with an emergency call system which automatically calls the local emergency authorities when the vehicle is involved in a serious accident. This system instantly transfers to them accurate vehicle position and other
accident related data and thereby reduces the time for the rescue services to arrive. Some people might consider this system as an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally regard this as…?
(IF 'SPLIT BALLOT A')

A real risk of intrusion that A minor inconvenience You do not consider it as an
None of these
TOTAL would deter you from having compared with the usefulness inconvenience as far as you DK
(SPONTANEOUS)
such a system of the system are concerned
UE25 EU25 12821 10% 28% 45% 6% 11%
BE 559 7% 32% 56% 3% 3%
CZ 504 8% 36% 39% 7% 10%
DK 530 5% 21% 61% 4% 9%
D-W 548 18% 31% 34% 7% 9%
DE 809 16% 31% 37% 7% 9%
D-E 257 9% 28% 49% 4% 9%
EE 511 5% 20% 41% 5% 29%
EL 494 12% 28% 53% 4% 3%
ES 566 5% 15% 52% 8% 20%
FR 494 10% 30% 50% 2% 8%
IE 496 8% 30% 37% 7% 18%
IT 529 7% 32% 45% 9% 6%
CY 255 7% 28% 51% 3% 11%
LV 523 8% 22% 38% 9% 24%
LT 502 10% 28% 38% 5% 20%
LU 260 9% 24% 52% 3% 12%
HU 516 10% 19% 46% 10% 15%
MT 249 13% 20% 43% 4% 20%
NL 498 9% 30% 52% 2% 6%
AT 498 11% 24% 46% 5% 13%
PL 529 9% 26% 39% 6% 19%
PT 539 7% 22% 55% 4% 12%
SI 491 9% 30% 46% 10% 6%
SK 574 5% 32% 49% 4% 10%
FI 517 10% 39% 44% 3% 4%
SE 512 7% 28% 58% 2% 5%
UK 688 11% 32% 40% 9% 9%
QE12b Cars can be equipped with an in-built system collecting information such as their location or speed, in order to produce real time traffic information. Some people might consider this system as an intrusion on driver’s privacy. Do you personally
regard this as…?
(IF 'SPLIT BALLOT B')

A real risk of intrusion that A minor inconvenience You do not consider it as an
None of these
TOTAL would deter you from having compared with the usefulness inconvenience as far as your DK
(SPONTANEOUS)
such a system of the system are concerned
UE25 EU25 11975 18% 29% 35% 7% 12%
BE 473 15% 33% 46% 4% 1%
CZ 507 19% 32% 30% 8% 11%
DK 515 18% 28% 43% 3% 8%
D-W 505 27% 29% 25% 8% 12%
DE 761 25% 29% 27% 7% 11%
D-E 260 21% 29% 36% 6% 8%
EE 493 14% 22% 33% 4% 27%
EL 506 16% 25% 50% 6% 2%
ES 446 9% 16% 44% 10% 21%
FR 515 26% 32% 33% 2% 7%
IE 504 16% 31% 27% 4% 21%
IT 490 10% 31% 39% 8% 12%
CY 249 9% 22% 54% 5% 11%
LV 496 13% 22% 33% 10% 22%
LT 502 13% 25% 32% 6% 24%
LU 246 19% 31% 36% 3% 11%
HU 499 8% 23% 40% 13% 16%
MT 251 12% 15% 40% 3% 30%
NL 521 21% 33% 38% 4% 5%
AT 502 13% 18% 43% 8% 18%
PL 471 12% 24% 36% 7% 22%
PT 472 9% 26% 46% 6% 13%
SI 536 12% 31% 40% 12% 6%
SK 569 15% 31% 42% 5% 7%
FI 514 23% 39% 31% 3% 5%
SE 490 23% 27% 42% 2% 6%
UK 625 21% 35% 27% 9% 8%

Introducere-Apendix-EU Survey

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introducere-Apendix-EU Survey

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Special Eurobarometer

Use of Intelligent Systems

Fieldwork: June - July 2006

1. EU CITIZENS’ DRIVING PATTERNS .......................................................... 4

1.1 The Average European Driver...................................................................4

2. FACTORS EFFECTING THE CHOICE OF CAR ............................................ 13

3. PERCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEMS ............................... 17

3.1 Perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle systems .................................... 19

5. THE ROLE OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES...................................................... 52

Against this background, DG Information Society and Media launched this

Moreover, questions QE2-QE5 concerning the profile of drivers were systematically

1. EU CITIZENS’ DRIVING PATTERNS

Source questionnaire: QE1-QE67

1.1 The Average European Driver

You drive your

Second hand 53%

6 to 10 years old 28%

4 to 5 years old 19%

2 years old 10%

DK 1% Less than 1 year old 5%

On urban roads 44%

From 10.000 to less than 15.000

1.2 Differences between countries and respondent groups

1.2.1 Drivers and non-drivers

Source questionnaire: QE1

- Respondents in the EU15 are significantly more likely to have

EU15 61% 4% 5% 8% 25%

Also the location of residence appears to influence whether a respondent has a

1.2.2 The car fleet

Source questionnaire: QE4-QE6

- Most Europeans drive a small or a medium sized car –

EU25 48% 27% 12% 9%

NL 47% 24% 8% 16%

A great majority of Europeans drive either a medium sized car (48%) or a

EU15 48% 51% EU15 6% 6% 11% 13% 19% 28% 17%

In general, it can be pointed out that:

• Respondents having an older car (6 years+): The unemployed most often

1.2.3 Europeans’ driving habits

- Most Europeans drive on urban roads or on

IT 71% 16% 10%

EU25 44% 13% 22% 22%

CZ 42% 10% 30% 18%

QE3 How many kilometres do you drive per year?

2. FACTORS EFFECTING THE CHOICE OF CAR

This second chapter examines which factors EU citizens consider as important

Source questionnaire: QE7

- Fuel consumption is considered in parallel with safety -

Level and availability of 1%

There are no striking differences between socio-demographic categories or in terms of

“Convenience” factors such as engine performance are most often mentioned by

Fuel consumption is considered to be slightly more important by those who drive a

In conclusion, there appears to be demand, and thus, a market for intelligent

The following chapters examine EU citizens’ perceptions of individual safety systems

3. PERCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENT VEHICLE SYSTEMS

Respondents were presented with the following systems:

In the following sub-chapters we examine EU citizens’ perception of the usefulness

3.1 Perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle systems

- There is no doubt about the perceived usefulness of intelligent vehicle

7. Ecall, Emergency call

3. Blind Spot Monitoring

10. Monitoring the state

4. Adaptive Head Lights 53% 4% 17% 10% 9% 7%

5. Obstacle and collision