Unleashing the power of data for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Thomas Deloison: “As the world moves toward widespread electric vehicle (EV) adoption, a key challenge lies ahead: deploying charging infrastructure rapidly and effectively. Solving this challenge will be essential to decarbonize transport, which has a higher reliance on fossil fuels than any other sector and accounts for a fifth of global carbon emissions. However, the companies and governments investing in charging infrastructure face significant hurdles, including high initial capital costs and difficulties related to infrastructure planning, permitting, grid connections and grid capacity development.

Data has the power to facilitate these processes: increased predictability and optimized planning and infrastructure management go a long way in easing investments and accelerating deployment. Last year, members of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) demonstrated that digital solutions based on data sharing could reduce carbon emissions from charging by 15% and unlock crucial grid capacity and capital efficiency gains.

Exceptional advances in data, analytics and connectivity are making digital solutions a potent tool to plan and manage transport, energy and infrastructure. Thanks to the deployment of sensors and the rise of connectivity,  businesses are collecting information faster than ever before, allowing for data flows between physical assets. Charging infrastructure operators, automotive companies, fleet operators, energy providers, building managers and governments collect insights on all aspects of electric vehicle charging infrastructure (EVCI), from planning and design to charging experiences at the station.

The real value of data lies in its aggregation. This will require breaking down siloes across industries and enabling digital collaboration. A digital action framework released by WBCSD, in collaboration with Arcadis, Fujitsu and other member companies and partners, introduces a set of recommendations for companies and governments to realize the full potential of digital solutions and accelerate EVCI deployments:

  • Map proprietary data, knowledge gaps and digital capacity across the value chain to identify possible synergies. The highest value potential from digital solutions will lie at the nexus of infrastructure, consumer behavior insights, grid capacity and transport policy. For example, to ensure the deployment of charging stations where they will be most needed and at the right capacity level, it is crucial to plan investments within energy grid capacity, spatial constraints and local projected demand for EVs.
  • Develop internal data collection and storage capacity with due consideration for existing structures for data sharing. A variety of schemes allow actors to engage in data sharing or monetization. Yet, their use is limited by mismatched use of data standards and specification and process uncertainty. Companies must build a strong understanding of these structures internally by providing internal training and guidance, and invest in sound data collection, storage and analysis capacity.
  • Foster a policy environment that supports digital collaboration across sectors and industries. Digital policies must provide incentives and due diligence frameworks to guide data exchanges across industries and support the adoption of common standards and protocols. For instance, it will be crucial to integrate linkages with energy systems and infrastructure beyond roads in the rollout of the European mobility data space…(More)”.

Russia Is Trying to Leave the Internet and Build Its Own

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Timmy Broderick: “Last week the Russian government tried to disconnect its Internet infrastructure from the larger global Web. This test of Russia’s “sovereign Internet” seemingly failed, causing outages that suggest the system is not ready for practical use.

“Sovereign Internet is not really a whole different Internet; it is more like a project that uses various tools,” says Natalia Krapiva, tech-legal counsel at the international digital-rights nonprofit Access Now. “It involves technology like deep packet inspection, which allows major filtering of the Internet and gives governments the ability to throttle certain connections and websites.” By cutting off access to sites such as Western social media platforms, the Russian government could restrict residents from viewing any source of information other than the country’s accepted channels of influence.

This method of curtailing digital freedom goes beyond Russia: other countries are also attempting to develop their own nationwide Internet. And if successful, these endeavors could fragment the World Wide Web. Scientific American talked with Krapiva over Zoom about the implications of this latest test, the motive behind Russia’s actions and the ways the push for a sovereign Internet affect the digital rights of all users…(More)”.

Digital divides are lower in Smart Cities

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Andrea Caragliu and Chiara F. Del Bo: “Ever since the emergence of digital technologies in the early 1990s, the literature has discussed the potential pitfalls of an uneven distribution of e-skills under the umbrella of the digital divide. To provide a definition of the concept, “Lloyd Morrisett coined the term digital divide to mean “a discrepancy in access to technology resources between socioeconomic groups” (Robyler and Doering, 2014, p. 27)”

Despite digital divide being high on the policy agenda, statistics suggest the persisting relevance of this issue. For instance, focusing on Europe, according to EUROSTAT statistics, in 2021 about 90 per cent of people living in Zeeland, a NUTS2 region in the Netherlands, had ordered at least once in their life goods or services over the internet for private use, against a minimum in the EU27 of 15 per cent (in the region of Yugoiztochen, in Bulgaria). In the same year, while basically all (99 per cent) interviewees in the NUTS2 region of Northern and Western Ireland declared using the internet at least once a week, the same statistic drops to two thirds of the sample in the Bulgarian region of Severozapaden. While over time these territorial divides are converging, they can still significantly affect the potential positive impact of the diffusion of digital technologies.

Over the past three years, the digital divide has been made dramatically apparent by the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. When, during the first waves of full lockdowns enacted in most Countries, tertiary and schooling activities were moved online, many economic outcomes showed significant worsening. Among these, learning outcomes in pupils and service sectors’ productivity were particularly affected.

A simultaneous development in the scientific literature has discussed the attractive features of planning and managing cities ‘smartly’. Smart Cities have been initially identified as urban areas with a tendency to invest and deploy ICTs. More recently, this notion also started to encompass the context characteristics that make a city capable of reaping the benefits of ICTs – social and human capital, soft and hard institutions.

While mounting empirical evidence suggests a superior economic performance of Cities ticking all these boxes, the Smart City movement did not come without critiques. The debate on urban smartness as an instrument for planning and managing more efficient cities has been recently positing that Smart Cities could be raising inequalities. This effect would be due to the role of driver of smart urban transformations played by multinational corporations, who, in a dystopic view, would influence local policymakers’ agendas.

Given these issues, and our own research on Smart Cities, we started asking ourselves whether the risks of increasing inequalities associated with the Smart City model were substantiated. To this end, we focused on empirically verifying whether cities moving forward along the smart city model were facing increases in income and digital inequalities. We answered the first question in Caragliu and Del Bo (2022), and found compelling evidence that smart city characteristics actually decrease income inequalities…(More)”.

The Strategy Room: an innovative approach for involving communities in shaping local net zero pathways

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by Nesta: “Between January and March 2023, we piloted a novel digital engagement tool, The Strategy Room, to help local authorities understand their residents’ priorities for net-zero policies on the topics of heat, travel and food.

Twelve local authorities ran 66 public engagement sessions between them, attracting almost 640 participants to make policy recommendations for their local areas. This report presents the preliminary results from the pilot study….

Our results show the value of experimenting with new tools for public engagement on net zero that can combine local specificity and comparisons at a national level. To support other similar initiatives in the future and build public support for the policies that will help the UK to transition to net zero by 2050, decision makers should consider the following.

Change how they commission public engagement

Establishing a Citizen Participation Service in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to coordinate and channel resources to local climate teams would help demonstrate the governments’ commitment to putting people at the centre of net-zero policy.

Change how they frame and communicate net-zero policies

Use creative public engagement that allows people to deliberate and learn about policies through interactive, engaging material. Communicate the wider co-benefits of net-zero policies. In particular, emphasise general benefits related to health as well as incorporating people’s current concerns like energy insecurity into messaging.

Change how they tailor net-zero policy at national and local levels

The UK Government needs to lead by example with strategic commitments to help councils decarbonise the housing stock and food supplies they’re responsible for, if it expects people to change how they heat their homes and the food they eat…(More)”.

Asymmetries: participatory democracy after AI

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Gianluca Sgueo in Grand Continent (FR): “When it comes to AI, the scientific community expresses divergent opinions. Some argue that it could enable democratic governments to develop more effective and possibly more inclusive policies. Policymakers who use AI to analyse and process large volumes of digital data would be in a good position to make decisions that are closer to the needs and expectations of communities of citizens. In the view of those who view ‘government by algorithms’ favourably, AI creates the conditions for more effective and regular democratic interaction between public actors and civil society players. Other authors, on the other hand, emphasise the many critical issues raised by the ‘implantation’ of such a complex technology in political and social systems that are already highly complex and problematic. Some authors believe that AI could undermine even democratic values, by perpetuating and amplifying social inequalities and distrust in democratic institutions – thus weakening the foundations of the social contract. But if everyone is right, is no one right? Not necessarily. These two opposing conceptions give us food for thought about the relationship between algorithms and democracies…(More)”.

Next Generation Virtual Worlds: Societal, Technological, Economic and Policy Challenges for the EU

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

JRC Report: “This report provides an overview of the opportunities that next generation virtual worlds may bring in different sectors such as education, manufacturing, health, and public services among others. This potential will need to be harnessed in light of the challenges the EU may need to address along societal, technological, and economic and policy dimensions. We apply a multidisciplinary and multisectoral perspective to our analysis, covering technical, social, industrial, political and economic facets. The report also offers a first techno-economic analysis of the digital ecosystem identifying current key players in different subdomains related to virtual worlds…(More)”.

Culture and Democracy, the evidence

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the European Commission: “This report analyses the concrete link between democracy and culture. It maps out how citizens who participate in cultural activities are much more likely to engage in civic and democratic life. Inequalities persist throughout the EU when it comes to citizens’ participation in cultural activities, with a clear knock-on impact on democratic participation. And this is just another reason why it is crucial that cultural activities are inclusive and affordable. Even more so as we see that investing in cultural participation can also support a range of other societal objectives – for example, in fields such as health, education and social inclusion. This report, and addressing the issues identified within it, is part of the work the European Commission is doing to strengthen democracy, to promote an inclusive and engaged society and to support the sustainability of the cultural sector. In the Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026, we put a specific focus on the link between culture and democracy, and we want to bring policy makers and stakeholders together to jointly work towards the concept of cultural citizenship in the EU. This report is part of the process…(More)”.

Index, A History of the

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

“A Bookish Adventure from Medieval Manuscripts to the Digital Age” by Dennis Duncan: “Most of us give little thought to the back of the book—it’s just where you go to look things up. But as Dennis Duncan reveals in this delightful and witty history, hiding in plain sight is an unlikely realm of ambition and obsession, sparring and politicking, pleasure and play. In the pages of the index, we might find Butchers, to be avoided, or Cows that sh-te Fire, or even catch Calvin in his chamber with a Nonne. Here, for the first time, is the secret world of the index: an unsung but extraordinary everyday tool, with an illustrious but little-known past.

Charting its curious path from the monasteries and universities of thirteenth-century Europe to Silicon Valley in the twenty-first, Duncan uncovers how it has saved heretics from the stake, kept politicians from high office, and made us all into the readers we are today. We follow it through German print shops and Enlightenment coffee houses, novelists’ living rooms and university laboratories, encountering emperors and popes, philosophers and prime ministers, poets, librarians and—of course—indexers along the way. Revealing its vast role in our evolving literary and intellectual culture, Duncan shows that, for all our anxieties about the Age of Search, we are all index-rakers at heart—and we have been for eight hundred years…(More)”.

Data collaborations at a local scale: Lessons learnt in Rennes (2010–2021)

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Simon Chignard and Marion Glatron: “Data sharing is a requisite for developing data-driven innovation and collaboration at the local scale. This paper aims to identify key lessons and recommendations for building trustworthy data governance at the local scale, including the public and private sectors. Our research is based on the experience gained in Rennes Metropole since 2010 and focuses on two thematic use cases: culture and energy. For each one, we analyzed how the power relations between actors and the local public authority shape the modalities of data sharing and exploitation. The paper will elaborate on challenges and opportunities at the local level, in perspective with the national and European frameworks…(More)”.

Health Care Data Is a Researcher’s Gold Mine

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by James O’Shaughnessy: “The UK’s National Health Service should aim to become the world’s leading platform for health research and development. We’ve seen some great examples of the potential we have for world-class research during the pandemic, with examples like the RECOVERY trial and the Covid vaccine platform, and since then through the partnerships with Moderna, Grail, and BioNTech. However, these examples of partnership with industry are often ad hoc arrangements. In general, funding and prestige are concentrated on research labs and early-phase trials, but when it comes to helping health care companies through the commercialization stages of their products, both public and private sector funding is much harder to access. This makes it hard for startups partnering with the NHS to scale their products and sell them on the domestic and international markets.

Instead, we need a systematic approach to leverage our strengths, such as the scale of the NHS, the diversity of our population, and the deep patient phenotyping that our data assets enable. That will give us the opportunity to generate vast amounts of real-world data about health care drugs and technologies—like pricing, performance, and safety—that can prepare companies to scale their innovations and go to market.

To achieve that, there are obstacles to overcome. For instance, setting up research projects is incredibly time-consuming. We have very bureaucratic processes that make the UK one of the slowest places in Europe to set up research studies.

Patients need more access to research. However, there’s really poor information at the moment about where clinical trials are taking place in the country and what kind of patients they are recruiting. We need a clinical clinicaltrials.gov.uk website to give that sort of information.

There’s a significant problem when it comes to the question of patient consent to participate in a R&D. Legally, unless patients have said explicitly that they want to be approached for a research project or a clinical trial, they can’t be contacted for that purpose. The catch-22 is that, of course, most patients are not aware of this, and you can’t legally contact them to inform them. We need to allow ethically approved researchers to proactively approach people to take part in studies which might be of benefit to them…(More)”.