Prepared for Environment and Climate Change Canada
Supplier name: Ekos Research Associates
Contract number: K8A49-200074/001/CY
Contract value: $39,781.64
Award date: June 7, 2019
Delivery date: October 18, 2019
Registration Number: 021-19
For more information on this report, please contact Environment and Climate Change Canada at: ec.enviroinfo.ec@canada.ca
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français
Cat. No.: xxx
ISBN: xxx
Unless otherwise specified, you may not reproduce materials in this publication, in whole or in part, for the purposes of
commercial redistribution without prior written permission from Environment and Climate Change Canada's copyright
administrator. To obtain permission to reproduce Government of Canada materials for commercial purposes, apply
for Crown Copyright Clearance by contacting:
Environment and Climate Change Canada
Public Inquiries Centre
7th Floor, Fontaine Building
200 Sacré-Coeur Boulevard
Gatineau QC K1A 0H3
Telephone: 819-997-2800
Toll Free: 1-800-668-6767 (in Canada only)
Email: ec.enviroinfo.ec@canada.ca
Cover photo: © GettyImages.ca
Inside photos: © Environment and Climate Change Canada
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2019
Aussi disponible en français
The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) was established in 1992 to inform Canadians about pollutants in their communities and serves as a public inventory of releases, disposals, and transfers. Organizations in Canada, including manufacturers, mines, oil and gas operations, power plants, and sewage treatment plants are required to report to the NPRI. Governments, companies, organizations, researchers, and citizens are all potential users of NPRI data. A survey of data users seeks to understand the needs of users and satisfaction with the inventory, particularly given additions to the NPRI website that have taken place in the recent past to improve the users' ability to use and interpret the data.
An online survey was conducted with 182 individuals who have used NPRI data and the website to gather information on their data needs and experiences with the inventory and website in order to make both easier to understand and navigate. The survey was conducted between mid-July and mid-August, 2019, from two sources: a client-supplied list of known data users and an open source link used with a general announcement about the survey on social media and the NPRI website on canada.ca. A series of 14 follow-up interviews were also conducted in the second half of August with some survey respondents to obtain more detailed information and context about use of the NPRI as well as sources of satisfaction and areas for improvement.
The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) was established in 1992 to inform Canadians about pollutants in their communities and serves as a public inventory of releases, disposals, and transfers. Organizations in Canada, including manufacturers, mines, oil and gas operations, power plants, and sewage treatment plants are required to report to the NPRI. In all, the inventory tracks over 320 pollutants from over 7,000 facilities throughout Canada. The public inventory is intended to help Canadians understand pollutants released in their communities, encourage action to reduce pollution, and track changes in pollutants over time. Governments, companies, organizations, researchers, and citizens are all potential users of NPRI data. The NPRI website has been designed and updated to help users understand and navigate the data. Users have the ability to search for information in their area, source information for projects and presentations, read data highlights and overviews, or search datasets and the complete inventory database.
A survey of reporters and data users was conducted in 2007 to understand who was using the inventory, their opinions on reporting requirements, and satisfaction with the NPRI. The 2019 survey of data users seeks to understand the needs of users and satisfaction with the inventory, particularly given the additions to the NPRI website that have taken place since the last iteration of the survey, developed to improve the users' ability to use and interpret the data. The primary objectives of the 2019 Survey of Data Users are:
The online survey was conducted with 182 individuals who have used NPRI data and the website to gather information on their data needs and experiences with the inventory and website in order to make both easier to understand and navigate .
The survey questionnaire was designed by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), and reviewed by Ekos Research for clarity, comprehensiveness, skip logic, and flow. The questionnaire was subsequently programmed and translated by Ekos Research, each of which was reviewed by ECCC. The questionnaire was tested with members of the NPRI Work Group between July 10 and 12 (17 test cases) with only minor changes to the wording and skip logic. The survey required an average of 18 minutes to complete and was conducted between July 16 and August 19, 2019. A total of five email invitations/reminders were sent (one per week), with the last one extending the date to augment response. A series of reminder calls were also made in the fifth week of the survey to speak with non-respondents from the list-based sample provided by the Department.
A total of 281 emails were sent from the list-based sample, each with a dedicated Personal Identification Number included in the survey link provided. Another 33 entries from the list-based sample provided by ECCC were sent the generic invitation to the open link version of the survey since there was no specific contact provided for these organizations. Of the 281 invited to the PIN-controlled version of the survey, two entries bounced as invalid email entries. Among the remaining 279, 67 completed the survey. Another 19 started the survey, but failed to complete it. The overall response rate based on the 67 who completed the survey among the 279 receiving the invitation is 24%.
It is impossible to tell what the response rate is in the open link since the survey was generally advertised on the ECCC website and through social media networks, in addition to the 33 organizations in the list-based sample. Overall, 197 entered the link and moved past the introduction. Of these, 115 completed the survey and 82 started the survey, but dropped off before completing it.
Survey data gathered from the list-based sample and open link were combined and are reported without the application of any weight, as characteristics of the population of users of the NPRI is not known.
A margin of error is also not applicable since a census of all members of the population was attempted in the list-based, PIN-controlled sample, and there was no random selection process used in the open link survey. Overall, since the degree of representativeness of the population of NPRI users cannot be assessed, either from the list-based sample or the open link, and results are combined from the two sources in treatment of the data, the findings should be generally considered qualitative in nature.
In addition to the survey, a small series of 14 in-depth interviews were conducted by telephone with users of the NPRI who had completed the survey and indicated a willingness to be interviewed by telephone. For some, a $75 incentive was offered, although this was not made available to federal government employees, and was not accepted by a further four participants who believed it to be a conflict of interest. The interviews addressed more detailed context of how they have used the inventory, as well as issues, limitations, or shortcomings they have experienced with it, along with the value of the NPRI for their particular applications. Lastly, suggestions for improvements and other changes were also explored. The length of the interview ranged from 15 to 35 minutes depending on the participant's use of the NPRI.
Results are presented in text, charts, and tables. Bulleted text is used to describe specific segments of the sample, if they are statistically and substantively different from the overall results for the entire sample (i.e., at least 5% or more from the overall mean in any given subgroup). Differences not noted in the report can be assumed to be either not statistically significant in their variation from the overall result, judged to be too small to be noteworthy, or the number of cases in the sub-sample is too small to be reliable.
Readers should also note that survey findings are presented in the report in terms of valid percentage of responses, excluding those who said "don't know", "not applicable", or otherwise did not provide a response on any given question. Results may also not total to 100% due to rounding.
Results of the interviews are interspersed with the survey findings in relevant thematic areas throughout the report highlighted in grey. In some cases results described may be based on only two or three interview participants, typically noted as "a few" or "several". In some cases, results are described on the basis of input from one participant, also reflected in the use of quotes meant to be illustrative of key points. Therefore, qualitative findings are meant to be illustrative and help to provide added context to the survey findings and should be interpreted with caution.
In the combined sample collected, two in three (64%) have used the NPRI, although 36% have not. The following table presents the types of organizations respondents represent among those using and not using the NPRI, indicating a wide variety of use and interest. Representatives from industry are the largest proportion of respondents across users and non-users of the Inventory (23% of those in the sample who have used the NPRI and 16% of the 58 individuals in the sample who have not used the NPRI). Government representatives are also a large proportion of the sample who have used the NPRI. In fact, four in 10 of those in the sample who have used the NPRI come from federal, provincial, or municipal governments.
Among non-users, individual citizens and those in municipal government form large portions of the sample (33% and 16%, respectively).
| What type of organization are you primarily affiliated with? | NPRI Users n=112 |
NPRI Non-Users n=58 |
|---|---|---|
| Industrial facility/association | 23% | 16% |
| Provincial government | 13% | 3% |
| Federal government - Environment and Climate Change Canada | 12% | 2% |
| Federal government - Health Canada | 12% | 0% |
| Environmental Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) | 8% | 3% |
| Academic institution | 5% | 3% |
| Individual citizen | 4% | 33% |
| Municipal government | 4% | 16% |
| Commercial/Institutional | 2% | 5% |
| Federal government - Other | 1% | 3% |
| Students | 1% | 3% |
| Other | 13% | 12% |
Nearly nine in 10 (87%) of survey respondents rated their knowledge as high when it comes to searching the Internet for specific information. Seven in 10 (73%) said they are strong in their knowledge of spreadsheets to capture and manipulate data. This is considerably higher, however, among NPRI users, particularly advanced users (81% and 85% respectively), compared with 61% of non-users. Similarly, seven in 10 (73%) of the sample also rated their knowledge and comfort as high when it comes to using search functions and filters in online tools. Half (51%), however, said they are comfortable with using information databases to perform advanced analysis. This is higher among NPRI users in general, and advanced users in particular (58% and 63%, respectively) compared with non-users (41%).
This chart has four horizontal stacked bars. On a scale of 5 points where 1-2 means not knowledgeable/ comfortable, 3 means average, and 4-5 means knowledgeable/comfortable.
Respondents were asked: How would you describe your level of knowledge and comfort with…?
The 111 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Among the 36% of survey respondents indicating they have not used the NPRI, all but a handful (89%) believe it could be of benefit to them, with application shared equally between personal and professional benefit. Half of non-users who indicated interest said they would be likely to use it (4 or 5 on the 5-point scale from not at all to very likely). Only nine per cent said they would not be very likely to use it.
Preferred methods of contact for more information would be through the NPRI website (74%) and also through general Internet search, such as Google (45%).
Reasons for not having used the NPRI in the past largely relate to lack of awareness (76%):
Among those indicating an interest, some of the topic areas they would be most interested in include background about the NPRI (what information it contains, how it is collected and maintained, etc.), as well as how to use it (how to use it for specific purposes, how best to derive relevant information from it). A few others said they were interested in understanding the levels and types of pollutants in areas of interest, and that a visual, interactive map would be useful.
Also among those interested, information requirements to begin using the NPRI include step-by step guides (62%), example study cases (52%) and video tutorials (48%), along with live webinar training (40%).
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Do you think that NPRI data could benefit or be of interest to you? | n=54 |
| Yes | 89% |
| No | 11% |
| In what capacity would NPRI data be most useful to you? | n=46 |
| Professionally | 28% |
| Personally | 26% |
| Both | 46% |
| How likely are you to use NPRI data? | n=46 |
| Not likely (1-2) | 9% |
| Moderately likely (3) | 39% |
| Likely (4-5) | 52% |
| How could NPRI best reach out to you to provide more information? | n=47 |
| NPRI Canada.ca website | 74% |
| General Internet Search | 45% |
| Social Media | 26% |
| Canada Gazette | 6% |
| Other website | 4% |
| Other | 17% |
| Why haven't you used NPRI data in the past? | n=68 |
| Unaware | 51% |
| Need better understanding of what I can find there | 18% |
| Not relevant | 9% |
| Did not realize could access for personal use | 7% |
| Too technical | 3% |
| Other | 12% |
| What would you need in order to get started using NPRI data? | n=42 |
| Step-by-step guides | 62% |
| Study cases (examples of how others use the data) | 52% |
| Video tutorials | 48% |
| Live webinar training | 40% |
| In class training | 19% |
| Other | 12% |
Overall, among users of the NPRI, very few use it for personal application, and if they do, they use it for both professional and personal reasons (17%). Only four per cent use it exclusively for personal applications.
More specifically, just over half of users (55%) indicated they rely on the NPRI to analyze sectors and/or historical trends, just under half (46%) use it for environmental risk assessment, and another 40% use it to identify pollutant releases in a specific area or community. Three in 10 hold discussions, at least in part based on NPRI data. Just over one in four (27%) use it for policy development and 19% use it for research, including ongoing tracking of land, air, and water quality, as well as establishing linkages with other data sources. Fewer rely on it for other purposes including quality assurance checks and benchmarking facility performance among other activities.
This chart has 13 single bars.
Respondents were asked: What was your purpose for using the data? The 112 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Each of the interview participants said they use the NPRI for professional uses, and only a few also access it for personal interest. Overall, participants' main use of the NPRI system consists of accessing the data to conduct various analyses, but use and benefits of the system varies slightly depending on the organizational context and unique role within their organization. Some participants had been using the NPRI for years and have a high level of knowledge and familiarity while others, particularly academics, had made limited use of the system.
Those who access the NPRI as a part of their work with an industrial facility or organization reported primarily using the service to upload data to the NPRI using the Single Window Information Manager (SWIM) portal, conducting quality control of data entered, and accessing data to run analyses including monitoring long-term emissions trends and industry benchmarking. Some also described accessing the NPRI for the purposes of consultation with the NPRI on changes to reporting requirements, advocating for their industry or sector, and establishing internal emissions priorities and decision-making. A few also noted they use the NPRI data to support or refute claims made by the NPRI regarding their industry or sector. These participants typically have a high degree of familiarity with the NPRI, having intimate knowledge of or experience with the upload process, quality control measures, and methods of assembling data for analysis.
Those working with NGOs reported accessing the NPRI data primarily for either specific substances or emitters for the purpose of advocating policy changes and responding to community concerns. Some also indicated use of the data to help identify long term trends, develop modeling, and identify potential links to areas such as health.
Similarly, those working with academic institutions said they access the data to run analyses for various research projects, including potential health implications of specific emissions and the development of mathematical models to predict emissions based on particulates. Participants who use the NPRI as part of their work for the government similarly use the NPRI data for analysis on health and environmental impacts of various emissions.
Overall, interview participants found the NPRI to be a very useful tool that fills a gap of available information on chemical use and emissions. Many took the time to comment on how pleased they are with the overall system.
"It remains a very useful tool even with no changes. I'm pretty sure there are improvements to be made, but no major overhaul seems necessary."
The primary benefit of the NPRI for most participants is how the data is publicly available without the need for access requests, and the data is longitudinal in nature, allowing for analysis on long-term trends and changes. Participants across all backgrounds noted these as positive factors.
"It's essential. When we're assessing a sector and comparing it with another sector or source of air pollution we need that data to do comparisons and also to provide a historical perspective for each sector."
"So as long as it stays as open and easily accessible as it is, that's great I think for researchers like myself who want quick and easy access to the data."
Data access was reported as particularly useful to those in academic, government, and NGO environments, who in some cases said the NPRI is their only available source for the information they require for research or advocacy efforts. Those who use the NPRI for the purposes of emissions modeling noted its use for validation of their results. Those working with NGOs noted the NPRI's usefulness in highlighting potential areas of focus for advocacy and the associated benefit of then using that data to hold industry and government to account from a regulatory perspective.
"You can see five years' data at a time, that's really important. And being able to look over the decade and see what's changed, what's improved, what's not."
"From a local perspective, for citizens to be able to go to a local company and say 'look, this is what you're discharging into our community, it's not acceptable' and be talking directly to the company to say 'what can be done? What can you do to reduce your discharges?'"
Participants representing industrial facilities or organizations commented on the NPRI's benefit for benchmarking purposes. The ability to compare and contrast emissions between facilities or sectors was noted as useful to informing internal decision making around ongoing emission strategies. Some said they appreciate the NPRI's use in keeping records of emissions patterns over time for a particular facility or chemical emission.
"I mean it gives context to the numbers that we calculate and it can help sort of inform decisions on what could be maybe more priority contaminants for us compared with other industrial emitters in the country."
"The benefit would be to inform us in our decision making; where we need to reduce our emissions or where we are doing a good job. Those kind of areas where we are trying to make business decisions we can use the NPRI data to prioritize our emission reduction strategy."
In terms of where users initially heard about the inventory, the NPRI website on canada.ca (50%) and directly from ECCC are the two primary sources (49%). These are followed at a distance by a general Internet search (15%) and Canada Gazette (12%). A significant proportion simply indicated their employer/supervisor/work colleagues without further specification, shown in the chart under "Other".
This chart has 5 single bars.
Respondents were asked: Where did you hear about NPRI data? The 110 respondents selected:
Only items with 3% or more shown in chart
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Most NPRI users have been accessing the Inventory data for more than five years (66%), and few have been using it for less than a year (12%).
This chart has 5 single bars.
Respondents were asked: When did you start using NPRI data? The 111 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
All but a handful of those responding to the survey who use NPRI data access it through the NPRI website on canada.ca (92%). Another 20% indicated they also rely on Government of Canada open data, although this is higher among advanced users (27%), and 12% rely on email to the NPRI. Very few use other methods to access the data (8%).
This chart has 7 single bars.
Respondents were asked: How/where do you obtain NPRI data? The 112 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
The most likely data product to be utilized is the Query Site, used by six in 10 NPRI users in the survey sample. Another 44% reported using Single Year Flat Files. Raw, disaggregated data in the MS Access database are used by one in three (36%), as are aggregated release data from the past five years (32%). Google Earth is used by one in four and fewer (18%) use the Open Mapping Services.
In terms of information products, just under half use the Sector Overview (48%) and slightly fewer use the Data Highlights Report (44%). More than one in three (38%), however, said they do not use either of these NPRI information products.
When asked about how they access and work with NPRI data, users unanimously indicated they use a laptop or desktop computer, rather than a mobile device (not shown in chart). Only a handful also rely on a mobile device for access or use.
This chart has 10 single bars split in two sections.
Respondents were asked: Have you used any of the following NPRI data products/information products? The respondents selected:
Data Products (n=105)
Information Products (n=94)
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Among the 22 individual users who work with Single Year Flat files, most said having additional years would be helpful. About half said the file contains everything they need, although nearly as many said they need to bring additional sources into the mix to get what they need. Suggesting that users understand that the NPRI cannot be all things to all people, 75% said they are satisfied with the product even if some need to rely on additional information.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Would adding additional years be useful? | n=22 |
| Yes | 77% |
| No | 23% |
| Does this file contain all of the information you need or do you need to use multiple files to get the information you need? | n=34 |
| Yes, it contains everything needed | 53% |
| No, I need to access and link different files | 47% |
| Satisfaction with Use | 75% |
Among the 32 users who have used the aggregated release data, just under half were not aware they could use the online data search tool and download the data. There is about equal likelihood that users would download the data on open data or through the online search tool.
When asked about the adequacy of five years of aggregated data, just over half said they would prefer to see data for a longer period.
In terms of the time it takes to obtain the data sought, only one in four suggest it takes too much time. As with Single Year Flat files, about half of users of the aggregated release data report the information is complete and contains everything they need. Similarly, about half said they need to link to other information, although almost half do not. Overall, just over half rated themselves as satisfied with their use of the aggregated release data product, although 18% (or 6 users) said they are not satisfied.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Aggregated data is available for download on the newly redesigned online data search tool under the 'pre-defined queries'. Were you aware of this? | n=32 |
| Yes | 59% |
| No | 41% |
| Would you be more likely to download the aggregate data file on? | n=30 |
| Online data search tool | 30% |
| Open Data | 27% |
| Both | 43% |
| Is 5 years of data enough? | N=31 |
| Yes | 42% |
| No | 58% |
| How would you rate the time it takes to obtain the information that you are looking for? | n=31 |
| Little time (1-2) | 26% |
| Average (3) | 48% |
| Too much time (4-5) | 26% |
| Is there information that you need that is not contained in the file? | N=21 |
| No | 52% |
| Yes | 48% |
| Does this file contain all of the information you need or do you need to use multiple files to get the information you need? | n=24 |
| Yes | 58% |
| No | 42% |
| Satisfaction with Use | 58% |
Among the 22 respondents using raw, disaggregated data, only one in three said it does not contain everything they need and half said they link to other sources of information to complete their objective. Nearly two in three said they are satisfied with the information product, and only 11% (4 users) said they are not satisfied.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Is there information that you need that is not contained in the file? | n=22 |
| No | 36% |
| Yes | 64% |
| Do you use other multiple files to get the information you need? | n=20 |
| No | 50% |
| Yes | 50% |
| Satisfaction with Use | 63% |
By and large, the 25 users of the Open Mapping services agree having access to data for additional years would be useful, and shapefiles would also be helpful. Key types of information seen as valuable are layers for each pollutant and each environmental compartment. Three in four also see utility in layers for each sector and each category. Overall, seven in 10 said they are satisfied with the data tool and only users indicated dissatisfaction.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Would adding additional years be useful? | n=25 |
| No | 16% |
| Yes | 84% |
| Would you like shapefiles to be available? The shapefile format is a popular geospatial vector data format for geographic information system (GIS) software | n=28 |
| Yes | 89% |
| No | 11% |
| What kind of additional information would you like to see and use on maps? | n=32 |
| Map layers for each pollutant | 97% |
| Map layers for each environmental compartment | 84% |
| Map layers for each sector | 75% |
| Map layers for each category | 72% |
| Origins and destinations of transfers for off-site disposal, treatment and recycling | 47% |
| Map layers of pollution prevention activities | 38% |
| Other | 9% |
| Satisfaction with Use | 71% |
The online search tool is used to find information about substances released more often than it is used for other information (79%). About half use the site to gather information about companies, pollution trends, or to create industry sector profiles. Just over one in three use it for complex analysis, although a similar proportion use it to find out about pollution in their own community.
The amount of time required to obtain the information sought is considered appropriate by two in three, although 29% feel it takes too much time. Overall, two in three said they are satisfied with the Query Site and only 15% (9 users) indicated dissatisfaction.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| For what purpose do you use the online data search tool? | n=63 |
| To find information on substances released | 79% |
| To learn about companies | 52% |
| To look at pollution trends | 49% |
| To do industrial sector profiling | 48% |
| To extract data for complex analyses | 38% |
| To learn about pollution in my community | 37% |
| Other | 8% |
| How would you rate the time it takes to obtain the information that you are looking for? | n=63 |
| Little time (1-2) | 33% |
| Average (3) | 38% |
| Too much time (4-5) | 29% |
| Satisfaction with Use | 66% |
The most likely types of information to have been accessed in the NPRI are data for specific substances, pollutants, or years, according to three in four users. About half have accessed data for specific locations, industry sectors, or the release of specific medium (e.g., land, water, air). Fewer have accessed the sector overviews, ECCC analysis or data for transfers and disposals.
This chart has 9 single bars.
Respondents were asked: Over the last year, what types of NPRI information have you accessed?
The 104 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Acknowledging that substances and data required to be reported to the NPRI have undergone a number of changes over time, which has an impact on trend analysis, the survey asked users which tools they have used to help them interpret the data. Half of users have relied on the substance list by threshold category webpage to help them interpret the NPRI data. Similarly, 48% have used the guide for reporting to the NPRI (48%) and/or the history of reporting requirements webpage (45%). Slightly fewer (39%) have been using and interpreting data from the webpage.
This chart has 6 single bars.
Respondents were asked: What tools/guidance, if any, have you used to help interpret the NPRI data?
The 98 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Users of the NPRI in the survey sample were asked about their satisfaction with a number of aspects of the inventory and support services. Following are the proportions of those satisfied, along with an indication of the level of dissatisfaction.
Support services – Email and telephone support provided by ECCC staff are areas where two in three of those using them indicated satisfaction. About one in six are not satisfied. Video tutorials – used by only 20 individuals in the sample – are a source of satisfaction for just under half.
Information products – Roughly half of those using the NPRI Data Highlight (53%) and Sectoral Overview (43%) are satisfied, and dissatisfaction is fairly limited (9% to 13%).
NPRI Structure – Just under half (46%) indicated satisfaction with the NPRI website on canada.ca, although 18% are dissatisfied. Ease of locating specific field or elements and/or data files are areas where four in 10 are satisfied (44% and 42%, respectively), but 16% to 20% respectively are dissatisfied.
This chart has 8 single bars representing "satisfied (4-5)" and a column on the side representing "dissatisfied (1-2)".
Respondents were asked: How satisfied are you with the following aspects of the NPRI? The respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
This chart has 8 single bars representing "satisfied (4-5)" and a column on the side representing "dissatisfied (1-2)".
Respondents were asked: How satisfied are you with the following aspects of the NPRI? The respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
More than half of interview participants expressed an overall positive view of the NPRI despite some specific concerns or comments. Several said the NPRI is a "fantastic" resource and it is "great" to see this much data for 25 years, available for the entire country. Many said it is a key resource they use on a regular basis in their work.
"It's just crazy to me that you can find all this information in one place, in one database, for all of Canada, for anyone that has a certain threshold of pollutants – just the overall database itself is very convenient and very useful."
"Making these suggestions doesn't mean we're not satisfied with what we offer. They have been doing a fantastic job."
Several spoke positively about the NPRI reports that are produced, including the sector overview report and the annual/summary report. Participants said these are easy to digest and provide a helpful perspective on the data.
"There are some good resources available – like a sector overview of Oil and Gas which explains the major emissions."
"I like that they do annual reports so they're showing whether emissions to air are going up or down and emissions by sector are going up or down. So, I'd say that has been really useful."
NPRI staff are also a key source of satisfaction according to several participants. A few said they have a great contact among NPRI staff they can rely to help them understand what they are looking at, or get them the answers or data they need. Staff are said to be responsive, helpful, and very knowledgeable about the NPRI and pollution emissions in general.
"…the personnel are really interested in helping us out; they want to see the products used. That attitude and that policy of being open and answering questions, paying attention to suggestions, I think they should maintain that. They offer a nice public face and I really appreciate that."
"The NPRI staff are fantastic! When you compare them with other departments… they are very knowledgeable and they understand the subject matter. They have been better than most at retaining staff and hiring very knowledgeable people".
A number of other specific sources of satisfaction include, according to one participant, that the data are downloadable, and according to another, the data link up nicely with some provincial sources in terms of reporting. One participant said they believe the data quality is good and another said they like how there is the ability to search by postal code.
"What's really good is to be able to put in, not just the name of the company because often what you know in the local community is not its official legal name exactly, so also being able to put in a postal code. That really is very useful."
"It's often just finding the company that can be the challenge but I think the postal code helps a lot in that, just an alternative way to find it."
"I like how it's tied into, for example the TRA in Ontario…and they incorporate not just the federal level….. When you report you can report the NPRI pollutants as well as anything that falls under TRA from the same SWIM portal which is really handy for us."
Almost half of participants said they find the NPRI reasonably easy to use. That said, many said they find it overly complicated and difficult to use, particularly for the general public. Even among those who find it easy to use, participants contextualize this in terms of their own expertise and experience with using it. Some nonetheless provided comments about possible steps to make it easier to work with.
Specifically, the way the site is organized is seen by many as complex and not obvious, such that it takes a fair bit of work to find the data sought, although some argue that, once you find it, working with the data is relatively straightforward. Some argue the language used is technical and not user-friendly for those who are not in the business of understanding pollutant release. Some said, for the general public or beginners in general, the inventory lacks a good overview of what it is, how to use it, and what the data mean, along with clear channels to support in how to use it or getting questions answered.
"(For the general public) it's too complicated to use and there are very few supports to guide you on how to use it. If you are not a regular user, you can't use it easily. (It's) too unclear and complicated, with no 'how to' guidance. People will give up after 10 minutes, feeling confused."
"[The Government] are making the NPRI for very specific users and purposes and it is becoming more complicated all the time, not less, and (they) never makes much effort to make it user-friendly or create the supports needed to allow the public or infrequent users to use it."
"We can't aggregate some data as easily as we'd like to. If we're looking at specific pollutants for one region, the listing of emitters is not as practical as it could be sometimes."
"I don't go through the Environment Canada website because it seems to be always changing and there's so many different layers and levels that it can be a bit confusing."
"There needs to be more simplicity and clarity, and basic guidance for public users. It needs to be developed and tested with basic users. (Is plain language used. Does this help you understand and use it?)"
A few participants argued the NPRI lacks in visualization tools that allow users to see the data in a different and more user-friendly way (e.g., a region at a glance, trends at a glance), or allow users to build and "see" layers of analysis in one picture. A few said this would be particularly helpful for the general public who may not understand the data but can see what it means with the use of a picture.
"If someone just wants to have a sense of emissions for a region, having maps with maybe colour coding in terms of emissions for different pollutants. If that's easy to generate that would be very useful."
"I did see a Canada-wide map of facilities but, (it would be good) if they would produce more local scale maps."
"I think that's a good way of expressing that data and making it accessible for people."
"I think there could be applications for citizens and academia, but right now it's a bunch of tables and numbers and lists and it's a little bit less accessible; so as many graphic products as possible."
"There are new mapping features available on the NPRI website which we are aware of and I think if there was a bit more to that it would be really beneficial and a very powerful tool that we could use more readily."
"Layers on a map so then you can add in different layers to depending on what you want to look at [would be helpful]."
Further to the concerns expressed earlier about the level of complexity of the NPRI, several said the organization of the site does not allow users to search in the way they would like to (i.e., use the criteria they would like) or to isolate or group in a way they would like. Some also said that in order to use the information fully, users need to go to several different places and bring the material together independently because the system does not allow for this flexibility. An example provided was the ability to be able to see everything for one facility in once place, which currently requires searches in multiple places and bringing it together manually. Another such example is the ability to bring together data for multiple years. A few suggested it is more difficult or labour-intensive to aggregate the data sought from the NPRI than it is using some other tools.
"Getting to the point where you access the data is hard but once you get the data it's very good quality and it's very cool to see all of Canada, to see an inventory for something like that."
"The NPRI has become more and more complex and used as an internal/expert tool."
"It would be nice to have the option to download a file for a comprehensive overview of many years, or to select a one year data file from a specific year."
"It would be great if there was location specific data but all I've seen in the database is there's a company and this is the total amount they are emitting at a particular site."
"If I'm looking at one facility in particular I click on it and then I have to click four more times to find what I need. Whereas if I could just click on the facility name and then have everything on one page, it would be so much easier."
Lastly, regarding visualization and aggregation of data, one participant articulated a similar idea in terms of a preference to see data that is more synthesized and analyzed, rather than trying to wrap one's head around individual data for an "at a glance" perspective.
"When I try to do it myself I wouldn't be able to get a lot of information out of the NPRI data. We had specialists at [….], not every [organization] does but we were fortunate to have some data analysts or toxicologists or other professions like policy analysts that were more familiar with it."
"I would rather not have to look at individual pieces of raw data. I would rather see that someone else has done that for me."
Some interview participants spoke of concerns about accuracy and transparency with respect to data quality and what is being reported. Several expressed concerns about the quality control process and verification, such as a lack of third party auditing. A few also mentioned the lack of information about numbers used by reporters and how there were arrived at (e.g., type of monitoring process conducted to obtain numbers). Some also expressed concerns about the manual entry required, suggesting the NPRI should allow for bulk electronic upload and have built-in flags and checks where entries seem illogical or misaligned with previous data or other fields. Some said it is difficult to be completely confident in the data when these elements are not present.
"There needs to be guidance on what the information means. What you can use it for and how to interpret it. Limitations and disclaimers also need to be there to tell you what you can't use it for and can't assume, as well as sense of precision. Some transparency about the information."
"There is no verification or audit (e.g., 3rd party audit) to ensure accuracy or legitimacy. Most of the time emission factors used are not concrete and specific monitoring is required (e.g., random stack sample monitoring or CEM.) You don't know if it is reliable."
"There is no auditing process so you can't be sure of what they are using, if they are good estimates or if they have not made input errors. They need to have third party audits done."
"They should also have some random checks generally by NPRI. The system should flag some errors re: inconsistent with other data/other years. [They] could also add some reporting of capacity for a company or plant and so other numbers should seem reasonably aligned with this, or red flags should go up. There needs to be transparency about who is checking these numbers, if anyone, and or/if the system automatically checks/challenges some numbers to those reporting."
Re: concern about lack of transparency about numbers input, "Where do they come from? What are they based on? Are they continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) or manual stack samples or are they just estimates? It makes a big difference to accuracy and you need to know this in order to be able to assess accuracy and reliability of the numbers."
"In this day and age we should be able to do 'an electronic bulk upload'. That way our software can generate the emissions, we can generate a file in Environment Canada's format and send it to them. That avoids us having to do the manual entry, and what I'm getting at is it avoids errors in typos, in human errors in the final dataset, which we've seen before."
"I think if they want to improve the quality of the data they have to look at how it's being entered."
Another fairly common theme among several interview participants is a concern about thresholds for reporting being set too high, allowing smaller emitters to escape the need to report. This means, according to some, that emissions from many smaller organizations are not included in the overall picture. Therefore, one further argued, it is difficult to get an accurate sense of the cumulative effect in a region or from an industry when so much of the data are missing. In terms of transparency, even knowing the percentage of data or emitters that are missing with a general description of who is not reporting is seen as helpful in the interpretation of data according to one participant.
"....I think what would be a benefit is if there's some way of assessing cumulative impact in a neighbourhood. If you're looking facility to facility, maybe there are three in one neighbourhood all emitting the same chemical but all three are below the threshold for reporting – however in such close quarters to one another the cumulative emissions risk is not being captured, and maybe all together those facilities do present a health risk to the local residents."
"One of the challenges to see improvement on is that it's focused on the big releasers, right? And smaller companies – and it's not just companies, but municipalities too are dischargers – tend not to be in the data and the problem with that is for a local community small amounts of discharge can be significant."
"Some of those thresholds don't catch the smaller companies and therefore it's not giving people in the community a complete picture of what's going on. If you added up all the discharges from these small places we'd maybe see hey it's a substantial amount of pollution going into the air."
"[For example], dry cleaners – we don't know what kind of emissions they are producing and there are thousands of small companies doing this. Maybe they should be regulated but there's no data to back it up."
Having information about concentrations, toxicity, and chemical mixtures is also something a few participants feel is missing from the NPRI. One industry representative argued that greater precision is also needed in terms of data quality to be able to assess real change over time given the estimates are in parts per million.
Several expressed concerns about the many changes that have taken place with the NPRI over time, compromising the consistency and ability to make historical comparisons. One participant in particular suggested the NPRI suffers from an identity crisis with conflicting objectives – trying to be a general tracking tool, while at the same time trying to accommodate the very specific needs of many. This makes it increasingly more complicated over time. The argument is that the NPRI is "trying to be too many things to too many people" and is becoming more and more specific as a result. A few others argued even consistency of categories (e.g., for sectors) within different places in the NPRI are not consistent and do not match up, making it harder to draw comparisons.
"I think changing too much is also not good because it just makes things more difficult to navigate."
"Often they change the view or presentation in the website and we need to search for something that's changed – so maybe somehow commit to a format so that you know where to go. Maybe change the font or the colours but not drastically change the location of the hyperlinks."
"There is a 'tension of purpose' between specifics about individual substances and overall consistency over time. It needs to find the balance. With a clear understanding of [its] purpose and mandate so that it is a useful tool with which to monitor pollutant release over time as the underpinning of good policy."
"You can't do trend analysis because it has changed the consistency of reporting (e.g., units over time) so there is no way to do it."
As a side point regarding changes to the NPRI over time, two participants also remarked how these changes are not well communicated to users and need to be more clearly laid out and explained.
"There have also been too many changes to the NPRI over time, you cannot keep up and they don't inform you. Unless you are in the loop, and using it routinely, you can get lost."
A few argue rather than adding to or changing the NPRI, it should remain as-is, with more resources and IT support invested into it to keep it functioning well, and possibly increasing the frequency of reporting periods.
"That system really requires a lot more support. It seems like the resources they have allocated to supporting the database itself and our ability to interact with that database is very limited. We've had a lot of challenges with that site in terms of it not working – not allowing us to enter data, not saving the data we enter, that sort of thing. If the backend of the data is not well managed, I think the website that the survey focused on where you actually download the data could become compromised."
"Efficient tech support does not necessarily equate to effective tech support".
"Insular government decisions without understanding the impact."
That said, there were other participants who suggested they would like to see substances added to it or that they would like to search for specific locations. Others said they would like to see categories of industries or substances narrowed because they are too wide for current use. Some said they would prefer to search by different criteria (e.g., specific release environments, sub-sector).
"Sometimes I find NPRI groups a lot of sectors together, so you know not always grouping the sectors together would be useful. So bringing it down to the three or four digit NAICS code that could be very, very helpful."
Two in three users (64%) have had questions while using the NPRI. Four in 10 found the information they needed on the website, while just under four in 10 called or emailed the helpdesk or Enviroinfo. Most of those indicating "other" contacted someone in ECCC or NPRI staff (other than the helpdesk) directly.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Have you ever had questions (e.g., about content, technical issues, or other issues) while using NPRI data? | n=95 |
| Yes | 64% |
| No | 36% |
| When you have had questions (e.g., about content technical issues, or other issues), thinking about your most recent experience(s), what have you done about it? | n=61 |
| Found the information on the NPRI Canada.ca website | 41% |
| Called/emailed the NPRI helpdesk or Enviroinfo | 38% |
| Found the information elsewhere | 21% |
| Other | 31% |
| Gave up/Did nothing | 10% |
In terms of possible tools to support their use of the NPRI, nearly two in three (63%) believe step-by-step guides would be very useful and another half (53%) feel case studies would be helpful. Live webinars and in-class training are less likely to be seen as useful by comparison.
Respondents were asked: Thinking about your use of NPRI data in the past, which of the following tools would be most helpful to you? The 87 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
When in-depth interview participants were asked about additional supports to use the NPRI system, a few said they never had need for support and were able to find everything easily through navigating the website and accessing existing guidance. One participant pointed to the "NPRI Guidance Document" as quite useful.
"No, there is a lot of guidance and how to use NPRI and all that stuff; I've never had an issue on the NPRI website to access information."
Many of those who had previously accessed support services expressed satisfaction with the current level of service available from the NPRI. These participants typically said they have contacts at NPRI whom they contact directly with questions or concerns and had high praise for their timeliness and level of engagement. A few commented on the responsiveness and knowledge of the NPRI staff.
"They (NPRI staff) are great! They always call me back or set up meetings with me to discuss so my needs are pretty much always met on that."
"I'm satisfied with the NPRI team I deal with in terms of their responsiveness and the level of engagement I want; I hear back from them on all of that and I appreciate that."
Many also had suggestions for improvements or expansion of existing supports including: live support via online chat or phone, case studies, video tutorials, webinars, step-by-step guides, a Q & A section, and formal in-person training. Of these, step-by-step and case studies were cited most often. Most of these comments were referencing lay-users and the general public who may not be as familiar with the intended purpose of the NPRI and various tools available on the website. One participant was particularly adamant about the creation of a written citizens' guide to using the NPRI, which he felt would increase public access to data for the purposes of citizen engagement and activism.
"Needs to be more straightforward and develop guides and test with public and have greater efforts to increase awareness of it and what it does, how to use it or it isn't a public inventory".
"Simplify the messaging and maybe provide step-by-step instructions for the non-initiated public."
Live training was mentioned most often by those who use the NPRI regularly for work and require more in-depth knowledge of specific processes and procedures. One participant said this is particularly needed when rolling out large changes to reporting requirements so questions can be answered as the information is being communicated. One participant said examples for reporting guidelines would be useful and reduce back and forth between facilities and NPRI staff.
"The videos are great but they're not interactive, right? So I can watch the video but if I have a question it won't be clarified then and there."
"It could be some online tutorials, some videos or where to click, something simple to start off. And maybe for more advance notions, maybe some in-person courses once a year or something of that type."
"Maybe for certain classes of pollutants they could include how this is generally quantified for x, y, and z industry and this is the kind of data quality we're looking for."
Some said changes to the website and datasets should be communicated more effectively. These participants said frequent changes to the site leave users looking for the new path to a familiar page, which can be frustrating. One participant suggested an email distribution list in which clients could opt in to receive website or dataset updates. Another said highlighting changes on the website homepage would be useful.
"I feel their communication on updates of the data is pretty limited and I think they rely on people accessing the website to be able to find out when new datasets are available. So I guess if there was an improvement opportunity it might just be around communication."
"No, I think it's just communication. I don't think formal training would need to happen. If they just had some communication of what's available and when it's updated that would be pretty helpful."
More advanced users of the Inventory were asked about combining the data with other information sources, with six in 10 indicating they do this. Other datasets used include other environment data, followed by health-related data, substance information, and economic data. One in four also use population data. About six in 10 indicated satisfaction with the ability to compare within a sector, within or between regions, and substances. Satisfaction is marginally lower in terms of ability to link with other data, and few indicated satisfaction with the ability to draw comparisons about risk. About half of those who combine the NPRI with other databases said they use other sources to provide context to NPRI data (e.g., information about toxicity, fate, and transportation properties of NPRI substances), with a few pointing to different sources for doing so. Among these individuals using other sources to provide context (n=23), everyone agreed they would use such a tool to incorporate more NPRI data, if one were provided through the NPRI.
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Have you ever combined NPRI data with other data? | n=74 |
| Yes | 62% |
| No | 38% |
| What other datasets have you used NPRI data with? | n=46 |
| Other environmental data | 61% |
| Health related data | 35% |
| Substance Information | 33% |
| Economic data | 30% |
| Population trend data | 24% |
| Other | 22% |
| Satisfaction levels | Satisfied (4-5) |
| Perform comparisons within a sector (n=37) | 65% |
| Perform regional/provincial comparisons (n=34) | 59% |
| Perform substance to substance comparison (n=34) | 53% |
| Link to other data (n=38) | 47% |
| Compare relative risk (n=23) | 17% |
| Do you currently use other sources of information to provide context to NPRI data? | n=72 |
| US EPA's RSEI (Risk Screening Environment Indicators) model | 15% |
| Risk Scoring system by Scorecard | 11% |
| Other | 33% |
| No | 54% |
| If NPRI offered a tool to incorporate more context to NPRI data, would you use it? | n=26 |
| Yes | 100% |
Half of NPRI users would be most interested in being able to look at sources or levels of pollutants in their own community. About one in three said they would have an interest in information for academic purposes, or information about the impacts of climate change on the quality of soil, air, or water. Other areas include an interest in pollutant levels Canada-wide, in a specific region/province, or industry, as well as comparison, historical trends, and population health effects.
This chart has 5 single bars.
Respondents were asked: What would you be most likely to use NPRI data for in the future?
The 138 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
Among the other types of data offerings NPRI users would like to see, shapefiles (41%) and online visualization (38%) are at the top of the list, along with custom maps (31%). Fewer inventory users are interested in other formats (18%). Those using the open mapping and Google Earth data products are more apt to be interested in shapefiles.
This chart has 9 single bars.
Respondents were asked: If NPRI were to expand to other types of data offerings, what data formats or product types would you be interested in using? The 87 respondents selected:
National Pollutant Release Inventory Survey of Data Users, 2019
In reference to specific file formats and fields available, many participants said they are content with the existing formats available to access NPRI data. These participants primarily use Excel format when downloading data, and described it as flexible and widely accepted.
"We can manipulate the data pretty quickly once it's in Excel."
A few people, however, expressed frustration with Excel format; primarily that it is not always compatible with all software, and editing data once imported is time-consuming. For example, one participant noted how Excel automatically rounds decimal points, and another mentioned odd spacing or labels that need adjustment. Suggestions for improvements included formats better compatible with Tableau and PowerBI. Another suggested using Access.
"Our students and researchers sometimes need to put a lot of time into just rewriting titles of the variables because either they have characters that are not compatible with other software or odd spaces. These are really small details but at the end are very costly time wise for us."
"Maybe using a format that is more universally accepted by more sophisticated software would be a way to go. And it doesn't have to be an expensive one, but maybe using Access instead of Excel, both are part of the Microsoft Office package."
Several participants suggested NPRI export more data into maps or other visual formats to improve access. A few suggested expansion in the available data on air emissions, or suggested the inclusion of 'air sheds' and 'air zones' as searchable areas on maps. One participant expressed appreciation for Shape Files and KML files for generating maps independently.
Several voiced specific suggestions for the datasets available for download. One said it would be useful to be able to select year by year files as well as to have one file including all years. Another suggested moving all available datasets onto one page for easier access and to provide an opportunity for clarification of the differences between sets including details on contents and how they were prepared.
Three in four NPRI users indicated an interest in having updates about the program, particularly where it relates to publication of data (81% of those interested) or consultations on changes to be made around substances or reporting requirements (79% of those interested). Upcoming workshops or training are of interest to two in three (65%), and overviews are also of interest to about half (55%). Slightly fewer see the appeal of knowing about periods of consultation, community outreach, or report launches. By and large, email is seen as the best way to reach out to the community of NPRI users about updates (84%).
| Col1 | Col2 |
|---|---|
| Would you be interested in receiving updates regarding the NPRI Program? | n=104 |
| Yes | 77% |
| No | 23% |
| What updates would you be interested in receiving? | n=80 |
| Data publication | 81% |
| Consultations on changes made to the substances and other reporting requirements | 79% |
| Upcoming workshops and training | 65% |
| Publication of information overviews | 55% |
| Consultation periods | 48% |
| Launch of reporting period | 39% |
| Community outreach | 38% |
| What would be the best way for the NPRI program to communicate with you about updates? | n=80 |
| By email | 84% |
| Through the NPRI Canada.ca website | 8% |
| Through social media - ECCC | 5% |
ENGCLOSED
Email invitation used for the closed version of the survey, used for unique individuals in the sample
Survey: Use of the National Pollutants Release Inventory (NPRI) | Sondage: Utilisation de l'Inventaire national des rejets de polluants (INRP)
La version française suit le texte anglais.
Sir/Madam,
Since 1992, the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) has been collecting data about pollutant releases, disposals and transfers in Canada. 7000 facilities, including manufacturers, mines, oil and gas operations, power plants, and sewage treatment plants, are required to report to the NPRI.
A survey of NPRI data and website users is being conducted to gather information on their data needs and experiences with the inventory and website. The results will be used to make both the data and the website easier to understand and navigate. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.
Please be assured that the information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act of Canada regarding the protection of personal information. Your answers are completely confidential (this means that no individual will be associated with the survey's results - rather, they will be rolled up into large categories to protect the confidentiality of each respondent) and that survey is voluntary.
Please click here to start the survey: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?EN:07919:[UNIQUEID]
Note that this link contains an access code unique to you, so please do not forward it to others. If you would like to circulate a link to the survey to others, please send the following link: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?EN:07919OPN
Should you have any questions regarding this survey, please contact Jérémie Blanc from Ekos Research Associates Inc. at jblanc@ekos.com or 1-800-388-2873.
You can unsubscribe from this survey's mailing list by clicking the following link: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?EN:07919:[UNIQUEID]:UNSUB
Madame,
Monsieur,
Depuis 1992, l'Inventaire national des rejets de polluants (INRP) recueille des données sur les polluants rejetés, éliminés et transférés au Canada. Sept mille installations, y compris des usines, des mines, des exploitations gazières et pétrolières, des centrales de production d'énergie et des usines de traitement des eaux d'égout, doivent transmettre une déclaration à l'INRP.
Un sondage à l'intention des utilisateurs des données et du site Web de l'INRP est mené pour recueillir des renseignements sur les besoins des utilisateurs en matière de données, et sur les expériences qu'ils ont vécues avec l'inventaire et le site Web. Les résultats serviront à faciliter la compréhension des données et la navigation dans le site Web. Il vous faudra environ 15 minutes pour répondre au sondage.
Vous pouvez avoir la certitude que les renseignements que vous fournirez seront traités en conformité avec la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels. Vos réponses sont complètement confidentielles (c'est-à-dire que les résultats du sondage ne seront associés à aucun nom mais seront plutôt groupés dans de grandes catégories afin de protéger l'anonymat de chaque répondant); le présent sondage est conduit sur une base volontaire.
Veuillez cliquer ici pour commencer le sondage: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?FR:07919:[UNIQUEID]
Notez que ce lien contient un code d'accès unique à vous, veuillez donc ne pas le transmettre à d'autres personnes. Si vous souhaitez distribuer un lien du sondage à d'autres personnes, veuillez envoyer le lien suivant: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?FR:07919OPN
Si vous avez des questions concernant ce sondage, veuillez communiquer avec Jérémie Blanc des Associés de recherche Ekos Inc., à jblanc@ekos.com ou au 1-800-388-2873.
Vous pouvez vous désinscrire de la liste d'envoi de ce sondage en cliquant sur le lien suivant : https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?FR:07919:[UNIQUEID]:UNSUB
ENGOPEN
Email invitation used for the open version of the survey, used for generic emails where we have no name attached
Survey: Use of the National Pollutants Release Inventory (NPRI) | Sondage: Utilisation de l'Inventaire national des rejets de polluants (INRP)
La version française suit le texte anglais.
Sir/Madam,
Since 1992, the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) has been collecting data about pollutant releases, disposals and transfers in Canada. 7000 facilities, including manufacturers, mines, oil and gas operations, power plants, and sewage treatment plants, are required to report to the NPRI.
A survey of NPRI data and website users is being conducted to gather information on their data needs and experiences with the inventory and website. The results will be used to make both the data and the website easier to understand and navigate. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.
Please be assured that the information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act of Canada regarding the protection of personal information. Your answers are completely confidential (this means that no individual will be associated with the survey's results - rather, they will be rolled up into large categories to protect the confidentiality of each respondent) and that survey is voluntary.
Please click here to start the survey: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?EN:07919OPN
Should you have any questions regarding this survey, please contact Jérémie Blanc from Ekos Research Associates Inc. at jblanc@ekos.com or 1-800-388-2873.
You can unsubscribe from this survey's mailing list by clicking the following link: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?EN:07919:[UNIQUEID]:UNSUB
Madame,
Monsieur,
Depuis 1992, l'Inventaire national des rejets de polluants (INRP) recueille des données sur les polluants rejetés, éliminés et transférés au Canada. Sept mille installations, y compris des usines, des mines, des exploitations gazières et pétrolières, des centrales de production d'énergie et des usines de traitement des eaux d'égout, doivent transmettre une déclaration à l'INRP.
Un sondage à l'intention des utilisateurs des données et du site Web de l'INRP est mené pour recueillir des renseignements sur les besoins des utilisateurs en matière de données, et sur les expériences qu'ils ont vécues avec l'inventaire et le site Web. Les résultats serviront à faciliter la compréhension des données et la navigation dans le site Web. Il vous faudra environ 15 minutes pour répondre au sondage.
Vous pouvez avoir la certitude que les renseignements que vous fournirez seront traités en conformité avec la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels. Vos réponses sont complètement confidentielles (c'est-à-dire que les résultats du sondage ne seront associés à aucun nom mais seront plutôt groupés dans de grandes catégories afin de protéger l'anonymat de chaque répondant); le présent sondage est conduit sur une base volontaire.
Veuillez cliquer ici pour commencer le sondage: https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?FR:07919OPN
Si vous avez des questions concernant ce sondage, veuillez communiquer avec Jérémie Blanc des Associés de recherche Ekos Inc., à jblanc@ekos.com ou au 1-800-388-2873.
Vous pouvez vous désinscrire de la liste d'envoi de ce sondage en cliquant sur le lien suivant : https://surveys.ekos.com/ekos/cwx.cgi?FR:07919:[UNIQUEID]:UNSUB
WINTRO
Web Intro
Since 1992, the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) has been collecting data about pollutant releases, disposals and transfers in Canada. 7000 facilities, including manufacturers, mines, oil and gas operations, power plants, and sewage treatment plants, are required to report to the NPRI.
A survey of NPRI data and website users is being conducted to gather information on their data needs and experiences with the inventory and website. The results will be used to make both the data and the website easier to understand and navigate. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.
Please be assured that the information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act of Canada regarding the protection of personal information. Your answers are completely confidential (this means that no individual will be associated with the survey's results - rather, they will be rolled up into large categories to protect the confidentiality of each respondent) and that survey is voluntary.
PREQ1
What type of organization are you primarily affiliated with?
Academic institution 1
Students 2
Media 3
Environmental Nongovernment organizations (NGO) 4
Federal government Environment and Climate Change Canada 5
Federal government Health Canada 6
Federal government Other (please specify) 7
Provincial government 8
Municipal government 9
Indigenous group 10
Industrial facility/association 11
Citizen's group 12
Individual citizen 13
Commercial/Institutional 14
Financial/Insurance/Real Estate 15
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q1
Have you used NPRI data?
The National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) is Canada's public inventory of releases, disposals and transfers of pollution in the environment. It tracks over 320 pollutants from over 7,000 facilities across Canada.
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q1B
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1
Do you think that NPRI data could benefit or be of interest to you?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q1C
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1, might use/could benefit in Q1B
In what capacity would NPRI data be most useful to you?
Personally 1
Professionally 2
Both 3
Don't know / No response 99
Q1D
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1, might use/could benefit in Q1B
How likely are you to use NPRI data?
Not at all likely 1 1
2 2
Moderately likely 3 3
4 4
Very likely 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q1E [1,6]
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1, might use/could benefit in Q1B
How could NPRI best reach out to you to provide more information)?
Select all that apply
NPRI Canada.ca website 1
Other website (which?) 78
Social Media (which?) 2
Canada Gazette 3
General Internet Search (e.g., Google) 4
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q1F
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1
Why haven't you used NPRI data in the past?
Unaware 1
Not relevant 2
Too technical 3
Did not realize could access for personal use 4
Need better understanding of what I can find there 5
No ability to access on mobile device 6
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q1G
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1, might use/could benefit in Q1B
What would you most want to know about NPRI data to better understand its uses?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q1H [1,6]
Haven't used NPRI or DK in Q1, might use/could benefit in Q1B
What would you need in order to get started using NPRI data?
Select all that apply
Live webinar training 1
Video tutorials 2
In class training 3
Step-by-step guides 4
Study cases (examples of how others use the data) 5
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q2
Used NPRI data
Did you use the NPRI for:
Personal use 1
Professional use 2
Both 3
Don't know / No response 99
Q3 [1,13]
Used NPRI data
What was your purpose for using the data?
Select all that apply
For discussions with a facility (or facilities) 1
For use in research (please specify) 2
For academic study (student projects, education) 3
For preparation of a media story 4
For analysis of sectors or trends 5
For an environmental and/or risk assessment 6
For statistical purposes (for example: uncertainty analysis) 7
Policy development 8
Benchmarking facility performance 9
Benchmarking for competitive purposes 10
To identify pollutant releases in a specific area or community 11
To perform quality assurance checks of your NPRI reports 12
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q4 [1,7]
Used NPRI data
How/where do you obtain NPRI data?
Select all that apply
From NPRI Canada.ca website 1
From Government of Canada Open Data 2
From Government of Canada Open Maps 3
Other website (which?) 78
(GoC employee only – PREQ1=5,6,7) From ECCC Data Catalogue 4
(GoC employee only – PREQ1=5,6,7) Federal Geospatial Portal 5
From the NPRI by email 6
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q5
Used NPRI data
When did you start using NPRI data?
Last six months 1
6 months to 1 year ago 2
1-2 years ago 3
2-5 years ago 4
More than 5 years ago 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q6 [1,7]
Used NPRI data
Where did you hear about NPRI data?
Select all that apply
NPRI Canada.ca Website 1
Other website (which?) 78
Social Media (which?) 2
Canada Gazette 3
General Internet Search (e.g., Google) 4
Directly from Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) 5
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q7 [1,5]
Used NPRI data or the NPRI data could benefit/interest me
[Q1B = 1]What would you be most likely to use NPRI data for in the future?[ELSE]Have you used NPRI data for any of the following purposes?
Select all that apply
Levels of pollutants in my community/neighbourhood 1
Sources of pollutants in my community/neighbourhood 2
Information for academic purposes (e.g., research, school project) 3
Impacts of climate change on quality of soil, water and air 4
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q8 [1,8]
Used NPRI data
Have you used any of the following NPRI data products?
Select all that apply
Single Year Flat Files (link to website) 1
Aggregated release data, last 5 years (link to website) 2
Raw disaggregated data (MS Access database from 1994 to current) (link to website) 3
Open Mapping Services (link to website) 4
Google Earth (link to website) 5
Query Site (Online Data Search) (link to website) 6
Other (please specify) 77
None – have not used any data products 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q8B [1,3]
Used NPRI data
Have you used any of the following NPRI information products?
Select all that apply
NPRI Sector Overview (link to website) 1
NPRI Data Highlight (link to website) 2
Other (please specify) 77
None – have not used any information products 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
CALCUSERTYPE
Calculation to determine if advanced or beginner
Advanced 1
Beginner 2
Have not used any/Unknown 3
Q9 [1,4]
Used NPRI data/information product from either Q8 or Q8B
What do you use to access and view these data and information products?
Select all that apply
Cell phone 1
Tablet 2
Computer 3
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q10A
Use Single Year Flat Files
Single Year Flat Files
Would adding additional years be useful?
Yes (please enter the range of years) (2 dropdown boxes, range 1993-2018) 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q10B
Use Single Year Flat Files
What are the most useful fields in the file?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q10C
Use Single Year Flat Files
Does this file contain all of the information you need or do you need to use multiple files to get the information you need?
Yes, it contains everything needed 1
No, I need to access and link different files (which ones?) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q11A
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Aggregated data is available for download on the newly redesigned online data search tool under the "pre-defined queries". Were you aware of this?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q11B
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Would you be more likely to download the aggregate data file on:
Open Data 1
Online data search tool 2
Both 3
Don't know / No response 99
Q11C
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Is 5 years of data enough?
Yes 1
No (How many more years would you want added?) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q11D
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
What fields are the most useful?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q11E
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
How would you rate the time it takes to obtain the information that you are looking for?
Very little time 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Far too much time 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q11F
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Is there anything that would make this process easier for you?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q11G
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Is there information that you need that is not contained in the file?
Yes (what information is missing?) 77
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q11H
Use Aggregate Release data, last 5 years
Does this file contain all of the information you need or do you need to use multiple files to get the information you need?
Yes 1
No (what other files do you use?) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q12A
Use Raw disaggregated data
Raw disaggregated data (MS Access database from 1994 to current)
What fields are the most useful?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q12B
Use Raw disaggregated data
What field do you need to format or change before you are able to use the file?
Please specify 77
None 98
Don't know / No response 99
Q12C
Use Raw disaggregated data
Is there anything that would make this process easier for you?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q12D
Use Raw disaggregated data
Is there information that you need that is not contained in the file?
Yes (what information is missing?) 77
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q12E
Use Raw disaggregated data
Do you use other multiple files to get the information you need?
Yes (what other files do you use?) 77
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q14A
Use Open Mapping Services/Google Earth
Open Mapping Services/Google Earth
Would adding additional years be useful?
Yes (how many years?) 77
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q14B
Use Open Mapping Services/Google Earth
Would you like shapefiles to be available?
The shapefile format is a popular geospatial vector data format for geographic information system (GIS) software.
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q14C [1,7]
Use Open Mapping Services/Google Earth
What kind of additional information would you like to see and use on maps?
Select all that apply
Map layers for each pollutant 2
Map layers for each category (release, disposal, transfer) 3
Map layers for each environmental compartment (air, water, land) 4
Map layers for each sector 6
Origins and destinations of transfers for off-site disposal, treatment and recycling 7
Map layers of pollution prevention activities 8
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q14D
Use Open Mapping Services/Google Earth
What would you use these for?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q15A [1,7]
Use Query Site
Query Site
For what purpose do you use the online data search tool?
Select all that apply
To learn about pollution in my community 1
To find information on substances released 2
To learn about companies 3
To look at pollution trends 4
To do industrial sector profiling 5
To extract data for complex analyses 6
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q15B
Use Query Site
How would you rate the time it takes to obtain the information that you are looking for?
Very little time 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Far too much time 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q16PROD
No products used from Q8 or non-user from Q1
What is the reason you do not use any of the NPRI data products?
It doesn't fulfill my needs 1
I didn't know it existed 2
It's too complicated to use 3
The file is too big 4
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
PREQ16
Used NPRI data
General NPRI Program
How satisfied are you with the following aspects of the NPRI?
Q16A
Used NPRI data
Quality of the NPRI data
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16B
Used NPRI data
Coverage of substances
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16C
Used NPRI data
Coverage of sector/facilities
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16D
Used NPRI data
Ease of locating the data files
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16E
Used NPRI data
Ease of locating specific data fields/elements
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16F
Used NPRI data
Timeliness of release of data
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16G
Used NPRI data
Ease of understanding and interpreting NPRI data
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16H
Used NPRI data
Video tutorials
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16I
Used NPRI data
Telephone support provided by ECCC staff
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16J
Used NPRI data
Email/online support provided by ECCC staff
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16K
Used NPRI data
NPRI Sectoral Overview
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16L
Used NPRI data
NPRI Data Highlight
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16M
Used NPRI data
History of reporting requirements
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16N
Used NPRI data
Data Quality Management Framework
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16O
Used NPRI data
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q16P
Used NPRI data
NPRI Canada.ca Website
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neutral 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Have not used this 98
Don't know/ No response 99
Q17B
Some dissatisfaction in the coverage of substances
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the coverage of substances. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q17C
Some dissatisfaction in the coverage of sector/facilities
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the coverage of sector/facilities. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q17FB
Some dissatisfaction in timeliness of release of data
How frequently would you like to see data updates in the online data search tool?
Quarterly 1
Semi annually 2
Annually 3
More often (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q17FC
Some dissatisfaction in timeliness of release of data
Would you also expect the previous versions to be available for download (e.g., on the GC Open Data Portal)?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q17K
Some dissatisfaction in the NPRI Sectoral Overview
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the NPRI Sectoral Overview. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q17L
Some dissatisfaction in the NPRI Data Highlight
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the NPRI Data Highlight. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q17P
Some dissatisfaction in the NPRI Website
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the NPRI Canada.ca Website. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q18
Used NPRI data
Have you ever had questions (e.g., about content, technical issues, or other issues) while using NPRI data?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q18B [1,4]
Used NPRI data, Had a question/issue/problem while using NPRI data
When you have had questions (e.g., about content, technical issues, or other issues), thinking about your most recent experience(s), what have you done about it?
Select all that apply
Called/emailed the NPRI helpdesk or Enviroinfo 1
Found the information on the NPRI Canada.ca website 2
Found the information elsewhere 3
Other (please specify) 77
Gave up/Did nothing 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q19 [1,5]
Used NPRI data
Thinking about your use of NPRI data in the past, which of the following tools would be most helpful to you?
Select all that apply
Live webinar training 1
In class training 2
Step-by-step guides 3
Study cases (examples of how others use the data) 4
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q20
Used NPRI data
Would you be interested in receiving updates regarding the NPRI Program?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q20B [1,8]
Used NPRI data, Interested in receiving updates regarding the NPRI
What updates would you be interested in receiving?
Select all that apply
Data publication 1
Publication of information overviews 2
Consultations on changes made to the substances and other reporting requirements 3
Upcoming workshops and training 4
Launch of reporting period 5
Consultation periods 6
Community outreach (ex.: online educational kits for teachers, festivals we're attending, new info product available, etc.) 7
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q20C
Used NPRI data, Interested in receiving updates regarding the NPRI
What would be the best way for the NPRI program to communicate with you about updates?
By email 1
Through the NPRI Canada.ca website 2
Through social media – ECCC channels (LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook) 3
Other (please specify) 77
None 98
Don't know / No response 99
PREQ21
Used NPRI data product listed from Q8
How satisfied are you with the NPRI data products you have used?
Q21A
Single Year Flat Files
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q21B
Aggregated release data, last 5 years
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q21C
Raw disaggregated data (MS Access database from 1994 to current)
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q21D
Open Mapping Services
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q21E
Google Earth
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q21F
Query Site (Online Data Search)
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know/ No response 99
Q22A
Some dissatisfaction with Single Year Flat Files
You indicated some dissatisfaction with Single Year Flat Files. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q22B
Some dissatisfaction with Aggregated release data, last 5 years
You indicated some dissatisfaction with aggregated release data (last 5 years). Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q22C
Some dissatisfaction with Raw disaggregated data
You indicated some dissatisfaction with raw disaggregated data. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q22D
Some dissatisfaction with Open Mapping Services
You indicated some dissatisfaction with Open Mapping Services. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q22E
Some dissatisfaction with Google Earth
You indicated some dissatisfaction with Google Earth. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q22F
Some dissatisfaction with Query Site (Online Data Search)
You indicated some dissatisfaction with Query Site (Online Data Search). Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q23
Advanced user only
Considering the type of content found within the files, how representative do you feel the file names are of their content?
Not at all representative 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Completely representative 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q24 [1,10]
Used NPRI data
Over the last year, what types of NPRI information have you accessed?
Select all that apply
Data for specific geographic locations (community, postal code, municipality, city, province) 1
Data for specific facilities 2
Data for specific years 3
ECCC analysis of the data (data highlights) 4
Data for specific Industry sectors 5
Data for specific pollutants 6
Release data to specific medium (air, water and/or soil) 7
Data for transfers and disposals 8
Sector overviews 9
Other (please specify) 77
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q25 [1,5]
Used NPRI data
The substances and data that are required to be reported to the NPRI have undergone many changes over the years. These changes can affect your data analysis. What tools/guidance, if any, have you used to help interpret the NPRI data?
Select all that apply
Substance list by threshold category webpage 1
History of reporting requirements webpage 2
Using and interpreting data from the NPRI webpage 3
Guide for reporting to the NPRI (link to webpage) 4
Other (please specify) 77
None 98
Don't know / No response 99
Q26
Used NPRI data
Are you able, with the current data products, to perform all your analyses or are there gaps?
Yes, I can perform all analyses 1
No, there are gaps 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q27
Used NPRI data
How can we improve our data products to meet your needs?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q28 [1,9]
Used NPRI data
If NPRI were to expand to other types of data offerings, what data formats or product types would you be interested in using?
Select all that apply
API 1
Xml 2
Tableau or PowerBI 3
Txt 4
Web services 5
Shape files 6
Online visualization 7
Custom maps 8
Other (please specify) 77
None, not interested in other formats/product types 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q29
Advanced user
Have you ever combined NPRI data with other data?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q29B [1,6]
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
What other datasets have you used NPRI data with?
Select all that apply
Other environmental data (please specify) 78
Population trend data 1
Economic data 2
Substance Information (toxicity, fate and transport properties) 3
Health related data 4
Other (please specify) 77
None required 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q29C
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
For what purpose?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29D
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
What challenges did you have when you combined NPRI data with other datasets and what would have made it easier for you?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
PREQ29E
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
How satisfied are you with the following aspects of the NPRI?
Q29E1
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
Ability to link to other data
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q29E2
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
Ability to perform comparisons within a sector
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q29E3
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
Ability to perform regional/provincial comparisons
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q29E4
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
Ability to perform substance to substance comparison
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q29E5
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data
Ability to compare relative risk
Extremely dissatisfied 1 1
2 2
Neither 3 3
4 4
Extremely satisfied 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q29F
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data, Some dissatisfaction with ability to link to other data of interest
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the ability to link to other data of interest. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29G
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data, Some dissatisfaction with ability to perform comparisons within a sector
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the ability to perform comparisons within a sector. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29H
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data, Some dissatisfaction with ability to perform regional/provincial comparisons
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the ability to perform regional/provincial comparisons. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29H2
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data, Some dissatisfaction with ability to perform substance to substance comparison
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the ability to perform substance to substance comparison. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29H3
Advanced user, combined NPRI data with other data, Some dissatisfaction with ability to compare relative risk
You indicated some dissatisfaction with the ability to compare relative risk. Can you provide some detail about why or what you were dissatisfied with?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q29I
Advanced user, have not combined NPRI data with other data
Would you like to be able to link NPRI data to other data?
Yes (which ones?) 77
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q29J
Advanced user, have not combined NPRI data with other data, would like to be able to link NPRI data to other data
What benefits would this provide to you?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q30 [1,3]
Advanced user
Do you currently use other sources of information to provide context to NPRI data? Context could refer to information about the toxicity, fate and transport properties of NPRI substances.
Select all that apply
US EPA's RSEI (Risk Screening Environment Indicators) model 1
Risk Scoring system by Scorecard 2
Other (please specify) 77
No 98
Don't know / Not applicable 99
Q30B
Advanced user, currently use other sources of information to provide context to NPRI data
Are there any pros/cons of these tools that gives more context to the data you want NPRI be aware of?
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
Q30C
Advanced user, currently use other sources of information to provide context to NPRI data
If NPRI offered a tool to incorporate more context to NPRI data, would you use it?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know / No response 99
Q30D
Advanced user, currently use other sources of information to provide context to NPRI data
Please explain how you would use the tool to incorporate more context to NPRI data.
Please specify 77
Don't know / No response 99
PREQ31
How would you describe your level of knowledge and comfort with:
Q31A
Searching the Internet to find specific information
Not at all knowledgeable/ comfortable 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Very comfortable/ knowledgeable 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q31B
Using search functions and filters in an online data tool to get the specific information you need
Not at all knowledgeable/ comfortable 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Very comfortable/ knowledgeable 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q31C
Using spreadsheets to capture and manipulate data
Not at all knowledgeable/ comfortable 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Very comfortable/ knowledgeable 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
Q31D
Using information data bases to perform advanced analysis (e.g., pollution trends)
Not at all knowledgeable/ comfortable 1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
Very comfortable/ knowledgeable 5 5
Don't know / No response 99
THNK
Those are all the questions we have for you. Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this survey, it is greatly appreciated.
[Visit ekos.com]