In this article, we focus on data trust and data privacy, and how attitudes may be changing during the COVID-19 period. On balance, it appears that Australians are more trusting of organizations with regards to data privacy and less concerned about their own personal information and data than they were prior to the spread of COVID-19. The major determinant of this change in trust with regards to data was changes in general confidence in government institutions. Despite this improvement in trust with regards to data privacy, trust levels are still low.

Data have played a role in urban mobility policy planning for decades, especially in forecasting demand, but much less in policy evaluations and assessments. The surge in availability and openness of (big) data in the last decade seems to provide new opportunities to meet demand for evidence-based policymaking. This paper reviews how different types of data are employed in assessments published in academic journals by analyzing 74 cases. Our review finds that (a) academic literature has currently provided limited insight in new data developments in policy practice; (b) research shows that the new types of big data provide new opportunities for evidence-based policy-making; however, (c) they cannot replace traditional data usage (surveys and statistics). Instead, combining big data with survey and Geographic Information System data in ex-ante assessments, as well as in developing decision support tools, is found to be the most effective. This could help policymakers not only to get much more insight from policy assessments, but also to help avoid the limitations of one certain type of data. Finally, current research projects are rather data supply-driven. Future research should engage with policy practitioners to reveal best practices, constraints, and potential of more demand-driven data use in mobility policy assessments in practice.

In our data-driven society, personal data affecting individuals as data subjects are increasingly being collected and processed by sizeable and international companies. While data protection laws and privacy technologies attempt to limit the impact of data breaches and privacy scandals, they rely on individuals having a detailed understanding of the available recourse, resulting in the responsibilization of data protection. Existing data stewardship frameworks incorporate data-protection-by-design principles but may not include data subjects in the data protection process itself, relying on supplementary legal doctrines to better enforce data protection regulations. To better protect individual autonomy over personal data, this paper proposes a data protection-focused data commons to encourage co-creation of data protection solutions and rebalance power between data subjects and data controllers. We conduct interviews with commons experts to identify the institutional barriers to creating a commons and challenges of incorporating data protection principles into a commons, encouraging participatory innovation in data governance. We find that working with stakeholders of different backgrounds can support a commons’ implementation by openly recognizing data protection limitations in laws, technologies, and policies when applied independently. We propose requirements for deploying a data protection-focused data commons by applying our findings and data protection principles such as purpose limitation and exercising data subject rights to the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework. Finally, we map the IAD framework into a commons checklist for policy-makers to accommodate co-creation and participation for all stakeholders, balancing the data protection of data subjects with opportunities for seeking value from personal data.

Data driven analysis is proven to create a competitive advantage to business. Governments and nonprofit organizations also turn to Big Data to harness its benefits and use it for social good. Among different types of data sources, location data collected from mobile networks is especially valuable for its representativeness, real-time observation, and versatility. There is a distinction between mobile positioning data (MPD) generated by the exchanges between mobile devices and the core network; versus over-the-top or system-level location data collecting individual GPS location. MPD is composed of all mobile network events regardless of the mobile phone brand, operating system, app usage, frequency bands or mobile generation; it is uniform and ubiquitous. Getting the best out of MPD relies on the knowledge of how to create an advanced algorithm for homogeneously processing this massive, complex data into insightful indicators. Anonymized and aggregated MPD enables the testing of multiple combinations with other data sources, fully abiding by GDPR, to arrive at innovative solutions. These unique insights can help tackle societal challenges (the state of mobile data for social good June 2017 GSMA, UN Global pulse). It can help to establish accurate statistics about population movements, density, location, social patterns, finances, and ambient environmental conditions. This article demonstrates how MPD has been used to help combat Covid-19 in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Furthermore, depending on the future direction, MPD and data analysis can serve powering economic development as well as working toward the Sustainable Development Goals, whilst respecting data privacy.

Data governance is an emerging field of study concerned with how a range of actors can successfully manage data assets according to rules of engagement, decision rights, and accountabilities. Urban studies scholarship has continued to demonstrate and criticize lack of community engagement in smart city development and urban data governance projects, including in local sustainability initiatives. However, few move beyond critique to unpack in more detail what community engagement should look like. To overcome this gap, we develop and test a participatory methodology to identify approaches to empowering community engagement in data governance in the context of the Monash Net Zero Precinct in Melbourne, Australia. Our approach uses design for social innovation to enable a small group of “precinct citizens” to co-design prototypes and multicriteria mapping as a participatory appraisal method to open up and reveal a diversity of perspectives and uncertainties on data governance approaches. The findings reveal the importance of creating deliberative spaces for pluralising community engagement in data governance that consider the diverse values and interests of precinct citizens. This research points toward new ways to conceptualize and design enabling processes of community engagement in data governance and reflects on implementation strategies attuned to the politics of participation to support the embedding of these innovations within specific socio-institutional contexts.

Turning the wealth of health and social data into insights to promote better public health, while enabling more effective personalized care, is critically important for society. In particular, social determinants of health have a significant impact on individual health, well-being, and inequalities in health. However, concerns around accessing and processing such sensitive data, and linking different datasets, involve significant challenges, not least to demonstrate trustworthiness to all stakeholders. Emerging datatrust services provide an opportunity to address key barriers to health and social care data linkage schemes, specifically a loss of control experienced by data providers, including the difficulty to maintain a remote reidentification risk over time, and the challenge of establishing and maintaining a social license. Datatrust services are a sociotechnical evolution that advances databases and data management systems, and brings together stakeholder-sensitive data governance mechanisms with data services to create a trusted research environment. In this article, we explore the requirements for datatrust services, a proposed implementation—the Social Data Foundation, and an illustrative test case. Moving forward, such an approach would help incentivize, accelerate, and join up the sharing of regulated data, and the use of generated outputs safely amongst stakeholders, including healthcare providers, social care providers, researchers, public health authorities, and citizens.

A number of governmental and nongovernmental organizations have made significant efforts to encourage the development of artificial intelligence in line with a series of aspirational concepts such as transparency, interpretability, explainability, and accountability. The difficulty at present, however, is that these concepts exist at a fairly abstract level, whereas in order for them to have the tangible effects desired they need to become more concrete and specific. This article undertakes precisely this process of concretisation, mapping how the different concepts interrelate and what in particular they each require in order to move from being high-level aspirations to detailed and enforceable requirements. We argue that the key concept in this process is accountability, since unless an entity can be held accountable for compliance with the other concepts, and indeed more generally, those concepts cannot do the work required of them. There is a variety of taxonomies of accountability in the literature. However, at the core of each account appears to be a sense of “answerability”; a need to explain or to give an account. It is this ability to call an entity to account which provides the impetus for each of the other concepts and helps us to understand what they must each require.

In low-income countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)—where data is scarce and national statistics offices often under-resourced—aggregated and anonymised mobile operators’ data can provide vital insights for decision-makers to promptly respond to both prevailing and new pandemics, such as COVID-19. Yet, while research on possible applications of mobile big data (MBD) analytics for COVID-19 is growing, there is still little evidence on how such use cases are actually being adopted by governmental authorities and how MBD insights can effectively be turned into informed public health actions in times of crises. This four-part commentary paper aims to bridge such literature gaps, by sharing lessons learnt from the DRC, whereby Congolese public health authorities, through a steep learning curve, have initiated a public–private sector dialogue with local mobile network operators (MNOs) and their ecosystem partners to leverage population mobility insights for COVID-19 policy-making. After having set the scene on the policy relevance of MBD analytics in the context of the DRC in the first section, the paper will then detail four key enablers that contributed, since March 2020, to accelerate Congolese authorities’ uptake of MBD, thus effectively increasing preparedness for future pandemics. Thirdly, we showcase concreate use-cases where “readiness-to-use” has actually translated into actual “usage” and “adoption” for decision-making, while introducing other use cases currently under development. Finally, we explore challenges when harnessing telco big data for decision-making with the ultimate aim to share lessons to replicate the successes and steer the development of MBD for social good in other low-income countries.

In this editorial, Guest Editors Richard Benjamins (Telefónica), Jeanine Vos (GSMA), and Stefaan Verhulst (Data & Policy Editor-in-Chief) draw insights from a set of peer-reviewed, open access articles in a Data & Policy special collection dedicated to the use of Telco Big Data Analytics for COVID-19.

This commentary looks at the use of corporate social responsibility (CSR) mechanisms for implementing responsible data use. The commentary offers an overview of CSR theory and the discourse on a growing phenomenon known as corporate digital responsibility (CDR). The commentary links these theories to the historical debates on the nature of technology, ethics, and society. The aim is to reflect on CSR and CDR mechanisms and ignite the discussion on their adequacy considering the pursuit of data responsibility. Through our discussion and brief case studies, the paper reveals the gaps in relying on CSR and CDR and the need for a broader societal and comprehensive approach.

Fraud analytics refers to the use of advanced analytics (data mining, big data analysis, or artificial intelligence) to detect fraud. While fraud analytics offers the promise of more efficiency in fighting fraud, it also raises legal challenges related to data protection and administrative law. These legal requirements are well documented but the concrete way in which public administrations have integrated them remains unexplored. Due to the complexity of the techniques applied, it is crucial to understand the current state of practice and the accompanying challenges to develop appropriate governance mechanisms. The use of advanced analytics in organizations without appropriate organizational change can lead to ethical challenges and privacy issues. The goal of this article is to examine how these legal requirements are addressed in public administrations and to identify the challenges that emerge in doing so. For this, we examined two case studies related to fraud analytics from the Belgian Federal administration: the detection of tax frauds and social security infringements. This article details 15 governance practices that have been used in administrations. Furthermore, it highlights the complexity of integrating legal requirements with advanced analytics by identifying six key trade-offs between fraud analytics opportunities and legal requirements.

This paper identifies the potential benefits of data sharing and open science, supported by artificial intelligence tools and services, and dives into the challenges to make data open and findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR).

Open innovation programmes related to data and artificial intelligence have interested European policy-makers as a means of supporting startups and small and medium-sized enterprises to succeed in the digital economy. We discuss the objectives behind the typical service offerings of such programmes and propose a case for exploring how they align with the motivations of individual companies who are targeted by these initiatives. Using a qualitative analysis of 50 startup applications from the Data Market Services Accelerator programme, we find that applicants wrote most frequently about fundraising, acceleration and data skills. A smaller number of startups expressed interest in services related to standardization or legal guidance on General Data Protection Regulation and intellectual property rights, which are some of the ongoing priority areas for the European Commission. We discuss how the value propositions of these less desired offerings can be amplified by appealing the existing business motivations of data-driven startups.

Machine-generated artworks are now part of the contemporary art scene: they are attracting significant investments and they are presented in exhibitions together with those created by human artists. These artworks are mainly based on generative deep learning (GDL) techniques, which have seen a formidable development and remarkable refinement in the very recent years. Given the inherent characteristics of these techniques, a series of novel legal problems arise. In this article, we consider a set of key questions in the area of GDL for the arts, including the following: is it possible to use copyrighted works as training set for generative models? How do we legally store their copies in order to perform the training process? Who (if someone) will own the copyright on the generated data? We try to answer these questions considering the law in force in both the United States and the European Union, and potential future alternatives. We then extend our analysis to code generation, which is an emerging area of GDL. Finally, we also formulate a set of practical guidelines for artists and developers working on deep learning generated art, as well as some policy suggestions for policymakers.

This article explores the role of interoperability in the development of digital public services in Europe, analyzing the effects of an European Union (EU)-level initiative (the European interoperability framework, EIF) and the development of e-Government services on how citizens interact online with public administrations. The EIF is a common EU framework providing guidance on public sector interoperability. EU countries are not mandated to follow the EIF, but they are encouraged to take up its guidance in their respective national interoperability frameworks (NIFs). Against this background, this article tests two hypotheses: (a) the introduction of NIFs facilitates the online interaction between citizens and public administrations and (b) better e-Government services encourage citizens to interact online with public administrations. Both hypotheses are confirmed by a panel data analysis covering 26 European countries over the period 2012–2019. The analysis relies on a dummy variable reflecting the adoption of NIFs, built by carefully examining official documents of the countries in the scope of the analysis. Based on the empirical results, this article puts forward two main policy recommendations. First, efforts to improve e-Government services across Europe should be intensified in order to support the overarching digital agenda of the EU and increase benefits for European citizens. Second, interoperability should become a central element when designing new digital public services. Therefore, the European Commission could foster a common approach to interoperability of digital public services across the EU by strengthening the governance of interoperability initiatives and encouraging the adoption of specific interoperability requirements.

From exoskeletons to lightweight robotic suits, wearable robots are changing dynamically and rapidly, challenging the timeliness of laws and regulatory standards that were not prepared for robots that would help wheelchair users walk again. In this context, equipping regulators with technical knowledge on technologies could solve information asymmetries among developers and policymakers and avoid the problem of regulatory disconnection. This article introduces pushing robot development for lawmaking (PROPELLING), an financial support to third parties from the Horizon 2020 EUROBENCH project that explores how robot testing facilities could generate policy-relevant knowledge and support optimized regulations for robot technologies. With ISO 13482:2014 as a case study, PROPELLING investigates how robot testbeds could be used as data generators to improve the regulation for lower-limb exoskeletons. Specifically, the article discusses how robot testbeds could help regulators tackle hazards like fear of falling, instability in collisions, or define the safe scenarios for avoiding any adverse consequences generated by abrupt protective stops. The article’s central point is that testbeds offer a promising setting to bring policymakers closer to research and development to make policies more attuned to societal needs. In this way, these approximations can be harnessed to unravel an optimal regulatory framework for emerging technologies, such as robots and artificial intelligence, based on science and evidence.