Our Stories
Our Stories
Andrea Cominola
After getting a degree in Environmental and Land Planning Engineering from the Politecnico di Milano in 2013 and a Ph.D. in Information Technology in 2017, today Andrea Cominola, despite his very young age, holds the position of Assistant Professor at the Technische Universität Berlin and at the Einstein Center Digital Future, which in Berlin is also known as the house of digitalization.
In Berlin he coordinates the Smart Water Networks research group, which mainly deals with developing data-informed algorithms and sensor-based technologies that support sustainable, cost-effective, and just decision making in urban water management, and awareness/sustainable behaviors in human-environment systems.
Andrea, how long have you been in Berlin and how did you get your current job?
I have been living in Berlin since 2018. Before moving here, I was at the Politecnico di Milano for about ten years. I started in 2007 and three years later I graduated in Environmental and Land Planning Engineering with a thesis supervised by Prof. Rodolfo Soncini Sessa. Continuing on this path, in 2013 I obtained my master's degree, also in Environmental and Land Planning Engineering, with a thesis written under the supervision of Prof. Andrea Castelletti. At the same time, I attended the Alta Scuola Politecnica, where, beside having acquired multidisciplinary skills and knowledge, I met many friends that I still cherish today. In the same year I started the Ph.D. program in Information Technology, which I concluded in early 2017, again under the supervision of Prof. Castelletti and with Prof. Matteo Giuliani as co-supervisor. After that, I spent a year as a post-doc researcher, during which I further developed the research I started with my PhD and I completed the activities related to the European project “SmartH2O”.
Did you have the opportunity to have some experiences abroad during that period?
In addition to an Erasmus in Norway, while writing my master's thesis I spent two months at Penn State University, Pennsylvania, with a scholarship awarded by the Politecnico. Later, in the “break” between my master’s degree and the start of my PhD, I spent a month and a half in Seoul, at Korea University, where the external evaluator of my MSc thesis works. Finally, I spent six months at UC Davis, California, during my Ph.D. The above collaborations were particularly fruitful and resulted in some scientific publications.
Have you always studied water resources?
Basically yes, but always from different points of view. In my Bachelor’s thesis I developed indicators and models to understand how the human action of regulating the flow in some water bodies modifies their hydrological regime with respect to natural conditions. In my Master’s thesis I kept working on river networks, but I adopted a more theoretical approach and developed a framework to simulate the evolution of river basins over time as driven by different optimality criteria. With my Ph.D. I changed direction and my focus turned to urban water systems. My Ph.D. research consisted in the development of behavioral models of the use of water resources by residential users. The research was part of a large European project that exploited the data recorded by smart water meters installed in various homes. Basically, the models I developed were used for customer segmentation, profiling demand patterns and, consequently, providing recommendations for a “customized” management of urban water demands. A truly compelling project, in which we also integrated these models with a mobile app and a “gamified” web portal for water users. Compared to my previous research, the scale was much smaller and I moved from the natural context to the urban one, which has remained at the center of my main projects ever since.
Why did you choose to do a Ph.D. and, then, to continue with an academic career?
Tough question! In some ways it was the result of a sequence of events that happened at the right moments. During my studies I did not have the ambition to become a university professor, even if in the end it happened. Overall, I would say that there were two fundamental factors in determining my choices.
The first, and perhaps the most important in deciding to do the Ph.D., was having the chance to to know the world of research when I was still a Master's student. Especially in the periods I spent abroad I was exposed to various inputs related to this world and I thought that I would have liked to be part of it. Prof. Castelletti was able to involve the master’s degree students in the activities of his research group and my thesis required a very active interaction with the rest of the group. This collaborative environment grew further during my stay in the United States, where I also had the opportunity to participate in my first scientific conference. Not just any conference, but the largest international Earth and space science meeting in the world. The mere participation was an epiphany because it made me realize that the world of research is made up of worldwide collaborations with scientists interested in common topics and challenges, something much more dynamic and stimulating than what I had in mind before.
The second factor, more related to the choice to continue with an academic career, is about the characteristics of the projects in which I have been involved. As I have already said, I did not choose to do a Ph.D. with the initial ambition of becoming a university professor. I did it because at the time there was a lot of discussion about how the data made available by smart meters could be used to develop innovative models and because I knew that my research would have been contributed to an important European project. This was particularly appealing to me both because the project was innovative and interesting and because I would have been involved in a collective enterprise that included many activities in collaboration with various European partners. Something similar happened after my Ph.D. I knew that I was passionate about the topics I worked on and that I wanted to stay in the world of research, especially for its great freedom and the global relevance of the challenges to be tackled in water resources management. Almost by chance, through the Politecnico I learned that the Einstein Center Digital Future in Berlin, thanks to a public-private partnership, was financing various positions as Assistant Professor on digitization topics related to various themes, including water. So, I participated in the call and won it. In this case too it was a matter of knowing how to seize an opportunity that presented itself at the right time.
What plans do you have for the future?
Based on how my journey has unfolded so far, I’d say it’s very difficult to make predictions! Joking aside, I feel very comfortable in Berlin and I’d like to continue doing research here for some time. We currently have several ongoing projects, the research group I created when I started working here has grown a lot and the idea is to capitalize on this effort. Sure, in the long run I wouldn’t mind going back to Italy. A university position would be the most natural outcome but I would not exclude research management positions in European or international research centers either. I will tackle the problem on how to come back when I’ll start to miss the mountains too much! Berlin is wonderful, but very flat….
How can your research influence decision-makers in implementing solutions that go towards a more sustainable development?
What I do together with my research group is to develop tools that allow conscious, informed decisions. We try to generate useful information for the various decision makers so that their decisions are motivated by scientific evidence. In the case of water resource management, there are many decision-makers: public decision-makers of political-administrative nature such as municipalities and governments, private decision-makers such as technology developers, but also ordinary citizens. From this point of view, we develop both decision support systems aimed at large public or private decision-makers, and educational awareness tools, aimed at making users aware of certain issues. In short, the scenario is complex and it is not easy to find an optimal compromise between the often divergent interests of the stakeholders involved. The tools we develop seek to capture this complexity and help decision makers consider the interests of all the different stakeholders.
Another aspect is linked to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) promoted by the UN: although it is the subject of a specific SDG (SDG 6), water is a theme that unites them all. Our research addresses the development of resilient water infrastructure (SDG 9) and helps make cities more sustainable (SDG 11). But water is also linked to agriculture (SDG 2) and to the identification of pathogens via sewage systems, as happened during the Covid-19 pandemic (SDG 3). Furthermore, both in universities and through awareness-raising tools aimed at citizens, we engage in quality educational activities (SDG 4). Finally, SDGs 7 ("Clean and accessible energy") and 16 ("Peace, justice and institutions") are also linked to the theme of water: in fact, many water basins are managed by several countries and this often creates potential conflicts. From all these points of view, the research on water is absolutely strategic.
What is your opinion about research models involving collaboration between universities and companies?
If we talk about large European projects, the involvement of companies – large or medium-small – creates a good exchange ecosystem with academic research. This model, in fact, allows companies to minimize the financial risk associated with investments in technological innovation. In countries like Germany, where the industrial background is very strong, collaborations between universities and companies are very frequent and the model can work. Obviously, it is not the only model: there are issues in which, by their nature, companies don’t have a main direct interest, such as more theoretical research which does not have an immediate economic return. This is why it is important to protect the freedom of research, which allows for the creation of multiple models.
As far as the involvement of companies is concerned, I would distinguish two models. The first is the development of a project directly financed by the industry. In this case, industrial partners turn to universities in search of skills and expertise they do not necessarily have in-house to solve some practice-oriented problems. In this scenario, the impact of academic research is more emphasised, a requirement that is becoming increasingly important also for obtaining new funding at European level. It is a model which, in my opinion, works well but which must be built gradually. The key is to find a meeting point between the operational interest of the company and the relevance of scientific research. Particularly important, from my point of view, is the possibility of obtaining results which, at least in part, can be made public and made available to the international scientific community. The second, less frequent model - as far as I have experienced - is that of public-private partnerships that indirectly finance research, as in the case of the Einstein Center Digital Future. The Berlin water utility has invested, together with public stakeholders, to finance my position but does not have a decision-making power over the research I carry out. However, I can turn to them to understand if what I do is relevant or not and many projects can stem from this interaction. The important thing is to maintain a good level of communication, cooperate to do research together.
How would you describe your experience at the Politecnico di Milano and how important it was for your career?
My experience at the Politecnico di Milano was fundamental and, overall, very positive. It is perhaps the period of my life that I remember with more light-heartedness and energy. When I started the Bachelor’s program I was little more than a teenager and for the first time I experienced freedom from the constraints of school schedules, the possibility of leaving the context in which I had grown up, of meeting people with backgrounds and stories different from mine, and it is It was also the moment I started studying topics that really interested me. My most important friendships date back to the years of the Politecnico, where I even met my wife!
Sometimes I would have liked the educational model to be more similar to that of other countries, where, especially in Master's degree programs, the approach is much more “practical” and immediately involves projects for which students are directly responsible. But I realized that things are going in this direction at the Politecnico too. I have to admit that the Italian educational model, which is often mistreated or not supported with appropriate resources, works very well because it offers an excellent preparation and gives graduates the chance to succeed both in Italy and abroad.
Also, from the point of view of my career, the experience at the Politecnico was fundamental both for how it trained me and for the opportunities it gave me in terms of experiences abroad and the possibility of exploring the world of research.
Are there any memories of your “polytechnic years” that you are particularly attached to and that you would like to share?
Beyond meeting my wife, I would mention a conference in Vienna that I attended a week before my Master’s degree together with a group of classmates who were also about to graduate. Naturally, given the circumstances, we lived it more like a holiday and in fact we showed up at the conference for one day only, when we had to present our work… maybe my grad students shouldn't read this part, however it was a great team building experience! This same group of friends met again after our graduation: some, like me, started a PhD, others got a research grant. It was very nice to conclude the Master’s degree together and meet again the following year with different roles, above all because many stimulating discussions and many scientific collaborations arose from this friendship. Having a group of friends whom I later worked with as a colleague is perhaps the best memory I have of the Politecnico.
What advice would you give to a student who would like to do the same job as you?
The most important thing is to figure out whether the world of research is something he/she is passionate about, without starting with the a priori ambition of wanting to pursue an academic career at all costs. It is first necessary to understand whether the concrete work of research and teaching is something that engages you. It is work in which passion and curiosity nurture the more operational part. As I have already said, I was very lucky to start being involved in this world already during my Master’s program and, if there were a chance, I would advise everyone to try to do the same. The best way is to find mentors who can introduce you to the world of research and make you understand how it works. Not only at the beginning, but at all stages of one's career.
The second advice is to be proactive. Do not hide, but rather show your skills and ideas! The world of research offers many opportunities but you have to look for them, get in touch with the scientific communities of reference, understand which ones to turn to in order to carry on your projects. In my field, we often find ourselves having to communicate with people from very different backgrounds and for this we need to develop a “specialized multidisciplinary” profile that can put different skills and competences to good use.
Newsletter
Do you want to stay updated on all the research activities, events and other initiatives taking place at the Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria of the Politecnico di Milano? Subscribe to the DEIB Community newsletter!
Newsletter
Do you want to stay updated on all the research activities, events and other initiatives taking place at the Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria of the Politecnico di Milano? Subscribe to the DEIB Community newsletter!
