The French Polynesian economy has been given a positive assessment in the aftermath of the covid-19 pandemic by the body issuing the French Pacific franc.

The Overseas Emission Institute said it expected French Polynesia should return to its pre-crisis level of GDP in the first quarter of 2023.

It noted that tourism has rebounded, and hotels had restored their profitability.

• READ MORE: Other Ma’ohi Nui reports

Over the 2022 financial year, the overall turnover of the hotel industry reached US$540 million over US$289 million in 2021.

However, the report said inflation last year rose to 6.6 percent, with food prices alone going up by 12 percent.

Costs for housing rose 8.8 percent and for transport 8.2 percent, with fuel costs going up almost 28 percent.

Labour market picked up
The report also said the labour market had picked up again with a 5.1 percent increase in the workforce.

It said in the first 10 months of last year, the salary mass grew by seven percent.

It said sectors such as energy, transport and the hotel industry carried out large-scale projects requiring significant loans, which were up by almost 60 percent from 2021 to last year.

The report credits the investment to the government’s economic relaunch programme for the period 2021 to 2023.

The institute added that the territorial elections and the geopolitical risks in the Pacific constitute factors of uncertainty likely to weigh on the behaviour of economic actors.

Unions sceptical
However, the secretary-general of the main union group CSTP-FO doubts the figures are accurate.

Patrick Galenon told Tahiti-infos there were about 80,000 unemployed people.

“We are told that there is only nine percent unemployment and that people do not want to work. But that is not the situation,” he said.

Galenon added: “They want to work, unfortunately they can’t find any [jobs]. The extremists will say that many come from outside and that they find a job”.

He said what was needed was a real local employment law on which work had been done for 10 years.

“In the form of a joke, I said that when I go to Paris, I try to adapt to Paris. I put on a tie or a coat when I’m cold.

“If they come from outside, it’s not for our good looks but to earn money by setting up a business”, he said.

Galenon asked why none of the managers of the big hotels were Polynesian.

“We are also going to talk about land because it is linked: 80 percent of land is presumed to be state property.

“Where are the lands of the Polynesians? Afterwards, we are told, don’t worry, we are returning the land to the Polynesians.

“But we don’t give them anything back, it’s their land!,” he said.

He added that “on the other hand, we give back to people who are not the real owners. This will create even more problems”.

Galenon said home ownership had now slipped out of reach for many because almost US$500,000 was now needed to buy a house.

Election a “social revolution”
In his view, last month’s election victory of the Tavini Huira’atira wasn’t a vote for independence, likening the result instead to a “social revolution”.

In an interview with Tahiti Nui TV, Galenon said he was “convinced that there are many people who were not for independence or for the blue party [Tavini’s party colours] but who voted blue because socially, the country was going very badly.”

Galenon said it was inconceivable to have products that had increased in price by 35 to 40 percent.

Measuring against the figures in France, Galenon said the monthly minimum wage was US$1563 while in France it was US$1940.

“In France it’s 35 hours [a week], here it’s 39 hours and unfortunately life here is 40 percent more expensive. So, we have a real problem,” he said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A large number of New Zealanders are facing a perfect storm at retirement, with minimal savings and no house, raising the risk that thousands will enter old age in poverty.

According to the latest retirement expenditure guidelines from Massey University, a two-person retiree household living an urban “choices” lifestyle, which includes some luxuries, would need to have saved NZ$809,000.

In the provinces, a couple would need to have saved $511,000.

• READ MORE: How New Zealanders miss out on hundreds of thousands in retirement savings
• Fall in ageing Australians’ home-ownership rates looms as seismic shock for housing policy
• The edges of home ownership are becoming porous. It’s no longer a one-way street
• NZ’s fossil fuel investment ban for popular KiwiSaver funds is more political than ethical

New Zealanders have traditionally relied on owning a home to support themselves during their retirement years. But many of the New Zealanders now aged between 50 and 65 – a cohort of almost half a million people – will go into retirement as renters after skyrocketing house prices over the last three decades put home ownership out of reach.

At the same time, this generation were already working adults when the Labour government introduced KiwiSaver in 2007, and are less likely to have a significant savings cushion.

Last year, Treasury raised concerns that this mixed group of baby boomers and generation X will not be able to financially manage retirement on their own.

Declining home ownership
Home ownership in New Zealand has fallen to the lowest rate in 70 years, with just 65 percent of people living in houses they own, down from the peak of 74 percent in the 1990s.

According to the 2018 Census, around one in four people between 50 and 65 don’t own the home they live in.

Research by Kay Saville-Smith from the Centre for Research Evaluation and Social Assessment suggests that by 2053 almost half of over-65s would be renting. That would mean 640,000 over-65s renting, including 326,000 renters aged over 85.

This issue of declining home ownership disproportionately affects those who have remained on low incomes throughout their working life. This, in turn, has stark consequences for Māori and Pacific people in New Zealand.

Between 1986 and 2013 the proportion of Māori and Pacific peoples living in owner occupied housing fell at a faster rate than the overall population (down 20 percent and 34.8 percent, respectively).

Skyrocketing rents
Also, in the last five years nationwide rents have risen 28 percent across all property types and regions.

For increasing numbers of people, housing — whether through ownership or renting — has become unaffordable.

The rapidly increasing rental costs have also reduced the ability of people to save for their own home.

KiwiSaver came too late

In 2007, the Labour-led government set up KiwiSaver as a voluntary savings scheme to help New Zealanders save for their retirement and to lift New Zealand’s low national savings rate.

But New Zealanders aged 50 to 64 were already adults and mid-career when KiwiSaver was launched. In our low-wage economy, they are likely to have contributed only 3 percent of wages, in addition to the employer’s 3 percent.

While some will have used their KiwiSaver account plus the government subsidy to put a deposit on a home purchase, few will have saved a significant nest egg for retirement. The 2021 Financial Markets Authority KiwiSaver Report showed average balances of only $26,410.

Squeaking by on superannuation
There is some support for retirees. When a person reaches the qualifying age of 65 years, they receive New Zealand Superannuation, currently $437 per week after tax for a single person.

But superannuation is predicated on owning your home rather than renting. Home ownership means effectively living rent free, with only rates and maintenance as regular necessary expenses in addition to food, power and phone.

Those people renting are currently confronted by a median weekly rental for a small house or apartment of $390 per week. While they may also be able to access the accommodation supplement and temporary additional support to assist with costs, a new threat has emerged in the form of inflation.

Consumer price index inflation peaked at close to 6.35 percent in early 2022, its highest level in three decades.

As well as steady increases in the price of electricity, petrol prices increased by 10 percent over the past year, and annual food prices rose 6.85 percent in February year-on-year. Fruit and vegetables are the largest contributors to the price rise. Car use can be contained with less recreational outings, but electricity, fruit and vegetables are needed for health.

None of this is going unnoticed. Treasury has raised the alarm about the increase of old age poverty. Many in the 50-65 age group share those concerns, and are approaching retirement with rational trepidation.

Dr Claire Dale is a research fellow, University of Auckland. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

From Brisbane to Sydney, many thousands of Australians have been reliving a devastating experience they hoped — in 2021, 2020, 2017, 2015, 2013, 2012 or 2010/11 — would never happen to them again.

For some suburbs built on the flood plains of the Nepean River in western Sydney, for example, these floods are their third in two years.

Flooding is a part of life in parts of Australia. But as climate change intensifies the frequency and severity of floods, fires and other disasters, and recovery costs soar, two big questions arise.

• READ MORE: After the floods comes underinsurance: we need a better plan
• You can’t talk about disaster risk reduction without talking about inequality

As a society, should we be setting up individuals and families for ruin by allowing them to build back in areas where they can’t afford insurance? And is it fair for taxpayers to carry the huge burden of paying for future rescue and relief costs?

Considering ‘managed retreat’
Doing something about escalating disaster risks require multiple responses. One is making insurance as cheap as possible.

Another is investing in mitigation infrastructure, such as flood levees. Yet another is about making buildings more disaster-resistant.

The temporary levee in Maryborough that’s prevented much of the CBD from being inundated. Floodwaters are slowly dropping @abcnews pic.twitter.com/Vpxccl1Ej7

— Johanna Marie (@JohannaMarie_) March 1, 2022

The most controversial response is the policy of “managed retreat” — abandoning buildings in high-risk areas.

In Australia this policy has been mostly discussed as something to consider some time in the future, and mostly for coastal communities, for homes that can’t be saved from rising sea levels and storm surges.

It’s a sensitive subject because it uproots families, potentially hollows outs communities and also affects house prices — an unsettling prospect when economic security is tied to home ownership.

But managed retreat may also be better than the chaotic consequences of letting the market alone try to work out the risks to individuals and communities.

Grand Forks: a case study
The strategy is already being implemented in parts of western Europe and North America. An example from Canada is the town of Grand Forks, a community of about 4000 people 300 kilometres east of Vancouver.

The town is located where two rivers meet. In May 2018 it experienced its worst flooding in seven decades, after days of extreme rain attributed to higher than normal winter snowfall melting quickly in hotter spring temperatures.

Deforestation has been blamed for exacerbating the flood.

The flood damaged about 500 buildings in Grand Forks, with lowest-income neighbourhoods in low-lying areas the worst-affected.

In the aftermath, the local council received C$53 million from the federal and provincial governments for flood mitigation. This included work to reinforce river banks and build dikes. About a quarter of the money was allocated to acquire about 80 homes in the most flood-prone areas.

The decision to demolish these homes — about 5 percent of the town’s housing — and return the area to flood plain has been contentious.

Some residents simply didn’t want to sell. Adding to the pain was owners being paid the post-flood market value of their homes (saving the council about C$6 million). There were also long delays, with residents stuck in limbo for more than year while authorities finalised transactions.

A sensitive subject
Grand Forks shares similarities to Lismore, the epicentre of the disaster affecting northern NSW and southern Queensland.

Lismore is also built on a flood plain where two rivers meet. Floods are a regular occurrence, with the last major disaster being in 2017. Insuring properties in town’s most flood-prone areas was already unaffordable for some. In the future it may be impossible.

Last week, NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet said about 2000 of the town’s 19,000 homes would need to be demolished and rebuilt, a statement the local council general manager downplayed, saying in the majority of cases “people will not have to worry”.

For a community traumatised by loss, overwhelmed by the recovery effort and angry at the perceived tardiness of government relief efforts, discussing any form of managed retreat is naturally emotionally charged.

But there is never an ideal time to talk about bulldozing homes and relocating households.

Uprooting communities
Managed retreat has far-reaching financial ramifications. As in Grand Forks, the first questions are what homes are targeted, who pays, and how much.

Some residents may be grateful to sell up and move to safe ground. Others may not, disputing the valuation offered or being reluctant to leave at any price.

Managed retreat policies also affect many more than just those whose homes are being acquired. Demolishing a block or suburb can push down values in neighbouring areas, due to fears these homes may be next. Those households are also customers for local businesses. Their loss can potentially send a town economy into decline.

No wonder many people want no mention of managed retreat in their communities.

Pricing in climate change
Markets, however, are already starting to “price in” rising climate risks.

Insurance premiums are going up. The value of homes in high-risk areas will drop as buyers look elsewhere, particularly in the wake of increasingly frequent disasters.

The economic fallout, both for individual households and local communities, could be disastrous.

The Reserve Bank of Australia warned in September 2021 that climate-related disasters could rapidly drive house prices down, particularly in areas that have previously experienced rapid house price growth.

These disasters are also amplifying inequality, with poorer households more likely to live in high-risk locations and also to be uninsured.

In Lismore, for example, more than 80 percent of households flooded in 2017 were in the lowest 20 percent of incomes. These trends will intensify as growing climate risks translate into higher insurance premiums and lower house prices.

A deliberate strategy of managed retreat, though distressing and difficult, can help to minimise the upheaval in housing markets as climate risks become increasingly apparent.

We can do better than leaving the most socially and economically vulnerable households to live in high-risk areas, while those with enough money can move away to better, safer futures. Managed retreat can play a key role.

Dr Antonia Settle is an academic and McKenzie postdoctoral research fellow, The University of Melbourne. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.