BYTE Big Data Community Workshop

BYTE:
BYTE Big Data Community Workshop
Lorenzo Bigagli, National Research Council of Italy
Martí Cuquet, University of Innsbruck
1 December 2016, Valencia, Spain
Big data roadmap and cross-disciplinary community for
addressing societal Externalities

@BYTE_EU www.byte-project.eu
Workshop agenda
11:00 – 12:15 STRENGTHENING THE BYTE BIG DATA COMMUNITY
Presentation of the BBDC
Group work on its future
12:15 – 13:30 CONTRIBUTING TO THE BDVA
Presentations on the BBDC focus areas for 2016:
• Smart cities (Anna Melchor, InnDEA, València)
• Health (Aggelos Liapis, Athens University, BYTE AB)
• Environment (Giovanni Rum and Wenbo Chu, GEO Secretariat)
Small groups discussion to integrate BYTE findings
13:30 – 13:45 CLOSING REMARKS

Vision and mission
Civil society as important as industry, academia and policy makers
in the EU strategy for big data

Big Data Value
cPPP
CSOs
NGOs
NPOs
EU Big Data Strategy: filling the gap
BDVA
TF9
Societal
TF5 Legal
TF3
Community
Big Data Community

Objectives
◦ Engage NGOs, NPOs, CSOs, third sector, local
governments, tech-transfer organizations
◦ Continue BYTE research on societal externalities of big
data, and how to make the best of them
◦ Input and feedback to BDVA, membership and related
networks

Activities
◦ Research/consultation to identify sector-specific
and general guidelines about current big data
issues, good practice and touch points with
standards and methodologies
◦ 3 focus areas per year
◦ Input and validation
◦ SRIA societal implications
◦ EC work programme

BDVA SRIA

Big Data PPP in H2020
ICT-14-2016-2017: Big Data PPP: cross-sectorial and cross-lingual
data integration and experimentation
ICT-15-2016-2017: Big Data PPP: Large Scale Pilot actions in sectors
best benefitting from data-driven innovation
ICT-16-2017: Big data PPP: research addressing main technology
challenges of the data economy
ICT-17-2016-2017: Big data PPP: Support, industrial skills,
benchmarking and evaluation
ICT-18-2016: Big data PPP: privacy-preserving big data technologies

Membership
◦ Open to individuals and
organisations
◦ 4 envisioned membership
categories
◦ interested party
◦ associate member
◦ full member
◦ ambassador

Interested party
Description
••Contact list
••Identify key issues
••Identify sectors of
interest
••Participate in
discussions with peers
Opportunities
••Stay informed and
interact
consultations
Engagement
••Low-level – reactive
••Occasional
teleconference/meeting

Associate member
Description
••Contact list
••Identify sectors of
interest
discussions with peers
••Regularly contribute to
focus areas
••Review BBDC outcomes
Opportunities
interact
consultations
••Participate in research
and innovation projects
Engagement
••Regular teleconferences
••Occasional meeting or
annual workshop

Full member
Description
••Contact list
••Identify sectors of interest
••Participate in discussions
with peers
••Regularly contribute to
focus areas
••Review BBDC outcomes
••Commit resources to
BBDC activities
Opportunities
interact
consultations
••Participate with priority or
lead research and
innovation projects
••Support or take part in
BBDC management
Engagement
••Regular teleconferences
••Occasional meeting or
annual workshop
••Letter of intent
(120h/year – 0.75PM)
••Participation in annual
relevant meeting
••Potential BDVA
membership

Ambassadors
Local contacts, partners and institutions
Contact with local initiatives
Obtain local input for the community
Disseminate results and represent the community locally
Organise joint co-branded events

Group work
Roam and brainstorm around 3 focus points
◦ Strategy and sustainability
◦ Mission, objectives, activities
◦ Advertising and expanding the community
◦ Venues, contacts, related networks
◦ You name it!
◦ Community name and identity after the end of BYTE

Funding opportunities
Cooperation agreement with another community (e.g. BDVA)
Corporate/Government sponsorship
EU funding (e.g. H2020)
Funding from Member States
Annual membership fee and member contributions
Crowdfunding
Conference fees
Standardization Bodies
Business Areas (e.g. Joint Industry Programs for Big Data in Automotive, Defense, Oil & Gas, Energy,
Transport and other sectors)
Service fees

BYTE Big Data Community Workshop

You name it!
Big Data Social Club
Big Data for [social] good
Big Data Crew
Big Data Fellowship
EU Big Data ClearingHouse (EU BiDCH) – Neutral 3rd party
EU Big Data Trust (EU BiDT)
EU Big Data Advisory (EU BDA)
EU Big Data Society
EU Big Data Agency

Contributing to the BDVA
◦ Focus areas for 2016
◦ Smart cities (Anna Melchor, Smart City Valencia)
◦ Health (Aggelos Liapis, Athens University, BYTE AB)
◦ Environment (Wenbo Chu and Giovanni Rum, GEO
Secretariat)
◦ Small groups discussion to integrate BYTE findings

Smart cities
This case study has focused on the creation of value from potentially massive amounts of urban data that emerges through the
digitalised interaction of a city’s users, i.e. of citizens and businesses, with the urban infrastructure. The economies of digital,
especially big data, favour monopolistic structures, which may pose a threat to the many SMEs in cities. However, open source
and open platforms, open data, and even open algorithms crystallise as a shortcut and “technology-driven form of
liberalisation” accompanying the big data movement in cities, which has the potential to level the playing field and even spur
more creativity and innovation. Nonetheless, monetisation of big data remains a moving target. Investments by the private
sector need to be secured by reduction or compensation of future uncertainties, otherwise the current state of lack of
investments will remain. Similarly, with the increasing potential of machines that learn, old jobs consisting of simple tasks are
also at risk. New skills are required and will create new jobs, but numbers are most likely not equal.
As for the social and ethical externalities, the potential of big data to be used for social good is immense, especially in the
digitalising city. However, the reliance on data-driven services needs a debate on how we can assure enough equality when
there are so many different reasons why not all citizens will reap value from data in equal amounts. This may be due to the
digital divide we have been aware of for a while now, or to entirely new challenges through recent technological
breakthroughs such as deep learning, which enable machines to learn and take over simple tasks, such as counting cars or
recognising letters. Moreover, trust in computing methods for big data may be harder to establish if their rationale cannot be
easily explained. Furthermore, businesses, critical infrastructures, and lives may rely on big data algorithms.
Since new sources of data create new ways that data can be misused (including sensitive personal data), this case study
questions the suitability of the current legal framework based on data ownership. Indeed, the shift towards big data may imply
that data as well as algorithms to mine the data are required commodities to create value through user experience and
services.
Finally, political externalities include losing control to big data actors outside Europe. Indeed, big data businesses can improve
the European economy, but require a unified European data economy with accordingly unified policies.

Health
This case study has focused on the use of genetic data by a public health data driven research organisation. Overall, this case study highlights a number of
positive societal externalities that flow from genetic research and rare gene identification, which is facilitated through the utilisation of big health data.
Concerning economical externalities, one important result is cost saving for healthcare organisations that are gained through more accurate and timely
diagnoses and efficient treatments. This is particularly important when dealing with rare genetic disorders that may not otherwise attract the attention that
disorders and health issues affecting the wider population do. In addition, the utilisation of big data in healthcare produces another economic externality in
that it potentially generates revenue especially through the development of marketable treatments and therapies, and the innovation of health data
technologies and tools. Nevertheless, research initiatives, such as the institute of the case study, are naturally subject to financial restrictions and cost savings
measures implemented by governments.
On the societal and ethical side, the identification of rare genetic disorders provides treatment opportunities for the patient, as well as more effective
diagnostic testing for future patients and a greater understanding of rare genetic disorders generally. In addition, analyses of genetic data enables treating
clinicians to provide a range of other healthcare services for family members, including genetic counselling. Beyond the initial purpose for the data collection,
there is limited or no reuse of genetic data due to legal and ethical issues. However, data reuse may become a stronger focus in the future for the purpose of
producing additional benefits for patients and society. There will likely be an increase in focus on research for the purpose of developing personalised
medicine treatments, which focuses on improved treatment based on patient drug metabolism. Whilst the positive social impacts of reusing genetic data are
obvious, ethical considerations will remain at the forefront of any policies supporting the repurposing of genetic data, especially as it is sensitive personal
data. There are potential negative impacts linked to the utilisation of big data in healthcare such as over-medicalisation of an otherwise healthy population;
discrimination based on the stratification on genotype or in relation to health insurance policies; and incidental findings discovered when data is analysed.
For example, cancer genes may be discovered alongside the identification of rare genes or other genetic mutations.
Since health data is by its very nature sensitive data, this case study highlights legal risks associated with data protection and data security. In particular,
anonymisation is a legal requirement that is challenging to achieve with genetic data. The issue of data protection and information privacy calls for the
development of adequate protections that balance the right to personal data protection whilst fostering innovation in the digital economy. Although data
security preservation measures ensure compliance with standard data protection requirements, they can also hinder further research, which in turn, could
lead to new developments and treatments. Lastly, threats to intellectual property rights can arise in relation to subsequent uses of big health data, such as in
relation gene patenting (and licensing) of new drug therapies, or if it were to be included in works protected by copyright.
Concerning political externalities, the availability of big amounts of data will enable politicians to have more information about different situations in the
health sector and thus a better understanding that may lead to improve their decision-making and increases the investments in healthcare.

Environment
This case study has been conducted in the context of an earth observation data portal (GEOSS), a global-scale initiative for better
understanding and controlling the environment, to benefit Society through better-informed decision-making. On the positive side,
the use of big data is credited with having strong implications on the economic growth, e.g. sea data for fishing nations and
weather data for tourism, for the mere direct effects on the IT sector such as opportunities for infrastructure/hardware/data
centres, and rent-sharing possibilities for computing. However, big data could as well be seen as a threat by traditional services,
for example in the weather forecasting sector.
Our analysis of social and ethical externalities shows the effectiveness of data-intensive approaches in improving the governance
of environmental challenges, supporting safe and environment-friendly operations. This has implications on the robustness of the
environment to recover after stressing events (resilience), especially in urban context, as well as on the actual quality of life and
human health. On the other hand, big-brother-effect and manipulation, real or perceived, can be problematic. In fact, as human
society is an integral part of the environment, especially in urban context, the fear of data abuse, privacy violation and the like,
may hamper participation and engagement. More subtly, also excessive trust in data-intensive applications has been highlighted
as a possible negative implication, in that it would encourage the false believe that the dynamics of the environment can be
captured quantitatively, overlooking qualitative aspects that, instead, remain fundamental to comprehend it.
With respect to legal externalities, the growing reliance on data in the environment sector is certainly highlighting many
shortcomings of the current legal frameworks, e.g. on IPR, privacy, and authorisation to use the data. Potential problems are more
prominent when considering different legislations such as the principle of full and open exchange of data that is simply
inconsistent with some of the current national policies. Legal support for citizens in data-related issues is arguably going to
become a public service, in the future. Besides, incompatibilities in the legal frameworks in different countries are seen as
inhibitors that need to be adapted, in order to remove legal barriers.
Finally, political externalities include increased transparency and accountability, since choices will have to be based on measurable
and observable indicators. However, there is a risk of depending on external sources, particularly provided by big players. In this
regard, the environment community is concerned about the imposition of commercial products as de facto standards, causing an
implicit vendor lock-in for their maintenance and evolution. The use of GEOSS map data is a potential source of political tensions,
e.g. with regards to disputed or otherwise sensitive areas. As Europe leads the innovation in the spatial sector, the shift to a more
intensive use of data in the environment sector may put Europe in a primary role on the political scene.

Stay tuned
http://byte-project.eu/byte-community

BBDC contacts
◦ Lorenzo Bigagli (lorenzo.bigagli@cnr.it), Jarl Magnusson (jarl.s.magnusson@dnvgl.com)
◦ Coordination and general organisation
◦ Edward Curry (edward.curry@insight-centre.org), Umair ulAssan (umair.ulhassan@insight-
centre.org)
◦ Impact and development
◦ Martí Cuquet (marti.cuquet@sti2.at), Csilla Gödri (godri@niif.hu)
◦ Communication and outreach
◦ Rachel Finn (rachel.finn@trilateralresearch.com)
◦ Institutional liaisons (EC, BDVA, etc.)

See you soon…
◦ Parallel session on Social & Legal aspects
◦ 14:45, this same room
◦ BYTE Final Conference
◦ 9 February 2017, London (TBD)
… and thank you for joining!

BYTE Big Data Community Workshop

More Related Content

Similar to BYTE Big Data Community Workshop (20)

More from BYTE Project (12)

Recently uploaded (20)

BYTE Big Data Community Workshop