Deliverable 3.2 Case study reports on constructive findings on the prerequisites of successful big data implementation in the transport sector

The deliverable presents seven reports of the case studies conducted in Work Package 3 during Task 3.2. The case studies conducted are the following:

• Case study 1 “Railway transport”

• Case study 2 “Open data and the transport sector”

• Case study 3 “Real-time traffic management”

• Case study 4 “Logistics and consumer preferences”

• Case study 5 “Smart inland shipping”

• Case study 6 “Optimised transport & improved customer service”

• Case study 7 “Big data and intelligent transport systems”

The methodology outlined in D3.1 “Case study methodology” was used as a template for each of the case studies. The template provided a consistent, but flexible approach to address the unique circumstances and learnings in each case study. It also leveraged the case study leaders’ strengths in understanding the applications of big data technology in transport operations.

Besides developing a deep understanding of the big data technology and its business applications, the case studies also present an analysis of the issues that serve as ‘opportunities’ and ‘barriers’ to the implementation of big data, as well as the resulting outcomes of the implementation. These issues were analysed using the knowledge developed in Work Packages 1 and 2 of the LeMO project, from economic, political, social and ethical, legal, and environmental perspectives.

The LeMO project's interim review in Brussels

On Wednesday, 26 June 2019 the LeMO project team travelled to Brussels for the 1st interim period review meeting by the INEA & EC. The team presented in detail the work done so far, demonstrating results, facts and achievements as these have occurred during the first 18 months lifetime.


The agenda for the day was full as a broad range of topics needed to be covered in the space of six hours. The Coordinator and Work Package Leaders gave concise presentations on key achievements made, potential challenges faced and next steps of each work package. The Project Officer provided comments after each presentation. Once the series of presentations was over the progress and main results had been discussed.

The first impression of the team after the review completion was that of satisfaction and recognition of the excellent work done so far, of course with some constructive feedback. The commitment of the different partners all along the project half-life, but also during the review preparation was excellent, leading to important achievements, and a comprehensive defense of them in front of the Project Officer. It was very successful meeting and a good opportunity to get feedback from the project officer.

It is with enthusiasm that the Partners have embarked on the second half of the project and are now busy preparing for the trend analysis and road-mapping set to start this summer.