Big data

The UK economy could gain £216bn through the better management.

As the amount of data continues to grow exponentially, compounded by the internet, social media, cloud computing and mobile devices, it poses both a challenge and an opportunity for organisations – how to manage, analyse and make use of the ever-increasing amount of data being generated.

In an economic study on ‘big data’ by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr), sponsored by business analytics company SAS UK, we investigated how UK organisations, both public and private, can unlock the economic value of big data through the adoption of analytics.

The results show that ‘Data Equity’ – the economic value of data – has the potential be worth £216bn to the UK economy over the next five years – equivalent to more than the current defence, NHS and education and budgets combined.

The benefits of data equity are expected to manifest themselves in the creation of new jobs – Cebr predict that 58,000 could be created as a result of the entry to markets of new businesses, through which the business creation benefits are derived.

Business creation benefits and could raise employment as the result of new business start-ups and increased demand for data-specific roles. Improvements in market and customer intelligence in every sector will support entrepreneurial activity, allowing for more precise strategising and reduced uncertainty, therefore attracting new business start-ups into these markets.

The main efficiency gain is contributed through improvements to customer intelligence. Data-driven improvements in targeted customer marketing, the more effective meeting of demand and the analytical evaluation of customer behaviour is forecast to produce £74 billion in benefits over the next five years – the majority being driven by UK manufacturing (£45bn) and retail (£32bn).

We expect the manufacturing sector to see the largest innovation gain from the adoption of big data analytics. The utilisation of high-performance analytics could lead to new product development benefits of £8 billion in increased output over the next five years. The retail sector can also experience significant gains through innovation such as new consumer products which are expected to induce a £3 billion rise in output.

There is also much value to be unlocked from supply chain and logistical data. Cebr anticipates £46 billion in gains through using predictive analytics to better forecast demand, replenishment points and optimise stock and resource allocation to reduce costs.

The public sector is another key gainer. Government could save £2 billion in fraud detection and generation £4 billion through better performance management. A further £6 billion in efficiencies could be gained by analysing performance data, with the healthcare system benefiting by £2 billion.

This enhanced information, and ability to react dynamically to changes in the market landscape, will enable smaller businesses to compete more effectively with larger and more established ones, having reduced barriers to entry. Small retailers and manufacturers are anticipated to take significant advantage of this big data opportunity, generating £15 billion of new business.

Job creation is a key aspect of the report and experts agree that data equity has the potential to be as important to organisations as brand equity. As a result there is an increasing demand for ‘data scientists’ – highly skilled statisticians who work with data to derive business insights. We are already seeing the emergence of the Chief Data Officer in the US as organisations look to capitalise on their data equity for a competitive advantage, and it won’t be long until that trend crosses the pond.

But currently demand for data scientists outstrips supply, with the UK facing a particularly acute skills gap when it comes to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects. This emphasises the need to teach high quality STEM skills at school and university to prepare the next generation of graduates for the big wide world of data.

As the volume of data created exponentially increases and big data’s value is unlocked to greater effect by technological advances, we would expect data to start appearing on the balance sheets of companies that begin to realise its value in financial terms. Furthermore, the efficiency and innovation gains generated from data-driven technologies can play a vital role in ensuring the competitiveness of the UK’s goods and services on the global stage, and thus generate a wider economic benefit beyond the value of the significant asset to its owner.

Tapping into the dizzying amount of big data could be the stimulus the UK economy has been searching for. High performance analytics has the power unlike any other technology to generate growth, reduce debt, create jobs, develop new innovations and deliver greater operational efficiencies. Organisations, large or small, government or commercial, must get to grips with the big data challenge, and use analytics to identify tomorrow’s opportunities.

Big Data: A man inspects a supercomputer in Paris. Credit: Getty

Shehan Mohamed is an economist at the Centre for Economics and Business Research and Andy Cutler is the head of high performance analytics at SAS UK. They co-authored the report Data Equity: unlocking the value of big data.

 

Getty
Show Hide image

A new German law wants to force mothers to reveal their child’s biological father

The so-called “milkmen’s kids law” would seek protection for men who feel they have been duped into raising children they believe are not biologically theirs – at the expense of women’s rights.

The German press call them “Kuckuckskinder”, which translates literally as “cuckoo children” – parasite offspring being raised by an unsuspecting innocent, alien creatures growing fat at the expense of the host species’ own kind. The British press have opted for the more Benny Hill-esque “milkmen’s kids”, prompting images of bored Seventies housewives answering the door in negligées before inviting Robin Asquith lookalikes up to their suburban boudoirs. Nine months later their henpecked husbands are presented with bawling brats and the poor sods remain none the wiser.

Neither image is particularly flattering to the children involved, but then who cares about them? This is a story about men, women and the redressing of a legal – or is it biological? – injustice. The children are incidental.

This week German Justice Minister Heiko Maas introduced a proposal aimed at to providing greater legal protection for “Scheinväter” – men who are duped into raising children whom they falsely believe to be biologically theirs. This is in response to a 2015 case in which Germany’s highest court ruled that a woman who had told her ex-husband that her child may have been conceived with another man could not be compelled to name the latter. This would, the court decided, be an infringement of the woman’s right to privacy. Nonetheless, the decision was seen to highlight the need for further legislation to clarify and strengthen the position of the Scheinvater.

Maas’ proposal, announced on Monday, examines the problem carefully and sensitively before merrily throwing a woman’s right to privacy out of the window. It would compel a woman to name every man she had sexual intercourse with during the time when her child may have been conceived. She would only have the right to remain silent in cases should there be serious reasons for her not to name the biological father (it would be for the court to decide whether a woman’s reasons were serious enough). It is not yet clear what form of punishment a woman would face were she not to name names (I’m thinking a scarlet letter would be in keeping with the classy, retro “man who was present at the moment of conception” wording). In cases where it did transpire that another man was a child’s biological father, he would be obliged to pay compensation to the man “duped” into supporting the child for up to two years.

It is not clear what happens thereafter. Perhaps the two men shake hands, pat each other on the back, maybe even share a beer or two. It is, after all, a kind of gentlemen’s agreement, a transaction which takes place over the heads of both mother and child once the latter’s paternity has been established. The “true” father compensates the “false” one for having maintained his property in his absence. In some cases there may be bitterness and resentment but perhaps in others one will witness a kind of honourable partnership. You can’t trust women, but DNA tests, money and your fellow man won’t let you down.

Even if it achieves nothing else, this proposal brings us right back to the heart of what patriarchy is all about: paternity and ownership. In April this year a German court ruled that men cannot be forced to take paternity tests by children who suspect them of being their fathers. It has to be their decision. Women, meanwhile, can only access abortion on demand in the first trimester of pregnancy, and even then counselling is mandatory (thereafter the approval of two doctors is required, similar to in the UK). One class of people can be forced to gestate and give birth; another can’t even be forced to take a DNA test. One class of people can be compelled to name any man whose sperm may have ventured beyond their cervix; another is allowed to have a body whose business is entirely its own. And yes, one can argue that forcing men to pay money for the raising of children evens up the score. Men have always argued that, but they’re wrong.

Individual men (sometimes) pay for the raising of individual children because the system we call patriarchy has chosen to make fatherhood about individual ownership. Women have little choice but to go along with this as long as men exploit our labour, restrict our access to material resources and threaten us with violence. We live in a world in which it is almost universally assumed that women “owe” individual men the reassurance that it was their precious sperm that impregnated us, lest we put ourselves and our offspring at risk of poverty and isolation. Rarely do any of us dare to protest. We pretend it is a fair deal, even that reproductive differences barely affect our lives at all. But the sex binary – the fact that sperm is not egg and egg is not sperm – affects all of us.

The original 2015 ruling got it right. The male demand for reassurance regarding paternity is an infringement of a woman’s right to privacy. Moreover, it is important to see this in the context of all the other ways in which men have sought to limit women’s sexual activity, freedom of movement and financial independence in order to ensure that children are truly “theirs”.  Anxiety over paternity is fundamentally linked to anxiety over female sexuality and women’s access to public space. Yet unless all women are kept under lock and key at all times, men will never, ever have the reassurance they crave. Even then, the abstract knowledge that you are the only person to have had the opportunity to impregnate a particular woman cannot rival the physical knowledge of gestation.

We have had millennia of pandering to men’s existential anxieties and treating all matters related to human reproduction, from sex to childbirth, as exceptional cases meaning women cannot have full human rights. Isn’t it about time we tried something new? How about understanding fatherhood not as winning gold in an Olympic sperm race, but as a contract endlessly renewed?

What each of us receives when a child is born is not a biological entity to do with as we choose. It is a relationship, with all of its complexities and risks. It is something worth contributing to and fighting for. Truly, if a man cannot understand that, then any money wasted on a Kuckuckskind – a living, breathing child he could get to know – has got to be the least of his worries. 

Glosswitch is a feminist mother of three who works in publishing.