NZ | Population Statistics Thread

[metroman]

Queensland's population is forecasted to hit 8-9 million within the next couple of decades. South East Queensland will eventually become a metropolis stretching from Noosa down to Tweed Heads on the Gold Coast. It will possibly be Australia's second biggest centre. There is some debate about that, as Melbourne may overtake Sydney's population in the next 20 years. New Zealand's population may sprawl in a similar way as South East Queensland. Instead of 1 million people in Christchurch for example it is possible that Canterbury as a region will have that population and as it gets better rail connections and infrastructure etc it could become like a sprawling centre. Same may apply to the other provinces like Waikato, Taranaki, Hawkes Bay. Someone in an earlier post even suggested a Palmy/Wellington/Kapiti metropolis. This is what good rail infrastructure has the very real possibility of doing, drawing communities, cities, towns and villages closer together.

[jarbury]

Yuck. Sprawl.

[nthbeach]

doubling the population in 20 years, that is out of control. That would be a pretty big metropolis, guessing there is already about 3 million people in the sunshine coast, brisbane, gold coast and also ipswich cities.
Would be cool to see something like that in NZ. Dont think a canterbury metropolis would happen, apart from Christchurch, Timaru and ashburton are too small and too spread out from chch. Palmy/Wellington/Kapiti could happen and could include the area around masterton. But I think a NZ metropolis would most likely occur around auckland/hamilton/tauranga, perhaps another major city could develop within the triangle around huntly or morrinsville.

[nthbeach]

sprawl may be yuck, but it will continue to happen, it wont stop

[Svartmetall]

You seriously don't want to see what has happened between Brisbane and the Gold Coast or the Sunshine coast. SEQ is a lovely part of the world, but it is, ultimately, quite unsustainable. The sprawl is quite something to behold and not something I'd like to see replicated in NZ.

Sprawl won't continue to happen if politicians wise up to the detrimental impact of sprawl. There are lots and lots of academic, peer reviewed articles addressing the detrimental factors associated with sprawl both economically and environmentally. It's essential that NZ doesn't go further down that route.

[metroman]

I think they are trying to repair some of the unsustainable aspects of urban sprawl through better designed communities, masterplanned communities with well integrated public transport hubs and town centres. The Sunshine Coast is a classic example of this. Highrise development is definitely the way to go.

[whizz_pat]

Originally Posted by nthbeach

doubling the population in 20 years, that is out of control.

Agreed. Doubling the population in 20 years gives an average annual growth rate of (100ln2)/20= 3.46%
Doesn't sound bad when its a mere 3.5% ay.
OZ as a whole is growing at a rate of 0.96%, and NZ is growing at a rate of 1.18%, giving a doubling time of around 70 and 60 years respectively.

Definately, the 3.5ish percent growth rate is unsustainable.

[nthbeach]

wow, NZ is actually growing at greater rate than Aust, that is really cool. So ho many years (to the closest 100) when we pass aust?

[KLK]

Originally Posted by nthbeach

I think a NZ metropolis would most likely occur around auckland/hamilton/tauranga

Leaving Tauranga aside - absolutely.

Lets face it, with a half-decent train system, it wouldn't be that far at all.

But yes, Sprawl is evil......agreed.

[Urbania]

Originally Posted by whizz_pat

Agreed. Doubling the population in 20 years gives an average annual growth rate of (100ln2)/20= 3.46%
Doesn't sound bad when its a mere 3.5% ay.
OZ as a whole is growing at a rate of 0.96%, and NZ is growing at a rate of 1.18%, giving a doubling time of around 70 and 60 years respectively.

Definately, the 3.5ish percent growth rate is unsustainable.

Let's get some actual facts on here...

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@....0?OpenDocument

For the year until the end of March 2008, Australia's population grew by 336,800 people or 1.6%. For the past 10 years, Australia has averaged population growth of around 1.3%.

For the year until March 2008, Queensland's population grew by 91,900 people or 2.2%. For the past 10 years, Queensland's population growth has been around 2.0% or above.

Queensland's population is growing by almost twice the number of people New Zealand's population is growing by yearly. It will not be long before it bypasses NZ's population and moves ahead at a rapid pace.

[MelboyPete]

Is there a projected maximum population for NZ which would be feasible ?

[jarbury]

Well unless something changes significantly regarding migration levels, NZ's population is not expected to exceed 5.5 million. However, I think once our population actually starts decreasing (which isn't till after 2050 I don't think) there will probably be a lot of political pressure to avoid this from happening.

Many European countries have decreasing or stagnant populations though, and they manage OK economic growth.

[sensible]

returning to a bit of common sense... i doubt we will ever get a 'huge sprawling metropolis'... Auckland and hamilton would have to under go unprecedented growth before that happens and it certainly wont be happening in Christchurch or wellington for 1000 years. Plus, by the time say Auckland would be knocking on Hamiltons door, such growth would have opened a few minds on planning in a more sustainable manner.

Having lived in SEQ and having family still there, both NZ and Aus born, i have to say its dissapointing to see the way its been developing. too rushed and out of control its all about money money

[jarbury]

I certainly hope that Auckland never sprawls much beyond its existing boundaries. The only places that I consider vaguely appropriate for further greenfields development are Papakura to Pukekohe and Swanson to Kumeu. However, the problem is that would take up a lot of incredibly productive rural land, that Auckland desperately needs.

Regarding a big upper North Island metropolis, this certainly won't (and shouldn't) happen by each city growing to meet others. However, towns between Auckland, Hamilton and Tauranga should definitely be encouraged to grow (in sustainable ways). A 160 kph regular train service between the three cities - servicing places like Pokeno, Te Kauwhata, Huntly (dare I say it), Ngaruwahia, Morrinsville etc. would enable people who want a more spacious lifestyle to enjoy it in those smaller towns, while the bigger cities intensity.

There would be huge economic advantages of being able to catch an hourly train service to Hamilton and/or Tauranga which took say 1 hour to get to Hamilton and another 40 min to Tauranga. You'd be getting a faster city-centre to city-centre time than you manage on the plane I would imagine.

[piles]

Where is Auckland in terms of population compared to the Australian cities. I'm guessing at number 5 behind Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth? Is the Auckland pop growing at a faster rate than Brisbane or Perth?

[whizz_pat]

Originally Posted by Urbania

Let's get some actual facts on here...

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@....0?OpenDocument

For the year until the end of March 2008, Australia's population grew by 336,800 people or 1.6%. For the past 10 years, Australia has averaged population growth of around 1.3%.

For the year until March 2008, Queensland's population grew by 91,900 people or 2.2%. For the past 10 years, Queensland's population growth has been around 2.0% or above.

Queensland's population is growing by almost twice the number of people New Zealand's population is growing by yearly. It will not be long before it bypasses NZ's population and moves ahead at a rapid pace.

Sweet, my source was a Statistics NZ 2005 booklet. The figures I posted were the average annual rate of change of population from 2000-2004. Your stats seem to contradict mine, so there is some uncertainty.

I would like to point out that it is not a competition of whose population can grow the fastest, and a higher population growth rate does not mean a higher standard of living. If that was the case, Egypt would be kicking ass in terms of quality of life (which is not the case).

Originally Posted by piles

Where is Auckland in terms of population compared to the Australian cities. I'm guessing at number 5 behind Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth? Is the Auckland pop growing at a faster rate than Brisbane or Perth?

Yeah Auickland is number 5 in terms of popuation. Auckland is the second fastest growing city in Australasia, after Brisbane.

[Ironmanfood]

Originally Posted by MelboyPete

Is there a projected maximum population for NZ which would be feasible ?

I don't know, but I read on another website yesterday that NZ currently produces enough food to support 50 million people.

I'm not sure if that is what you menat by feasible, but I thought it was an interesting stat ....

[Urbania]

Originally Posted by whizz_pat

Yeah Auickland is number 5 in terms of popuation. Auckland is the second fastest growing city in Australasia, after Brisbane.

Is this currently or over a particular time period? Because at the moment, Perth and Darwin are growing faster than Brisbane, but not on average over the last 10 years.

[whizz_pat]

I have no clue. I have heard it in some paper somewhere.

[Brizzy-Mike]

The Brisbane-Gold Coast-Sunshine Coast conurbation is 180km long, about 2.3million people. Its form is clearly linear meaning it can be serviced by public transport fairly easily, rather than a London or Paris shaped blob. There is a conscious effort to consolidated and promote along the public transport routes. There are about 1.7million cars at 65% car ownership rates. As usual, a large proportion of the Gross Regional Product is expended on the 1.7million cars, less than 20% of which are for commercial purposes and have a return on income, the rest is spent on oversized cars stuck in traffic jams or screaming along motorways taking kids to school or getting a small bag of shopping. The weather is fabulous.