NZ 1st in OECD, 3rd in world for business ease

The World Bank’s Doing Business report ranks New Zealand third, and it is the highest-ranked OECD economy .

The annual report measures government regulations and their effect on business across 189 countries.

A media release says:

A new World Bank Group report finds that high-income economies in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) continue to lead the world in providing business-friendly environments for local entrepreneurs.

Doing Business 2014: Understanding Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises ranks 189 economies on the ease of doing business. Six of the top 10 are OECD economies: New Zealand, the United States, Denmark, the Republic of Korea, Norway, and the United Kingdom. OECD economies also continue to take steps to improve business regulations, with more than half implementing at least one regulatory reform in the past year.

New Zealand, the highest-ranked OECD economy, has made sustained efforts to improve its business climate. The report finds that in the past year New Zealand made it easier to enforce contracts by implementing an electronic case management system—improving the recording of court cases, lowering costs, and shortening resolution times.

“OECD economies on average have managed to create a regulatory system that facilitates interactions in the marketplace and protects important public interests without unnecessarily hindering the development of the private sector,” said Augusto Lopez-Claros, Director, Global Indicators and Analysis, World Bank Group. “Their stronger institutions and lower transactions costs provide an appropriate point of reference for other economies. In fact, we see countries increasingly seeking to narrow the gap with OECD practices, notably in Europe and Central Asia.”

The breakdown on New Zealand is here.

Economic Development and Small Business Minister Steven Joyce today welcomed the report:

“This is excellent news. Only Singapore and Hong Kong are higher than us overall and we still rank first in the world for starting a business and investor protection,” Mr Joyce says.

“This World Bank report is highly regarded and is used by businesses internationally when they consider setting up operations. The fact that New Zealand continues to rank so high sends a clear message that we are an ideal country for business investment.”

While New Zealand is in third place for the second year running, improvements to the business regulations were evident in a number of areas.

The cost to a business of construction permits and getting an electricity supply, as a percentage of income per capita, have dropped every year since 2010. Improvements to New Zealand’s court system were also cited by the World Bank as making contract enforcement speedier and less costly to business.    

The World Bank’s Doing Business report provides objective measures of the time, cost and number of procedures involved in all major aspects of running a business. . .

Ease of doing business is important.

Less time and money wasted on difficulties in doing business leaves more to spend in and on the business.

There is no room for complacency, though. We’re good and with the right policies we can be better.

10 Responses to NZ 1st in OECD, 3rd in world for business ease

  1. Viv K says:

    There is clearly no justification then for weakening environmental protections by making the RMA more business friendly, the system is not broken.

    Like

  2. JC says:

    Any system that can drag out the consenting process for many years and cost millions of dollars without penalty is by definition.. broken.

    JC

    Like

  3. Quintin Hogg says:

    And that is just for consent to renovations for ones home….

    Like

  4. jabba says:

    yet more good news .. anorther couple of terms under a National lead Govt and we will be a true paradise

    Like

  5. […] NZ 1st in OECD, 3rd in world for business ease (homepaddock.wordpress.com) […]

    Like

  6. TraceyS says:

    Will the RMA ever be “business friendly”?

    Like

  7. JC says:

    The answer is pretty yes. I think I’ve mentioned it before but its worth repeating an actual case study for a US state..

    A very large sawmill was proposed so they got a consent in 10 working days and paid NZ$900 for it.. case closed.

    How they did it was to go to the authority and asked for the “book” on consents applicable for activities like sawmills and simply designed the sawmill compliant with all the rules, regulations and requirements in the book.

    The authorities simply checked and ticked off all the bits and pieces.

    The authority advertised the plan and objectors had to object within 10 working days, pay a $50,000 fee to object and if the objection was overruled they had to pay the expected daily profit of the mill for every day they delayed the project (and lost their $50,000 fee).

    The big thing is having that “book” so that all the requirements are known by the project manager before planning is started and from memory the authority cannot introduce new rules once the project plan is in progress.

    Thats pretty business friendly!

    NZ is a much smaller place with its own issues but the principles behind the US state are applicable to a fair degree here.

    JC

    Like

  8. TraceyS says:

    I would like to say that I agree with that model JC, but cannot.

    However, “the book” is a very good idea. Why on earth we don’t gather all the evidence from every hearing that ever took place into one location and load it into a searchable database so all future applications can benefit easily and inexpensively from the wealth of knowledge generated from the past efforts of others is beyond me. Much of it is already available publicly anyway, just not all in one place.

    I particularly like how ECan puts it all online for public-notified consents. The next step would be to have the facility to search across consents for terms such as “peak sound pressure” and so on.

    Instead, the wheel is reinvented over and over again, benefiting no-one but consultant planners, lawyers, and other experts. Whereas, in lots of cases evidence presented (on noise for example) for a similar proposal might be entirely adequate for new projects.

    I don’t think we want a whole lot of penalties and disincentives for people giving their input into proposals. However, we do need to make a move away from the fear-based model we have at present where consent expenses and process duration are strongly determined by the arrogance and/or litigiousness of your opposition, be that a regulating authority or submitters (or in the worst of situations, both).

    I am now going to do a “Robert” and finish commenting at Homepaddock. The time has come where I have no more spare time to give, and as much as I enjoy it, other things must take priority now.

    Like

  9. Philgwellington Wellington says:

    Clearly the country is financially dependant on the state of bovine mastitis. This report is what is wrong with the media in this country. It’s not BS, it’s CS silly! In my book this Is an epic fail. How can you watch child and adult poverty, and the general standard of living of many Kiwis, and trumpet such 100% pure organic effluent. You must be a wealthy country ostrich. Evan is a non democratic dictatorship. How can you say it’s not. I’m guessing you think dictatorship is ok when you voted for the dictator.

    Like

  10. Currently it appears like BlogEngine is the preferred blogging platform available right now.

    (from what I’ve read) Is that what you’re using on your blog?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: