2.1. Today’s Auckland is larger, more prosperous, more ethnically diverse, and more concerned about future sustainability than ever before.
2.2. This chapter begins with a brief description of what Auckland was like 50 years ago, and then goes on to examine the Auckland of today. It looks at the region’s current situation in terms of Auckland’s population, economy, social landscape, and the environment, highlighting key challenges for local government, which are addressed in detail in later chapters.
2.3. Auckland’s urban form has changed significantly over the past 50 years. In the 1960s the urban area was significantly smaller and the pattern of land use was less dense, although the suburbs were growing fast. The Auckland Regional Authority was created in 1963, and its jurisdiction covered 31 local territorial bodies. Population density was seven people per acre.1
2.4. The popularity of the motor car was, at that stage, already influencing the city’s development as people became more mobile. While Queen Street remained the retail and commercial hub, inner city traffic congestion was driving people out to larger suburban shopping centres in areas such as Mt Roskill, Takapuna, Otahuhu, and Papatoetoe. Industry was concentrated in inner city areas including Parnell and Freemans Bay as well as Te Papa and Otahuhu. It was also expanding out to rural land in Rosebank Peninsula and South Auckland. New housing suburbs followed close behind.2 The populations of central suburbs such as Newmarket and Mt Eden were decreasing. The areas now comprising Franklin and Rodney Districts were predominantly rural, with the beginning of the development of holiday homes on the Whangaparaoa Peninsula.
2.5. As is the case today, Auckland in the 1960s was dealing with a growing number of residents, but diversity was only just beginning to increase. At the 1961 census, the population was approaching half a million,3 having increased 17% between 1956 and 1961.4 Māori accounted for 4% of Auckland’s population and Pacific peoples 1%, with both groups growing fast.5 (There was no category for Asian, but the Chinese proportion of the population was 0.4%.6) The post-war baby boom meant large numbers of school children, for whom new schools were being rapidly constructed in the suburbs. Nearly 5,000 students attended the University of Auckland. New Zealand’s first urban marae7 was established at Mangere in 1965.8
2.6. Auckland was an important player in the national economy. The city’s share of New Zealand’s total trade was 26%, most of it handled through Auckland’s ports. Agricultural products dominated overseas exports. Auckland had more heavy industry than any other New Zealand city. The Glenbrook Steel Mill was built in 1969 and the city exported a considerable amount of iron and steel. Domestic manufacturing (clothing, footwear, foodstuffs, appliances, textiles, furnishings, building materials) also played an important role in the city’s economy, reflecting the import protection policies of the day. Auckland hosted the head offices of many New Zealand-wide firms and provincial offices of most Government departments.9
2.7. Transport infrastructure was undergoing rapid development. The construction of the harbour bridge in 1959 had linked up the north and south of the city. Most freight moved in, out, and around the city by rail. The Port of Auckland was the largest port, the Port of Onehunga being constrained, as it is now, by difficult access. Merchant ships also traded out of the Royal New Zealand Navy base at Devonport. Passengers travelled mainly by sea. Air travel was in its infancy, operating mainly out of the Royal New Zealand Air Force base at Whenuapai prior to the opening of Auckland International Airport in 1966.10
2.8. Many of the concerns about the city’s future revolved around the implications of growth. In 1964, the New Zealand Herald highlighted issues such as land use planning to accommodate population growth, providing for rapidly increasing Māori and Pacific populations, maintaining the city’s character and heritage, reshaping the central city, managing more cars on the roads, and protecting the city’s recreational assets such as beaches and parks.11
2.9. Three times larger than Wellington or Christchurch, Auckland is New Zealand’s biggest city by a considerable margin. At the time of the 2006 census it was home to a third of New Zealand’s population, or 1.3 million people, and a third of the national workforce.12 The current population is estimated to be almost 1.4 million. 13
2.10. With a total land area of 5,000 square kilometres, the Auckland region extends from Te Hana north of Wellsford to Pukekohe in the south. The region is endowed with significant natural assets – three large harbours, 1,600 kilometres of coastline, numerous beaches, and the islands of the Hauraki Gulf. It also has a globally significant volcanic landscape and an extensive network of regional parks.
2.11. Auckland’s urban form is relatively dispersed and polycentric. The Auckland central business district (“CBD”) is the most significant urban centre for the region, but other sub-regional city and town centres are also important. Some parts of the region are densely populated, others are rural, characterised by farmland and small service towns. Overall, Auckland is less densely populated than many of its international counterparts.14 The population balance, however, is tilted towards the urban. Although only around 11% of the land in the region is urban use, most of the population (89%) live in urban areas where business and employment opportunities are concentrated.15
2.12. By 2050, Auckland’s population is predicted to reach over 2 million, representing 41% of New Zealand’s population.16 The number of Aucklanders has increased relatively quickly because of historically high levels of overseas inbound migration and the city’s much higher rate of natural population increase compared with the rest of New Zealand. These factors have more than compensated for the movement of many Aucklanders to other parts of the country. The region has had to cope with an annual population growth rate of 2.4% for the five years to June 2006, reducing to 1.7% in the year to June 2007.17
2.13. Currently Auckland’s age structure is similar to the rest of New Zealand, except in the young worker age group where Auckland has a relatively higher share. Over time, however, Auckland’s population is expected to age significantly, although compared with the rest of New Zealand, Auckland will continue to have relatively higher levels of young workers and lower numbers of older people.
2.14. The city is already the most ethnically diverse region in New Zealand and distinctive internationally for its mix of peoples. In 2006, 56% of the regional population identified with European ethnic groups, 19% with Asian, 14% with Pacific peoples, and 11% with Māori.18 Looking to the future, ethnic groups, particularly Asian and Pacific peoples, will increase most quickly from both ongoing migration and, for the Pacific Islands population in particular, third and fourth generation births in Auckland. It is estimated that in the past 15 years approximately 65% of New Zealand’s adult non-English speaking migrants settled in Auckland, and the city population currently includes around 190 different ethnic groups.19
The challenge for local government: Responding to rapid demographic changeTo put Auckland’s population growth in perspective, the Auckland region receives the equivalent of the population of the Wellington region every 20 years. This means that the entire range of infrastructure/services provided by both central and local government in Auckland (including roads, rail, public transport, energy and water infrastructure, schools, hospitals, universities) must be upgraded and/or expanded every two decades.
Complicating the situation is the fact that the growth is not uniformly spread across the city. Projections suggest faster population growth in Manukau than in North Shore, Waitakere, and Auckland Cities.20 Outer areas (Rodney and Franklin) will also grow rapidly, although these areas will remain relatively less populated than other parts of the region.
As a result of increasing diversity, the needs and expectations of the population will become more complex and localised. Particular combinations of cultural influences and affiliations, differences in demography (age structure, fertility, and life expectancy) and socio-economic status among ethnic groups result in different needs for publicly provided goods and services. For example, the Pacific and Māori populations are younger while the Asian population is characterised by older workers and students.
Different ethnic groups and age groups also tend to cluster in parts of the city; for example, most of the younger and older populations will be concentrated in what is now Auckland and Manukau Cities. How local government engages with local communities and addresses their particular needs will in future vary considerably across the city.
Should inward migration continue, Auckland will increasingly face the challenges of settling newcomers from diverse cultural and language backgrounds. Successful settlement depends on providing migrants with the language, social, and work skills they need to participate in the life of their new community. Failure to do so can lead to low educational achievement, unemployment, and crime for younger people, and social isolation for older people. While central government is responsible for providing many of these services, the social and economic impacts of unsuccessful migrant settlement are felt locally, and local government has an important role to play.
Migration rates, however, are vulnerable to international competition in relation to wages and conditions, particularly for skilled workers, and New Zealand’s continued attractiveness as a destination is by no means assured. Uncertainty about the rate and composition of migration-driven population growth makes it difficult for local government to justify long-term decisions about the land, infrastructure, and services required to cater for more people. Yet there is also a risk that failure to provide services and facilities of an appropriate standard will discourage immigration and investment.
2.15. As outlined in Chapter 1, “Why Auckland Matters”, Auckland is a key player in the national economy; operating industry clusters in manufacturing and technology, the marine industries, creative industries, and information and communications technology (“ICT”); providing specialised services such as business services, distribution and tertiary education; acting as an international gateway; and providing the country’s largest domestic market.
2.16. For most of the past decade, Auckland’s economy has consistently outpaced national economic growth, peaking in the year to March 2008 when regional gross domestic product (“GDP”) grew by an estimated 3.9% compared with the national growth rate of 2.9%.21 Until recently, employment growth has also been above average, with much of it occurring in high value-added industries, especially transport, storage, communications, finance, insurance, property, and business services. This growth has fed through into labour shortages and rapidly rising house prices.22
2.17. As the economic recession started to bite in mid-2008, Auckland’s economy has been hard hit. The regional GDP growth rate dropped back to 1.8% for the year to September 2008, the same rate as for New Zealand as a whole. Regional employment growth has also fallen steeply, much more so than nationally. House price inflation and labour shortages eased in the year to March 2008 compared with the previous year. These results are consistent with past trends where Auckland’s business cycle has been ahead of national upturns and downturns by about two quarters. The situation is expected to worsen further this year, with improvement predicted in 2010. 23
2.18. Clearly Auckland’s economy has the ability to be a strong performer. But does it lead national growth in the way that other large international cities do? This is an important question in seeking to understand how best Auckland can contribute to New Zealand’s recovery from the current economic crisis.
2.19. The Economic Development Indicators 2007 report compared Auckland’s performance with that of other regions of New Zealand and with six “comparator cities” of mostly similar size, density, and economic make-up, namely Vancouver, Brisbane, Adelaide, Copenhagen, Seattle, and Melbourne. Auckland’s productivity levels (GDP per worker) are lower than the average of a sample of 78 metropolitan regions in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) and below most comparator cities. The difference in productivity between Auckland and New Zealand as a whole – the Auckland “premium” – is in the middle of the comparator cities, suggesting that, in the New Zealand context, Auckland is contributing normally to economic growth. 24
2.20. These findings are supplemented by research undertaken for the Commission by Covec Ltd on the drivers of Auckland’s economic growth. It was found that, while Auckland’s economy does matter to the rest of New Zealand, it is not currently acting as an engine of growth for the following reasons:
Agglomeration
2.22. Covec reviewed a number of recent studies that have demonstrated that agglomeration is occurring in Auckland and making the region more productive. 26
2.23. Research by Motu Economic and Public Policy Research shows that value added per worker in the Auckland region is 30–50% higher than that of the regions outside Auckland, and in particular this productivity premium is 120–150% higher in Auckland’s CBD.27 This reflects the high-value industries located in Auckland.
2.24. International research suggests that doubling a city’s population will increase productivity by between 3% and 8%.28 In Auckland’s case, with a much lower expected rate of population increase (43% over the next 24 years), Covec has concluded that the agglomeration-based productivity gains are likely to be at the lower end of the range – about 3% in total over the next two decades. 29
2.25. Achieving these gains, however, will require trade-offs between the costs and benefits of increasing population densities. Some people will inevitably be discouraged from living in Auckland should the greater population result in increased house prices, more commuting, greater congestion, and negative social outcomes. Local government’s transport and land use policies will therefore have a significant role in how agglomeration develops in Auckland. Improved mobility would also allow areas of employment to be accessed by a wider pool of workers, potentially increasing the density of economic activity.
2.26. Overall, the education levels of New Zealand’s workforce are above the OECD median and improving. However, there are significant numbers of people at the lowest levels of literacy and numeracy.30 Auckland’s share of the working-age population with a tertiary qualification is low by international standards, falling below all but one of the six comparator cities cited in Economic Development Indicators 2007 . 31
2.27. This is despite the fact that Auckland educates a large proportion of New Zealand’s university students (40%); New Zealand’s university graduation rate is one of the highest in the OECD; and the quality of the region’s tertiary institutions is high (for example the University of Auckland is ranked 65th out of over 500 universities according to the Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings 2008).32
2.28. Until recently Auckland firms were experiencing skills shortages, ranging from shortages of trades people for the construction industry through to those with specialised tertiary qualifications, including the ICT sector. Twenty-six percent of Auckland firms reported difficulties in finding skilled labour in the March 2008 quarter, but this has dropped back to just 1% in the September 2008 quarter as the economy has contracted.33 These skill shortages occurred despite the high level of inward migration outlined earlier in this chapter. Although migrants are often highly qualified (more have bachelors degrees than Auckland-born residents), they are more likely to be unemployed or underemployed, representing an economic loss to the Auckland economy. 34
2.29. It has also been suggested that the mix of tertiary qualifications of Aucklanders may not be optimal for meeting the labour market needs of Auckland’s long-term economic growth. For example, New Zealand exceeds OECD norms in the number of science graduates, but falls well short of OECD averages in the number of engineers and PhD graduates.35 Management skills are perceived to be less available in New Zealand and lower than in Australia, the UK, and many other OECD countries, according to the International Institute of Management Development World Competitiveness Yearbook.36
2.30. In 2007 the OECD reported on New Zealand’s innovation system and identified a number of deficiencies, including issues of particular relevance to local government in Auckland, namely infrastructure weaknesses (broadband, electricity networks, and Auckland’s transport) and the need to assist the diffusion of innovation by helping small and medium enterprises interact better with the city’s strong tertiary education and research community.37 Auckland’s infrastructure is discussed below, and the issues relating to education, research, and innovation are outlined below.
2.31. Tertiary education facilities have the potential to play an important role in innovation – not only through teaching and the imparting of skills, and research and its application by business, but also because of the role they play in attracting highly talented people to a city. In theory, Auckland is in a strong position – the region is a significant national centre of learning, containing a number of tertiary research institutions, major Crown research institutes, and other research organisations. The University of Auckland’s UniServices has grown to become the largest organisation commercialising university research in Australasia. Auckland also has a high-quality lifestyle, increasingly seen as a major factor in attracting innovative people and the business and capital that follow them.
2.32. Yet at both a local and national level, indicators suggest that innovation is not occurring as widely as might be expected. Auckland’s share of national employment in high-tech services and goods manufacturing is broadly in the middle of the comparator cities mentioned, but this may simply reflect the fact that Auckland has a greater proportion of its national population than the other comparator cities.38 Nationally New Zealand has a low level of research and development (“R&D”) and patenting (patenting is seen as a measure of the effectiveness of R&D spending) compared with the OECD average. However the growth of R&D in New Zealand has been one of the strongest in the OECD. 39
2.33. As indicated by the OECD, the weakness seems to be in the area of linkages between education/research and business. Three business incubators, which develop businesses from a very preliminary stage, supported by New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, are located in Auckland at the University of Auckland, Massey University, and Auckland University of Technology. What Auckland lacks compared with some other successful cities, particularly in Asia, are industry-based science or business parks (such as biotech or aeronautical parks), which allow more established firms to co-locate in a supported setting.40 These are demonstrated to attract innovators, by providing opportunities for collaboration between entrepreneurs working on complementary development and the ability to share resources, workforces, and technology, as envisaged in the theory on agglomeration economies.
The challenge for local government: Addressing the recession in the short term while maintaining focus on the issues that will boost the performance of Auckland’s economy in the long termThe significant role of the Auckland region in the national economy, and the potential for it to contribute more to New Zealand’s economy, is recognised by central government.
The 2006 Metropolitan Auckland Project Background Paper concluded that Auckland has many of the ingredients to become a much higher economic performer.41 It attributed the city’s underperformance to population-led growth cushioning lower productivity, over-reliance on domestic-led growth, infrastructure constraints (technology, broadband, transport, energy), skills shortages in a tight labour market, relatively low levels of educational achievement in some sectors of the regional population, low levels of research and development, and low levels of business expenditure on investment.
Local government has the ability to influence outcomes in some of these areas, whether as a provider of services, through its policy and regulatory settings that impact on decisions made by businesses, or through the ability of the city to attract and retain talented people.
It is important that focusing on short- to medium-term measures to ameliorate the effects of the economic crisis does not draw attention away from the fundamental changes that must be made to promote the productivity and competitiveness of Auckland businesses. In particular, careful consideration must be given to the long-term cost to Auckland’s economy of making quick savings by cutting core infrastructure spending.
Keeping a close check on regulatory costs and impediments to business and maintaining cost-effective delivery of public services are key areas for local government activity in addressing the impacts of the recession in Auckland.
2.34. The World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009 ranked New Zealand’s infrastructure 50th out of 134 countries, down from 33rd the previous year.42 The quality of the country’s port and air transport infrastructure rated as competitive advantages while New Zealand’s road, electricity, and railroad infrastructures were cited as competitive disadvantages. New Zealand businesses rated inadequate infrastructure as the most problematic of 15 different factors for doing business.43
2.35. As outlined in Chapter 1, Auckland’s economy plays a significant distribution role in the New Zealand economy. This in part reflects the presence of the major air and sea ports through which significant trade volumes flow. Auckland International Airport hosts 70% of all international travellers to New Zealand and is the second largest cargo port by value.44
2.36. Some $23 billion in exports and imports flow through Ports of Auckland annually.45 The Port of Auckland is New Zealand’s largest container port, handling 37% of New Zealand’s total container trade by volume.46 By international standards, however, the city’s port is small, ranking at 100 in the American Association of Port Authorities’ listing of world ports measured by container traffic volume, behind two comparator cities, Vancouver and Melbourne.47 The future role and scale of Auckland’s port will be influenced by international trends in the maritime industry, including the use of larger international vessels requiring deeper harbours and wanting to call at fewer New Zealand ports, and the growth of coastal shipping driven by higher fuel charges and other road transport costs. Decisions about port infrastructure will also have economic implications for other infrastructure such as road and rail transport links.
2.37. Auckland’s land transport infrastructure is highly dependent on roading, both for moving people and freight. In 2006 71% of Aucklanders travelled to work by car, van, or truck.48 The number of cars on Auckland’s roads is continuing to increase. In comparison with the Australian comparator cities, a smaller proportion of people in Auckland travelled to work in Auckland by car; however, while car use in Auckland has steadily risen, the proportion of Australian car commuters peaked in the late 1990s/early 2000s and has been dropping since.49 Almost all freight is transported by road, some 250 million tonnes in 2002.50 Traffic congestion is perceived to be a significant problem by Aucklanders. Morning peak travel delay times fluctuate but show improvement recently reducing from 0.84 minutes of delay per kilometre in March 2007 to 0.76 minutes in March 2008.51
2.38. Research in 2005 by the Auckland Regional Council (“ARC”) benchmarking Auckland’s transport system against Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Ottawa, Vancouver, and Helsinki found Auckland has the highest proportion of car use and lowest use of other transport modes. This is illustrated in Figure 2.1. Auckland also had the lowest levels of public transport supply and usage. However, this has changed recently with higher fuel prices and improved public transport options resulting in an increase in rail and bus commuter patronage. In the year to March 2008, public transport patronage Auckland-wide increased by 4.4%, and public transport trips to the CBD grew by 11%.52
2.39. It is clear that, unlike many other European, Australian and US cities, Auckland does not yet offer an effectively integrated transport system so that users can move easily between modes (for example, walking, car, cycling, public transport) to access a wide variety of destinations. Cities that offer such systems are increasingly being seen as more desirable places to live in terms of quality of life.
2.40. The 2005 Auckland Regional Land Transport Strategy envisages a shift towards investment in public transport and travel demand management although road transport will continue to receive the bulk of funding.53 Relative spending on infrastructure for roading and public transport in Auckland mirrors the pattern of usage, although significant investment in rail has been made and more is planned for the future. This is outlined in more detail in Chapter 25, “Transport”. Generally, cities tend to spend more on public transport as population increases, reflecting the economics of mass transit systems versus the infrastructure and environmental costs of greater car use. Auckland is currently spending less on public transport relative to population than many other international cities.54
2.41. By international standards Auckland’s broadband infrastructure is lagging behind in investment, speed, and widespread access. In 2005, while 49% of Aucklanders had access to the internet (primarily dial-up) at home, compared with 11% nationally, speed and quality varied considerably across the city.55 The New Zealand Institute has estimated average broadband download speeds in Auckland at 3 Mb/s.56 By comparison, Singapore is targeting a 1 Gb/s fibre-to-premises service “for every home, school and business” by 2015.57 Nationally, New Zealand’s e-readiness ranking is the lowest out of Australia, Canada, United States, and Denmark, and went down between 2007 and 2008.58 New Zealand also has the lowest number of broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants of the comparator countries.59
2.42. Clearly the development of advanced broadband services in New Zealand has been relatively slow, and there are also a relatively small number of service providers and high comparative prices for internet access. This is of concern to the New Zealand Government, which intends to invest up to $1.5 billion in an ultra-fast broadband network with a “fibre-to-the-home” aspiration connecting 75% of New Zealanders.60
2.43. For cities, ICT infrastructure, particularly fast broadband, is becoming an important element in maintaining international competitiveness. It enables firms to participate in the international digital economy, thereby improving productivity, attracting business (especially multinationals), people, and investment, and improving access to global markets as outlined in Chapter 27, “Information and Communications Technology”.
2.44. Auckland’s large population places particular pressure on the national electricity grid at peak times. Ensuring security of supply from a system heavily dependent on hydro power is a national issue. Maintaining reliable transmission to Auckland, however, is also strongly influenced by transmission infrastructure adequacy and the additional risk that all sources of generation are to the south of the city and feed through only two major transmission lines. (See Chapter 28, “Electricity”.)
2.45. The 2006 prolonged power outage to the central city and recent power outages have highlighted Auckland’s problems with reliable power supply, and international perceptions of the city’s electricity security may still be influenced by it. The World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009 ranked New Zealand 52 out of 134 countries for the quality of its electricity supply (defined in that index as lack of interruption and lack of voltage fluctuation relative to other countries).61
The challenge for local government: InfrastructureInfrastructure is both expensive and essential. The region depends on central government funding for some major infrastructure assets such as highways. Other infrastructure, such as stormwater, is expected to be funded locally. Auckland faces significant infrastructural challenges in areas of direct local government involvement such as transport and stormwater. Demand is rising but the infrastructure required to satisfy it is inadequate. Public transport must be improved to reduce travel times, support intensification, reduce environmental impacts, and improve social cohesion – demand needs to be managed and existing infrastructure better utilised. Auckland lags internationally in its ability to cater for fast broadband, regarded as a key infrastructure asset underpinning future economic growth. Power supply is also an issue in terms of transmission vulnerability.
Addressing many of Auckland’s key challenges involves decisions about infrastructure. For example the ability to meet social needs such as affordable housing and safety are linked to community infrastructure and public transport. People on lower incomes are particularly reliant on public transport to get to work. And decisions about infrastructure affect most other issues in the region ranging from land use to air quality.
It is essential that planning for infrastructure takes a long-term focus. This means taking into account global changes such as climate change and peak oil – might the Auckland of the future be less car-dependent, produce more weightless exports, and have a greater number of workers operating from home?62 Infrastructure designed around this scenario would mean less spending on roading but more on public transport and provision for fast broadband.
2.46. With a few large notable exceptions, Auckland’s businesses are not strongly internationally focused. Many that do operate internationally have production bases offshore, often in Asia, but retain head offices in Auckland. Most of the city’s businesses are small, service-oriented, locally focused firms. Eighty-five percent of firms are locally owned and orientated.63 While one-third of them import raw materials, less than 10% are involved in exporting.64 However, it is likely that Auckland provides valuable inputs to national chains of production that end up exporting to the rest of the world. A significant proportion of Auckland’s business activity is domestically focused.65
2.47. Surprisingly, there are no data available on international destination and sources of Auckland’s exports, imports, and foreign investment – it is not possible to find evidence to develop conclusions about the extent and nature of the city’s links with the Asia-Pacific region and how they might be developed further.
2.48. After Sydney and Melbourne, Auckland is one of three (roughly equal) centres of economic activity (with Brisbane and Perth) in Australasia.66 To the extent that Auckland is linked into the Australasian economy, there is a tendency to lose some functions such as management and service functions to the larger cities, Sydney and Melbourne. But the fact that there are other sectors in which Auckland is already internationally competitive, such as the marine and film industries, indicates that the city does have specialised niches within the Asia-Pacific region.
2.49. Auckland’s increasing Pacific Islands and Asian populations are deepening the city’s linkages to the Asia-Pacific region. Many migrants retain long-term and sometimes intergenerational connections to their countries of origin. These provide channels for ongoing cross-cultural influences, personal and business relationships, and inward and outward income transfers and investment.
2.50. New Zealand participates in the key economic institutions of the Asia-Pacific region such as Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (“APEC”) and has free trade agreements with China, Brunei, Chile, Singapore, Thailand, and Australia. While Auckland is not directly represented in these arrangements, it has had indirect and direct input into them. Auckland has been the location of major international economic meetings, including APEC 1999. Auckland businesspeople participate in the business forums and consultation processes associated with these institutions, and its businesses benefit from trade and investment liberalisation achieved at national level.
2.51. Like many large cities, Auckland’s social landscape depends on the perspective from which it is viewed. There are certainly concentrations of wealth in the city. There is considerable choice in terms of high-quality educational and health services, both public and private. Good housing is available, and most Aucklanders are in good health. Yet there is a significant proportion of the population whose access to the full range of lifestyle services and choices offered by the city is constrained for various reasons outlined in the following paragraphs. The well-being of these groups is likely to be further compromised as the impact of the economic recession increasingly affects Aucklanders. The social well-being of Auckland’s population and the governance recommendations are discussed in detail in Chapter 9, “Promoting Social Well-Being”.
2.52. Disparity is a feature of Auckland’s social landscape as it is in many larger cities. Social conditions vary significantly across the region and between different ethnic and socio-economic groups. There are significant pockets of deprivation that are often masked by regional statistics. Within Auckland, higher deprivation is often concentrated in particular areas, mainly in Manukau and Auckland Cities, with 30% of Aucklanders (almost 400,000 people) living in areas with higher deprivation.67 By comparison, 25% of the Wellington region’s population and 21% of the Canterbury region’s population live in areas of higher deprivation.68 Māori and Pacific peoples and people living in areas of high deprivation have higher rates of mortality and disease, lower educational qualifications, higher rates of truancy, stand downs, and suspensions, and higher rates of overcrowding.
2.53. In December 2008, approximately 11% of the working-age population in Auckland was receiving a main benefit, which includes unemployment, domestic purposes, sickness, and invalids benefits.69 This is similar to the national average, but there is a 12% difference across the city – 17% of working-age Papakura residents were on a main benefit compared with only 5% on the North Shore.70
2.54. Health services are delivered in Auckland through the Waitemata, Auckland, and Counties Manukau District Health Boards and the Auckland Regional Public Health Service (“ARPHS”), which provides public health services for the three boards. While local government does not directly provide healthcare, its policies and regulations on matters such as gambling, alcohol, pollution, food inspection, public transport, and sport and physical activity have a direct impact on people’s health.
2.55. Maintaining the health of Auckland’s growing, ageing, and increasingly ethnically and socio-economically diverse population is challenging. Broadly speaking the city’s older, younger, Māori, Pacific, and new immigrants have a disproportionate number of health ailments. The APRHS Service Delivery Plan 2007/2008 to 2009/2010 identified the following priority areas – reducing the incidence and impact of infectious diseases, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, tobacco- and alcohol-related harm, cancer, and environmental inequalities.71
2.56. Some health issues, such as cancer or tobacco-related illness, are national problems. Others have higher incidence in Auckland and may relate to particular circumstances of big-city living and socio-economic status. One example is infectious diseases, which spread more easily in circumstances of poverty and overcrowding. Of New Zealand’s 12 largest cities, Manukau City had the highest rate of meningococcal disease for children under 15 in 2006 (although this had reduced considerably compared with 2002) and had 18 cases of tuberculosis, while most of the other big cities had none.72 The relationship between housing, overcrowding, and social well-being is discussed in detail in Chapter 9.
2.57. There are significant differences in healthcare requirements across the Auckland region. For example, the 2007 Quality of Life report found that of New Zealand’s 12 largest cities, infant mortality rates between 2000 and 2003 were the highest in Manukau, while Rodney had the second lowest rate. Manukau City also had one of highest birth rates for teenage mothers (13–17 years), North Shore had the lowest.73
2.58. In 2006, ARPHS identified urban development, transport and food, and alcohol and tobacco as the three major areas where local government activity could improve health and well-being. As the city’s population grows and becomes more densely housed, good urban design is essential to create an environment that supports good health. For example, access to open space and physical activity opportunities are important for tackling obesity; housing quality has a significant impact on overall health and well-being; and good transport links reduce the potential for social isolation, among other things. Over-reliance on car transport restricts physical activity, contributing to health issues such as heart disease, diabetes, and obesity.
2.59. Auckland educates about 33% of New Zealand’s school population.74 It has proportionately more schools than other parts of New Zealand at the extreme ends of the school decile range reflecting the uneven distribution of socio-economic groups across the city.
2.60. Low uptake of preschool education, unqualified school-leavers, and ethnic and sub-regional disparities in gaining educational qualifications are issues for Auckland’s education system. Participation in early childhood education in 2006 was the lowest in the country, and there are significant sub-regional access inequalities, which are discussed in further detail in Chapter 9. The low participation can be explained to some extent by lack of childcare facilities, and the high Pacific, and to a lesser degree Māori, population in Auckland, given both groups have lower participation in preschool education and are over-represented in the age group being measured.
2.61. At the other end of the school system, while 76% of Aucklanders have at least an upper secondary school education and 27% have a tertiary education,75 18% of Aucklanders over 15 have no educational qualifications.76 Most of the latter live in Manukau and Auckland Cities. In terms of ethnicity, Asian school leavers have the highest percentage of qualifications at NCEA Level 2 or higher (86%) and Māori have the lowest (43%).77 Sub-regionally, North Shore City has the highest percentage of school leavers with qualifications at NCEA Level 2 or higher (79%) and Papakura District has the lowest (56%).78
2.62. The implications of this are far-reaching for the individuals concerned, for communities, and for the economy. Educational attainment is linked to employment, with only 52% of those with no qualifications participating in the workforce compared with 85% of those with a bachelor degree or higher.79
2.63. Auckland’s economic growth in recent years has resulted in relatively low unemployment. In the September 2008 quarter, the unemployment rate in the Auckland region was 4.4%, only slightly higher than the national rate for the same quarter (4.2%).80 Across the region unemployment figures varied greatly, from 10.8% unemployment in the Papakura District to 2.4% in North Shore City.81
2.64However, as the economy has moved into recession, unemployment in the Auckland region appears to be increasing at a greater rate than the national average. December 2008 quarter figures show the region’s unemployment rate to have increased to 5.2%, while the national figure is 4.6%.82 Similarly the number of people in the Auckland region receiving the unemployment benefit increased by 35% for the 2008 December quarter compared with the same period in 2007.83
2.65. Complete information is not available on the level of underemployment (where people are already working but are unable to work in areas that utilise their skills, or where people who want to work full-time but can find only part-time work). However, anecdotal evidence from migrants and refugees suggests it is an issue for this population.
2.66. Like other social domains such as health and education, employment seems to be influenced by where people live in the city and their socio-economic status. Sustainable employment helps to connect people in their communities and provides economic independence.
2.67. In 2008 Auckland was the second least affordable region in New Zealand for purchasing a house.84 It was also relatively expensive by international standards. The 5th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey classified Auckland’s housing as severely unaffordable.85 As noted previously, the importance of housing in relation to social well-being and other outcomes is a key theme in Chapter 9, “Promoting Social Well-Being”.
2.68. Auckland’s rate of home ownership was about 3% lower than the national average in 2006.86 In 2004, 55,120 homeowners were paying more than 30% of their household income on housing costs.87 There was also a growing number of working households (estimated at 54,900 in 2006) unable to purchase a home even at the lower end of the housing market (in the lower quartile or lower-scale house price range).88 A key issue in the rental market is a shortage of affordable and secure rental accommodation for poorer households and vulnerable people.
2.69. The proportion of the Auckland region’s population living in crowded housing in 2006 was the highest in the country at 16%, with considerable variation across the region, from 5% in Rodney to 25% in Manukau.89 A breakdown by ethnicity shows that the figures are even higher for Pacific communities (48%), Māori (27%), other ethnic groups (23%), and Asian (21.5%).90
2.70. Lack of affordable housing is both a social and economic issue. Where Aucklanders can afford to live, the quality of their housing, and how much income they have left over after meeting housing costs affects people’s education, health, and employment. Housing costs may constrain Auckland’s economy by limiting housing options for low- to medium-paid workers and determining whether employees locate or remain in the region.
2.71. The economic recession is having both negative and positive effects on Auckland’s housing situation. Auckland property values fell by 6.9% in the year to September 2008, which should be making housing cheaper, yet household incomes are under threat from unemployment and the slowing economy.91 There has also been a steady rise in mortgagee house sales which indicates ongoing pressure on housing affordability as interest rates remain high.92 The changes are most likely to impact negatively on lower-income households.
The challenge for local government: Housing affordabilityA wide range of interrelated factors affect the price of housing. Supply side issues, some of which are influenced by local government, include the availability of land affected by urban planning policies and land banking, development costs (and delays), construction costs, and central government policy. Demand side issues include population growth, changing household composition, location and accessibility, and liveability, as well as wider economic factors such as the labour market, housing market cycles, investment preferences, and the liquidity of debt.
Further complicating the situation are increasingly diverse cultural norms, changing household and family structures, and differences in socio-economic status, which result in a multiplicity of different housing requirements among different groups and between localities.
2.72. The level of personal over-indebtedness has risen in the past 10 years and is seen as a significant barrier to achieving positive social and economic outcomes. Fringe lenders with high interest rates and charges, and over-priced mobile shops and door-to-door operators who sell on credit, particularly in South Auckland, are identified as particular problems. Research by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs identified inability to meet the needs of everyday household expenses as the most common reason for borrowing from fringe lenders by Pacific consumers in South Auckland.93
2.73. Broadly speaking, Auckland seems to be less safe than the rest of New Zealand, both in terms of residents’ perceptions of safety and rates of recorded criminal offences. In absolute terms, however, the statistics show sub-regional differences and an increase in reported violent crime (which may partly be associated with increased reporting of domestic violence).
2.74. Similarly Aucklanders assessed their personal safety differently depending on where they lived in the city. In 2006 Manukau had the lowest percentage of residents who felt safe in their home, neighbourhood, and city centre during the day and after dark, while Rodney and North Shore had the highest percentage.94
2.75. The rate of recorded criminal offences in the Auckland region shows a slight downward trend between 1998 and 2007.95 Dishonesty offences (burglary, car conversion, theft, receiving, and fraud) are the most common offences across the city. Across the city’s three police districts (Waitemata, Auckland City, and Counties Manukau), the rate of recorded violent offences has increased since 1999, most noticeably in Counties Manukau.96
2.76. Social cohesion describes the strength of the networks and relationships and the degree of trust that binds people together in communities. Most of the factors influencing social cohesion, namely population and immigration patterns, economic factors, natural environment, and information technology, are in a state of change in Auckland as a result of the region’s rapid growth in recent years. Measures for assessing social cohesion are
2.77. in their early stages, and there is little comparative international data, but the following information provides some indication of the city’s performance in this area:Central government retains primary responsibility for funding and delivering core social services such as health and education and its macroeconomic policy settings influence issues such as housing affordability.
The role of local government has traditionally focused on the following:The private sector (not-for-profit organisations, volunteers, philanthropists, and business) also has a role in addressing Auckland’s social issues. The not-for-profit sector provides assistance to groups such as those with disabilities or on benefits, or through activities such as supporting business or skills development in more deprived communities. Philanthropy occurs through various organisations. Volunteerism, although diminished as people become more time-poor, is still evident in areas such as school boards or community groups.
As Auckland’s social issues become increasingly complex and are exacerbated by the current economic recession, new ways will need to be found to address the problems, many of which are, in the New Zealand context, unique to Auckland. In particular, resources must be applied to improve social well-being for the most deprived communities. Auckland carries the burden of this deprivation in three ways – the loss of potential to contribute to Auckland’s growth, the additional pressure on health and social services, and the reduced desirability of Auckland as a place to live.
Improving social well-being outcomes clearly will require central and local government to work together very closely as central government holds the funding and is responsible for delivering many social services while local government has close knowledge of the needs and priorities of its local communities. Some councils are already engaged in partnership projects with central government, such as the Tamaki Transformation Programme, which involves the Auckland City and Auckland Regional Councils, Housing New Zealand, Ministry of Social Development, health agencies, and the local community.
The private sector, in the form of not-for-profit and business organisations, can also have an important role to play in advocacy, funding, service delivery, and capacity building. Formal cooperation between these groups and local government is in its infancy in Auckland. Consideration must be given to local government structures that could facilitate and foster these types of collaborative approaches to addressing social issues.
While attempts have been made to address social issues at a regional level through the One Plan for Auckland and the Auckland Sustainability Framework and a range of other regional issue-specific strategies, there is no overall regional strategic direction for social development, and it is probably fair to say, no common understanding between
central and local government about the key social priorities for Auckland and how to address them.
2.77. Aucklanders place high value on the natural environment and heritage of their city – the beaches, countryside, bush, volcanic cones, clean air and water, and the region’s cultural and historic heritage. Local government plays a direct role in managing the environment and heritage through its responsibilities under the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”) and the Biosecurity Act 1993. Its policies and regulations on issues such as land use, transport, and other service provision can also impact positively or negatively on the region’s environment.
2.78. This section summarises the condition of Auckland’s environment, drawing on the ARC’s environmental monitoring data.102
2.79. Although specific data regarding the effect of climate change on Auckland are not yet available, Ministry for the Environment projections for New Zealand indicate that Auckland is currently and will in future face more extreme weather conditions such as droughts and storms.103 Average temperatures are expected to increase by about 1 °C by 2040 and 2 °C by 2090.104 Changes in rainfall and wind patterns will show even more marked seasonality, for example with more westerlies expected in spring than occur now. Since 1998 the annual mean temperature for Auckland has been consistently higher than the long-term average.105 Auckland’s sea level is rising and may rise faster than average over the next 20–30 years.106
2.80. Vehicles are the main source of Auckland’s air pollution, closely followed by the discharges from wood-fired domestic heating. Key pollutants include fine particulates, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone. They affect air clarity and can affect health – in Auckland it is estimated that air pollution causes over 500 premature deaths per year and 1.1 million “reduced activity days per year” when people feel unable to go to work or school.107
2.81. There is no overall measure of the quality of Auckland’s air. The ARC undertakes monitoring at specific sites to assess air quality in relation to Ministry for the Environment targets for acceptable levels of specific pollutants, but the situation is complicated by wide intra-regional variation, the effect of weather patterns on pollution dispersal, and changes in traffic patterns.108 Results from the ARC’s monitoring programme show that while the overall number of days where the ministry’s targets have been exceeded does appear to have dropped over time, the downward trend has been highly variable. In terms of individual pollutants, particulate exceedences have increased slightly in recent years. Significant improvements in vehicle technology and fuel consumption have reduced vehicle emissions, which account for most particulate pollution, but these gains have been offset by increases in vehicle numbers, more car usage, more diesel vehicles, and larger vehicle engines.109
2.82. Auckland is becoming more built up and less open. Demand for housing, including the popularity of rural lifestyle and coastal property, is seeing building on previously undeveloped land. Rural land is shifting from pastoral farming with its open landscape towards more intensive and enclosed landscapes associated with horticulture, viticulture, lifestyle blocks, or commercial forestry. The scale and intensity of housing development in our coastal areas means that many of the unique coastal and estuarine landscapes that contribute significantly to the identity of Auckland are being modified or disappearing.110
2.83. Public open space (parks, volcanic cones, sports grounds, bush, and islands) forms approximately 16.7% of the region’s total land area.111 This is made up of land owned and controlled by the city, district, and regional councils and the Department of Conservation (“DOC”). Around 46% of this is regional parks managed by the ARC.112 As the population grows this land is being used more and more intensively.
2.84. Open space has overlapping uses for recreational, cultural, and environmental purposes. Some of the land was purchased by local and central government to protect valued resources (water) and cultural and natural features such as the Waitakeres, the Hunuas, the Hauraki Gulf islands, and the volcanic cones. The amount of “green space” (open space under the management and control of, or leased by, councils) per 1,000 residents varies across the Auckland region. For the cities in the Auckland region mentioned in the 2007 Quality of Life report, the amount of green space per 1,000 residents ranges from 4.9 hectares in Auckland City to 9.3 hectares in North Shore City. In comparison, outside the region, Hamilton has 12.4 hectares per 1,000 residents and Tauranga has 18.4 hectares. Between 2004 and 2006 the amount of green space per 1,000 residents actually decreased in Auckland City and Rodney District.113
The challenge for local government: Auckland’s urban formManaging Auckland’s growth and development in the context of the region’s highly dispersed urban form is complicated. Accommodating population growth through urban sprawl has increased infrastructure costs and places pressure on the environment.
It is essential that the region’s land use develops more sustainably in future. The Auckland Regional Growth Strategy provides for a more compact urban form. The need for land use intensification is agreed and legislated for in the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004.114 The challenge is ensuring implementation.
Achieving intensification will need to take into account issues such as preserving heritage and historic buildings, the quality of amenities in high-density areas, and maintaining sufficient open space for recreation. At the same time, population growth will also need to be accommodated, with implications for the provision of public transport, roading, and other infrastructure. Related to this is the continuing pressure for subdivision and the loss of productive agricultural and horticultural land, particularly on the urban fringes. The multitude of existing plans and associated regulation at local and regional level has led to calls for region-wide spatial planning, control of greenfield and brownfield development, and a coordinated approach to urban renewal.
2.85. Auckland’s biodiversity, its plants, animals and the habitats they live in, has been extensively modified and reduced from its original state. In 2004, the region contained 15% indigenous forest, 11% regenerating scrub, and less than 0.4% freshwater wetland.115
2.86. Nevertheless, the Auckland region remains home to some unique native species such as the world’s only viable stitchbird population, located on Little Barrier Island. It also contains significant natural areas and habitats. These include the Waitakere Ranges, the Hunua Ranges, the large harbours and estuaries, remnants of forest and wetlands in both urban and rural areas, and gulf islands such as Great Barrier Island. In 2004 it was estimated that 11% of the region’s land area was within protected natural areas with the majority in regional parks and DOC land, as well as local scenic and recreational reserves, together with an increasing amount of private land subject to protection covenants, mainly in rural areas.116
2.87. Vegetation clearance, urban growth and development, and introduced weeds and pests are the main threats to Auckland’s biodiversity. Both the ARC and DOC manage ecological restoration projects such as dune and wetland restoration, and the establishment of the Tawharanui Open Sanctuary. Pest levels are the lowest in mainland New Zealand at many of these sites, with a major pest eradication project now under way on Rangitoto and Motutapu Islands.
2.88. Auckland’s biodiversity is important for many reasons. In conservation terms the city’s variety of native species is significant nationally – over one-third of the country’s native ferns and over half of New Zealand’s bird species exist in the Auckland region.117 Access to such a rich natural environment is also a recreational asset for the city’s residents and a tourist attraction for visitors.
2.89. Auckland’s water comes from underground aquifers and surface sources such as lakes, dams, and streams. Water can be taken “as of right” for individual domestic purposes and animal drinking water. Water for other purposes, mainly municipal supplies, is governed by resource consents under the RMA. Where supply is controlled, water is allocated up to sustainable levels, but there is evidence that a number of streams are under pressure from overuse.
2.90. Major water sources include the municipal bulk water supply dams in the Waitakere and Hunua Ranges, Hayes Creek, and the Onehunga Aquifer. Significant quantities of water are also taken from the Waikato River, Franklin lowlands, the north-western periphery of metropolitan Auckland, industrialised parts of the Auckland isthmus, Manukau City, and Clevedon Valley. Individual reticulated water supplies exist in many rural towns. Eighty percent of the water allocated under provisions of the RMA in the Auckland region goes to the major reticulated supplies in Auckland, Rodney, and Franklin.118 In urban areas water is of high quality and the supply is reliable. There is no evidence of shortages, but there is potential for better demand management. Outside the metropolitan areas, water is scarce in a number of small communities such as Snells Beach, Algies Bay, Warkworth, Helensville, Omaha, and parts of Franklin District.
2.91. Auckland has a highly diverse range of marine environments, from exposed west coast ocean beaches to two of the southern hemisphere’s largest harbours. The Hauraki Gulf is protected as a marine park under the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000. It includes reserves and conservation areas administered by DOC, and the surrounding foreshore, seabed, and coastal waters. Local authorities can add their reserves to the marine park while retaining ownership, and protected private or Māori land can also be included in the park with the owners’ consent. The Hauraki Gulf Marine Park covers the Hauraki Gulf, Waitemata Harbour, Firth of Thames, east coast of the Coromandel Peninsula, Little Barrier Island, the Mokohinau Islands, more than half of Great Barrier Island, Cuvier Island, Rangitoto Island, Mototapu Island, Mount Moehau, Mansion House on Kawau Island, North Head Historic Reserve, four marine reserves, and the internationally recognised wetland at the Firth of Thames.
2.92. Auckland’s marine ecosystem hosts flora and fauna ranging from mangroves to sediment-dwelling organisms and fish. It also accommodates many different human activities such as recreational swimming and boating, commercial and recreational fishing, shipping, and aquaculture.
2.93. Auckland’s growth is placing pressure on the city’s marine environment. Recreational use is intensifying as the population grows, as is demand for commercial activity such as aquaculture. Urban development and development of coastal property for housing has increased the amount of runoff from roads, sediment washed into the sea, and stormwater discharges into the sea. More intensive farming practices now deposit large amounts of nutrients into areas such as the Firth of Thames; this can cause algal blooms. Pollutants are highest around urban areas and in sheltered areas such as the upper harbour that do not flush out so regularly.
2,94. Although Auckland does not discharge sewage directly into the sea, discharges do occur via overflows into the wastewater system. The other major marine contaminant is stormwater, which washes contaminants from the land into the sea. Accumulation of heavy metals (mainly zinc, copper, lead) is causing the most concern, especially where it settles in marine sediment and affects the health of shellfish and fish. Vehicles are the major source of these pollutants, along with some seepage from older contaminated land sites. Unsafe levels of microbial contamination (caused by sewage discharges) at some Auckland beaches is a significant issue for many Aucklanders, but there is evidence that the situation is improving as wastewater systems are upgraded.119
2.95. There is wide variation in the quality of water in Auckland’s lakes and streams, largely dependent on how the land around them is used, although the ARC’s water quality data suggest that quality of water in Auckland’s rivers and streams is getting better.120 As with the marine environment (as outlined above), increasing urbanisation and more intensive farming in the Auckland region is increasing the potential for pollution.
2.96. In urban areas the main contaminators of Auckland’s streams and lakes are sediment from earthworks (the single largest contaminant), rural unsealed roads, and forestry and horticulture, as well as stormwater contaminants generated from roads and hard surfaces, and pollution events such as oil spills. Rural water is contaminated by nutrient enrichment from farm run-off and sediment from farm development. Many lakes are also threatened by introduced pest plants and exotic fish, which crowd out native species and clog waterways.121
2.97. Water pollution complaints to the ARC have steadily increased. Most of these relate to industrial sources, particularly vehicle and equipment washing, and oil and petrochemical spills. This is attributed to increased public awareness of the effects of water pollution and the ARC’s role in dealing with it.122
2.98. Auckland’s historic heritage comprises
2.99. Heritage is of central importance in defining the identity of Auckland. There are 3,100 protected cultural heritage sites in the region. The ARC’s cultural heritage inventory has more than 14,000 items recorded including over 8,000 recorded archaeological sites, 1,000 sites with historic maritime associations, 2,100 historic buildings and structures, and approximately 600 botanical heritage sites.125 Yet much of the total Auckland region is still to be systematically assessed and surveyed to identify cultural heritage resources and only a small proportion of sites are formally scheduled for protection in regional or district council plans. In particular, cultural heritage places of significance to Māori are largely under-represented in statutory documents in the region. The sustainable management of archaeological sites and other aspects of historical heritage is a significant issue in the region.126 In particular, the destruction of Auckland’s built heritage has been the subject of much recent public debate with both positive developments such as the preservation of the low-rise heritage-based area of the Britomart project, yet concern about changes to planning provisions that would have resulted in the demolition of more older homes in heritage zones. (Aspects of Auckland’s natural heritage have already been discussed.)
2.100. Local government in Auckland has a history of involvement in managing the effects of development on the environment through its role in implementing the provisions of the RMA. Section 5(2) of the Act describes sustainable management as
… managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while—
2.101. Given that the legislation was world-leading in terms of environmental management when it was passed in 1991, it is probably fair to say that Auckland’s local government is quite experienced in this area compared with other cities internationally.
2.102. Recent years have seen an increasing focus on becoming a sustainable city. In 1993, Waitakere City committed itself to becoming an “eco city” by adopting the principles of the United Nations Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and Agenda 21 as guiding documents.127
2.103. In 2007, Auckland’s local authorities, in a joint project with central government, developed the Auckland Sustainability Framework. The framework describes sustainability as anticipating future challenges and opportunities; working within ecological limits; acknowledging social, cultural, economic, and environmental interrelationships; learning from the past, enhancing Auckland’s current well-being, and creating a positive and enduring legacy; and developing “a resilient region that can adapt to change by building strong communities and robust ecological systems, and designing flexibility into our economy, infrastructure and buildings”.128
2.104. The Auckland Sustainability Framework aims to enable the region to continue to develop in the face of five identified future challenges – climate change, increasing pressure on and shortages of natural resources such as oil and water, capitalising on globalisation, managing population growth and demographic change, and addressing disadvantage. Comprehensive measures to assess Auckland’s sustainability are still under development. As has been noted in respect of other regional initiatives, little action has followed the preparation of the framework.
The challenge for local government: Meeting the global challenges of the future – climate change and resource shortagesClimate change will impact on a wide range of local government activities including strategic and land use planning (for example promoting development away from coastal areas should sea levels rise), water supply and irrigation (in event of drought), stormwater and flood management, roading and other infrastructure (for example the need to build to withstand more extreme weather), coastal infrastructure (to cope with rising sea levels), management of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (should climate change affect habitats), civil defence and emergency management (for extreme weather events) and biosecurity (if increasing temperatures make New Zealand more hospitable to tropical pests).
In terms of resource shortages, operating in an oil-scarce world is inevitable. Closer to home, natural resources that a number of generations have taken for granted will
be coming under pressure. For example, the Auckland region has a finite supply of water available for use and an increasing number of people wanting to use it. Managing local government responsibilities for water allocation will become more complex, and will need to address demand management. A more managed water system might be required delivering different water qualities appropriate for different uses, for example grey water for toilets and gardens.
2.105. The analysis contained in this chapter suggests there are a number of areas in Auckland’s economic, social, and environmental performance where better long-term performance can realistically be achieved. These are as follows:
1. “Population Leaps Ahead”, New Zealand Herald – Supplement, 2 June 1964, p. 2.
2. “Auckland City” from An Encyclopaedi a of New Zealand, edited by A.H. McLintock, originally published in 1966, Te Ara – The Encyclopaedi a of New Zealand, updated 18 September 2007; and Margaret McClure, “Auckland”, Te Ara – The Encyclopaedi a of New Zealand, updated 8 May 2008 (both available at www.teara. govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
3. The population was 448,365 at the census of 1961. “Auckland City”, An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, see Te Ara – The Encyclopaedia of New Zealand.
4. “Population Leaps Ahead”, New Zealand Herald – Supplement, 2 June 1964, p. 2.
5. Figures calculated on the basis of data cited in “One in Ten Will be Polynesian”, New Zealand Herald – Supplement, 2 June 1964, p. 2.
6. Department of Statistics, Population Census 1961, Vol. 7: Race, Government Printer, Wellington, 1964.
7. Marae – tribal meeting house(s) and buildings.
8. “Auckland City” from An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, 1966, and Margaret McClure, “Auckland”, Te Ara – The Encyclopaedia of New Zealand.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. ”Population Leaps Ahead”, New Zealand Herald – Supplement, 2 June 1964.
12. Auckland Regional Council, Employment in the Auckland Region: Results from the 2006 Census of Population and Dwellings, 2006 Census Series, April 2008, p. 1 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
13. Statistics New Zealand, Auckland Region Quarterly Review, March 2008, p. 3.
14. Committee for Auckland, The Case for Auckland, August 2006, p. 37 (available at www.aucklandnz.org, accessed February 2009).
15. Figures provided by Auckland Regional Council, sourced from Statistics New Zealand and ARC, “Draft Regional Monitor: Land-use and Built Environment”.
16. McDermott, Philip, “Auckland’s Population”, in Royal Commission on Auckland Governance, Report, Volume 4: Research Papers, Auckland, 2009, pp. 39–66 (p. 45) (available at www.royalcommission.govt.nz).
17. Ibid., p. 45.
18. Ibid., p. 52.
19. Ministry of Social Development, The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, Ministry of Social Development, July 2008, p. 3 (available at www.royalcommission.govt.nz, “Research Papers”).
20. McDermott, Philip, “Auckland’s Population”, in Report, Volume 4: Research Papers, p. 58.
21. Auckland Regional Council, Business and Economy 2008: The Auckland Region, Auckland Regional Council, 2008, p. 2 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
22. Note that at the time of writing this report, economic conditions were undergoing significant change. This report has endeavoured to include the most up-to-date data wherever possible.
23. Ibid., pp. 3, 6; and Auckland Regional Council, Auckland Business and Economy Update 08, December 2008 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
24. Ministry of Economic Development, The Treasury, Statistics New Zealand, Economic Development Indicators 2007, Wellington, 2007, pp. 110–120 (available at www.med.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
25. Covec, “Drivers of Economic Growth in Auckland”, in Royal Commission on Auckland Governance, Report, Volume 4: Research Papers, Auckland, 2009, pp. 101–129 (p. 106).
26. Ibid., p. 118. Agglomeration is the process whereby businesses cluster together and benefit from economies of scale in terms of production, marketing, and sales, and access to infrastructure. Co-location of people, activities, and skills stimulates knowledge and idea transfers, prompting innovation. Concentrations of workers provide both a pool of labour and ready consumer markets. Such clusters usually occur in larger cities with strong financial markets, which provide the capital that businesses need to grow.
27. Maré David (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research), Labour Productivity in Auckland Firms, Ministry of Economic Development, Occasional Paper 08/09, Wellington, August 2008, p. 35.
28. Covec, “Drivers of Economic Growth in Auckland”, in Report, Volume 4: Research Papers, p. 105.
29. Ibid., p. 105.
30. Economic Development Indicators 2007, p. 61. This “long tail of underachievement” occurs in some of the fastest growing population groups and therefore potentially has significance in terms of the ability of these groups to contribute to/benefit from the knowledge economy.
31. Ibid., p. 118. The comparator cities are Vancouver, Brisbane, Adelaide, Copenhagen, Seattle, and Melbourne.
32. Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings 2008 (available at www.topuniversities.com, accessed February 2009).
33. Auckland Regional Council, Business and Economy 2008: The Auckland Region, p. 3, and Business and Economy Update 2008: The Auckland Region, p. 2.
34. Committee for Auckland, Growing Auckland, Growing New Zealand, November 2008, p. 20 (available at www.aucklandnz.org, accessed March 2009).
35. Economic Development Indicators 2007, p. 63.
36. Cited in Economic Development Indicators 2007, p. 62.37. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: New Zealand, September 2007 (available at www.oecd.org, accessed February 2009), cited in Covec, “Drivers of Economic Growth in Auckland”, in Report, Volume 4: Research Papers, pp. 124–125.
38. Economic Development Indicators 2007, pp. 112, 118. The comparator cities are Brisbane, Adelaide, Melbourne. No comparison is made for Seattle, Vancouver, and Copenhagen.
39. Ibid., p. 44.
40. A project to develop a New Zealand Innovation Centre was announced in 2008. Central government has pledged $25 million and Auckland City Council has earmarked $20 million worth of land for the innovation centre at the University of Auckland’s Tamaki Campus. The centre’s aim is to create a cluster of companies and support organisations that will foster growth of high-tech research and development companies. (See www.nzinnovationcentre.com.)
41. De Blaauw, N., Waite D., and Williamson J., Metropolitan Auckland Project: Background Paper, Ascari Partners, 2006, p. 20.
42. World Economic Forum, Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009, Geneva, 2008, p. 384 (available at gcr.weforum.org, accessed February 2009).
43. Ibid., New Zealand Country Profile, pp. 258–259.
44. Submission to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance from Auckland International Airport Ltd, p. 2. (All submissions are available at www.royalcommission.govt.nz.)
45. Submission to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance from Ports of Auckland Ltd, p. 2.
46. Ibid., p. 2.
47. American Association of Port Authorities, World Port Ranking 2007 (available at www.aapa-ports.org, accessed February 2009). The comparator cities are Vancouver, Brisbane, Adelaide, Copenhagen, Seattle, and Melbourne.
48. Auckland Regional Council, The People of the Auckland Region, Auckland Regional Council, 2006, p. 11.
49. Mees P., Sorupia E., and Stone J., Travel to Work in Australian Capital Cities 1976-2006: An analysis of census data 2007, University of Melbourne and the Australasian Centre for the Governance and Management of Urban Transport, pp. 4–5 (available at www.abp.unimelb.edu.au, accessed February 2009). The comparator cities in Australia are Brisbane, Adelaide, and Melbourne.
50. Auckland Regional Council, Auckland Regional Freight Strategy 2006: Summary Document, p. 3 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
51. Auckland Regional Council, Transit New Zealand, Congestion Indicator Report 2008. Measurement of average delay per kilometre involves surveys on a sample of Auckland’s strategic and regional arterial networks.
52. Auckland Regional Transport Authority, Annual Report 2008, p. 5.
53. Auckland Regional Council, Moving forward: Summary Document, 2005 Auckland Regional Land Transport Strategy, p. 4 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
54. Information provided by the Auckland Regional Land Transport Authority.
55. Committee for Auckland, The Case for Auckland, p. 29.
56. Cited in Auckland Regional Broadband Advisory, The Auckland Broadband Imperative: Enabling Transformation in the Auckland Region, A White Paper for Broadband in Auckland, Version 1.0, January 2008, p. 11 (available at www.aucklandplus.com, accessed February 2009). Mb/s (megabits per second) is a data transfer rate.
57. Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore, “Updates on Singapore’s 10 Year Infocomm Masterplan – Intelligent Nation 2015 (iN2015)” (Fact Sheet available at www.ida.gov.sg, accessed February 2009). 1 Gb/s (gigabits per second) = 1,000 Mb/s.
58. Economist Intelligence Unit, E-readiness rankings 2008: A white paper from the Economist Intelligence Unit, June 2008, p. 5 (available at www.eiu.com, accessed February 2009).
59. Economic Development Indicators 2007, p. 75. Comparator countries relate to the comparator cities used previously and are Canada, Australia, Denmark, United States.
60. Hon Steven Joyce, Minister for Communications and Information Technology, “Government readies for new moves on broadband”, media release, 5 February 2009 (available at www.beehive.govt.nz, accessed March 2009) and National Party “Policy 2008: Infrastructure – Broadband” (available at www.national.org.nz, accessed March 2009).
61. Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009, p. 390.
62. Skilling, David and Boven, Danielle, So far yet so close: Connecting New Zealand to the global economy, Discussion Paper 2007/1, New Zealand Institute, Auckland, March 2007, p. 37. The weightless economy is a term that describes economic activity that does not involve the transaction of a physical product. Examples of weightless activities include the creative industries, research-based activity, financial services, contact centres, and software.
63. Ministry of Economic Development, Auckland Regional Council, Urban Centres and Economic Performance: Auckland Stocktake, Auckland Sustainable Cities Programme, June 2006, p. 53 (available at www.sustainableauckland.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
64. Ibid., p. 53.
65. Committee for Auckland, The Case for Auckland, p. 4.
66. Capital Strategy Limited, Auckland: New Zealand’s First City of Global Significance, Key Themes, Summary Report to MED: Government and Urban Development Office for the Growth and Innovation Advisory Board, November 2005, p. 14.
67. Areas of higher deprivation are the 30% of areas within New Zealand that have deprivation scores between eight and 10 on the New Zealand Index of Deprivation 2006 (NZDep2006). Ministry of Social Development, The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 4.
68. Calculated by the Ministry of Social Development using data from NZDep2006.
69. December quarter figure calculated by the Ministry of Social Development.
70. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 13.
71. Auckland Regional Public Health Service, Service Delivery Plan 2007/2008 to 2009/2010, June 2007 (available at www.arphs.govt.nz, accessed February 2009), cited in The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 6.
72. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 7.
73. New Zealand’s 12 biggest cities are Rodney, North Shore, Waitakere, Auckland, Manukau, Hamilton, Tauranga, Porirua, Hutt, Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin. Quality of Life Project, Quality of Life ’07 in Twelve of New Zealand’s Cities, pp. 51–52 (available at www.qualityoflifeproject.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
74. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 9.
75. Ministry of Social Development, The Social Report 2008, Regional Indicators – Auckland, August 2008 (available at www.socialreport.msd.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
76. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 10.
77. The Social Report 2008, Regional Indicators – Auckland.
78. The Social Report 2008: Regional Indicators. For territorial authority data see the website www.socialreport.msd.govt.nz.
79. Department of Labour, Annual In-Depth Regional Report, Department of Labour, Auckland, 2007, cited in The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 10.
80. Statistics New Zealand, Household Labour Force Survey: September 2008 Quarter, Wellington, 2008 (available at www.stats.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
81. Territorial authority unemployment figures supplied by Statistics New Zealand.
82. Statistics New Zealand, Household Labour Force Survey: December 2008 Quarter, Wellington, 2008 (available at www.stats.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
83. Ministry of Social Development, “Benefit Factsheets”, Auckland Region, December 2008 and December 2007 (available at www.msd.govt.nz).
84. Hargreaves, B., Home Affordability Report, Massey University, Palmerston North, March 2008, cited in The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 14.
85. 5th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey: 2009, Ratings for Metropolitan Markets, data for 3rd quarter 2008 (available at www.demographia.com, accessed February 2009).
86. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 15.
87. DTZ New Zealand and New Zealand Institute of Economic Research, The Future of Home Ownership and the Role of the Private Rental Market in the Auckland Region, Centre for Housing Research Aotearoa New Zealand (CHRANZ), Wellington, March 2007, p. 54, cited in The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 15.
88. Ibid.
89. The measure of crowded housing is those requiring one or more additional bedrooms as defined by the Canadian National Occupancy Standard. Ministry of Social Development, The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 16.
90. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 16.
91. Auckland Regional Council, Auckland Business and Economy Update 08, p. 3.
92. “Mortgagee index at record high”, index compiled from mortgagee sales listed on TradeMe and realestate.co.nz, posted 8 September 2008 (available at www.interest.co.nz, accessed February 2009).
93. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 17.
94. Ibid., p. 17.
95. The Social Report 2008, Regional Indicators – Auckland, p. 19.
96. The Social Landscape in Auckland Region, p. 19.
97. The Social Report 2008, Regional Indicators – Regional Councils, pp. 28–29.
98. The Social Report 2008, pp. 110–121.
99. The Social Report 2008, Regional Indicators – Regional Councils, p. 16.
100. The OECD measure of low income is 50% of the median equivalent disposable household income. The Social Report 2008, pp. 62–63.
101. Ibid., p. 63. The proportion of New Zealand’s population on low incomes had risen to 12% by 2007.
102. Auckland Regional Council, State of the Auckland Region Report 2004 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009). This section of Chapter 2, “Auckland Now”, also includes updated data received from Auckland Regional Council.
103. Ministry for the Environment, Climate Change Effects and Impacts Assessment: A Guidance Manual for Local Government in New Zealand, 2nd edn, May 2008, p. xii (available at www.mfe.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
104. Ibid., p. xi.
105. State of the Auckland Region Report 2004, p. 52.
106. Ibid., p. 59.
107. Auckland Regional Council, “Update on Health Effects from Motor Vehicle Emissions to Air”, Report to the Regional Land Transport Committee, September 2007.
108. Pollutants monitored include fine particles (PM10 and PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Auckland Regional Council, “State of the Region’s Air Quality”, AirFacts, 4, Auckland Regional Council, July 2007 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
109. Auckland Regional Council, “State of the Region’s Air Quality”, AirFacts, 4, and “Vehicles, Air Quality and Climate Change”, AirFacts, 15, November 2007.
110. State of the Auckland Region Report 2004, p. 78.
111. Ibid., p. 79.
112. Ibid.
113. Quality of Life Project, Quality of Life ’07 in Twelve of New Zealand’s Cities, 2007, p. 220. The cities in the Auckland region included in the Quality of Life report are Rodney, North Shore, Waitakere, Auckland, and Manukau. “Green space” includes sports areas, parks and gardens (including passive recreational spaces, historic reserves, and scenic reserves), riverside/lakeside/beachside walks, and other similar areas.
114. The Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004, among other things, requires local authorities to amend land transport and land use provisions in their planning documents to give effect, in an integrated manner, to the growth concept in the Auckland Regional Growth Strategy. One of the key features of the growth concept is that growth is to be managed by promoting quality, compact urban environments (intensification). See Regional Growth Forum, Auckland Regional Growth Strategy: 2050, 1999, p. 2, and Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004, sections 3(b), 40(1), and Schedule 5.
115. State of the Auckland Region Report 2004, p. 91.
116. Ibid., p. 92.
117. Ibid., p. 94.
118. Auckland Regional Council, The Big Clean Update, Edn 12, Auckland Regional Council Newsletter, June 2006, p. 1 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
119. Hauraki Gulf Forum, Tikapa Moana – Hauraki Gulf State of the Environment Report, Auckland Regional Council, June 2008, p. i (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
120. Scarsbrook, M., River Water Quality: State and Trends in the Auckland Region, Technical Publication No 336, Auckland Regional Council 2007, p. 1 (available at www.arc.govt.nz, accessed February 2009).
121. State of the Auckland Region Report 2004, pp. 109–119.
122. Ibid., pp. 116–117.
123. Wāhi tapu – sacred place, location with spiritual meaning.
124. Urupā – burial ground, cemetery.
125. See www.arc.govt.nz, “Cultural Heritage Inventory”.
126. State of the Auckland Region Report 2004, p. 86.
127. See www.waitakere.govt.nz.
128. Auckland Regional Growth Forum, Auckland Sustainability Framework, September 2007, p. 5 (available at www.sustainingauckland.org.nz, accessed February 2009).
| Home | Help | Disclaimer & Copyright | Contact us | newzealand.govt.nz |