03.06.2026
A social media age restriction policy may help address some of the risks young people face online and cannot do the job on its own. To make a meaningful difference, the policy needs to be backed by a clear evaluation framework.
As New Zealand considers introducing its own social media age restriction policy, there is a need to clearly define how the policy will protect under-16s from the risks of digital harm and how we will know if it is working.
In Social media age restrictions – the case for an evaluation framework, Dr Seungyeon Kim of Koi Tū Centre for Informed Futures argues that New Zealand has a critical opportunity to establish a robust framework for evaluating how the policy addresses the risks of social media.
The unprecedented convergence of declining youth mental health and rapid technological innovation has prompted research, laws, and policies to address the risk of the digital world to young people. In December 2025, under-16s in Australia are barred from accessing social media platforms including TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and X. New Zealand is looking to follow, but it is unclear how the policy will actually work.
Debate on the policy is largely centred around its necessity. On one hand, preventing under-16s from accessing social media may protect them from some of the risks associated with social media platforms. On the other, the policy’s feasibility and enforcement, and how the policy will prepare under-16s for the risks of social media when they do turn 16, bring considerable concern.
Dr Kim examines the potential pathways through which social media may contribute to harm, as well as the benefits that social media can provide for young people, including connection, self-expression, support, and access to information.
Both sides of this equation should be considered as the policy comes into action so that New Zealand can build a more cohesive response to the risks of the digital environment to young people.
This is why an evaluation framework is needed. The policy’s strengths, gaps, and proposed mechanism of change need to be clarified and taken into account to build a pragmatic and meaningful approach to youth digital safety.
The digital environment is changing quickly. New risks, challenges, and hazards will continue to emerge, and policies seeking to address them must also be able to adapt. That means ongoing evaluation, empirical evidence, and a willingness to refine the approach as new information becomes available.
The paper is not an argument for or against social media age restrictions. It is an argument for doing the work properly: establishing a rigorous evaluation framework, learning from the evidence, and building a coordinated system of approaches that can better protect young people in an evolving digital world.
