Download Economic Forum Agenda 3 March 2011

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Economic Forum will be held on:
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
Thursday 3 March 2011
1.30pm
Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland
Economic Forum
OPEN AGENDA
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson
Deputy Chairperson
Councillors
Anae Arthur Anae
Cameron Brewer
Sandra Coney, QSO
Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO
Ann Hartley, JP
Mike Lee
Des Morrison
Richard Northey, ONZM
Wayne Walker
Penny Webster
George Wood, CNZM
Ex-officio
His Worship the Mayor, Len Brown, JP
Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse
(Quorum 7 members)
Carmen Fernandes
Committee Secretary
25 February 2011
Contact Telephone: (09) 301-0101
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Note:
The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy
unless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contact
the relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
PROCEDURAL
1
Apologies
5
2
Declarations of Interest
5
3
Confirmation of minutes
5
4
Leave of absence
5
5
Acknowledgements
5
6
Petitions
5
7
Deputations
5
8
Extraordinary Business
5
9
Notices of Motion
6
10
Presentation from Telecom New Zealand
7
DECISION MAKING
Reports of Chief Executive
11
Economic Development Strategy Update
12
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
17
13
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011
31
14
Request to hold a joint meeting with the Social and Community
Development Forum on Thursday, 7 April 2011
35
15
9
Consideration of Extraordinary Business Items
INFORMATION
Reports of Chief Executive
16
17
Presentation from Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development
Limited (ATEED)
37
Consideration of Extraordinary Information Items
Page 3
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
1
Apologies
An apology from Councillor Sandra Coney for non-attendance has been received.
2
Declaration of interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making
when a conflict arises between their role as an elected representative and any private or
other external interest they might have.
At the close of the agenda no requests for declarations of interest had been received.
3
Confirmation of minutes
3.1
4
Meeting minutes Economic Forum, 3 Feb 2011
Leave of absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
5
Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
6
Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests for petitions had been received.
7
Public Forum
A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to
address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 5 minutes per
item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.
At the close of the agenda no requests to speak had been received.
8
Extraordinary business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if(a)
The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b)
The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the
public,(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent
meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,Page 5
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
(a)
(b)
That item may be discussed at that meeting if(i)
That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local
authority; and
(ii)
the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time
when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting;
but
no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item
except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of he local authority for further
discussion.”
At the close of the agenda no requests for extraordinary business had been received.
9
Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no notices of motion had been received.
Page 6
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 10
Presentation from Telecom New Zealand
File No.: CP2011/00834
Executive Summary
Telecom New Zealand will present to the Economic Forum on the opportunities for rural
broadband in Auckland.
Recommendation
That the Presentation from Telecom New Zealand be received.
Presentation from Telecom New Zealand
Page 7
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 11
Economic Development Strategy Update
File No.: CP2011/00835
Executive Summary
This report provides an update on progress towards the draft Economic Development Strategy
(EDS) and proposes a strategic framework to frame further definition of the EDS. The strategic
framework developed builds on the Mayoral vision, which aims towards Auckland being the
World’s most liveable city. The draft framework is seeking to promote three overarching strategic
priorities:
1. Investment in a step change in Auckland’s economic performance, especially through exports
and internationalisation, with a particular focus on:
o Developing an internationally connected innovation ecosystem
o Growing Aucklanders’ skills, education and learning
2. A business friendly and well functioning city; and
3. Quality city form and design.
Once the strategic framework is endorsed by the Economic Development Forum, further work
would be undertaken by officers to identify the focus and priority actions and performance
indicators within the framework. This would be presented to the April Economic Forum for
discussion and further refinement.
Recommendations
a)
That the “Economic Development Strategy Update” report be received.
b)
That the Economic Forum
i)
Endorse the general approach taken in the draft strategic framework as set
out in this paper and shown in Attachment A
Background
A draft Economic Development Strategy (EDS) will be released for consultation in June 2011,
following approval from the Economic Forum and Regional Operations Development Committee.
This timing aligns with the release of the draft Auckland Plan. It is intended that the final EDS be
adopted by Council at the same time as the Auckland Plan later in the year with agreed economic
development projects being included within the 2012-2022 Long Term Plan (LTP). This timeframe
will also allow the Council to work with other key economic agencies (especially the New Zealand
Government) to ensure that alignment and coordination around the goals, strategies and actions
in EDS can be achieved.
The final EDS will become the guiding document for future economic development planning and
investment decisions of both council and key stakeholders. The document will include:
 a vision statement with supporting economic goals
 strategic priorities
 outcomes and key performance indicators
 strategic plans, transformational projects and actions; and
 a delivery plan.
It will also be supported by a number of technical papers that will provide the full rationale for the
proposals contained within the main document.
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 9
Item 11
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
1.
Development of the draft EDS framework
In November 2010 the Economic Development Forum agreed that for the purpose of the EDS,
economic development could be defined as:
“…a process of making strategic interventions in order to catalyse economic and social wealth,
generating a better quality of life and standard of living for all Aucklanders now and into the future”
In February 2010 the forum, and also the Regional Development and Operations Committee of the
Council:
“…endorsed a strategic approach for the Economic Development Strategy, which recognises that
the EDS will:
 Be developed in partnership with central government, the private sector and the Auckland
community, and be for Auckland as a whole;
 Have an ambitious but credible economic goal, supported by social and environmental
outcomes and aligned to the strategic goals of the Auckland Plan; and
 Be long-term in its focus, underpinned by a short-term economic development action plan
Since December 2010, a series of policy position papers have been developed on a wide range of
strategies issues. These can be grouped into four major strategic themes:




core infrastructure
human capital and social cohesion
attractions and the environment; and
value added business and exports.
These papers have also provided technical input into the drafting of the Auckland Plan discussion
document. Once the papers have been fully completed and edited, they will be made available to
the Forum as a technical publication. While the EDS is not a statutory document, these papers will
serve a similar function to a Section 32 analysis required for any policy statement or plan under
the Resource Management Act 1991.
2.
Draft EDS Framework
At the February Economic Forum an initial diagram of a draft strategic framework for the economic
development strategy was shown and discussed. The diagram summarised the key themes from
the technical documents and a recent Economic Development Strategy workshop held with
council officers and officers from the Ministry for Economic Development, COMET, Auckland
Transport, Waterfront Auckland and Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development.
The Economic Forum provided a number of comments on the draft strategic framework. Feedback
also has been received from the senior Council officials, the Mayor’s Office and from officers
involved in the Auckland Plan process. As a result, the framework continues to be developed in
order to give effect to the Mayor’s vision for Auckland as the “world’s most liveable city – an
internationally competitive, prosperous economy for all Aucklanders”, through (i) investment in a
step change in Auckland’s economic performance, especially through exports and
internationalisation (ii) the creation of a business friendly and well functioning city and (iii)
ensuring quality city form and design, (refer Appendix 1 for the proposed strategic framework).
The three key elements of the strategic framework are discussed below.
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 10
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
The key platform of the EDS would be investment to generate a step change in the economic
performance of Auckland, which would lead improvements in terms of relative prosperity. Two
principal economic priorities within the framework are proposed to create this step change.
i) An Innovation Ecosystem
The first is to develop Auckland into an internationally connected innovation ecosystem. Research
undertaken by the Ministry of Economic Development has indicated that, relative to other
international cities, Auckland is a mid to low innovation performer on the World stage. Businesses
in Auckland generally have difficulty commercialising ideas and knowledge, and as a result are
unable to properly capitalise on the creativity and inventiveness, which is key attribute of the City’s
(and New Zealand’s) culture. Auckland businesses have a low level of investment in R&D, have
low rates of patent activity, and lacks the type of innovation infrastructure found in moist major
cities. For example Auckland still does not have a science and technology park or other specific
innovation centre. Businesses in Auckland are often not aware of innovation as a key component
in business successes and tend to rely on internal resources for product and process innovation.
These issues are exacerbated by shallow capital markets and an investment environment which
has been skewed towards unproductive activity.
On the positive side Auckland has all of the actors and institutions required for an innovation
system already present in the city (for example tertiary institutions and education agencies). There
is also considerable R&D breadth and depth within our research and education organisations that
needs to be better coordinated and leveraged. Underlying this is a culture of inventiveness and
creativity that is a major potential competitive advantage for Auckland and New Zealand.
There is therefore a major opportunity for the Council to lead the development of an innovation
framework/ecosystem for Auckland. The strategy will identify a range of targeted initiatives such
as supporting high value internationally competitive sectors, encouraging exporting, enhancing
internationalisation and connectivity, improving access to capital, and accelerating research and
development.
ii) Skills, education and learning
The second priority area is to grow Aucklanders’ skills, education and learning. This is closely
related to the innovation ecosystem as the essential input into that system is skilled human capital.
There are pockets of high unemployment and underemployment in Auckland which points to a
mismatch in the supply and demand for jobs. Qualified workers are not able to find jobs that match
their skills due to barriers to participation (for example migrants and people with disabilities) and
low skilled workers needing up-skilling (including job readiness). In some areas significant
numbers of youth are leaving school with limited skill levels and low job readiness, and are falling
out of the employment market altogether.
The tertiary sector offers excellent advanced learning opportunities however trades training is still
limited. The skills pathways is generally linear- relying on progression to university as the main
model, rather than reflecting the range of skills necessary to fully support our sectors and services
of competitive advantage. Given the changing face of Auckland’s working population, multiple and
flexible pathways must be a priority to engage learners in further education.
Auckland’s share of the working population with tertiary education is low by international
standards, although a high proportion of Auckland’s occupations are highly skilled. This indicates
a high level of loss to overseas markets and a reliance on migrant workers. Auckland’s businesses
are often small, and do not have the capacity to up-skill employees, leading to low levels of labour
and capital productivity.
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 11
Item 11
A. Investment in a step change in Auckland’s economic performance
Item 11
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
On the positive side Auckland has a large migrant population who are often highly skilled.
International students make both a short and long-term contribution to the economy which needs
to be maximised. Auckland’s large and growing youth population offers great potential for the
future, if it can be adequately trained and skilled to meet the needs of tomorrow’s high tech and
niche industries. There are significant community and local learning initiatives already underway
across Auckland, which can be supported and enhanced- for example COMET, the Skills Highway
and the Computer Clubhouse. Auckland has a range of world class education and research
facilities and Auckland has the highest concentration of education providers in New Zealand.
The opportunity exists for the Council to lead, coordinate and undertake interventions to improve
labour market productivity, the acceleration of early childhood learning programmes, generation of
employment pathways for school leavers, better skills forecasting and programmes to ensure skills
shortages and misalignments are met/mitigated.
The framework also indentifies a range of other important underpinning economic platforms, which
include:
 Creating a vibrant creative world city through investment in the visitor economy and its
underpinning infrastructure, holding major events, supporting creative industries, and actively
promoting Auckland’s brand
 The creation of an Iwi/Maori economic powerhouse were partnering opportunities would be
maximised, Maori identity would be promoted as a part of Auckland’s brand, and current
roadblocks in education and skills addressed
 The achievement of an innovative rural economy that is based on high value agricultural
industry and high technology, and where relationships with tourism and food sectors are
maximised
 Establishment of a diverse cultural economy which builds on the opportunities presented by
migrants, where diversity is celebrated and capitalised on, where opportunities presented by
existing and emerging ethnic precincts are maximised, and which is underpinned by
community economic development programmes
 The achievement of a clean, green eco-city where leading edge clean technology industries
are encouraged, energy and resource efficient infrastructure is in place, and weightless export
industries are promoted.
B. Quality city form and design
Supporting the investment in Auckland’s economic performance is quality city form and design.
This would mean ensuring that Auckland has a city centre of an international standard and that
outstanding urban design and heritage is promoted/protected across Auckland. Priority would also
need to be put on ensuring there is sufficient provision of industrial and business land to meet
future business needs. Affordable housing options would be promoted, and that the natural
environment and amenities are adequately protected and leveraged off. Local economic
development opportunities, especially around town centres and business precincts would need to
be further developed and supported, in conjunction with Local Boards.
C. A business friendly and well functioning city
The other important platform in the proposed framework is the need for a business friendly and
well functioning city in terms of efficient regulation, sensible land use planning and the provision of
world class economic infrastructure, especially in terms of transport and broadband. A key part of
this priority is the promotion, within the Council itself of a positive and can-do approach towards
economic development and the business community. This could include further support for
customer-focused and efficient business processes *(for example resource consents) and also a
customer-focused approach towards compliance and enforcement which will help develop
Auckland’s national and international identity as a great place to do business.
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 12
3.
Next steps
The Economic Forum’s feedback on the proposed draft strategic framework for the EDS is now
sought. Further work is currently being undertaken to develop the priority actions for Council and
our partners under each of these platforms.
This information will be presented to the April Economic Forum meeting for discussion and further
refinement. The information presented will include the rationale, approach and key actions.
It is intended that the outcomes agreed at the April Economic Forum will form the basis of informal
consultation with Council’s key stakeholders.
4.
Performance Measurement Framework
As part of the EDS development, further work is underway on developing an appropriate
performance measurement structure. Measures are being considered that align with the
economic platforms already identified in the report. A review of the GDP per capital goal is the
subject of another report to this forum.
Decision Making
The draft EDS strategic framework is presented in Appendix 1 for discussion and refinement by
the Economic Forum.
Significance of Decision
This project does not trigger the Significance Policy.
Consultation
A stakeholder engagement plan is being developed to identify how key stakeholders will be
involved in shaping the EDS. The plan will outline strategies for engaging:
-
Elected representatives
Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs)
Central Government
Council advisory panels: Pacific Peoples, Ethnic, Business, Rural, Youth, Disability (tbc),
Maori Statutory Board, the online People’s Panel
Business Improvement Districts (BIDS)
Business and community (not-for-profit) sectors, and the
General public.
Methods for engaging stakeholders are expected to be wide-ranging, maximising opportunities for
input. Where possible, stakeholder engagement will be coordinated with other council and
ATEED activities to create efficiencies avoid duplication.
Work is being undertaken to align engagement activities with that of the Auckland Plan and local
board plans. A draft stakeholder engagement and communications plan for the Auckland Plan will
be reported to the Auckland Future Vision Committee on 1 March 2011.
In addition, the local board symposium on the 18th February provided an opportunity to start
conversations about economic issues and actions at the local level with local board members.
There may also be opportunities to explore these matters further as part of future local board
workshops.
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 13
Item 11
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 11
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
An EDS stakeholder engagement plan will be presented to the Economic Development Forum at
its April meeting.
Financial and Resourcing Implications
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Legal and Legislative Implications
There are no legal or legislative implications associated with this project.
Implementation Issues
Delays in implementing the recommended decision will have an impact on the ability of the
Council to deliver an EDS by June 2011. The draft EDS is considered a key input into the
Auckland (Spatial) Plan.
Attachment
No.
Title
A
Auckland: The World's most Liveable City
Page
15
Signatories
Author
David Hawkey, Manager Economic Strategy and Policy
Authorisers
Harvey Brookes, Manager Economic Development
Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 14
Attachment A
Item 11
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Economic Development Strategy Update
Page 15
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 12
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic
Development Strategy
File No.: CP2011/00724
Executive Summary
On 3 February 2011 the Economic Forum endorsed a recommendation that the Economic
Development Strategy (EDS) should have an ambitious but credible economic goal. As a result,
ten potential economic goals have subsequently been analysed by a consultant, Market
Economics Limited in terms of their economic feasibility.
The analysis undertaken by Market Economics Limited indicates that an economic goal which
requires Auckland to increase its Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDP) growth enough to
move up 20 places within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) world city rankings series within 20 years, is potentially the most appropriate goal for
the EDS in terms of economic ambition and reasonableness. Officers have reviewed this
analysis and are recommending this economic goal to the Economic Forum for its endorsement.
Recommendations
a)
That the “A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy”
report be received.
b)
That the Economic Forum endorses the economic goal to move Auckland up 20
places within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development world
city rankings series within 20 years.
c)
That the Economic Forum notes that further refinement of this goal may be
undertaken.
Background
The Economic Forum endorsed on 3 February 2011 a recommendation that the EDS should have
an ambitious but credible economic goal, which also should be supported by social and
environmental outcomes and be aligned to the Auckland Plan. The economic goal would be an
aspirational target that the EDS would seek to achieve through the on-going underpinning
interventions made by the Auckland Council, central government and other parties.
A consultant, Market Economics Limited, was commissioned to test the economic reasonableness
of ten potential economic goals, including the initially proposed goal of increasing growth in
Auckland’s GDP by enough to rank within the top 10 cities of the world in terms of GDP per capita
within 20 years. Market Economics Ltd.’s analysis and findings are attached as Attachment A of
this report. In brief, the ten potential economic goals and Market Economics Limited’s analysis of
these is summarised below.
Potential Growth Goals:
1. Top 10 in 20: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will allow it to rank (in terms of
GDP per capita) within the top 10 cities of the world within 20 years (i.e. by 2031).
2. 20 in 20 OECD: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will allow it to gain 20 places (in
terms of GDP per capita) in the OECD world city rankings series within 20 years.
3. Top 10 in the South: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will allow it to be one of the
top 10 cities (in terms of GDP per capita) in the southern hemisphere within 20 years.
4. Third in Australasia: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will place it in the top three
cities (in terms of GDP per capita) in Australasia within 20 years.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 17
Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
5. Top 10 in ASEAN/Australasia: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will place it in
the top 10 cities (in terms of GDP per capita) in the ASEAN/Australasian region within 20
years.
6. 2025 Task Force: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will allow New Zealand to
have living standards comparable to Australia by 2025.
7. Top half of OECD: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will place it in the top half of
OECD cities (in terms of GDP per capita) within 20 years.
8. 20% better than Historic: Auckland’s GDP will improve by 20% compared to historic GDP
trends.
9. Top in the South: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate which will make it the top city in the
southern hemisphere (in terms of GDP per capita) within 20 years.
10. 20 in 20 Demo: Auckland’s GDP will grow at a rate that will allow it to gain 20 places in the
Demographia (rather than OECD) ranking within 20 years.
Methodology:
The methodology applied by Market Economics Limited to determine the economic feasibility of
the potential economic goals is detailed in section 4 (pp. 23 and 24) of Attachment A. In
summary, the methodology applied:
1. Determines the growth rate of GDP that is required to achieve each potential economic
goal;
2. Tests the goals’ reasonability by comparing their growth rates to historic growth of
Auckland’s GDP. This test classifies each goal as Probable (i.e. may happen under status
quo conditions), Ambitious, Optimistic or Unlikely; and
3. Tests the reasonability of three Ambitious/Optimistic goals with the Auckland Region
Economic Futures Model, which determines the level of growth required in exports,
consumption and productivity to achieve each goal’s GDP growth rate, for three exchange
rate scenarios. It needs to be noted that the required rate of GDP growth to meet the
proposed economic goals is relatively sensitive to the exchange rate assumptions made (in
terms of NZ$/US$), which is why three scenarios (high, medium, low) are applied.
Results:
Market Economics Limited tested the potential economic goals. First, they compared the required
GDP growth against historical trends. This analysis indicated that the following goals are
economically reasonable:
1. 20 in 20 OECD.
2. Third in Australasia.
3. NZ Top half of OECD.
4. 20% better than Historic.
5. 20 in 20 Demo.
Of these five potential goals, Market Economics Limited also indicated that 20 in 20 OECD and
20% better than Historic can be measured easily. These two potential economic goals were also
tested on whether they are feasible in terms of required export growth, changes in domestic
consumption and improvements in productivity. Market Economics Limited indicates that they still
remain feasible.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 18
On balance, the analysis indicates that, of the range of potential goals examined, two appear to
emerge as economically reasonable (especially if the NZ$/US$ exchange rate is assumed to
remain strong) and more easily measurable. These were: 20 in 20 OECD and 20% better than
Historic. The analysis shows that the 20 in 20 OECD goal is the most economically realistic (i.e.
in terms of realistic levels of required export, consumption and productivity growth). Given that
this goal is also still relatively aspirational in nature, officers recommend the 20 in 20 OECD goal
as the preferred option.
Decision Making
N/A
Significance of Decision
N/A
Consultation
Consultation will be undertaken as part of planned EDS consultation processes. This will
include consultation with internal stakeholders, Council Controlled Organisations, the MED,
Local and other relevant boards, and the public.
Financial and Resourcing Implications
N/A
Legal and Legislative Implications
N/A
Implementation Issues
N/A
Attachment
No.
Title
A
Auckland Council: Auckland Economic Growth Agenda
Page
20
Signatories
Author
Gavin Millynn, Policy Advisor
Authorisers
David Hawkey, Manager Economic Strategy and Polic
Harvey Brookes, Manager Economic Development
Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 19
Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
11 February 2011
Attachment A
Auckland Council: Auckland
Economic Growth Agenda
Draft
Prepared by:
Dr Garry McDonald
Rodney Yeoman
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 20
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
AUCKLAND COUNCIL: AUCKLAND ECONOMIC GROWTH AGENDA
Item 12
1 BACKGROUND
As an aspirational goal, it has been suggested that Council works to grow the Auckland economy to a point where (real) GDP per capita would be high enough to gain a place in the top 10 cities of the world within 20 years (in terms of GDP per capita).The Economic Development team within the Council has suggested a number of alternative goals. Market Economics (M.E) has been commissioned by the Ministry of Economic Development (MED)to complete two sets of work with regard to growth goals for Auckland City. Auckland Council in collaboration with MED has commissioned M.E to build on the first MED study to test several new growth goal options. 2 INTRODUCTION
In the following sections we outline the modelling caveats andlimitations, outline our approach and summarisethe overall results. It is important to note that the modelling was conducted under very tight time constraints, which has meant that a relatively simple technique had to be applied and as such there are associated limitations and caveats which must be understood before the results are considered (see Section 3 for details). The approach applied is described briefly in Section 4, more detail on the modelling and assumptions can be supplied at a later date. The goals which have been tested are defined in Section 5 and the results for each goal are displayed in Section 6. 3 CAVEATS AND LIMITATIONS
There are five caveats and limitations which must be understood and evaluated before policy makers can use this analysis 1 . 3.1 SUGGESTED GOAL
We note that Market Economics is merely providing data from which the attainability and reasonableness of each goal can be measured by policy makers at the Auckland Council. We do not support or endorse the goals as defined in this study. 1
Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and reliability of the information contained in this report, neither Market Economics Limited nor any of its
employees shall be held liable for the information, opinions and forecasts expressed in this report.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 21
Attachment A
The Auckland Council has an objective to grow the regional economy in order to provide more wealth for the city’s residents (Auckland Economic Growth Agenda ‐ EGA). The Auckland Council would like to understand what alternative growth goals could be used in the EGA. These goals would need to be credible, yet sufficiently ambitious to induce a change process anddevelopment. Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
3.2 RESTRAINTS ON GROWTH
The modellingin this study was conducted at an aggregate Auckland Region level (i.e the region as a whole). Given the time constraints it has not been feasible to assess the micro‐level implications. There may be a number of constraints that inhibit Auckland’s ability to exploit all development and growth opportunities. For example, there maybe binding input constraints with respect to labour force (quality and quantity considerations), capital (foreign investment, domestic savings), land supply (zoning and metropolitan boundaries) or foreign inputs. Another possible constraint to growth may include institutional issues (e.g. government policies, management capability) and approaches towards environmental and social impacts. Other potential constraints include infrastructure issues, such as transportation bottelnecks (road, rail, sea and air). In addition, there may also be demand constraints (domestic and international). The Auckland and New Zealand economies are heavily dependent on international demand, we note that the achievement of these goals will be linked to how our exporters compete internationally. Attachment A
We believe that there are some key questions that need to be answered before the soundness of the goals can be assessed with accuracy. For example,  Are there enough resources (labour, capital, land, water etc) available to allow production to grow to reach the goal?  Would national and local institutions or government allow this level of growth (potential environmental degradation (CO2) and social inequality)?  Given the level of domestic demand, what level of exports are required to support growth? 3.3 BASE YEAR
The base year in the model is set as 2006, which was chosen as this was the last year that the OECD publisheda complete list of GDP per capita for the OECD metropolitans. We note that there have been significant economic changes since 2006 with the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) impacting growth on a global level and in most metropolitans. The relative impact of the GFC will have changed the rankings of most cities.We are unable to ascertain how Auckland City has performed relative to the other OECD citiessince 2006 as time series information covering the GFC is not currently available. We note that in the model the Auckland GDP per capita between 2006 and 2010 areestimated using World Bank national annual growth rates (some of which are negative). 3.4 DATA SETS
This work has combined many data sets from various sources which may have slightly different characteristics. In the given time frame we have been unable to verify that all the data sets are entirely consistent. For example some of the characteristics that could not thoroughly verified include;  Timing: Some data sets maybe calendar year while others maybe June or March year end.  Exchange Rate: We believe that most of the data sets are defined in US dollars, the metadata for some of the data sets is ambiguous and does not clearly indicate the currency reported.  Geographic Definitions:The geographic definition of each city in the data sets is not discussed in detail in any of the metadata. For example, we know that the recent change in the spatial geography of Auckland is not taken into account in the data sets. We suspect that the spatial definition of other cities may also havechanged. 3.5 SCENARIOS AND GROWTH FORECASTS FOR THE OECD CITIES
The City level forecasts used in each of the scenarios are based on historic growth rates. This method of forecasting has limitations, especially where cities and nations have shown strong or weak historic growth. This forecasting technique does not attempt to model the underlying activity of the economic actors in each city and as such will be a ‘best approximation’. However we note that it would be exceedingly A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 22
difficult, and time and cost intensive,to develop detailed economic forecasting models for each city in the OECD metropolitan group. The weakness of historic trend forecasting is that some cities will be assumed to grow by a rate which is higher/lower than would be estimated using more detailed econometric forecasting or General Equilibrium Modelling. For example the Irish citieshaveshown very strong growth over the past three decades with an average growth in per capita GDP of 3.8% per annum. In the national BAU scenario the model assumes that Dublin’s GDP per capita will grow by 3.8% per annum until 2040. Under this scenario Dublin will have the highest GDP per capita in the OECD by 2040. This result seems optimistic given recent economic events which are still unfolding in Ireland. If detailed econometric or General Equilibrium Modelling was conducted for Dublin the forecast growth would likely be different from the historic trend forecast. Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
However we believe that the forecasting method applied here is reasonable given the time available to us,the breadth of the forecasting required and the initial scope of this work. It is our view that the relative ranking and forecast for each individual city in the list for each scenario should not be relied on in isolation. The ‘overs and unders’ for the group of cities will tend to offset each other, which means that the overall goal under each scenario will be a useful guide as to the future. 4 APPROACHAND METHODOLOGY
This study has built on the initial model developed in the 2010 study to establish the growth required at an aggregate (Auckland) level for a range of goals. This model would only test the rationality of the aggregate level of growth (i.e. is this level of growth realistic given historic results). There are seven main steps in the modelling; a. Establish GDP per capita in all OECD Cities:In the previous study we employed three dynamic future scenarios, IMF & BAU 2 , National BAU 3 and City BAU 4 . The three dynamic goals modelled the potential growth in all OECD cities to take into account the fluid nature of the goal. These three scenarios produce GDP per capita for each city in US dollars terms per annum out to 2031. b. GoalModelling:Under each of the scenarios we can establish a ranking for each city in the year 2031. The goal dictates which ranked city and its associated GDP per capita is relevant. This step provides the benchmark of activity which quantifies the value (in US dollars) of the goal. c. Place Goal in Auckland Context: The US dollar goal is then converted into New Zealand dollars using three exchange rate levels. As there is much uncertainty with regard to exchange rates we have applied three rates that encompass the range of likely future rates, high ($0.80), medium ($0.50) and low ($0.40). Note:At this point we have 9 scenarios for each goal (i.e. 3 dynamic growth futures by 3 exchange rate futures) d. Establish Auckland’s Real GDP: We then combine the required New Zealand dollar value per capita to the Statistics New Zealand ‐ SNZ (medium) population forecasts to estimate total Real GDP required by 2031 (or 2025). 2
This scenario assumed that all OECD cities grow/decline at the rate set out in the IMF national projections (2010-2015). While in the long-term the cities grow by
the historic growth trend set out in the WB national data set (1980-2009).
3This second dynamic scenario assumed that all OECD cities grow by the national growth rates indicated in the historic long-term trend (from WB data).
4The City BAU assumes that the OECD Cities continue to grow at the rate indicated over the period 2000-2007.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 23
Attachment A
Conversely there will also be some cities that have had a low growth history.It is likely that many of them will actually grow faster in the future than we have estimated in each of the scenarios. Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 12
e. Calculate Compound Growth Rate: The 2031 level of Real GDP is compared to the 2010 level to estimate growth per annum. f. Growth Threshold:The required rates of growth for each goal have been compared to historic rates of growth. This provides an initial test of reasonableness, thatindicates which goals may be unrealistically optimistic. Any goal that requires growth to exceed the 95thpercentile of historic growth is defined as unachievable and is eliminated from the study. Attachment A
g. Measure Attainability of the Goal: We then apply a second testof attainability and reasonableness to the remaining goals using the Auckland Region Economic Futures Model (AREFM) 5 . a. AREFM: The base case was set using an AREFM run that assumesmedium population growth (Statistics New Zealand projections) andhighgrowth in gross fixed capital formation and exports (EFM High). b. AREFM exports shocked:We then shocked the level of exports 6 in the model until Real GDP in Auckland met the level required for each goal. We applied the following constraints: i. Labour Force Participation: While some increase in labour force participation is reasonable we believe that most of the increase in activity would have to be driven by growth in productivity. For this reason we have increased the growth in productivity in the model to ensure that labour force participation stays within reasonable bounds. ii. Consumption: The growth in real consumption per capita was increased to maintain the ratio between income and spend. iii. Population: The population is restricted to the medium growth scenario.Note that if the goal is achieved the growth in income may cause more internal and external migration to Auckland. c. Results: This method allows us to establish the additional growth in exports, consumption and productivity required to meet the goal. 5 GOALS
In this study we have tested ten growth goals. Some of these goals have been suggested by representatives from Auckland Council and others have been developed by M.E. 1) 20 in 20 OECD: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to gain (move up) 20 places in the OECD rankings in 20 years (by 2031). 2) Top 10 in the South: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to be in the top 10 cities in the southern hemisphereby 2031. 3) Third in Australasia: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to be in the top 3 cities in the Australasia by 2031 7 . 4) Top 10 in the ASEAN/Australasia: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to be in the top 10 cities in the ASEAN/Australasian region by 2031. For details of the model contact Garry McDonald.
All exports for each industry were increased by the same proportion.
7Data from Demographia (2005) Gross Domestic Product (GDP-PPP).
5
6
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 24
Attachment A
5) 2025 Task Force: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow New Zealand to have living standards that are comparable to Australia by 2025 8 . 6) Top half of OECD:that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow New Zealand to be in the top half of OECDcities by 2031 9 . 7) 20% better than Historic: A goal which compares Auckland growth to past performance. 8) Top 10 in 20: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to be placed in the top 10 OECD rankings in 20 years (by 2031). 9) Top in the South: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to be in the top city in the southern hemisphere by 2031. 10) 20 in 20 Demo: that Auckland should strive to grow Real GDP per capita at a rate which will allow Auckland to gain (move up) 20 places in the Demographia rankings in 20 years (by 2031). Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
8Calculated by assuming that Auckland has 25% of the national population and that the GDP per capita of the non-Auckland New Zealanders is estimated for the
future using OECD national GDP per capita data. This means that Auckland GDP per capita must grow faster to pull the national average up in order to catch up to
Australia.
9Calculated by assuming that Auckland has 25% of the national population and that the GDP per capita of the non-Auckland New Zealanders is estimated for the
future using OECD national GDP per capita data. This means that Auckland GDP per capita must grow faster to pull the national average up to become 17th in the
OECD.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 25
Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
6 FINDINGS
The results from the modellingare displayed in this sectionwhich begins with the initial test of reasonableness that compares the required growth for reach each goalto historic growth (subsection 6.1).Then the results from the final step in the study are displayed in sub section 6.2. 6.1 GROWTH THRESHOLD
Attachment A
The accompanying Table summarisesthe results from the first five steps described in the methodology section.We suggest that the reasonableness of each goal should be tested against historic growth trends andwe believe that any goal that requiresgrowth to be significantly higher than historic averagesis probably unachievable. In this study we have used national historic growth data and percentile calculations to define four ranges of growth: 1) Unlikely: is defined as growth exceeding the 95th percentile for sustained periods 10 (over 6.2% represented by red shading). Any goal that requires growth to exceed 6.2% per annum is too optimistic. 2) Optimistic: is defined as growth which exceeds the 85th percentile (over 5.1% per annum represented by purple shading). Only 3 years of the past 20 have exhibited growth that exceeded the 85th percentile. We believe that it will be difficult to maintain growth above the 85th percentile for any sustained period of time. 3) Ambitious:growth which exceeds the average historic rate (2.3% per annum represented by green shading). 4) Probable: growth which is below the historic average rate (less than 2.3% per annum represented by blue shading). First, two of the goals should be ignored as they Exchange rate
Goal
High
Medium
Low
have been achieved, Top 10 in the South and Top 10 a) 20 in 20 (OECD)
3.3%
5.5%
6.6%
in ASEAN and Australasia. The modelling shows that a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
3.4%
5.6%
6.7%
Auckland is likely to be in a position to meet these c) City BAU
6.1%
8.4%
9.5%
goals by 2031 without substantial changes in its b) Top 10 in the South
a) IMF & BAU
growth path. Probable
b) National BAU
Secondly, we believe that goals e (2025 Task Force), h(Top in South) and i(Top 10 in 20), are probably too optimistic given historic rates of growth. Although we do note that some cities (OECD) have historic growth rates which are comparable to that required to meet these goals. However we question whether this level of growth can be sustained over 15‐20 years in Auckland. Finally, we believe that the remaining four goals are the more realistic goals, a (20 in 20 (OECD)), c (Third in Australasia), f (NZ Top half of OECD),g(20% better than Historic) and j (20 in 20 (Demo)). We note that some of these goals will be hard to measure, which may limit their usefulness from a policy perspective. c) City BAU
c) Third in Australasia
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
3.7%
3.4%
d) Top 10 in ASEAN and Australasia
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
c) City BAU
5.9%
5.6%
7.0%
6.7%
Probable
e) 2025 Task Force
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
6.6%
6.5%
9.8%
9.7%
11.3%
11.3%
f) NZ Top half of OECD
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
3.0%
3.4%
5.2%
5.6%
6.3%
6.7%
g) 20% Better than Historic
4.2%
6.5%
7.5%
h) Top 10 in 20
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
c) City BAU
4.8%
5.0%
8.4%
7.1%
7.3%
10.8%
8.1%
8.4%
11.9%
i) Top in the South
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
4.6%
4.4%
6.9%
6.6%
8.0%
7.7%
j) 20 in 20 (Demo)
a) IMF & BAU
b) National BAU
3.3%
3.3%
5.5%
5.5%
6.6%
6.6%
In the past 20 years growth has only exceed this level of growth once. We believe that it is very unlikely that growth will exceed the historic 95th percentile
continuously for more than a handful of years in the future.
10
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 26
For example the data used in the Third in Australasia goal and the 20 in 20 (Demo)were drawn from a 2005 report which has not been updated in over half a decade. The Council may find it hard to test Auckland’s performance against this goal as data for some Australian cities (Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane) is not collected regularly. Equally, goal fmay be hard to test as the impact of Auckland’s growth may not be easily separated from other effects (Did Auckland cause NZ to grow?). Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
For this reason we believe that the remaining two goals are probably the best of the group. The 20 in 20 seems to be achievable (especially if the exchange rate remains strong)and it will be relatively easy to measure performance given that an entirely independent body(OECD) provides regular data. The 20% better than historic goal is probably obtainable, however this goal does not rely on relativities and will be of little use in the future if there are major changes (negative or positive) in the global economic systems. In the following section we display the AREFM results for three of the goals.The initial test shows that the 20 in 20 (OECD) and the 20% better than historic goals are probably achievable and that they can be measured easily so these two should be tested further. We have also elected to test the 3rd in Australasia as this goal is achievable and interesting from a South Pacific regional perspective. The results have been displayed visually in graphs with Real GDP growth against exports, consumption and productivity. The model establishes the level of growth require in exports, domestic consumption and productivity in order to reach each of the goals under three exchange rate scenarios. For each scenario there were between three and nine scenarios. We applied the final step (measured attainability using AREFM) to three scenarios for each goal(the highest, lowest and middle). These scenarios corresponded to high, low and medium exchange rates. To provide an indication as to the continuum of outcomes we have calculated the required rate of growth in exports, consumption and productivity to meet real GDP growth ratesat 1% intervals. This data was used to estimate the ‘best fit’ second order polynomial (black line).Each graph indicates the historic national average (National) and the AREFM results (EFM High). The graphs have maintained the colour code and percentile technique applied in the previous table.The red shading indicates the growth rates which are unsustainable and therefore it is unlikely that goals in this part of the graph will be achievable. The blue area represents growth which would be lower than historic. The goals that fall in the zones shaded green (ambitious) and purple (optimistic) are the goals which are of interest. Export and Real GDP Growth However we do note that this model has not examined the link between exchange rates and exports. It isobvious that domestic exports become more Annual Growth in Exports
The results show that export growth for all three goals is probably unobtainable if the exchange rate is weak (40 cents against US dollar). The 12.0%
results show that the “20% better than 20 in 20 (low $)
10.0%
historic” goal is also unlikely if the exchange 20% Better (low $)
Unlikely
rate is less than 50 cents against the US 8.0%
3rd in Aus (low $)
Optimistic
20% Better (med $)
dollar. The remaining five scenarios are 3rd in Aus (med $)
6.0%
20 in 20 (med $)
achievable, with the 20 in 20 being the 20% Better (high $)
3rd in Aus (high $)
most achievable goal. 4.0% Ambitious
20 in 20 (high $)
National
2.0%
EFM High
Probable
50%
0.0%
0%
1%
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
2%
85%
3%
4%
5%
95%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Annual Growth in Real GDP
Page 27
Attachment A
6.2 MEASURE ATTAINABLITY OF THE GOALS
Item 12
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
competitive when the NZ dollar is weak. This implies that thereis a negative relationship between export growth and the local currency,therefore it may be realistic to expect higher export growth when the New Zealand dollar is weak.However, if domestic exports grow there will be upward pressure on the value of the New Zealand dollar. The link between these two effects has not been accounted for in this study. Consumption and Real GDP Growth: Annual Growth in Consumption 12.0%
10.0%
20 in 20 (low $)
8.0%
20% Better (low $)
Unlikely
3rd in Aus (low $)
6.0%
20% Better (med $)
3rd in Aus (med $)
20 in 20 (med $)
Optimistic
4.0%
Ambitious
20% Better (high $)
3rd in Aus (high $)
20 in 20 (high $)
National
2.0%
Probable
Althoughthese rates of growth in 0.0%
consumption seem high compared to historic 0%
1%
rates, we believe they are reasonable given that Auckland residents will have higher disposable incomethan historically if the goals are achieved. EFM High
50%
2%
85%
3%
4%
5%
95%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Annual Growth in Real GDP
Productivity and Real GDP Growth: The required productivity growth for all three goals is relatively high compared to historic rates. We believe that the growth in productivity required under each goal will require significant shifts in economic activity. However some of the required growth in activity could be supported by increased labour force participation. 12.0%
It is our view that productivity is unlikely to exceed 2.1% per annum over long periods of time which means that rates of growth in the 85th to 95th percentile range are probably too high.As with the previous indicators the results show that the three goals are reasonable if the exchange rate remains strong. However they all become unachievable or unlikely if the exchange rate drops below 50 cents against the US dollar. Annual Growth in Productivity
Attachment A
The consumption growth for all three goals is probably unobtainable if the exchange rate isin the weak to medium range (40‐50 cents against US dollar). While all three goals would require continuous growth in consumption of between 3% per annum and 6% per annum if the exchange rate is medium to high. 10.0%
8.0%
20 in 20 (low $)
Unlikely
6.0%
20% Better (low $)
3rd in Aus (low $)
4.0%
Optimistic
2.0%
Ambitious
0.0%
Probable
0%
1%
20% Better (med $)
3rd in Aus (med $)
20 in 20 (med $)
20% Better (high $)
3rd in Aus (high $)
20 in 20 (high $)
National
EFM High
50%
2%
3%
85%
4%
5%
95%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
Annual Growth in Real GDP
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 28
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
1) 20 in 20 (OECD): This goal becomes unachievable if the exchange rate drops below 44 cents to the US dollar. 2) 3rd in Australasia: This goal becomes unachievable if the exchange rate drops below 45 cents to the US dollar. 3) 20% better than Historic: This goal becomes unachievable if the exchange rate drops below 53 cents to the US dollar. The New Zealand dollar has been below 50 Monthly Exchange Rate:
United States of America Dollars per New Zealand Dollar cents for less than 43 months 11 or less than $0.80
14% of the post float history. This provides NZ $ Strong 13%
an indication that the risk of the dollar $0.70
dropping below 50 cents for long periods is NZ $ Strong/Medium 39%
fairly low. For over 73% of the post float $0.60
history the currency has been in the range NZ $ Medium 34%
of 50 to 70 cents. $0.50
NZ $ Weak 14%
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
$0.40
6.3 CONCLUSION
First we stress that these results are indicative and, given the caveats stated earlier, additional work would need to be undertaken to confirm and validate these findings while improving the robustness of the model framework. This project was completed under tight timeframes which prohibited detailed analysis. The testundertaken in section 6.1 indicated that the required growth rates for three of the goals areboth attainable and ambitious: 20 in 20, third in Australasia and 20% better than historic. These three goals have been tested using the AREFM modelling. The result from the analysis shows that the attainability of these three goals is heavily influenced by the exchange rate,if the exchange rate drops below 44 cents to the US dollar we believe that none of the goals could be reached, if it remains above 70 cents the goals will be a stretch but still achievable. Yours sincerely Dr Garry McDonald Director Market Economics Ltd [email protected] DDI (09) 915 5520
11
The New Zealand currency was floated in 1985.
A Prosperity Goal for the Auckland Economic Development Strategy
Page 29
Attachment A
As a separate indicator the model was solved to establish the achievability tipping point, which is the minimum exchange rate value where each goal becomes unachievable. The following minimum exchange rates were calculated for each goal, Item 12
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for
2011
File No.: CP2011/00789
Executive Summary
This report proposes a calendar of topics and items for presentation and discussion with the
Economic Development Forum over the balance of 2011. It has been structured to align with the
development timeframes for both the Auckland Plan and also the Economic Development
Strategy, so that the forum’s discussions can have the greatest possible influence on these
processes. It also provides the forum the opportunity to link with some of the key external players
in Auckland’s economic development.
Recommendations
a)
That the “Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011 report be
received.
b)
That the Economic Forum
i)
Approve the attached draft calendar of topics for the 2011 Economic Forum
meetings.
Background
In order to maximise the value of the Economic Forum a draft calendar of meetings has been
developed (Attachment A). The calendar reflects:
 The current priority on the production of the draft Auckland Plan and Economic Development
Strategy, and the associated community and stakeholder engagement processes
 The broad range of areas which economic development covers- for example by holding a joint
Economic Development and Social and Community Development Forum in April
 Critical economic development projects, whose success will have a major bearing on
Auckland’s future economic performance (for example the cruise ship terminal and the
convention centre)
 The benefits which will arise by engaging the Forum with range of experts from the sectors of
comparative advantage which are present in Auckland (for example health, food marine, ICT,
film and screen) and ensuring that our strategies reflect their priorities
 Our joint working relationship with Council Controlled Organisatons (CCOs) and in particular
Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Limited. (ATEED)
Three regular items will be provided to every Forum meeting during 2011:
 A Manager’s report on the activities and results of the Economic Development department
 An update on progress with the Economic Development Strategy; and
 An overview on macro-economic issues affecting Auckland from the Council’s Chief Economist
(recruitment for the Chief Economist’s position is still in progress)
Feedback is sought from the Forum on this proposed calendar and any additional items forum
members would like to see brought to, or discussed at the Forum.
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011
Page 31
Item 13
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 13
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
A similar calendar is now under development for the Business Advisory Panel. This panel is
composed of private sector business leaders, chaired by Councillor Cameron Brewer. The panel
expects to meet 3-4 times per year to discuss a range of important economic development issues.
Hence it will be an important source of external information for the Forum. Economic Development
Forum members will have a standing invitation to attend the Panel meetings, so that they might
further connect with members of Auckland’s business community. The first meeting will be on 24
March, at which Greg Clark will be a guest speaker, discussing economic development strategies
for major world cities, including Auckland.
Decision Making
The draft Economic Forum Calendar is presented in Attachment A for discussion and refinement
by the Economic Forum.
Significance of Decision
This project does not trigger the Significance Policy.
Consultation
There are no stakeholder consultation implications arising from this report, expect to the extent
that the stakeholders identified as potential guests will be invited to the appropriate Economic
Development Forum meetings.
Financial and Resourcing Implications
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Legal and Legislative Implications
There are no legal or legislative implications associated with this project.
Implementation Issues
There are no implementation issues associated with this report.
Attachment
No.
Title
A
Calendar of Topics for the 2011 Economic Forum meetings
Page
33
Signatories
Author
Harvey Brookes, Manager Economic Development
Authoriser
Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011
Page 32
Regular Items
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Special Items (report)
Broadband update
April
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Social Lending
Cruise Infrastructure- results of
review
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
Chairman and Manager’s Update
Economic Development Strategy
Update
Chief Economist Update
International Relations Strategy
Joint Economic - Social &
Community Development
Forum
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011
Discussion Items
Draft Economic Strategy including
Goals
Introduction to ATEED, incl. RWC
update
The social and people dimensions
of economic development
Introduction to Sectors of
Comparative Advantage in
Auckland
Guests
 MED, Auckland Policy Office,
ATEED
 ATEED
 Departments of social
development labour,
education, science and
innovation, COMET,
Computer Clubhouse etc,
Social lenders such as ASB
Trust
 Waterfront Auckland, Cruise
New Zealand
 MED, NZTE, ATEED, Sector
Leaders
 ATEED, Sector leaders
Innovation priority in the ED
Strategy
Skills priority in the ED Strategy
Sector Focus(1) - Health and
Food
 ATEED, Sector leaders
New Zealand Convention Centre
Update
Sector Leaders (2)- High value
manufacturing, marine and biotec
 ATEED, Sector leaders
Business and Town Centres
Strategy
Sector Focus(3) - creative, screen
and film
 ATEED, Sector leaders
The Rural Economy
Sector Focus(4) – Finance and
business services
 ATEED, Sector leaders
Major Economic Infrastructure in
Auckland
 Auckland Airport, Ports of
Auckland Ltd, Watercare,
ATEED, Regional Facilities,
Waterfront Auckland
Page 33
Attachment A
Month
March
Item 13
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Attachment A
Item 13
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Economic Development Forum: Proposed Calendar for 2011
Page 34
Request to hold a joint meeting with the Social and
Community Development Forum on Thursday, 7 April
2011
File No.: CP2011/00793
Executive Summary
The Chairperson of the Social and Community Development Forum has requested for a joint
meeting with the Economic Forum on Thursday, 7 April 2011 to discuss Social Economic
Development. This report seeks the approval of the Economic Forum to hold the joint meeting
with the Social and Community Development Forum.
Recommendations
a)
That the “Request to hold a joint meeting with the Social and Community
Development Forum on Thursday, 7 April 2011” report be received.
b)
That the Economic Forum agree to hold a joint meeting with the Social and
Community Development Forum on Thursday, 7 April, 2011 at 11.30am in the
Council Chamber, Town Hall.
c)
That the quorum for the joint meeting be set at 8, being a majority of the combined
total.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author
Carmen Fernandes, Committee Secretary
Authoriser
Warwick McNaughton, Manager Governance Support
Request to hold a joint meeting with the Social and Community Development Forum on Thursday, 7
April 2011
Page 35
Item 14
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Economic Forum
03 March 2011
Item 16
Presentation from Auckland Tourism, Events and
Economic Development Limited (ATEED)
File No.: CP2011/00830
Executive Summary
Michael Redman, Chief Executive, Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Limited
will make a presentation to the Economic Forum on an introduction to ATEED and the roles and
responsibilities between ATEED and Council’s Economic Development Unit.
Recommendation
That the Presentation from Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Limited
be received.
Presentation from Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Limited (ATEED)
Page 37