Ref: https://drcf.org.uk/publications/papers/insightssmartdataframeworks 

Published on 26 March 2026, this report from the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum (DRCF) provides an international comparative analysis of Smart Data implementation models to inform the UK’s strategic approach under the Data (Use and Access) Act (DUAA) 2025.

Core focus

The report reviews how jurisdictions worldwide have approached consumer data portability and Smart Data ecosystems, drawing lessons to help the UK implement its cross-sectoral Smart Data ambitions. The DUAA 2025 empowers the Secretary of State to create sector-specific Smart Data schemes via secondary legislation, building on the Open Banking precedent. As of May 2025, one in five UK consumers and small businesses were actively using Open Banking services, up from one in seventeen in March 2021.

Three implementation models

The report categorises global Smart Data approaches into three main models:

1. Regulator-mandated 

Government-led, prescriptive legislation (e.g. Australia’s Consumer Data Right, Brazil’s Open Finance). Provides legal certainty and mandated participation, but risks high compliance costs, regulatory rigidity, and potential for stifling innovation. Australia’s experience is cited as a cautionary tale of disproportionate costs relative to uptake.

2. Market-facilitated  

Industry-driven, with regulators in a facilitative role (e.g. US, Japan, Hong Kong). Fosters innovation and commercial flexibility but suffers from inconsistent standards, fragmentation, slower incumbent adoption, and uncertain liability frameworks. The US is experiencing particular instability following legal challenges to its framework, which has been seen as lacking unambiguous positioning.

3. Public infrastructure-led 

Built on foundational national Digital Public Infrastructure such as digital identity and data exchange layers (e.g. Estonia’s X-Road, Singapore’s SGFinDex via Singpass). These solve interoperability and trust-by-design but require major upfront investment and sustained political commitment. Estonia saves an estimated 820+ years of working time annually through X-Road.

A fourth category, Hybrid and Transitioning, covers jurisdictions like India (Account Aggregator / DEPA framework, with over 100 million consents by 2024) and the UAE (transitioning from market-led to a centrally mandated Open Finance framework).

Key themes from the analysis

Governance

A central coordinating body is consistently identified as critical. Without it, sector-by-sector schemes under the DUAA risk creating new data silos rather than eliminating them.

Standards and interoperability

Cross-sector fragmentation is a recurring failure mode. The risk that different UK government departments managing different Smart Data schemes could produce divergent technical standards is highlighted as a significant concern.

Consumer consent journey

Legal compliance alone is insufficient. The quality of the consent user experience is as important as the legal principle. Brazil’s experience shows how broadly drafted consent forms led to data misuse and loss of public trust. India’s AA framework shows high consent numbers but low conversion due to friction. Singapore’s integration with Singpass is held up as a model of frictionless, trustworthy consent.

International alignment

The report recommends aligning with Gaia-X (the EU’s federated data infrastructure framework) to protect the UK’s data adequacy status (renewed until 2031), maintain access to EU digital markets, and reduce compliance burdens for internationally active businesses.

Anti-competitive risks

The report flags the possibility that Smart Data schemes could inadvertently facilitate tacit collusion if they enable easy monitoring of competitor pricing — a novel risk that warrants safeguards by design.

Considerations for the UK

The report proposes five strategic pillars:

1. A central Smart Data governance body to coordinate all schemes, set baseline standards, and prevent fragmentation.
2. Phased, use-case-driven rollout prioritising energy (for Net Zero), finance, and telecoms, learning iteratively before expanding.
3. Sector-tailored implementation models — acknowledging that some sectors suit market-led approaches while others need regulatory mandates, within a unified strategic framework.
4. Interoperability by design, integrating with the UK’s Digital Verification Services (DVS) trust framework (as envisioned in the DUAA) to create a trusted, unified consent architecture.
5. Clear secondary legislation covering liability frameworks, security standards, transparent cost-benefit processes, and safeguards against anti-competitive conduct.

Relevance to IB1

The DRCF report findings and recommendations are closely aligned with IB1’s existing work and strategic positioning.  

Central governance and Trust Frameworks

The report’s core recommendation, a ‘central’ body setting common baseline standards and ensuring cross-sectoral interoperability, closely mirrors the architecture IB1 has developed through its Trust Framework and Scheme architecture. The DRCF’s concern about fragmented sectoral schemes producing new data silos is precisely the problem IB1’s governance approach is designed to solve, specifically the interoperability between them.

Energy Smart Data and Perseus 

The report explicitly names energy as a priority sector for Smart Data designation, citing its alignment with Net Zero policy objectives. IB1’s Perseus programme, enabling permissioned energy data access for SME carbon reporting and green finance, is an existing example of the kind of sector-specific, use-case-driven scheme the report advocates.

Consent and liability frameworks

IB1 has developed detailed consent and liability standards across energy, water, finance, supply chains, and other sectors. The DRCF’s finding that the quality of the consent journey is as critical as the legal principle, and that clear liability apportionment is essential for industry confidence, directly reinforces the value of this work.

Interoperability across sectors

The report warns that without strong central coordination, different government departments could develop incompatible standards across schemes. IB1’s cross-sector interoperability work, including its engagement between Open Energy, Perseus and Open Banking, addresses this risk directly.

International standards alignment

The report recommends aligning with international frameworks such as Gaia-X. IB1’s engagement with cross-border data governance and its work across multiple jurisdictions is consistent with this direction.

The DRCF report diagnosis and recommendations map closely with the approach IB1 has built, and provides independent external validation of the strategic importance of IB1’s work.

Will Goodhart, started his new role as Executive Director of the Future of Sustainable Data Alliance (FoSDA) towards the end of April this year, following 18 years as Chief Executive at the CFA Society of the UK.

We caught up with Will to hear his perspective on the next phase of sustainable finance – where sustainability is set to become embedded in every financial decision – and to discuss the role of data, the evolving regulatory landscape and what the recent Data Act means for businesses and consumers.  

Ross: Will, you spent nearly two decades at the CFA, much of it focusing on sustainability. What brought you to FoSDA?

Will: For the last 5 to 10 of those years at the CFA, we had a focus on sustainable investing and educating people on how to invest sustainably. So we developed the CFA certificate in ESG investing, now called the CFA Certificate Sustainable Investing. Following this, we developed a certificate in climate and investing and the certificate for impact investing at the beginning of 2024. 

I wanted to apply my experience more directly – helping people use their skills and knowledge to advance sustainable finance. So, joining FoSDA felt like a natural fit because of my understanding of the market, the connections I had and the potential FoSDA has as an organisation. It has an important role to play in empowering financial markets to tackle environmental and social challenges through the provision of high-quality, comprehensive data.

Ross: So, what are the barriers to making the market for sustainable data work?

Will: I think improving the consistency, comprehensiveness, and interoperability of data are key. As well as highlighting the value of data and demonstrating the importance of a competitive market in the provision of sustainable data and sustainable analytics.

Of course, FoSDA is not here to solve everything ourselves, but also to convene stakeholders and support the ecosystem. 

There are still data gaps out there to work on. For example, real estate data can be fragmented across markets. And even with nature and biodiversity data, which has grown significantly thanks to geospatial analysis and AI, we need to ensure the methodologies are transparent and robust.

Ross: That point on nature data is interesting – it feels like a fast-growing but complex space?

Will: Yes, someone recently called nature data a “jungle” and I think that’s a bit extreme but still apt. There’s tremendous innovation and growth in biodiversity and nature-related indicators, but understanding how that data is derived and making sure the market for nature data functions properly is crucial. 

Ross: I think it’s also finding that link to impact as well. 

Will: Yes, one of the problems with that nature and impact is knowing your baseline. Getting a baseline for nature is quite challenging. To know that you’re creating impact, you have to know what the situation was beforehand and then be able to measure it in the same way after to see if there has been any positive impact. 

Ross: Do you think, as sustainability becomes more embedded in finance, that FoSDA’s work will become easier?

Will: We’re entering a new phase where sustainability is becoming part of every financial decision and that naturally creates pushback from those invested in the old ways. But the integration of sustainability indicators into policy, regulation and standard-setting will intensify, because the challenges are no longer in the distance, they are here, now. That makes it critical to ensure regulations are targeted, proportional, and effective. 

Ross: I wanted to get your thoughts on the Data (Use and Access) Act and how this might influence FoSDA’s work?

One positive is that it may change how people think about data – not just as an asset for producers but as something that should benefit consumers more directly. Like with Open Banking, it could open up markets, give consumers more choice, and spark a wider conversation about governance and value sharing.

I think the more that it happens, now that there’s a common framework for it, the more people expect that they should be able to share their data with others in situations where it’s going to be beneficial to them. 

Ross: The Data Act also touches on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and how this is being used to analyse data and automate decision making. What are your thoughts on this?

Will: We see a lot of claims of AI-powered models analysing unstructured data to deliver sustainability insights. And while the technology is exciting, it needs to be used appropriately. Consumers of AI-generated data should question its provenance and understand the processes behind it.

Ross: And finally Will, what’s next for FoSDA?

Will: A key priority is making standardisation and machine-readability fundamental to financial reporting and systems, so data can flow seamlessly and effectively. We’re looking forward to working with others to frame that problem and drive progress.

Ross: Hi Jane, it would be great to start our conversation by getting a better understanding of what Perse does?

Jane: Perse is a data Infrastructure company in the energy and carbon markets. We provide data services that relate to our connectivity to every single meter, building, and generation asset in Britain. We’ve tackled a number of technology and legal challenges when it comes to unlocking access to data. These have been demonstrated across a variety of use cases from energy procurement, demand flexibility services for the National Energy System Operator (NESO) and work in the carbon reporting space for major land owners like National Trust.  

Ross: You mentioned meters there, could you speak to the value of Smart Meters in driving our net zero efforts?

Jane: Smart meters provide timely data and help to optimise the grid, enabling network operators to identify where demand flexibility is needed. Granular data can also inform the suitability of different measures to improve the carbon intensity of buildings, such as heat pumps and solar PV. We’ve led the technical and legal aspects of the Smart Meter Data Repository Feasibility project for DESNZ, looking at recommendations to ensure smart meter data is more accessible for driving net zero efforts. 

It’s worth noting that, at Perse, we support all meter types—not just smart meters but also analogue and advanced ones. This allows us to cater to a wide range of customers, be it domestic, retail, SME, micro or corporate entities. But half-hourly data is key and, while decarbonisation in the electricity market has progressed, the gas sector remains a significant challenge. This is the area that needs the most amount of work and it will come down to half hourly data to fully understand what the electrification of gas will look like and how we can best drive returns on investment. 

Ross: Where do you see the value in the Perseus pilot?

Jane: Perseus is creating a movement that goes beyond the energy sector. It has the ability to communicate the value of opening access to data and the impact that has on accelerating our net zero transition. Increasing awareness that this kind of data exists is a big part of the benefits for us. 

What’s more, Perseus highlights use cases beyond energy. The energy industry has been, traditionally, very inward facing. So it’s good to highlight how crucial energy data is to the wider net zero transition. Stakeholders in the energy market have been slow in their recognition of how important this is. 

Another key area is exploring alternatives to current consumer consent processes. While existing Smart Energy Code mechanisms are being used in the pilot, they can be high-friction. The pilot has provided a platform to test new approaches, which I believe will gain approval in the near future.

Ross: What would you like to see in future iterations of the pilot, as Perseus develops? 

Jane: The Gas sector will be crucial in future iterations. Expanding the scope to incorporate other meter types will be equally important as the majority of stakeholders rely on a variety of meter types beyond smart meters. This can be done quickly because Perse has already built the solution. 

Ross: What’s your experience working with SMEs and getting them to engage with this kind of work? 

Jane: With Natwest, we created a product targeted at their business customer base. But my take from Perse’s work, more widely, is that it can be harder to get engagement from smaller businesses when they aren’t subject to mandatory reporting requirements. They may only participate if they’re part of the supply chain of a larger company or if they need to meet contract conditions. 

For instance, you can’t tender a government contract without having a net zero strategy. So, although engagement in the SME sector has been slow, I think we are at an important time in creating a shift and greater realisation of the importance of having this data and having a net zero position for their company. 

Today we need to be cognisant that SME’s main concern is often the cost of energy, with this coming before carbon intensity in their priorities to address. Potential solutions to help address this could include, for example,  shifting tax away from electricity tariffs to gas tariffs. This could help make things like heat pumps more cost effective. At the moment, environmental taxes are applied to electricity, which seems misplaced as users engaged in their net zero plans are often already sourcing their electricity from renewables.

Given the many conversations I’m in at the moment I believe it very important to have as much debate as openly as possible, as this impacts everyone.

Here’s a question:

How should the UK implement its National Data Infrastructure so that it provides consistent control, sharing, and security for data, much like other public infrastructures such as roads and utilities?

“Everything should be as simple as it can be, but not simpler”
[often attributed to Einstein]

Having initiated ‘data as infrastructure’ at a political level in the UK in 2013, I’ve been watching and learning on this for a long time. We’ve made remarkable progress in some areas, less so in others.

Let’s explore, starting with some lessons learned.

One immediate reflection is that as over 60 countries moved to copy the Open Banking Standard, those who took only ‘parts’ of the system tended to experience less ideal outcomes (to the point that they often add them back in later to help course-correct — most notable are those who thought this was ‘just a tech problem’ and only took the open API principles).

We can look to past UK data initiatives like MiData and Open Banking and potentially infer that voluntary-only initiatives and centralisation do not work, and that the decentralised nature of Open Banking was more successful. However, these are shallow reflections.

We can point to three factors beyond centralised or voluntary which are dependent on the use case:

1. Market incentives: there must be an economic argument that policy can then amplify or mandate. If there is no financial incentive, there will be no movement (regardless of central vs decentralised, mandate or not — mandates are also often ignored). Midata was mostly tech-led, Open Banking was use-case led.
2. Removal of friction: Removing transactional friction may seem like something everyone wants, but not if your current business model relies on it. There must be “something in it” for everyone, or at least a path to cost reduction or a new business model. Removing friction can help everyone go together: this is never a ‘technology problem’ (e.g. absence of a data ontology).
3. Mandates: if the friction is ‘too high’, regulatory intervention is necessary to mandate participation and move the market. However, if the market can demonstrate self-initiation, then ‘endorsement’ from government can be sufficient to drive impact. Value creation must be visible in both cases.

I believe that we need to embrace these factors in our systems design.

We need to:

1. work out where the lines are drawn between central, pre-competitive and competitive areas;
2. ask what the role of regulation is, and at what granularity
3. query how things can be implemented in a way that humans (and machines) can and want to adopt
4. ensure those governing, operating and participating can be helped in their assessments of compatibility and interoperability
5. work out how to prioritise and create clear (and stable) roadmaps that enable investment to be made

I believe that we can build on the success of sector-specific approaches:

The Open Banking model’s success lies precisely in its sector-specific, incremental approach. It focused on the unique needs of banking, where security, standardisation, and customer trust were paramount.

Copying the Open Banking model into other sectors (e.g., energy, transport, health) isn’t about duplication but about applying tested frameworks tailored to each industry.

Without considering the market incentives for participation we risk techno-utopian thinking

Instead of trying to create a complex, overarching architecture that risks being too broad, a sectoral approach allows for flexibility and adaptation to industry-specific challenges. This carries a risk of fragmentation, and equally a potential to mandate cross-sector interoperability without defining exactly what this means in detail for everyone. The risk of push back on over-reach is material and catastrophic (in terms of adoption, if it fails). Further, market-incentives will be market-specific.

Avoiding Over-Standardisation

National Data Architecture risks over-standardisation and could stifle innovation instead of enhancing it. Different sectors have wildly varying levels of data maturity, hugely variable data governance needs and challenges, and a one-size-fits-all approach is highly likely to impose unnecessary constraints on sectors that are not as ready for them.

For example, imposing the level of data governance on the industrial sector that is required in the financial sector is (today) not realistic. We are, however, on the frontline of that journey with ESG reporting today, and it highlights the complexity of that real-financial sector bridging. Incremental improvements, like extending Open Banking principles to energy or transport can allow industries to evolve organically while keeping governance controls and security as a priority.

Pragmatism of the Incremental Approach

The incremental, domain-by-domain approach may seem less ambitious, but it offers a practical pathway to innovation that can be adopted today. Trying to design a top-down, comprehensive national architecture from the outset risks paralysis by analysis and over-planning. Learning from Open Banking and rolling out smart data initiatives sector-by-sector allows for continuous improvement and responsiveness to real-world feedback, which may be more effective than a sweeping, coordinated architecture.

Interoperability Requires Industry Engagement

Interoperability relies on industry engagement. This is best fostered through practical, sector-specific initiatives like Open Banking. Imposing an overarching system from above risks of alienating key industry stakeholders, who may resist changes that threaten their business models (this happens in every sector already, today). Open Banking’s success came from the balance of regulatory oversight and industry cooperation, a formula that can be replicated in other sectors.

Market Failures Can Be Addressed Incrementally

There are (always) risks of market failures such as data hoarding (castle & moat is still the prevalent investment model for data businesses). These issues should be tackled incrementally through sector-specific mandates rather than a top-down architecture, but can be accelerated with top-down principles.

The competition fostered by Open Banking and similar initiatives already shows promise in tackling data monopolies. An incremental, practical approach allows policymakers to address market failures as they emerge, rather than trying to solve all potential problems with a one-time top-down design.

Trust is Earned, Not Imposed

Trust in data systems cannot be imposed from the top. While Open Banking was catalysed by regulation, it earned user trust through transparency, security, and gradual adoption, not through a top-down imposition. Similarly, rolling out frameworks sector by sector allows consumers, businesses and citizens to see the benefits and gradually gain confidence in the approach. Attempting to ‘mandate trust’ top-down could backfire, especially in sectors like health, where data privacy concerns are particularly sensitive.

At IB1, our Trust Frameworks are one tool (of many) that can help foster multilateral collaboration, building on Open Banking principles.

Decentralisation Encourages Innovation

The decentralised, minimised and pre-competitive nature of Open Banking has led to its adoption and innovation. A large, centralised approach would have risked locking in certain standards or technological pathways that could hinder future innovations. Allowing sectors to develop their own interoperable standards fosters a more competitive, flexible landscape, where innovations in one sector can inform developments in another, without being dictated by a single framework.

Data governance should aim to balance impact on rights and security
while minimising its own footprint and reach

While the idea of a unified, overarching data framework may sound appealing in theory, in practice it would risk being too rigid, slow to adapt, and detached from the unique needs of individual sectors. A more pragmatic approach — building on the lessons of Open Banking and extending these principles to other industries — may offer the best balance of innovation, security, and user control.

Please feel free to comment, or message me (via LinkedIn or directly)

Disclosure: I sat on the MiData energy sector board (mostly tearing my hair out on these points); co-chaired the creation of the Open Banking Standard (through which I learned so many lessons it could fill a book or two); was founding CEO of the Open Data Institute; am co-Chair of the Smart Data Council, and run this non-profit (IB1.org) working on data governance at sector and national scale.

Thanks to Chris, Frank, Paul, Hadley and others for their feedback and inputs.

Useful links

Lessons learned from Gaia-X Data Spaces https://www.sitra.fi/en/articles/eight-lessons-from-building-data-spaces/

ODI on Data Institutions 
https://theodi.org/insights/projects/rd-data-institutions/

Icebreaker One on how it implements data sharing 
https://ib1.org/what-we-do

Open Banking (implementation entity)
https://openbanking.org.uk

Additional narrative on cities
https://agentgav.medium.com/the-porous-city-92ae986cd43c

Other opinions
https://agentgav.medium.com

Building from principles tried and tested under Open Banking, the Roadmap identifies needs and opportunities to build a wide range of interoperable smart data schemes. It particularly highlights the banking, finance, energy and road fuels, telecommunications, transport, retail, and home-buying sectors for further development.

These changes represent a clear direction for the future of UK smart data, presenting a vision of decentralised, interoperable schemes based on common, open standards and supported by strong governance. These are changes that we strongly welcome and will continue to support.

Our work shows that smart data schemes which align with the principles of the Government’s Roadmap are both possible and successful. Our work also exemplifies why smart data schemes are vital in the transition to net zero (e.g. Perseus). 

Around half of UK business emissions are produced by 5 million SMEs. Perseus is creating new rules and processes to unlock access to green finance. It does this by making automated sustainability reporting possible for every SME business in the UK and, with trusted controls, empowering SMEs to share reporting data with banks. This will help unlock £billions that the banks are looking to deploy to enable a faster net zero transition, helping SMEs to action affordable, personalised, data-enabled insights on how best to improve efficiency and decarbonise their business. 

Perseus exemplifies how smart data schemes can support innovation and advance a progressive vision for financial services in the journey to net zero. Our work also highlights two opportunities for value creation which will multiply as the UK’s smart data economy grows. 

Firstly, Perseus creates both economic and environmental value for businesses by connecting smart data flows across sectors. We are starting with energy data and this  will expand as the project connects with other sectors holding key data such as water, transport, agriculture, and the built environment. 

Secondly, Perseus demonstrates the value of an interoperable approach to smart data sharing in the transition to net zero. Use cases which elevate the connected power of data to address environmental change cannot be neatly divided along sector lines. Without change, the potential of data and digitalisation to support positive environmental action will continue to hit arbitrary limits.

In both cases, value creation hinges on the instigation of decentralised, interoperable and trusted smart data schemes at scale across the economy. 

At IB1 we go one step further, choosing to operate with radical transparency about our own journey towards implementation. We openly publish and licence as many aspects of our process, research, and resources as possible (including success stories and the bumps in the road!). We further prioritise collaboration and knowledge exchange, encouraging other organisations to use our resources for collective benefit in developing the UK’s smart and environmental data sharing ecosystems. 

To get involved in Perseus, please contact us at perseus@ib1.org or join online today at ib1.org/join/perseus.

If you would like to discuss other programmes, sector or place-based work, please email partners@ib1.org or join as an IB1 member at ib1.org/join. 

Photo credit: Jerry Kavan on Unsplash

Animated slides below:

[open-to-comment Google slides version]

I believe we need to come up with some kind of umbrella language that isn’t about “climate” [tired] or “oceans” or “plastics” and… it’s not the word ‘sustainability’ [expired] or the SDGs [too big]. Instead, could we be outcomes-based? I know my science friends won’t jump at this, but it’s not for them. The financial economy and industry already have an operating model: can we align around redefining value?

Stills (in case Google is blocked in your organization)

Aligned with our ethos of collaboration: ‘to go far, we go together’, they contribute to our mission of making data work harder to reach net zero. Now we want to highlight some of the important work they do for both people and the planet.

This week, I’m joined by Jose Cordovilla and Deepika Swamy, TYPSA. who have participated in our Impact Investing project and NIMBUS project, respectively. Jose is the Director of TYPSA’s Infrastructure Advisory and Deepika is the Head of Environment and Sustainability, UK. 

In this Q&A we touch on some of the inefficiencies surrounding the infrastructure industry, and how less data friction could open up the industry, inviting opportunities and disruptors, ultimately creating more business.

Ross: Thank you both for taking the time to talk with me. Could you start by giving me an overview of TYPSA?

Jose: Thanks for having us! Of course. TYPSA is a consulting firm and we cover most of the spectrum in engineering, with around 90 percent of work we do being on the technical side. A lot of work in my division is around financing and managing infrastructure assets, feasibility, planning and setting up long term contact for the government. Most of the work we do is for the private sector, but around 75% of projects in my sector involve helping developers bid for PFIs (Private Finance Initiatives) and PPPs (Public Private Partnerships).

Asset management is where my particular interest in working with IB1 lies. To capture the knowledge of assets, we have our own equipment for scanning, and have systems for monitoring asset performance, so that clients can plan operation and maintenance. We focus mainly on the life-cycle analysis cost side, and how you build into life-cycle expenditure.

Ross: Are you working on any interesting projects at the moment?

Deepika: Here in the UK, we have the High Speed 2 (HS2) project, which we have worked on for the past 8 years. HS2 is quite high on the government’s decarbonisation agenda, and there’s a public commitment to reduce carbon impact by 50%. That is no mean feat!

For HS2, we generate the data ourselves, using technology such as BIM (Building Information Modelling). Everything we do is digitised and all the models we design get fed into a BIM model, this model then gives us an output in terms of data, quantities and materials. Using that, we extract what’s relevant to us, and if data isn’t available, we use an EPD (Environmental Product Declaration) from suppliers. With this we can process the data and find hot spots to identify where we can further reduce carbon impact. We’ve been able to consistently reduce carbon but whether we can achieve 50% reduction at this stage in the project, we’re unsure but I do think it’s a huge undertaking from the government. 

Ross: What data-related challenges have you faced on this project and more generally in your industry?

Deepika: We do have minor challenges with data but the majority of the problems are actually down to the sheer size and scale of the projects we work on. Again, if data isn’t available we tend to use benchmark data. 

Jose: In a more general sense, our sector is very contract-centric, and very opaque. There’s a lot of advantages to possessing privileged or granular data, particularly when it comes to price. I think this is why a lot of the focus of open data standards should be on procurement and looking at how a project is conceived. There’s a plethora of contracts in which, having less data friction would open up a lot of opportunities and business. 

There’s also a lot of inefficiencies in the industry. In fact, the construction industry is the least efficient of all sectors, and it’s been like this for years. In some countries like the USA, productivity is actually decreasing. Compare this to sectors like telecoms, which has seen an incredible increase in efficiency, logistics too. But this has yet to happen in the construction industry. There’s a lot of trapped value. And, when we look at having better data on supply chains, there’s a whole ecosystem there and I think there will be a lot of disruption in this space. 

Ross: How do you think the industry can unlock this trapped value? Where do you see incentives coming from?

Jose: If I had to name one, it would be contracting and procurement. Improving the accessibility, openness and granularity of contracting data would unleash everything else. The fact of the matter is, there is no real transparency. When the data is made available, it’s not really accessible, unless you’re a heavily qualified developer. The second one would be the circular economy. This is one issue on top of the list for contractors. Having traceability of materials, and their origin. 

Deepika: There are certainly procurement issues. For example, we found using reused steel has the lowest environmental impact, even when compared to timber. There is availability of this reused steel but sometimes the client becomes nervous to mandate this because there’s an uncertainty around procurement. It’s complex doing it at a large scale but on smaller projects it might be more easily achieved. 

Ross: Does the government feed into these inefficiencies? 

Jose: This is a subject you could write books about! The contracts we deal with are really large, and these carry a lot of interest along with the potential for corruption, and information asymmetry. Also looking at our industry, the way the brains of engineers are built, they’re systematic and this makes it hard to change the way things are done. Its multidisciplinary work and so integrating all the dimensions of sustainability can take time. But I am positive, because the gap here is so big compared to other industries, so there’s a lot to gain. But I know some of the traditional engineering companies will be driven out of the market. 

Deepika: I think this is a journey, and an unprecedented one. We’ve all committed, both governments and projects, to attain net zero but we don’t really know what that looks like. There’s plenty to learn from each other along the way. 

Almost all of the data we need already exists. But it’s not getting to the right places. 

Lack of trusted data flow leads to poor decisions that make it more risky and difficult to quantify and invest in the transition to net zero.

Better data infrastructure – like licensing, assurance, and security – will make it easier to make net-zero decisions at speed, with confidence and at a global scale. 

The world must be able to find, share and trust the data we need to get to net zero. That requires data-sharing infrastructure – and Icebreaker One is developing it.

A FOSDA/Icebreaker One analysis of net zero data brought this opportunity to life. It identified a series of data gaps and holes – problems with data availability, reliability and comparability. It found ‘hotspots’ of problems where data is too difficult to find or too difficult to trust – like energy consumption and production by source, greenhouse gas emissions, and supply chain reporting. 

This is why trust in data is one of the main areas for improvement highlighted in the EU’s July 2021 revised sustainable finance strategy, which aims to improve ESG ratings. 

This isn’t a challenge that needs new technology. Many attempts to consolidate data—new databases and portals—struggle to scale. We need to develop the rules of the road, not a new database. Unless we act now, we’ll let the opportunity to modernise slip through our fingers.

Who needs data-sharing infrastructure?

All Icebreaker One projects involve identifying use cases – specific examples of user needs around data access and use in order to achieve a particular net-zero outcome. They allow us to understand who needs to access data, what data they need, and the impact it could have. 

Three use cases from our projects illustrate the wide range of stakeholders who need better access to data to get to net zero.

Use case 1: getting more electric cars on the road

Just one electric car on the roads can save an average 1.5 tonnes of CO2 per year, according to EDF. But more than 30% of households in the UK cannot install at-home electric vehicle charge points, highlighting the importance of affordable and nearby on-street charging. 

Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) are an essential player in getting more charge points on the UK’s streets. Their connection departments are responsible for processing and managing requests to the grid for electricity in the here and now, as well as forecasting future capacity requirements so that they can prioritise where to invest in greater capacity.

They need to know when and where charge points will be installed (domestic, public, commercial and industrial), the nature of these charge points (slow, rapid, ultrarapid, for example), and how they are utilised. But there is currently no mandatory registration of installations, with data having to be pulled from multiple sources. Data on utilisation of different types of charge point and plans for future installations is even more patchy and problematic to access. 

They need data infrastructure that implements a Trust Framework , which automates data licensing, security checks, and technical integration. Using a Trust Framework, a DNO will be able to access this information more quickly and cost-effectively, accessing hundreds of datasets with just one round of authentication and technical integration.  This in turn helps them make sure that grid capacity can meet the demand from newly installed EV charge points. 

The trust framework also allows DNOs to collaborate more effectively with other industry stakeholders. As well as accessing others’ data, DNOs can publish their own data securely, safe in the knowledge that only authenticated users can access it. That will help ensure that the UK is able to meet its ambitious targets for EV ownership by 2030 and beyond. 

Read more

Use case 2: making our homes more energy efficient

The energy consumption of existing buildings accounts for around 34% of the UK’s annual carbon emissions. What’s more, 80% of buildings in use today will still be in use by 2050, the same year we have pledged to reach our net zero emissions target. It is therefore evident that the decarbonisation of our buildings and homes through retrofitting is a fundamental requirement if we are to stay within the boundaries of the Paris Agreement. 

Data has a central part to play in realising these retrofitting goals. In fact, the looming task of making our buildings more energy efficient cannot be realised without data. Our Standard for Environment, Risk, and Insurance (SERI) programme recognised this when we designed a climate-ready building passport (C-RBP). The C-RBP is a tool for insurers to pool together data on the physical, environmental, financial, risk and regulatory elements of a building, and in doing so, provide a more well-rounded, accurate and timely view of risk. 

By improving the discovery, access and use of data with the C-RBP, insurers can more accurately price risk while incorporating climate change mitigation measures into their policies. This incentivises net-zero behaviours from their customers such as retrofitting. The impact of data goes further still, helping asset owners and investors align their assets with ESG regulations. 

Read more

Use case 3: unlocking green finance to help small businesses cut emissions

There are more than 5.9 million Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in the UK, accounting for around half of the country’s business greenhouse gas emissions.

But there is no common process to follow when reporting emissions, and many reports are based on inaccurate estimates. SMEs’ stakeholders like banks and corporate customers are therefore receiving low-quality data that is not comparable or actionable. 

To address this, Icebreaker One is working with Bankers for Net Zero to convene a cross-sector coalition – called Project Perseus – to build the data infrastructure we need to improve emissions reporting. 

Perseus will enable automated sustainability reporting for every small business in the UK, so that we can reduce emissions faster. It will make it easy to share accurate, assurable data that sits behind emissions calculations. It will inform investment decisions, enable targeted decarbonisation interventions, reduce reporting burdens and unlock green finance. 

Read more

Ross: Hi Chris, in order to lay the foundations for our chat, can you define what we mean by a data catalogue? 

Chris: A data catalogue can be an individual organisation making the datasets that it wants to publish available through a portal or website. It can also be an index of other organisations’ data sets. Our Open Net Zero service, for example, is a data catalogue that indexes many other data catalogues. We don’t copy or store any of the data they hold, we just provide a service to help find their datasets, wherever they are on the web.

Ross: What is the importance of tagging in data catalogues?

Chris: Tagging is a mechanism for organising or labelling your datasets. You want people to find the datasets and understand them when they get there. Tagging should reflect your best idea of what will help people focus in on the data they’re looking for, but within this is the challenge of trying to work out what people think when they are looking for information. One person’s organisational structure can be quite different from the next.

Ross: What is Icebreaker One’s approach to tagging in Open Net Zero? 

Chris: We take a use-case-driven approach to tagging. This means taking a real situation of data requirement and working out what the person looking for data needs and consequently how we should structure the data so that it’s useful to them. This leads to a much more purpose-led approach to labelling data. And, over time, we hope to have enough use cases that we end up with a general set, formed around use cases rather than in a vacuum. An example we’re working on at the moment, is a use case focused around finding datasets that can influence impact investing in the built environment. We believe this kind of use case will also help other types of searches in the future.

Adding to this, with Open Net Zero, we’re trying to make data discoverable from a very large number of sources. We store the tags that the originators use because we want to perpetuate that information onto other people that get data from us. But at the same time, we add our own tags in an attempt to map them into categories that are useful. Specifically around the way the data is categorised and how it might be applied in getting to net zero, since that’s what we’re all about.

Eventually, we aim to build a subset of common tags from all of the data we’re seeing so we can start to encourage some standards. Icebreaker One doesn’t intend to become a standards body, but we can see patterns and we want people to join us in contributing to the conversation around the tags net-zero datasets should be labelled with.

Ross: You mentioned standards, what pre-existing standards are there in regards to datasets?

Chris: There are many standards that you can adhere to when you’re talking about properties of data. For example, there are standards for how to represent the file format. There’s also something called ‘controlled vocabularies’. So, within the field of ‘unit of measure’ there’s a control vocabulary of how you can say what the unit of measure is – kilograms, cubic inches etc. 

Overall, I think the main problem around adopting a standard is that organisations, whether in the US, EU or elsewhere, will design a vocabulary with one particular purpose but this can become problematic when trying to generalise beyond this one purpose. 

Ross: What are some of the main problems you’re finding when working with data catalogues for Open Net Zero? 

Chris: Machine-readability: Some data catalogues lack a machine-readable interface, which makes our work with Open Net Zero, as a catalogue of catalogues, much harder. We can add 20,000 datasets from a machine-readable catalogue to our index in five minutes but this isn’t always the reality. In many cases, we find that the data publishers have concentrated on web portals where people manually navigate to find and download a data file but there’s no way to navigate using software.  

Custom APIs: We have a backlog of several catalogues that can only be accessed through a custom API (application programming interface). They have an API to list the datasets and retrieve information about them, which is better than nothing, but it means that each API needs to be taken separately and we have to work out how they organised it, how they map to our data structure and so on. What this means is, an organisation has done all the work to create an API, and then everybody who uses it has to do that work to use the API. There are established standards for publishing catalogues, such as DCAT, CSW and INSPIRE that make including the data in other tools much easier.

Licensing: Licensing can be inconsistent, and a question data users have to ask is: Does the dataset’s licence permit me to use it for my intended purpose? Many data portals have no information about what you can do with the data they publish. Some assume it’s implicitly open because they’ve published it on the web, but without a licence you can’t know that for sure. It could be covered by copyright, which means that you’re not allowed to use it.

Recourse: It’s good practice to make sure that you as a publisher are contactable. We have forms on Open Net Zero to ask whether a data set exists for a particular thing, in which case we’ll try and help if we can, and to suggest a data set that we’ve missed, either one that you’ve published or one that you’ve seen that you think should be in our list. It’s really important that you don’t just publish without recourse because you won’t learn whether your data is useful or not. A lot of organisations put a lot of effort into creating, collating, describing and publishing datasets as well as all the legal stuff but then aren’t contactable. 

Ross: What countries or organisations are publishing catalogues well/poorly?

Chris: At a national data level, we’ve found France and Ireland very easy to index. They’ve got a sensible categorization and tagging scheme. As a net zero index, we don’t want every bit of data those governments publish about every part of their operations. By having a good categorisation system we are able to index only relevant datasets. 

For a recent bad example, I would point to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They have published a widely-used official database of emission factors, yet the full dataset cannot be downloaded, there’s no catalogue of what’s in there and there’s no API. It’s just a website you have to fish through and download CSV files, or you can download a desktop app that does the same thing.

As a middle ground between these examples, you’ve got data catalogues like the RTE (France) API. It’s a good interactive data portal with 40 or 50 APIs and data sets but again it lacks machine readability. The only way you can see the list is by going to the website and navigating through them. So we haven’t indexed their data, not because it isn’t good data but because 50 APIs is too much to index and maintain manually.

The value of good data publication

Open Net Zero and the Icebreaker One team ultimately want to raise the bar when it comes to sharing net-zero data. Part of this is highlighting what good data publication looks like. If organisations are providing good licensing, clear access conditions and well-structured descriptive metadata, this should be praised. It also means having conversations with those looking to improve, like our work to make net-zero data more discoverable for impact investors. An Icebreaker One membership allows organisations to be part of this conversation and part of a collaborative process of shaping net zero data. 

The future of our digital economy is based on data interoperability   

Regarding data, today is the ‘simplest’ the landscape will be. We have, and will continue to, see huge economic and social value generated from the utilisation of data. 

Data are being generated from web-based, industrial and financial systems, from our built world and our environment. To fully exploit its value, we need to connect data to those who need it. We need to reduce the friction of finding, accessing, and using both commercial and non-commercial data to enable better decision-making, analysis and insights that can help citizens, businesses and government unlock value.

A key attribute of smart data is that it is everywhere. In designing systems fit for a web-enabled era, it is essential to address data governance as a distinct area of work from its  ‘utilisation’.

This isn’t a problem that needs new technology. Many attempts to consolidate data—new databases and portals—struggle to scale. Our economic and infrastructure systems are being digitalized in a decentralised and distributed way.

There is no ‘centre’ in a system like this: we need to connect data, not collect it. 

Trust Frameworks enable this by setting the rules of the road and addressing risks and concerns that prevent the sharing and use of data. To unlock the market architecture for trusted and secure data sharing requires an open, standards-based approach. 

A Trust Framework is a very thin layer to enable market actors to agree on the rules of the game. An implementation entity for a Trust Framework can (a) assure organisations are who they say they are; (b) ensure alignment around pre-agreed rules (e.g. licensing, consent, liability, technical and non-technical areas); and (c) enable and facilitate monitoring, enforcement and modes of redress aligned with those rules.

To enable pre-authorised access to data, Trust Frameworks include verification and assurance services for organisations who wish to share, access and use data. For the avoidance of doubt, Trust Frameworks do not replace other forms of data aggregation and management and, indeed, they can act to enable them. 

The UK has led the world in the creation of such frameworks, through Open Banking (which is regulated in the UK and has been copied in over 80 countries) and Open Energy (which is in development, part-funded by industry and government).  

An open market design for data must ensure that such markets are: 

1. Cohesive — common rules across markets 
2. Interoperable — common processes, frameworks, connections
3. Legal — common frameworks for data rights, liability, redress
4. Controlled — common, rights-based consent management for access to data
5. Universal — open to the whole market

Five core principles for the underpinning data infrastructure include; that:

1. Trusted data is essential to our digital future.
   Accurate, trustworthy data that informs action is essential to decision-makers across society, industry and government. It helps derisk decisions, accelerates new solutions to market and enables transparent monitoring against targets. 
2. Access to data must be open
   Data must be made discoverable and accessible to those who need it.  To unlock public and private sector benefits, the ability to effectively share data (using Open or Shared licenses) across sectors is essential. It includes both the real economy and the financial economy. Data must be machine-readable, and have open metadata to enable its discovery.
3. Rules for data sharing should address public and private sector needs
   To enable access to data, the definition of the rules used to share it requires participation from diverse actors. Robust policies and standards can also support assurance and audit. Data owners need to be able to control who can access it in a manner that addresses commercial, legal and regulatory requirements.
4. Data infrastructure must be governed openly and independently
   To maintain an open market, data infrastructure must include public and private sector actors in its design, implementation and enforcement. A market-neutral body is a preferred approach to developing such data infrastructure and will include remits of data governance, policy, licensing, technical and operational principles. This infrastructure needs to be developed, and iterated upon, at a pace that is relevant to the urgency of the issues being tackled. Both its processes, and outputs related to its implementation, should be openly licenced.
5. Data infrastructure requires mandates for engagement
   To close data gaps as rapidly as possible and address the public interest, Governments and regulators should define rules for access to specific data, mandate participation and drive adoption. Similarly, industry initiatives can define rules for specific industry benefit, and act as catalysts to adoption. Common policies and open standards must create mandates for machine-readable data, data access processes, access control and mechanisms for enforcement that unlock data flow. 

If you would like to learn more, please get in touch partners@ib1.org

To endorse these principles for net zero data, please sign the https://ib1.org/icebreaker-principles.

1. Impact on SMEs
   Open banking has had a significant impact in the UK, enabling consumers to access innovative financial services from accredited providers who have been granted secure access to their bank transaction data by consumers. The impact on small businesses has been greater still, with consistently higher penetration of the SME sector throughout the implementation period.

2. SMEs as early adopters – innovation or efficiency?
   SMEs tend to be early adopters of technology: they bought the first fax machines and mobile phones and adopted personal computing ahead of consumers generally. However, they have adopted open banking not because they are natural innovators but because it saves them time and money, for example replacing manual reconciliation of accounts payable with cash in the bank and tax filing.
   Project Perseus has the potential to do the same: it can save them time (in filing data based on energy consumption) and money (by providing lenders and brokers assured data on their GHG generation).
3. Building on what’s there today
   Most of the building blocks for Perseus are already available or soon will be through the smart data council. As with any data-sharing ecosystem, Perseus will need a Trust Framework (user authentication/authorisation and provider accreditation) as well as common security and messaging standards. The model if not the actual structures/standards for these are already in place as a result of work done for open banking, open energy and the pensions dashboards but there is little or no incentive for any individual company to adopt these standards even though the benefits of collective action are plainly visible. This was essentially the problem that ensured that open banking would not be adopted on a voluntary basis by individual firms.
4. Incentives
   The lesson is clear: to take this project forward it will be necessary to either:
   1. provide individual entities with an incentive to participate in the ecosystem (including adhering to its standards and protocols) or 
   2. make adherence mandatory.
5. Compliance
   As noted above, SMEs already have (financial) incentives but banks and intermediaries do not. That said, the “Long Term Regulatory Framework” referred to repeatedly in the JROC recommendations for the future of open banking does suggest that regulators may, at least in the next two years or so, have the powers to mandate compliance with the standards incorporated in a wide range of data sharing schemes.
   
   Firms would be ill-advised to oppose adopting standards voluntarily that they will shortly be required to adopt. Given this, it would be to the advantage of relevant regulators to participate in the current round of informal discussions being facilitated by Icebreaker One as they could help ensure that industry-led plans mesh with the regulations that will ultimately come into force.

Pension funds, market investors and countries (sovereign wealth funds) are allocating $trillions to create a lower-carbon future. At the moment this is done using ‘financial economy’ modelling based on top-down economic models, Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) ratings and related financial instruments that have a risk-based focus. While these will deliver a ‘lower carbon’ future, there are material risks in data: in models, inputs & reported outputs.

Currently, there is a material absence of transparency, assurance, comparability and auditability around environmental reporting, including ‘ESG’ and ‘impact investing’, that many groups around the world are trying to address. Most reporting is ‘push’ (e.g. to https://cdp.net or TCFD reporting, which is now mandatory for >50k companies in Europe).

While better reporting is a form of progress, it does not provide a causal link to materiality or ‘double materiality’. ESG ratings are very far from mature.

Governments are likely to mandate that such publishing be made ‘open’ (for some definitions of open) and XBRL has the mandate to help develop principles for machine-readable data reporting. One challenge is that everyone is trying to ‘build a portal’ rather than taking a web-scale approach — this is not scalable and increases barriers to access and share.

At Icebreaker One we’re making data work harder to deliver net zero. We’re promoting the idea that companies publish their reports, data, and metadata in a way that can be properly indexed.

We’re building a Climate Finance ‘Trust Framework’ where organisations can legally verify that they are the publisher and enable auditors to better assure the outputs.

Step one is to invert the reporting model to one of verified publishing, the act of which can enable a secure open market of actors to use in their own systems/portals/hubs/analytics/tech stack for publishing.

Step two is to start opening up the data value chains between the ‘real economy’ and the ‘financial economy’. This means, for example, enabling access to the energy data (both kWh consumption and its carbon intensity at the time of use) to users in a way they can share it through to carbon accounting, risk modelling (insurance), investors, ESG ratings providers, auditors and a range of other users (e.g. energy efficiency will become priced/tradable in emerging decentralised flexibility markets).

This approach is embedded in our Open Energy programme. We’ve also started indexing GHG models and emissions factors (43,000+ so far) at Discover, which is entirely open source. Together these are connected by our Open Net Zero service.

We can use the trust framework to verify sources, connections and provide access control for non-public data. Copies of audit data can also be used to provide a certifiable provenance that supports assurance. Such certification would give the market/rating higher confidence and drive behaviours towards transparency, quantifiable impact and double materiality.

One way of thinking about this is: we could automate greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting within a trusted framework. This would facilitate capital flow to projects that demonstrate the greatest measurable progress towards a a lower carbon future and, if applied across economies, would let us work out whether or not we are on target to hit net zero in advance, rather than waiting for the climate data to tell us we’re not.

Slides, open-to-comment, https://bit.ly/IB1-NZDF

*the above diagram only addresses climate finance risk through the reporting frameworks. Unpacking the actual financial risk models themselves is yet another dimension, as are the climate and catastrophe risk models. As with all systems-modelling approaches, there is no ‘edge’ to the data flows.

Preamble: “I recently rewatched The Imitation Game with my son and it made me wonder if we need a similar intervention to better address the vast challenges we face our energy digitalisation transformation. We need to get the best minds in the country to come together and join the dots properly. Currently that is falling between the cracks. How can we better use what we have to improve our security, resilience and lay foundations for innovation and growth” — Gavin Starks.

“The current situation facing the UK is not a question of security of gas supply, but of high gas prices set by international markets. The UK’s exposure to volatile global gas prices underscores the importance of our plan to generate more cheap, clean renewable energy and nuclear power in the UK to reduce our reliance on expensive fossil fuels”, https://gov.uk/government/news/russia-ukraine-and-uk-energy-factsheet

The issue is that addressing our energy security will take time, will not be addressed by this coming winter (2022-23) and may impact hitting our binding Net Zero targets. The new energy security strategy further underscores the importance of energy data to achieving national targets [link, link].

The challenge is to improve energy security in both supply and efficiency (reduction of consumption): to accelerate switching to a new energy mix; reducing energy use across the UK (domestic, public and commercial); to ensure economic stability and alleviate the cost-of-living crisis.  This needs a coordinated understanding of where energy is being used, where it can be reduced, and how this relates to network supply and distribution.  Current modelling, while advanced, does not have the right quantity, quality, diversity, granularity and time resolution to maximise the benefit for the whole system.  Industry, Government and consumers need better access to data and information to help reduce risk, increase efficiency and maximise resilience. 

The gap to better understanding of what options exist and what opportunities are realistic, is that there are many different systems and models across organisations that make secure, resilient and repeatable sharing of trusted data difficult. An opportunity exists to help ‘join the dots’ between organisations and initiatives, to accelerate the EDiT recommendations, to help increase our energy resilience and unlock rapid innovation. Convening around this challenge requires public and private sector collaboration, across sectors (e.g. heating, renewables, retrofit, EV). 

Understanding systemic options that could help address this

There will be issues regarding pricing, availability, flexibility and pressure on demand. To address this will require collaboration between the DNOs, energy supply and demand, better understanding of where there is demand vs flex. It will require coordination between government, industry and consumers to both reduce demand and increase production. The UK can probably cope through this summer into autumn. This period (3-6 months) can be used to prepare for Winter ‘22 where, under current conditions, it is exposed and at risk.

We propose a programme that will: 

1. In 2022, enable government and industry to understand the priority data gaps that stand in the way of addressing current exposure, and in delivering the energy strategy. 
2. Bring together expertise by convening relevant stakeholders in a coordinated, agile, time-bound and results-based programme;
3. Identify specific use cases that can deliver solutions that can be addressed through better data sharing, and could include where data could aid government and regulator decision making (through stakeholder engagement and research);
4. Identify the data and information needed (both presumed open data and secure data);
5. Build reusable data infrastructure (including that which requires higher security levels) needed for the data sharing to take place in a trusted framework (e.g. Open Energy);
6. Analyse and report on Open Energy’s data sensitivity classes so that the work can be repeated, replicated and scaled across related sectors (eg. electric vehicles, water);
7. Benchmark current practices and report on improvements, evidence and outcomes that support decision-making and institutional memory, aligned with the national interest. 

Who is involved and why 

Icebreaker One is an independent, non-partisan non-profit making data work harder to deliver net zero. Its team is uniquely skilled in convening public and private sector actors, with decades of experience creating incentives for corporate collaboration and shaping public and private data governance, at global, national and local levels. It sees the opportunity to increase energy security and accelerate climate finance to achieve demonstrable Net Zero outcomes. It has developed Open Energy as a non-profit service and is working across the energy and EV sectors to create open marketplaces for data. 

Our network includes over 60 organisations across the energy sector that have been actively involved in the development of Open Energy.

If you would like to get in touch about this idea, or Open Energy in general, please contact openenergy@ib1.org

We brought together a panel of experts to discuss the role that regulation plays in supporting DNOs and unlocking sector-wide innovation, in our February webinar hosted by Icebreaker One Co-Founder and Programme Manager, Gea Mikic:

• Charlotte Hillenbrand, Product Strategist, Icebreaker One
• Sara Vaughan, Non Executive Director, Elexon
• Liam Bennett, Senior Manager – Data Policy and Regulation, Ofgem

The panel started by discussing what’s changed for DNOs and the wider energy market over recent decades, before exploring how the sector can work together to achieve net zero goals. Here’s a summary of the key themes.

1. The impact of transition

Increases in distributed generation require Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) to take on system operator functions; shifting their role from passive/reactive energy distribution to such as and active network management, using new technology and real-time data to make interventions on the network: to the transition from Distribution Network Operator to Distribution System Operator (DSO).

“The distribution network used to be seen as passive. It was basically a conduit for getting power from one place to another. Today is very different. In the last decade, the usage patterns of Britain’s local electricity distribution networks have changed rapidly. There’s been a sharp increase in more low carbon generation connecting to local networks, as both consumers and businesses invest in their own generation equipment” says Sara Vaughan, Non Executive Director, Elexon.

Sara explains: “In a DSO model, the very last thing that the network will be is passive. It is sitting at the centre of thousands of potential interactions, playing host to a variety of different distributed energy resources and enabling flexibility transactions as an alternative to just investing in more network capacity. The key to this, of course, is data and digitalisation. The networks need to know where the assets are, the investors and developers need to know where the opportunities are, and consumers need to know that this is all possible. Greater data visibility and open data are essential steps towards the digital transformation of the energy sector and the acceleration to net zero”.

Are we heading in the right direction?

It’s clear that this is a pivotal moment for the energy sector. How can policy and regulation provide the structural support for this shift?

“What every regulated body needs is a degree of certainty in terms of future policy. My concern, when you couple the current world situation with the cost of living crisis that we’re seeing more generally at the moment, is around political will to keep pushing forward. We know that there are some members of Parliament already who are talking about slowing down the drive to net zero. But we will never get to net zero unless we drive for it. Once we are on that path, then we reduce our dependence on gas and its volatility. So we have to keep that decarbonisation focus and investment going.”

Sara Vaughan, Elexon

We need to work collectively to keep modernising and diversifying our digitised energy systems. Liam Bennett, Senior Manager – Data Policy and Regulation at Ofgem, emphasises: “Digitalisation is the key; driving open data up through the DNOs and up through other systems to provide value. If we keep progressing in silos and we all think that in our individual parts of the system we’re building the right thing, but none of it interacts; we don’t really get that true value in the whole system and we end up either overbuilding or we just fundamentally don’t get there.

“Each DNO having its own data sharing platform is definitely a good starting position. To make data available to consumers, to stakeholders, to Ofgem, is a really positive step. My push to DNOs would be: how do we use those open data platforms? We need to take a common approach, whether it be through an open network project or a third party; making sure that stakeholders and flexibility providers can go and access each of those different data platforms and know what data they’re going to get, in the right fashion, in the right timeliness”.

2. Focus on interoperability

Interoperability is essential if the energy industry is to achieve its 2030 climate targets. Liam states: “The wider system probably needs three key points to deliver in the next 10 years. The first is common data and metadata standards. Ofgem recently published a letter on the common information model for the Long Term Development Statement for DNOs, which is a strong step for us, and we think future standards will also be valuable. Secondly, minimum standards for data quality. Everyone in the digital energy sector needs to know that the data they receive is accessible and acceptable. Thirdly, you need clearly articulated roles and responsibilities in the sector. You need to reduce risk; we need increased regulatory certainty. And we need to understand who you interact with to get what you need to operate in that future system. The operation requires interfaces between different parts.

“We’d like to see the approach DNOs are taking to engage external providers such as Open Energy to find common interfaces. We’ve been on quite a journey so far, from the Energy Data Task Force into the Energy Digitalisation Task Force. We’ve taken quite an open approach to our regulation, collaborating with the sector and with DNOS as well. We want to take that forward. Collaborative and iterative design is the only way we’ll get the energy system we all envisage. So yes, our door is open. We want to design the system with you. Come and help us.”

Liam Bennett, Ofgem

3. Getting started

With so much to navigate, it’s important just to make a start. Charlotte Hillenbrand, Product Strategist at Icebreaker One, explains: “the challenge is always: where do we start? I’ve encountered lots of clients where that conversation has been rolling for a couple of years. And the problems are somewhat known, but the starting point still evades the teams. So that’s where Open Energy is really trying to help DNOs and other players in the sector: to get started. With Open Energy you can dive in and start accessing data; start finding open and shared datasets and see who else in the community is active.

“We’ve really tried as much as we can to facilitate DNOs to operationalise the data best practice that’s laid out in their RIIO-ED2 business plans, because we recognise that this is a really complex space. We’re focussed on removing as much friction from the process as we can, in order to get to value as quickly as possible.”

Charlotte Hillenbrand, Icebreaker One

Charlotte: “We’re indexing and connecting data, not collecting data. So the data will always remain on individual systems. What we’re facilitating is the connection and transaction of datasets in a safe environment. And in that way, you can build the picture, ingest the data you need, and start to map it”.

Get involved

• Become a member of Open Energy to use our pilot service
• Join Icebreaker One, which develops and operates Open Energy, as a supporter
• Sign up to the Open Energy newsletter

We brought together a panel of experts to discuss the role that regulation plays in supporting DNOs and unlocking sector-wide innovation, in our February webinar hosted by Icebreaker One Co-Founder and Programme Manager, Gea Mikic:

• Charlotte Hillenbrand, Product Strategist, Icebreaker One
• Sara Vaughan, Non Executive Director, Elexon
• Liam Bennett, Senior Manager – Data Policy and Regulation, Ofgem

The panel started by discussing what’s changed for DNOs and the wider energy market over recent decades, before exploring how the sector can work together to achieve net zero goals. Here’s a summary of the key themes.

1. The impact of transition

Increases in distributed generation require Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) to take on system operator functions; shifting their role from passive/reactive energy distribution to such as and active network management, using new technology and real-time data to make interventions on the network: to the transition from Distribution Network Operator to Distribution System Operator (DSO).

“The distribution network used to be seen as passive. It was basically a conduit for getting power from one place to another. Today is very different. In the last decade, the usage patterns of Britain’s local electricity distribution networks have changed rapidly. There’s been a sharp increase in more low carbon generation connecting to local networks, as both consumers and businesses invest in their own generation equipment” says Sara Vaughan, Non Executive Director, Elexon.

Sara explains: “In a DSO model, the very last thing that the network will be is passive. It is sitting at the centre of thousands of potential interactions, playing host to a variety of different distributed energy resources and enabling flexibility transactions as an alternative to just investing in more network capacity. The key to this, of course, is data and digitalisation. The networks need to know where the assets are, the investors and developers need to know where the opportunities are, and consumers need to know that this is all possible. Greater data visibility and open data are essential steps towards the digital transformation of the energy sector and the acceleration to net zero”.

Are we heading in the right direction?

It’s clear that this is a pivotal moment for the energy sector. How can policy and regulation provide the structural support for this shift?

“What every regulated body needs is a degree of certainty in terms of future policy. My concern, when you couple the current world situation with the cost of living crisis that we’re seeing more generally at the moment, is around political will to keep pushing forward. We know that there are some members of Parliament already who are talking about slowing down the drive to net zero. But we will never get to net zero unless we drive for it. Once we are on that path, then we reduce our dependence on gas and its volatility. So we have to keep that decarbonisation focus and investment going.”

Sara Vaughan, Elexon

We need to work collectively to keep modernising and diversifying our digitised energy systems. Liam Bennett, Senior Manager – Data Policy and Regulation at Ofgem, emphasises: “Digitalisation is the key; driving open data up through the DNOs and up through other systems to provide value. If we keep progressing in silos and we all think that in our individual parts of the system we’re building the right thing, but none of it interacts; we don’t really get that true value in the whole system and we end up either overbuilding or we just fundamentally don’t get there.

“Each DNO having its own data sharing platform is definitely a good starting position. To make data available to consumers, to stakeholders, to Ofgem, is a really positive step. My push to DNOs would be: how do we use those open data platforms? We need to take a common approach, whether it be through an open network project or a third party; making sure that stakeholders and flexibility providers can go and access each of those different data platforms and know what data they’re going to get, in the right fashion, in the right timeliness”.

2. Focus on interoperability

Interoperability is essential if the energy industry is to achieve its 2030 climate targets. Liam states: “The wider system probably needs three key points to deliver in the next 10 years. The first is common data and metadata standards. Ofgem recently published a letter on the common information model for the Long Term Development Statement for DNOs, which is a strong step for us, and we think future standards will also be valuable. Secondly, minimum standards for data quality. Everyone in the digital energy sector needs to know that the data they receive is accessible and acceptable. Thirdly, you need clearly articulated roles and responsibilities in the sector. You need to reduce risk; we need increased regulatory certainty. And we need to understand who you interact with to get what you need to operate in that future system. The operation requires interfaces between different parts.

“We’d like to see the approach DNOs are taking to engage external providers such as Open Energy to find common interfaces. We’ve been on quite a journey so far, from the Energy Data Task Force into the Energy Digitalisation Task Force. We’ve taken quite an open approach to our regulation, collaborating with the sector and with DNOS as well. We want to take that forward. Collaborative and iterative design is the only way we’ll get the energy system we all envisage. So yes, our door is open. We want to design the system with you. Come and help us.”

Liam Bennett, Ofgem

3. Getting started

With so much to navigate, it’s important just to make a start. Charlotte Hillenbrand, Product Strategist at Icebreaker One, explains: “the challenge is always: where do we start? I’ve encountered lots of clients where that conversation has been rolling for a couple of years. And the problems are somewhat known, but the starting point still evades the teams. So that’s where Open Energy is really trying to help DNOs and other players in the sector: to get started. With Open Energy you can dive in and start accessing data; start finding open and shared datasets and see who else in the community is active.

“We’ve really tried as much as we can to facilitate DNOs to operationalise the data best practice that’s laid out in their RIIO-ED2 business plans, because we recognise that this is a really complex space. We’re focussed on removing as much friction from the process as we can, in order to get to value as quickly as possible.”

Charlotte Hillenbrand, Icebreaker One

Charlotte: “We’re indexing and connecting data, not collecting data. So the data will always remain on individual systems. What we’re facilitating is the connection and transaction of datasets in a safe environment. And in that way, you can build the picture, ingest the data you need, and start to map it”.

Get involved

• Become a member of Open Energy to use our pilot service
• Join Icebreaker One, which develops and operates Open Energy, as a supporter
• Sign up to the Open Energy newsletter

A panel of experts gathered to discuss the emerging pressures and priorities for DNOs and the wider energy system, in Icebreaker One’s January webinar hosted by Open Engagement Manager, Vichi Chandra.

“We can’t talk about anything happening in the energy market without thinking about the current context of rising gas prices, the current cost of living crisis, and what that means to people” says Dhara Vyas, Deputy Director, Energy UK. “High prices are – rightly – driving the media narrative right now and that has meant a significant shift away from the UK leading the way on decarbonisation and net zero, to the current cost of living crisis which impacts on everyone. 

“However, I think there is a significant, real concern that this should not mean we put the brakes on our journey to achieve a net zero system. It’s really important that we think about this in the context of the consumer.”

Matt Webb, Head of Enterprise Data Management, UK Power Networks highlighted the role of DNOs in making this happen: 

“We need to accelerate the connection of low carbon technologies and maximise their use in order to contribute to net zero ambitions. At the same time, we must maintain our core role of ensuring the continuity and quality of energy supply. We cannot lose sight of the fact that we need to keep the lights on”.

Matt Webb, UK Power Networks

A period of transformation

January’s Energy Digitalisation Taskforce report made a number of key recommendations detailing what is required to deliver a digitalised and decarbonised energy system.

“One that stood out to me was the call to embed a culture of digitalisation and I think that’s really important”, said Dhara.

“It’s essential that companies across the market are planning for a digital system when it comes to building the right skills and investing in digital assets and activities. DNOs are of course a vital part of that infrastructure, and the networks in fact have a much better understanding of the state of the system than perhaps a lot of other parts of the sector; so it’s vital that they share that across the market in order to help us build the system of the future”

Dhara Vyas, Energy UK

It’s a viewpoint shared by Matt. “Digital transformation is as much about culture, behaviours and ways of working. And that’s where we as a sector need to shift to be more open and collaborative. We talk about interoperability a great deal; and that’s about how we align and standardise and facilitate communication and interaction between the different players in this ecosystem. 

“The RIIO ED2 business plans that we as DNOs have published in recent months, go into significant detail about how we plan to invest and develop our digital capabilities over the coming years, right the way through until 2028. We find ourselves at a really pivotal and important point in terms of how we meet this ongoing challenge, and ultimately deliver the interoperable energy system of the future that we are all aiming for”.

The shift that is required of DNOs, and the wider energy system as a whole, is significant. As Matt explains, “in normal terms, what a DNO is and does, is quite monolithic. And all of a sudden, to find yourself in a central, facilitating role is a big change to make. Traditional network operation entails fairly passive and predictable systems, and we’re now moving into – and are in the midst of – a far more dynamic environment. We need to help facilitate new forms of service, service providers and business models; increasing competition and consumer choice as well as supporting a flexibility first approach”.

How Open Energy can help

Open Energy is a service that makes it easy to search, access and securely share energy data. It covers the full spectrum of data; all the way from open data to really hard to access, commercially sensitive shared data, where access control is important. The Open Energy service currently includes search and access control, co-designed over the last 18+ months by industry, for industry, with support from and engagement with BEIS, InnovateUK and Ofgem (who sit as an observer on the Open Energy Steering Board).

Gavin Starks, Founder and CEO of Icebreaker One, states:

“The approach that we’ve taken with IB1 and the development of Open Energy has been to ask what are the market design principles for data sharing that can scale to whole markets, and across sectors? This has led the teams to understand how to reduce the friction, and connect data between organisations, without insisting that anyone has to put their data in a particular place. Secure data exchanges are made possible by the adoption of open standards and a shared data infrastructure that underpins cohesion and interoperability across the market.

Gavin Starks, Icebreaker One

“What we’ve been focussing on is the really valuable information that tends not to be Open – and in many cases can’t be Open. As soon as you need a set of rules around that, there needs to be a set of legal contracts and a set of processes whereby the control around who can access what recommendations, when, and so on, can be codified. There’s a lot of work there on how we can give that Access Control to the people who hold the data. 

“Whether or not that’s a business-to-business context or whether it’s a consumer context; the mode of consent, the process of consent management, and rights assignment to the data are all miles away from what organisations are used to thinking about and dealing with. So there’s a massive amount of work to be done in helping to understand the problems that everybody’s trying to solve, both in terms of infrastructure, but also in understanding what the rules are and how we can bring people together so that we end up with an open marketplace”.

What are the opportunities here for DNOs?

Matt says: “When it comes to data, commerciality is certainly one of those factors we need to think about, and we need to be cognisant of the fact that we work in an increasingly competitive market. However, we need to recognize that we are part of an ecosystem now where that commercial data is key. The key to that is us working collaboratively and trying to establish the common processes and practices that make sure that we’re making consistent decisions.” 

Dhara agrees that a whole-system approach is needed: “we have identified all the pieces of the puzzle but now we need to put them together”.

“It’s not just about DNOs but everyone in the sector; the challenge is manifold” adds Gavin. “Leadership needs to come from various different points of the system – government and market leaders – and a lot of the innovation will come naturally from large organisations and smaller start-ups. The question is: how can we do all that together? 

“What we’ve tried to create here with the Open Energy programme is space for that to happen. So ultimately we’re here to help bring people together, have the right conversations and really focus on where that business value is and how that interlinks with the overall data strategy; both for individual organisations and for the sector as a whole”.

Get involved

• Become a member of Open Energy to use our pilot service
• Join Icebreaker One, which develops and operates Open Energy, as a supporter
• Sign up to the Open Energy newsletter

Driving decarbonization and emissions accountability through data transparency

28 October 2021
11:30-12:30 CET (05:30 am – 06:30 am EDT / 05:30 pm – 06:30 pm SGT)
Duration: 1 hour

Session description

Businesses across the world are stepping-up their climate commitments: setting targets to reduce emissions and align with the 1.5°C target for a climate-safe world. However, with mounting pressures to accelerate decarbonization and create accountability for such commitments, understanding and exchanging product-level carbon emissions data is fast becoming a license to operate. Imagine a future in which the carbon footprint of individual products is calculated (and communicated) based on primary data from the entire supply chain, Scope 3 emissions can be tackled exactly where needed or financial decisions are informed by reliable and verified emissions data.

Today, such transparency poses a significant challenge – one which urgently needs to be addressed by any business with serious intentions to move towards net zero. This session will explore the root-causes of this challenge and discuss some of the promising opportunities access to product-level emissions data could unlock. In this context, the importance of collaboration and (technological) innovation will be discussed, focusing in particular on the critical role businesses play in making emissions transparency – and hence decarbonization – a reality.

Slides used in this presentation are embedded below [or download as PDF]

For the UK to hit its national targets we must both re-risk investment and make impact accountable. This will require opening up access to commercial data using low-friction, secure, trusted networks. In addition, data that is in the national interest must be published for access by anyone using open licenses. 

Examples of open standards for data sharing include Open Banking, Open Energy and insurance and asset-level innovation such as SERI.

Open standards can help create open marketplaces for commercial and open data: rapidly expanding proven sector trust frameworks to support the finance sector to find, access and use data; to create incentives, improve decision making and radically increase transparency. 

Imagine a decision-maker could mandate net-zero,
continuously measure progress and
act to adapt incentives in a timely, credible manner.

Our aim at IB1 is to make data work harder to deliver Net Zero—to unlock data flows for better metrics, risk assessment and incentive creation, to model Net Zero strategies and returns, unlock high-resolution economic analysis, and enable the practical application of real-world data down to the asset level. The opportunity is to deliver an open marketplace for commercial data that incentivises the whole value chain. This can be achieved through the implementation of open standards for data sharing.

To deliver a demonstrably Net Zero future requires changes to institutional frameworks of data sharing and access (governance, regulation, transparency). For example, a regulatory mandate not only ‘to’ disclose but ‘how to’ disclose. A trust framework can inform mandates for policy and regulation, legal, operational and technical standards for interoperability. This is a systems-based approach in which financial, engineering, consumption and environmental data can be activated and operationalised.

The approach can enable:

• Operational open marketplaces for commercial data sharing across sectors
• Distributed, decentralised activity with a minimum-viable centralised service 
• Delivery of co-developed, policy-aligned solutions that address market needs
• Cohesion and interoperability, radically reducing cost and friction
• Risk-managed and cost-effective solutions for governance and compliance 
• Industry innovation to support, de-risk and incentivise Net Zero

Icebreaker One has, in collaboration with government, regulators and industry, created a market-wide solution for secure commercial data sharing and is implementing this across energy, transport, water, agriculture and the built world. This is based on a proven blueprint: with Treasury backing, Open Banking opened up secure access to shared financial data. It has since transformed the fintech sector, creating tens of billions of pounds in value. This is expanding to Open Finance and is, also with government support, being developed for Open Energy.

As the DDSG chair has commented previously, “as we look to a low-carbon economy, the data that we need to reach Net Zero at the pace we’re working to isn’t available…. the gas and electricity networks are deploying digital solutions to ensure we can achieve not only our wider decarbonisation goals, but ensure we continue and improve the level of service for our customers”.

The slides used during the discussion are below.

Pace. Repeatability. Materiality.

With the G7 backing TCFD, there are now $trillions of assets and financial instruments that will have to quantify their climate risk: it is fantastic to see progress to robust reporting on Climate & Finance. This is one of the areas which we watched emerging and led to the creation of Icebreaker One.

Today, there is about $2T* (that’s $2,000,000 million) being spent on renewables PER ANNUM at the moment and this needs to double in short order. So, while the financial system is riding on the Green Swan [citation] principles, there are still big questions about how this will affect change, will it be enough and will it happen quickly enough? What are the carrots and inevitable sticks?

James Vaccaro argues that the TCFD’s remit is too narrow “Whilst it’s entirely sensible and necessary to look at how to protect finance from the climate, all the scientific evidence suggests that this will be hopelessly insufficient unless we also address how we protect the climate and society as a whole from finance. Shifting focus to climate impacts will allow financial institutions and regulators alike to better establish how finance can become an ally, rather than an antagonist, in the just transition to a climate-safe world.” and calls for a Taskforce on Finance-related Climate Impacts.

We have highlighted challenges with TCFD previously and ask how we can move from theory to tangible.

We can’t create a ‘fair’ transition until we have our core infrastructure in place (too rapid, and we will experience other forms of systems collapse that will make things worse) and we need to balance this with the fact that physics doesn’t care about our economy. It is to be seen whether TCFD and related (e.g. SFDR which is, strangely, not joined up) create the right change at the right pace.

The material areas where Icebreaker One is and can contribute are to help unlock and automate the flow of commercial, sensitive and secure data (as well as Open Data) that help demonstrate and evidence materiality.

Open Energy is laying the foundations to automate access to all energy data across the economy.

SERI is laying the foundations of how to unlock and automate non-financial data that is relevant to insurance, risk modelling and investment.

Our Data Infrastructure paper provides an overview of the market architecture for non-financial data sharing, nationally and internationally. Let’s start by automating our measurement and radically reduce the cost of data sharing to enable markets to get the price right, better manage risk and de-risk the vast capital (we have set a target of $3.6T/y) on a continuous basis.

* $2T/y is the latest figure I’ve had communicated to my privately by an industry expert (broker) based on the aggregate of global investment including Biden’s plan (link below).

Related links

https://liiba.co.uk/library/?category_name=press-releases

https://www.theccc.org.uk/publicationtype/0-report/08-supporting-research/

https://unepfi.org/psi/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/NZIA-launch-press-release.pdf

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/biden-climate-plan.html

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/sustainable-finance-disclosure-7965546/