The New Zealand Institute
| Grade | NZ Rank | Trend | Latest Value | 2015 Target | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | Not applicable | Bad | -29,904 | -15,000 | Leaving for OE or other opportunity |
The net migration of citizens reveals how New Zealanders assess New Zealand as a place to live. A range of factors might make a citizen move abroad or stay in New Zealand. A citizen’s decision to move abroad or to return home indicates that the net effect of all of these factors is negative, or positive.
The most important reason to include net migration of New Zealand citizens as an overall measure is because changes in migration of citizens indicate how satisfied people are with their country, and how it compares with other places they could live.
The focus is on New Zealand citizens because they are generally free to leave and return to New Zealand without restriction, whereas migrants who are not citizens may not have the same range of options available, and changes in immigration policies affect overall migration rates.
Citizens usually start their migration in New Zealand. Of those who leave, only some will return so even a country that is performing well should have more citizens leaving than returning.
New Zealand invests public resources to develop productive citizens. If those citizens then leave to contribute to other countries then those other countries will gain the benefit from New Zealand’s investment. It does not follow that citizens should be discouraged from leaving, because citizens who have international experience are especially valuable. The skills citizens learn overseas and the connections they establish allow them to make important contributions to businesses and their communities.
If large numbers of citizens are leaving and New Zealand does not have sufficient workers then immigration can fill the gap. Immigrants bring important skills and connections too, and they increase the diversity of New Zealanders. If too many citizens are leaving then large numbers of immigrants are required to replace them. There are costs as well as benefits from immigration, because of the need for migrants to get established in their new country.
Over the past three decades long-term net migration of New Zealand citizens has been outwards, as shown in Figure 1. Departures of New Zealand citizens are more volatile than arrivals which show relatively little variation year-to-year. The net outward migration for the year to June 2011 was 29,904, more than double the June 2010 year at 14,236 and above the previous eight years, except 2008. Departures tend to grow when the global economy is performing well so reduced outward migration in the June 2010 year is partly explained by the recession. However the departures have risen in the June 2011 year, with a jump from Christchurch following the earthquake that damaged many homes and businesses on 22 February 2011.
In addition to the increase in New Zealand citizens departing, more of them are leaving for Australia. Over half (56%) the New Zealanders who left permanently went to Australia, as shown in Figure 2. This is higher than the share in the June 2010 year (48%). Asia (14%) and the United Kingdom (12%) are the next largest destinations for New Zealand citizens departing in the June 2010 year. According to a 2001 Treasury report on migration flows to Australia, the skills distribution of New Zealanders who cross the Tasman is very similar to that of the population as a whole (Glass & Choy, 2001). More recent research shows that New Zealanders living in Australia generally have the same characteristics as those remaining in New Zealand but Australians in New Zealand are more skilled than Australians in Australia (Stillman & Velamuri, 2010).
In the early 2000s New Zealand’s proportion of tertiary qualified citizens living abroad at 8.2% was close to the OECD average of 6.9%, as shown in Figure 3. New Zealand educates a higher proportion of its population aged 25-64 to a tertiary qualified level (40%) compared to the OECD average of 30% (as shown in Figure 4 of the Educational achievement measure). Departing highly skilled New Zealand citizens are also replaced by highly skilled citizens from other countries, creating a ‘brain exchange’ rather than a ‘brain drain’ (Lidgard & Gilson, 2002).
Growing departures have been driving net migration of New Zealand citizens recently. There was an average of 24,000 long-term departures per annum over the 16 year period from 1995-2010 compared to 19,000 in the period 1979-1994, as shown in Figure 4.
Survey research shows that most people who leave New Zealand go for new experiences or for economic opportunities. Therefore policies that will improve net migration of citizens are those that make New Zealand a more attractive place to live and those that improve economic performance.
A country where residents are happy with the life they experience is more likely to be one where citizens who have departed remain confident they would return in the future. According to Gallup’s global wellbeing surveys conducted over 2010, 63% of New Zealanders rated their lives as “thriving”, placing the country in seventh equal position out of a total of 124 countries. 35% of New Zealanders rated their lives as “struggling” and only 2% as “suffering”. So life in New Zealand is attractive for many.
With over half the people permanently departing New Zealand going to Australia, progress towards Government’s goal of closing the GDP per capita gap with Australia would improve the migration outcome.
Efforts by the Kiwi Expat Association (KEA) to connect with people living overseas strengthen links with New Zealand and may make it more likely that New Zealanders will return. Those links are potentially valuable, even if New Zealanders do not return, because of the value for New Zealand of international connectedness. KEA has initiated a network of highly skilled Kiwis who have returned to Auckland and migrants who have moved there, to foster and retain international experience for the benefit of New Zealand.
The Department of Labour maintains http://www.newzealandnow.govt.nz/ which contains a section providing information to help expatriates who are returning home and links to documentation for visa applications for their partners. Policy changes to better facilitate access for partners and dependants of expatriates has led to priority processing for residence applications from partners of expatriates. Partners and dependents are now eligible for a permanent resident visa in the first instance, rather than the resident visa that most other migrants get.
New Zealand’s current performance on net migration of citizens is broadly comparable with past performance, when population growth and economic conditions are taken into account. The number of New Zealanders returning is roughly constant, indicating that New Zealand retains its appeal. However, New Zealand has a relatively high proportion of citizens living overseas, and there is a steady flow to Australia where wages are higher.
Evidence of a trend for more New Zealanders to return, for fewer to leave for Australia, or of policies that are likely to be effective in reducing net outflows would justify a B, but current evidence results in a grade of C.
With an average of 25,000 New Zealand citizens returning each year over the last decade and an average of around 48,000 departing, the average net loss has been around 23,000 citizens. If returns continue to average around 25,000 but departures were reduced to 40,000, a target of 15,000 net outward migration for 2015 results.
New Zealand citizen net migration is used for this measure and differs from overall net migration as set out below. It includes New Zealand citizens arriving from abroad for an intended period of 12 months or more, minus citizens departing for an intended period of 12 months or more.
Net migration data is subject to caution because unauthorised movements are not taken into account in the inflows and these are significant in some OECD countries. In addition the data on outflows are of uneven quality, with departures being only partially recorded in many countries or having to be estimated in others.
Figure 1: Statistics New Zealand, Infoshare database: International Travel and Migration. Permanent & long-term migration by every country of residence and citizenship (Annual-Jun), retrieved 10 August 2011 from http://www.stats.govt.nz/infoshare/.
Figure 2: Statistics New Zealand. International Travel and Migration: June 2011-Tables. Data is from Table 7: Permanent and long term departures by country of next permanent residence, retrieved 10 August 2011 from http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/Migration/IntTravelAndMigration_HOTPJun11.aspx.
Note: ‘Other/Not stated’ includes 1.5% of respondents not indicating their next country of permanent residence.
Figure 3: OECD (2008). A Profile of Immigrant Populations in the 21st Century: Data from OECD countries, data retrieved 12 March 2011 from http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=2308070/cl=47/nw=1/rpsv/cw/vhosts/oecdthemes/99980142/v2008n1/contp1-1.htm.
Note: Measure is calculated for OECD countries where data was available. Data from the 2000 round of censuses (most conducted in 2001) was used for 22 countries and population register data for four (Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden). For a few countries, some of the themes included in the database were not covered by either population censuses or registers; in these cases labour force surveys (LFS) provided by Eurostat were used and averaged over the period 1998-2002. LFS data were used in all tables for the Netherlands and Germany. Full methodology details are provided in Annex A of the report.
Figure 4: Statistics New Zealand, Infoshare database: International Travel and Migration. Permanent & long-term migration by every country of residence and citizenship (Annual-Dec), retrieved 14 March 2011 from http://www.stats.govt.nz/infoshare/.
Note: Figures for ‘Net other citizens’ have been calculated by subtracting New Zealand citizens from the total of all citizenships.
Further information links for net migration
Glass, H. & Choy, W.K. (2001). Brain Drain or Brain Exchange? Treasury Working Paper 01/22 available at http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2001/01-22/twp01-22.pdf.
Lidgard, J.M. & Gilson, C. (2002). Return migration of New Zealanders: Shuttle and circular migrants, New Zealand Population Review, 28(1), 99-128. Available at http://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/76555/nzpr02-28-lidgard.pdf.
Poot, J. (2009, May). Trans-Tasman Migration, Transnationalism and Economic Development in Australasia, Motu Working Paper 09-05, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research, Wellington. Available at http://www.motu.org.nz/publications/detail/trans-tasman_migration_transnationalism_and_economic_development_in_austral.
Stillman, S. & Velamuri, M. (2010). Immigrant Selection and the Returns to Human Capital in New Zealand and Australia, International Migration Settlement & Employment Dynamics, Department of Labour, Wellington. Available from http://www.dol.govt.nz/publication-view.asp?ID=344.
ShareThis