WEF IT UnlockingValueData BalancingGrowthProtection SessionSummary

7/28/2019 WEF IT UnlockingValueData BalancingGrowthProtection SessionSummary

1/14

1

Unlocking the EconomicValue of Personal Data

Balancing Growth andProtection

Rethinking Personal Data Project, Workshop Summary, Brussels, 8 October 2012

October 2012


2/14

2

World Economic Forum

2012 - All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any

means, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and

retrieval system. The views expressed are those of certain participants in the

discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of all participants or of the

World Economic Forum.


3/14

3

SummaryPersonal data can drive innovation,investment and sustainable economicgrowth, and greatly improve socialwelfare. There is a risk, however, thatthis value will not be realized givenconcerns about security, privacy,control and trust.

The World Economic Forum convened a half-day

workshop as part of the ongoing Rethinking PersonalData project (www.weforum.org/personaldata).More than 70 participants from different stakeholder

communities, including government, industry, academia,

think tanks and civil society, took part in the workshop.

Participants came from multiple countries from across

Europe, the US and the Middle East. Government

representatives included European parliamentarians, the

European Commission, data protection regulators, EU

member states and more. There were also

representatives from a wide range of industries, including

healthcare, financial services, logistics, automotive, IT andtelecommunications.

Some of the high-level messages that emerged from the

day included:

There is a need to ensure that rules governingpersonal data flow are flexible enough to enable new

business models, accommodate technology

evolution, enable user trust and meet the

requirements for user transparency

There was an acknowledgement that the basic dataprotection principles are not flawed and are still

applicable in many ways. However, the challenge is

that they do not work in todays world; they are not

being effectively implemented. In particular, notice

and consent was highlighted as not delivering real

effective choice to individuals to ensure

permissioned, trusted flow of data

There was broad agreement on the need to refreshand update existing privacy principles given the

significant shifts in technology and the way data is

collected and used; it has been decades since the

original Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs)

were written

Within the existing principles, the focus should be onfive principles grouped in two areas

- The openness and individual participationprinciples are key, but need to be refined and

strengthened; it may be possible to interpret

other principles through these

- The principles concerning collection limitation,purpose specification and use limitation need to

be redefined given they are based on the old

approach of data having a single purpose

Individuals are now both producers of data as wellas consumers; the old, somewhat paternalist,approach of viewing the individual exclusively as the

data subject and the organization as the data

controller is no longer valid

Use of codes of conduct could help enable flexibilityin the regulatory framework, and a potential

mechanism for a globally interoperable policy

framework

There was agreement on the importance ofgathering better evidence on how personal data is

used to create and at times destroy value; several

ideas on what should be measured and how to

measure it were discussed Participants highlighted the importance of

considering different applications of personal data

across different sectors; deeper and more

transparent knowledge exchange about the manner

in which data flows through the ecosystem could

lead to better decision-making by all stakeholders

Participants discuss how to strike the balance between growth and

protection over lunch
http://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://www.weforum.org/personaldata


4/14

4

Balancing Growth andProtectionOver lunch, participants discussedhow to strike the balance betweenusing personal data to create socialand economic growth opportunitiesfor all and the need to protect

individuals.

The discussion was stimulated by three introductory

comments from different stakeholder perspectives

government, industry and civil society.

From the government perspective the following issues

were identified:

A one-size fits all approach does not reflect therealities of how individuals use data

It is important to reflect different sectoral uses ofdata, which is why case studies prepared for this

event were so useful It is important for policy-makers to apply a reality

check and to try to square the circle of not halting

business use of data, but also protecting the citizen

Definition of personal data should not cover all dataabout an individual as that would prevent lots of

positive uses

Consent should not always be explicit, but can oftenbe implied as part of delivering the service

Clarify liabilities between data controller and dataprocessor as data moves

Given the complexity, it is important not to rush thediscussions on the EU data regulation

From the perspective of industry, the following points

were addressed:

The massive increase in the amount of datagenerated, particularly from mobile (always

connected real-time data) and social media, is a

significant megatrend

This creates potentially significant opportunities tocreate new value for individuals, companies and

society, but also poses challenges to data privacy

and protection

Experts from academia and civil society noted:

This is a very complex issue that requires a nuancedapproach to resolve

There is an emerging consensus that there shouldnot be a rebalancing of rights these should remain

absolute

However, the process/governance requiresimprovement to ensure confidence of all

stakeholders this needs to be open, transparent

and clear.

Alexander Alvaro, Vice-President of the European Parliament, discusses

the EU Data Protection Regulation

Challenges of privacy andprotection

Privacy law was established with the assumptionthat the sharing of personal information was harmful

- notice and consent is a reflection of this.

For many new services (e.g. Twitter, Foursquare,Yelp and Facebook), the presumption is individuals

want to share; the value comes from sharing

Personal data lockers allow the individual to be boththe data subject/creator and controller; organizations

and laws need to reflect this shift

Challenge of applying a nuanced social concept ofprivacy, which in the offline world is clearly

contextual to the online world where context is more

difficult to define


5/14

5

Challenge to ensure organizations that can createdramatic social benefits (e.g. in healthcare) by using

data for secondary purposes other than the original

purpose of collection are able to do so

Challenge is to find ways to do data collectionwithout creating bureaucracy and without turning

consumers into liars (e.g. asking consumers to say

they have read and understood T&Cs)

Very different views were expressed on whetherregulatory attempts to protect individuals would help

facilitate or restrict the flow of data; resolving this

challenge is key to unlocking value of data

Socioeconomic benefit of data flow

Participants highlighted some examples of how datais being used to create value:

- Healthcare for research and better patientcare to save thousands of lives

- Automotive telematics/sensors in car to helpauthenticate owner to improve efficiency and

reduce theft, reduce driver fatigue, prevent road

accidents, improve fuel efficiency, etc.

- E-commerce and logistics to deliver productsefficiently and offer better service to customers

Distinction was drawn between the free flow of dataand free flow of knowledge. New approaches can

create ways for organizations to access and use

data to generate insight and knowledge without

having to own or store data. This could be potentially

facilitated by the individual having more control over

use of data through opt-in

However, many argued that while this new approachmight work in some circumstances, it could also lead

to a tragedy of the data commons where individuals

will not opt-in because of transaction costs the

time and effort required to understand and make this

decision. A key question is how do we enable free

flow of data in those circumstances where user

control may not be effective or appropriate?

Potential for a harm minimization approach wheredata could be used to create value without explicit

consent unless there specific harm to an individual

William Hoffman, World Economic Forum, outlines the three key

questions for discussion

Role of trust

Trust is something that regulation itself will notachieve; it comes in part from effective enforcement

of rules that are appropriate to different contexts

The possible role for co-regulation with effectiveenforcement was suggested as a good way to build

trust; this would be one way to take into account

context and complexity of the challenge but still build

trust

Key to building trust is to acknowledge that mostpersonal data has multiple rights holders. While

some data is "owned" by the individual, most data

has lots of stakeholders who have rights to it

including individuals, the private sector andgovernments. By establishing joint rights and trading

rules to exercise these rights, we can help build trust

Ensuring effective security of data is key to buildingtrust; government and the private sector needed to

work together

It is also important to address trust betweenorganizations (including companies and

governments) when exchanging data and particularly

to ensure data can cross borders effectively

One way to build trust is through the use of safeharbour provisions that allow field trials with

hundreds, thousands of people, and work out whatworks and what doesnt through experiment


6/14

6

Principles for Trusted Flowof Personal DataShared principles were seen as theanchor points for global governanceand a way of strengtheningaccountability, predictability and trust.

Principles have been a core part of the governance of

personal data, but the manner in which they are

implemented needs to be updated to reflect how much

the world has changed.

Principles for personal data can be grouped into three

areas protection and security, rights and responsibility

for using data and accountability/enforcement.

There was an acknowledgement that the basic data

protection principles are not flawed and are still

applicable in many ways. However, the challenge is that

they do not work in todays world; they are not being

effectively implemented. In particular, notice and consentwas highlighted as not delivering real effective choice to

individuals to ensure permissioned, trusted flow of data

Participants were in general agreement on the need to

revisit privacy principles given the significant shifts in

personal communications technology, the adoption of

cloud-based services, and the manner in which data is

collected, stored and analysed. Since the privacy

principles were written in the 1970s and 1980s, the value

of connecting, sharing and analysing data has grown

significantly.

Within the existing principles, there are five which create

the most tension in the ecosystem (specified in Figure 1).

These are the ones participants felt should be clustered

into two areas.

The openness and individual participation principles were

viewed as the primary two principles to revisit and re-

conceptualize given the increased role of individuals as

both producers and consumers of data. With this

structural change in data flows, the shift in control to the

individual should be more thoroughly reviewed and

understood. With a refresh on a more user-centric

approach on control and openness, it was suggested

that these models could then serve to inform new

approaches to limits on collection, use specification and

consent.

Figure 1: The OECD Privacy Principles grouped according to the three

key areas for dialogue provided a framework for discussion

With broad recognition that a move away from the

traditional notice and consent models was needed,

participants suggested individuals simply do not have

agency over the secondary uses of personal data

throughout the ecosystem. To address this lack of

visibility on the relational aspects of data (What is its

provenance? Who is it related to? What are the

associated permissions for using it?), it was noted that a

broader use of metadata may serve as a technological

means to address this current deficiency.

Additional ideas in this area of discussion included

grouping the principles of collection limitation, purpose

specification and use limitation, together under a cluster

of Processing Principles. This grouping could be aimed

at maintaining the contextual integrity in the use of data

as it flows through the value chain.


7/14

7

One of the key points of discussion was around how to

deal with different types of data the principles

predominantly apply to data that is actively collected.

How do we deal with data that is passively collected orobserved? With inferred data created by proprietary

algorithms?

Consistent with discussions held in other regions of the

world, there was also recognition of a class of use cases

aimed at serving the larger public good. This issue

continually arises as a key uncertainty requiring additional

discussion. The challenge lies in how to achieve a

balance between the engagement of individuals yet

establishing a sufficiently large pool of anonymous data

for analysis that would avoid a tragedy of the data

commons. One of the consistent points of discussionwas that models built on leveraging anonymous data to

create this data commons were highly problematic.

While conceptually there is a need for a rich data

commons, the design and implementation of this concept

requires a great deal more debate and discussion.

Anonymous data and its increasing ability to be de-

anonymized were also topics receiving much attention.

Because of the de-anonymization risk, approaches which

considered virtually all data types to be linked to an

individual would lead to significant reductions in value

creation.

Instead, a focus on ensuring de-anonymization did not

take place through both technological and policy

approaches was seen as being more appropriate and

sustainable. The point was made that the continual

advances in technology to re-identify data (and the

incentives of multiple actors in the ecosystem to do so)

should not be underestimated. A combination of

technical innovations (more robust permissions via

metadata), legal innovations (adoption of legally binding

system rules with strict non-compliance penalties) and

improved data literacy by individuals so they could make

effective choices were factors that all needed to be morefully developed.

In addition, participants emphasized the importance of

strengthening accountability and enforcement. This is

perhaps one of the critical areas needed to ensure a

balanced ecosystem. While the principle as it stands is

fine, there needs to be further work on how to make this

a reality.

The need to more fully explore co-regulatory approaches

utilizing binding corporate rules (BCRs), which are

currently used for international transfers, was seen as ameans for developing a more flexible, contextually

relevant and efficient approach for implementing the

principles.

Participants discuss principles for personal data in breakout groups


8/14

8

The Need for BetterEvidenceOverall, there was widespreadagreement that a deeper, cross-sectoral understanding of how datacan used to either create or destroyvalue is needed in the marketplace.

With a deeper and more robust evidence base, a positive

feedback loop could be established between individuals,

civil society, governments and private sector

stakeholders. Deeper and more transparent knowledge

exchange about the manner in which data flows

throughout the ecosystem, could lead to better decision-

making by all stakeholders

Figure 2: The positive feedback loop from gathering better evidence on

how personal data is used

What is already being measured?

Overall, participants felt relatively limited evidence was

being systematically captured on how personal data is

being used to create value. There is also a perception

that there is a bias towards things that are easy to

measure and are easily seen.

Participants highlighted some of the areas where

evidence is being measured, including anecdotes and

stories, some measures of individual behaviour (both

actual measures and survey or polling measures), data

access requests, data breaches and market value of

companies collecting and using data.

To help structure the conversation around what is already

being measured in terms of case studies, the World

Economic Forum presented a simple framework for

discussion.

At the workshop, participants shared 10 case studies on

how personal data is being used to create (and in some

cases destroy value), what the scale of the impact is and

what issues or concerns such applications raised. By

considering a range of applications, participants

discussed how principles and rules needed to reflect the

range of different contexts in which personal data is being

used.

Figure 3: Framework for capturing use cases for how personal data

creates or destroys value


9/14

9

What should be measured?

There are a number of areas where suggestions were

made on what should be better measured to increase

understanding and ensure better decision-making by all

stakeholders.

Some of the main areas include:

Benchmark status quo measurement where arewe at the moment in terms of costs of current

approaches to data protection which can then be

used to monitor trajectory and direction of change

Producer surplus and consumer surplus of differentofferings (e.g. OBA)

Social attitudes and consumer understanding Quality of service and user experience Regulatory compliance and cost/benefits Measurement of risk, harm and trust Contextual analysis of data data types, harms,

value for diff industry sectors

Marginal costs/benefits of opt-in vs opt-out

How should we measure in anadaptive, iterative way?

The possibility of creating a dynamic always on approachto measuring how data is being used was discussed. In

effect, the view is that it would be helpful to start using

big data to measure the impact of big data.

In addition, a crowd-sourcing approach that involves

individuals in the collection of data about how data is

used and to enforce and monitor good and bad uses is

seen as particularly effective.

Lastly, participants discussed collaborative

methodologies of capturing evidence, for example

through trust frameworks.


10/14

10

Further Reading onEvidence and PrinciplesBarth-Jones, Daniel C., The 'Re-Identification' of Governor William Weld's Medical Information: A Critical Re-Examination of

Health Data Identification Risks and Privacy Protections, Then and Now(June 4, 2012). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2076397orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2076397Brynjolfsson, Erik, Hitt, Lorin M. and Kim, Heekyung Hellen, Strength in Numbers: How Does Data-Driven Decisionmaking

Affect Firm Performance?(April 22, 2011). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486Halvorson, George, Goldsbrough, Peter, Kennedy, Simon, Kent, James, Close, Karalee and Becker, Daniel, The Digital

Dimension of Healthcare, Report of the Digital Innovation in Healthcare Working Group 2012, Global Health Policy Summit.

Available athttp://www.globalhealthpolicyforum.org/docs/GHPS_Digital_Innovation_Report.pdfInternational Institute of Communications, Personal Data Management: The Users Perspective, Executive Summary.

(October 9, 2012). Available athttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectiveRubinstein, Ira, Big Data: The End of Privacy or a New Beginning?(October 5, 2012). Available at SSRN:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2157659

Tene, Omer and Polonetsky, Jules, Big Data for All: Privacy and User Control in the Age of Analytics(September 20, 2012).

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2149364World Economic Forum, Rethinking Personal Data: Strengthening Trust, (May 2012).http://www.weforum.org/personaldata
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2076397http://ssrn.com/abstract=2076397http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2076397http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2076397http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2076397http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486http://www.globalhealthpolicyforum.org/docs/GHPS_Digital_Innovation_Report.pdfhttp://www.globalhealthpolicyforum.org/docs/GHPS_Digital_Innovation_Report.pdfhttp://www.globalhealthpolicyforum.org/docs/GHPS_Digital_Innovation_Report.pdfhttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2157659http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2157659http://ssrn.com/abstract=2149364http://ssrn.com/abstract=2149364http://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://www.weforum.org/personaldatahttp://ssrn.com/abstract=2149364http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2157659http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2157659http://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://www.iicom.org/resources/open-access-resources/doc_details/226-personal-data-management-the-users-perspectivehttp://www.globalhealthpolicyforum.org/docs/GHPS_Digital_Innovation_Report.pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1819486http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486http://ssrn.com/abstract=1819486http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2076397http://ssrn.com/abstract=2076397


11/14

11

Workshop Participants

John Jolliffe Senior Manager Adobe Systems France

Gerald Deck Director and Lead Counsel, Europe Middle-East and

Africa

Akamai Technologies Germany

Jasper Meyers Senior Corporate Counsel Alcatel-Lucent The Netherlands

Dirk Linnenbruegger Executive Vice-President, IT Strategy & EnterpriseArchitecture

Allianz SE Germany

Karim A. Lesina Executive Director, EMEA Government Affairs AT&T Belgium

Stefan Scholer Head of Strategic Corporate Planning AUDI AG Germany

Kostas Rossoglou Senior Legal Officer BEUC, The European Consumer Organisation Belgium

Ian Emond European Affairs Policy Officer British Airways Belgium

Tilmann Kupfer Vice-President, Trade and International Affairs BT Group Plc Belgium

Cecile Plaidy Lawyer BT Group Plc Belgium

Bjarne Rasmussen Vice-President CA Technologies Switzerland

Richard Thomas Adviser, Global Strategy Centre for Information Policy Leadership United Kingdom

Leszek Izdebski Managing Director, IBSG Cisco USA

Willem Debeuckelaere President Commission for the Protection of Privacy Belgium

Jean-Philippe Moiny Research Fellow Council of Europe Belgium

Alan Mitchell Strategy Manager Ctrl-Shift United Kingdom

Alexandra Krenzler Senior Manager, European Affairs Deutsche Telekom Germany

Jacques Bus Secretary General Digital Enlightenment Forum Belgium

Cameron Craig Partner DLA Piper UK LLP United Kingdom

Marie-Hlne Boulanger Head of Unit, Data Protection European Commission, DG Justice Belgium

Nicole Dewandre Advisor to the Director-General European Commission, DG Connect Belgium

Rosa Barcelo Policy Coordinator - Data Protection European Commission, DG Connect Belgium

Achim Klabunde Head of Sector IT Policy European Data Protection Supervisor Belgium

Anne-Christine Lacoste Head, International Cooperation and Legislative

Policy

European Data Protection Supervisor Belgium

Sean Kelly Member of the European Parliament European Parliament Belgium

Alexander Alvaro Member of the European Parliament European Parliament Belgium

Erika Mann Director, European Affairs Facebook Belgium

Nicolas de Cordes Vice-President, Marketing Vision France Telecom France

Titus Goll Consultant Public Affairs German Dialogue Marketing Association (DDV) Germany

Marisa Jimenez Senior Counsel, European Privacy Policy Google Belgium

Pat Walshe Director Privacy GSM Association United Kingdom

Reehan Sheikh Senior Information Officer Health Authority of Abu Dhabi (HAAD) United ArabEmirates

Daniel Pradelles Privacy Officer, Europe Middle East and Africa HP France

John H. Clippinger Chief Executive Officer ID3, MIT USA

Ira Rubinstein Senior Research Fellow, Adjunct Professor Information Law Institute, NYU School of Law USA


12/14

12

Ken Anderson Senior Research Scientist, Vibrant Data Portfolio

Manager Intel Labs

Intel USA

Geoffrey A. Manne Lecturer in Law International Center for Law & Economics, Lewis& Clark School

USA

John Grumitt Vice-President International Diabetes Federation United Kingdom

Frdric Donck Director, European Regional Bureau Internet Society Belgium

Robin Wilton Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy Internet Society United Kingdom

Jamie Ferguson Vice-President, Health IT; Fellow, Institute for HealthPolicy

Kaiser Permanente USA

David Jacoby Senior Security Researcher Kaspersky Sweden

Chris Hutchins Vice President of European Affairs Liberty Global Belgium

Simon G. Davies Information Systems and Innovation Group,Department of Management

London School of Economics United Kingdom

Marc Davis Partner Architect, Microsoft Online Services Division Microsoft Corporation USA

Jean Goni Director, Privacy Microsoft Corporation Belgium

John Bowman Head of EU and International Data Protection Policy Ministry of Justice of the United Kingdom United Kingdom

Alex Fowler Global Privacy and Public Policy Leader Mozilla USA

William Heath Co-Founder Mydex CIC United Kingdom

Daniela Fabian Masoch Global Head, Data Privacy Novartis International AG Switzerland

Timothy Edgar Senior Legal Advisor Office of the Director of National Intelligence USA

Brendan Van Alsenoy Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry;

Information and Communications Policy

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD)

France

Kaliya Hamlin Executive Director Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium USA

Alin Stanescu Senior Public Policy Strategist, Government Affairs

Europe

Qualcomm Belgium

Cynthia O'Donoghue Partner Reed Smith LLP United Kingdom

Christopher Mikkelsen Co-founder Refugees United Denmark

Aurlia Debru European Affairs Officer Renault Nissan Alliance Belgium

Chris Sundermeier General Counsel, Chief Privacy Officer Reputation.com, Inc. USA

Simon Torrance Chief Executive Officer, Telco 2.0 Initiative STL Partners United Kingdom

Luk Vervenne Chief Executive Officer Synergetics nv, TAS3 Belgium

Berin Szoka President Tech Freedom USA

David Dean Senior Partner and Managing Director The Boston Consulting Group Germany

Kenneth Neil Cukier Data Editor The Economist United Kingdom

Penelope Naas Vice-President Public Affairs UPS Belgium

Scott L. David Executive Director, Law School University of Washington USA

Rob Conway Chief International Affairs Officer VimpelCom Ltd Netherlands

Russell Schrader Associate General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer Visa USA

Antonella Galetta PhD Researcher Vrije Universiteit Brussel - LSTS Belgium


13/14

13

Contact

Sincere thanks are extended to the industry experts who

contributed their unique insights to this workshop. We

are also grateful for the commitment and support of The

Boston Consulting Group (BCG) in their capacity as

project adviser.

Visit www.weforum.org/personaldata

Contact:

William HoffmanAssociate Director

Information Communication and Technology Industries

Tel.: +1 212 703 2332

E-mail:[email protected] Kalapesi

Project Manager (BCG Secondee)

Information Communication and Technology Industries

Tel.: +1 917 392 0789

E-mail:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


14/14

14

TheWorld Economic Forum isan independent international

organization committed to

improving the state of the world

by engaging business, political,

academic and other leaders of

society to shape global, regional

and industry agendas.

Incorporated as a not-for-profit

foundation in 1971 and

headquartered in Geneva,

Switzerland, the Forum is tied to

no political, partisan or national

interests.

World Economic Forum

91-93 route de la CapiteCH-1223 Cologny/Geneva

Switzerland

Tel.: +41 (0) 22 869 1212

Fax: +41 (0) 22 786 2744

[email protected]

www.weforum.org

WEF IT UnlockingValueData BalancingGrowthProtection SessionSummary

Documents

Transcript of WEF IT UnlockingValueData BalancingGrowthProtection SessionSummary