The Data Investment Plan for Aotearoa NZ, commissioned by the Government Chief Data Steward and published by Stats NZ in December 2021.
Data Investment Plan [PDF 828 KB]
Data has the ability to improve the lives of New Zealanders today and for generations to come. It is increasingly shaping our daily lives, our decisions, and our interactions. It is paramount for New Zealanders to have access to information they can trust.
The government holds and uses a vast amount of data on behalf of New Zealanders. This is an enduring asset that needs to be carefully curated. However, we cannot stand still. We must look to the future and identify the data needs of tomorrow.
The purpose of this Data Investment Plan (the Plan) is to support government agencies to maximise the value of our current data assets, help Ministers invest strategically and sustainably to meet future needs, and to assist Iwi and Māori to work with the Crown to establish priorities for data investment to meet Te Tiriti responsibilities.
New Zealand’s government data system has many strengths. These include robust statistical design, data standards, reliable detailed economic datasets, and innovative national wellbeing and social insight measures.
New Zealand is also considered a world leader in its use and integration of administrative data, and in the development and implementation of frameworks that engender trust in how data is used, such as Ngā Tikanga Paihere and Five Safes Frameworks, the Algorithm Charter for Aotearoa New Zealand, and the Data Protection and Use Policy.
While we should celebrate these strengths and continue to lead in these areas, we must also acknowledge there are frailties and key gaps in the government’s data systems. This limits the data system’s ability to support government, community and individual decision making, as well as our ability to measure the outcomes that we are trying to achieve.
A major cause of our data limitations is that our investment in data can be piecemeal, uncoordinated, and tactical rather than cohesive and strategic. This leads to:
This is the first phase in a multi-year programme that will explore our data assets, the infrastructure that surrounds them, and the capabilities required to unleash them.
The project has:
The Plan provides the government with a comprehensive view of data asset investment opportunities. This supports a more strategic, coordinated and systematic approach to data investment by:
The Government Data Strategy and Roadmap 2021 (the Strategy) published in September 2021 provides a shared direction and plan for Aotearoa NZ's government data system, offering a flexible foundation for agencies to work together and align their data initiatives.
The Government Data Strategy and Roadmap [HTML]
The Strategy seeks an inclusive and integrated data system and has five objectives.
It is built around four focus areas: data, capability, leadership, and infrastructure, and underpinned by a responsibility to uphold Te Tiriti and a commitment to maintain and enhance Public Trust and Confidence.
The Plan is a companion document to the Strategy and should be read alongside it.
The creation of the Plan is a key project to action within year one of the Strategy’s data focus area.
A multi-agency team performed a stocktake during which they assessed approximately 800 actual and potential data assets under 64 groupings. Detail on the stocktake process is provided in Appendix Two.
The stocktake identified 20 data asset groups (31 percent) spanning the society, environment and economy pillars were in need of major development. Economic assets were found to be the best performing and environmental assets requiring the most investment.
The stocktake also identified 12 cross-cutting populations of interest (half of which require major development) and six data asset groups that support Māori data needs and aspirations (one third need major development).
Finally, although assessment of data infrastructure and capability will be considered in future, the stocktake also assessed the data integration assets that are critical to realising the benefits of these data assets. Half of the four groupings needed major development.
Data assets refer to data products, infrastructure, and capability. Examples of data products include data measures like student achievement, data sets like the crime and victimisation survey data and climate data, and data tools like the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI).
The stocktake (and by extension, the Plan) assessed only Essential Data Assets. Essential Data Assets are distinguished from other data assets by virtue of their strategic importance to Government. They are used to:
The table below presents the findings of the Essential Data Asset stocktake by the 64 groups. The totals exceed 64 because some data groups have more than one data asset.
| Pillar | Generally fit for purpose | Some development needed | Major development needed |
| Economy | 13 | 5 | 3 |
| Environment | 0 | 8 | 10 |
| Society | 4 | 14 | 7 |
| Populations of interest | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Data integration assets | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Iwi-Māori data needs | 1 | 3 | 2 |
All categories and associated data products under the environmental pillar require some or major development. There are major data gaps in understanding New Zealand's water quality and availability, ecosystems and the benefits New Zealand as a country derives from these systems, the generation and life cycle of waste, land use, natural disasters and the impacts of climate change.
The society pillar, Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations, and populations of policy interest dimensions contain some robust data products, but most categories require some or major development. There are major gaps in data about children, migrant populations, Iwi-Māori wellbeing, and geographic communities smaller than the regional level.
Data products that make up the categories under the economy pillar have had the most investment over time and, consequently, are the most well developed. This is because they comprise the largest number of Tier 1 Statistics - a list of high priority statistics approved by Cabinet in 2012.
Populations of policy interest have been included in the stocktake as a cross-cutting dimension across the key pillars of society, environment and economy.
The stocktake has identified specific Essential Data Assets for the following populations: Iwi-Māori, Pacific peoples, migrants (including refugees), women, gender diverse peoples, disabled people, seniors, children, whānau (families), geographic communities, and socially and economically excluded groups such as chronically unemployed people, prisoners, digitally excluded people, and homeless people.
Essential data integration assets include the portals, dashboards and tools that are used to bring together and disseminate data critical for decision making, monitoring progress, and research. The highest profile of these tools are the Integrated Data Infrastructure and the Longitudinal Business Database.
Essential data integration assets also include a range of statistical frameworks and standards, core national registers such as business, people, property, address, and biodiversity and national datasets like imagery, rivers, roads, and models.
In the context of this work, Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations refer to building the capacity and capability of Iwi-Māori for the collection, management, and governance of Iwi-Māori data and those data asset groups that support Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations.
The process to understand the government’s essential data assets and prioritise investment opportunities, has been underpinned by the mana ōrite relationship between Statistics New Zealand (Stats NZ) and the Data Iwi Leaders Group. It has also undergone a consultation process.
The Data Iwi Leaders Group and Stats NZ have agreed to describe their Te Tiriti o Waitangi relationship as a mana ōrite relationship rather than a Treaty partnership, an acknowledgement that one of the most critical principles of Te Tiriti is the enduring relationship between the Crown and iwi/hapū.
Mana ōrite is understood as the parties having equal explanatory power within the operation of the relationship. This means that the parties acknowledge and accept each other’s unique perspectives, knowledge systems and world views as being equally valid to decisions made under the relationship.
In 2019, Stats NZ and the Data Iwi Leaders Group signed the Mana Ōrite Relationship Agreement as a commitment to work together through agreed relationship principles, goals, and deliverables that will give effect to the mana ōrite relationship.
It is the first agreement of its kind between Iwi-Māori and the Crown and solidifies the value of data-driven insight in the growth and prosperity of Aotearoa.
Through working together and leveraging their strengths, the Data Iwi Leaders Group and Stats NZ seek:
The stocktake of data assets was informed by a substantial body of knowledge that has grown from previous engagements with Iwi-Māori, including the Whānau Ora Outcomes Framework and Measuring Māori Wellbeing draft set of indicators created by Te Puni Kōkiri.
The prioritisation framework and process were reviewed and supported by the Data Iwi Leaders Group as a good way to prioritise investments in data collected by government. There was also engagement with Te Mana Raraunga (the Māori Data Sovereignty Network).
The outputs of the prioritisation process were reviewed by the Data Iwi Leaders Group.
It is our intention that future iterations of the Plan will have expanded Iwi-Māori involvement to reflect our improved knowledge of Iwi-Māori data assets and needs. Of key consideration will be the development of Iwi-Māori data capability within government, iwi and hapū, including an increased focus on Māori governance of Māori data.
What are our highest priority investment opportunities?
During the stocktake of Essential Data Assets, a large number of potential investment opportunities were identified. These were subsequently refined to create 90 investment opportunities that were scored against approved evaluation criteria.
The development of assessment criteria and the process to prioritise opportunities is described in Appendix Two.
A summary of the prioritisation process results is presented in the table below. A number of key themes emerged through the prioritisation process.
| Pillar | Top 30 | Next 60 | Total |
| Economy | 7 | 27 | 34 |
| Environment | 7 | 4 | 11 |
| Society | 8 | 19 | 27 |
| Populations of interest | 4 | 8 | 12 |
| Data integration assets | 4 | 2 | 6 |
| Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations | 5 | 1 | 6 |
The top investment opportunities from each pillar are described below, with the full listing provided as Appendix Three. Alignment of the top 30 opportunities to the Treasury’s Living Standards Framework is provided as Appendix Four.
Current state
Data on housing affordability and homelessness has been produced using the IDI, but further work is required to develop robust measures. In particular, data is needed for populations of interest, which requires additional integrations to measure at the appropriate level of aggregation.
Opportunity
If further investment is made in the IDI, then housing affordability and homelessness can be calculated more quickly, on a more granular basis and with focus on populations of interest.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.
Current state
Understanding and monitoring the numbers and characteristics of households experiencing material hardship and/or poverty is essential for monitoring the Child Poverty Reduction Act 2018 as well as evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. The Longitudinal Survey of Income and Housing begins data collection in 2021/22 and the first results of persistent child poverty will become available from 2024. However, more granular data is needed to identify and monitor sub-groups experiencing material hardship/poverty.
Opportunity
If the data better identify households and living arrangements such as whānau as an economic unit, a more nuanced understanding of child poverty can be achieved. Additional data can provide additional benefits. For example, by better measuring energy hardship, the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment can better set policy and regulate the energy sector.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
The Land Cover Database (LCDB), maintained by Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research and funded by MBIE, is a nationally comprehensive land use map of New Zealand covering:
Opportunity
If we better understand land, its profile, and its use, we can better understand:
Status
Owner plans a Budget bid within two years.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current State
There is an increasing need to monitor the sources of emissions and impacts of climate change such as impacts of climate change on biodiversity. Data collected on resilience (including Iwi-Hapū), impacts, and vulnerabilities can be used to drive adaptation and mitigation strategies like forecasting and managing water inundation.
Opportunity
If we monitor our emissions well, we will be able to keep stock of our carbon inventory and meet our national climate goals. Maintenance of the Greenhouse Gas Inventory is important for international reporting.
Status
The Climate Change Commission is currently considering data reporting standards and requirements.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current state
New Zealand's primary source of information on population and subpopulation data is the Census. Over-reliance on the Census can increase the risk profile of population data, resulting in undesired outcomes, and has inherent limitations (the Census is infrequent, and does not count some population groups, including Iwi and Māori, Pacific groups, as well as others).
Opportunity
If administrative data is used as New Zealand’s primary source of population data, then our population data would become more frequent, accurate and more granular. More accurate population and subpopulation data has implications across government – for example, in determining health funding and setting electoral boundaries. There is also an opportunity to align with iwi/hapū concepts. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Stats NZ's Census Transformation Programme undertook a series of investigations based on the 2013 Census to look at the ability of admin data sources to provide census-type information. This work accelerated in response to the 2018 Census (especially in regard to Iwi-Māori population data). The Census Transformation Programme will continue in the lead-up to Census 2023.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, many government and non-government bodies hold relevant administrative data.
Current state
Peoples' ethnic identity includes the ethnic group(s) they identify with as well as their ability to express their identity and speak their language. Currently, there are differences in how ethnicity is defined in administrative data. For example, Māori can identify themselves by ethnicity, descent, or iwi affiliation and Fijian Indians can be classified as Pacific peoples or Indian depending on how data is collected and aggregated.
Opportunity
If more consistent definitions are applied across administrative data, data is more readily re-used and combined - enabling us to better draw insight from multiple data sources.
Status
This is not a current programme. Stats NZ plans a Budget bid within the next two years.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
Current state
There is limited availability of data measuring the wellbeing of children and their resilience. This has made it difficult to form a meaningful picture of how children are doing as a group and across different sub-groups. For example, there are gaps in data reflecting the child’s point of view. There is a need for data that provides comprehensive coverage of different domains of wellbeing.
Opportunity
If we can measure child wellbeing using a more comprehensive set of measures and at a more granular level, we will be able to better understand the population and identify areas in the system where intervention is required. Use of internationally comparable measures will also enable us to benchmark against other nations.
Status
Programme of work is underway.
Responsible agencies
Social Wellbeing Agency, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Te Puni Kōkiri.
Current state
Currently, there is limited availability of data on sub-national populations. The data collected is often unreliable because it is generally taken from samples such as data on the wellbeing of Pacific Peoples.
Opportunity
If attributes are added to administrative data (to enable the identification of populations of policy interest) and data is integrated well, agencies will have better visibility of sub-national populations, then they can understand their needs and identify areas requiring intervention. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Stats NZ does not have this in train as an independent project. It would benefit from a sector approach.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
Current State
The Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) is a large research database that holds microdata about people and households. The data is about life events - such as education, income, benefits, migration, justice, and health. The data is then linked together, or integrated, to form the IDI. Administrative data, particularly datasets that have been generated rather than collected or developed, often does not meet expectations around data quality for some of their downstream uses and maintaining data at this quality carries costs for agencies that provide it.
The Integrated Data service has grown considerably in the last seven years, supporting over 700 customers working on around 300 different projects, and receives about 100 new project applications each calendar year. The use of the IDI is evolving and increasingly being used to solve real-time problems like assessing the wage subsidy effectiveness during COVID19, rather than being limited to research. The IDI is also of increasing interest to Iwi-Māori, both in terms of data sovereignty and in developing specific insights pertaining to Iwi-Māori. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Opportunity
The service is integral to work across the system, but there is more value that could be gained by increasing the service offering for government users, expanding the customer base, looking to partner to provide more direct impact for communities across New Zealand, and work more closely with Treaty partners to enable achievement of their data aspirations. There is also an opportunity to improve data quality (consistent data and metadata) so that IDI data becomes more widely usable.
Status
Stats NZ and contributing agencies have a continuous improvement approach in place.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, contributing agencies.
Current state
A register is a specific type of dataset listing all members of a defined population. It is the sole authoritative source of that information, kept complete, accurate and up-to-date. For example, the companies register administered by the Companies Office is the single, authoritative data source for company information. Key features of a register are persistent unique identifiers, immutable entries, and live data. Currently, there is no statistical person frame. Additionally the business, property, address, district valuation roll, and biodiversity registers require further investment. Foundational data such as imagery, LIDAR, rivers, and roads centrelines are needed to underpin other data.
Opportunity
If more registers are established, data is updated more frequently, is of higher quality, and is more readily linked to other datasets. This will enable more timely and rich insights as well as a focus on populations of interest. The establishment of registers needs to take account of social licence and be supported by sound governance to ensure ongoing public trust and confidence. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, contributing agencies.
This Plan is a guiding document for future decisions to enable a better targeting of resources across the system, it is not specifically funded or directive. As a result, each investment opportunity will require funding – either from baseline or through the Budget and infrastructure investment pathways.
The top 30 investment opportunities contain opportunities that are already in train, those that are expected to result in a Budget bid in the next two years, and new initiatives that will require substantial development before they are investment ready. Some opportunities have dependencies on other programmes across government which means they can’t be implemented at this time, others are subject to delivery constraints.
Prioritisation data and implementation considerations have been combined to form an early, indicative delivery roadmap (Appendix Five). This roadmap will be refined and validated each year and presented with each iteration of the Plan.
The Plan will play an important role in informing longer-term, strategic investment decisions made through the Budget process in two key ways.
First, the process of developing the Plan is helping agencies to identify opportunities for improvement and to develop and align joint Budget bids. A roadmap of existing programmes and potential Budget bids is set out in the next section.
Secondly, the Plan supports the Government Chief Data Steward to work with Investment Officials (the public service leaders for Construction, Data, Digital, Finance, Infrastructure and Investment, with responsibility for providing collaborative stewardship of the investment management system) to develop annual Budget guidance, strengthen the planning phase within the investment lifecycle and to provide advice to Investment Ministers on Budget bids.
The Government Chief Data Steward will also:
While the Plan identifies and prioritises Essential Data Assets for new and/or further investment through the Budget process, there are also implications for ongoing data asset management.
The Plan highlights the state of the data system’s Essential Data Assets and reinforces the need for the system to play an active and responsible role in maintaining these intangible assets through baseline funding, in the same way as agencies undertake standard capital asset management on behalf of New Zealanders.
This Plan does not preclude or impinge on investment in data investment opportunities that have not been prioritised in the Plan or are out of scope.
Agencies and the system in general will continue to be flexible and able to respond to ad-hoc and changing data needs – as has been reinforced by our response to COVID-19.
The Data Investment Plan does not explicitly address cyber security. However, cybersecurity risk was considered and addressed through the stocktake and prioritisation process.
Future iterations of the Plan will specifically address the infrastructure and capability requirements for good practice data security.
This is the first iteration of the Plan, which prioritises opportunities for investing in data products. The next iteration of the plan will have broader coverage of Iwi-Māori data needs. Future iterations of the Plan will reflect shifting priorities and evolving technologies as well as have an increased focus on the infrastructure (including alignment with digital infrastructure priorities) and capability required to support the data system.
The Information Group, an existing cross-agency group of digital and data representatives at the general manager and deputy chief executive levels, will monitor the effectiveness of this Plan and govern the development of future Plans.
Administrative data – data collected as part of the day-to-day business processes and record keeping of organisations.
Classification – a set of categories that represent distinct classes, groups or attributes of data.
Domain – part of the taxonomy for organising essential data assets which divides the pillars into topics.
Essential data assets – includes statistics, datasets and data infrastructure that are needed to generate insights and support critical decisions. Because they are reused over time, they need to be maintained to ensure they continue to deliver value.
Government Chief Data Steward – the government functional lead for data. The role supports the use of data as a resource across government to help deliver better services to New Zealanders. This is achieved through setting data standards and establishing common capabilities, developing data policy and strategy, and planning.
Government Chief Digital Officer – the government functional lead for digital, overseeing the development and management of digital for the state sector.
Government data system – includes the people and organisations that collect and use data, government data holdings (survey, administrative etc) and associated architecture and infrastructure, supporting components such as data access and common practices, and enablers such as protection mechanisms to ensure that data within the system is used in a safe way (Reference: Data Strategy and Roadmap).
Iwi-Māori Data – Iwi and Māori are and have been data designers, collectors and disseminators for countless generations. For some Māori, Māori data is a tāonga. Māori data is data that is for, from or about Māori and the places they have connection with. It is data about or from iwi in terms of people, language, culture, resources, environments. Cutting across this is the idea of both individual and collective wellbeing – that iwi are interested in how people fare individually as well as the collectives that they comprise. How each iwi defines the components of wellbeing, and their relative priority, shifts from iwi to iwi.
Measurement framework – a set of standard concepts, definitions and classifications for compiling measures within a particular domain or topic area.
Metadata – the information that defines and describes data.
Pillar – part of the taxonomy for organising essential data assets and includes the following: Economy, Society, Environment.
Population – the total membership or universe of a defined class of units which are the focus of interest. A population could consist of all the persons in a country, or those in a particular geographical location, or a specific ethnic group, depending on the purpose of the study. A population could also consist of non-human units such as farms, houses, business establishments or sheep.
Register – a complete list of units in a defined population. A statistical register is a register that is constructed and maintained for statistical purposes, according to statistical concepts and definitions, and under the control of statisticians. Administrative registers, such as birth and death registrations and a tax client register, can be used as sources for statistical registers.
Taxonomy – a schema for naming, organising and presenting essential data assets.
Tier 1 statistics – a list of the most important statistics needed to understand how well New Zealand is performing and to inform critical decision making. The list of Tier 1 statistics was approved by Cabinet in 2012.
Treasury Living Standards Framework – The Treasury’s perspective on what matters for New Zealanders’ wellbeing, now and into the future. It is a flexible framework that prompts thinking about policy impacts across the different dimensions of wellbeing, as well as the long-term and distributional issues and implications. It includes twelve domains of current wellbeing outcomes, four capital stocks that support wellbeing and risk and resilience.
The Data Investment Plan was developed in a three-step process with consultation occurring at each step. The steps were as follows:
From March 2020 to June 2021 a cross-agency working group completed a stocktake of the data system’s Essential Data Assets (EDAs) and identified key data gaps. This work was informed by adopting a system-wide view of what New Zealand’s enduring information needs are.
The stocktake of data assets was informed by a body of knowledge that has grown from previous engagements with Iwi-Māori, including the Whānau Ora Outcomes Framework and Measuring Māori Wellbeing draft set of indicators created by Te Puni Kōkiri.
The data system is complex, with multiple externalities that affect both system assets and the use of these assets. While designing the stocktake, the Working Group first created a classification system to make the stocktake more accessible to non-data scientists.
The classification system comprises three high-level pillars: economy, environment, and society. The three pillars are subdivided into domains and, beneath these, 80 categories organise the essential data products related to that category (as well as identifying the data gaps).
The system was informed by the Treasury’s Living Standards framework, the Tier 1 statistics and international approaches.
There are also three cross-cutting dimensions – Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations, populations of policy interest and data integration assets – which cut across the pillars.
The working group assessed categories of data products as being generally fit for purpose, in need of some development, or in need of major development, where there may be no current methodology known to fill the data gap.
The Information Group governed the development of the Plan. The Information Group is a cross-agency governance group of digital and data general managers and deputy chief executives. It is chaired by the Government Chief Data Steward.
Having agreed the Stocktake and data gaps, in July 2021 the Working Group developed assessment criteria (based on approved design principles) by which the data gaps were prioritised for investment.
The framework was supported by the Data Iwi Leaders Group as a good way of prioritising government investment in data collected by the government. The assessment criteria and weightings (overleaf) were approved by the Information Group.
In July-August 2021, a sub-group of the Working Group assessed the 90 opportunities and scored each opportunity against the assessment criteria.
This assessment was sequentially reviewed by the wider Working Group, the Data Iwi Leaders Group, and the Information Group.
In August 2021, a sub-group of the Working Group assessed the 30 highest ranked opportunities, considered the complexity of investment, any dependencies and what was already underway to prepare the pipeline.
This assessment was sequentially reviewed by the Data Iwi Leaders Group, and the Information Group.
9% Would filling the gap contribute significantly to any of the Government priorities listed below?
14% Would filling the gap contribute significantly to addressing one or more enduring information needs:
18% Would filling the gap contribute significantly to any elements of the integration goal of the NZ Data Strategy listed below?
14% Would filling the gap contribute significantly to any elements of the inclusivity goal of the NZ Data Strategy listed below?
9% Would filling the gap contribute significantly to Iwi-Māori data needs and aspirations?
9% Does failure to invest create unacceptable risk to the quality of the EDA for any of the following reasons?
9% Will addressing the gap deliver value by enabling any of the following:
9% Is there a high probability that a proposal to fill the gap could be delivered within the next two years?
9% Has the agency initiated any work to fill the gap? For example, a proposal or business case has been or is being prepared.
In this appendix, we describe the top 30 investment opportunities, separated by pillar. The titles of the next 60 opportunities are also listed.
Current state
Data on housing affordability and homelessness has been produced using the IDI, but further work is required to develop robust measures. In particular, data is needed for populations of interest, which requires additional integrations to measure at the appropriate level of aggregation.
Opportunity
If further investment is made in the IDI, then housing affordability and homelessness can be calculated more quickly, on a more granular basis and with focus on populations of interest.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.
Current state
Understanding and monitoring the numbers and characteristics of households experiencing material hardship and/or poverty is essential for monitoring the Child Poverty Reduction Act 2018 as well as evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. The Longitudinal Survey of Income and Housing begins data collection in 2021/22 and the first results of persistent child poverty will become available from 2024. However, more granular data is needed to identify and monitor subgroups experiencing material hardship/poverty.
Opportunity
If the data better identify households and living arrangements such as whānau as an economic unit, then a more nuanced understanding of child poverty can be achieved. Additional data can provide additional benefits. For example, by better measuring energy hardship, the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment can better set policy and regulate the energy sector.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
It is difficult to measure the size and value of New Zealand’s digital economy. Work needs to be done to define what a digital economy is and how to measure it. This will enable us to form conclusions on the productivity and production of this sector within the New Zealand economy.
Opportunity
If the size and value of New Zealand’s digital economy is understood, then it enables agencies to support areas of growth and gain better insight into the economy. The importance of this sector has been shown during the COVID 19 pandemic.
Status
Underway.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
There is limited availability of data showing the contribution of the tourism, labour and health sectors to the economy by region. This is important for agencies to understand the performance of industries and where the most value is gained. For example, we are unable to determine the value of Chinese tourist spend by region.
Opportunity
If satellite accounts can be measured accurately, then agencies can understand where value is being produced and where future opportunities lie.
Status
There is currently work underway to develop the tourism satellite account.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
Current state
A longitudinal business database is used to obtain data. A finer level of data granularity is required to understand the wellbeing and demographics of business owners. More work needs to be done to gather data surrounding small and self-employed businesses.
Opportunity
If the wellbeing and demographics of business owners is understood, then agencies can understand the sustainability of New Zealand businesses in various economic climates.
Status
Stats NZ use a longitudinal database to obtain current data. MBIE has initiated a survey targeted at business owners and the impacts of COVID-19. However, these surveys have not been consolidated.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
There is under coverage of Māori businesses in existing data. Further development of definitions relating to Māori, Pacific peoples, tourism and foreign-held business need to be established to understand these businesses. Some core Māori businesses are registered on IRD databases.
Opportunity
If all Māori businesses are able to be identified and good data is collected, then agencies will be able to monitor the health of these businesses and benchmark them across their respective industries.
Status
Work is underway to define Māori business. Regulatory definitions have been developed under the Tax Act but do not provide full coverage.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Te Puni Kōkiri.
Current state
There are issues with the quality and frequency of detailed occupational data. Data is collected every 5 years via the Census leading to large gaps. Detailed earnings data is not readily available and it is difficult to undertake pay-gap analysis on population sub-groups like ethnic groups, or disabled people, due to a lack of agreed standards. There is also work to be done on the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations to better reflect New Zealand's work culture.
Opportunity
If granular occupation and earnings data is collected, then agencies will be able to analyse pay gaps within sub-national populations. This could then be used to improve working conditions for sub-national populations and improve their socio-economic outcomes.
Status
A programme of work is being developed.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Public Service Commission and Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
The Land Cover Database (LCDB), maintained by Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research and funded by MBIE, is a nationally comprehensive land use map of New Zealand covering:
However, we have no nationally consistent measure of land use to link local activities to local change and lack enough monitoring sites to provide reliable measurement of soil erosion, good data on soil health, and detailed elevation mapping across NZ and outlying islands at sub-metre resolution.
Opportunity
If we better understand land, its profile, and its use, we can better understand:
Status
Owner plans a Budget bid within two years.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current state
There is an increasing need to monitor the sources of emissions and impacts of climate change such as the impacts of climate change on biodiversity. Data collected on resilience (including Iwi-Hapū), impacts, and vulnerabilities can be used to drive adaptation and mitigation strategies like forecasting and managing water inundation.
Opportunity
If we monitor our emissions well, we will be able to keep stock of our carbon inventory and meet our national climate goals. Maintenance of the Greenhouse Gas Inventory is important for international reporting.
Status
The Climate Change Commission is currently considering data reporting standards and requirements.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current state
There is limited availability of data on the social, economic and environmental impacts of natural disasters. New Zealand has an obligation to report under the Sendai framework focusing on the adoption of measures to address disaster risk. There is no centralised data relating to the cost of a natural disaster (including mortality, injury, displacement, and asset damage). Emphasis needs to be placed on measuring the impacts and costs of these events.
Opportunity
If the cost of natural disasters can be measured, then agencies can put strategies in place to minimise the impacts of these events.
Status
Work has been initiated in this area but it has not been coordinated.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
There is limited monitoring of biological, chemical and particulate contaminants within waterways, data collection and standards are inconsistent across the regions. There is a need for a national database to understand water quality across the country, and monitor the flow of pollutants as they move through catchments.
Opportunity
If additional water quality data is collected, then agencies will be able to monitor and understand the flow of pollutants through New Zealand's waterways.
Status
A programme of work is being developed.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current state
There is limited data relating to water stored in aquifers and the quantity of water taken from lakes and rivers. This has made it difficult to measure our water stocks at any point in time. A lack of understanding could lead to overuse of water systems leading to negative environmental outcomes. For example, an overused aquifer will draw water and nutrients away from the surface.
Opportunity
If we understand our water stocks, then we can manage water more effectively, including the effects of projected climate change on the flow of water in rivers and aquifers.
Status
A programme of work is being developed..
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment.
Current state
There is limited data collected on New Zealand’s ecosystem services. A measurement framework has not been developed and it is difficult to measure the benefits provided by our ecosystems like the benefit of pollination in our agriculture sector.
Opportunity
If we understand the benefits our ecosystems provide, then we can monitor the health of these systems and protect our most valuable resources.
Status
No programme in place.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment, Department of Conservation.
Current state
There is limited data available on the generation, recycling, reuse and disposal of waste. The data that is collected is not sufficient for the System of Environmental Economic Accounting (SEEA) reporting. More data is required to gain an understanding of New Zealand’s waste.
Opportunity
Improving the quality of our waste data is necessary to support our ability to develop and evaluate effective policies and actions, and to support better monitoring and compliance. Better data will allow us to track our progress toward a circular economy.
Status
Programme is underway.
Responsible agencies
Ministry for the Environment, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Current state
New Zealand’s primary source of information on population and sub-national population data is the Census. Over reliance on the Census can increase the risk profile of population data, resulting in undesired outcomes, and has inherent limitations (the Census is infrequent and does not count some population groups, including Iwi and Maori, Pacific groups, as well as others).
Opportunity
If administrative data is used as New Zealand’s primary source of population data, then our population data would become more frequent and accurate. More accurate population and subpopulation data has implications across government – for example, in determining health funding and setting electoral boundaries. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Stats NZ’s Census Transformation Programme undertook a series of investigations based on the 2013 Census to look at the ability of admin data sources to provide census-type information. This work accelerated in response to the 2018 census (especially in regard to Iwi-Māori population data). The Census Transformation Programme will continue in the lead-up to Census 2023.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, many contributing government and non-government bodies hold relevant administrative data.
Current state
Peoples' ethnic identity includes the ethnic group(s) they identify with as well as their ability to express their identity and speak their language. Currently, there are differences in how ethnicity is defined in administrative data. For example, Māori can identify themselves by ethnicity, descent, or iwi affiliation and Fijian Indians can be classified as Pacific peoples or Indian depending on how data is collected and aggregated.
Opportunity
If more consistent definitions are applied across administrative data, data is more readily re-used and combined - enabling us to better draw insight from multiple data sources.
Status
This is not a current programme. Stats NZ plans a Budget bid within the next 2 years.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
Current state
New Zealand collects its victimisation data through the New Zealand Crimes and Victims survey (NZCVS). This survey is funded annually through a contestable research pool. Limited data is available from the survey on some types of victimisation such as child abuse, abuse of disabled people, and elderly abuse.
Opportunity
If baseline funding was secured for the NZCVS, then the Ministry of Justice can have confidence any improvements made to the survey would have lasting benefits. Multiple agencies reliant on this data will continue to develop insights and form strategies around their findings. Robust sources of data will be provided for both national and international reporting like Indicators Aotearoa, and UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Status
Funded partly through baseline (40%) and partly through a research pool which is contestable (60%).
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Justice.
Current state
New Zealand does not have a nationally held collection of primary health care data. There are no data reporting standards leading to difficulties in collating health data from different providers. This has previously led to underestimation of certain diseases and illnesses.
Opportunity
If standardised data reporting is established, this will enable a better understanding of individual health outcomes and support preventative treatment.
Status
Stats NZ has not initiated any work as New Zealand's health system is undergoing large scale change. As part of this change the Ministry of Health will look to establish national data reporting standards.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Health.
Current state
There is limited availability of data surrounding mental health and addiction. Most mental health and addiction patients are referred to primary care providers where a lack of national data reporting standards has made it difficult to collate information.
Opportunity
If agencies have access to improved data, then they will be able to further understand the population experiencing mental health illnesses and develop future strategy.
Status
Under consideration.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Health.
Current state
It is difficult to understand equity within New Zealand. A conceptual and measurement framework of equity has not been established. Data lacks the granularity required to form meaningful conclusions, particularly within disadvantaged sub-national populations.
Opportunity
If we can understand equity within our society, then we can identify areas for improvement and put measures in place to avoid negative outcomes in education, justice and health for our disadvantaged groups.
Status
A programme of work is being developed.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Justice, Social Wellbeing Agency, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Te Puni Kōkiri.
Current state
There is a lack of data on unpaid and voluntary work. The last Time Use Survey was completed in 2009. This survey captures data on unpaid and voluntary work but sufficient robustness for populations of policy interest.
Opportunity
If frequent data on unpaid and voluntary work is captured, then agencies can understand the contribution made by households and the not-for-profit sector and areas that require support.
Status
A programme of work is being developed.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
Current state
There is a lack of data surrounding family and whānau social and economic wellbeing. Existing data is predominantly from Te Kupenga, the Māori wellbeing survey, carried out every 10 years. Measures of wellbeing focus predominantly on the individual and not family units. An understanding of how to measure family wellbeing needs to be developed before data can be collected.
Opportunity
If family and whānau wellbeing can be measured, then agencies can determine which families need support and how to provide that support.
Status
In pipeline.
Responsible agencies
Ministry of Social Development, Te Puni Kōkiri, Stats NZ, Social Wellbeing Agency.
Current state
There is limited availability of data measuring the wellbeing of children and their resilience. This has made it difficult to form a meaningful picture of how children are doing as a group and across different sub-groups. For example, there are gaps in data reflecting the child’s point of view. There is a need for data that provides comprehensive coverage of different domains of wellbeing.
Opportunity
If we can measure child wellbeing using a more comprehensive set of measures and at a more granular level, we will be able to better understand the population and identify areas in the system where intervention is required. Use of internationally comparable measures will also enable us to benchmark against other nations.
Status
Programme of work is underway.
Responsible agencies
Social Wellbeing Agency, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Te Puni Kōkiri, Stats NZ.
Current state
There is limited availability of data on community wellbeing. Improved availability and standards are needed for community level data. Most government data is focused at a national level and all surveys are too small to provide robust data below the regional level. This is further exacerbated when disaggregated by other characteristics like ethnicity.
Opportunity
If community wellbeing is understood, then we can begin to understand the drivers and put strategies in place to improve population wellbeing. This would enhance social outcomes and reduce the strain on related services like health.
Status
The Social Wellbeing Agency has work underway to help quantify the wellbeing of communities around the country.
Responsible agencies
Social Wellbeing Agency.
Current state
There is limited data available on Māori wellbeing that reflects te ao Māori perspectives. This data is predominantly obtained from the Census and Te Kupenga, the Māori wellbeing survey. More frequent data supported by improved infrastructure which shows Māori perspectives, priorities, language, access to services and control is needed, at both a national and local level.
Opportunity
If Māori wellbeing can be measured, then Māori are better positioned to achieve mana motuhake.
Status
Underway.
Responsible agencies
Te Puni Kōkiri.
Current state
The Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) is a large research database that holds microdata about people and households. The data is about life events - such as education, income, benefits,migration, justice, and health. The data is then linked together, or integrated, to form the IDI. However, administrative data, particularly datasets that have been generated rather thancollected or developed, often does not meet expectations around data quality for some of their downstream uses and maintaining data at this quality carries costs for agencies that provide it.
The Integrated Data service has grown considerably in the last seven years, supporting over 700 customers working on around 300 different projects, and receives about 100 new project applications each calendar year. The use of the IDI is evolving and increasingly being used to solve real-time problems like assessing wage subsidy effectiveness during COVID19, rather than being limited to research. The IDI is also of increasing interest to Iwi-Māori, both in terms of data sovereignty and in developing specific insights pertaining to Iwi-Māori.
Opportunity
The service is integral to work across the system, but there is more value that could be gainedby increasing the service offering for government users, expanding the customer base, looking to partner to provide more direct impact for communities across New Zealand, and work more closely with Treaty partners to enable achievement of their data aspirations. There is also an opportunity to improve data quality (consistent data and metadata) so that IDI data becomes more widely usable. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Stats NZ and contributing agencies have a continuous improvement approach in place.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Toitū Te Whenua, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Ministry for the Environment, Ministry for Primary Industries.
Current state
A register is a specific type of dataset listing all members of a defined population. It is the sole authoritative source of that information, kept complete, accurate and up-to-date. For example, the companies register administered by the Companies Office is the single, authoritative data source for company information. Key features of a register are persistent unique identifiers, immutable entries, and live data. Currently, there is no statistical person frame. Additionally the business, property, address, district valuation roll and biodiversity registers require further investment. Foundational data such as imagery, LIDAR, rivers, and roads centrelines are needed to underpin other data.
Opportunity
If more registers are established, data is updated more frequently, is of higher quality, and is more readily linked to other datasets. This will enable more timely and rich insights as well as a focus on populations of interest. The establishment of registers needs to take account of social licence and be supported by sound governance to ensure ongoing public trust and confidence. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Owner has initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Toitū Te Whenua, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Ministry for the Environment, Ministry for Primary Industries.
Current state
Data governance is the combination of people, policies, standards, processes, and technology that enables data to be available, usable, consistent, coherent and secure. Although significant guidance exists to support good data governance, currently there is no system governance layer. As a result, each entity makes individual choices and there is divergence in practice.
Opportunity
If consistent data governance is put in place, data use becomes more efficient, reusable, and comparable. Governance is also important to ensure that the ways in which data is used are consistent with public expectation. Specific immediate opportunities relate to the establishment of Health New Zealand and the new Māori Health Authority and a requirement for consistent health data and Māori data across the system. There is also an immediate opportunity to further define and implement the Waka Hourua model of Māori Data Governance co-designed between Kawanatanga and te ao Māori participants in 2020, as outlined in the Tawhiti Nuku report. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
Owners have initiated a proposal to fill the gap.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ, Ministry of Health.
Current state
Existing data standards are not being implemented consistently across government. A lack of consistent business rules, data formats and levels of aggregation mean that data sets cannot be easily combined for cross-agency data sharing. For example, many regions are developing their own collections, without the use of data standards.
Opportunity
If data is standardised, then agencies will be able to use data collected by other organisations and in different regions. This can be used to develop meaningful insights and conclusions. This opportunity is an Iwi-Māori priority.
Status
No active programme.
Responsible agencies
Stats NZ.
This dimension comprises four elements:
Specific opportunities included under this dimension, which have been incorporated into opportunities included under other pillars and dimensions include:
LSF categories |
Prioritised gaps |
| Subjective wellbeing | |
| Health |
|
| Knowledge and skills | |
| Jobs and earnings |
|
| Cultural identity |
|
| Time use |
|
| Social connections | |
| Housing |
|
| Civic engagement and governance | |
| Safety |
|
| Income and consumption |
|
| Environment |
|
| Social capital | |
| Human capital | |
| Natural capital |
|
| Financial and physical capital |
|
The top 30 investment opportunities contain opportunities that are already in train, those that are expected to result in a Budget bid in the next two years, and new initiatives that will require substantial development before they are investment-ready. Some opportunities have dependencies on other programmes across government which means they can’t be implemented at this time, others are subject to delivery constraints.
Prioritisation data and implementation considerations have been combined to form an indicative roadmap (with the highest priority investments in each pillar in bold and responsible agencies identified). This roadmap indicates when each project would be completed.
The roadmap will be refined and validated each year and presented with each iteration of the Plan.
Pillar/Dimension |
Years 1-3 |
Years 4-7 |
Years 8-10 |
Economy |
|
|
|
Environment |
|
|
|
Society |
|
|
|
Populations of policy interest |
|
|
|
Data integration |
|
|
|