There might be a basis for thinking Auckland will dominate New Zealand’s populationgrowth over coming decades. Data released in recent weeks by Stats NZ indicates the fertility rate continues to fall (down to 1.56 births per woman in the 2023 year) and natural increase (births minus deaths) now contributes only 15 per cent to annual population growth. The rest comes from net immigration, which last year was at a staggering 126,000.
A group of us were funded to look at what New Zealand’s demographic composition would look like in 2038 as part of a project called Nga Tangata Oho Mairangi.
Our projections were that Auckland would be the recipient of between 50 and 60 per cent of population growth over the coming decades, adding 500,000 to 700,000 to the city’s population. That suggests about 40 per cent of all New Zealanders would be Auckland residents in the 2040s.
The Infrastructural Commission thinks 49 per cent of future population growth will occur in Auckland, and that this would add 648,000 to the city’s population by 2048.
A major reason is that Auckland is the main beneficiary of immigration. Auckland is the destination of between 50 and 60 per cent of all immigrants, and when the number of arrivals and the net gain is as high as it was for 2023, then Auckland grows – and grows fast.
In addition, there is a net internal migration loss to other regions (mostly adjacent regions) of 10,000 to 12,000 per year. This is just about cancelled out by the annual natural increase for Auckland (+10,638 for 2023).
Like the Infrastructural Commission, we are projecting by the 2040s, around three-quarters of New Zealand’s population will live in the top half of the North Island.
The minister thinks Auckland’s population growth could contribute to GDP (productivity per capita).
There is a school of thought that sees productivity gains coming from the concentration of populations and activities in a city like Auckland as size and scale increase, especially in relation to knowledge-based sectors. But various negative externalities such as traffic congestion or housing availability/affordability also need to be factored in.
Talk of Auckland’s growth raises the question of whether this growth is desirable nationally or locally.
Much of Auckland’s infrastructure is struggling to catch up with past population growth, never mind keeping pace with current and future growth projections.
The paradox is that key sectors, including construction, now rely extensively on immigrant labour. Yet immigrants add to the demand for housing and other services/infrastructure.
Then there are national questions. We forecast over the next two decades, many of New Zealand’s 67 Territorial Authorities (TAs) will begin to experience population stagnation (little or no population growth) and some will see population decline. Further, a growing number of centres will experience hyper-ageing.
Distinguished Professor Emeritus Paul Spoonley. Photo / Andrew Warner
Is that really what we want as a country? How do we provide for the very different regional growth patterns when it comes to funding roads or health care? Where do we put elder care facilities? Or schools? How do regional employers get the labour that they need?
The closure of schools or bank branches over recent decades is instructive when it comes to understanding the impacts on local economies and populations. As the core institutions that attract or retain people in regions and the smaller centres leave, then so do people, or at least those who have a choice.
We have done little, as a country, to consider much less act on the significant demographic change that we are currently seeing and, in this case, the ongoing growth of Auckland. Before we double Auckland’s size, shouldn’t we have a considered discussion about our options and what is in our common interest?
Distinguished Professor Emeritus Paul Spoonley was one of the lead researchers on an MBIE-funded project, Nga Tangata Oho Mairangi, that looked at New Zealand’s population in 2038.
