**6. Conclusions**

In the present study, infrastructure alternatives for autonomous electric vehicles are evaluated and prioritized, for the first time and at an early stage, due to the low maturity level of certain of these technologies (e.g., autonomous vehicles, dynamic charging, etc.), through the combined application of two hybrid multi-criteria analysis models, with the participation of experts. The experience drawn from conducting the research that is presented in this paper shows that the decision on the appropriate infrastructure for autonomous electric vehicles depends on the selection between alternatives with different maturity levels, in terms of technology readiness and real-life implementation. This fact increases the uncertainty in their evaluation. For example, there is relatively limited international experience in dynamic electric vehicle charging, which is until now at an experimental stage. The specific paper depicts the methodological framework that allows both for the comprehensive evaluation of different infrastructure alternatives within the current context and for the ability to update the evaluation in the future, taking into account the dynamic evolution of the relevant technologies, in order to support the decision-making process regarding the optimum solution relating to infrastructure for autonomous electric vehicles, in terms of safety and sustainability criteria.

Based on the current availability of data and information, plug-in (wired) charging facilities and the separate circulation of autonomous electric vehicles are revealed as the optimum solution. This selection is mostly due to the significantly high weight attributed to two aspects of safety for the users, i.e., public health, with the alternative of dynamic charging being linked to concerns due to exposure of the public to electromagnetic radiation, and road safety concerns, which relates to the avoidance of mixed traffic conditions for vehicles of different levels of automation.

In addition to prioritization and the optimum selection among the available alternatives, the methodology leads to the identification and prioritization of specific issues (e.g., electromagnetic radiation and road safety considerations) related to the overall concept of safety and sustainability that will emerge when the most technologically advanced of these alternatives will be ready for wide-scale implementation. Thus, the analysis offers useful insight to policymakers, highlighting important safety aspects that should be taken into account for the integrated and sustainable planning of transport infrastructure in the future.

It is therefore shown that these new technologies should be adopted with prudence and should focus on the appropriate design and operation of infrastructure in order to primarily ensure traffic safety and public health. Moreover, as technologies are advancing, the available infrastructure alternatives should be constantly evaluated concerning their safety and sustainability implications in a holistic, cross-disciplinary way that goes beyond the conventional traffic engineering and transport planning approaches.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, K.A. and E.B.; methodology, K.A.; formal analysis, K.A.; investigation, K.A.; resources, K.A. and N.G.; data curation, K.A.; writing—original draft preparation, K.A., N.G., M.P.-L. and E.B.; writing—review and editing, K.A., N.G., M.P.-L. and E.B.; visualization, K.A., N.G., M.P.-L. and E.B.; supervision, M.P.-L. and E.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Data are contained within the article.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
