UNECE brought governments, industry and technical experts together to develop harmonized international regulations for Automated Driving Systems, enabling the safe deployment of highly automated vehicles across jurisdictions.
The dilemma
Automated Driving Systems (ADS) are rapidly advancing and promise significant improvements in road safety, mobility and transport efficiency. However, the technology is being developed globally while regulatory approaches have historically been fragmented across jurisdictions. Without internationally harmonized safety requirements, manufacturers could face inconsistent approval processes, barriers to market access, and uncertainty regarding safety expectations. Regulators also needed a framework capable of assessing systems that perform the complete dynamic driving task without continuous human supervision.
The regulatory gap
The automotive sector is one of the most highly regulated industries globally. Manufacturers, regulators and other stakeholders rely on internationally harmonized technical regulations to support technological innovation, improve safety and environmental performance, and facilitate international trade by reducing technical barriers to vehicle approval and market access.
However, global harmonization reached its limits when addressing Automated Driving Systems (ADS). Existing regulatory frameworks had evolved around two fundamentally different compliance models, namely type approval and self-certification. Type-approval systems are used in many markets including the European Union, Japan and Türkiye, while self-certification systems are used in countries such as the United States, Canada and the Republic of Korea. Reconciling these approaches created an opportunity for the development of globally aligned regulatory requirements for increasingly automated vehicles.
In addition, traditional vehicle regulations were built on the assumption that a human driver is present in the vehicle, continuously monitoring the driving environment and performing the driving task. As ADS technologies evolved toward assuming the complete dynamic driving task, many existing regulations required review and amendment to address concepts such as "driver", "driver's seat" and other driver-dependent provisions that could create legal, technical and implementation challenges.
New regulatory approaches and evaluation methods were therefore needed to assess vehicles equipped with ADS that perform the full tactical and operational driving functions without continuous human supervision. The absence of internationally recognized safety principles, validation methodologies, data recording requirements, safety case frameworks and in-service monitoring provisions created uncertainty for both regulators and developers. Without a coordinated international response, there was a significant risk of regulatory fragmentation, reduced public confidence, increased barriers to deployment and slower realization of the safety and mobility benefits promised by automated driving technologies.
The approach
1. In June 2018, UNECE established the Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) under the UNECE World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29), the main global body for vehicle regulations.
2. In June 2019, The Member States (Contracting Parties), developed the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles (FDAV) which established a common vision, high-level safety principles, key definitions and a coordinated programme of work for automated driving. WP.29 invested significant effort in achieving broad consensus on the FDAV and its subsequent updates, ensuring a shared regulatory direction for the development of automated vehicle regulations.
3. Building on the FDAV, GRVA spent four years developing a multi-pillar approach for the safety assessment and performance evaluation of automated vehicles. This work culminated in the adoption by WP.29 in June 2024 of the Guidelines and recommendations for ADS safety requirements, assessments and test methods to inform regulatory development.
4. In November 2024, in accordance with the principles established in the FDAV, GRVA created the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Automated Driving Systems (ADS) to develop a regulatory framework that could be implemented both as a UN Regulation under the 1958 Agreement, primarily supporting type-approval systems, and as a UN Global Technical Regulation (GTR) under the 1998 Agreement, accommodating both type-approval and self-certification regimes.
Participation and work methods
The initiative brought together Contracting Parties from multiple regions, vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, technical services, standards development organizations, research institutions and other stakeholders. Participation included representatives from major global automotive and technology companies through industry associations and accredited NGOs, alongside government authorities and independent experts. Building on earlier WP.29 achievements, including the FDAV and the ADS Guidelines, the group used regular international meetings, workshops and consensus-based decision-making to develop performance-based and technology-neutral requirements, while broadening participation to include stakeholders that had not traditionally been involved in automotive regulation.
Key concepts included:
(a) A Safety Management System (SMS) covering the full ADS lifecycle.
(b) A Safety Case approach demonstrating that the ADS is free from unreasonable safety risk.
(c) Requirements for validation and testing credibility (incl. simulations).
(d) Event and occurrence reporting mechanisms to authorities.
(e) Data Storage Systems for Automated Driving (DSSAD).
(f) Continuous monitoring of ADS performance after deployment.
This approach enabled a high degree of international harmonization while preserving national sovereignty and providing flexibility for implementation under different regulatory systems.
Results achieved
The initiative produced the world's first comprehensive globally harmonized regulatory framework specifically addressing Automated Driving Systems. In January 2026, GRVA adopted the draft UN Regulation and recommended the draft GTR for consideration by WP.29. The framework established common safety principles for ADS-equipped vehicles and provided regulators with tools for evaluating highly automated vehicles beyond conventional driver-assistance systems.
Notable outcomes include:
(a) Development of outcome-focused ADS safety requirements.
(b) Establishment of internationally recognized Safety Case principles.
(c) Introduction of lifecycle-based Safety Management Systems.
(d) Creation of requirements for data recording and occurrence reporting.
(e) Alignment of regulatory approaches across major automotive markets.
(f) Strengthened cooperation among governments, industry and technical experts.
The framework also demonstrated that international consensus on complex emerging technologies is achievable when supported by structured (consensus based) collaboration and evidence-based regulation.
The work involved more than six years of international collaboration within GRVA and WP.29, multiple ADS workshops hosted across Europe, Asia and North America, and participation from government authorities, industry experts, standards organizations and technical services. The project culminated in the adoption of the UN Regulation and UN GTR on ADS by WP.29 in June 2026, following their endorsement by GRVA in January 2026.
The transferable lesson
The ADS initiative demonstrates that regulators can proactively shape emerging technologies through international cooperation rather than relying solely on fragmented national measures. Performance-based regulations combined with a structured safety case methodology can provide flexibility for innovation while maintaining high safety expectations.
Key lessons include:
(a) Focusing initially on high-level governance, including the creation of a new working group, proved challenging. It was not necessarily the most effective entry point.
In fact, simple political signals of support, such as declarations by the G7 Transport Ministers encouraging international collaboration on automated driving through UNECE, provided the momentum needed to launch and sustain the work.
(b) The Informal Working Group (IWG) on ADS operated with six co-chairs from the Americas, Europe and Asia, supported by four co-secretaries representing industry, standards development organizations (SDOs) and other stakeholders. Rather than creating governance difficulties, this distributed leadership structure became an asset, helping to build trust, ensure balanced representation and maintain broad stakeholder engagement.
(c) The decisive factor in securing commitment across stakeholders was the consensus-based development and adoption of the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles (FDAV), which established a common vision, shared principles and a coordinated programme of work.
(d) Early and continuous engagement with industry and their trained technical experts improves regulatory quality by ensuring that regulatory objectives are informed by technical feasibility, implementation experience and an understanding of existing regulatory frameworks.
(e) Technology neutral and outcome-focused regulations may remain relevant longer than prescriptive technology-specific requirements.
(f) Safety assurance for AI-driven and highly automated systems requires lifecycle oversight extending beyond initial validation.
(g) Data collection and post-market monitoring seem to be necessary steps for continuously improving safety of highly complex systems.
(h) Neither the scale of the challenges to be addressed nor the political and economic priorities at stake justified departing from sound regulatory practices. The ADS experience demonstrated that, even in rapidly evolving fields such as artificial intelligence and automated driving, technological neutrality remains essential to ensuring effective, credible and future-proof regulation.
Future questions remain regarding the integration with future artificial intelligence technologies, cybersecurity evolution and cross-border operational details.
