Publicly funded data-driven innovation programmes frequently involve partnerships between small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and municipal authorities utilizing citizen data. The intention of these projects is to benefit citizens. However, few such projects achieve success or impact within the project timeframe. This may result in benefit accruing mainly to the SME partner, who gains both learning and data, engendering questions of data justice around whether citizen data are being exploited without sufficient benefit returning to citizens. Through case studies composed of interviews and document analysis, we examine how benefits for citizens are conceived and achieved in the publicly funded data-driven air quality projects Data Pitch and Smart Cities Innovation Framework Implementation. We find the differences between the programme funders’ policies had a clear influence on the citizen engagement elements. There are also a number of ways in which the desired citizen engagement and benefit becomes diluted, including through misalignment of incentives and focus, a lack of prioritization and ownership, and power imbalances between citizens and the other actors in the quadruple helix model. To retain the focus on ensuring citizens benefit from data-driven innovation programmes using citizen data, we propose the use of data Justice plans. More work is required to specify the content and mechanisms of such plans for application in such programmes.

Innovative, responsible data use is a critical need in the global response to the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Yet potentially impactful data are often unavailable to those who could utilize it, particularly in data-poor settings, posing a serious barrier to effective pandemic mitigation. Data challenges, a public call-to-action for innovative data use projects, can identify and address these specific barriers. To understand gaps and progress relevant to effective data use in this context, this study thematically analyses three sets of qualitative data focused on/based in low/middle-income countries: (a) a survey of innovators responding to a data challenge, (b) a survey of organizers of data challenges, and (c) a focus group discussion with professionals using COVID-19 data for evidence-based decision-making. Data quality and accessibility and human resources/institutional capacity were frequently reported limitations to effective data use among innovators. New fit-for-purpose tools and the expansion of partnerships were the most frequently noted areas of progress. Discussion participants identified building capacity for external/national actors to understand the needs of local communities can address a lack of partnerships while de-siloing information. A synthesis of themes demonstrated that gaps, progress, and needs commonly identified by these groups are relevant beyond COVID-19, highlighting the importance of a healthy data ecosystem to address emerging threats. This is supported by data holders prioritizing the availability and accessibility of their data without causing harm; funders and policymakers committed to integrating innovations with existing physical, data, and policy infrastructure; and innovators designing sustainable, multi-use solutions based on principles of good data governance.