Exhibit 8-2. This was from a case involving regulation of the drone industry in the US and Europe.
Note (1) the predisposition of actors (+, 0 or -, depending on their support for the AUVSI) and (2)
the labeling of each relationship in terms of potential/actual power; and (3) when there are
two-way relationships, you need to show two separate arrowns, as the power of A>B is not equal to
the power of B>A.


                                            US Congress

                                                −,+

Med/med

Med/med

Hi/med

Med/med

Med/med

Med/lo

Med/lo

Med/lo

Med/lo

Med/med

Hi/med

Hi/med

Hi/med

Hi/med

Med/med

Med/med

Lo/lo

Med/med

Hi/med

Hi/med

Hi/med

Med/med

Lo/lo

                                            Task Force

                                                 −

                                         US Forest Service

                                                 −

                                  Federal Aviation Administration

                                                 −

                                   Academy of Model Aeronautics

                                                 +

                                        European Commission

                                                −,+

                                  European Aviation Agency (EASA)

                                                −,+

                   European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE)

                                                 0

                  Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI)

                                                 +


Public policy in this case is being made through group equilibrium model, where in the EU there are
actors such as EUROCAE and European Commission that take interest in the issue and in the US the
interested actors are Task Force, US Forest Service, Academy of Model Aeronautics and US Congress.
With that in mind, AUVSI should try lobby different actors to influence decision making of FAA and
EASA. Even though critics of drones (e.g. US Forest Service) have certain power over the decision
makers it is a lot smaller comparing to AUVSI’s and its allies’. As European Commission and US
Congress are both the highest legislature bodies in their domains, AUVSI should try to lobby them
in order to exert power on decision makers through them. This can be done by lobbying in the
electoral process and also by using its current publications which have a wide readership of
influential people. It can also exert power to European Commission by lobbying EUROCAE. Another way
to exert power on FAA in the US would be through Academy which are in favor of AUSVI and a strong
ally in this issue, and have also been working with FAA on the project of “know before you fly”.
All of this lobbying should be done so that the decisions are made in AUVSI’s favor, which is to
limit regulations on drones, so that no further regulations are passed, but just the current ones
are enforced better.

Most likely scenario:

Forest service influences FAA

Task force and FAA do not start the registering of drones

FAA fines people for misuse of drones

AUVSI lobbies US Congress and Academy

“Know before you fly” project is underway

AUVSI lobbies European Commission and EUROCAE

Increase in safety of public

Growth of the drones market

Amendments to “aviation package” are made

Sale of drones continues increasing