Email thread between Stats NZ and MfE, ending 15 June 2017
From:
To:
Cc:
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Subject:
RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
Date:
Thursday, 15 June 2017 10:13:35 a.m.
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Withheld under Whenever I’m outnumbered, I’ll come to you. When/if we meet with
you guys could
section 9(2)(a) come over here.
That time is good.
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
1982
From:
@mfe.govt.nz]
Act
Sent: Thursday, 15 June 2017 10:01 AM
Withheld under
To:
@stats.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a)
Cc:
@mfe.govt.nz>
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
How does 11am sound? Are you working at MfE on Friday or do you want me to come to Stats?
Information
Withheld under That time suits
too.
section 9(2)(a)
From:
@stats.govt.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 15 June 2017 9:29 a.m.
Withheld under
To:
section 9(2)(a)
Official
Cc:
;
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
the
Withheld under Hi
section 9(2)(a)
I’m free all day except 10-10.30, as I’ve blocked out my day for QA and avoiding all
unnecessary meetings.under
Some reflections below.
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
From:
@mfe.govt.nz]
Released
Sent: Thursday, 15 June 2017 8:43 AM
Withheld under
To:
@stats.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a)
Cc:
@mfe.govt.nz>;
@mfe.govt.nz>
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
Withheld under Hi
section 9(2)(a)
Are either of you free to discuss this in person on Friday?
1. IVS – it looks like there is consensus that this is a no go. If this is the case, is it worth
contacting MBIE to get data customisation? Or should we rather go down the visitor
arrivals/regional ports track. If what is currently output via NZ.Stat is a no go (and it isn’t
really given the purpose for which it was compiled), there may be little point in
contacting MBIE for further customisation unless we can be sure to request and receive
data that is fit for our purposes. And I worry about how much time this would take.
2. Body of Evidence – would the IVS info even make the cut as BOE? I thought it was
strictly peer-reviewed articles at this stage? Interesting question. The IVS data that Stats
has used and output as part of Tourism Satellite Account is peer reviewed in a sense (i.e.
Stats has put it thru a QA for the purpose of using it as an input into the Tourism Satellite
Account). What we may get from MBIE or its third party might not be peer reviewed
and require cleaning.
3. DOC data – great that
is working with DOC. It’d be good to get an update from his
Withheld under
1982
meeting yesterday. The concession data and hut bookings data is what we were
section 9(2)(a)
envisioning to get out of the indicator “use of conservation land” which is assigned to
.
Act
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
From:
@stats.govt.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 14 June 2017 10:58 a.m.
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
To:
Information
Cc:
;
;
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
Just to clarify, MBIE regularly engage with the contracted survey provider so negotiations
wouldn’t be needed. It would be more a case of if MBIE can’t provide the granularity or
Official
customisation around this they would ask the third party to do so.
the
Yes DOC has done work using IVS but I’m steering them back to their own data collection and
getting that in a shape and format that could be used for both their purposes and the wider
govt/industry.
under
I’m meeting them again this afternoon and have been privy to concessionaire visitation data
(domestic and international combined). Also, the data they have from their online portal
(*https://booking.doc.govt.nz/) might be a good starting point given it collects the number of
people booking great walks, huts etc..and has a split between international and domestic
visitors.
Released
*Not all information collected is visible from the landing page.
B
From:
Sent: Wednesday, 14 June 2017 10:46 AM
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
To:
@stats.govt.nz>
Cc:
@mfe.govt.nz;
@mfe.govt.nz;
@mfe.govt.nz
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
Withheld under Hi
section 9(2)(a)
Withheld under Thanks for this info. I tend to agree. You not being a fan of the IVS for our measure/purpose
section 9(2)(a) aligns with
’s advice to us.
We are short on time for this forthcoming report, and if MBIE contracted the survey collection to
a third party, I can’t imagine negotiations will occur quickly.
Our first port of call would have been DOC data, but it seems DOC itself is only disseminating
national park visits using IVS data.
As you say, administrative data (e.g. visitor arrivals and regional port) would provide for more
robust estimates, but provide a somewhat indirect measure of tourist pressures on the land
environment
1982
It sounds like something might eventuate from your work with DOC (as we know they collect
the info) and joining data insights that could enable us (the ER programme) to develop a better
indicator over time and incorporating time series.
Act
But for immediate purposes, we might be best to use the IVS information as part of our ‘body of
evidence’ approach that we use to help measure a topic where robust, high quality data is not yet
available.
Withheld under
, how do you want to take this forward?
section 9(2)(a)
Cheers
Withheld under
Information
section 9(2)(a)
From:
Sent: Tuesday, 13 June 2017 8:12 PM
Official
Withheld under
To:
@stats.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a)
Cc:
@mfe.govt.nz
the
Subject: RE: IVS data for environmental reporting
Withheld under Hi
,
section 9(2)(a)
under
In relation to the IVS, it may well be worth approaching MBIE (I have a contact if you’d like) to
see if they/there third party data collector could offer any additional insights or customisation.
That said, I’m not a huge fan of the IVS for such a measure/purpose and would favour
administrative based data for a more robust estimate.
As an aside, I am currently working with DOC to assist them in trying to value international
Released
tourist spend in national parks. In the process I am learning about what data DOC has on visitors
to huts, camp sites and great walks as well as visitation to concessionaires (operators) who run
businesses on the DOC estate as well as DOC visitor centres.
I think it would be worthwhile such an avenue is explored ahead of the IVS as DOC’s data
collection is set to be transformed with recent budget wins. I’m looking to influence that by way
of ensuring their various data insights are joined up, as opposed to operating in silos, and are
collecting both volume and value measures.
Happy to meet to discuss and look to broker some DOC engagement.
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
From:
Sent: Monday, 12 June 2017 4:48 PM
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
To:
@stats.govt.nz>
Cc:
@mfe.govt.nz;
@mfe.govt.nz
Subject: IVS data for environmental reporting
Withheld under Hi
section 9(2)(a)
Withheld under Can you help? (
has pointed me in your direction)
section 9(2)(a)
1982
The Land team for environment reporting is proposing to develop an indicator for tourist
activities, as a pressure measure on the condition of the land environment. The pressure topic we
Act
are reporting to is the wonderfully narrow ‘resource use and management and other human
activities’.
We are thinking, despite some data quality reservations, that the IVS could be used to:
- Show the top attractions/activities (e.g. a national park, glacier, marae) that international
visitors visited, in a single year and/or a comparison over years
- We would want to breakdown, for example, the national park visits to individual
Information
national parks (if cell counts permit)
- Show the number of international visitors who visited a national park per year and, if
possible, per quarter to show seasonal effects
Being familiar with this survey, what is your advice? What is possible given survey design and
sample limitations? We don’t have to reach Tier 1 status with this.
Official
We’ve had a look at what is available via NZ Stats, but these tables don’t contain all the
the
breakdowns we think we might need. Therefore, do we need to approach MBIE, as the data
supplier, or do you guys have access to the underlying dataset?
Attached is our measure assessment template, and an email trail is below.
under
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Withheld under Ok thanks
.
Released
section 9(2)(a)
I’ll wait to hear back from you re. what StatsNZ can provide. I’m happy to contact MBIE if we
need to.
From a scientific perspective it would be good to explore the data for the time series available
(even if the methodology changed), but from a time constraint perspective I revised the initial
measure-assessment template to just include the 2016 snapshot.
But it would be good to have as much data as possible, and then we have the option of analysing
it as a snapshot or for a longer time series.
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Withheld under Hi
section 9(2)(a)
I’ve attached the draft measure assessment template.
I’ve had a look on the MBIE site, and on their ‘data download’ page they have all the microdata
available to download as a ZIP file: http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-
industries/tourism/tourism-research-data/ivs/data-download (these are too big to send via
email)
1982
·
They have a activities csv which has the breakdown by individual national parks, but it’s
hard to interpret as they don’t have it split by year (the same way as on the stats portal),
Act
they only sort by “Survey Response ID”
·
There is another csv called IVSSurveyMainHeaders which break down the
SurveyResponseID by year – perhaps we could cross reference the “SurveyResponseID”
for the 2016 data, and then use it to filter the activities csv.
What do you think?
Information
If you could follow up with StatsNZ to see if their portal has a national park breakdown, that’d be
much easier.
There is also a shared MBIE mailbox where we could ask for the data? I.e All 2016 data for
Official
activities participated in, including the sub groups (e.g. individual national parks).
the
Happy to hear your thoughts.
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
under
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Environment Reporting - Land / Purongo Taiao Whenua
Released
Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa
DDI +64 4
| stats.govt.nz
*********************************************************************************************
Please Note: The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files may be confid*ential information,
and may also be the subject of legal professional privilege. It is not necessarily the official view of the Ministry for the
Environment. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail is unauthorised. If you
have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete the original. Thank you.
*********************************************************************************************
1982
Act
Information
Official
the
under
Released
