Skip to main content

What we stand for: Safer and Smarter Mobility Worldwide

December 1, 2022

We want to create a world in which people can travel safely and in which the ecological effects of road-related mobility are minimised. We aim to provide lasting protection against traffic-related deaths, injuries and damage. We aim to reduce as far as possible mobility’s carbon footprint and other harmful emissions. We are committed to developing modern, digital and smart solutions which help to achieve these aims.

Content produced in association with Jenoptik

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • The proven route to safer roads from iRAP
    July 23, 2024
    Research from Johns Hopkins University suggests nearly 700,000 deaths and severe injuries were prevented over eight years in road safety projects which used the International Road Assessment Programme methodology
  • Harnessing the strengths of CMOS for ITS applications
    January 24, 2017
    Sony’s Arnaud Destruels explains the benefits of CMOS sensors for ITS applications. In the transport sector roadside, trackside and platform cameras were devices for viewing and assessing a situation while individual sensors did all the clever stuff like traffic counting, speed calculation, queue lengths, signal status and so on. Well, not any more.
  • 15-minute cities versus tinfoil hat wearers: only one winner in this fight
    April 19, 2023
    Tinfoil hat wearers – conspiracy theorists who delight in joining non-existent dots – are doing their best to make the 15-minute city concept toxic. It’s wonderful that they’re doomed to fail
  • Taking the long view of ITS
    March 24, 2015
    Caroline Visser believes the ITS industry must present a coherent case for consideration of the technology to become part of transport policy and planning. As ITS advisor and road finance director for the International Road Federation (IRF) in Geneva, Caroline Visser is well placed to evaluate quantifying the benefits of ITS implementation – a topic about which there is little agreement and even less consistency. She is pressing to get some consistency in the evaluation of ITS deployments through the use of