{"schema_version":1,"assessment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_opportunity320_20260801","source_experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__economics_finance","archetype_slug":"deadweight_loss_reduction","domain_slug":"economics_finance","title":"Bounded occupancy-responsive curb-parking pricing","opportunity_summary":"Test whether a uniform curb-parking price causes simultaneous peak saturation, search loss, and substitutable nearby or off-peak slack, and whether capped time-and-location-responsive prices improve access reliability without unacceptable accessibility, spillover, distributional, safety, or administrative harm.","adopter_authorizer":"The municipal parking or transportation authority and legally empowered municipal body responsible for curb prices and accommodations, subject to required public notice and oversight.","scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":4,"rationale":"If the proposed pricing mismatch is the binding cause, reducing cruising, waiting, failed attempts, and stranded capacity could materially improve curb access and traffic-related outcomes; actual prevalence and effect magnitude are unsupported."},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":3,"rationale":"The proposal addresses concrete interests of drivers, businesses, residents, street users, and municipal authorities, but the sealed candidate contains no evidence that any affected group or authorizer currently demands this intervention."},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"Responsive pricing directly targets time-location misallocation and is more reversible than adding capacity, but its advantage disappears if raw undersupply, poor substitution, enforcement, or information is the binding constraint."},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":2,"rationale":"The composition includes caps, incidence safeguards, monitoring, comparison, and rollback, but prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no material distinction from existing responsive-parking approaches is established."},"technical_implementability":{"score":4,"rationale":"A small pilot can be expressed through bounded price bands, occupancy and search measurements, preselected blocks, and rollback rules; local meter, payment, enforcement, and data-system capabilities remain unknown."},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"A municipal decision-maker and an authorization pathway are identified, but local legal power, notice requirements, accommodation obligations, political acceptance, and cross-boundary coordination require verification."},"evidence_readiness":{"score":3,"rationale":"The candidate specifies observable problem indicators, a uniform-price comparison, problem and intervention falsifiers, and harm categories, but supplies no baseline data, calibrated thresholds, measurement method, or comparison-unit design."},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"Price caps, accessible-parking protections, public notice, protected-user monitoring, suspension triggers, and reversion reduce exposure, although their operational effectiveness and threshold values are untested."},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"The mechanism could be repeated across blocks and periods, but scaling depends on local demand patterns, substitutes, legal rules, payment access, monitoring infrastructure, enforcement, and spillover management."}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"A bounded non-deployment diagnostic using baseline occupancy, search-delay, failed-attempt, enforcement, price-schedule, and adjacent-block or off-peak data, plus authority and accessibility review.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Existing administrative data are substantially usable.","Only a small set of candidate and comparison blocks is analyzed.","Limited supplemental manual observation is needed.","No new citywide sensing system is procured."]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Design and configuration for a small time-limited pilot, including price-band rules, payment and meter changes, safeguards, public notice, staff preparation, data controls, and predeclared evaluation and rollback procedures.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The municipality can reconfigure existing meters or payment software.","The pilot covers a limited number of preselected blocks.","No major civil works or wholesale equipment replacement is required.","Legal and procurement review remain routine rather than contested."]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Operate and evaluate the limited pilot through representative periods, including enforcement coordination, monitoring, public support, accessibility and spillover assessment, comparison analysis, and possible rollback.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The evaluation requires several months of operation.","Independent or dedicated evaluation labor is included.","Some supplemental occupancy or search-time measurement is required.","The scope remains a pilot rather than a citywide program."]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Annual resource equivalent for maintaining responsive schedules on the pilot-scale footprint, monitoring outcomes and safeguards, handling complaints and accommodations, data governance, software support, and periodic recalibration.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Existing enforcement and payment infrastructure absorbs most routine activity.","Major equipment replacement and expansion are excluded.","Monitoring intensity declines after launch but does not cease.","The estimate applies to a limited footprint, not citywide operation."]}},"research_burden":"HIGH","earliest_credible_horizon":"3_TO_12_MONTHS","pipeline_gates":{"recognizable_externally_supportable_problem":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The candidate defines a recognizable conjunction of saturation, search delay, failed attempts, and substitutable slack, but labels it a hypothesis and provides no local baseline evidence that the conjunction persists or is caused by uniform pricing."},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"The candidate identifies the legally empowered municipal body responsible for curb prices and accommodations as the decision authority."},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"Relative to the uniform-price baseline, the proposal claims that capped responsive prices improve occupancy reliability or search time without threshold-breaching access, spillover, safety, distributional, or administrative harms; both benefit and failure are testable."},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"The specified observables and problem falsifier support a limited baseline diagnostic on preselected blocks and comparable periods before any live pricing change."},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The proposal contains caps, exclusions, notice, accommodation review, halt criteria, and rollback, but local legal authority and the practical ability to preserve accessible use and control spillover have not been established."},"implementation_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"A small time-limited pilot provides a general boundary, but the number of blocks, available infrastructure, data access, measurement intensity, procurement needs, and operating duration are unspecified, making the cost bands assumption-dependent."}},"blocking_evidence":["Local baseline evidence of persistent peak saturation or search delay occurring alongside genuinely substitutable nearby or off-peak slack.","Evidence distinguishing a uniform-price allocation wedge from raw capacity shortage, poor information, weak enforcement, or an already justified externality-oriented charge.","Verification of municipal legal authority, notice obligations, accessible-parking protections, and permissible data collection.","Locally calibrated comparison blocks and periods, outcome definitions, harm thresholds, and decision rules.","Evidence that nearby blocks and alternative times are usable substitutes rather than merely nominal slack.","Bounded prior-art comparison establishing whether the proposed composition or safeguards offer any distinctive incremental contribution."],"next_evidence_step":"Conduct a predeployment diagnostic on a small set of candidate and comparable blocks and periods: compare peak occupancy, search delay or failed attempts, enforcement conditions, and simultaneous adjacent or off-peak slack under the uniform schedule. Advance only if the conjunction persists after accounting for enforcement, information, and raw-capacity explanations; falsify the problem claim if saturation and search loss are absent, slack is not substitutable, or another constraint explains the pattern.","research_questions":["Does the proposed conjunction of peak saturation, search loss, and substitutable slack persist across representative days and periods?","Is uniform pricing the binding cause rather than capacity shortage, enforcement failure, information failure, space designation, or justified externality pricing?","Which users can realistically retime, relocate, change mode, or use alternative payment channels, and which protected or necessary trips cannot?","What comparable blocks and periods permit a credible counterfactual while accounting for spillovers across the pilot boundary?","What predeclared thresholds would identify unacceptable accessible-use loss, spillover occupancy, safety effects, business disruption, complaints, or administrative burden?","Can existing meters, payment systems, enforcement processes, and occupancy measurements implement capped schedules without privacy-expanding surveillance?","Does a prior-art comparison reveal a testable contribution beyond existing responsive-parking programs?","Under what observed conditions would added capacity or changed space designation outperform repricing? "],"recommendation":"VALIDATE_PROBLEM_FIRST","uncertainty_constraints":["All problem prevalence and causal-effect statements are hypotheses or inferences rather than observed findings.","World novelty, prior-art prevalence, market size, stakeholder demand, and realized impact are unmeasured.","Cost bands depend heavily on unknown local infrastructure, data quality, procurement, legal review, pilot footprint, and evaluation intensity.","Reduced parking demand alone cannot be interpreted as recovered welfare without access, incidence, substitution, and spillover evidence.","The relevant municipal authority and safeguards are specified generically, not verified for a particular jurisdiction."],"closed_book_prior_art_boundary":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched. This assessment makes no claim that occupancy-responsive parking pricing, its safeguards, or its evaluation design is novel, rare, prevalent, or superior to existing programs."}