Читать книгу Derecho administrativo y ciudades inteligentes - Grenfieth de J. Sierra Cadena - Страница 10

1

The Smart Green Communities in the Informational City

William Gilles^*

On the 50^th anniversary of the OECD, the Secretary-General of this organization highlighted that “we need growth without environmental damage and without worsening social inequalities and regional imbalances. That means taking a path radically different from that of the countries that industrialized in the 19^th and 20^th centuries”¹.

The development of smart green communities attempts to meet this challenge by helping local governments to reconcile economic growth and environmental concerns. The digital society has created a new context that could help governments to reach this objective as local authorities can increase the efficiency of their environment policies thanks to the information and communication technologies (ICTs). “ICTs can play a significant role to improve the carbon footprint of cities by moving to a more intelligent use of energy”², but not only in this sector. According to the European Union, “it is clear that ICT should be the connection to enable exploitation of potential synergies among the various ‘smart’ realms of activity that will all help achieve carbon neutrality in cities. These realms include energy in buildings, electric mobility, eHealth, eCare, and eGovernance”³. In this context, smart city solutions should generate a global market of USD 408 billion by 2020, of which a quarter should concern solution design, research and engineering services⁴.

The reason of this significant role of new technologies in smart green projects is that ICTs are “the ‘innovation gene’ for smart cities, the core source for the interoperable networked application that break the barrier between industry and the public sector to bring tangible improvement to people’s lives”⁵. This may explain why 28 European cities⁶ have signed the Green digital charter launched by the European Union in 2009. In this Charter, which is a response to recommendations of the European Commission⁷, mayors and leaders of those European cities acknowledge that “information and communication technologies are critical enablers for sustainable growth and must be integrated into the work of European cities to mitigate climate change”; that “European good practices for low-emissions ICT must be based on the practical experience of public authorities who can set an example for others”; and that “cities can lead Europe in maximizing the potential for ICT to reduce emissions, by delivering innovative technical solutions and encouraging behavioral change,”⁸ the signatories of the Charter commit among others to develop cities as platforms for innovation in order to favor low carbon activities, to serve as an example for the private sector and the wider community in the green digital agenda by developing their own ICT infrastructure and digital services with the smallest carbon footprint, and to support the development of open innovation and low carbon activities⁹. Finally, the signatory cities aim to “decrease ICT direct carbon footprint per city by 30 % by 2020.”

This objective, however, should not be pursued only by cities, but more generally by communities. The reduction of the carbon footprint or the will to benefit from the smartness of the smart green projects should not be reserved to cities and urban areas but should also be a part of the development strategies of rural areas. For this reason, the expression “Smart green communities” is further appropriate.

Because all communities (urban and rural communities) have to face the new context created by the arrival of the Internet and the development of ICTs in a digital era, we will deal with smart green communities, and not only about smart green cities. Our society, called the information society, corresponds to a new era where data are at the core of the ecosystem. Because of their value for the economy, companies aim to collect more and more data in order to develop their business. Because it helps understand human behavior, governments also use and reuse data. Of course, some governments use data for mass surveillance, but the same also collect data in order to improve our living conditions, in particular at the local level.

Because local governments are the closest layer of government to local people, they are more sensitive to the daily lives and well-being of their populations. Thus, one might not be surprised to see that communities try, in a digital age, to use ICT tools in order to become smarter and to implement better public policies regarding environmental sustainability issues (§ 1). Making communities smarter and greener should, however, not be regarded as an aim in itself. The objective is above all to favor better lives within an environmentally friendly framework that respects fundamental rights against the uncontrolled collect, use and reuse of our personal data (§ 2).

§ 1 – Smarter Communities for Better Green Public Policies

A. Better Green Public Policies for Responding to Current Issues

Imagine a country where 97 % of the territory is covered by water, but only 1 % is potable¹⁰; a country where more than one in six people cannot access to drinking water¹¹, knowing that everyone on Earth needs every day at least 20 to 50 liters of clean and safe water to ensure its daily subsistence¹²; a country where the water cost has increased by 30 % in 5 years¹³; a country where 25 persons out of 100,000 die every year because of diseases caused by the low-quality water while others suffer from serious diseases for the same reasons¹⁴.

Imagine a country where 22 % of the population cannot access to electricity; a country where 2 million people die every year because of the low quality of the energy for cooking¹⁵; a country where nevertheless the global electric consumption has been multiplied by more than 3 in almost 4 decades and is still in a constant growth; a country where the global energy demand will grow by 37 % by 2040¹⁶ and where the global electricity demand will double by 2050.

Finally, imagine a country where the emission of carbon dioxide has increased by 52 % in 22 years; a country where almost 25 % of the CO₂ emissions in the world come from electricity, and 20 % from transportations¹⁷.

We all know this country. In reality, these features are not those of a country, but those of the Earth. As explained previously, the access to water is more and more difficult for a part of the population as the price is constantly increasing. This assertion is true both for developing countries and developed countries as the Rickards Real Cost Water Index shows. According to this index, calculated by IBM in local currency, the Water cost has increased by 32.9 % from the beginning of 2008 to the end of 2013 (+ 16.9 %, if calculated in USD). As a comparison, in the 4^th quarter of 2013, water costs $0.34 in Manila (+ 28.3 % since 2008, if calculated in local currency), $0.97 in Sao Paulo (+ 32 % since 2008, if calculated in local currency), $1.61 in Singapore (+ 50 % since 2008, if calculated in local currency), $1.97 in San Antonio (+ 22 % since 2008, if calculated in local currency), or $2.26 in London (+ 33.7 % since 2008, if calculated in local currency¹⁸.

In addition to the water price increases, most consumers also face higher prices for electricity, when they have access to this energy. It should be recalled, in this respect, that if 78 % of the population in the world have access to electricity¹⁹, 1.6 billion inhabitants have no access today to electricity (80 % of the rural population in Africa), and 2 billion people still do not have a sufficient energy to live in the dignity²⁰. Yet, the global electric consumption has been multiplied by 3.2 in 38 years from 6129 TWh in 1973 to 20,915 TWh in 2012²¹, and is expected to continue to do so in the coming years. According to the International Energy Agency, if the global energy demand is multiplied by 1.5 by 2050, the global electricity demand will double because of the population growth and the new needs of developing countries in terms of energy consumption and more especially of electricity²².

At the same time, the global population could suffer from an increase of carbon dioxide emission. Regarding this evolution, we should point out that, in the world, the carbon dioxide emission has increased from 22.7 billion tons in 1990 to 34.5 billion tons in 2012²³, and that this rise should continue in the future if nothing is done. It is also important to underline that 60 % of CO₂ emissions in the world are related to the sector of the energy, among which 40 % come from the electricity sector and 20 % from the transportation sector²⁴. If China is the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world with 9.86 tons out of 34.5 tons in 2012 (29 %), this problem is not only a matter of developing countries as the USA emitted 5.19 tons (15 %) and the European Union 3.74 tons (11 %) the same year²⁵. Finally, it should be noted that the energy supply causes 26 % of carbon dioxide emission in the world. Transport is responsible for 13 % of this emission, residential and commercial buildings for 8 %, and waste and wastewater for 3 %²⁶.

In all these sectors, smart green communities can play a role to reduce these emissions. In other words, for all the reasons mentioned above, we should improve the efficiency of green public policies. Smart communities can help reach this goal as they are nearly always linked to green policies. Indeed, most of the cities that intend to become smarter also develop green policies or try to improve the efficiency of their environmental public policies. For instance, Qui Aijun explains that in China, the construction of smart cities always integrates an ecological plan in order to fight against the traffic congestion, or to reduce the environmental pollution. In Nanton, like others Chinese cities, ICTs are used, “to optimize the infrastructure, maximize the use of natural resources and build a harmonious cultural environment with the goal of becoming a low-carbon Smart City”²⁷. This feature is not only available in China, but is common to other smart communities in the rest of the world. So, developing smarter communities help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and favors, therefore, a better life.

B. Smarter Green Communities for Better Lives

Smarter green communities help improve our lives in at least two different ways. First, developing smart communities favors the effectiveness and efficiency of local green policies. The result is not only to clean up the air or the water; it is also to reduce the cost of public policies or individual invoices.

For instance, reducing energy demand by increasing the efficiency and conservation of electricity in homes, in businesses, in industries or in governmental buildings do not only favor the reduction of the greenhouse gas emissions, but is also to decrease the customer’s electricity bill or the public spending in the latest example.

Second, the aim is not only to reduce the cost of green public policies by improving their effectiveness and efficiency; the aim is also to favor directly better lives for their citizens. For instance, the smart street lighting does not only help reduce public expenditures for the taxpayers by cutting the energy cost and minimizing the maintenance cost. It also reinforces safety in the streets by illuminating the path while the pedestrian is moving. These three advantages have prompted the City of Oslo to be the first one in the world to launch a dynamic outdoor lighting system in April 2006. Thanks to 14,000 lamps out of 70,000 equipped with new light fixtures and sensors, the City of Oslo can regulate the amount of lighting needed by analyzing in real time the surrounding conditions. The illumination level provided by the City of Oslo depends on the time of day, seasons, weather conditions, or the density of the traffic, as cars also generate themselves lighting. Thanks to this dynamic lighting, the City of Oslo has saved between 40 and 70 % of electricity over the previous lamps and expect to improve again this efficiency by extending this technology to all the 70,000 street lamps in Oslo. According to the city, such an extension could help reduce yearly the electricity consumption of 20 GWh and the CO₂ emission of 7,000 tons²⁸. At the same time, streets are safer and more comfortable: thanks to a better visibility for drivers and pedestrians, enlightening streets helps improve traffic safety and to reduce crime²⁹. So, the dynamic lighting makes Oslo citizens feel more secure.

Oslo’s dynamic street lighting is not the only example of the smart green project developed by communities to improve living conditions of their inhabitants. Most of them pursue the same aim, whether it is to develop smart grids in order to optimize the energy in Issy-les-Moulinneaux in France³⁰, in Ashton Hayes Smart Village in United Kingdom³¹, in the City of Castellón in Spain³² or elsewhere in Europe and in the world³³; whether it is to develop climate-neutral public transport like in Oslo³⁴, or even to improve only the efficiency of public transport to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and save time for citizens; or whether it is to implement smart meters to detect water leaks to prevent flood and water damage in homes or reduce water consumption in the Miami-Dade County Park³⁵.

In this regard, we should underline how substantial is the water loss from leaking pipelines in some cities (25 % in UK cities, and even nearly 50 % in London; 40 % in Montreal; 35 % in Seoul; 50 % in Vietnam cities³⁶ or 25 % in Rome³⁷).

Some cities try to combine several smart green projects, like Oslo which plans to become a zero-emission city by 2050. Similarly, Copenhagen intends to “become a Smart city that offers the world’s best urban environment and a unique urban life. To achieve this goal, [they] have planned four milestones: green and blue capital carbon-neutral, clean and healthy city, and the world’s best city for cyclists”³⁸.

§ 2 – Smarter Green Communities in a Better Legal Framework

A. By Guaranteeing a Right to Information

The main areas of the smart green communities are energy, water, transportation, and waste. Smart green communities are, in all of these cases, those which enable efficiency of their public services thanks to the informational society; those which have all the infrastructure to use data at their best in order to save energy and water or to regulate the traffic and the pollution thanks to a public transport optimization. We can thus assert that the information is the very core of smart green communities. Its high value is, however, the result of its use and reuse by public administrations, citizens or companies in order to develop new public services or improve the existing ones. In other words, the improvement of living conditions is the result of the use and reuse of data that are collected by public administrations or by companies.

As a consequence, the success of smart green communities relies on the fluidity of the information that is generated in this framework. To put it in another way, smart green communities are not only cities that are connected and that use ICTs in order to improve the efficiency of their environmental policies and to reduce the Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Smart green communities are rather cities that organize and optimize their environmental policies around the information. It is important, therefore, to ensure a smooth flow of information.

Indeed, a community may be connected or even hyper-connected without necessarily having information flowing in a useful way and an appropriate use. The risk in the informational society is less to have a lack of information than to face a profusion of information. This is especially true for smart green communities because they regularly issue data relating to water consumption, electricity consumption or transportation. So the profusion of information may inhibit users to access on time to the information they need.

For example, public transport schedules may be available throughout the day, but they have less interest if they are not updated in real time to provide information on current incidents and delays to come. Similarly, electricity meters or water meters can provide information, but they are not smart if they do it, one or twice a year as it is mostly currently done. That is why smart meters collect data several times in one hour. Smart meters rely, however, not only on the dissemination of data, but also on the capacity to analyze them in real time and to send feedback to the consumer in order to explain him how to reduce his/her electric or water consumption. If meters are not able to do so, the wealth of information loses, therefore, its usefulness. We should note that in the French case of Linky³⁹, the feedback will come not only from the analysis of the data collected by the electric meter, but also by analyzing the tweets and comments sent by the consumers.

Thus, a community, even hyper-connected, which is unable to ensure a good flow of information, cannot be regarded as a smart one. Whereas a connected city aims to decompartmentalize data by putting an end to information silos, an informational city aims to ensure relevant real-time dissemination of public information to stakeholders. The informational city is therefore a further step in the process of enhancing data by ensuring greater fluidity of the flow of public information, both internally and externally.

For this reason, one of the features of smart green communities is their ability to include their citizens in the process. This inclusion relies on the association of citizens to community environmental policies. In this regard, the City of Oslo has adopted an interesting methodology by opening its environmental strategy to its citizens and more widely to every person interested. The Norwegian capital considers that “reaching the target of becoming a Zero-Emission City will require new ideas and efforts from everyone”⁴⁰.

This inclusion is also achieved by reinforcing transparency and making the information available for citizens in order to give them more choices and help them to take the smartest and greenest decisions. Since they are based on the exploitation of data, smart green communities raise some questions as regards both the right to participation and the right to information. In this last case, communities have to answer at least to the following legal issues: to what type of information does a citizen have the right to access? Can the community invoke the right to secrecy in some circumstances? What are legal blockages to a smoothly flow of information and to its use and reuse by stakeholders or by third parties? What kind of data should be opened by the smart green community? What are the rights of consumers, of public administration or of third parties in the use and reuse of data collected within the implementation of green public services?

The aim is at the end to make the most people and companies benefit from the revolution of smart green communities. The signatories’ will of the 2009 Green digital charter to collaborate “with industry to support greener production and logistics and using green procurement”⁴¹ follows this logic. The same applies to the statement made in 2011 by the OECD Secretary-General. According to Angel Gurría, “governments in both developed and emerging economies must empower companies and individuals as actors in the quest for green growth. This will mean removing obstacles to the introduction and commercialization of new technologies and the development of new modes of production. It will mean encouraging people to work and live differently. Energy and transport will be among the first sectors to target greener growth.”⁴²

B. By Protecting the Right to Privacy in a Greener Environment

As the improvement of living conditions in a smart green community is linked to the data collection and analysis, it is important to closely monitor this process in order to be sure that it respects our right to privacy.

With the open data and above all the big data, the risk to infringe on a person’s privacy is not fictitious but really exists. For instance, in France, the electric smart meter of EDF called “Linky” collect the load curve every 10 minutes on the request of the consumer⁴³. If Linky has started to collect some data in 300,000 homes, the process is, however, at the beginning. First, the aim is to cover all the territory by 2020. The challenge is real because this objective means the installation of 35 million smart electric meters in 15 years. Second, EDF is studying how to improve the data analysis of as the current process seems not effective enough. Indeed, the aim is to analyse by this date 120 terabytes a year, that is to say 35 million data collections every 10 minutes. Moreover, EDF intends to analyse also consumer’s tweets and comments⁴⁴.

With such a quantity of data, information collected is more difficult to analyse for EDF, that is not a company specialized in data analysis. So EDF has decided to work with companies from the digital sector, such as Teradata⁴⁵, whose business is based on data collection and analysis⁴⁶.

And that is the point: the development of smart green policies has changed the ecosystem: in the informational society, local government does not work only with traditional companies from the environmental sector, as they used to do in the past. As ICTs facilitate the environmental effectiveness and efficiency, local governments also have to collaborate with new companies from the digital sector, such as IBM or Oracle, whose business is to analyze data. This evolution does not only change the ecosystem from the economic point of view. It also affects the relationship with customers as well as the one with local governments.

The more information a company will have, the more the enterprise has the possibility to know each detail of the customers’ private life. So, in smart green communities, customers have to face a fundamental choice. They have to know if they prefer to give up some personal privacy safeguards in order to benefit from better services or if they prefer to renounce to it in order to keep their whole right to privacy. About local government, the issue is to choose the right company when a public procurement is initiated because the winner of the tender will not anymore provide only electricity or water, it will also collect and manage personal data. It is therefore for the local government to choose a company that is respectful of the citizen’s fundamental rights. Being a smart green community is not only to ensure the efficiency of the environmental policy, it is also to guarantee its inhabitants’ right to privacy.

Notas

* Associate Professor (HDR) at the Sorbonne Law School (University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne). President of the Institut du Monde et du Développement pour la Bonne Gouvernance Publique (IMODEV).

¹ A. Gurría, OECD Secretary-General, “New sources of growth in the 21st century. Fostering innovation and green growth” in OECD, Better policies for better lives. The OECD at 50 and beyond, 2011.

² European Commission, Smart Sustainable Cities: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/cities/index_en.htm

See also European Commission, DG INFSO, Impacts of Information and Communication Technologies on Energy Efficiency, Final report, September 2008: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/docs/studies/2008/2008_impact-of-ict_on_ee.pdf

³ European Commission, Meeting of Advisory group ICT Infrastructure for energy-efficient buildings and neighbourhoods for carbon-neutral cities, Strategic priorities for the new framework programme for research and innovation covering the period 2014-2020, September 16, 2011: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/docs/smart-cities/smart-cities-adv-group_report.pdf

⁴ See S. Turner, Head of the Future Cities of Manchester City, ICT insights, No. 10, September 2014, p. 29.

⁵ D. He, President of Marketing and Solution Sales of Huawei, “The Innovation Gene for Smart Cities”, ICT insights, No. 10, September 2014, p. 1.

⁶ That is to say: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Belfast, Birmingham, Bologna, Bristol, Eindhoven, Genoa, Ghent, The Hague, Helsinki, Linköping, Lisbon, Malaga, Malmo, Manchester, Murcia, Nantes Métropole, Nice Cote d’Azur, Nuremberg, Reykjavik, Rijeka, Tallinn, Stockholm, Venice, Vienna, Zagreb and Zaragoza. See http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/green_digital_charter/index_en.htm (accessed March 8, 2015).

⁷ See Commission of the European Communities, Commission recommendation of October 9, 2009, on mobilizing Information and Communications Technologies to facilitate the transition to an energy-efficient, low-carbon economy, C(2009) 7604 final: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/docs/recommendation_d_vista.pdf (accessed March 8, 2015).

⁸ See the Green Digital Charter of 2009: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sustainable_growth/docs/charter/green_d_charter.pdf (accessed March 8, 2015).

⁹ Ibidem.

¹⁰ See R. Krishnamurthy, Opening financial taps for more water: http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/innovation_explanations/article/rajasekar_krishnamurthy.html (accessed March 8, 2015).

¹¹ See National Academy of Sciences: http://www.drinking-water.org/flash/splash.html (accessed March 8, 2015).

¹² That is to say, to drink, to cook or to be kept clean. See National Academy of Sciences, Why is safe water essential: http://www.drinking-water.org/html/en/Overview/Why-is-Safe-Water-Essential.html (accessed March 8, 2015).

¹³ See development below, IBM, Water Cost Index, Waterfund 2013, 2014: http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view_group.php?id=5047 (accessed March 4, 2015).

¹⁴ Polluted water favors the occurrence of diarrheal diseases such as cholera that cause every year the death of 1.8 million people and the illness of tens of millions of others. See National Academy of Sciences, op. cit.

¹⁵ See EDF, Les inégalités de l’accès à l’énergie dans le monde, 30 avril 2013: https://www.lenergieenquestions.fr/les-inegalites-de-lacces-a-lenergie-dans-le-monde/

¹⁶ See International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook, 2014.

¹⁷ See EDF, Le poids de l’électricité dans les enjeux énergétiques globaux (infographie), April 17, 2013: https://www.lenergieenquestions.fr/le-poids-de-lelectricite-dans-les-enjeux-energetiques-globaux/

¹⁸ See IBM, Water Cost Index, Waterfund 2013, 2014: http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view_group.php?id=5047 (accessed March 8, 2015).

¹⁹ See The World Bank, World Development Indicators: Electricity production, sources, and access, 2014: http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.7.

²⁰ See EDF, Les inégalités de l’accès à l’énergie dans le monde, op. cit.

²¹ See EDF, La consommation d’électricité dans le monde, 12 décembre 2012: http://jeunes.edf.com/article/la-consommation-d-electricite-dans-le-monde, 273.

²² See EDF, Le poids de l’électricité dans les enjeux énergétiques globaux (infographie), op. cit.

²³ See European Commission (Joint Research Centre), PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Trends in Global CO₂ Emission. 2013, Report, October 2013: http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/pbl-2013-trends-in-global-co2-emissions-2013-report-1148.pdf

²⁴ See EDF, Le poids de l’électricité dans les enjeux énergétiques globaux (infographie), op. cit.

²⁵ See European Commission (Joint Research Centre), PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, op. cit.

²⁶ See United States Environmental Protection Agency, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html (accessed on March 8, 2015).

²⁷ See Q. Aijun, Deputy-director of the Economic and Information Commission of Nanton (Jiangsu Province), in ICT insights, No. 10, September 2014, p. 29.

²⁸ See Community of Oslo, Dynamic street lighting can cut energy use by 70 %, November 5, 2014: http://www.oslo.kommune.no/english/environment/climate_and_energy/effective_measures_/article229486-65018.html.

²⁹ LonMark International, Open Streetlight Control System for Smarter Cities. Market, Challenges, Solutions and Next Steps. A profitable and strategic opportunity for cities, ESCOs and streetlight maintenance operators, 2014: http://http://www.lonmark.org/connection/solutions/lighting/20140227-SmartStreetlight-LONMARK-Whitepaper.pdf. See also Regjeringen, 70 % Energy Savings on Dynamic Lighting, November 25, 2009: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/sub/framtidensbyer/the-participating-cities-/oslo/70-energy-savings-on-dynamic-lighting--.html?id=575052

³⁰ http://www.smartgrids-cre.fr/media/documents/monde/IssyGrid_DossierdepresseERDF.pdf (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³¹ http://www.spenergynetworks.co.uk/userfiles/file/Flyer_AshtonHayes.pdf (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³² https://www.iberdroladistribucionelectrica.com/webibd/corporativa/iberdrola?IDPAG=ENSOCDISREDPRI (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³³ For more examples about smart grids projects in France, in Europe or elsewhere, see: http://www.smartgrids-cre.fr/index.php?p=france (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³⁴ Community of Oslo, Public transport to be climate-neutral by 2020, October 25, 2013: http://www.oslo.kommune.no/english/environment/climate_and_energy/effective_measures_/article229439-65018.html.

³⁵ See J. Berst, Patching up the Pipes: How Smart Technologies Help Cities Prevent Leaks and Save Money: http://www.waterworld.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-7/editorial-features/patching-up-the-pipes-how-smart-technologies-help-cities-prevent-leaks-and-save-money.html (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³⁶ See Water loss and other information: http://www.corrosion-club.com/waterfigures.htm (accessed on March 8, 2015).

³⁷ See A. Asín, M. Boyd, Smart Water: pipe control to reduce water leakages in Smart Cities, August 3rd, 2011: http://www.libelium.com/smart_water_wsn_pipe_leakages/

³⁸ See Peter Bjorn Larsen, Business Development Manager at the City of Copenhagen, in ICT insights, No. 10, September 2014, p. 28.

³⁹ For further details about Linky, see below.

⁴⁰ City of Oslo, Towards the Zero-Emission City, October 28, 2013: http://www.oslo.kommune.no/english/environment/climate_and_energy/effective_measures_/article263581-65018.html.

⁴¹ Green Digital Charter, op. cit.

⁴² A. Gurría, OECD Secretary-General, “New sources of growth in the 21st century. Fostering innovation and green growth” in OECD, Better policies for better lives. The OECD at 50 and beyond, 2011.

⁴³ For instance, see Commission de régulation de l’énergie (CRE), Deliberation of July 7, 2011 on the electric meter called Linky; S. Leblal, “Big data : EDF évalue la solution UDA de Teradata pour ses compteurs Linky”, Le Monde Informatique, 8 avril 2014 : http://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lire-big-data-edf-evalue-la-solution-uda-de-teradata-pour-ses-compteurs-linky-57117.html.

⁴⁴ See S. Leblal, art. cit.

⁴⁵ La vie des réseaux, ERDF choisit les solutions Teradata pour Linky, 24 octobre 2013 : http://www.laviedesreseaux.fr/Informez-vous/Actualite/ERDF-choisit-les-solutions-Teradata-pour-Linky

⁴⁶ For further information, see for instance S. Leblal, art. cit.