BERL Regional Rankings 2011

Jason Leung-Wai Kelly Dustow Wilma Molano

BERL #5214

March 2012 BERL Regional Rankings 2011

1 Summary...... 2

2 Introduction ...... 3

3 The Economic Context ...... 5 3.1 International ...... 5 3.2 National ...... 5

4 Local Authorities ...... 7 4.1 The top ten ...... 8 4.2 The bottom five ...... 12 4.3 Biggest gains ...... 14 4.4 Largest declines ...... 14 4.5 Short term indicator graphs – Local Authorities...... 15 4.6 Medium term indicator graphs – Local Authorities ...... 19 4.7 Relative Openness Index graph– Local Authorities ...... 23

5 Regional Councils ...... 24 5.1 Short term indicator graphs – Regions ...... 28 5.2 Medium term indicator graphs – Regions...... 30 5.3 Relative Openness Index graph - Regions...... 32

6 Cities ...... 33 6.1 Short term indicator graphs – Cities ...... 37 6.2 Medium term indicator graphs – Cities ...... 39 6.3 Relative Openness Index graph – Cities ...... 41

7 Appendix - Economic Indicators – what are they? ...... 42

Tables

Table 3.1. New Zealand KPIs ...... 6 Table 4.1. Local authority rankings ...... 7 Table 4.2. Local authorities with the largest gains ...... 14 Table 4.3. Local authorities with the largest falls ...... 14 Table 5.1. Regional rankings ...... 24 Table 6.1. City rankings ...... 33

1 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

1 Summary

It is our belief at BERL that “regions matter”. And that regional development is absolutely necessary to encourage economic growth at a national level.

An effective, efficient national economy needs strong local economies as part of a system that contributes to the final output of New Zealand Inc. Auckland cannot survive without the support and resources generated from the rest of the country. Urban areas cannot be as effective, without the rural areas generating the primary resources that are converted into products. Cities exist and form to facilitate activity and services. Transport and communications infrastructure link them all together.

Each local economy has different focuses, endowments and areas of specialisation, contributing to growth in their own way. But each also provides the environment and the infrastructure that supports populations and allows them to engage in business activity and prosper.

Changes in technology and the global economy have actually increased the importance of regions, and local activity. The ability for activity to be undertaken anywhere; the mobility of the workforce; and the localisation of innovation has put even further value on the importance of place.

To understand the national economy we must understand the building blocks that support it. That is, we must understand and support the local economies that make-up the national economy.

And to provide effective economic development support to local economies we need to be able to measure their activity. This is crucial if we are to identify benchmarks and to set an aspirational target. As the saying goes, “you cannot manage what you cannot measure”.

As such, this analysis provides government, local government and private businesses with a high-level overview on economic performance at a sub-national level. The analysis compares performance at three sub-national aggregations:

 local authority  regional council  city.

The rankings are based on indicators of economic activity – population, employment, value added (GDP) and businesses. The rankings also incorporate the level of activity in the productive (export focused) sectors of the economy.

Our ranking methodology has changed this year in that we look at both the short and medium term change in these indicators. This provides more consistency in year to year rankings and encourages a longer term focus on development and investment.

It is important to note that this is a ranking report. It is based on the change in activity in an area relative to changes in other areas. It is therefore looking at rate of change rather than the actual quantum of activity.

2 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

2 Introduction

Economic growth is important for all New Zealanders. Economic growth provides more jobs, more money, and an opportunity for an improved lifestyle. Understanding what causes economic growth and where this growth is coming from within New Zealand is especially important to maintain and increase our current standard of living.

The BERL economic indicator ranking provides a comprehensive measure of the economic performance of New Zealand’s 66 local authorities, 14 regions and 20 cities.

The overall ranking provides government, industry and the public with an understanding of the relative performance of New Zealand’s districts, cities and regions, and provides important information which:

 local authorities and regions can use to monitor their performance relative to their peers, and identify areas where they can improve their performance.  businesses can use to identify areas of growth and decline.  governments can use to inform national economic policies, and identify where activity is occurring.

The performance of each local authority, region or city is based on the change in key economic indicators over the last year (short term) and over the last five years (medium term).

Short and medium term performance of the area is taken into account to reflect changes in the area’s performance that are more permanent in nature rather than solely reflecting shifts that may be one-off shocks or corrections. The Relative Openness Index provides a long term measure of the export sectors of the economy, and openness to trade.

Indicators are taken from the BERL Regional Database. This database contains several trend indicators at a local authority level broken down by industry sector. It is built from publicly available data including the New Zealand Business Demography statistics, Household Labour Force Survey, National Accounts, and sub-national Population Estimates. It forms the basis of much of the regional economic development work we do and is used by a number of councils and economic development organisations in New Zealand to identify economic activity and performance in their regions.

The key performance indicators that make up the regional rankings are: population, employment, GDP and business units (which are calculated in the short and medium term) and the Relative Openness Index, which provides a longer term measure of the gearing of the regional economy towards export focused sectors. The relative performance across all of these nine indicators determines the ranking for each area. There is also no weighting system applied to the economic indicators used in this report, i.e. employment growth in the short term has the same significance as employment growth over the medium term. However, for the overall ranking, scores for each measure are weighted and then summed.

The big change from last year is Auckland, which is now an amalgam of the seven local authorities that used to make up the Auckland region. This has reduced the number of local authorities being ranked to 66. As such, comparisons with last year don’t necessarily match up. The other change is looking at regional and city rankings, which provide a further set of benchmarking tools for local authorities.

3 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

This report is organised into seven chapters. Chapter 3 provides some context on the national and international economy. The next three chapters then look at the three area breakdowns – Local Authority, Regional Council, and City.

Again we stress that this report provides a high-level analysis showing how local authorities, regions and cities compare relative to each other. For effective interventions and targeted regional economic development activity a much more detailed level of analysis is required that looks at the absolute values and quantum of change rather than comparative differences between councils. That is, more detailed information should be obtained and assessed to inform, identify and support regional economic development activity.

Further, this is purely a desk-based exercise. Where possible we have tried to verify the numbers where they look questionable and have related changes to activities that we are aware of as part of our general knowledge and understanding of regions. However, we have not verified all activity or gone out of our way to identify why the changes have occurred.

4 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

3 The Economic Context

While the rankings report compares the relative performance of districts, it is useful to put the performance within the context of the global and national economy. In general there has been a significant slowdown in economic activity since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008. New Zealand dipped into recession in 2009 and appeared to have recovered by 2011. However, signs of a recovery are fading and there is every chance of a further decline in activity going forward.

3.1 International

Global growth and trade has slowed over the past year, with high uncertainty and volatility in international markets. The GFC, escalated by Europe’s sovereign debt problem, continues to send jitters throughout the world with the outcome uncertain. This uncertainty has affected investment decisions and markets resulting in lower global growth forecasts. The IMF has lowered global growth forecasts to around 3.3 percent in 2012, with global growth increasing to 3.9 percent in 2013.

However, while slowing, Asian markets are still expected to grow strongly in 2012. China is expected to grow at around 8.2 percent and India at 7.0 percent. Developing Asia is expected to grow at around 7.3 percent. Growth is expected to accelerate even further in 2013.

The changing focus of New Zealand markets towards Asia means that we will avoid a lot of the pain out of Europe and that export demand is likely to continue. Similarly, the continuing trend for food and energy will support New Zealand’s key export sectors.

3.2 National

The national economy continues to be influenced by the global economy, particularly the uncertainty around Europe. The recent GFC has resulted in increased caution in relation to investment and spending. Government has pulled back its spending, with major cuts to the public sector. New Zealanders are holding back on the big ticket items, and being much more careful in how they are spending. This has all resulted in a subdued domestic market with the expected recovery being pushed back until certainty returns.

On the flip side, exports continue to grow, with higher commodity prices for our main products. Dairy, wood, meat and oil are all generating excellent returns. Demand from our key markets, particularly in Asia and Australia, remain high. However, exports have been dampened somewhat by the high New Zealand dollar.

Ultimately, New Zealand’s performance shows signs of an economy that is trying to regain ground after a global recession. Key economic indicators in 2011 are all above their five-year average. However, population growth, business units growth and business size growth are lower in 2011, than the five-year average.

5 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Table 3.1. New Zealand KPIs

%pa Key Performance Indicators 2011 2006-2011

Resident population grow th 0.9 1.0 GDP grow th 1.6 0.6 GDP per capita grow th 0.7 -0.4

Employment grow th 1.6 0.7 Labour productivity grow th 0.0 -0.1

Business units grow th -0.6 0.5 Business size grow th 2.2 0.2 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Employment growth for the year ending March 2011 was 1.6 percent compared to the medium term average of 0.7 percent. Unemployment is currently sitting around 6.3 percent (December 2011 quarter). In March 2011, where this data relates to, the unemployment rate was higher at 6.6 percent.

GDP growth was 1.6 percent for the year ending March 2011. However, over the medium term, there has been much slower growth, at 0.6 percent per annum.

Population growth has been slower in 2011, increasing by 0.9 percent last year compared to 1.0 percent per annum over the last five years. Emigration is continuing at record levels, with many skilled New Zealanders moving to Australia in particular. In the 2011 calendar year, there were 48,829 people departing New Zealand for Australia, the highest level since 1979.

The rankings reflect the ability of districts, regions and cities, to operate within the national and international environment. And it is apparent from the results that some have operated better than others in the trying environment of the last five years.

6 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4 Local Authorities

At the most disaggregated level we have 66 local authorities. Each of these is tasked with encouraging the four wellbeings of their community – economic social, cultural and environmental. We do note that there is a huge variation in the size, scale and activity of local authorities, which can have an impact on what they can do but also on their economic performance.

Table 4.1. Local authority rankings

RANK RANK BERL Regional Rankings 2011 2010 2011 2010 Buller 1 5 ↑4 Hauraki 34 41 ↑7

Queenstow n-Lakes 2 2 → Napier City 35 54 ↑19

Waimakariri 3 4 ↑1 Invercargill City 36 38 ↑2

Selw yn 4 1 ↓3 Rotorua 37 57 ↑20 Waikato 5 42 ↑37 Whangarei 38 44 ↑6

Western Bay of Plenty 6 14 ↑8 South Taranaki 39 47 ↑8

Central Otago 7 8 ↑1 Kaipara 40 53 ↑13

Tauranga City 8 33 ↑25 Otorohanga 41 16 ↓25

Ashburton 9 7 ↓2 Dunedin City 42 48 ↑6

Hurunui 10 10 → Kapiti Coast 43 30 ↓13

Tasman 11 21 ↑10 Marlborough 44 49 ↑5 New Plymouth 12 3 ↓9 Gore 45 26 ↓19

Waipa 13 13 → Far North 46 61 ↑15

Auckland 14 35 ↑21 Thames-Coromandel 47 64 ↑17

Mackenzie 15 6 ↓9 Palmerston North City 48 18 ↓30

Carterton 16 9 ↓7 Upper Hutt City 49 45 ↓4

Southland 17 27 ↑10 South Wairarapa 50 36 ↓14 Taupo 18 19 ↑1 Gisborne 51 12 ↓39

Nelson City 19 29 ↑10 Low er Hutt City 52 58 ↑6

Hamilton City 20 34 ↑14 Grey 53 17 ↓36

Waimate 21 55 ↑34 Waitomo 54 50 ↓4

Timaru 22 28 ↑6 South Waikato 55 52 ↓3

Porirua City 23 22 ↓1 Horow henua 56 65 ↑9

Westland 24 40 ↑16 Christchurch City 57 37 ↓20 Whakatane 25 56 ↑31 Masterton 58 32 ↓26

Waitaki 26 20 ↓6 Central Haw ke's Bay 59 25 ↓34

Clutha 27 39 ↑12 Whanganui 60 46 ↓14

Opotiki 28 60 ↑32 Kaw erau 61 63 ↑2

Manaw atu 29 15 ↓14 Wairoa 62 23 ↓39

Hastings 30 31 ↑1 Stratford 63 62 ↓1

Wellington City 31 11 ↓20 Tararua 64 59 ↓5

Kaikoura 32 24 ↓8 Rangitikei 65 51 ↓14

Matamata-Piako 33 43 ↑10 Ruapehu 66 66 → source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Of interest, seven of the top ten local authorities are based in the South Island, including the top four. Of the three North Island local authorities, two were from the Bay of Plenty region. Only one city was represented in the top ten.

7 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Of the bottom five performances, all were based around the Central North Island. They were all rural based, with small, declining populations.

This section reviews the ranking performance of the ten highest ranked and the five lowest ranked local authorities. It also identifies local authorities that have made significant movements in this year’s rankings.

4.1 The top ten

Three new entrants - Waikato district, Western Bay of Plenty district, and Tauranga City made their way into the top ten in 2011. Making way for these three were New Plymouth, Mackenzie and Carterton districts. We also have a new number one in 2011, with last year’s top dog, Selwyn, dropping down to 4th.

Buller. Congratulations to Buller district. Employment Despite a trying couple of years on the 160 West Coast with the Pike River disaster, 150 1 140 the Buller district has some good news as the 130 best performing local authority in 2011. 120 110 Buller district topped four of the nine ranking 100 Index2000=100 90 indicators. It had the highest employment and 80 business unit growth in 2011; and the best 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Buller Total NZ employment and GDP growth over the past five Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand years of all districts.

Buller is up four places in the rankings from last year, mainly due to improved employment and population growth in 2011. Over the past year, the district’s employment growth has improved from 6th to 1st, while its population ranking improved from 61st to 28th place.

The mining sector continues to drive economic activity. The void created by Pike River has been quickly filled by expansion in other mines. Looking forward, the consenting for Bathurst mines has progressed, and a major growth period is looming for the district. We expect Buller to go from strength to strength over the next few years as increasing demand for mineral resources continues.

Queenstown Lakes. The Queenstown Resident Population Lakes district is a perennial performer in 170 160 2 the BERL regional rankings. It has 150 retained 2nd place for the second year in a row 140 130 and has been in the top five for the last five 120 110 years.

100 Index2000=100 90 As usual, Queenstown Lakes’ performance has 80 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 been driven by population growth, which flows Queenstown Lakes Total NZ through into the other indicators. Queenstown Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand Lakes ranks 1st in medium term population growth and medium term business units growth. In 2011, it ranked second in population and third in business unit growth.

8 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

The recession has hurt Queenstown Lakes, particularly the property market and the related construction industry. As a result, Queenstown Lakes ranked poorly in employment (31st) and GDP (56th). Despite this, longer term growth in both of these indicators has kept Queenstown Lakes in the top two.

Waimakariri. The Waimakariri district moved up 180 GDP one spot to secure a podium finish in 2011. 170 160 Building on strong GDP growth in 2010, a further 150 3 140 11 percent surge in 2011 saw Waimakariri top the GDP 130 120 rankings for 2011. 110

Index2000=100 100 90 Waimakariri has also seen improvements in its 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 th Waimakariri Total NZ population growth over the past year, improving from 7 Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand to 4th place.

Waimakariri has been a strong performer over the medium term, ranking in the top ten in each of the four indicators. Over the medium term, Waimakariri is ranked 2nd in GDP, 3rd in population growth, 8th in employment growth and 9th in business unit growth.

Selwyn. Last year’s best performing local Resident Population authority, Selwyn district has fallen out of the 150 medals to fourth in 2011. Out of all the districts, 140 4 130 Selwyn had the highest population growth in 2011. 120 110 100

Selwyn has had the highest population growth for the last Index2000=100 90 two years. However, a decline in employment, GDP and 80 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 business unit growth in 2011 has resulted in a fall in the Selwyn Total NZ rankings. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

In 2011, Selwyn’s employment ranking dropped from 5th place to 40th, while GDP ranking dropped from fourth place to 24th.

Over the medium term, however, Selwyn has performed strongly, with all four indicators ranking in the top 10. Overt the medium term, Selwyn ranked 2nd in population, 5th in GDP, 6th in employment, and 10th in business units.

Waikato. The Waikato district was the biggest Employment improver amongst the top ten districts, moving 140 from 42nd in 2010 to 5th in 2011. The district had 130 5 120 strong GDP and employment growth of 9.0 percent and 110 nd 6.8 percent respectively over the past year, ranking 2 100

on both indicators. Index2000=100 90 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 This growth has come from a 65 percent increase in Waikato Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand employment in electricity supply and a 9.5 percent increase in manufacturing, which in turn was driven by growth in wood product manufacturing.

9 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Supporting the rapid growth in employment and GDP, the Waikato district has enjoyed solid population growth over the medium term, ranking 8th. As well, Waikato has performed well over the medium term in employment (12th) and GDP (13th).

Western Bay of Plenty. The Western Bay of Employment Plenty has moved up eight places from last year 150 140 to rank just outside the top five. The district’s 6 130 performance was supported by improvements in 120 employment and GDP rankings, where it came in 7th and 110 100 th

4 respectively. The Western Bay of Plenty also had the Index2000=100 90 9th fastest growing population in 2011. 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Western Bay of Plenty Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand Western Bay of Plenty is a solid performer, with strong medium term rankings in population, employment and GDP, where it ranks in the top 10 for each. In particular, the Western Bay of Plenty ranked 2nd for employment growth over the last five years.

The indicator that stops the Western Bay of Plenty from ranking higher is business unit growth, where it ranked 57th in 2011 and 32nd over the medium term.

Central Otago. The Central Otago district moved 170 GDP th up one spot to 7 place in 2011. 160 150 140 7 th In 2011, Central Otago had the 4 fastest growth 130 120 th in business units, and the 6 fastest growth in 110 100 employment. However, its population ranking dropped Index2000=100 90 to 17th (from 9th), and it was a bad year for GDP where it 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 ranked 60th (a large drop from 15th in 2010). Central Otago Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

However, like many others in the top ten, Central Otago has performed strongly over the last five years, with three rankings in the top ten.

Over the last five years, Central Otago has had the 2nd fastest growth in business units, the 5th fastest growth in employment and the 7th fastest population growth.

10 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Tauranga. Tauranga is the only city in the top 150 GDP ten and it has achieved this with a stellar 140 improvement from its 33rd rank in 2010. 130 8 120 110 While population growth has eased, with Tauranga City 100 only the 25th fastest in 2011, the city’s economy was Index2000=100 90 rd 80 humming. Tauranga City ranked 3 in both employment 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 th Tauranga City Total NZ and GDP growth, and 6 in business units growth. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

Tauranga City’s rapid population growth is reflected in its medium term ranking, where it has had the 6th fastest growing population over the last five years. As well it has had the 14th fastest employment growth and the 17th fastest GDP growth.

Ashburton. The Ashburton district dropped two Employment places in 2011. Over 2011, an improved ranking in 140 130 population (up 23 spots to 3rd) was offset by drops 9 120 in employment and GDP. Rankings for employment and 110 GDP were down 28 and 34 spots respectively, with 100 th th

Ashburton ranking 48 in employment and 54 in GDP in Index2000=100 90 2011. 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Ashburton Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand What has kept Ashburton amongst the top ten local authorities is its medium term rankings, where it has had solid growth over the last five years. In particular, Ashburton ranks 13th in employment and 9th in population growth. It has had the 8th fastest increase in business units over the last five years.

Hurunui. The Hurunui district has Employment remained in 10th place for the second year 150 140 in a row. The result is a combination of a 10 130 strong population rank in 2011, and good medium term 120 rankings for GDP and business unit growth. 110 100

Index2000=100 90 th Hurunui’s highest rank in 2011 was 5 for population. It 80 ranked 25th for employment and 28th for business unit 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Hurunui Total NZ growth. Its GDP growth was in the bottom half at 42nd. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

Solid medium term rankings were retained for GDP (7th) and business units (8th). Hurunui district also ranked well on the Relative Openness Index (5th).

11 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4.2 The bottom five

Unfortunately with any rankings exercise, there are those that are at the top and those that are at the bottom. For this report we want to focus on the positives, and so we have only included the bottom five rather than ten!!

Most of the local authorities in the bottom five had negligible or negative population growth for 2011. These districts were also predominantly rural and had small populations to start with. Interestingly, all of the bottom five are located around the Central North Island.

Ruapehu. New Zealand’s poorest Resident Population performing economy for 2011 is the 120 66 Ruapehu district. This is the second year 110 running that Ruapehu has been in last place. 100

90 Over 2011, Ruapehu struggled to retain population and Index2000=100 employment. It had the second lowest ranking for 80 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 population and the lowest ranking for employment. In Ruapehu Total NZ 2011, employment in Ruapehu declined by 8.9 percent. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

Ruapehu’s medium term performance is also low. The district had the lowest population and business unit growth over the past five years. It ranked in the bottom five for employment and GDP growth. Ruapehu’s highest ranking is 45th on the openness index.

Rangitikei. The Rangitikei district is the Employment second lowest ranked local authority in 130 65 2011. Apart from the openness index, 120 th where Rangitikei ranked 7 , and medium term 110 nd business unit growth (52 ) all short and medium term 100

indicators ranked in the bottom six. 90 Index2000=100

80 The Rangitikei district had the second lowest ranking 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Rangitikei Total NZ th for employment and GDP in 2011. It ranked 60 in Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand population and 62nd in business unit growth.

Medium term indicators were not much better. Population and employment over the last five years ranked 62nd, while GDP ranked 63rd.

Tararua. The Tararua district struggled to 130 GDP retain population in 2011, ranking 59th. It 120 also performed poorly across all other 64 110 indicators. 100

On a positive note, the 2011 rankings appear higher Index2000=100 90 than the medium term rankings, which suggest that there 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Tararua Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

12 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012 are potentially positive times ahead. Apart from its 20th ranking on the openness index, its next best ranking was 50th for GDP growth in 2011.

Stratford. The Stratford district had the lowest ranking for GDP, and also ranked poorly in 63 employment (63rd). Stratford’s best ranking was for business units, where it ranked 36th. Over the medium term, growth has been in the bottom half of the rankings across all indicators. Employment growth has been Stratford’s best indicator, with a ranking of 38.

Wairoa. Wairoa district has the fourth slowest population growth of all local authorities. It also ranked poorly for GDP at 61st. Wairoa has had a big turnaround from 2010. In 2010, Wairoa ranked 62 2nd for business units and 8th for employment growth. In 2011, its ranking had fallen to 48th and 51st respectively.

Over the last five years, Wairoa has had the second worst population performance, just ahead of Ruapehu district.

13 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4.3 Biggest gains

Table 4.2. Local authorities with the largest gains This section looks at the ten local Local Authority 2011 rank 2010 rank change authorities with the largest climb in terms Waikato 5 42 37 of their ranked economic performance Waimate 21 55 34 from 2010 to 2011. Ōpōtiki 28 60 32 Whakatāne 25 56 31 Table 4.2 shows that the Waikato district Tauranga City 8 33 25 14 35 21 had the largest spot climb during 2011, Auckland City Rotorua 37 57 20 climbing 37 spots to secure a spot in the Napier City 35 54 19 top ten. Thames-Coromandel 47 64 17 Westland 24 40 16 Waimate district had the second highest source: BERL Regional Database 2011 climb; rising 34 spots from 55th place to 21st. It was followed by Ōpōtiki, which climbed 32 spots to 28th, and then Whakatāne, which climbed 31 spots to 25th. Tauranga City also had an impressive climb, climbing 25 spots to a position in the top ten local authorities in 2011.

Interestingly, four of the biggest improvers, - Ōpōtiki, Whakatāne, Tauranga, and Rotorua, are all from the Bay of Plenty region. This flows through into the regional council rankings in the next chapter.

4.4 Largest declines

The local authorities with the largest Table 4.3. Local authorities with the largest falls declines fell between 19 and 39 spots. Local Authority 2011 rank 2010 rank change Leading the declines were Gisborne and Gisborne 51 12 -39 Wairoa, situated next to each other on the East Wairoa 62 23 -39 Grey 53 17 -36 Coast of the North Island, and both falling 39 Central Haw ke's Bay 59 25 -34 spots. Palmerston North City 48 18 -30 Masterton 58 32 -26 Three cities are on the list of the top ten largest Otorohanga 41 16 -25 Wellington City 31 11 -20 declines – Palmerston North, Wellington and Christchurch City 57 37 -20 Christchurch. While there were no distinct Gore 45 26 -19 issues to point at in the decline in Palmerston source: BERL Regional Database, 2011 North, Wellington struggled with a fall in employment and GDP, largely from the cleanout of the public service, where there was close to 800 job losses in Defence alone. Understandably, Christchurch ranked last in population growth in 2011.

On the West Coast, the decline in Grey district is offset by the growth in Buller. Central Hawke’s Bay, Masterton, Otorohonga and Gore rounded out the ten largest ranking falls.

14 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4.5 Short term indicator graphs – Local Authorities

Resident population growth

-3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Selwyn District Queenstown-Lakes District Ashburton District Waimakariri District Rodney District Hurunui District Tasman District Auckland Kaikoura District Western Bay of Plenty District Hamilton City Nelson City Carterton District Waikato District Wellington City Porirua City Invercargill City Central Otago District Waimate District Kaipara District Manawatu District Buller District Mackenzie District Palmerston North City Upper Hutt City Tauranga City South Wairarapa District Dunedin City Timaru District Westland District Waipa District New Zealand New Plymouth District Kapiti Coast District Marlborough District Matamata-Piako District Whangarei District Clutha District Hauraki District Hastings District Waitaki District Rotorua District Masterton District Grey District Napier City Southland District Otorohanga District Taupo District Lower Hutt City Whakatane District Gisborne District Far North District Stratford District Gore District Central Hawke's Bay District South Taranaki District Thames-Coromandel District Horowhenua District Wanganui District Waitomo District Tararua District Rangitikei District South Waikato District Opotiki District Kawerau District Wairoa District Ruapehu District Christchurch City

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

15 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Employment (FTE) growth

-10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 Buller District Waikato District Tauranga City Rotorua District Tasman District Central Otago District Western Bay of Plenty District Whakatane District Opotiki District Nelson City Waipa District Waitaki District Auckland South Taranaki District Horowhenua District Taupo District Whangarei District Hamilton City Hauraki District Matamata-Piako District Clutha District Southland District Kapiti Coast District Mackenzie District Rodney District Hurunui District South Wairarapa District New Zealand Upper Hutt City New Plymouth District South Waikato District Waimakariri District Queenstown-Lakes District Kaipara District Carterton District Invercargill City Waimate District Dunedin City Hastings District Timaru District Waitomo District Selwyn District Central Hawke's Bay District Wellington City Christchurch City Grey District Porirua City Westland District Manawatu District Ashburton District Masterton District Lower Hutt City Wairoa District Napier City Thames-Coromandel District Gisborne District Tararua District Wanganui District Gore District Palmerston North City Marlborough District Kawerau District Kaikoura District Far North District Stratford District Otorohanga District Rangitikei District Ruapehu District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

16 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Real Value Added growth (GDP)

-15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 Waimakariri District Waikato District Tauranga City Western Bay of Plenty District Rodney District Hamilton City Buller District Mackenzie District Horowhenua District Tasman District Southland District Taupo District Nelson City Porirua City Rotorua District Waipa District Whakatane District Westland District Auckland Dunedin City Thames-Coromandel District Waimate District Lower Hutt City Far North District Selwyn District Invercargill City New Plymouth District New Zealand Matamata-Piako District Christchurch City Hastings District Upper Hutt City Whangarei District Kaikoura District Napier City Manawatu District Clutha District South Waikato District Timaru District Hauraki District Otorohanga District Gisborne District Palmerston North City Hurunui District Waitaki District Wellington City Central Hawke's Bay District Marlborough District South Taranaki District Kawerau District Grey District Tararua District Waitomo District Masterton District Kaipara District Ashburton District Wanganui District Queenstown-Lakes District South Wairarapa District Carterton District Opotiki District Central Otago District Wairoa District Gore District Ruapehu District Kapiti Coast District Rangitikei District Stratford District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

17 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Business units growth

-4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Buller District Carterton District Queenstown-Lakes District Central Otago District Auckland Tauranga City Ashburton District Porirua City Nelson City Taupo District Hamilton City Napier City Kaikoura District Waimate District Thames-Coromandel District Opotiki District New Plymouth District New Zealand Wellington City Lower Hutt City Rodney District Timaru District Upper Hutt City Selwyn District South Taranaki District Palmerston North City Central Hawke's Bay District Kapiti Coast District Manawatu District Hurunui District Hastings District Waipa District Westland District Waitaki District Southland District Waimakariri District Waitomo District Stratford District Tasman District Mackenzie District Waikato District Christchurch City Invercargill City Gore District South Waikato District Clutha District Wanganui District Otorohanga District Masterton District Wairoa District Far North District Dunedin City Grey District Whakatane District Rotorua District South Wairarapa District Whangarei District Marlborough District Western Bay of Plenty District Gisborne District Ruapehu District Horowhenua District Hauraki District Rangitikei District Matamata-Piako District Tararua District Kaipara District Kawerau District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

18 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4.6 Medium term indicator graphs – Local Authorities

Resident population growth, 2006-2011

-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Queenstown-Lakes District Selwyn District Rodney District Waimakariri District Auckland Hamilton City Tauranga City Central Otago District Waikato District Ashburton District Western Bay of Plenty District Wellington City Waipa District Carterton District New Zealand Whangarei District Hurunui District Tasman District Kapiti Coast District Marlborough District Palmerston North City Upper Hutt City Nelson City Porirua City Westland District Mackenzie District New Plymouth District Kaikoura District Manawatu District South Wairarapa District Waimate District Kaipara District Hastings District Dunedin City Invercargill City Grey District Matamata-Piako District Hauraki District Taupo District Timaru District Clutha District Central Hawke's Bay District Napier City Far North District Lower Hutt City Christchurch City Buller District Gisborne District Southland District Masterton District Rotorua District Thames-Coromandel District Waitaki District Stratford District Otorohanga District Whakatane District Horowhenua District Waitomo District Wanganui District Gore District South Taranaki District South Waikato District Tararua District Rangitikei District Opotiki District Kawerau District Wairoa District Ruapehu District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

19 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Employment (FTE) growth, 2006-2011

-4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Buller District Western Bay of Plenty District Hauraki District Opotiki District Central Otago District Selwyn District Waipa District Waimakariri District Whakatane District Carterton District New Plymouth District Waikato District Ashburton District Tauranga City Waitaki District Hurunui District Mackenzie District Matamata-Piako District Queenstown-Lakes District Southland District Grey District Kapiti Coast District Manawatu District Timaru District Whangarei District Porirua City Nelson City Invercargill City Waimate District Wellington City Clutha District Auckland Hastings District New Zealand Kaipara District Tasman District Kaikoura District Rodney District Upper Hutt City Stratford District Gore District Hamilton City Otorohanga District South Taranaki District Masterton District Palmerston North City Napier City Westland District Marlborough District Taupo District Wanganui District Wairoa District Waitomo District Rotorua District Christchurch City Lower Hutt City Dunedin City Far North District Gisborne District South Wairarapa District South Waikato District Thames-Coromandel District Horowhenua District Rangitikei District Ruapehu District Kawerau District Central Hawke's Bay District Tararua District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

20 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Real Value Added growth (GDP), 2006-2011

-6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 Buller District Waimakariri District Mackenzie District New Plymouth District Selwyn District Opotiki District Hurunui District Western Bay of Plenty District Otorohanga District Taupo District Southland District Hauraki District Waikato District Whakatane District Waipa District Central Otago District Tauranga City Queenstown-Lakes District Tasman District Wellington City Waitaki District Ashburton District Timaru District Westland District Palmerston North City Waimate District Matamata-Piako District Auckland Hastings District Porirua City Napier City Clutha District New Zealand Manawatu District Kawerau District Nelson City Whangarei District Far North District Hamilton City Rotorua District Christchurch City Gore District Dunedin City Stratford District Invercargill City Kaipara District Gisborne District Waitomo District Wanganui District Grey District Rodney District Wairoa District Lower Hutt City Kaikoura District Masterton District Marlborough District Thames-Coromandel District Horowhenua District South Waikato District Carterton District Kapiti Coast District South Taranaki District Tararua District Ruapehu District Rangitikei District Upper Hutt City South Wairarapa District Central Hawke's Bay District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

21 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Business units growth, 2006-2011

-3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Queenstown-Lakes District Central Otago District Carterton District New Plymouth District Ashburton District Porirua City Nelson City Hurunui District Waimakariri District Selwyn District Mackenzie District Waipa District Timaru District Napier City Auckland Rodney District Hamilton City Gore District Wellington City Kapiti Coast District Buller District Upper Hutt City Invercargill City Taupo District Tauranga City Tasman District New Zealand Christchurch City Lower Hutt City South Wairarapa District Marlborough District Dunedin City Waikato District Western Bay of Plenty District Hastings District Gisborne District Wanganui District Kawerau District Manawatu District Masterton District Waitaki District Westland District Thames-Coromandel District Palmerston North City Southland District Whangarei District South Taranaki District Kaikoura District Whakatane District Stratford District Matamata-Piako District Clutha District South Waikato District Rangitikei District Waimate District Kaipara District Far North District Hauraki District Grey District Wairoa District Horowhenua District Otorohanga District Rotorua District Opotiki District Central Hawke's Bay District Tararua District Waitomo District Ruapehu District

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

22 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

4.7 Relative Openness Index graph– Local Authorities

Relative openness index

-15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 Southland District South Taranaki District Clutha District Kawerau District Hurunui District Waimate District Rangitikei District South Waikato District Wairoa District Tasman District Western Bay of Plenty District Central Hawke's Bay District Carterton District Kaipara District South Wairarapa District Opotiki District Otorohanga District Taupo District Matamata-Piako District Tararua District Waitomo District Buller District Gore District Waitaki District Ashburton District Marlborough District Westland District Kaikoura District Waikato District Gisborne District New Plymouth District Hastings District Manawatu District Central Otago District Waimakariri District Mackenzie District Timaru District Waipa District Far North District Selwyn District Queenstown-Lakes District Thames-Coromandel District Horowhenua District Rotorua District Ruapehu District Rodney District Napier City Whakatane District Hauraki District New Zealand Christchurch City Grey District Tauranga City Stratford District Auckland Masterton District Kapiti Coast District Whangarei District Wanganui District Invercargill City Dunedin City Nelson City Hamilton City Upper Hutt City Wellington City Lower Hutt City Palmerston North City Porirua City

source: BERL REgional Dataase 2011

23 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

5 Regional Councils

The 66 local authorities were grouped into their regional council areas to allow ranking across the 14 regional council areas. The performance of each region is shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1. Regional rankings

Rank Region 2011 2010 Auckland 1 3 ↑2

Bay of Plenty 2 7 ↑5

Taranaki 3 1 ↓2

West Coast 4 12 ↑8 Otago 5 5 →

Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough 6 14 ↑8

Waikato 7 9 ↑2

Southland 8 10 ↑2

Haw ke's Bay 11 6 ↓5 Canterbury 9 2 ↓7 Wellington 10 4 ↓6

Northland 12 13 ↑1

Gisborne 13 8 ↓5

Manaw atu-Wanganui 14 11 ↓3

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Taranaki has been bumped out of the top spot by Auckland, with the two regions swapping positions from last year.

Six of the top eight regions all improved their ranking from a year earlier, while Northland was the only bottom half region to show improvement (albeit by one spot). Otago stayed steady in the number five spot. The West Coast and Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough had the largest climb in rankings this year, both up eight spots.

There have been some large shifts this year in spite of the medium term indicators, which reflects the real shifts in activity in 2011. Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough region climbed from last place to 6th place this year, while the West Coast Region climbed from 12th to 4th place. The other big improver was Bay of Plenty, which climbed five spots from 7th place in 2010 to 2nd in 2011. Big shifts in the opposite direction were had by Canterbury, which dropped seven spots to 9th; and Wellington, which dropped six spots to 10th.

24 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Auckland Not only can Auckland boast about being the biggest Council in New 1 Zealand, it can now also boast about being the best performing region. Auckland’s sublime performance in 2011 saw it climb from 3rd in 2010 to being the best performing region in 2011.

As the main entry for migrants and with a large migrant population already, Auckland consistently has the highest population growth of all regions. Auckland also had the highest business unit growth in 2011.

Auckland ranked either 1st or 2nd in five of the nine indicators and was in the top five for all bar the Relative Openness Ondex. Auckland came in 1st on resident population growth (short and medium term), and business unit growth (2011). It was the 2nd ranked region on employment growth (2011) and medium term business unit growth.

Bay of Plenty. The Bay of Plenty nd Employment region is the 2 best performing 140 2 region in New Zealand in 2011, 130 improving five spots from 2010. 120 110 The Bay of Plenty region had the highest 100 employment and GDP growth for 2011, and

Index2000=100 90 the fastest growing GDP over the medium 80 term. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Bay of Plenty Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand The region also ranked 2nd in medium term employment growth and on the Relative Openness Index.

Two of the local authorities within the Bay of Plenty region – Western Bay of Plenty district and Tauranga City – finished in the top ten in the local authority rankings.

25 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Taranaki. Taranaki, which ranked 1st in 2010, Resident Population has dropped two spots to 3rd in 2011. This is 120 3 the result of poor 2011 rankings in population 110 and GDP growth, where it ranked 9th and 10th out of 100 the 14 regions.

90 Index2000=100

However, its medium term rankings reflect the 80 economic strength of the Taranaki economy. 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Taranaki Total NZ rd Taranaki ranked 3 on both medium term Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand employment, GDP and business unit growth. It is also the top ranked region in relation to relative openness.

The only measure that lets the Taranaki region down is population growth, where it ranks 10th over the medium term.

West Coast. The West Coast region is the 4th Employment best performing of the 14 regions; and one of 140 the largest movers from last year, up eight 130 4 120 spots. The three districts that make up the West 110 Coast - Buller, Grey and Westland – ranked 1st, 53rd 100 and 24th respectively in the 2011 local authority

Index2000=100 90 rankings. 80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 West Coast Total NZ st The West Coast had one 1 place ranking (medium Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand term employment growth) and two 2nd place rankings (medium term GDP and business unit growth in 2011). The West Coast also ranked 3rd on the Relative Openness Index and 4th on employment growth in 2011.

Otago. The Otago region came in 4th in 2011, an improvement of one position from 2010. Otago had one 1st place ranking, for medium term business unit growth.

5 It also came in 2nd for medium term population growth and 3rd for population growth in 2011, which is a strong performance for a provincial region in the south island.

Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough. Employment 130 Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough moved up nine 120 6 places from last in 2010, to 5th in 2011. The rapid rise in the rankings has come about due to 110 across the board consistency, with the region having 100 90

six rankings in the top five. Index2000=100

80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 The region performed well in population, GDP and Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Total NZ employment in 2011, recording the 2nd, 5th and 4th Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand fastest growth amongst the regions.

26 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Over the medium term, the region achieved a ranking of 4th for population, business units and the Regional Openness Index.

Canterbury. The Canterbury Region had the largest fall in rank, going from 2nd place in 2010 to 10th in 2011, a decline of eight places. This is due in part to a decline in population growth from the 3rd 10 fastest growth in 2010 to the slowest growing in 2011.

Canterbury also struggled on the employment front, ranking 11th in 2011 and over the medium term. Canterbury’s best performance was for medium term business unit growth, where it ranked 5th.

Wellington. The Wellington region 130 GDP dropped seven places, from 4th in 2010, 120 11 to 11th in 2011. The big drops were in short term employment and GDP, 110 where the region ranked 11th and 12th respectively. 100

Index2000=100 90 This is in contrast to short term business unit and 80 population growth, where Wellington ranked 3rd and 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Wellington Total NZ 4th respectively. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

Over the medium term, Wellington had the 5th fastest population growth and the 6th fastest employment and business unit growth. However, it ranks 14th out of 14 on the Relative Openness Index.

Manawatu-Whanganui. The region Resident Population with the lowest growth in 2011 is the 120 14 Manawatu-Whanganui region. The 110 Manawatu-Whanganui region has dropped three 100 places from last year.

90 Index2000=100

The Manawatu-Whanganui region had the lowest 80 ranking on four of the five medium term indicators, 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Manawatu-Whanganui Total NZ and two of the four 2011 indicators. Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand

The Manawatu-Whanganui region had the lowest short term and medium term employment and GDP growth. In the medium term, the region was lowest across all indicators apart from employment, where it was one off the bottom. In relation to the openness index, the region was 12th.

Included in the Manawatu – Whanganui region are Ruapehu, Rangitikei, Wanganui, Manawatu, Palmerston North, Tararua and Horowhenua. The region includes the three worst performing local authorities from 2011. The best performing local authority in the region was Manawatu district, which placed 29th.

27 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

5.1 Short term indicator graphs – Regions

Population growth 2011

Auckland Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Otago Wellington Waikato New Zealand Bay of Plenty Southland West Coast Taranaki Northland Manawatu-Wanganui Hawke's Bay Gisborne Canterbury

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Employment (FTE) growth 2011

Bay of Plenty Auckland City Waikato West Coast Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough New Zealand Taranaki Otago Southland Northland Canterbury Wellington Hawke's Bay Gisborne Manawatu-Wanganui

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

28 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

GDP growth 2011

Bay of Plenty Waikato Auckland Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Southland New Zealand Canterbury West Coast Northland Hawke's Bay Taranaki Otago Wellington Gisborne Manawatu-Wanganui

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Business units growth 2011

Auckland West Coast New Zealand Wellington Taranaki Hawke's Bay Otago Waikato Bay of Plenty Canterbury Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Southland Manawatu-Wanganui Northland Gisborne

-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

29 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

5.2 Medium term indicator graphs – Regions

Population growth p.a. 2006 - 11

Auckland New Zealand Otago Waikato Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Wellington Bay of Plenty Canterbury Northland West Coast Taranaki Hawke's Bay Southland Gisborne Manawatu-Wanganui

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Employment (FTE) growth p.a. 2006-11

West Coast Bay of Plenty Taranaki Southland Auckland City Wellington New Zealand Waikato Otago Northland Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Canterbury Hawke's Bay Manawatu-Wanganui Gisborne

-1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

30 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

GDP growth p.a. 2006-11

Bay of Plenty West Coast Taranaki Auckland City Southland Waikato New Zealand Otago Canterbury Wellington Northland Hawke's Bay Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Gisborne Manawatu-Wanganui

-0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Business units growth p.a. 2006-11

Otago Auckland City Taranaki Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Canterbury Wellington New Zealand Southland Waikato Hawke's Bay Gisborne Bay of Plenty West Coast Northland Manawatu-Wanganui

-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

31 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

5.3 Relative Openness Index graph - Regions

Relative openness index 2011

Taranaki Southland Gisborne Nelson/Tasman/Marlborough Hawke's Bay West Coast Bay of Plenty Waikato Otago Northland Canterbury New Zealand Manawatu-Wanganui Auckland City Wellington

-10.00 -5.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 source: BERL Regional Database 2011

32 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

6 Cities

The importance of cities to economic growth and cultural, environmental and social wellbeing is well documented. In general, cities concentrate infrastructure and activity, resulting in reduced prices, improved networks, diversity, innovation, and the “buzz” that attracts ambitious people. Well-functioning cities will result in improved economic growth outcomes.

Of the 66 local authorities, we have included 20 into our city rankings. These differ from the ‘official’ defined cities in New Zealand to include what we consider the top 20 settlements in New Zealand.

Table 6.1. City rankings

rank BERL Regional Rankings 2011 2010 Tauranga 1 9 ↑8 New Plymouth 2 1 ↓1

Auckland 3 11 ↑8 Nelson 4 7 ↑3 Hamilton 5 10 ↑5

Timaru 6 6 → Porirua 7 5 ↓2 Hastings 8 8 →

Wellington 9 2 ↓7 Napier 10 18 ↑8 Invercargill 11 13 ↑2

Rotorua 12 19 ↑7 Whangarei 13 14 ↑1 Dunedin 14 16 ↑2

Marlborough 15 17 ↑2 Palmerston North 16 4 ↓12

Upper Hutt 17 15 ↓2 Gisborne 18 3 ↓15 Low er Hutt 19 20 ↑1

Christchurch 20 12 ↓8

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

33 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Tauranga. Tauranga has claimed top dog Employment status in relation to economic performance in 150 140 cities in 2011. It achieved this by improving 130 1 eight spots on 2010. 120 110 Tauranga had the fastest growing employment and 100

Index2000=100 90 GDP growth of all the cities in 2011. It also had the 80 second fastest business unit growth in 2011. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Tauranga Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand Over the last five years, Tauranga has had the 2nd fastest employment and GDP growth, and the 3rd fastest population growth.

New Plymouth. New Plymouth has been dethroned from its top spot in 2010, but has dropped only one spot to still be the 2nd best performing city in 2011. GDP 2 150 140 New Plymouth had a poor 2011 by its own 130 th standards, with its best result being ranked 7 on 120 business unit growth, followed by 8th in employment 110 100 growth. Index2000=100 90 80 However, what has kept it at number two is its medium 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 New Plymouth Total NZ term growth. New Plymouth has had the fastest Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand growth in employment, GDP and business units of all cities over the last five years. It is also ranked 3rd on the Relative Openness Index. The only indicator where New Plymouth struggles is population growth, ranking 11th over the medium term.

Auckland. Auckland has climbed in from outside the top 10 in 2010 to claim 3rd spot in the city rankings. This is an excellent outcome for what is considered our alpha city.

3 th In 2011, Auckland had the fastest population and business unit growth. It was also the 4 fastest in terms of employment growth.

Similarly, Auckland ranked 1st in population growth over the medium term. GDP and business unit growth was ranked 6th and employment growth just snuck into the top half at 9th.

Nelson. Nelson has improved three spots from 2010 to take 4th spot in the city rankings. Nelson has displayed a solid performance in 2011.

4 In 2011, Nelson had the 3rd fastest growth in population, employment, and GDP. Business unit growth was not far behind, with Nelson ranking 4th.

34 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Over the medium term, however, the performance has been constant with all indicators ranked in the top 10. Nelson ranked 3rd in business unit growth, 6th in employment growth, 9th in population growth, and 10th in GDP growth over the medium term.

Hamilton. Hamilton has jumped five spots to 140 GDP round out the top five cities in 2011. 130

120 5 In 2011, Hamilton had the 2nd fastest growth in 110 both population and GDP. It also ranked 5th in 100 th

business unit growth and 6 in employment growth. Index2000=100 90

80 Over the last five years, Hamilton has had the 2nd 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Hamilton Total NZ fastest population growth behind Auckland, and the 7th Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand fastest business unit growth. Letting it down slightly were employment and GDP growth, where Hamilton ranked 12th in both measures.

Wellington. Wellington has fallen seven spots Employment to 9th. However, it has hung on to its position in 130 9 the top half of the city rankings. Which is good 120 as you don’t really want to see your capital city 110

languishing!! Plus its where BERL lives. 100

90 Wellington had a poor economic performance in 2011, Index2000=100 80 th ranking 13 on employment growth and second to last 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 th th Wellington Total NZ on GDP growth (19 ). It did, however, have the 4 Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand fastest population growth and the 8th fastest business unit growth across all cities.

Over the last five years, its performance has been slightly better. Wellington ranked 3rd on GDP growth, 4th on population growth, and 8th on both employment and business unit growth.

Napier. Napier was a strong improver in 2011, moving up eight spots and breaking into the top ten.

Napier’s best ranking in 2011 was 6th, for business unit growth. It ranked 15th in GDP growth and 10 th 17 in both population and employment growth.

Over the medium term, Napier has had the 5th fastest growth in business units and the 9th fastest growth in GDP. It has not performed so well in population and employment growth, ranking 16th and 14th respectively.

Rotorua. Rotorua had a stellar performance in 2011, improving its ranking by seven spots to be the 12th ranked city in New Zealand.

12 Rotorua had the 2nd fastest employment growth in 2011. It also had the 5th fastest GDP growth. This

35 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012 was tempered by having the 16th fastest population growth and the 17th fastest business unit growth.

Rotorua has struggled through the last five years, which is why it is in the bottom half of the city rankings. It has had the slowest population and business unit growth of all the cities. Further it ranked 16th in employment growth and 13th in GDP growth.

Palmerston North. Palmerston North suffered the 2nd largest drop in 2011, falling from 4th in 2010, to 16th in 2011. Palmerston North was the 19th and 18th ranked city in relation to employment and GDP respectively, in 2011. It fared slightly better in business unit growth, ranking 12th. It also had 16 th the 7 fastest population growth of all the cities.

Over the last five years, Palmerston North was ranked 5th in GDP and 7th in population growth. It has not fared so well in business unit and employment growth, ranking 18th and 13th respectively.

Gisborne. Gisborne had the largest fall in rankings out of all the cities evaluated. It has fallen 15 spots from 3rd in 2010 to 18th in 2011, largely a result of a very poor 2011.

18 In 2011, Gisborne’s best ranking was 17th for GDP growth. It ranked 18th for employment, 19th for population, and 20th for business unit growth.

Over the last five years, performance has not been much better. Gisborne ranked last for employment growth, second last for population growth, and 17th out of 20 for both GDP and business unit growth.

Christchurch. Christchurch is the lowest ranking city in 2011, falling eight Resident Population 120 spots from 2010. 20 110 A large reason behind the drop was 100

population growth, with Christchurch ranking last in 90 Index2000=100 2011 and 18th over the medium term. 80 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 However, Christchurch also struggled in 2011, ranking Christchurch Total NZ Source: BERL, Statistics New Zealand 14th in employment and business unit growth, and only slightly better (11th) in GDP growth.

The earthquakes have taken a toll, with medium term performance also down. Over the last five years, Christchurch ranked 17th in employment growth, 14th in GDP growth, and 12th in business unit growth. Its only ranking in the top 10 is for the Relative Openness Index, where it ranks 8th.

36 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

6.1 Short term indicator graphs – Cities

Population growth 2011

Auckland Hamilton Nelson Wellington Porirua Invercargill Palmerston North Upper Hutt Tauranga Dunedin Timaru District New Zealand New Plymouth District Marlborough District Whangarei District Hastings District Rotorua District Napier Lower Hutt Gisborne District Christchurch -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Employment (FTE) growth 2011

Tauranga Rotorua District Nelson Auckland Whangarei District Hamilton New Zealand Upper Hutt New Plymouth District Invercargill Dunedin Hastings District Timaru District Wellington Christchurch Porirua Lower Hutt Napier Gisborne District Palmerston North Marlborough District -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

37 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

GDP growth 2011

Tauranga Hamilton Nelson Porirua Rotorua District Auckland Dunedin Lower Hutt Invercargill New Plymouth District New Zealand Christchurch Hastings District Upper Hutt Whangarei District Napier Timaru District Gisborne District Palmerston North Wellington Marlborough District -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Business units growth 2011

Auckland Tauranga Porirua Nelson Hamilton Napier New Plymouth District New Zealand Wellington Lower Hutt Timaru District Upper Hutt Palmerston North Hastings District Christchurch Invercargill Dunedin Rotorua District Whangarei District Marlborough District Gisborne District -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

38 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

6.2 Medium term indicator graphs – Cities

Population growth p.a. 2006-11

Auckland Hamilton Tauranga Wellington New Zealand Whangarei District Marlborough District Palmerston North Upper Hutt Nelson Porirua New Plymouth District Hastings District Dunedin Invercargill Timaru District Napier Lower Hutt Christchurch Gisborne District Rotorua District 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Employment (FTE) growth p.a. 2006-11

New Plymouth District Tauranga Timaru District Whangarei District Porirua Nelson Invercargill Wellington Auckland Hastings District New Zealand Upper Hutt Hamilton Palmerston North Napier Marlborough District Rotorua District Christchurch Lower Hutt Dunedin Gisborne District -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

39 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

GDP growth p.a. 2006-11

New Plymouth District Tauranga Wellington Timaru District Palmerston North Auckland Hastings District Porirua Napier New Zealand Nelson Whangarei District Hamilton Rotorua District Christchurch Dunedin Invercargill Gisborne District Lower Hutt Marlborough District -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

Business units growth p.a. 2006-11

New Plymouth District Porirua Nelson Timaru District Napier Auckland Hamilton Wellington Upper Hutt Invercargill Tauranga New Zealand Christchurch Lower Hutt Marlborough District Dunedin Hastings District Gisborne District Palmerston North Whangarei District Rotorua District -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

40 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

6.3 Relative Openness Index graph – Cities

Relative Openness Index

Marlborough District Gisborne District New Plymouth District Hastings District Timaru District Rotorua District Napier New Zealand Christchurch Tauranga Auckland Whangarei District Invercargill Dunedin Nelson Hamilton Upper Hutt Wellington Lower Hutt Palmerston North Porirua -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0

source: BERL Regional Database 2011

41 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

7 Appendix - Economic Indicators – what are they?

As outlined before there are five indicators measured over the short and medium term. The definitions are given in the table below.

Economic Indicator Definition

Resident population Population living in a particular area. Areas are based on Statistics New Zealand Census Area Unit Boundaries.

GDP GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product, and measures the total value contributed by the activities of all businesses and organisations in the region. In theory it is equal to the value of the output of business (i.e. sales or turnover) less purchases from other businesses of goods and services used in production. In practice, GDP is akin to the sum of wages, salaries, profits and operating surplus arising from all economic activity in the industry and/or region.

Business unit A business unit is a separate operating unit engaged in New Zealand in one, or predominantly one, kind of economic activity from a single physical location or base.

FTE Employment Measured as the number of employed persons – but in terms of full-time equivalents (FTEs), such that two part-time employed persons is counted as one full-time person.

Relative Openness Index The BERL Relative Openness Index reflects the composition of the economic activity in a district/region. It measures the proportion of an area’s GDP that is accounted for by sectors open to competition from abroad, compared with that proportion nationally.

Sectors in the index include all of the primary and manufacturing industries, as well as accommodation, transport, communications and business services activities.

A higher rank on this measure indicates an area whose economy is more oriented towards internationally competitive activities, relative to areas with a domestic market focus.

Each of these indicators reflects the economic performance of a geographic area. In particular, they reflect the attractiveness of a place to live (population), its ability to sustain its population (GDP, business units and employment), and its ability to grow (Relative Openness Index).

42 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012

Neither BERL nor any of its employees accepts any responsibility on any grounds whatsoever, including negligence, to any other person.

While every effort is made by BERL to ensure that the information, opinions and forecasts are accurate and reliable, BERL shall not be liable for any adverse consequences of decisions made in reliance of any report provided by BERL, nor shall BERL be held to have given or implied any warranty as to whether any report provided by BERL will assist in the performance of functions.

43 BERL Regional Rankings Report March 2012