Access to Sensitive Data: Satisfying Objectives Rather than Constraints

The argument for access to sensitive unit-level data produced within government is usually framed in terms of risk and the legal responsibility to maintain confidentiality. This article argues that the framing of the question may restrict the set of possibilities; a more effective perspective starts from the data owner’s principles and user needs. Within this principlesbased framework, the role of law changes: It becomes an ‘enabling technology’, helping to define the solution but playing no role in setting the objectives. This shift in perspective has a number of consequences. The perception of ‘costs’ and ‘benefits’ is reversed. Law and established practice are distinguished and appropriately placed within a cost-benefit framework. The subjectivity and uncertainty in risk assessments is made explicit. Overall, all other things being equal, the expectation is that a move towards objective-based planning increases data access and improves risk assessment. This alternative perspective also addresses the problem of the public-good nature of research outputs. It encourages the data owner to engage with users and build a case for data access taking account of the wider needs of society. The UK data access regime is used as the primary example of the arguments in this article

[1]  Julia Lane,et al.  Balancing access to health data and privacy: a review of the issues and approaches for the future. , 2010, Health services research.

[2]  I. Ritov,et al.  Emotion-based choice , 1999 .

[3]  H. Varian Microeconomic analysis : answers to exercises , 1992 .

[4]  D. Kumaran,et al.  Frames, Biases, and Rational Decision-Making in the Human Brain , 2006, Science.

[5]  Micro-data : a crucial asset for statistical systems Note by the National Institute of Statistics of Italy Summary , 2022 .

[6]  C. Skinner Statistical Disclosure Risk: Separating Potential and Harm , 2012 .

[7]  D. Kahneman Thinking, Fast and Slow , 2011 .

[8]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .

[9]  J. Delfgaauw,et al.  Public Sector Employees: Risk Averse and Altruistic? , 2009, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[10]  George T. Duncan,et al.  Disclosure Risk vs. Data Utility: The R-U Confidentiality Map , 2003 .

[11]  F. Ritchie UK release practices for official microdata , 2009 .

[12]  F. Ritchie Business Data Linking – Recent UK experience , 2004 .

[13]  Felix Ritchie Provision of ONS data for analysis: Safe use, not safe data , 2011 .

[14]  F. Ritchie Resistance to change in government: risk, inertia and incentives , 2014 .

[15]  William Samuelson,et al.  Status quo bias in decision making , 1988 .

[16]  Joel Huber,et al.  An Investigation of the Rationality of Consumer Valuations of Multiple Health Risks , 1987 .

[17]  Felix Ritchie International Access to Restricted Data - A Principles-Based Standards Approach , 2010, IASSIST.

[18]  Anco Hundepool,et al.  Guidelines for the checking of output based on microdata research , 2010 .