What’s stopping you? Dive in!

Cities are increasingly appreciating that quality data has value collectively. Whether it’s being able to support mobility solutions or asset maintenance, private operators are interested in what we have to share. Unsurprisingly, when we peek over the fence at our corporate neighbours, we can see things that we would also very much like to access. What can mobility data tell us about how our cities are being used? Can traffic sensors give us better insight into air quality? Do nursing home operators collect information about the frequency of family visits - what could this tell us about intergenerational cohesion and support in the wider community?

‘I like to think of data in terms of people and place: there’s the people kind of data and there’s the place kind of data’. Adrian Slatcher, Manchester City Council

However, data sharing - and making data open for sharing - brings one particular thing into question: how much control do cities have over their own data; over the data they manage and that which they choose to share? Place-based data is sometimes the easiest to share, whereas people-based data is generally sensitive, if not completely off limits. Increasingly though, the two are intertwined, with new disruptive technology being deployed such as facial recognition software in public open spaces. The path to ethical and transparent, open data and data sharing can seem littered with privacy and ethical concerns.

Cities are finding that, even where sensitive data is not involved, it is not always straightforward to manage data as a valuable resource - with a number of internal and external barriers preventing a smooth exchange of data as and when it is needed (from internal skills deficits to legal issues when dealing with outside agencies).