We bring together policy and legal experts, AV technologists, NGOs, and AV private sector firms for a candid 24-hour dialogue.

An AV policy scrum session is guided by our design-thinking and design-sprint model. It results in a list of actionable policy and strategy options for the questions that you bring to the table.

Our Approach

An AV policy scrum is a policymaker's answer to a hackathon: fast-paced, solutions-oriented, no boundaries to creativity. We developed this unique method to generate policy options for cities and state governments within 24-hours. Lunch to lunch. 

Our first AV policy scrum enabled the City of Boston to generate actionable policy options to implement Autonomous Vehicles into their transportation strategy included in Imagine Boston 2030.

Boston AV Scrum in Progress

​The City of Boston brought 4 AV issues to the table. We brought the right people, the right analysis and methods, and the iconic HKS pizza.  After 24 hours, the working teams presented their actionable policy options and were scrutinized by the rest of the participants.

Highlights from Recent Scrums
Kansas City, Missouri

In Kansas City, we explored:

  • What infrastructure will AV fleet operators expect, how will the public earn a return on those investments, and what new public value opportunities will AVs bring to the region?  
  • What are the necessary information flows between AV fleet operators as well as with the public sector to ensure safe, reliable and equitable operations as well as support other public interests?
  • What regulatory framework best supports AV fleet operations on a regional basis?

Specific next steps resulting from the scrum included:

  • Collaborate with AV companies on infrastructure needs;
  • Explore smart city design principles to better understand their infrastructure options and funding;
  • Draft a Standard Operating Agreement (SOA) that dictates a data sharing policy between AV fleet operators and regional municipalities;
  • Hold listening session with curb users on flexible curb infrastructure; and
  • Designate “champions” to deliver policy advocacy briefings on a state-level.
Rhode Island

In Rhode Island, we explored:

  • How can AVs complement and help to improve transit?
  • With the introduction of modern technologies, how can we envision the use and development of curbside and street-side infrastructure to best meet the needs of our communities?
  • What are the outcomes of success important to each of the Mobility Challenge project partners? What research questions and methods can be applied to ensure we achieve our goals?

The overarching ideas that emerged from the scrum were: (1) holistic planning will be critical in the years to come; (2) existing structures—from governance to transportation revenue and funding—will need reform; (3) transportation must, become more agile, flexible, and offer more on-demand interaction with users; and (4) Rhode Island should focus on the technology and infrastructure of the future.

Specific next steps resulting from the scrum included:

  • Assess funding revenues and pricing in future transportation systems scenarios;
  • Develop and deliver a comprehensive plan to co-design and integrate soft and hard infrastructure;
  • Engage citizens, technical experts, and Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) teams to develop and evaluate curb access scenarios;
  • Refine and finalize the plan for evaluating the Rhode Island Transportation Innovation Partnership (TRIP) initiative; and
  • Determine the best method for engaging in stakeholder and community outreach.
Toronto, Canada

In Toronto, we explored:

  • How can we prevent TNCs from siphoning off mass transit ridership?
  • How can we discourage single-occupant or empty automated vehicles from circulating?
  • What kinds of priorities should automated transit vehicles receive?

Specific next steps resulting from the scrum were:

  • Ensure that the first AV experiences Torontonians have is in a TTC transit vehicle;
  • Help cyclists and pedestrians feel more comfortable around automated buses;
  • Increase the reliability of lower-performing lines, leveraging the result of local initiatives such as the King Street pilot;
  • Explore the use of mobility packages, following the example of other cities like Helsinki;
  • Ensure that automated vehicles support existing policy goals across transportation and other related areas (e.g., land use);
  • Continue to create meaningful multi-modal options that are alternatives to vehicle trips; and
  • Leverage automated vehicles to achieve improvements in street and neighborhood design, particularly in the inner suburbs.