Mobility on Demand and Automated Driving Systems: A Framework for Public-Sector Assessment (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5 REPORT CHAPTER 1: METHODOLOGY This report uses a multi-method qualitative approach to research MOD, privately owned AVs, and SAVs. First, the research team conducted a literature review to document existing definitions of MOD, AVs, and related services and technologies; described key elements of these services including business models, AV infrastructure, policies, and enabling technologies; assessed AV technologies and current pilot programs; and summarized the potential impacts of AV services. For the pilot programs, the researchers supplemented the review of existing research literature with web- based media searches and interviews with private operators and public agencies. MOD and AVs are quickly evolving concepts, so it is possible that the research team inadvertently omitted recent literature and case studies. The research team conducted interviews with MOD and non-MOD specialists. The team developed a standard protocol for the interviews, but the questions that were asked in each interview were tailored to the focus of the interviewee. Experts were interviewed from the following organizations: • Alameda-Contra Costa County Transit • Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) • City of Monrovia • City of Santa Monica—Big Blue Bus • Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory • Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CTAA) • Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) • Goin • Hewlett Foundation • JUMP • Kansas City Area Transit Authority (KCATA) • Liftango • Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) • MCA • MemEx • MetroLab Network • Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) • Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) • Mobility Carsharing • Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) • National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) • National Science Foundation (NSF) • National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) • North America Bikeshare Association (NABSA) • North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) • Oakland Mayor’s Office • Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) • Pivot Strategies, LLC

6 REPORT • Pierce County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Pierce Transit) • Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) • PTV Group • Rand Corporation • Rutgers CAIT • Schweiger Consulting • San Francisco Country Transportation Authority (SFCTA) • San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) • Share Now • Shared-Use Mobility Center • SPIN • Texas A&M Transportation Institute • Transportation Research Board (TRB) • Tripshot • University of Maryland (UMD) • University of Texas, San Antonio (UT San Antonio) • University of Georgia (UGA) • US Department of Transportation (USDOT) • Uber • Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (Valley Metro) • Yaffe Mobility Consulting. The findings of the interviews echoed the themes and findings of the MOD Sandbox projects (see the end of Section 3: The Commodification of Transportation for more detail). In addition, the interviews revealed a gap at the state department of transportation (DOT) level regarding infrastructure development that could support AVs at Level 5 automation. These two findings—the reiteration of MOD Sandbox themes and a knowledge gap at the state level—informed the research process. After the literature review and interviews, the research team developed a six-step impact assessment framework based on the previously published work, Understanding How Cities Can Link Smart Mobility Priorities Through Data by Shaheen et al. (2018). This framework was developed through a collaborative effort between the Transportation Sustainability Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley) and the International Council on Clean Transportation. The researchers also used insights provided by expert interviews and the literature review. The researchers also developed several MOD and AV use cases. In April 2019, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) hosted a stakeholder engagement session, collecting feedback from private, public, and academic stakeholders on the use case scenarios. Appendix A: Stakeholder Engagement summarizes the session findings and participants. The key outputs of the stakeholder engagement session informed the impact assessment framework and helped develop a set of common use cases. The use cases represent general scenarios faced by public agencies engaged with MOD operators. The information provided in the following sections is informed by the various research methods and sources discussed in this section.