What does it actually mean to treat data as an asset?

We understand what it means to own a house, a car, a share in a company, a patent or a trademark. In each case, there is an established legal framework that defines the asset, establishes who holds it and enables it to be sold, transferred, financed or protected.

Data is more complicated. A business may have spent decades building a valuable body of data that it protects and depends upon, yet establishing precisely what constitutes that asset, and what rights are attached to it, is far less straightforward.

That uncertainty has commercial consequences. It can make data harder to value, license or share with confidence, leaving transactions heavily dependent on contracts and trust between the parties rather than an independently verifiable understanding of what the data is and how it may be used.

This is a challenge we have been exploring in the Isle of Man through the development of the Data Asset Foundations framework, which establishes the statutory basis for defined, governed data to be recognized as an asset.

With the framework now moving into implementation, a much broader question remains relevant for businesses: if we are serious about treating data as an asset, what does that actually require?

What makes data an asset?

The first point is that a data asset cannot simply mean any dataset.

For a body of data to function as a distinct asset, four fundamental questions need to be answered. What exactly is it? Not simply "our customer records", but a precise boundary: which information, covering which period, from which sources and, if the data has been worked on rather than simply collected, how it was produced.

Who may use it? What is the holder actually permitted to do, and what limits came attached to the data when it was gathered? Those limits do not disappear on registration; they travel with the asset as registration does not displace existing contractual, intellectual property or data-protection rights; those obligations continue to apply.

Who is responsible for it? There needs to be a named party accountable for keeping the asset in good order and maintaining its governance. How can others have confidence in it? A means needs to be established by which a third party can see that the asset has been independently assessed and understand its assurance status, without needing direct access to the underlying data itself.

These are relatively simple questions, but many organizations would struggle to answer all four consistently across the data they hold. Doing so requires businesses to move beyond broad descriptions of data and identify distinct bodies of information with defined boundaries, rights, responsibilities and potential uses.

That distinction has practical commercial value. Once there is greater certainty around what the asset is and the rights attached to it, there is a stronger basis from which it can be valued, licensed, shared or potentially used in financing.

Why the rules matter as much as the data

Perhaps the most important part of this shift is recognizing that a data asset is more than its underlying information. Its governance matters too. Typically, businesses hold data in one place while information about how that data should be governed sits elsewhere.

Its provenance, permitted uses, quality requirements and restrictions may be spread across policies, contracts, spreadsheets and other internal records. The relationship between the data and those rules therefore depends heavily on the organization maintaining it.

The Isle of Man's Data Asset Foundations framework provides the statutory basis for bringing the two together. The Data Asset Register, which is now being implemented as part of the framework's supporting operational arrangements, will record information defining the asset and its governance, including its identity, provenance, rights, permissions, responsibilities and means of verification.

Crucially, the underlying dataset itself will not sit on the Register. Instead, the information recorded will provide a consistent way of establishing what the asset is and the governance and rights attached to it.

There is a useful comparison with land registration. A land register does not determine whether a property is valuable or well managed. Instead, it provides certainty about what the property consists of, where its boundaries lie and who owns it, thereby reducing friction when conducting transactions based on the property.

The same principle has commercial relevance for data. Greater certainty will not create value where none exists, but it can make existing value easier to recognize and use, whether through licensing, sharing, financing or the development of new data-driven products.

For a potential investor, lender or licensee, that could make a material difference. Today, assessing a dataset may mean piecing together its provenance, permissions and governance from contracts, policies and internal systems. A defined and governed data asset can provide a clearer evidential starting point for that assessment, reducing some of the friction involved without determining the asset's value or guaranteeing a particular commercial outcome.

Making data an asset in more than name

For years, businesses have described data as one of their most valuable assets. But there is a difference between recognizing that data has value and creating the conditions that allow organizations to act on that value. Much of that challenge comes down to certainty: knowing what the asset is, where it came from, what rights attach to it and how those claims can be verified.

The Isle of Man's Data Asset Foundations framework is intended to provide that greater clarity. By creating a clear bedrock of uniform understanding, organizations' self-described most valuable asset can move from an internal resource to a defined, registered and governable asset, providing a much stronger basis for valuation, financing and commercial use.

As AI increases both the demand for high-quality data and the scrutiny applied to its use, the organizations best placed to benefit will be those that can demonstrate not simply that they possess data, but that they understand what it is, where it came from, what rights attach to it and how it is governed. Providing greater certainty around those questions is ultimately what the Data Asset Foundations framework is seeking to achieve.

We've featured the best cloud computing provider.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit