Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-27T11:24:10.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2021

Kristofer Ågren*
Affiliation:
Telia Company AB, Solna, Sweden
Pär Bjelkmar
Affiliation:
Public Health Agency of Sweden, Solna, Sweden
Elin Allison
Affiliation:
Telia Company AB, Solna, Sweden
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: kristofer.agren@teliacompany.com

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and associated measures implemented have rapidly changed how people move about and behave in society. Utilizing data on people’s mobility could provide unique and valuable insights to governments and institutions to better manage the crisis. These entities, however, have not traditionally had access to, nor the experience of applying, continuous anonymized and aggregated data on people mobility. This article aims to show how the Public Health Agency in Sweden successfully collaborated with a Nordic Telecoms operator to make use of such data during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, it investigates how the collaboration started, approaches used to go from data to insight, outcomes and impact, and lessons learned on both sides. Telia, the largest telecom operator in the Nordics, had an existing product commercially available that provided anonymized and aggregated insights about people’s movement. Several challenges existed within Telia as it was the first time worldwide a collaboration with a Public Health Agency would take place and social benefits had to be weighed against commercial and reputational risks. The hypothesis at the beginning of the pandemic was that the solution could be adapted to fit the needs of policymakers and the internal challenges could be overcome, while providing a meaningful contribution to the fight against the virus. The results show that it is possible to both form a mutually beneficial collaboration between a telecom operator and a public institution, and to make use of mobility data in evidence-based policymaking without compromising applicable personal data protection laws.

Information

Type
Translational Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© Telia Company AB and Folkhälsomyndigheten, 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Overall data process Telia Crowd Insights (number of subscribers refers to number of subscribers used as a basis in Crowd Insights in the Nordics).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Example of Telia dynamic grid over the Swedish city of Helsingborg.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Telia’s generic dashboard for Trip Data change showing change between a baseline period and a selected comparison period; −39% change in number of trips between counties in Sweden (April 1, 2020–June 30, 2020 vs. April 1, 2019–June 30, 2019).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Custom analysis showing Activity Data increase nationally during summer of 2019.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Difference in estimated number of people at the office (x-axis: week number, y-axis: % difference vs. week 10) by region (Region of Skåne, Region of Stockholm, Region of Uppsala) per calendar week during 2020. Estimated as all activities that have: (a) a longer duration than 1 hr, and (b) have a local start hour earlier than 16:00 and later than the first timestamp of leaving the home zone, and (c) have a distance of at least 500 m from the home zone. A home zone is defined where the earliest activity happens during the day. Weeks (24,32) and 44 are excluded as these are typical holiday weeks in Sweden and not relevant for this analysis.

Figure 5

Figure 6. The total number of trips by country (x-axis: week number, y-axis: % difference from week 6) from week 6 to 44, 2020. A trip is defined as a movement from one place to another separated by a dwell of at least 50 min. The minimum distance required for a trip to be registered varies by the density of the mobile base stations, for example, in densely populated areas the minimum distance is at least 500 m, and in rural sparsely populated areas the minimum distance required may be several kilometers.

Figure 6

Figure 7. Partial screenshot of the Telia Crowd Insights Data Quality dashboard that measures deviations in the data pipeline in an automated fashion. Deviations are flagged here and allow analysts to investigate only areas where troubleshooting may be required, thus reducing the overall load on the analyst resources.

Supplementary material: PDF

Ågren et al. supplementary material

Ågren et al. supplementary material 1

Download Ågren et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 41.3 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Ågren et al. supplementary material

Ågren et al. supplementary material 2

Download Ågren et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 46.7 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Ågren et al. supplementary material

Ågren et al. supplementary material 3

Download Ågren et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 29.9 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.

Author comment: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR1

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Review: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

No Conflicts of Interest.

Comments

Comments to Author: The authors should be commended for sharing the findings of their study of their work relevant to the pandemic.

Regrettably, however, there are several major shortcomings of the paper.

The method section is not elaborated upon. What was the data that was collected and used? Which period--the dates--did the dataset capture?

The dataset came from the mobile telco, which had already "packaged" such data into a service it called Crowd Insights. Given the strict data protection law in Sweden, one can only surmise that the Crowd Insights service must be already compliant with the DP law. If so, it is hard to understand where the privacy concern and reputational risk arises.

Further, rights such as privacy may be restricted in an emergency (based on Art. 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) although it is clear now that it is not necessary to go that far.

This reviewer has seen a demo of the use of such "data exhaust" data by Nokia back in 2010. It had been trialled for traffic in the Bay Area of San Francisco but it was found that when information of a jam was given to motorists, they avoided that area (which cleared up the jam) but then the alternate route then jammed up. It was a solution in search of a problem.

While not quite in that category, it is not quite clear what the current study found that is novel and of wider interest.

Review: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

No Conflicts of Interest.

Comments

Comments to Author: The paper covers its main objective, which is to show the value enclosed in Network Event Data gathered by Mobile Network Operators, and the opportunities associated with these data sharing with public administrations to enable an enhanced decision-taking process for multiple purposes, among them the case of COVID-19 lockdowns monitoring and effectiveness.

In my humble opinion the paper will be suitable for its publication once its authors develop some clarifications, such as the following aspects:

Grammatical and spelling revision should be carried out. Some examples: “social benefits had to be weighed agains commecial and reputational risk”, where I guess it should be written “social benefits had to be weighed against commercial and reputational risks”

The following statement lacks context: “Several challenges existed within Telia as it was the first time a collaboration with a Public Health Agency would take place” worldwide, or in Sweden?

It is stated that data from 2019 were also provided together with data from 2020, to enable comparisons of travel patterns with regard to the previous year. Were possible variations on Telis’ marketshare and number of total subscribers also provided, in order to discount those effects on the year-on-year insights?

It is said that “At this time, media reports, personal experiences and rumours were circulating regarding inhabitant’s compliance, or non-compliance, resulting in speculation and questions on how effective these new measures were”. To measure that effectiveness, did the end user, PHAS, carry out any correlation analysis of mobility data with healthcare data? did the format in which the data were provided allow that kind of cross-data combination between data from different origins? What kind of time and space aggregation standards enable that kind of combination?

Regarding the following point: “The process of anonymization and aggregation was very well documented at Telia and hence the legal department at PHAS could swiftly approve the collaboration from a legal and personal data protection perspective”. Could some metrics be provided? (e.g. the k-anonymity and l-diversity thresholds adopted to ensure anonymization).

In the next paragraph: “Also, the commercial contract was reviewed by the agency’s procurement function to be in line with those rules. The formal decision of signing the contract was made by the General Director of PHAS.” it is not very clear if we are still talking about a non-profit Data Use Agreement, or a Commercial Contract with a revenue; perhaps those issues are considered confidential, but it just seems to be a bit confusing given the overall context of the cooperation to read about a commercial contract.

The areas that could be further looked into in order to strengthen preparedness for potential future pandemics are a strong point in this paper; these learnings could be useful to other entities willing to cooperate in future business to government data sharing initiatives, however, I am missing some reflections on the technical aspects of it (platforms used to generate and share insights, format of the data shared, analytical tools used, level of automation of the data deliveries, etc.). It would also be appreciated some level of detail on the human capabilities on both sides, and the level of common understanding form an analytical point of view, necessary to enable the cooperation (initial trust in the data statistical representativeness, standards for data aggregation, etc.).

Review: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR4

Conflict of interest statement

No Conflicts of Interest.

Comments

Comments to Author: - In the introduction section, it would be desirable to mention (and reference) some of the previous scientific studies and articles, published in prestigious journals, which show the importance of mobility data in modeling the spread of an epidemic. This point is even mentioned in the section “Lessons Learned” page 14: “Recent research indicate that mobility data can play…” This is not in fact a “recent” finding for pandemic analysis as the research in this topic has been carried out since many years ago. Obviously the specific references to the modeling of the COVID19 epidemic are recent. We suggest authors to use a reference (amongst many available) published in a prestigious journal (peer review) such as this https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-68230-9

- Authors make various external references using the footer annotation format. I consider more appropriate to use a bibliographic references section for this purpose. This would also avoid duplicated footnotes: reference links 1,2,3 are the same that appear in the 11, 12 and 13 references.

- In the methodological section, an extrapolation procedure is mentioned to produce absolute mobility estimates of the entire population from the operator’s mobile lines count. It would be interesting to provide some additional details on how this procedure is carried out with some external reference or short explanation. Usually this is done by using census data although there might be different criteria (for example, the exclusion of people under <18 or >80 years old).

- In the manuscript, the importance of monitoring mobility during vacation periods is mentioned at the end of section 1. Were the movements of the native population going abroad or the movement of people between Nordic countries quantified at this time? Was there an anonymized monitoring of the presence of international travellers from other in Sweden?

- Regarding the use of the tool provided by Telia, it refers to monitoring the adherence of the population to the mobility recommendations provided by the authorities. This constitutes “a posteriori” descriptive analysis. Was the tool used for prescriptive purposes? That is, was PHAS able to use the tool to adjust future mobility recommendations (based for example on trends), anticipate expected dates for peaks of contagion or to estimate the demand for hospital beds?

- Regarding the charts, I would suggest some improvements for better readability. In Figure 5, it would be convenient to provide the labels for the months along the X-axis and / or add vertical grid lines to each week number label. In addition, the question arises regarding the reference week (10). Was the seasonal effect of mobility taken into account throughout the year? Probably in a normal year (without a pandemic) the relative mobility between the month of March and the month of June is not the same, but higher, so the% reduction in these circumstances could be even greater. In Figure 6, the colour legend that assigns each line in the graph to a country is missing.

- Regarding privacy, Were Telia clients given the opportunity to opt-out on this project? Was there a legal framework in Sweden that allows Telia to use this data without permission from customers? (although with all the security/privacy guarantees) It would be interesting to clarify this point.

- Finally, section 4 talks about the importance of keeping these processes and tools operational to promote a rapid response to potential epidemiological crises in the future. Could you clarify if in the case of PHAS there is a plan to create such infrastructure for the medium/long term? Will PHAS use mobility data beyond responding to the current crisis? In this sense, for Telia, has this experience modified the functional roadmap of the Crowd Insights tool?

Recommendation: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R0/PR6

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R1/PR7

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Recommendation: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R1/PR8

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: The use of anonymized and aggregated telecom mobility data by a public health agency during the COVID-19 pandemic: Learnings from both the operator and agency perspective — R1/PR9

Comments

No accompanying comment.