Activites

At the heart of SPES is the recognition that traditional data sources alone are insufficient to capture the complexity of contemporary sustainability challenges. Instead, SPES identifies a wide range of novel and complex data sources – from web analytics to citizen-generated data – that offer new opportunities for monitoring transitions across scales and contexts. Novel data sources raise concerns about quality, validity, privacy, bias, representativity, and legitimacy. Addressing these challenges requires an ethical data governance framework closely linked to methodological integrity.

Despite decades of policy attention, measuring sustainability transitions remains a contested and evolving task. Existing indicators – primarily grounded in economic metrics or static environmental benchmarks – struggle to capture the complexity, interconnectedness, and lived experience of sustainability transitions. They privilege what is easily measurable over what is meaningful, overlooking key dimensions such as social justice, public perceptions, and community resilience. Meanwhile, the data infrastructures underpinning these indicators are frequently fragmented, outdated, or inaccessible.

Conventional data sources – such as national statistics or structured surveys – remain essential but are increasingly inadequate on their own. They are often too slow, too coarse-grained, or too narrowly scoped to reflect the fast-changing dynamics of environmental degradation, social inequality, and technological disruption that define today’s transition contexts. As a result, the demand for more dynamic and integrated approaches to data and measurement is growing.

Policy Recommendations

1. Establish EU-wide guidelines for ethical use and harmonisation of novel data in transition monitoring

To strengthen the legitimacy and effectiveness of sustainability monitoring, the EU should establish ethical guidelines and minimum technical standards for the use of emerging data sources. These must address privacy, fairness, representativity, and accountability – especially for industry-led data (e.g., social media, platforms) and novel types (e.g., sensors, IoT, citizen science) – while remaining flexible for future data (e.g., LLM interactions, complementary currency data).

In parallel, ensuring the comparability and policy relevance of transition indicators requires cross-border harmonization. The EU should foster coordination among member states to align methodologies and integrate diverse data sources by expanding Eurostat’s infrastructure to include new data types. This dual focus on ethical governance and interoperability will support robust, comparative analyses across countries, regions, sectors, and population groups.

2. Promote open, transparent transition data, fund public datasets, and require method scrutability in all EU-funded programs

Public-facing datasets are vital for fostering transparency, accountability, and people’s engagement in sustainability transitions – yet they remain under-resourced. Starter funds can help launch and sustain open datasets that track key sustainability indicators, enable cross-regional and cross-group comparisons, and support evidence-based policymaking. This, in turn, strengthens democratic access to information and fosters innovation in how sustainability performance is measured and communicated.

In addition to mandating open data, EU-funded projects, particularly those addressing sustainability, should adopt open methodology principles – such as the use of open-source software and algorithmic transparency – to allow third parties to scrutinise how sustainability data is produced and to build upon these results.

3. Require GDPR-compliant access to platform data, with safeguards for vulnerable communities.

Platforms and digital services operating within the EU (e.g., web browsers, social media, sensors) should meet minimum standards for third-party access to data generated within EU borders, to support evidence-based policymaking and public interest research. This access – available to public authorities, researchers, and civil society – must be compliant with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other relevant legislation, standardized, non-discriminatory, and include clear procedures for responsible use.

At the same time, policy frameworks must protect communities and territories, especially disadvantaged ones, from the unintended consequences of data openness. Freely accessible data can affect real estate, competition, or expose regions to pressure. Making people, activities, or places “legible” through data must not come at the cost of resilience.

4. Recognize citizen-generated data and embed public participation in environmental governance.

Citizen-generated data, grounded in lived experience and community knowledge, enhances democratic legitimacy and local relevance in sustainability transition monitoring. EU institutions should support people’s participation in both data collection and validation, integrating CGD with institutional sources through inclusive processes such as citizen panels and co-design workshops.

To fully leverage CGD, the EU should establish a robust regulatory framework and quality standards that recognize it as a valid and legitimate source alongside expert data. This would ensure its inclusion in policy consultations and assessments, bridging the gap between institutional practices and people-led contributions, and fostering more accountable, trusted governance.

5. Strengthen public sector data literacy and capacity building and embed people’s participation in data governance.

Improving data literacy is key for navigating the complexity of sustainability data. EU funding should support comprehensive training and capacity-building for policymakers, public administrations, and people programs – especially from underrepresented groups – at both EU and local levels. Expanding the European Skills agenda initiatives, programs should cover interpreting emerging data sources and understanding the ethical dimensions of AI-supported tools. This is pivotal to increasing capabilities and to fostering individual and collective human agency (i.e. the commitment over one’s well-being and the well-being of ‘others’, including nature at large).

For these reasons, in parallel, public participation should be embedded in institutional processes through panels, co-design workshops, and deliberative forums. These participatory processes help ensure data governance is transparent, inclusive, and accountable—enhancing both democratic legitimacy and public trust in data-driven policymaking.

These Policy Recommendations are part of the third Policy Brief delivered by the SPES Consortium