Download original attachment
(PDF file)
This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Official Information request 'Tourism Impact'.
Email thread between DoC and MfE, cced to Stats NZ 
ending 18 August 2017
From:
Elaine Wright
To:
Withheld under Cc:
; 
 
;
; 
Subject:
FW: FOR YOUR INFO: Use of conservation land indicator
section 9(2)(a) Date:
Friday, 18 August 2017 12:56:11 p.m.
Attachments:
image001.png
Withheld under Hi 
section 9(2)(a)
FYI and further consideration. Please feel free to pass along to StatsNZ for a response.
Regards
Elaine
Dr Elaine Wright
Planning, Monitoring  & Reporting Manager, Science  & Policy Group
Level 3, 161 Cashel St, Christchurch
Department of Conservation - Te Papa Atawhai
DDI: M: +64 27 459 5638 | VPN: 5424
Conservation leadership for our nature Tākinā te hi, Tiākinā, te hā o te Āo Tūroā
www.doc.govt.nz
1982
From: 
 
Sent: Monday, 14 August 2017 5:07 p.m.
Withheld under To: 
@doc.govt.nz>; Elaine Wright <[email address]>; 
doc.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a)
Act 
Cc: 
>; 
@doc.govt.nz>; 
 
Subject: RE: FOR YOUR INFO: Use of conservation land indicator
I haven’t looked into the issues in depth in relation to this comment, but I do not at all share the negatives in the assessment quoted here
“We did explore using the IVS data, in particular 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. Stats NZ did have a few concerns around the survey design and sample limitations, and the breakdowns and tables
we were after weren’t available on the via NZ Stats. They said that because the purpose of the output data was to feed into the tourism satellite account it
wasn’t a direct pressure indicator/measure of resource use and management and other human activities (one of the legislative topics).”
1.  It seems odd to state that Stats NZ “have a few concerns around the survey design and sample limitations” given that it is an important contributor ($10 billion
per annum) to two of the most important Tier 1 official statistics – Balance of payments and GDP! It is not true that it is designed only for TSA. My memory
from when I was at Stats NZ is that  IVS existed before TSA was developed. [ “The IVS is the main data source for estimating expenditure by international
Information 
visitors to New Zealand (exports of travel services).”
http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/economic_indicators/balance_of_payments/BalanceOfPayments_HOTPDec14qtr/Data%20Quality.aspx
]
2.  I have analysed national park use using IVS and am confident of the quality of the outputs – which are superior in quality to much other data available. It is not
perfect, but it is based on a serious well-thought-out survey. While it is true that “the purpose of the output data was to feed into the tourism satellite
account” [and BOP and GDP -IW], and the sample design is likely to be oriented to this purpose, I see absolutely no obstacles (from a sampling design/
statistical viewpoint) to using the survey to estimate numbers of international visitors and hence it can  (and should, in my view, be tested and used to) provide
Official 
good quality estimates (with known sampling errors) of international visitors contribution to “direct pressure indicator/measure of resource use and
management and other human activities”.
3.  My assessment is that it is likely to provide superior data in scope and quality, at least in terms of international visitors, than DOC’s “ concessions data and
online booking data”. Our concessions data generally has big issues in terms of scope, consistency and availability/accessibility and on-line bookings have good
the 
coverage only of the 9 Great Walks. Testing could include comparison of VIS with the Commercial Accommodation monitor, and with the great walks in the in
the IVS with the DOC’s visitor booking system.
4.  I have tested my views here with 
, one of NZ’s top survey statisticians, who has been involved ith both Stats NZ and with the design of the IVS by
MBIE.
Principal Science Advisor - Statistics— under 
Kai-Tatauranga, Department of Conservation—Te Papa Atawhai
Level 3, Grand Central, 161 Cashel Street, Christchurch 8011 
Private Bag 4715, Christchurch, 8140
Conservation leadership for our nature | Takina te hi, Tiakina, te ha o te Ao Turoa
www.doc.govt.nz
Released 
From: 
 
Sent: Friday, 7 July 2017 7:08 a.m.
Withheld under To: Elaine Wright <[email address]>; 
@doc.govt.nz>; 
@doc.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a) Cc: 
@doc.govt.nz>; 
@doc.govt.nz>
Subject: RE: FOR YOUR INFO: Use of conservation land indicator
Thanks Elaine.
These permissions data sets are exactly what is needed to report on a range of OMF measures, and what I’ve sought in the past.
As you know, we have been wanting to get access to the permissions database for three years, but each time I’ve scoped it the response has been that the database
is such a mess that it’s not possible to easily provide these data. I understand that there has been some work done to improve this, so I’m very interested to see how
the MoE gets on.
Re DOC asset use data, some of this is a little easier, but other data points would require some work…
Does PMR have a role in this? I’m thinking that DOC should be reporting this stuff before MoE does it for us?
Cheers,
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
From: Elaine Wright 
Sent: Wednesday, 5 July 2017 4:37 p.m.
Withheld under To:
@doc.govt.nz>; 
@doc.govt.nz>
section 9(2)(a) Cc: 
@doc.govt.nz>;
@doc.govt.nz>; 
@doc.govt.nz>
Subject: FW: FOR YOUR INFO: Use of conservation land indicator
FYI
Dr Elaine Wright
Planning, Monitoring  & Reporting Manager, Science  & Policy Group
Level 3, 161 Cashel St, Christchurch
Department of Conservation - Te Papa Atawhai
DDI: M: +64 27 459 5638 | VPN: 5424
Conservation leadership for our nature Tākinā te hi, Tiākinā, te hā o te Āo Tūroā
www.doc.govt.nz
From:
@mfe.govt.nz] 
Sent: Tuesday, 4 July 2017 5:01 p.m.
Withheld under To: Elaine Wright <[email address]>
section 9(2)(a) Cc: 
@transport.govt.nz>
Subject: FOR YOUR INFO: Use of conservation land indicator
1982
Hi Elaine
The meeting with DOC last week went well, we’ve put in a request to see their concessions data and online booking data. The email is below.
Act 
We did explore using the IVS data, in particular 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. Stats NZ did have a few concerns around the survey design and sample limitations, and the breakdowns and tables
we were after weren’t available on the via NZ Stats. They said that because the purpose of the output data was to feed into the tourism satellite account it
wasn’t a direct pressure indicator/measure of resource use and management and other human activities (one of the legislative topics).
I’ve cc’ed in Bronwyn from Stats NZ if you have any questions about this.
I expect to get an answer regarding the tree-related indicators tomorrow and will send you a separate email tomorrow.
Nga mihi
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Information 
From:
 
Withheld under Sent: Thursday, 29 June 2017 3:53 p.m.
To: 
@doc.govt.nz; 
@doc.govt.nz; 
@doc.govt.nz
section 9(2)(a) Cc: 
; 
; 
; 
Subject: RE: SNZ/MfE/Doc connections
Kia ora
Official 
Thanks for taking the time to meet with us about the concessions data and online booking data.
1.  Wish list – concessions database
the 
We’d like to use the data to give a national picture of (commercial) use of public conservation land i.e. the number of active concessionaires by activity and primary
service per year, and include both recreational and non-recreational concessions/activities if possible. In addition, we’d like to show the economic benefits/impacts
generated from concessions (by activity and primary service per year).
Priority one:
Recreational concessions – extract with the following variables
under 
the number of active concessionaires by activity and primary service per year
breakdown by type of recreational activity e.g. guiding including walking, tramping, climbing, hunting, fishing, biking, kayaking and canoeing, skiing, bungy
jumping and caving and whatever breakdowns are available. Unidentified services variable should be explained in methodology.
revenue generated by DOC for each of these services per year (something similar to what’s included in the DOC annual report)
time series: minimum of six years is ideal, but we would want to scope out how far it goes back.
Identify which ones are one-off concessions so we can decide if we exclude them from the analysis.
Priority two:
The same variables as above but expanded to include the non-recreational activities
Breakdown by type of activity e.g. grazing; transport services; telecommunication facilities and power lines; commercial filming; beehives; sphagnum moss
Released 
gathering; gravel extraction; and other resource use activities.
revenue generated by DOC for each of these services per year
time series: minimum of six years is ideal, but we would want to scope out how far it goes back.
2.  Wish list - online booking portal
This measure would inform the individual use and occupancy of bookable DOC assets (focusing just on the Great Walks and conservation campgrounds) and identify
any trends in tourist numbers/occupancy over time. In addition, we’d like to show the economic benefits/impacts of these DOC bookable assets.
a list of the following DOC assets:
Great Walks huts and campsites
Conservation Camp grounds
these assets broken down by the individual assets (e.g. the individual great walk huts or campgrounds) and their occupancy capacity (no. of beds, tents),
spatial information (co-ordinates) would be useful for mapping the assets
the total number of visitors using each of these individual assets – we can do the analysis on the percentage occupancy within each asset e.g. if Clinton Hut has
40 beds and is fully booked every night, it has 100% occupancy over a certain period.
an indication of when (dates) the assets are bookable as some huts are only bookable during the summer so won’t completely reflect usage.
time series: from the beginning of when each asset was ‘created’.

3.  Attachment
I’ve attached a draft “measure assessment template” which might give you a better idea of how we want to use some this information. We welcome any feedback
you may have. Note we will have a separate measure assessment template for the economic impacts information – as this is a separate topic under our legislation.  It
also gives an idea of the type of metadata we would be needing to accompanying the information (e.g. collection methodology, limitations to data). 
Happy to meet in person to discuss if it’s easier. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks again for your time.
Nga mihi
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
, Environmental Reporting
Withheld under Ministry for the Environment – Manatu Mo Te Taiao
Mobile:
   Email:
@mfe.govt.nz Website: www.mfe.govt.nz 
section 9(2)(a) No.3 The Terrace, PO Box 10362, Wellington 6143
View the latest Environmental Reporting releases at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/more/environmental-reporting
MfE_logo
1982
Act 
From: 
@stats.govt.nz] 
Sent: Tuesday, 27 June 2017 4:24 p.m.
Withheld under To: 
; 
;
; 
@doc.govt.nz; 
@doc.govt.nz; 
@doc.govt.nz
section 9(2)(a) Cc: 
Subject: RE: SNZ/MfE/Doc connections
Hi all
Here is some info about Environmental Reporting.  Any questions, feel free to ask.
Cheers
Withheld under
section 9(2)(a)
Information 
From: 
 
Sent: Tuesday, 27 June 2017 2:10 PM
Withheld under To: 
@stats.govt.nz>; 
[email address]; 
@mfe.govt.nz; 
@doc.govt.nz;
@doc.govt.nz;
section 9(2)(a)
@doc.govt.nz
Official 
Subject: SNZ/MfE/Doc connections
Hi all,
the 
Thank you for taking the time today to meet and discuss the various intricacies of DoC data and the potential application of this for Stats NZ/MfE reporting purposes.
All parties emails are included above to facilitate further dialogue.
Cheers,
Withheld under
under 
section 9(2)(a)
*********************************************************************************************
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.
Released 
*********************************************************************************************
This email message was encrypted and has been decrypted by Trustwave SES 
This email message was signed and the signature has been verified by Trustwave SES 
Caution - This message and accompanying data may contain information that is confidential or subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or data is prohibited. If you received this email in error,
please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. We apologise for the inconvenience. Thank you.