The 2001 Census recorded 3.7 million usual residents in New Zealand, more than two and a half times the 1.4 million population recorded three-quarters of a century earlier in 1926. Although each consecutive census has recorded higher census usually resident population counts, the rate at which the population has grown has varied significantly. In the post World War II years, high fertility and immigration combined to boost the population by an average of more than 2 percent per year. The 1976–81 period experienced the lowest growth rate recorded, just 0.3 percent per year, a direct result of a net migration outflow of more than 100,000 people (Figure 1). During the latest intercensal period, 1996–2001, the average annual growth rate of 0.6 percent per year can largely be attributed to natural increase (excess of births over deaths), with the net effect of migration having a negligible impact on growth.
Figure 1
Average Annual Growth in Census Usually Resident Population Count, 1926-2001
While there has been slow growth for the population as a whole, growth differs for groups within the population. For example, the Māori ethnic group census usually resident population count rose to 526,281 at the 2001 Census. This is 21 percent more people of Māori ethnicity than enumerated 10 years earlier in 1991 (434,847). The Māori ethnic group typically grows at a higher rate than the total population because of a higher Māori ethnic group fertility rate and because of Māori births to non-Māori mothers. Vital registration data indicates that, ignoring migration, the Māori ethnic group population should currently grow by approximately 13 percent during a five-year intercensal period. However, unlike the total New Zealand resident population, which regularly gains population from overseas, the disproportional size of the New Zealand resident versus overseas resident Māori population means that typically there are net migration losses to the New Zealand resident Māori population intercensally.
Although New Zealand’s census endeavours to enumerate everyone present in the country on census night, since the mid-1980s there has been a dramatic rise in international tourists visiting New Zealand and New Zealand residents travelling overseas. The 2001 Census enumerated 83,472 overseas visitors, 32 percent more than were enumerated five years earlier in 1996 (63,243). Because of the seasonal and volatile nature of tourism, the choice of census date has a significant bearing on the number of overseas visitors enumerated. Moreover, the demographic composition and distribution of overseas visitors enumerated by census may not be entirely representative of that at other times in the year.
Internal travel among New Zealanders is also increasing, with a significant number of New Zealanders away from home on census night. In 2001, 5 percent (178,000) of New Zealanders were enumerated away from their usual place of residence, while an estimated 53,000 were temporarily overseas and therefore not enumerated.
Because of the increasing numbers of tourists in New Zealand and New Zealanders moving within the country, it has become increasingly important to recognise the difference between census night population counts, census usually resident population counts and estimated resident populations when addressing policy and planning issues. Unless stated otherwise, the following discussion focuses on the census usually resident population counts. As noted above, these exclude New Zealand residents who were temporarily overseas on census night.
Age and sex
At the 2001 Census, half of all New Zealand residents were aged 34.8 years or over. The lower median age for males, at 34.0 years compared with females at 35.6 years, reflects the fact that, females outnumber males for all ages over 20 years. This disparity was particularly marked at older ages. Among those aged 65 years and over, there were 78 males for every 100 females. This fell to just 43 males for every 100 females for those aged 85 years and over. Overall, for every 100 females living in New Zealand there were only 95 males.
The demographic transition, from high mortality and high fertility to low mortality and low fertility, which took place during the 20th century, is still in the process of shaping and ageing New Zealand’s population. One result of this transition is the dramatic change in the growth of particular age groups over the past 30 years. Between 1971 and 2001, the number of people in the 0 to 14 year age group fell by 6.7 percent, while the population aged 65 years and over rose by 86.4 percent. The working age population (15 to 64 years) grew by 43.8 percent. However, within the working age population there were was a notable age shift as the larger transitional cohorts moved from young to middle and then to late working ages. External migration patterns reinforced this change with younger outflows and older inflows. Overall, New Zealand’s population grew by 31.3 percent between 1971 and 2001. During this time, the median age rose by more than nine years, up from 25.6 years in 1971.
Figure 2
Population Change by Age Group, 1971-2001
At the 2001 Census, 12.1 percent of the population was aged 65 years and over, up from 9.9 percent in 1981. Conversely, the proportion of children under 15 years fell from 26.9 percent to 22.7 percent over the same period.
Between 1981 and 2001, the median age for both males and females rose by 6.7 years to reach 34.0 years and 35.6 years, respectively. These figures mask the fact that at the older ages the male population is ageing more quickly than the female. While the number of women aged 65 years and over increased by 41.8 percent between 1981 and 2001, the number of men in this age group rose by 50.3 percent over the same period.
For the Māori ethnic group the situation is different. The Māori ethnic group has a younger age structure than the non-Māori population. At the 2001 Census, half of all Māori were aged 21.9 years or less, compared with a median age of 34.8 years for the total population. The lower median age of Māori is a consequence of the more recent transition from high mortality and high fertility to low mortality and low fertility. This transition was different in nature and timing to that experienced by the European population and both mortality and fertility remain higher for the Māori population than for the non-Māori population. However, an increasingly important factor in the lower median age of the Māori ethnic group is a rising number of Māori births to non-Māori mothers, with 1 in 5 Māori children born to non-Māori mothers.
The median age for Māori males was 20.8 years compared with 23.0 years for females, reflecting the fact that females outnumbered males at all ages over 17 years. The disparity is more noticeable at older ages. Among those aged 65 years and over, there were 83 males for every 100 females. This fell to just 53 males for every 100 females for those aged 85 years and over. Overall, for every 100 Māori females living in New Zealand there were 96 Māori males, a slightly higher sex ratio than the total population, as a result of the smaller proportion of people in advanced ages.
Pacific peoples had the youngest age structure of the major ethnic groups, with a median age of only 21.0 years. This was slightly younger than people of Māori ethnicity, with a median age of 21.9 years, followed by people of Asian ethnicity (28.3 years) and people of European ethnicity (36.8 years) – includes people of New Zealand European ethnicity. People who belong to other ethnic groups (eg Middle Eastern, African, Latin American, etc) had a combined median age of 26.3 years.
Age structures also varied between regions. In the Auckland, Waikato, Gisborne and Wellington Regions, less than 12 percent of the population was aged 65 years and over, compared with more than 14 percent in Nelson and Marlborough. In Gisborne and Northland Regions, more than 25 percent of residents were children aged 0 to 14 years, compared with around 20 percent in Nelson, Canterbury and Otago Regions.
Similarly, the age structure of the Māori ethnic group varied between regions. Auckland, Gisborne, Wellington, Marlborough, Canterbury and Otago Regions had the lowest proportion of children in their Māori populations, at less than 37 percent. Four of these regions (Auckland, Wellington, Canterbury and Otago) also featured as regions with a very low proportion (under 3 percent) of Māori aged 65 years and over. In contrast, Gisborne had the highest proportion of its Māori population aged 65 years and over, and the highest median age of Māori for any region at 23.9 years. This is 1.4 years older than the next oldest region (Northland) and 3.3 years older than the region with the youngest Māori population (West Coast).
Marital status
Shifting social norms have seen a rise in the number of couples choosing to live together without formally marrying. While once consensual unions were commonly viewed as a precursor to marriage, it is clear that for many people they have become an alternative. These partnerships are varied in nature. At one end of the spectrum, they may involve a formal religious ceremony or a secular party with an exchange of vows in front of family and friends. Among some ethnic communities in particular, this is common. At the other extreme, one or both of the partners may not acknowledge the partnership – though its existence may be obvious to family and friends. A census can only enumerate those couples who choose to self-identify as being in a partnership and marital status is taken to be as stated by the respondents. An increasingly common type of partnership not captured by census is where partners live in different dwellings.
There has been a steady decline in the proportion of the adult population (aged 15 years and over) married but not separated, falling from 52.5 percent in 1991, to 51.7 percent in 1996 and 49.7 percent in 2001. People who were unmarried (never married, widowed, divorced) or separated outnumbered people living in a legal marriage. Despite this decline, for those living in a partnership, legal marriage was still by far the most common form of partnership in 2001 – 81 percent of those people living in partnerships were legally married to each other.
Figure 3
Legal Marital Status by Age Group, 2001
The proportion of the total adult population living in partnerships has remained fairly stable – 60.8 percent of adults were in a relationship in 2001 compared with 58.8 percent in 1991. However, this picture of stability is misleading. Age data presents a different picture, and in all age groups below 65 years it is becoming less common to be partnered. For example, 76 percent of 40 to 44 year olds were in a partnership in 2001 compared with 80 percent in 1996. Above 65 years of age, many relationships end in widowhood. Not surprisingly, reduction in mortality at these older ages is leading to increasing levels of partnership. Nevertheless, death is inevitable and, while 72 percent of 65 to 69 year olds were partnered in 2001, this figure falls steadily with increasing age and for those aged 85 years and over, 24 percent were partnered. The improvement in longevity at these older ages is very evident – in 1991 only 16 percent of those aged 85 years and over were partnered.
Figure 4
Social Marital Status by Age Group, 2001
The Māori ethnic group had a much larger proportion of its adult population in the young adult ages before which legal marriage normally occurs. In these age groups consensual unions are relatively common. However, there are also cultural differences in the propensity of Māori to register unions. At the 2001 Census, only 30.5 percent of the adult Māori population (aged 15 years and over) were married. For those living in a partnership, legal marriage was still the most common form of partnership, with 60.9 percent of Māori living in partnerships being legally married. At all ages, however, Māori were less likely to be married and more likely to be either single or living in an unregistered partnership, than the population as a whole.
Location of population
Auckland’s dominance among the 16 regional councils continues to grow. With 1,158,891 usual residents in 2001, Auckland had almost two and a half times as many people as the next most populous region, Canterbury, with 481,431 people. Canterbury is 3.5 times the geographic size of Auckland Region. The smallest regional population was the West Coast with 30,303 residents in 2001 – almost 40 times smaller than Auckland’s population.
Between 1996 and 2001, the highest rates of population growth were recorded in Auckland and Tasman Regions, where the populations grew by more than 8 percent. Gisborne, Manawatu-Wanganui, West Coast and Otago joined Taranaki and Southland as regions of population loss. In Southland and West Coast Regions, population losses between 1996 and 2001 exceeded 6 percent.
Auckland and Gisborne had the youngest populations with more than half their populations under the age of 34 years. In contrast, Marlborough and the West Coast had the oldest populations with more than half their populations aged over 38 years. The West Coast was also the only region in New Zealand where the number of males exceeded the number of females. The Bay of Plenty, Wellington and Nelson Regions had the lowest sex ratios with only 94 males for every 100 females.
Within the Auckland Region are four cities (North Shore, Waitakere, Auckland and Manukau). In 2001, for the first time their combined population exceeded one million (1,004,505). Together they contained 26.9 percent of New Zealand’s total usually resident population. Auckland is the largest city in New Zealand and was home to 367,734 people or 9.8 percent of New Zealand’s usually resident population at the 2001 Census, with a population density of 581 people per square kilometre. The second largest city was Christchurch, with 316,227 people or 8.5 percent of the population, with a population density of 700 people per square kilometre. The third largest city was Manukau with 283,197 people or 7.6 percent of the population and a population density of 415 people per square kilometre. Four cities had populations of less than 50,000: Invercargill (49,830), Porirua (47,370), Nelson (41,568) and Upper Hutt (36,372).
The three most populous districts were Tauranga (90,906), Rodney (76,182) and Whangarei (68,094), while the smallest districts were Kaikoura (3,483), Mackenzie (3,717) and Carterton (6,849). The population of Chatham Islands District was 720.
Internal migration
At any given time there are a large number of New Zealanders who are changing address. The 2001 Census found that more than half (52.1 percent) of people aged five years and over had lived at their current address for less than five years and almost 1 in 4 had lived there for less than a year.
Māori were more mobile than the New Zealand population as a whole. The 2001 Census found that 59.8 percent of Māori aged five years and over had lived at their current address for less than five years and almost 1 in 3 had lived there for less than a year. Not only were Māori highly mobile, but when they moved residence the move was likely to be over a greater distance. Seventeen percent of Māori aged five years and over were resident in a different regional council in 2001 than in 1996, compared with only 12 percent of the total population.
The young age structure of the Māori population, at least in part, will have contributed to their high mobility patterns. Variations in the levels of mobility of various age groups are well documented both in New Zealand and overseas. The 2001 Census revealed that people in their twenties were most likely to have changed residence. Almost half of those aged 20 to 24 years had moved residence within the last year, while only 1 in 6 people aged 25 to 29 years had lived at their current address for five or more years. After peaking in the 25 to 29-year age group, mobility levels continue to decline until at ages over 80 years, mobility rises as the need for support services and health care forces lifestyle changes.
Figure 5
Less than Five Years at Usual Residence by Age Group, 2001
The internal migration experience of New Zealand’s 16 regional councils was quite diverse. Between 1996 and 2001 net migration gains were evident in exactly half of these areas (Figure 6). Losses of over 5,000 people occurred in Manawatu-Wanganui and Southland Regions. The largest gains were in Bay of Plenty and Canterbury Regions, each with increases of over 8,000 people. The performance of both Auckland and Wellington Regions between 1996 and 2001 is notable. Auckland experienced a net loss of nearly 2,400 people to other regions of New Zealand (its traditional role has been as a net receiver of internal migrants). Wellington gained approximately 2,200 internal migrants between 1996 and 2001. During the previous intercensal period (1991–96) Wellington lost more internal migrants than any other region of New Zealand.
Figure 6
Net Inter-Regional Migration, 1996-2001
Net inter-regional migration camouflages the magnitude of the exchange of people. Of the 16 regions, the largest net gain was experienced by Canterbury Region (8,688 people) and the largest net loss was experienced by Manawatu-Wanganui Region (6,234 people). However, small net flows may result from large exchanges of people. During the 1996–2001 intercensal period, 350,000 people said they had been living in a different region in the previous census. The impact of these interchanges depends on the number of people moving in each direction and the relative sizes of the populations of the regions people moved to and from. For example, 1 in 5 of the people living in Nelson Region in 1996 moved out of the region between 1996 and 2001. Conversely, 1 in 4 of the people living in Nelson Region in 2001 had been living in a different region in 1996. This resulted in a net internal migration gain for Nelson Region of a mere 102 people.
Net population gain or loss between any two regions is usually a small percentage of the gross interchange between the two regions involved. During 1996–2001, the largest inter-regional net flows were Auckland to Bay of Plenty (2,517), resulting from the movement of 9,987 people from Auckland to Bay of Plenty and 7,470 people in the opposite direction. The next largest net inter-regional movements were Waikato to Bay of Plenty (2,418), Wellington to Auckland (2,391), Southland to Canterbury (2,253), and Southland to Otago (2,175). The two largest gross inter-regional flows occurred between Auckland and Waikato, with 16,476 people moving from Auckland to Waikato and 14,469 people moving from Waikato to Auckland, resulting in a net gain by Waikato of 2,007 people.
Tasman was unique among regions – it made net migration gains from all other regions. Wellington, Nelson, Marlborough and Canterbury made net migration gains from at least 11 other regions. Conversely, Gisborne, Taranaki and the West Coast had net migration outflows to at least 11 other regions.
No region made consistent net migration gains in all age groups. Canterbury came closest, only losing people in the 25 to 29-year age group. Northland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Hawke’s Bay, Tasman and Marlborough Regions were clearly popular destinations for families and the 65 and over population, but tended to experience net outflows of young adults. In contrast, Auckland and Wellington Regions only made net gains of young adults, losing in other ages. Gisborne, Taranaki, West Coast and Southland Regions lost population in virtually every age group.
With the notable exception of Auckland, which experienced a net gain of Māori, the pattern of regional gains and losses for Māori was very similar to that of the total population. Moreover, the age patterns suggest similar drivers. Northland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty and Nelson Regions generally featured as popular destinations for families and the 65 and over population, but tended to experience net outflows of young adults. Auckland, Wellington and Otago Regions tended to attract young adults, losing in other ages. Canterbury once again featured as an area popular with all ages, while Gisborne, West Coast and Southland Regions experienced net losses of population in virtually every age group. Given the disparate size of the regional Māori populations, as well as regional variations in the proportions of the population who are Māori, regional inflows and outflows of Māori were surprisingly similar in size and composition.
With more than 86 percent of New Zealand’s population living in urban areas, a great deal of internal migration takes place within and between cities. Of the 1.7 million New Zealanders who changed their usual address within New Zealand between 1996 and 2001, 71.8 percent were living in main urban areas, 14.9 percent in other urban areas and just 13.2 percent were living in rural areas at the time of the 2001 Census.
Between 1996 and 2001, there was a significant flow into rural areas from urban areas and rural centres as 18,666 more people moved into rural areas than left. Minor urban areas lost 12,858 people overall, mainly to rural areas and main urban areas. The gains and losses experienced by main and secondary urban areas were fairly balanced. Nevertheless, the general direction of internal migration flow was from smaller into larger urban areas, but urban areas overall lost to rural areas.
Between 1996 and 2001, rural centres lost population to minor, secondary and main urban areas; minor urban areas lost to secondary and main urban areas; and secondary urban areas lost to main urban areas. Only rural areas gained substantial population through internal migration. Main urban areas made a small gain of 2,280 people, in contrast to the net loss of 12,158 people for these areas between 1991 and 1996. However, secondary urban areas, minor urban areas and rural centres all experienced a net loss of population through internal migration between 1996 and 2001, though in general at a slightly lower level than in the previous intercensal period.
Figure 7
While rural areas gained from all types of urban hierarchy, it is worth noting that growth in rural lifestyle blocks in the rural areas close to urban areas is a factor in the rural growth. It is also worth noting that main urban areas tend to gain a disproportional share of new immigrants from overseas, therefore net internal migration losses in these areas are often more than offset by migration gains from overseas.
Between 1996 and 2001, there was a net outflow of Māori from urban to rural areas as 2,796 more Māori people moved into rural areas than left. Minor urban areas lost 4,596 Māori people, mainly to rural areas and main urban areas. The movement of Māori from main urban areas to rural areas (1,284) was more than offset by gains from minor urban areas (3,039) and from secondary urban areas (1,179). The general direction of internal migration flow of Māori population was from smaller to larger urban areas, but for urban areas to lose to rural areas. Between 1996 and 2001, rural centres lost Māori population to minor, secondary and main urban areas; minor urban areas lost to secondary and main urban areas; and secondary urban areas lost to main urban areas. Main urban areas and rural areas gained Māori population through internal migration between 1996 and 2001, while secondary urban areas, minor urban areas and rural centres lost Māori population through internal migration.