Author: Mark Gardner, Smart Data Research UK
How do you start to build public trust in a new research programme?
How do you engage meaningfully with people about concepts like data and public good, when they’re still figuring out who you are and what you’re about?
How do you ensure that people’s voices shape the direction of things from the very beginning?
These were just some of the challenges we faced when Smart Data Research UK (SDR UK) embarked on its first public dialogue, in partnership with Sciencewise.
Why we engaged early
Smart data is produced through our daily interactions with the digital world – when we buy products or services, use social media, or get directions. It’s collected through mobile phones, wearable devices, shop loyalty cards and smart technology. Smart data research happens when this data is safely shared for scientific research to help us understand important social challenges, from disease prevention to planning public services, understanding how people behave, or tackling climate change.
We believe this represents an exciting opportunity to improve public services and inform evidence-based policymaking. With this potential comes a strong sense of social responsibility – we must listen to what people have to say and do things to improve their lives.
It’s an interesting paradox. Smart data feels precious – it’s our data, about us, what we do, where we do it. Yet it’s ubiquitous – a sort of national asset we should all be able to draw from in the 21st century. This duality is part of the reason why good public engagement is essential – to ensure our work genuinely serves the public.
We decided to engage early – before our data services (the teams we’ve funded around the UK to provide safe and efficient ways for UK researchers to access and use smart data) were commissioned – because we wanted public insights to genuinely shape our approach.
And the dialogue format, with its emphasis on conversation and reflection over time, is the perfect way to explore complex issues with members of the public, and ourselves.
From skepticism to enthusiasm: how understanding evolved
One of the most striking aspects of our dialogue was seeing how participants’ views evolved as their understanding deepened. Initially, no-one really understood smart data research, but they grew more enthusiastic as they learned about its potential.
The 72 participants – drawn from diverse backgrounds across five locations (Belfast, Gateshead, Inverness, London and Newport) – met over four weeks to grapple with important questions: What does ‘public good’ mean? How should publicly funded scientists collaborate with private companies? What safeguards will adequately protect privacy?
Participants moved from initial concerns about data privacy to engaging with deeper questions about research methods, accountability, and transparency standards.
What public good means to people
Most importantly, we learned how people think about ‘public good’. For participants, this meant tackling big national challenges like health, economic inequality, and infrastructure. They focused on public services and challenges affecting them, their families and communities.
As one participant put it: “Using the data to help with health services is the most important thing that smart data could be used for.” Another from Belfast emphasised the economic dimension: “Socioeconomic growth is the driver for everything.”
Participants wanted research to translate into tangible improvements. They expected smart data research to focus on the causes and impacts of real challenges. One participant from Gateshead captured this idea: “There’s a project to increase transport within the North East…and having that research to say maybe where there’s inequalities in [accessibility] and obviously that would then have an impact on being able to access shopping, fuel, things like that.”
Public good isn’t just about generating insights – it’s about being useful and making a difference to how people live.
Addressing inequality at the heart of public good
Throughout the dialogue, participants consistently spoke about addressing inequality as central to public good. Drawing on their own experiences and those in their communities, they reflected on differences they saw across the country.
As one participant explained: “This is research that helps the public at large. Use the data to ease inequality like health disparities in two different areas. Use the data to make improvements to society.”
This focus on inequality wasn’t just about fairness – participants saw it as essential for research to understand and address the specific needs of different communities, particularly those who are disadvantaged or underserved.
Balancing hopes and concerns
The dialogue revealed both excitement about smart data research’s potential and legitimate concerns about implementation. People were initially skeptical about private sector involvement, but became more comfortable when they learned how public benefit was being prioritised and safeguards explained.
Learning about frameworks like the Five Safes (a widely-used framework covering safe projects, people, settings, data and outputs) significantly increased participants’ comfort with smart data research.
Importantly, participants wanted meaningful involvement in shaping research priorities and in continuing to define public benefit as we mature. They saw their role not just in providing oversight, but in helping to determine our path and evaluate our efforts.
Early engagement: challenging but invaluable
Engaging before our core services were commissioned presented unique challenges. Some conversations were necessarily hypothetical, and we couldn’t always provide concrete examples of our work in action. But this proved invaluable – it allowed public insights to genuinely shape our approach.
The insights we gained helped us think through things in real-time and will improve how we operate going forward. For example, we know we must more clearly articulate our data governance frameworks and oversight mechanisms. We’re planning a new channel for ongoing public involvement, and developing better ways to explain our work that resonate with public concerns – focusing on everyday problems like cold homes, gambling addiction, and access to affordable food.
The policy connection
The dialogue reinforced that delivering genuine public benefit requires active engagement with policymakers at both central and local government levels. Participants made clear that research findings must translate into policy decisions and meaningful action.
As one participant noted: “Social issues should be prioritised, you can justify to policymakers why they should be making changes to social issues if you have smart data research.” Another added: “I wish the council and government would actually use it. The people who should be using it and learning and making changes.”
This means working closely with government departments and local authorities to help them understand how smart data can inform evidence-based decision-making and improve public services. But we also need to develop ways for more companies and researchers across the UK to get involved. Only by connecting great research, businesses that support our mission, and effective policy engagement can we deliver the improvements to people’s lives that participants demanded.
The ongoing conversation
This dialogue demonstrated the immense value of involving the public in big and broad discussions about our work. The participants’ insights highlighted what truly matters to them – not just what we might assume is important.
As we continue developing SDR UK, public engagement will remain central to our approach. The dialogue showed that the public is willing to engage provided they have the right information and opportunities for genuine deliberation.
Over the coming months, we’ll be working with our data services to keep reflecting on the findings of the research and develop our plans for a public panel. We’ll also be working more closely with policymakers and researchers in government.
We’re deeply grateful to all participants who engaged so thoughtfully with these challenging questions, to Sciencewise for their advice and support, to Thinks Insight & Strategy for their outstanding dialogue delivery, and to our partners and oversight group for their hands-on participation.
This dialogue was just the beginning of a conversation about how smart data research can best serve the public. Learn more and stay in touch at sdruk.ukri.org.
Smart Data Research UK partnered with Sciencewise to conduct this public dialogue, with Thinks Insight & Strategy leading the dialogue delivery. The full dialogue research report provides detailed insights into public views on smart data research.
