1. Anna Davison, Jean Beetham, Jared Thomas, Abigail Harding, Vivienne Ivory, and Chris Bowie PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO DATA INTEGRATION Highlight findings from the report prepared for Statistics New Zealand Opus Research, Opus International Consultants Ltd, Lower Hutt

2. OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATION Key results of interviews, workshops, online discussion Highlight findings Trust in Statistics NZ Recommendations

3. NARRATIVE INTERVIEW TOOL The interview schedule was an effective tool: Ice breaker engaging & provided personal context Demonstrated differences between operational and statistical use of integrated data Participants’ responses were thoughtful: showed appreciation from different perspectives Scenarios generated interesting discussion around acceptability thresholds, benefits, costs, and values

4. NARRATIVE INTERVIEWS - OUTCOMES Participants considered it extremely important that data is shared with and used by the right people and for the right purpose – to provide benefit, rather than harm. “Most information has the potential for a positive and negative outcome for different people. It depends who makes the decisions and who has the information”

5. They felt strongly that information should not be shared with non-Government or private organisations without their consent/permission. “You wouldn’t want a loan shark setting up in an area where there is a high level of poverty, people won’t turn down a pot of gold, but it will be more detrimental to them in the long run” NARRATIVE INTERVIEWS – APPROPRIATE USE

6. De-personalised, pooled data was seen as useful, as long as it was used by the right people and was used to have a positive impact for either a particular group of individuals or wider society. “I would be happy for the information to be used if it is going to help other parents… if it would benefit my child.” NARRATIVE INTERVIEWS – AGGREGATE DATA

7. ACTION RESEARCH WORKSHOPS – THE METHOD The blocks made the DI process more understandable and personal – stacking blocks – holding blocks close – bold moves – lots of debate & discussion Lots of questions about how data could be integrated No clear purpose so…. participants co-created the why & what and then judged acceptability based on that

8. ACTION RESEARCH WORKSHOP – DATA TYPES Type of data was very important in determining acceptability Normal, routine data Personal, complex, sensitive data Too much information! They already have that!

9. ACTION RESEARCH WORKSHOP – PERSONAL EXPERIENCES Attitudes to data integration can be strongly attributed to personal experiences with and trust in government authorities and statistics data integration may be: unnecessary not useful misused Negative experiences data integration may be used to produce public benefits and increase fairness Positive experiences

10. ACTION RESEARCH WORKSHOP – PRIVACY & SECURITY When workshop participants discussed integrated data being held in a single database and linked to their personal or identifying information they tended to become increasingly less comfortable with statistical data integration. “The important thing is how is this confidential information treated? Is it strictly confidential and anonymous or can it be misused?” “If everything here is in Statistics NZ, if someone hacked it they would know everything about me, and that’s scary. That would have to be so secure, otherwise it’s too much information they’ve got about individuals, it’s very powerful.”

11. ACTION RESEARCH WORKSHOP – TRANSPARENCY & CONSENT Some participants felt that informed consent should be required for data integration “People need to know what’s being shared and how it’s being used, and why they need that, and that you can say no to having your data integrated”

12. ONLINE CONSULTATION - PROCESS

13. ONLINE CONSULTATION – LESSONS Rigidity of the tool “It was not as interactive as I’d expected” Development of rapport with other experts “…Felt very hesitant to edit other people's comments very much. Easier to put in a new comment.” Extreme scenarios “There were two types of concerns that people raised: privacy concerns and concerns about whether the idea was a good one.” “It was impossible to overcome or address the concerns” But, valuable insights were still found Mixed views on short timeframes – “waffling on” vs “tight timeframes”

14. ONLINE CONSULTATION – IMPROVING ACCEPTABILITY Who uses it? What for? How it is protected? Some experts felt that DI should only occur if: – The public are informed – The public find it widely acceptable CORE VALUES

15. ONLINE CONSULTATION – LIMITATIONS AND BENEFITS Experts more aware of limitations of administrative data: – Lack accuracy, or not be in a convenient form – Only capture those who interact with agency Benefits – Longitudinal tracking – More current, regular, accurate, detailed, and diverse data Better data Better research and information Better decisions and services

16. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS Most New Zealanders appear to have a relatively positive perception of data integration by public sector agencies Attitudes to data integration do not appear to be strongly associated with particular types of social groups Acceptability of data integration appears to be largely influenced by the individual’s own personal experiences There also appears to be a more general value-based concern around appropriate use

17. TRUST IN STATISTICS NEW ZEALAND AS A DATA CUSTODIAN Most of the research participants had a very high level of trust in Statistics New Zealand as a professional, competent, and trustworthy custodian of data. “I don’t have a problem bearing in mind it’s going to statistics and it’s not shared, and no one else gets access to it.” “Statistics NZ need to change their name, and it may change their attitude, and portray a better, a more engaging type of response. Stats to me are scary, but if they could encompass wellbeing, I’m sure people would be more responsive.”

18. RECOMMENDATIONS Statistics NZ could consider providing positive messaging around data integration to ensure they retain and gain the trust of the New Zealand public – Reassure of security, confidentiality, & privacy – Demonstrate need, value, & public benefits, particularly around statistical data – Consider offering the option to opt in/out of DI where personal, sensitive, or complex data is being used

19. DATA INTEGRATION ACCEPTABILITY THRESHOLDS Ambiguous & generalPurposeTransparent & specific need InsecureSecuritySecure Open accessAccessStrict restrictions, procedures & protocols Public/ personalisedPrivacy Confidential/ anonymous PrivateInterestsPublic Subjective & biasedData & metricsRepresentative & meaningful Unfair & harmfulOutcomesFair & beneficial Less acceptable More acceptable

20. THANK YOU Contact: Jared Thomas | Behavioural Research Manager Opus Research, Opus International Consultants Ltd jared.thomas@opus.co.nz 027 244 8574 | 04 587 0675 We would like to thank the research participants who generously gave their time and energy to take part in this study.