Talk:Demographics of New Zealand

Vital statistics - citation problem

The main source for the table in the section on Demographics of New Zealand#Vital statistics is [1], which contains data on New Zealand for up to 2014. Clearly it is not the source for the data for 2015, 2016, and 2017. So what is the source for these?-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:29, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

A lot of the data for 2001 onwards is very similar to the data in Reference 2. @Gadfium: do you have an objection to my adding Reference 2 as a citation to the "vital statistics" table? By the way the provisional fertility rate quoted in that source for 2017 is 1.81. -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

By all means add the stats.govt.nz page as a reference for the table. You could probably remove the World Factbook for the table if we are then not using any numbers from it in that section.-gadfium 20:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

I have been going through the sources to try to find out what says what.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:07, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

The "Mid-year population estimate" figure in the Developed Countries Demography database for each year is evidently the average of the 1st January figure for the year and for the next year. I checked in Excel.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:29, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

The "Average population" figure in the Vital statistics since 2001 was calculated as the average of the population in each quarter and rounded to the nearest 100.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:29, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Data in the Developed Countries Demography source

• "Developed Countries Demography". Institut national d'études démographiques. Retrieved 19 August 2017.

Note that this source does not contain these data before 1920 or after 2010

Vital statistics since
	Mid-year population estimate	Population at 1 January	Live births	Deaths	Annual natural population growth	Crude birth rate (per 1,000)	Crude death rate (per 1,000)	Natural change (per 1,000)	Total fertility rate
1921			29,623	11,474	18,149				3.08
1922			30,448	11,874	18,574				3.08
1923			29,148	12,239	16,909				2.96
1924			29,260	11,540	17,720				2.93
1925			29,869	11,844	18,025				2.90
1926			29,904	12,517	17,387				2.88
1927	1,440,050	1,429,700	29,278	12,600	16,678	20.3	8.8	11.6	2.79
1928	1,458,900	1,450,400	28,938	12,860	16,078	19.8	8.8	11.0	2.70
1929	1,476,750	1,467,400	28,859	13,220	15,639	19.5	9.0	10.6	2.64
1930	1,496,450	1,486,100	28,822	13,145	15,677	19.3	8.8	10.5	2.60
1931	1,514,800	1,506,800	28,867	13,062	15,805	19.1	8.6	10.4	2.56
1932	1,528,750	1,522,800	27,535	12,875	14,660	18.0	8.4	9.6	2.38
1933	1,540,900	1,534,700	27,204	12,862	14,342	17.7	8.3	9.3	2.31
1934	1,552,750	1,547,100	27,220	13,810	13,410	17.5	8.9	8.6	2.29
1935	1,564,050	1,558,400	27,150	13,664	13,486	17.4	8.7	8.6	2.25
1936	1,577,150	1,569,700	28,395	14,658	13,737	18.0	9.3	8.7	2.30
1937	1,593,200	1,584,600	29,896	15,215	14,681	18.8	9.6	9.2	2.39
1938	1,610,050	1,601,800	30,845	16,874	13,971	19.2	10.5	8.7	2.44
1939	1,629,950	1,618,300	32,872	15,933	16,939	20.2	9.8	10.4	2.56
1940	1,637,600	1,641,600	36,945	15,875	21,070	22.6	9.7	12.9	2.84
1941	1,632,400	1,633,600	39,170	17,047	22,123	24.0	10.4	13.6	2.93
1942	1,633,800	1,631,200	37,818	18,117	19,701	23.1	11.1	12.1	2.87
1943	1,639,200	1,636,400	34,684	17,122	17,562	21.2	10.4	10.7	2.61
1944	1,659,150	1,642,000	38,037	17,049	20,988	22.9	10.3	12.7	2.85
1945	1,702,050	1,676,300	41,534	17,686	23,848	24.4	10.4	14.0	3.10
1946	1,754,500	1,727,800	47,524	17,720	29,804	27.1	10.1	17.0	3.45
1947	1,799,350	1,781,200	49,698	17,442	32,256	27.6	9.7	17.9	3.63
1948	1,835,700	1,817,500	49,062	17,285	31,777	26.7	9.4	17.3	3.57
1949	1,873,000	1,853,900	48,841	17,578	31,263	26.1	9.4	16.7	3.53
1950	1,909,900	1,892,100	49,331	18,084	31,247	25.8	9.5	16.4	3.55
1951	1,949,100	1,927,700	49,806	18,836	30,970	25.6	9.7	15.9	3.60
1952	1,997,550	1,970,500	51,846	18,896	32,950	26.0	9.5	16.5	3.67
1953	2,049,650	2,024,600	51,888	18,354	33,534	25.3	9.0	16.4	3.65
1954	2,096,550	2,074,700	54,055	18,876	35,179	25.8	9.0	16.8	3.78
1955	2,141,600	2,118,400	55,596	19,225	36,371	26.0	9.0	17.0	3.88
1956	2,187,000	2,164,800	56,531	19,696	36,835	25.8	9.0	16.8	3.98
1957	2,236,000	2,209,200	58,425	20,862	37,563	26.1	9.3	16.8	4.03
1958	2,289,400	2,262,800	60,556	20,301	40,255	26.5	8.9	17.6	4.11
1959	2,337,850	2,316,000	61,798	21,128	40,670	26.4	9.0	17.4	4.18
1960	2,381,650	2,359,700	62,779	20,892	41,887	26.4	8.8	17.6	4.24
1961	2,432,450	2,403,600	65,390	21,782	43,608	26.9	9.0	17.9	4.31
1962	2,488,550	2,461,300	65,014	22,081	42,933	26.1	8.9	17.3	4.19
1963	2,541,350	2,515,800	64,527	22,416	42,111	25.4	8.8	16.6	4.05
1964	2,591,950	2,566,900	62,302	22,861	39,441	24.0	8.8	15.2	3.80
1965	2,640,400	2,617,000	60,047	22,976	37,071	22.7	8.7	14.0	3.54
1966	2,687,550	2,663,800	60,003	23,778	36,225	22.3	8.8	13.5	3.41
1967	2,728,150	2,711,300	61,022	23,007	38,015	22.4	8.4	13.9	3.35
1968	2,759,000	2,745,000	62,112	24,464	37,648	22.5	8.9	13.6	3.34
1969	2,788,500	2,773,000	62,360	24,161	38,199	22.4	8.7	13.7	3.28
1970	2,828,050	2,804,000	62,050	24,840	37,210	21.9	8.8	13.2	3.17
1971	2,875,300	2,852,100	64,460	24,309	40,151	22.4	8.5	14.0	3.18
1972	2,929,100	2,898,500	63,215	24,801	38,414	21.6	8.5	13.1	3.00
1973	2,992,300	2,959,700	60,727	25,312	35,415	20.3	8.5	11.8	2.76
1974	3,058,400	3,024,900	59,336	25,261	34,075	19.4	8.3	11.1	2.58
1975	3,117,800	3,091,900	56,639	25,114	31,525	18.2	8.1	10.1	2.37
1976	3,153,550	3,143,700	55,105	25,457	29,648	17.5	8.1	9.4	2.27
1977	3,164,900	3,163,400	54,179	25,961	28,218	17.1	8.2	8.9	2.21
1978	3,165,800	3,166,400	51,029	24,669	26,360	16.1	7.8	8.3	2.07
1979	3,164,550	3,165,200	52,279	25,340	26,939	16.5	8.0	8.5	2.12
1980	3,170,150	3,163,900	50,542	26,676	23,866	15.9	8.4	7.5	2.03
1981	3,185,450	3,176,400	50,794	25,150	25,644	15.9	7.9	8.1	2.01
1982	3,210,650	3,194,500	49,938	25,532	24,406	15.6	8.0	7.6	1.95
1983	3,245,800	3,226,800	50,474	25,991	24,483	15.6	8.0	7.5	1.92
1984	3,278,900	3,264,800	51,636	25,378	26,258	15.7	7.7	8.0	1.93
1985	3,298,050	3,293,000	51,798	27,480	24,318	15.7	8.3	7.4	1.93
1986	3,308,300	3,303,100	52,824	27,045	25,779	16.0	8.2	7.8	1.96
1987	3,327,800	3,313,500	55,254	27,419	27,835	16.6	8.2	8.4	2.03
1988	3,343,650	3,342,100	57,546	27,408	30,138	17.2	8.2	9.0	2.10
1989	3,357,500	3,345,200	58,091	27,042	31,049	17.3	8.1	9.2	2.12
1990	3,390,100	3,369,800	60,153	26,531	33,622	17.7	7.8	9.9	2.18
1991	3,463,200	3,410,400	59,911	26,389	33,522	17.3	7.6	9.7	2.09
1992	3,534,100	3,516,000	59,166	27,115	32,051	16.7	7.7	9.1	2.06
1993	3,575,050	3,552,200	58,782	27,100	31,682	16.4	7.6	8.9	2.04
1994	3,623,050	3,597,900	57,321	26,953	30,368	15.8	7.4	8.4	1.98
1995	3,677,450	3,648,200	57,671	27,813	29,858	15.7	7.6	8.1	1.98
1996	3,734,500	3,706,700	57,280	28,255	29,025	15.3	7.6	7.8	1.96
1997	3,782,450	3,762,300	57,604	27,471	30,133	15.2	7.3	8.0	1.96
1998	3,815,900	3,802,600	55,349	26,206	29,143	14.5	6.9	7.6	1.89
1999	3,840,200	3,829,200	57,053	28,122	28,931	14.9	7.3	7.5	1.97
2000	3,862,100	3,851,200	56,605	26,660	29,945	14.7	6.9	7.8	1.98
2001	3,894,600	3,873,000	55,799	27,825	27,974	14.3	7.1	7.2	1.97
2002	3,952,850	3,916,200	54,021	28,065	25,956	13.7	7.1	6.6	1.89
2003	4,025,550	3,989,500	56,134	28,010	28,124	13.9	7.0	7.0	1.93
2004	4,087,950	4,061,600	58,073	28,419	29,654	14.2	7.0	7.3	1.98
2005	4,137,650	4,114,300	57,745	27,034	30,711	14.0	6.5	7.4	1.97
2006	4,186,200	4,161,000	59,193	28,245	30,948	14.1	6.7	7.4	2.01
2007	4,232,000	4,211,400	64,044	28,522	35,522	15.1	6.7	8.4	2.17
2008	4,272,100	4,252,600	64,343	29,188	35,155	15.1	6.8	8.2	2.18
2009	4,319,400	4,291,600	62,543	28,964	33,579	14.5	6.7	7.8	2.12
2010	4,370,350	4,347,200	63,897	28,438	35,459	14.6	6.5	8.1	2.15
2011		4,393,500

Data in Births and deaths: Year ended December 2017

• "Births and deaths: Year ended December 2017". Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa. 18 February 2018. Retrieved 5 August 2018.
• "Table: Estimated Resident Population (Mean Quarter Ended) by Sex (1991+) (Qrtly-Mar/Jun/Sep/Dec)". Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa. 2018. Retrieved 5 August 2018.

Vital statistics since 2001
	Average population	Live births	Deaths	Natural change	Crude birth rate (per 1,000)	Crude death rate (per 1,000)	Natural change (per 1,000)	Total fertility rate
2001	3,886,700	55,800	27,825	27,972	14.36	7.16	7.20	1.97
2002	3,951,200	54,021	28,065	25,956	13.67	7.10	6.57	1.89
2003	4,027,700	56,136	28,011	28,125	13.94	6.95	6.99	1.93
2004	4,088,700	58,074	28,419	29,655	14.20	6.95	7.25	1.98
2005	4,136,000	57,744	27,033	30,711	13.96	6.54	7.42	1.97
2006	4,185,300	59,193	28,245	30,948	14.14	6.75	7.39	2.01
2007	4,226,200	64,044	28,521	35,520	15.15	6.75	8.40	2.18
2008	4,262,000	64,341	29,187	35,154	15.10	6.85	8.25	2.19
2009	4,304,900	62,541	28,965	33,579	14.53	6.73	7.80	2.13
2010	4,353,000	63,897	28,437	35,457	14.68	6.53	8.15	2.17
2011	4,386,300	61,404	30,081	31,320	14.00	6.86	7.14	2.09
2012	4,410,700	61,179	30,099	31,080	13.87	6.82	7.05	2.10
2013	4,446,700	58,719	29,568	29,148	13.20	6.65	6.55	2.01
2014	4,513,200	57,243	31,062	26,181	12.68	6.88	5.80	1.92
2015	4,599,300	61,038	31,608	29,430	13.27	6.87	6.40	1.99
2016	4,696,500	59,430	31,179	28,251	12.65	6.64	6.01	1.87
2017	4,796,000	59,610	33,339	26,268	12.43	6.95	5.48	1.81

@BrugesFR: I wondered why some cells in the old version were coloured blue - my guess was that it was something to do with sourcing that was a holdover from an old version. I have put your edit summary in an explanatory note. There are some cells with values of 2.10 and above that you did not colour blue - was this accidental?-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Toddy1: I usually check my editions before modifying them. If it happened was accidental, you have all the rights to fix them but remind that these numbers in blue, it is a positive value to separate them this which indicate to a numbers that goes in detriment, which they lead to an older average age and the consequence is that the population is diminishing. Regards.--BrugesFR (talk) 20:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Ethnic %

Ethnic % should add up to 100% not 110% as per article. -.@Photnart. (talk) 04:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC).

I have moved the explanatory footnote to the infobox. --Hazhk (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Vital Statistics

This whole section is deleted @Aircorn? A table of vital statistics are standard on all country demographics pages, and it's very useful to actually see a statistic such as population births or deaths in a particular year--reading off a graph is not the same. Can someone manually undo this? 202.20.104.254 (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

No fear, I have fixed this problem. Tweedle (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

WP:NOTSTATS applies even on this page. At least collapse it. Aircorn (talk) 05:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Not really because this article is the main article for such statistics, nor is there a 'lack context or explanation' as to why they are here. I will collapse it by default anyway. Tweedle (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Why do we need multiple graphs showing the same thing? Aircorn (talk) 00:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Which graphs show the same thing? The graphs you deleted do not show the same thing and are not represented elsewhere in the article. The population pyramid over time shows the population pyramid of New Zealand changing from 1950 to 2020 (showing the population getting older) while the population growth over time graph shows population growth % in New Zealand from 1925 to today (showing annual % change of the population slowing down). Tweedle (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

The population pyramid is in the info box and the section. There are two graphs showing population growth. The total fertility rates (which is also in the table) is showing the same trend as the population growth percentage. All in all we have six graphs, two tables (one extremely large one) and an image covering population growth in some form for a section that has just two paragraphs. Aircorn (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I feel you are conflating the meaning of the table/graphs together or I am misunderstanding your point entirely. The fact the section has two paragraphs is irrelevant and irrespective of the images and tables.

First of all the population pyramid in the infobox and section are not the same and show different things from one another as one is the current year while the other is animation over time so I don't get the point there.

Second of all, the TFR graph is not the same as population growth as population growth can still grow from outside forces such as migration and is not exclusively dependent on the TFR of a country. The fact it shows the same trend is irrelevant as its purpose is to show New Zealand's TFR over time in a user friendly manner, the table version of TFR (this goes for the entire vital statistics table here) over time serves the purpose of a specific set of users who need to find a specific point in times TFR, population, natural change etc. etc.

I don't get your point on there being two graphs showing population growth, there is only one which you deleted previous, do you mean the population graphs over time? There is two of them (on the right is one of them). If so then I don't care about deleting the graph version above the current vital statistics but the rest should be kept in because they all show equally important things. Tweedle (talk) 20:51, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Its not irrelevant that it has two sections, as that has direct relevance to dueness of content (which includes graphs and tables). When an article is overloaded with images it is usual practice to remove some and the best targets are those which convey similar information. If you want the animated pyramid then move it to the infobox, but to have both in one article is overkill. As to the total fertility rates it is worth noting that we are not writing an article for a specific set of users, but for a general audience. Anyway since we can at least agree that one of the population graphs can go I will remove that one. Will you consider moving the population pyramid to the infobox? Aircorn (talk) 03:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

It is irrelevant in this case as that is a problem of quantity of text and is again irrespective of the images, nor is the content UNDUE at all, this is especially relevant in a subject like demography where a large portion of information can be conveyed using graphs. 2 extra images is not a 'overload', but for the sake of it I have made an extra section covering age structure so you will stop bring it up. "As to the total fertility rates it is worth noting that we are not writing an article for a specific set of users, but for a general audience" then where would you have us place the vital statistics table? Tweedle (talk) 13:09, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Annual percentage growth rate graph is very wrong

Try this: take the annual percentage growth rate for each of the ten years from say 1941 to 1950, and apply them cumulatively from 1.2 million
Percentages are, say, 14, 12, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 17, 16.
If the graph is right, the population at 1950 should then be approximately:
1.6*1.14*1.12*1.10*1.12*1.14*1.16*1.17*1.18*1.17*1.16 = 6.24 million.
Funnily enough, the population in 1950 wasn’t actually 6.24 million. It was less than a third of that, at approximately 1.9 million.
Therefore, the annual growth rate graph is, sadly, but definitely, rubbish. Boscaswell talk 09:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Typical Kiwi

typical kiwis are both pakeha and maori unless they are newer migrants that haven't yet mixed. Yet the article seems to imply we are not very mixed. 120.21.187.73 (talk) 07:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)