DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS

The entire population of New Zealand is ultimately the consequence of immigration (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). The original source of migrants was restricted to the Pacific Islands and most of the immigrants were Polynesians. About three hundred years ago, however, Europeans began their exploration into this part of the world, and soon after, settlers started arriving from the British Isles and other parts of Europe (Statistics New Zealand, 1995), with the first Pakeha woman arriving in 1806 (Statistics New Zealand, 1998). In 1840, New Zealand became a British colony when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed by the British Crown and the Maori Chiefs.

The first batch of Chinese immigrants began arriving in Otago towards the end of the early gold rushes in the late 1860s due to the shortage of labour in these gold mines after a large number of miners left for the mines in the West Coast (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). When the gold mining industry began to decline, New Zealand began to restrict the number of Chinese immigrants. A poll tax of £10 was imposed on Chinese immigrants in 1881, which was progressively raised to £100 in 1896, and in 1899, the Immigration Restriction Act limited immigration to British subjects. The 1916 census recorded 2,147 Chinese in New Zealand.

Between 1939 and 1952, the immigration policy began to shift towards family reunification and there was a gradual removal of the laws that discriminate against Chinese immigration (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). The number of Chinese in New Zealand recovered slowly to nearly 5,000 in 1945, and in 1951, the Chinese gained the right to be naturalised. These changes gave a more stable social structure to the community, and the Chinese population doubled to about 11,000 between 1945 and 1966 and more than doubled again between 1966 and 1986 (Statistics New Zealand, 1995).

Besides the Chinese, the Indians constituted the only other Asian group that has any significant representation in New Zealand. They faced lower barriers than the Chinese immigrants because India was, for a period of time, part of the British Empire. The Indian population grew from 181 in 1916 to 1,554 in 1945 (Statistics New Zealand, 1995) and over 15,810 in 1986 (Vasil and Yoon, 1996).

With the removal of immigration barriers based on ethnicity in 1986, the Asian population grew steadily over the last decade. In 1991, the total Asian population in New Zealand reached 99,576, which represented an increase of 82% since the previous census (Statistics New Zealand, 1995) ¹⁰. The rise in the number of people with Asian ethnicity accounted for 42% of the total growth in New Zealand's total resident population, which grew only 3.4%. Although their growth rate was relatively large, Asians still comprised less than 3% of the total population (Statistics New Zealand, 1995) and there was no real cause for alarm.¹¹

Besides looking at the various growth rates of the Asian population, it is more important to analyse their contribution to the economy relative to their demand on resources. To accomplish this difficult task would require detail data that are not readily available. At the national level, however, it is quite clear that New Zealand has benefited from the increased presence of the Asian population (Keating, 1998; Bennett, 1998; Cremer and Ramasamy, 1996; Vasil and Yoon, 1996; Statistics New Zealand, 1995).

Statistics New Zealand (1995) provided some information from the 1991 census that might be useful for a general analysis. Firstly, as evident from Table 1, the Asian population was relatively young compared to the European population.

Table 1: Age Distribution

Source: Statistics New Zealand (1995).

More importantly, the proportion of working age adult (15-64 years old) was relatively higher for the Asian population, which implied that their relative expected contributions to the national resources was higher than their counterparts. Furthermore, their relative expected demand on the national resources, especially on government expenditures, as indicated by their smaller dependency ratio (the ratio of children (below 15 years old) and elderly (65 and above) to working age adults), was lower than their counterparts.

The ratio of elderly people to people of working age for the total population, including Asians, was 17.2% in 1991 but only 3.8% for the Asians (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). More importantly, the ratio for Asians had actually fallen from 4.6% in 1986. These differences in the ratio implied that the expected demands for income support, especially superannuation, and health services by Asians were significantly lower. Since superannuation and health were clearly two of the biggest expenditures of the government, Asians was expected to contribute positively towards the government's financial position.

Similarly, the ratio of children to working age adults among Asians had fallen from 43.5% in 1986 to 39.3% in 1991. These ratios, however, were still slightly higher than those of the total population, which implied that the expected demand on educational resources by Asians would be relatively higher. Since the total dependency ratio was still significantly lower for the Asian population and expenditure on education was lower than expenditures for superannuation and health, Asians, on the whole, contributed relatively more and demanded relatively less from the national resources. Furthermore, with a younger population base, their expected contribution in the future would also be relatively higher.

The average Asian family living in New Zealand in 1991 was, in some respects, closer to the traditional New Zealand family of 15 to 20 years ago (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). The majority if the Asian families in 1991 consisted of a couple with dependent children, a family type that would arguably provide a more stable social environment. Unfortunately, this family type accounted for only 38% of all New Zealand families in 1991 as compared to the 54% in 1976. One reason for this difference was the lower rate of divorce and separation, 6.5%, among the Asian population as compared to the 13.4% among all New Zealanders. Children in Asian families were therefore half as likely to be raised by a sole parent (Statistics New Zealand, 1995).

Another striking difference is the education attainment of the Asian population, which had 20.4% of its population having university qualification and 22.1% having no qualification as compared to 8.0% and 31.8% respectively for all New Zealanders (Statistics New Zealand, 1995). If education can be used as a gauge for the relative contribution to the society, as argued by many proponents of education as a merit good, then the Asians' contribution to the society would be relatively higher. In addition, Asians are also less likely to receive any income support from the government; 39.2% received some form of support as compared to 57.2% for all New Zealanders (Statistics New Zealand, 1995).

At the next census in 1996, the Asian population reached 160,683, which represented a slower increase of 61% over a period of five years (Statistics New Zealand, 1997). The growth rate appeared to have declined and may continue to decline unless there are some changes in the immigration policies. Even though they constituted only about 4% of the total population (Statistics New Zealand, 1988), their increases were quite prominent because most Asians were concentrated in the urban areas, especially in Auckland.

As shown in Table 2, the growth of the Asian population in Christchurch, however, was slightly lower than, but still consistent with, the national trends.

Table 2: Asian Population in Christchurch

Source: Statistics New Zealand.

The increase in the Asian population in Christchurch has to be interpreted from at least two perspectives. On one hand, the growth rates of the Asian population per se are very high. Between 1986 and 1991, the Asian population grew by 55.4% compared to the non-Asian growth rate of 1.6%, and between 1991 and 1996, the corresponding growth rates were 112.3% and 4.7%. From this perspective, the differences in the relative increases are alarming. On the other hand, the Asian share of the total population are relatively small growing from a negligible 1.4% in 1986 to 2.1% in 1991 and finally to 4.1% in 1996. From this perspective, however, there is absolutely no support for the fear of an "Asian Invasion."

The growths of the Asian population in the different community wards within Christchurch, nonetheless, have not been evenly distributed. As shown in Figure 1, the majority of the Asian population tended to congregate in the northwestern community wards of Fendlaton/Waimairri, Shirley/Papanui and Riccarton/Wigram. In particular, the increases in the Asian population in the Fendalton/Waimairri and Riccarton/Wigram community wards between 1991 and 1996 had been relatively large.

Figure 1: Asian Population by Community Wards

Source: Statistics New Zealand

The share of the Asian population in the three community wards in the northwest region of Christchurch has been increasing over the last decade: from 62% in 1986, to 63% in 1991 and 73% in 1996. Figure 2 shows the distribution of the Asian population, according to the latest census data, in the six community wards in Christchurch.

Figure 2: Geographical Distribution of Asian Population

Source: Statistics New Zealand.

Again, it is important to note that even though the actual increase in the Asian population in Christchurch is quite significant, especially in the Fendalton/Waimairi and Riccarton/Wigram community wards, they still constitute only a small percentage of the total population and there is no real cause for alarm. In the two community wards with the largest number of Asians in 1996, for examples, Asians constituted only 5.8% in each ward while in the two wards that have the smallest share, they comprised only 1.7% in each ward (see Table 3).

Table 3: Asian Population in Christchurch by Community Wards

Source: Statistics New Zealand.

Besides being unevenly distributed geographically within Christchurch, the Asian population was also unevenly distributed according to the countries of origin (see Figure 3). The four largest groups in the 1996 census were the Koreans, Malaysians, Mainland Chinese and Taiwanese. The Korean population, in particular, has grown significantly over the last decade from a negligible 12 people (0.46% of the Asian population) in 1986 to 1,800 people (14.3% of the Asian population) in 1996. However, with the closure of the immigration offices in Malaysia and Korea recently, the expected influx of immigrants and fee-paying students from these countries is likely to decrease in the near future.

Source: Statistics New Zealand.

For the purpose of this research, we can judiciously group a few segments together in order to economize on resources. The first obvious group consists of the People's Republic of China (Mainland Chinese), Republic of China (Taiwanese) and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kongers). Racially, the people of these three "countries" are mainly Chinese and share a common culture even though they have different political and economic structures.¹² Together, these Chinese from Northeast Asia accounted for 25.3% of the Asian population in Christchurch.

Another possible grouping for this study consists of people from Malaysia, Singapore and Philippines. These countries are multicultural and English is widely used, which implies that people coming to New Zealand from these countries will experience a relatively smoother transition. This group represents over 16% of the Asian population in Christchurch.¹³ Together with the Koreans and Chinese groups, they constituted the majority of the Asian population in Christchurch and were thus the primary targets for the focus groups.¹⁴

As discussed earlier, the Asian population in New Zealand is relatively younger and this trend is also reflected in the population distribution in Christchurch. As evident from Table 4, contrary to the general trend, the number Asian youths (10-19 years old) in Christchurch has been increasing over the last decade. This difference has resulted in an increase the relative share of Asian students in Christchurch. The 1996 share of 7.9% is also higher than the national average of 6.3% (Statistics New Zealand, 1997).

Table 4: Asian Youth Population in Christchurch

Source: Statistics New Zealand

It is important to note that, similar to the national trend, the total number of youths in Christchurch has been declining over the last decade. This decline is one indication that the population of New Zealand is aging over the last decade and will continue to shift towards the aging population over the next two decades. In addition, the growth of the resident population, particularly among the Pakeha population, has been negligible or negative. These trends suggest that immigration is needed in New Zealand to sustain any population or economic growth. Furthermore, the current system of social and economic support for the elderly residents may not be sustainable in the near future without further injections of young adults and in particular, injections of immigrants.

Also, there is apparently little support for the claims made by the Post Primary Teachers Association that there is an increasing demand for secondary school teachers since the number of youth has been decreasing over the last decade. Any alleged expected increase in demand therefore has to arise from sources other than expected increasing student enrollment. However, due to the increasing share of Asian youth in Christchurch, there may be a resulting increase in educational resources to cope with this non-tradition demand.

Also, several high schools in Christchurch has been actively recruiting fee paying students from overseas, especially from Asia, to supplement their operating income and provide their students with a more internationalized education. In addition, teachers and Board of Trustees also perceived the academic benefit of good role models in work habits and the national economic benefit of fostering trade links and integration with Asia (Bennett, 1998). With each foreign student paying approximately NZ$10,000 in fees, the income thus generated formed a substantial portion of the many schools' operating revenue¹⁵, and many of these schools need the money (Bennett, 1998).

The number of international students attending schools in New Zealand has more than doubled between 1992 and 1996 (Ministry of Education, 1996). In 1996, there were 5,603 foreign students in New Zealand schools and the majority of these students (72%) were enrolled in forms 5-7. Of the 5,603 students, 4,772 were fee-paying¹⁶, 308 were supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), and 527 were exchange students. While the majority of those supported by MFAT were from the Pacific Islands, the majority of the fee-paying students were from Asia (94.2%). Table 5 reports the Asian fee-paying students in New Zealand schools.¹⁷ Korea provided the largest share with 22.0%, followed by Japan with 21.8%, Thailand with 18.1%, Taiwan with 13.6%, Hong Kong with10.4%, Malaysia with 7.2%, and the other Asian countries made up the remaining 6.9%.

Table 5: Asian Fee-Paying Students in New Zealand

Source: Bennett (1998).

One apparent observation from Table 5 is that the secondary school sector and the tertiary sector seems to be quite independent, drawing from different sources for their students. The "staircase effect" appears to be rather weak internally; that is many of the foreign students attending secondary schools in New Zealand do not proceed to the tertiary sector in New Zealand. Bennett (1998) claimed that there is evidence that many students who excel at Bursary go on to more prestigious, non-New Zealand universities.¹⁸ If this is indeed true, then the tertiary sector should work together with the secondary school sector to better facilitate the transition of these students into the tertiary sector in New Zealand.

Besides prestige, students are also concerned with other factors such as cost, living environment and quality of education. For students who have been through the local secondary schools, their satisfaction with their schools and their relationships with fellow students will also significantly affect their choice. Perhaps more effort should be channeled into increasing the customer satisfaction and strengthening the ties between local and foreign students in order to develop a stronger customer loyalty so that the foreign students would continue to choose New Zealand as their tertiary education provider. The results of this study therefore should also be of great interest to tertiary education providers in New Zealand.