This study introduces Breakdown T&BRL, an advanced evaluation method that extends traditional technology readiness levels (TRL) by incorporating four additional axes: business readiness level (BRL), social readiness level (SRL), governance readiness level (GRL), and human resource readiness level (HRL). This approach subdivides TRL/BRL 5 to 7 demonstration stages to precisely identify barriers to real-world application. In addition, this approach integrates evaluations from both developers and independent third parties to highlight critical discrepancies and inform tailored roadmaps. This study applied Breakdown T&BRL to a case study on next-generation mobility robot device development within the Minami-Kurihashi bridge life platform (BLP) concept. The results of the case study demonstrated its effectiveness in pinpointing specific issues for social implementation, including the need for production-ready products and sustainable business models, while also proposing concrete countermeasures. The comparative analysis with previous Breakdown T&BRL case studies revealed unique trends for this mobility project. The TRL/BRL evaluation gap between developers and third parties was small, which can be attributed to consistent information sharing from extensive BLP events and demonstrations. Third-party SRL and GRL evaluations were notably high, which suggests that proactive stakeholder engagement through consortium operations and discussions with regulators significantly enhanced social acceptance and regulatory alignment for these mobility devices. These findings highlight how comprehensive engagement can notably influence technology’s successful path toward social implementation.

1. [1] M. Héder, “From NASA to EU: The evolution of the TRL scale in Public Sector Innovation,” Innov. J, Vol.22, Issue 2, Article No.3, 2017.
2. [2] J. C. Mankins, “Technology readiness assessments: A retrospective,” Acta Astronaut., Vol.65, pp. 1216-1223, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.058
3. [3] S. R. Sadin, F. P. Povinelli, and R. Rosen, “The NASA technology push towards future space mission systems,” Acta Astronaut., Vol.20, pp. 73-77, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0094-5765(89)90054-4
4. [4] G. Salazar and M. N. Russi-Vigoya, “Technology readiness level as the foundation of human readiness level,” Ergon. Des., Vol.29, Issue 4, pp. 25-29, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/10648046211020527
5. [5] R. F. B. Santacruz, B. P. Sullivan, S. Terzi, and C. Sassanelli, “Developing a technology readiness level template for model-based design methods and tools in a collaborative environment,” Proc. of the IFIP Int. Conf. on Product Lifecycle Management, pp. 237-249, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25182-5_24
6. [6] M. D. Rogers, “Technology assessment in the EU institutions,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.6, No.5, pp. 522-527, 2011. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2011.p0522
7. [7] International Organization for Standardization, “Space systems – Definition of the technology readiness levels (TRLs) and their criteria of assessment,” ISO 16290:2013, 2013. https://www.iso.org/standard/56064.html [Accessed June 1, 2025]
8. [8] I. Ihara, A. H. Pandyaswargo, and H. Onoda, “Development and the effective of the J-TRA: A methodology to assess energy technology R&D programs in Japan,” Proc. EcoDesign Products & Service Symp., pp. 109-117, 2018.
9. [9] Ministry of the Environment of Japan, “TRL calculation tool user manual,” 2016 (in Japanese). https://www.env.go.jp/content/900443533.pdf [Accessed June 1, 2025]
10. [10] Cabinet Office of Japan, “Cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program,” 2023 (in Japanese). https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/gaiyo/sip/sipgaiyou.pdf [Accessed June 1, 2025]
11. [11] T. Suzuki and G. Yoshizawa, “Special issue on managing catastrophic technological risks and role of technology assessment (TA) in the post 3/11 society,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.6, No.5, pp. 473-475, 2011. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2011.p0473
12. [12] G. Kudo, A. H. Pandyaswargo, and H. Onoda, “Breakdown technology & business readiness level assessment: A novel evaluation framework for assessing technology social implementation and innovation potential in the field of carbon neutrality” Proc. 14th Int. Symp. on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, 2025 (in press).
13. [13] A. Olechowski, S. Eppinger, N. Joglekar, and K. Tomaschek, “Technology readiness levels: Shortcomings and improvement opportunities,” Syst. Eng., Vol.23, No.4, pp. 395-408, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21533
14. [14] S. Yfanti and N. Sakkas, “Technology readiness levels (TRLs) in the era of co-creation,” Applied System Innovation, Vol.7, Issue 2, Article No.32, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020032
15. [15] European Association of Research and Technology Organizations, “The TRL scale as a research & innovation policy tool, EARTO recommendations,” 2014. https://www.earto.eu/wp-content/uploads/The_TRL_Scale_as_a_R_I_Policy_Tool_-_EARTO_Recommendations_-_Final.pdf [Accessed June 1, 2025]
16. [16] Cabinet Office of Japan, “Innovative environmental innovation strategy,” 2020 (in Japanese). https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/siryo/haihui048/siryo6-2.pdf [Accessed June 1, 2025]
17. [17] C. Y. Huang, Y. H. Hung, and G. H. Tzeng, “Using hybrid MCDM methods to assess fuel cell technology for the next generation of hybrid power automobiles,” J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Inform., Vol.15, No.4, pp. 406-417, 2011. https://doi.org/10.20965/jaciii.2011.p0406
18. [18] Y. Kikuchi, A. Heiho, Y. Dou, I. Suwa, I.-C. Chen, Y. Fukushima, and C. Tokoro, “Defining requirements on technology systems assessment from life cycle perspectives: Cases on recycling of photovoltaic and secondary batteries,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.14, No.6, pp. 890-902, 2020. https://doi.org/10.20965/ijat.2020.p0890
19. [19] T. Degawa, “The Concept of Technology Management from the Field of MOT and Development Ventures,” Kobunsha, 2004 (in Japanese).
20. [20] J. Yu, R. Wahls, B. Esker, L. Lahey, D. Akiyama, M. Drake, and D. Christensen, “Total technology readiness level: Accelerating technology readiness for aircraft design,” Proc. Conf. AIAA Aviation 2021 Forum, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2021-2454
21. [21] E. M. Rogers, “Diffusion of Innovations,” Free Press, 1962.
22. [22] F. W. Geels, “Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study,” Res. Policy, Vol.31, Issues 8-9, pp. 1257-1274, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8
23. [23] F. W. Geels, “Regime resistance against low-carbon transitions: Introducing politics and power into the multi-level perspective,” Theory, Cult. & Soc., Vol.31, Issue 5, pp. 21-40, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627
24. [24] A. W. Zimmermann, T. Langhorst, S. Moni, J. A. Schaidle, F. Besebaa, and A. Bradow, “Life-cycle and techno-economic assessment of early-stage carbon capture and utilization technologies – A discussion of current challenges and best practices,” Front. Clim., Vol.4, Article No.841907, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.841907
25. [25] A. Ogawa, “Research on the advancement of waste management systems and its evaluation using digital technology,” Ph.D. thesis, Waseda University, 2024 (in Japanese).
26. [26] Y. Kanao, “Research on the development and evaluation of next-generation mobility devices, including automated delivery robots – Development towards the Bridge Life Platform concept in Minami-Kurihashi Station area,” Master’s thesis, Waseda University, 2023 (in Japanese).
27. [27] I. Bruno, G. Lobo, B. Valente Covino, A. Donarelli, V. Marchetti, A. Schiavone Panni, and F. Molinari, “Technology readiness revisited: A proposal for extending the scope of impact assessment of European public services,” Proc. 13th Int. Conf. on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, pp. 369-380, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428502.3428552
28. [28] G. Kudo, A. H. Pandyaswargo, and H. Onoda, “Application of breakdown technology & business readiness level assessment to carbon capture technology: A case study on advancing social implementation assessment,” 14th Int. Symp. on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, 2025 (in press).
29. [29] H. Onoda, “An attempt to implement multi-benefit mobility in society in conjunction with urban development: Taking the Minami-Kurihashi Station Block ‘BRIDGE LIFE Platform’ concept as an example,” J. Inf. Process. Soc. Jpn., Vol.65, No.5, pp. d1-d10, 2024 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.20729/00233636
30. [30] A. Ogawa, K. Kubota, A. H. Pandyaswargo, R. Tsubouchi, K. Ozawa, M. Sawada, and H. Onoda, “Development of an autonomous robot for a contactless waste collection system and study for its social implementation,” IPSJ Trans., Vol.5, No.2, pp. 1-9, 2024 (in Japanese).
31. [31] K. Masuda and H. Onoda, “Challenges for demonstrating and commercializing autonomous delivery robots that can be driven on public roads,” J. Inf. Process. Soc. Jpn., Vol.65, No.5, pp. d11-d22, 2024 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.20729/00233637
32. [32] Y. Yamamoto, “A study on performance evaluation of autonomous delivery mobility in micro communities and the proposal of use cases for social implementation,” Master’s thesis, Waseda University, 2024 (in Japanese).