Australia: the world's fastest growing large rich country

In the decade between 2000 and 2010, Australia's population grew by 15.1%, more than any other large rich country. Spain was second with 14.4% growth and Canada was third with a 14.4% increase.

Population growth in IMF advanced economies with a population greater than 10 million, 2000-2010

Despite the country facing many of the same demographic challenges as other rich nations - namely an ageing population and a declining birth rate - it has managed to sustain strong population growth. This growth has been largely fueled by immigration; for example, in 2009, Australia had the highest rate of per-capita immigration in the OECD (the world's rich country club) in 2009.

Relative population growth 1980-2015,  top ten advanced economies

If smaller advanced economies are included in the analysis, only Singapore, Israel and Cyprus have outpaced Australia since 1980. When taking the IMF's 2015 population estimates, Singapore's growth rate is 123% during the period 1980-2015. Israel's rate is 119%, the growth rate for Cyprus rate is 78% and Australia comes in at 59%.

As the twelfth-emptiest country in the world, Australia certainly has the physical capacity to keep up its high rate of population growth. This is a key strength of the Australian economy as it can supplement its resource-led productivity gains with population-derived gains.

The population capacity of Australia

Australia is one of the emptiest countries in the world. In fact, it is the 12th least densely populated country in the world, ranked alongside vast, empty territories such as Mongolia and Western Sahara.

However given that a significant area of Australia is arid desert, perhaps it has reached capacity, constrained by limited food production? Certainly, Small Australia advocates such as Dick Smith appear to think that Australia is under unsustainable population pressure, having made comments this week that Brisbane increasing its population to 4 million would be "complete madness".

Unfortunately for Dick, the food capacity figures don't support his view. Australia has by far the most food growing capacity per capita on earth. Real Population Density measures the number of people per kilometre of arable land. The chart below inverses Real Population Density and shows the amount of arable land per person - and Australia clearly has the largest by a significant margin.

The amount of arable land per capita, in square metres. Australia has by far the most arable land per resident. Other notable countries are highlighted in orange for comparison.

So we can see that Australia under-uses its arable land relative to other countries. But what could its population be if it matched the utilisation seen in other nations? The chart below shows what Australia's population could be.

If Australia had the Real Population Density seen in each of these nations, what would its population be?

If Australia fed as many people as the world average with its arable land, its population would be 152 million, around 7 times its current population, or just under half of the population of the United States.

Australia could allow its population to grow to 84 million, and it would match the utilisation of food growing capacity of the United States. If it grew to a massive 1.4 billion, it would only then be matching Japan and South Korea's real population density.

Of course there are multiple factors that can skew these figures. Food exports and imports will affect the figures at a national level. Other parameters include level of development and cultural differences; these will affect how food is used. Perhaps the fairest comparison is the United States - a nation of a similar geographical area, development level and culture - which indicates an Australian population of 84 million is entirely sustainable.

The 'Real Population Density' figures used here are derived from the 2005 CIA World Factbook.

Migrant clustering and cultural influence in Australia

People born in Turkey are most likely to move to an area with a high number of their Turkish compatriots, according to the 2011 Australian census. Areas such as Meadow Heights, in Victoria, with around 20% of its populace born in Turkey are popular destinations for Turkish migrants. Despite only comprising 0.15% of Australia’s population, the median local prevalence of Turkish-born residents is 9%.

The chart below ranks migrants in Australia by their tendency to cluster with their national compatriots. This measure is based on a ratio that compares their proportion of the wider population with the median prevalence of compatriots within their local Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1) boundaries.

Ratio of weighted mean local prevalence to percentage of population. A higher ratio indicates a higher degree of localised clustering with compatriots. Figures are taken from the 2011 Australian Census.

Second place belongs to Cambodian migrants, who tend to cluster together disproportionately to their prevalence in the wider population. Despite making up only 0.13% of Australian residents, their median local prevalence is 6.4%. Springvale, a suburb in Melbourne, which comprises 23% Cambodian, and 15% Vietnamese residents, paints a fairly typical picture of a south-east Asian enclave. Likewise, more than 50% of the population of Cabramatta, in New South Wales, was born in Cambodia or Vietnam, according to the 2011 census.

Iraqi migrants are the third most likely to cluster with their fellow Iraqis. As mentioned in a previous post, this can be explained by the disproportionate degree of Iraqis that migrate via Australia’s Humanitarian Programme. Having fled their own war-ravaged nation, moving to areas with some of the familiar comforts of home makes sense.

Well Spread

At the other end of the scale, the Brits, New Zealanders, Germans, Indians and South Africans are relatively spread out across Australia. As a Western nation, it is hardly surprising that other Western nationals, such as those from the United Kingdom find it easy to integrate with the wider population. The spread of Indians can also be explained by the significant Western influence in the subcontinent, not least of which is a familiarity with the English language.

Arguably the most impressive spread of migrants are those born in China. Despite vast cultural differences, the Chinese are the tenth least clustered of 35 nations measured, and less so than many European nations, including Italy, Greece and Poland. Chinese people make up 1.5% of the Australian population, and their median local prevalence is 9.79%. This spread of Chinese demonstrates that the common perception that Chinese people cluster around Chinatown areas is a fallacy. 

Migrant Scale vs Clustering

There is a general trend that the smaller the amount of migrants from a given nation, the higher the degree of clustering. This trend is stronger among the nationalities that comprise less than 1% of Australian residents. 

Cluster ratio vs percentage of Australian population: generally, the smaller the number of migrants, the higher the  degree of clustering. A logarithmic cluster ratio scale is used to improve readability.

This pattern indicates that migrant sources typically begin in localised clusters, then spread out more evenly across the nation as their numbers increase. It can be expected that these initial clusters portray many of the cultural traits of their homeland, and help migrants to feel secure in a foreign land. As their scale increases within Australia, this leads to cross-cultural flows of influence between Australian and the expanding migrant culture. This, in turn, evolves into a hybrid, containing elements of both cultures and further supporting an even spread of migrants through a continual feedback loop. 

Mature examples of migrant source nations are the United Kingdom and New Zealand. The results of this cultural feedback loop are visible as the three nations share many cultural traits. Australia, as a result, continues to be attractive to migrants from these nations as a consequence. It can therefore be expected that in the future the Chinese and Indian feedback loops will gather pace, feeding into the very definition of ‘Australian culture’.

Overseas visitors by state

Greater Sydney has overtaken regional Queensland in the 2011 census as the most popular area for overseas visitors, with 50,579 (23%) of the 219,442 visitors nationwide. The non-Brisbane parts of Queensland came second with 41,108 overseas visitors.

Overseas visitors by state, percentage of total Australian overseas visitors (Source: ABS Census 2011)

In terms of single states, Queensland had the most overseas visitors with 65,020. This is 5% more than New South Wales, which came second with 61,918 visitors. Queensland was also the only state that had more overseas visitors outside of its capital rather than within. The Sunshine State's high visitor counts in regional areas can easily be explained by the chain of tourist resort that run along the state's 2,500km sub-tropical and tropical coastline. This chain begins with the iconic Gold Coast in the south, and finish with Cairns and the Cape York Peninsula in Far North Queensland. In both the censuses of 2001 and 2006, regional Queensland had more overseas visitors than Sydney.

Australia: The most immigrant friendly nation on earth?

Australia had the highest rate of immigration-per-capita in the OECD in 2009. This figure measures inflows of foreign migrants, as a proportion of its own population. This indicates that immigration plays a bigger role in Australian society than any other rich nation. Its only rival is European minnow Luxembourg, a nation more than 44 times smaller than Australia.

Inflows of immigration per capita across the OECD, 2009

The 697,000 immigrants that Australia received in 2009 equated to 3.15% of Australia's 22 million population. For comparison the OECD nation with a population closest to Australia's, the Netherlands, at 16.5 million, received only 104,000 immigrants.

Fellow English-speaking and resource-rich country Canada was also at the upper end of the scale but still well below Australia at 1.88%. The United States, a nation built on long-term inward migration, had a rather low 0.83%.

Inflows of immigration per capita across selected OECD nations, 2000-2009

Australia only overtook Luxembourg in 2009 however has sustained a clear upward trend through the years 2000 to 2009. GFC-suffering Ireland (and Spain) had a heavy downturn in inward migration during the late 2000s, while the United States and United Kingdom sustained their levels fairly consistently throughout the period.

The Australian migration context

Australia is a rich, stable, well-run nation with good infrastructure and strong education and healthcare systems. Its English-speaking characteristic and Asia-friendly distances and timezones make it an attractive destination for migrants around the world. In terms of economic performance, Australian was one of the few rich nations to avoid a recession throughout the GFC. It has maintained relatively strong GDP growth, recently underpinned by a mining boom, low unemployment and low levels of government debt.

The Australian federal government implements various policies to promote immigration. It has a slick immigration system designed to facilitate immigration to satisfy the labour needs of the country. It uses a points system and variety of visas types to ensure the right immigrants are approved. In 2010-11, 32% of Australia's long-term migrants were part of the skilled program, and around 26% were professionals or managers. Further streamlining of the points-based assessment system rolled out on 1st July 2012.

Australia has flexible labour laws that supports casual workers, and working holiday visas designed meet seasonal agricultural labour demands in remote areas.

The Australian Taxation Office supports some migrant-friendly taxation options such as Living Away from Home Allowance (LAFHA). It should be noted, however, that LAFHA is currently being phased out, which may reduce the attractiveness of Australia to some high-skilled workers.

The largest proportion of migrants are Chinese or Indian. Many settle in the CBDs of Australia's largest cities. 79% of the residents of Sydney's CBD, for example, were born outside of Australia. Greater Sydney's and Perth's figure is 41% and Melbourne's is 37%. For Australia as a whole, 30% of its residents are foreign-born.

The economic benefits of migration

The most obvious effect of net-positive migration is an expansion of the economy. More workers means more work which means higher GDP. This increase leads to an increase in tax revenues for the government and an expansion in internal market competitiveness. In terms of per-capita GDP increases, the results of studies vary, but most indicate at least a minimal boost, and none suggest a reduction.

Attracting high-skilled knowledge economy workers also has long-term benefits for the country. These workers go beyond merely satisfying short-term labour shortages and tend to produce a disproportionately high level of productivity, and thus GDP boost. Australia's brain gain is the loss of India, China, the United Kingdom et al.

Sources

World Economic Outlook Database April 2012
Inflows of foreign population into selected OECD countries

Only 21% of Sydney CBD residents were born in Australia

Only 21% of Sydney CBD residents were born in Australia. Across the whole nation, 70% of people were born in Australia, and this huge difference illustrates Sydney's cosmopolitan make-up.

Percentage of CBD residents born in Australia (Source: ABS Australian Census 2011)

Melbourne city centre follows closely behind Sydney CBD at 26% and Perth's and Brisbane's CBDs are 35% and 36% respectively. At the other end of the scale, Hobart is just below the national average, with 66% of city centre residents having been born in Australia.

Australia: where have the migrants come from?

These graphs present an analysis of results of the “country of birth” question in Australian censuses from 1991 to 2011. The goal is to determine the relative growth in migration from various countries across the timespan, and answer the following question: where have Australian migrants come from in the past two decades?

Two methods have been applied to determine the answer to this question:

1. The positive natural population growth effect has been ruled out by adjusting all annual figures 1991-2006 to 2011 levels
2. All 1991 figures have been weighted to equal 100%. For example, Indonesia has seen a result of 150% in 2011. This means that, as a proportion of the Australian population, Indonesians represent a 50% larger amount than in 2001. 

Australia and European Sources of Migrants

Australia and European countries of birth. Real volumes are relative to 1991 levels.

Of the 21.7 million people in Australia in 2011, 15 million were born in Australia. As a proportion of the population, this amounts to 69% of people, down from 75% in 1991. This proportionate fall equates to a real 8% fall as a proportion of the country from their 1991 levels (represented as 92% in 2011 in the graph above).

The European nations have largely seen steady falls. Greece and Italy have seen an almost perfectly correlated linear fall to only 57% of their 1991 levels. These two nations represent the single largest falls of any nation. It appears the sustained sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone has done little to increase migration levels to Australia, although admittedly these statistics don't cover the height of the crisis in late 2011/early 2012.

The UK saw significant falls between 1991 and 2001, however this subsequently steadied over the following decade to 2011.  Ireland, however, closely followed the UK until 2006. However, subsequently all of the losses 1991-2006 were reversed to leave Ireland with a slightly larger proportion of the population than in 1991, at 101%. As one of the English-speaking countries hardest hit by the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), this illustrates that Australia has been selected as a primary destination for Irish economic migrants.

East Asian Sources including China

East Asian countries of birth. Real migrant volumes are relative to 1991 levels.

Migration from east-Asian countries since 1991 follows a broadly exponential growth curve. Japan, Indonesia and Singapore has seen very similar levels of real growth in the range 148%-157% of 1991 levels. These levels of growth are steady but significant. Philippines has seen larger levels of growth; not quite in the explosive range, but a nevertheless significant growth to 182% of 1991 levels.

Thailand, South Korea and China, however, head up the group of east-Asian migrant source countries, with 257%, 282% and 318% respectively. All three countries have seen their proportionate representation in Australia accelerate rapidly. Unsurprisingly, Chinese-born migrants, in particular represent both the largest growth rates, and by far the largest absolute figures, with their 318,969 respondents now comprising 1.5% of all people in Australia (up from 0.4% in 1991).

China, South Korea, Thailand, Japan, Singapore, Indonesia and the Philippines combined have seen an increase that equates to 182% of their 1991 levels. This can be interpreted as a near-doubling of the size and influence of east-Asian culture in Australia compared with 20 years ago.

Western and South Asian Sources

Iraq, India and Sri Lanka as countries of birth. Real volumes are relative to 1991 levels.

Last, but by no means least, are the south and western Asian migrant source countries. These countries have even outpaced the growth of east Asian migration. India-born migrants have reached 375% of 1991 levels in Australia, significantly ahead of China in terms of growth rate, and almost catching up in absolute terms with 295,362 born in India. From 1991-1996, the real growth rate of Sri Lankan migration almost perfectly matched India’s. However from 2001 onwards, India has surged ahead of its sub-continental neighbour.

The real outlier here, however, is Iraq. This country has seen truly explosive growth in Australia as a source of migrants. Whilst the absolute count, at only 48,169 is smaller than many countries, this is the result of a huge gain considering in 1991 there were only 5,172 Iraq-born migrants in Australia. The spur for this migration can be identified as the Gulf War 1990-91 and the Iraq War 2003-2011. For example, in 2010-11, 3083 Iraqi nationals were given permanent residence in Australia, of which 2730 (78%) were through the Australian Humanitarian Programme.

Religion and the 2011 Australian Census

With the first round of 2011 census results recently released in June 2012, the first subject of discussion is the state of religion in Australia. The purpose of this post is to provide an overview of religion in the country in terms of those that are growing, those that are contracting and provide some analysis on the accelerating growth in atheism and other non-religious categories.

Winners and Losers

By a significant margin, the largest rise between 2001 and 2011 were the 'no religion' responses to the question. Specifically, this comprises the responses 'No Religion, nfd', 'Agnosticism', 'Atheism', 'Humanism' and 'Rationalism'. The 'no religion' responses have increased by a huge 1.9 million responses, leading to a 7% increase as a proportion of Australian responses.

In terms of relative increases, it is also by far the largest increase among answers that received more than 500,000 responses in 2001. Indeed, with its 41% increase, it is the only response that hasn't seen a real reduction (i.e. population increase adjusted).

Real change - the rate of change of a religion, adjusted for national population increases during the period 2001-2011. This intention of the adjustment is to give closer indication of the relative significance of a response, by removing the positive effect of natural population increase. Significant Responses - response selected more than 500,000 times in 2001

Religious affiliation (B14, T12), 2001 vs 2011 [Figure 1]. 'Main religions' include all denominations of Christianity defined within the census, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Australian Aboriginal religions, plus those categorised as 'other religious affiliations' within the census.

	2001	2011
No religion	2,905,993	4,796,786
Any main religion	14,027,658	14,871,287
Other	2,038,699	2,059,085
Total	18,972,350	21,727,158
Religious affiliation (B14, T12) counts.

After 'no religion', all remaining significant responses are negative in real terms. The next ranked religion is Catholicism, with a -7% result in real terms. The non-adjusted figure for Catholicism sees a clear rise of 9% to bring the number of Catholics up by 437,643.

Of the significant 2001 responses, Catholicism represents the least bad result in 2011. The other popular Australian religions have even less responses, indicating a fundamental shift in religious demographics within the country. Eastern Orthodox dropped 9.1%, with the Protestant denominations of Anglican, Presbyterian and Uniting Church plummeting 19%, 19.6% and 27% respectively.

Religious affiliations with largest percentage increase 2001-2011. Percentage figure is adjusted to remove impact of natural population growth (real change).

In contrast to the consistently negative results for the larger Christian denominations, other religions face a generally positive picture. Hinduism, in particular, has seen a huge increase by 147% in ten years in real terms and a nominal increase by 189%. In absolute terms, Hinduism's growth is third only to Catholicism and Islam. This increase can be explained through a similarly huge increase in migration from India between 2001 and 2011, with a 209% increase in census respondents indicating they were born in India. India has provided by far the largest relative increase in migrants in the decade to 2011, which correlates closely to the parallel increase in Hinduism.

Both Islam and Buddhism have also shown substantial real increases, at 44.6% and 26.4% respectively. This indicates both religions, along with Hinduism, are playing a more significant role in Australian society than they have in the past. 2.2% of Australians follow the Muslim faith, and 1.3% follow Hinduism. For comparison, the UK's 2001 census showed their equivalent figures were 2.7% and 1% respectively.

Religious affiliations with largest percentage decrease 2001-2011. Percentage figure is adjusted to remove impact of natural population growth (real change).

Christian churches make up all of the bottom ten performers. The Churches of Christ had the largest contraction ratio over the decade to 2011, followed by the Protestant churches of the Salvation Army, Uniting Church, Presbyterian and Reformed, Anglican and Lutheran churches. The remainder of the bottom ten performing denominations are all Christian variants.

Religion in the 25-34 Age Range

The overriding theme of poor performing Christian denominations may somewhat mask the reality of the situation in Australia. It is apparent there is a significant reduction in affiliation throughout much of the Christian religion in Australia. However, in order to understand the future of the religion, it is important to understand adherence within younger demographic.

Absolute counts of responses, change between 2001 and 2011 Australian censuses.

The 2011 census provides statistics broken down into age ranges, including the 25-34 range. This age range should be an effective indicator of future trends; these are prime working age respondents, often raising families and with limited influence from their own parents.

In the 25-34 range, Christianity performs even poorer than in broader ranges. An absolute reduction of 241,676 among this age range does not bode well for the future of the religion in Australia. In contrast, religions fuelled by immigration are showing significant increases, including Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. This is also the prime age range for government-encouraged immigration, which further explains the positive results shown for these religions.

Together with Christianity and other religions, this leaves a net absolute reduction among this age range of 84,811. It should be noted that this net reduction is despite the population increasing by 246,687 in the 25-34 age range. This pattern of absolute reduction of Christian following in Australia is a trend that cannot be sustained if the religion is to avoid a slow, lingering death. Contraction among this age range is outpacing natural population growth and the generational effect may accelerate contraction further in future, as older followers die off and young parents choose not to associate their children with their Christian religion.

Atheism, Agnosticism and other Non-Religious Categories

Agnostics, atheists, humanists, rationalists and other non-religious respondents add up to an increase of 321,988 in the 25-34 age range, which amounts to more than double the increase from Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam combined.

Percentage increase in no religious affiliation responses by state (in real terms, i.e. adjusted for population growth)

Australia as a whole shows a 41% increase in respondents indicating no religious affiliation. Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales,  and the combination of the Northern Territory, ACT and Tasmania all demonstrate similar levels of growth of atheism, agnosticism, humanism etc.

The two outliers are South Australia and Queensland. South Australia has seen limited growth in non-religious responses, at around 26% for all ages and a surprisingly low 15% growth among 25-34 year olds. At the other end of the spectrum, Queensland has shown significant growth among the non-religious categories, at 56%, which far more than any other state. 

State-by-State

The national average has Catholicism and other Christian churches as the most frequently chosen response at 25% and 36% respectively, bringing them up to a total of 61% combined. Beyond the Christian responses, 'no religion' comprised 22% and other responses comprised 17%.

Religious affiliation by state, 2011 Australian census data

Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia were broadly in line with the national average; the only figure of note is that Queensland has slightly less non-religious respondents but more non-Catholic Christian respondents.

New South Wales' mix is significantly different from the national average, and any other state. The key differentiator is that the state is significantly more religious than any other state. With only 18% of respondents indicating atheism, humanism, agnosticism or rationalism, each of the other religious categories were slightly above average.

The Northern Territory has a significantly higher rate of 'other' religions. This can be partly explained by the far higher rate of indigenous residents in the state, at 27%.

A somewhat surprising figure is that 28% of respondents in South Australia indicated that they have no religious affiliation. This is significantly higher than any other large state and is in contrast with the state's conservative, religious reputation. When this high rate of non-religious affiliation is combined with the low growth of of non-religious affiliation in South Australia, a picture is painted of a state with a mature, stable non-religious culture.

Conclusion

The Christian denominations have demonstrated significant contraction over the decade to 2011. In particular the larger protestant denominations have demonstrated particularly disappointing results. The global behemoth of Catholicism is also struggling; growing in nominal terms but its influence is waning as its growth is not keeping up with natural population growth.

The other key global religions of Buddhism, Islam and Hinduism have seen significant growth in Australia and this impressive growth is assumed to be driven by Asian immigration.

Of course, the main story here is the growth of non-religious responses, which equates to the contraction of religion in Australia. This is a story portrayed emphatically in every state, multiple age ranges, and across all popular religious denominations. Philosophies such as atheism, agnosticism, humanism and rationalism are all clearly on the rise in Australia. Their influence has increased since 2001 and can be expected to continue to increase over the coming years.

Most stats taken from ABS 2011 Australian Census data.