Ministry of Economic Development Home| Contact MED|


 
 
 

Links to this page were:

Section Subnavigation Links:

2. Auckland's Economic Performance


08/09: Labour Productivity in Auckland Firms

David C. Maré (Motu Economic & Public Policy Research)
[ Last Updated 9 September 2008 ]


It is unsurprising that Auckland's productivity and economic performance is higher than elsewhere in New Zealand. There is a clear positive relationship between urban density and good economic performance the world over – a relationship that is captured in the phrase "agglomeration effects". The causes of these effects are, however, still the subject of much research and debate. Recent reviews of the theoretical foundations of agglomeration effects (Duranton and Puga (2004)) and empirical evidence (Rosenthal and Strange (2004)) draw attention to the wide range of potential mechanisms through which agglomeration effects can operate, and the many different dimensions of economic performance that are subject to agglomeration economies.

As New Zealand's largest and densest city, Auckland should be expected to perform well. In addition, recent public discussions have emphasised the role that Auckland is expected to play in raising New Zealand's overall economic performance. There is a widely accepted perception that Auckland is not reaping the benefits that it should from agglomeration, and that it is consequently not delivering the economy-wide dividends that are expected of it, as illustrated in the following text from the Ministry of Economic Development's Strategy and Priorities for economic development:

"International evidence highlights the importance of having at least one outward facing, global city to lead a nation's economic development. A globally competitive city attracts world-class firms and highly skilled workers, which have significant flow-on effects throughout the economy. The concentration of activity will allow both employers and employees to benefit from specialised labour markets, allow for greater tacit knowledge flows between and within firms and research organisations, and provide the right platform for growing off a critical mass of innovation. Auckland doesn't yet play this role to the extent that major cities do in other economies."

Ministry of Economic Development (2008)

The evidence for Auckland's underperformance as a city is mixed. On many indicators, Auckland is performing well relative to other regions of New Zealand, and even relative to other cities internationally. Lewis and Stillman (2005) compare Auckland's labour market performance with that of other regions and conclude that ". . . Auckland appears to be a relatively good performer and this is consistent with agglomeration economies being at work in New Zealand's largest urban concentration." For international comparisons, Ministry of Economic Development (2007) presents a range of indicators, showing Auckland's relatively good performance in areas such as quality of living, employment rate, population growth, and broadband penetration. Two prominent exceptions are Auckland's relatively poor productivity (GDP per capita) level, and low proportion of population with tertiary qualifications.

A challenge for any comparison of Auckland with international cities is the choice of comparators. Ideally, comparison should be made with cities that are of similar size and density, and that fill a similar position in the national or larger regional urban settlement system. Auckland's size and employment density are similar to a mid-sized US city4, although comparable cities are part of a denser network of similar sized and larger cities.

New Zealand has a relatively high degree of urbanisation, with 86 percent of the population living in urban areas, compared with 74 percent (in 2005) in ‘more developed' countries.5 The proportion of New Zealand's urban population that is located in the Auckland urban area ("urban primacy"), at around 34 percent, is somewhat high for a developed country, although Henderson (2000) classifies New Zealand as having "satisfactory urban concentration".6 Auckland's place within the New Zealand or Australasian city-size distribution roughly fits the rank-size rule (Zipf's Law) found in most urban systems (Soo (2005) Gabaix (1999a)), or is slightly larger than predicted by this relationship.7

A priori, there appears to be little evidence that Auckland is significantly under-sized, or that agglomeration effects are abnormally weak in Auckland, given the structure of the urban settlement system of which it is a part. Nevertheless, as suggested by the quotation above, national and regional economic development policies have emphasised the need to promote the concentration of economic activity in Auckland, and the operation of agglomeration economies. It is clearly envisaged that there will be productivity gains through thicker labour markets, innovation and knowledge flows that will raise not only Auckland's economic performance but also that of New Zealand as a whole.

The argument that raising concentration in Auckland could plausibly raise New Zealand's economic performance has been eloquently asserted in a range of policy and discussion documents (e.g.: Skilling (2006), Auckland Regional Council (2007), Metro Project (2007) Committee for Auckland (2006)), although the presentation is often more aspirational and motivational than it is evidence-based, which may reflect the severe challenges of getting clear evidence on the future potential for Auckland. Much progress has been made in developing a region-wide strategy and action plan for promoting Auckland's economic development (Metro Project (2007), Auckland Regional Council (2008))8.

Against this background of a broad acceptance of the potential for stronger agglomeration economies in Auckland, and a practical commitment to actively promoting Auckland's growth, the objective of the current paper is to contribute to the evidence base on the strength and nature of agglomeration effects in Auckland and on patterns within Auckland.

Existing studies have analysed proximate indicators of productivity in Auckland, such as land prices (Grimes and Liang (2007)) and wages (Lewis and Stillman (2005), Paling et al (2007)). Few studies have looked directly at firm productivity measures as is done in the current paper. An exception is Maré and Timmins (2006), which looked at the overall relationship between concentration and firm productivity within New Zealand using a related data source, without a particular focus on Auckland.


4 The most similar US Urbanized areas are San Antonio TX, Riverside-San Bernadino CA, Columbus OH, Jacksonville FL, Orlando FL, Providence RI-MA and Memphis TN-MS-AR, all of which have employment in the 430,000 – 580,000 range and land area in the 1,030 to 1,300 square km range, compared with Auckland Urban Area’s employment and area of 556,000 and 1,074 square km. See Appendix A.

5 "More developed regions" comprise all regions of Europe plus Northern America, Australia/New Zealand and Japan.  This is the definition used in United Nations (2008).

6 Data are from United Nations (2008) and Statistics New Zealand (2005).  The NZ urban population includes all "cities, boroughs, town districts, townships and country towns with population of 1,000 or more".  Definitions for other countries vary but are broadly consistent.  Urban primacy is based on urban agglomerations of 750,000 or more.  For an international comparison of primacy, see also Appendix Table 1 in Junius (1997), which uses data from a previous edition of United Nations (2008).

7 The slope of the rank-size relationship is flatter for Australasian cities than it is in many other countries, suggesting that Australasian cities are unusually highly concentrated.  The two largest Australasian cities (Sydney and Melbourne) are of similar size, whereas Zipf's Law would predict that one of them would be considerably larger – about twice its current size (see Appendix A). Gabaix (1999b) discusses a range of factors that influence the slope, and notes that the slope "allows us to get information about the archaeology of the growth processes [across cities]".  Including New Zealand and Australian cities in the same ranking does not necessarily imply integration of the two economies but serves merely to indicate the relative size of Auckland and other New Zealand cities.

8 The action plan is organised around the 5 objectives of "Take effective and efficient action to transform Auckland's economy; Develop world-class infrastructure and world-class urban centres; Transform Auckland into a world-class destination; Develop a skilled and responsive labour force; and Increase Auckland’s business innovation and export strength" Metro Project (2007).



Back to Top