This statistic shows the biggest cities in New Zealand in 2022. In 2022, approximately **** million people lived in Auckland, making it the biggest city in New Zealand.

This statistic depicts the distribution of the major cities to the national GDP in New Zealand in 2015. According to the source, in this year, Auckland contributed with ** percent to the national GDP in New Zealand.

The price of residential property in New Zealand was the highest in the Auckland region in June 2025, with an average sale price of around ******* New Zealand dollars. The most populated city in the country, Auckland, has consistently reported higher house prices compared to most other regions. Buying property in New Zealand, particularly in its major cities, is expensive. The nation has one of the highest house-price-to-income ratios in the world. Auckland residential market The residential housing market in Auckland is competitive. Prices have been slowly decreasing; the Auckland region experienced an annual decrease in the average residential house price in March 2025 compared to the same month in the previous year. The price of residential property in Auckland was the highest in the North Shore City district, with an average sale price of around **** million New Zealand dollars. Home financing Due to the rising cost of real estate, an increasing number of New Zealanders who want to own their own property are taking on mortgages. Most residential mortgage lending in New Zealand went to owner-occupier borrowers, followed by first home buyers. In addition to mortgage lending, previously under the KiwiSaver HomeStart initiative, first-home buyers in New Zealand were able to apply to withdraw all or part of their KiwiSaver retirement savings to assist with purchasing a first home. Nonetheless, the scheme was discontinued in May 2024. Furthermore, even with a large initial deposit, it may take decades for many borrowers to pay off their mortgage.

ps-places-metadata-v1.01

SUMMARY

This dataset comprises a pair of layers, (points and polys) which attempt to better locate "populated places" in NZ. Populated places are defined here as settled areas, either urban or rural where densitys of around 20 persons per hectare exist, and something is able to be seen from the air.

RATIONALE

The only liberally licensed placename dataset is currently LINZ geographic placenames, which has the following drawbacks: - coordinates are not place centers but left most label on 260 series map - the attributes are outdated

METHODOLOGY

This dataset necessarily involves cleaving the linz placenames set into two, those places that are poplulated, and those unpopulated. Work was carried out in four steps. First placenames were shortlisted according to the following criterion: - all places that rated at least POPL in the linz geographic places layer, ie POPL, METR or TOWN or USAT were adopted. - Then many additional points were added from a statnz meshblock density analysis.
- Finally remaining points were added from a check against linz residential polys, and zenbu poi clusters.

Spelling is broadly as per linz placenames, but there are differences for no particular reason. Instances of LINZ all upper case have been converted to sentance case. Some places not presently in the linz dataset are included in this set, usually new places, or those otherwise unnamed. They appear with no linz id, and are not authoritative, in some cases just wild guesses.

Density was derived from the 06 meshblock boundarys (level 2, geometry fixed), multipart conversion, merging in 06 usually resident MB population then using the formula pop/area*10000. An initial urban/rural threshold level of 0.6 persons per hectare was used.

Step two was to trace the approx extent of each populated place. The main purpose of this step was to determine the relative area of each place, and to create an intersection with meshblocks for population. Step 3 involved determining the political center of each place, broadly defined as the commercial center.

Tracing was carried out at 1:9000 for small places, and 1:18000 for large places using either bing or google satellite views. No attempt was made to relate to actual town 'boundarys'. For example large parks or raceways on the urban fringe were not generally included. Outlying industrial areas were included somewhat erratically depending on their connection to urban areas.

Step 3 involved determining the centers of each place. Points were overlaid over the following layers by way of a base reference:

a. original linz placenames b. OSM nz-locations points layer c. zenbu pois, latest set as of 5/4/11 d. zenbu AllSuburbsRegions dataset (a heavily hand modified) LINZ BDE extract derived dataset courtesy Zenbu. e. LINZ road-centerlines, sealed and highway f. LINZ residential areas, g. LINZ building-locations and building footprints h. Olivier and Co nz-urban-north and south

Therefore in practice, sources c and e, form the effective basis of the point coordinates in this dataset. Be aware that e, f and g are referenced to the LINZ topo data, while c and d are likely referenced to whatever roading dataset google possesses. As such minor discrepencys may occur when moving from one to the other.

Regardless of the above, this place centers dataset was created using the following criteria, in order of priority:

• attempts to represent the present (2011) subjective 'center' of each place as defined by its commercial/retail center ie. mainstreets where they exist, any kind of central retail cluster, even a single shop in very small places.
• the coordinate is almost always at the junction of two or more roads.
• most of the time the coordinate is at or near the centroid of the poi cluster
• failing any significant retail presence, the coordinate tends to be placed near the main road junction to the community.
• when the above criteria fail to yield a definitive answer, the final criteria involves the centroids of: . the urban polygons . the clusters of building footprints/locations.

To be clear the coordinates are manually produced by eye without any kind of computation. As such the points are placed approximately perhaps plus or minus 10m, but given that the roads layers are not that flash, no attempt was made to actually snap the coordinates to the road junctions themselves.

The final step involved merging in population from SNZ meshblocks (merge+sum by location) of popl polys). Be aware that due to the inconsistent way that meshblocks are defined this will result in inaccurate populations, particular small places will collect population from their surrounding area. In any case the population will generally always overestimate by including meshblocks that just nicked the place poly. Also there are a couple of dozen cases of overlapping meshblocks between two place polys and these will double count. Which i have so far made no attempt to fix.

Merged in also tla and regions from SNZ shapes, a few of the original linz atrributes, and lastly grading the size of urban areas according to SNZ 'urban areas" criteria. Ie: class codes:

1. Not used.
2. main urban area 30K+
3. secondary urban area 10k-30K
4. minor urban area 1k-10k
5. rural center 300-1K
6. village -300

Note that while this terminology is shared with SNZ the actual places differ owing to different decisions being made about where one area ends an another starts, and what constiutes a suburb or satellite. I expect some discussion around this issue. For example i have included tinwald and washdyke as part of ashburton and timaru, but not richmond or waikawa as part of nelson and picton. Im open to discussion on these.

No attempt has or will likely ever be made to locate the entire LOC and SBRB data subsets. We will just have to wait for NZFS to release what is thought to be an authoritative set.

PROJECTION

Shapefiles are all nztm. Orig data from SNZ and LINZ was all sourced in nztm, via koordinates, or SNZ. Satellite tracings were in spherical mercator/wgs84 and converted to nztm by Qgis. Zenbu POIS were also similarly converted.

ATTRIBUTES

Shapefile: Points id : integer unique to dataset name : name of popl place, string class : urban area size as above. integer tcode : SNZ tla code, integer rcode : SNZ region code, 1-16, integer area : area of poly place features, integer in square meters. pop : 2006 usually resident popluation, being the sum of meshblocks that intersect the place poly features. Integer lid : linz geog places id desc_code : linz geog places place type code

Shapefile: Polygons gid : integer unique to dataset, shared by points and polys name : name of popl place, string, where spelling conflicts occur points wins area : place poly area, m2 Integer

LICENSE

Clarification about the minorly derived nature of LINZ and google data needs to be sought. But pending these copyright complications, the actual points data is essentially an original work, released as public domain. I retain no copyright, nor any responsibility for data accuracy, either as is, or regardless of any changes that are subsequently made to it.

Peter Scott 16/6/2011

v1.01 minor spelling and grammar edits 17/6/11

Contains data from the World Bank's data portal. There is also a consolidated country dataset on HDX.

Cities can be tremendously efficient. It is easier to provide water and sanitation to people living closer together, while access to health, education, and other social and cultural services is also much more readily available. However, as cities grow, the cost of meeting basic needs increases, as does the strain on the environment and natural resources. Data on urbanization, traffic and congestion, and air pollution are from the United Nations Population Division, World Health Organization, International Road Federation, World Resources Institute, and other sources.

In 2019, Auckland in New Zealand was visited by ********* international visitors. Queenstown on the south island was the next most popular destination with just over a million international visitors in that year.

Background

Intentional self-harm is a common cause of hospital presentations in New Zealand and across the world, and self-poisoning is the most common method of self-harm. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is frequently used in impulsive intentional overdoses, where ease of access may determine the choice of substance.

Objective

This cross-sectional study aimed to determine how much paracetamol is present and therefore accessible in urban New Zealand households, and sources from where it has been obtained. This information is not currently available through any other means, but could inform New Zealand drug policy on access to paracetamol.

Methods

Random cluster-sampling of households was performed in major urban areas of two cities in New Zealand, and the paracetamol-containing products, quantities, and sources were recorded. Population estimates of proportions of various types of paracetamol products were calculated.

Results

A total of 174 of the 201 study households (86.6%) had at least one paracetamol product. Study households had mostly prescription products (78.2% of total mass), and a median of 24.0 g paracetamol present per household (inter-quartile range 6.0-54.0 g). Prescribed paracetamol was the main source of large stock. Based on the study findings, 53% of New Zealand households had 30 g or more paracetamol present, and 36% had 30 g or more of prescribed paracetamol, specifically.

Conclusions

This study highlights the importance of assessing whether and how much paracetamol is truly needed when prescribing and dispensing it. Convenience of appropriate access to therapeutic paracetamol needs to be balanced with preventing unnecessary accumulation of paracetamol stocks in households and inappropriate access to it. Prescribers and pharmacists need to be aware of the risks of such accumulation and assess the therapeutic needs of their patients. Public initiatives should be rolled out at regular intervals to encourage people to return unused or expired medicines to pharmacies for safe disposal.

Methods The stocks of paracetamol-containing medicines (acetaminophen) held at a single time point in New Zealand households are described in this dataset. These data were collected via a cluster-sampling survey of two cities in New Zealand.

A door-to-door survey study with random, clustered sampling of consenting household members in two cities in New Zealand was designed. A total of 201 households in 40 meshblocks in two Major Urban Areas (MUAs; areas of 100,000 or more residents) of Dunedin and Auckland were sampled. Meshblocks are Statistics NZ’s smallest geographic unit, and roughly correspond to a city block or part of it. Random cluster-sampling of 20 meshblocks in each city was performed by deprivation level, where all eligible MUA meshblocks were stratified by their New Zealand Deprivation Index 2013 (NZDep2013) index scores, which describe the level of area deprivation by taking into account multiple relevant area and household variables. Six meshblocks were randomly selected from each city from NZDep2013 8-10 meshblocks (most deprived), eight from NZDep 4-7, and 6 from NZDep2013 1-2 (least deprived), for a total of 40 meshblocks. This was done to obtain a sample that would be representative of the general New Zealand population by levels of deprivation. Each meshblock was sampled by starting from a random end of the street and then tossing a dice to choose a house to approach, and repeating this until either five households were recruited or there were no more households to sample.

Trained Research Assistants (RAs) knocked on the doors of domiciles in each meshblock to be sampled, chosen by tossing a dice as described. Inclusion criteria: person present and usually residing in a domicile in a meshblock which was sampled, and aged 16 or over. Exclusion criteria: not able to give informed consent (intoxicated, aggressive, otherwise not safe to approach – nobody was excluded for this reason).

Household members aged 16 years and over were eligible to participate, and if consent was obtained, basic demographics were collected about the household (number of people usually residing in the household, their age, sex, ethnicity). Participants were then shown images of paracetamol-containing products (sole and combination), and requested to bring out all paracetamol products of their own, and any that were shared by the household in communal areas of the domicile. Private stock of any other residents of the household who were not present and were therefore unable to consent was not recorded for ethical reasons. If there were no paracetamol products present, that was recorded. If there were paracetamol products present, product type, strength, expiry date, purchase date and means of obtaining (by prescription, pharmacy over-the-counter [OTC], other retailer [i.e. not a pharmacy; e.g. supermarket, petrol station], other, unknown) were recorded.

The data were entered into a main database which is fully de-identified. Meshblock numbers are included in the dataset, but households are only given an identifier derived from the meshblock code. It would not be possible to identify a specific household from the data. Paracetamol product names were cleaned in the dataset (if there were any misspellings), and new variables were calculated to summarise the data (e.g. total household stock of prescribed paracetamol products, etc.).

NZ Suburbs and Localities describes the spatial extent and name of communities in urban areas (suburbs) and rural areas (localities) for navigation and location purposes.

The suburb and locality boundaries cover New Zealand including North Island, South Island, Stewart Island/Rakiura, Chatham Islands, and nearby offshore islands.

Each suburb and locality is assigned a name, major name, Territorial Authority and, if appropriate, additional in use names. A population estimate is provided for each suburb and locality by Stats NZ.

For more information please refer to the NZ Suburbs and Localities Data Dictionary and the LINZ Website

Changes to NZ Suburbs and Localities can be requested by emailing addresses@linz.govt.nz

Change Request Guidance Documents: - Change Request Process - Change Request Principles, Requirements and Rules

APIs and web services

This dataset is available via ArcGIS Online and ArcGIS REST services, as well as our standard APIs. LDS APIs and OGC web services ArcGIS Online map services

There are two different versions of the dataset - one contains the value labels for responses, which will be most useful if you want to analyse in Excel. The other contains numeric values if you want to import into another statistical package.This survey was conducted by researchers in the Department of Geography at the University of Canterbury. We were interested in understanding how the electric scooters, recently introduced in New Zealand, are being used and what respondents think about them. We are interested in perceptions and experiences, whether respondents have used a scooter yourself or not. This is part of a wider project about the environment, health and social implications of new forms of transport.The project was approved by the University of Canterbury Human Ethics Committee (Ref: HEC 2018/49/LR-PS). The survey used a convenience sample as is not a representative population survey. Please read the notes included in the dataset before use and contact the authors with any queriesBoth authors now work at different institutions. Notes for using this dataset:-There are some missing values. We have retained cases where a minimum number of questions were answered, but have not deleted cases listwise so as to preserve potentially useful information. However, please be aware of missing data in analysing this data.-The survey is not representative. A comparison with national datasets will be available shortly, but do not attempt to use this data to represent the attitudes of the population. It is more useful for understanding attitudes of e-scooter users and looking at associations between variables, rather than drawing headline conclusions from one variable.-The sample frame was not a representative population sample. We used convenience sampling through existing networks and social media. This is not a robust or ideal approach to social surveys - however, given time and resourse constraints we opted for an approach that would allow us to collect some early insights into e-scooter use. -We have removed demographic information (other than age and gender) and open-text responses to preserve anonymity. If you require access to these please contact the researchers to discuss.-We suggest contacting us if you are unsure how to interpret the data.-The question numbers and questionnaire is provided.-The questionnaire was conducted online in February and March 2019. -The recommended citation for this dataset is: Curl, A., & Fitt, H. (2019). Attitudes to and use of Electric Scooters in New Zealand Cities [Dataset]. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.8056109

Abstract

Polluted air is a major health hazard in developing countries. Improvements in pollution monitoring and statistical techniques during the last several decades have steadily enhanced the ability to measure the health effects of air pollution. Current methods can detect significant increases in the incidence of cardiopulmonary and respiratory diseases, coughing, bronchitis, and lung cancer, as well as premature deaths from these diseases resulting from elevated concentrations of ambient Particulate Matter (Holgate 1999).

Scarce public resources have limited the monitoring of atmospheric particulate matter (PM) concentrations in developing countries, despite their large potential health effects. As a result, policymakers in many developing countries remain uncertain about the exposure of their residents to PM air pollution. The Global Model of Ambient Particulates (GMAPS) is an attempt to bridge this information gap through an econometrically estimated model for predicting PM levels in world cities (Pandey et al. forthcoming).

The estimation model is based on the latest available monitored PM pollution data from the World Health Organization, supplemented by data from other reliable sources. The current model can be used to estimate PM levels in urban residential areas and non-residential pollution hotspots. The results of the model are used to project annual average ambient PM concentrations for residential and non-residential areas in 3,226 world cities with populations larger than 100,000, as well as national capitals.

The study finds wide, systematic variations in ambient PM concentrations, both across world cities and over time. PM concentrations have risen at a slower rate than total emissions. Overall emission levels have been rising, especially for poorer countries, at nearly 6 percent per year. PM concentrations have not increased by as much, due to improvements in technology and structural shifts in the world economy. Additionally, within-country variations in PM levels can diverge greatly (by a factor of 5 in some cases), because of the direct and indirect effects of geo-climatic factors.

The primary determinants of PM concentrations are the scale and composition of economic activity, population, the energy mix, the strength of local pollution regulation, and geographic and atmospheric conditions that affect pollutant dispersion in the atmosphere.

Geographic coverage

The database covers the following countries: Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola
Antigua and Barbuda Argentina
Armenia Australia
Austria Azerbaijan
Bahamas, The
Bahrain Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus Belgium Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep.
Congo, Rep. Costa Rica
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep.
El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia
Faeroe Islands
Fiji
Finland France
Gabon
Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana
Greece
Grenada Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hong Kong, China
Hungary Iceland India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Iraq
Ireland Israel
Italy
Jamaica Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Korea, Dem. Rep.
Korea, Rep. Kuwait
Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia
Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao, China
Macedonia, FYR
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Mexico
Moldova Mongolia
Morocco Mozambique
Myanmar Namibia Nepal
Netherlands Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico Qatar
Romania Russian Federation
Rwanda
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovak Republic Slovenia
Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay Uzbekistan
Vanuatu Venezuela, RB
Vietnam Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Yemen, Rep. Yugoslavia, FR (Serbia/Montenegro)
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Kind of data

Observation data/ratings [obs]

Mode of data collection

Other [oth]

In recent years, Des Moines—like many cities in the American Midwest—has rejuvenated its downtown through a successful urban renewal program. The resulting influx of college students and young professionals into downtown has increased apartment construction and renovation. These apartment dwellers have created a demand for more entertainment options within walking distance. As part of your research, you want to measure whether this pedestrian population could have a favorable impact on your proposed business. This time, you'll compare the demographic attributes of your theater's area in Des Moines to successful theaters in the American Midwest. Some of these cities have large downtown populations and some don't. By identifying the ones that do, you could discover cities with populations more apt to frequent a downtown theater. You'll use 5-, 10-, and 15-minute walk times to conduct your analysis. (Generally, people are willing to walk up to 15 minutes to reach a destination.)

The workforce dataset contains monthly workforce sizes from July 2005 to June 2018 in the eight Australian capital cities with estimated stratification by indoor and outdoor workers. It is included in both csv and rda format. It includes variables for:

Year Month GCCSA (Greater Capital City Statistical Area, which is used to define capital cities) Date (using the first day of the month) fulltime: Fulltime workers parttime: Parttime workers n. Overall workers outorin. Estimated indoor or outdoor status

This data are derived from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Labour Force, Australia, Detailed, LM1 dataset: LM1 - Labour force status by age, greater capital city and rest of state (ASGS), marital status and sex, February 1978 onwards (pivot table). Occupational data from the 2006, 2011 and 2016 Census of Population and Housing (ABS Census TableBuilder Basic data) were used to stratify this dataset into indoor and outdoor classifications as per the "Indooroutdoor classification.xlsx" file. For the Census data, GCCSA for the place of work was used, not the place of usual residence.

Occupations were defined by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO). Each 6-digit ANZSCO occupation (the lowest level classification) was manually cross-matched with their corresponding occupation(s) from the Canadian National Occupation System (NOC). ANZSCO and NOC share a similar structure, because they are both derived from the International Standard Classification of Occupations. NOC occupations listed with an “L3 location” (include main duties with outdoor work for at least part of the working day) were classified as outdoors, including occupations with multiple locations. Occupations without a listing of "L3 location" were classified as indoors (no outdoor work). 6-digit ANZSCO occupations were then aggregated to 4-digit unit groups to match the ABS Census TableBuilder Basic data. These data were further aggregated into indoor and outdoor workers. The 4-digit ANZSCO unit groups’ indoor and outdoor classifications are listed in "Indooroutdoor classification.xlsx."

ANZSCO occupations associated with both indoor and outdoor listings were classified based on the more common listing, with indoors being selected in the event of a tie. The cross-matching of ANZSCO and NOC occupation was checked against two previous cross-matches used in published Australian studies utilising older ANZSCO and NOC versions. One of these cross-matches, the original cross-match, was validated with a strong correlation between ANZSCO and NOC for outdoor work (Smith, Peter M. Comparing Imputed Occupational Exposure Classifications With Self-reported Occupational Hazards Among Australian Workers. 2013).

To stratify the ABS Labour Force detailed data by indoors or outdoors, workers from the ABS Census 2006, 2011 and 2016 data were first classified as indoors or outdoors. To extend the indoor and outdoor classification proportions from 2005 to 2018, the population counts were (1) stratified by workplace GCCSA (standardised to the 2016 metrics), (2) logit-transformed and then interpolated using cubic splines and extrapolated linearly for each month, and (3) back-transformed to the normal population scale. For the 2006 Census, workplace location was reported by Statistical Local Area and then converted to GCCSA. This interpolation method was also used to estimate the 1-monthly worker count for Darwin relative to the rest of Northern Territory (ABS worker 1-monthly counts are reported only for Northern Territory collectively).

ABS data are owned by the Commonwealth Government under a CC BY 4.0 license. The attached datasets are derived and aggregated from ABS data.