Social Inclusion and Universities Professor David Adams

Social Inclusion and Universities

Professor David Adams

Governments and Social Inclusion in Australia

• SI still in the ‘nursery’ of public policy • Issues becoming more complex for governments

to ‘manage’ eg cost of living• Traditional departments cautious about adopting

new ideas in an environment of austerity• Moral climate changing…end of era of

entitlement• Critical to build alternative forms of capability

and to mainstream ideas

School ClosuresAn example of mainstream failure

• Increased costs of travel for school events and school connectivity for children and families

• Disruption and transition costs – e.g. new uniforms?• Learning issues - big vs small school debates • Loss of supportive local networks• Domino effect on viability of ( mainly) rural

communities• Most schools on the list were in the lowest 20% of

socio-economic status• And 40% were in forestry impacted areas

What is changing?

• Complexity of social exclusion risks increasing ( health; industry transition, demographics; relationships; energy etc)

• Risks occurring earlier in life ( eg access to social media) • More immediate and confrontational (e.g. cyber bullying) • More types of risks ( e.g. prevalence of obesity) • Sense of loss of control over basics (e.g water )• Reservoir of traditional social capital being depleted• Risks spreading to the middle classes (e.g. cost of living

pressures impacting on 30% plus)

So• Social inclusion protective factors not keeping up

with social exclusion risk factors• Governments have responded in four ways

1. Increase emergency assistance for those tipping over the edge

2. Run the jobs, jobs, jobs…. trickle down mantra3. Tinker with building family and community

capability (resilience, prevention)4. Toughen up the rules of citizenship eg income

management5. Target a few ‘wicked’ problems eg childhood obesity

Explaining Risks

• Solid structures and relations being replaced by ‘liquid’ relations

• These new relations can increase social inclusion but also create social exclusion risks

• Places being replaced by spaces – consumption, production, spirituality, identity, belonging, friendship, resources….

• Exacerbated by transition economies, austerity policies and demographics

From Solid to Liquid CommunitiesFor example:• Wards• Guilds• ParishesA small number of strong ‘solid’ tiesNew ones are emerging, for example:• SMS texting community• Blogs/Facebook• Retail, sport, arts, recreationA variable number of weak ‘liquid’ ties

How community creates a wellbeing footprint

• Communities have value because they can cause things to happen

• They are places and spaces to:– make friends, have fun, be happy– feel safe, be safe– shape futures and sort out values– forge identity and belonging– make sense of things and judge what’s right– get access to resources – and be a resource– creativity and imagination– A reservoir of social capital– learn stuff….e.g. skills

Time and Space Changing…..

Drive Through Funerals

Drive By Communion

Theory stuff

• Consumption, production, networks, recreation, learning and spirituality all being disconnected from place

• As is the power and authority of governments to manage (place)

• And traditional relations are becoming liquid – episodic, constantly changing form

• Creating new forms of inclusion/exclusion

Median age by LGA

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Median age by LGA

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Median age by LGA

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Median age by LGA

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Tasmanian population age discrepancies against national averages

TASMANIA

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Northern Tasmania estimated resident population 2006-2036

Local Government Area population change 2001-2011, by SEIFA ranking

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

Local Government Area population change 2001-2011, by SEIFA ranking

Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

City Creep

Rural adjustment

Growth in agriculture will not lead to population growth in regional communities because of:

• Increased use of technology (replacing people)• Increased use of remote technology ( Sensing

Tasmania) • Smaller number of larger farms (agglomeration

benefits)• Increased commuting by skilled workers• Use of mobile contractors

Centre of Population

• Tasmania's centre of population at June 2011 was on the banks of Woods Lake in the Central Highlands SA2.

• In the ten years to 2011, the centre moved 1.2 kilometres south-east, reflecting continued population growth in Greater Hobart.

Comparison net internal migrationby age and city vs region, Tasmania, 2006-07 to 2010-11

Source: Table 6. Experimental net regional internal migration estimates, by age, part of state, Tasmania, 2006-07 to 2010-11 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3412.02010-11?OpenDocument

Comparison net internal migrationby age and Victoria vs Tasmania, 2006-07 to 2010-11

Source: Table 6. Experimental net regional internal migration estimates, by age, part of state, Tasmania, 2006-07 to 2010-11 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3412.02010-11?OpenDocument

Shire of Melton (Vic) population growth

UTAS Challenges

• New demography of disadvantage emerging in rural settlements

• Exacerbated by ageing and loss of young people• Both prevalence and complexity of risks

increasing • New technologies may enable supportive

communities to form around learning networks and replace depleted traditional sources of social capital

Universities and Social Inclusion• Historically on the margins not in the mainstream of

policy or governance…UTAS taking some positive tentative steps

• Therefore rarely to scale or scope, unstable authorising environment

• But demographics are a major challenge• Metrics around benefits vs costs/risks contested• As does the ‘best’ business model ( eg mainstream or

specialist service systems etc) • OTT provides a supportive context to embed Social

Inclusion