1. Social Inclusion and Universities Professor David Adams

2. 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

3. School Closures An 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

4. 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)

5. 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 mantra 3.Tinker with building family and community capability (resilience, prevention) 4.Toughen up the rules of citizenship eg income management 5.Target a few ‘wicked’ problems eg childhood obesity

6. 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

7. From Solid to Liquid Communities For example: Wards Guilds Parishes A small number of strong ‘solid’ ties New ones are emerging, for example: SMS texting community Blogs/Facebook Retail, sport, arts, recreation A variable number of weak ‘liquid’ ties

8. 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

9. Time and Space Changing…..

10. Drive Through Funerals

11. Drive By Communion

12. 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

13. Median age by LGA Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

14. Median age by LGA Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

15. Median age by LGA Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

16. Median age by LGA Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

17. Tasmanian population age discrepancies against national averages TASMANIA Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

18. Northern Tasmania estimated resident population 2006-2036

19. Local Government Area population change 2001-2011, by SEIFA ranking Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

20. Local Government Area population change 2001-2011, by SEIFA ranking Source: ABS Census data, 2001, 2006 and 2011.

21. City Creep

22. 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

23. 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.

24. Comparison net internal migration by 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

25. Comparison net internal migration by 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

26. Shire of Melton (Vic) population growth

27. 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

28. 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