Switzerland has taken another concrete step toward the deployment of driverless vehicles. The newly published Weisungen do not create new rules, but they clarify how the new ordinance on automated driving will be applied in practice, especially for Level 4 driverless vehicle operations on predefined routes.

For the SAAM community, this is an important milestone. Many of our members contributed practical input based on real projects and operational experience, helping ensure that the guidance reflects the realities of deployment on the ground, not just legal theory.

Purpose and scope of the Instructions

The Weisungen do not introduce new legal rights or obligations. Their role is to operationalise Section 3 of the OAD (Arts. 43–48) by explaining:

• how applications for driverless vehicle deployment areas must be assessed,
• how authorities coordinate across cantons and federal bodies,
• how safety, traffic flow and road user interactions are evaluated in concrete, local contexts.

They are non-binding guidance, but clearly set expectations for both authorities and driverless vehicle operators.

Importantly, the Weisungen focus exclusively on driverless vehicles (Level 4) and do not apply to:

• Level 3 vehicles with takeover requests,
• automated parking systems.

Driverless vehicles on predefined routes (Level 4): how approval works in practice

From “vehicle approval” to “deployment area approval” 

The Weisungen confirm a central shift introduced by the VAF:
driverless vehicles are authorised via approval of the canton in which they will operate in.

Each project must define a Target Operational Domain (TOD), consisting of:

• road environments
• specific streets and segments,
• junctions and interaction points,
• operating times and conditions.

Approval is always geographically and operationally bounded.

Role of the “approval canton”

One canton acts as the approval authority (Zulassungskanton) and leads the process. Its responsibilities include:

• checking formal admissibility,
• coordinating with other cantons in the case of cross-canton operations
• coordinating with local municipalities and federal bodies (primarily FEDRO)
• issuing the final approval decision.

Other cantons or FEDRO must give explicit consent if respectively their cantonal territory or national roads are affected.

Safety, traffic flow and vulnerable road users: the core assessment logic

The three protection objectives are decisive

All applications are assessed primarily against Article 45(1) OAD, which focuses on:

• road safety,
• traffic flow (including public transport),
• needs of pedestrians and cyclists.

If these minimum requirements are not met, approval is not possible.

The Assessment Tool (Beurteilungsinstrument)

The Weisungen introduce a standardised assessment tool, currently provided as an Excel file, which structures the evaluation into three steps:

1. Operational and technical prerequisites
   • operator concept and supervision model,
   • communication links to vehicles,
   • compatibility between vehicle design limits and proposed area.
2. Criticality analysis of the route
   • segmentation of streets and junctions,
   • identification of challenging situations for automation,
   • classification of risk levels.
3. Demonstrated drivability
   • proof that the vehicle can handle all identified situations,
   • primarily based on manufacturer confirmation and type approval documentation.

Authorities are not expected to conduct vehicle testing themselves. 
The burden of proof lies with the applicant, supported by the manufacturer. 

Compensation measures instead of rejection

Where evidence is incomplete but no concrete safety risk is identified, authorities may impose conditions, such as:

• restricted operating hours,
• reduced speed,
• enhanced reporting obligations,
• closer supervision ratios.

Real-world test drives cannot be demanded as a rule before approval.

Operational governance: supervision, changes and long-term operation

Continuous supervision, not one-off approval

Approval is not the end of regulatory oversight. The Weisungen clearly defines: 

• ongoing supervision by cantonal authorities, 
• complementary controls by the FEDRO, police and vehicle inspection bodies. 

Supervision focuses on whether: 

• the real operation matches the approved deployment area, 
• operator concepts remain effective, 
• imposed conditions are respected. 

Managing changes in real-world conditions

Project holders must actively monitor:

• road works,
• events,
• infrastructure changes,
• software updates affecting vehicle behaviour.

Relevant changes must be reported promptly.
Authorities may then:

• adapt the approved area,
• impose temporary restrictions,
• require compensatory measures.

Suspension or withdrawal of approval is explicitly framed as a last resort.

Expansion of deployment areas 

Expansions are possible, but:

• must be formally requested,
• require renewed proof of compliance,
• may trigger a full new approval if the change is substantial (e.g. more complex roads, larger fleet).

Key takeaways for implementation

From an operational perspective, the Weisungen make three things very clear:

• The Ability for driverless vehicles to operate on the defined deployment area are the regulatory unit, not vehicles alone.
• Evidence-based safety arguments, supported by manufacturers, are central.
• Authorities expect iterative, cooperative processes, not “one-shot” approvals.

For project developers and mobility providers, this means that success depends less on technology alone and more on:

• early engagement with cantons and project stakeholders
• realistic definition of operational domains,
• robust operator and supervision concepts.