social inequality in australia essays

Connecting the dots: What really lies beneath the 'lucky country'

Although 2021’s only a few months old, we’ve already seen a plethora of controversies.

Every day we read about violence against women, verbal attacks of vulnerable people by those in positions of power, and dire warnings about pandemics, climate change, and an uncertain economic future.

On their face, these stories seem separate and unconnected. But two Monash academics have spearheaded research that “connects the dots”, revealing a patchwork quilt of human rights violations across Australia, as diverse as they are widespread.

The #MeToo movement and Eddie Maguire’s response to findings of racism within the Collingwood Football Club share a common root in systemic inequality and discrimination in Australia.

Many people like to think of Australia as the “lucky country” (indeed, Prime Minister Scott Morrison suggests we should be thankful we can protest in the streets without “being met with bullets” ). However, the reality is that you just have to scratch the surface to reveal significant human rights violations.

Read more: Australia’s history is complex and confronting, and needs to be known, and owned, now

The recently published Critical Perspectives on Human Rights Law in Australia  shines a light on the human rights abuses being committed in Australia, and shows that far from being isolated incidents, these violations reveal the injustice and inequality sitting just beneath the surface of society.

For example, Monash legal expert Dr Tania Penovic identifies a number of obstacles to women achieving full equality in Australia, including domestic violence, sexual assault, and pay inequity. She asserts that equality will remain elusive for as long as abuse remains invisible.

We must do more to ensure women’s voices are heard, their perspectives understood, and that all women, including Indigenous women, are able to play a central role in shaping contemporary laws and policies.

A history of disadvantage for Indigenous Australians

It’s well-recognised that Indigenous Australians have endured a long history of disadvantage, and that our laws and government institutions have been instrumental in this oppression.

The human rights experience of Indigenous Australians is significantly worse than for non-Indigenous Australians.

In Critical Perspectives on Human Rights Law in Australia , Indigenous women Inala Cooper and Shannan Dodson share their personal journeys, deeply rooted within their own Country and community. They illustrate how they channel the experience and wisdom of their Elders in their fight for human rights and self-determination.

Dr Harry Hobbs builds on this approach by advocating that Australia should fulfil its international obligations under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples  by pursuing negotiated treaties that expressly recognise the inherent sovereignty of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and facilitates their participation in political life.

What is also necessary is that Australia, as a whole, moves towards a fairer culture, in which the human rights of everyone are valued and respected, not just the rights of privileged, white, cisgender men.

What connects all these “dots” – these human rights violations – is the lack of a remedy. Indigenous footballers have little recourse when they’re subjected to racial vilification  from spectators, and even their own teammates and club officials; women know that if they report a sexual assault, there’s only a 10% chance  the perpetrator will be convicted; and young people voicing their anxiety about the impact of climate change on their future fall on deaf ears .

The lack of a federal Bill of Rights in Australia contributes to a culture where human rights abuses can be perpetrated with little risk of consequences. Having a strong legal framework that provides remedies for those who experience human rights abuses is only the first step in improving the human rights situation in Australia, but it’s an important one.

What is also necessary is that Australia, as a whole, moves towards a fairer culture, in which the human rights of everyone are valued and respected, not just the rights of privileged, white, cisgender men. The rights of the vulnerable and marginalised must be protected and valued as much as the rights of the wealthy and powerful.

Proactive action is required, starting with education

A key component of achieving a rights-respecting culture is ensuring everybody is aware of their rights. At present there’s a great deal of ignorance about human rights because it’s not embedded in the school curriculum. There’s much discussion about the importance of students learning about respectful relationships and consent , but more than this is needed.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child  requires that schools teach students about human rights. Australia isn’t complying with this obligation. Yes, we need our young people to learn about consent, but we also need them to learn about respecting all people regardless of their race, religion, culture, political opinion, ability, sexual orientation, gender identity or sex characteristics.

Read more: Australia’s international role in holding nations to account on women’s rights

Our school curriculums need a major overall to embed human rights. Reactive adjustments, following the exposure of systemic sexual harassment, isn’t enough.

Transforming Australia into a rights-respecting society is daunting, but the sooner we begin the sooner it will be attained.

As we move forward on this journey to increase human rights protections across Australia, it’s worth remembering this Jewish ethical maxim:

Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief.

Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now.

You are not obliged to complete the work,

But neither are you free to abandon it.

Critical Perspectives on Human Rights Law in Australia , edited by Paula Gerber and Melissa Castan, is published by Thomson Reuters.

• human rights
• human rights education
• racial vilification
• systemic inequality
• violence against women
• discrimination
• Indigenous disadvantage
• sexual assault
• domestic violence

Paula Gerber

Professor of Law

Melissa Castan

Professor, Faculty of Law

You don’t say, Prime Minister – and that’s part of the problem

While Australians demand change, the silence from Canberra on violence against women and gender inequality is a national shame.

Listening to women in grassroots leadership in a COVID-19 world

Women have been fighting poverty pay, long hours and unsafe working conditions long before COVID-19 hit.

Conflict, COVID, and child marriage

The pandemic is likely to intensify the harmful effects of child marriage, increasing exposure to violence, and decreasing access to healthcare and support networks.

Wedding hells

Australia criminalised forced marriage in 2013, but the practice continues to rise, highlighted most recently by developments in the tragic case of Ruqia Haidari.

You may republish this article online or in print under our Creative Commons licence. You may not edit or shorten the text, you must attribute the article to Monash Lens, and you must include the author’s name in your republication.

If you have any questions, please email [email protected]

Republishing Guidelines

https://lens.monash.edu/republishing-guidelines

• Follow UNSW on LinkedIn
• Follow UNSW on Instagram
• Follow UNSW on Facebook
• Follow UNSW on WeChat
• Follow UNSW on TikTok

New report: Wealth inequality in Australia and the rapid rise in house prices

2022-07-22T10:46:00+10:00

Photo: Shutterstock

UNSW and ACOSS partnership research report finds a widening gap between those who bought homes when they were affordable and those shut out of home ownership.

A report launched today by UNSW Sydney and Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) Poverty and Inequality Partnership confirms that even though Australians are now, on average, the fourth richest people in the world, the distribution of our wealth remains hugely unequal.

The wealth inequality pandemic: COVID and wealth inequality  says our overall household wealth has grown as much in the last three years as it did in the previous 15 – despite the COVID-19 pandemic and the recession in 2020 – thanks primarily to the soaring cost of residential properties across the country during that period.

The impact of rapidly rising house prices

Over two-thirds (69 per cent) of the overall increase in household wealth during the pandemic was in residential property, which rose in value by 22 per cent through the year to December 2021 – the highest annual increase in 35 years.

Rising house prices increase the divide between people who bought their homes when they were more affordable and younger people and those on low and modest incomes who are shut out of home ownership or struggle with escalating rents and mortgage payments. 

“Once again, this report reminds us that wealth in Australia is distributed very unevenly. We have over 130 billionaires in this country and last year their wealth grew, on average, by $395 million or 12 per cent. It means they now hold almost as much wealth as the 2.8 million households in the lowest 30 per cent of the population,” says Scientia Professor Carla Treloar, Director of the UNSW Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) and the Centre for Social Research in Health (CSRH).

“This research makes it clear we have an economic model that delivers profits for the wealthiest at the expense of those with least in our community, and it’s time for the inequality in our economic system to be addressed and made fairer for all.”

Acting ACOSS CEO, Edwina MacDonald says everyone deserves a roof over their heads, and a home that meets their basic need for shelter.

“It is simply wrong that something so fundamental has become so challenging for those on low and modest incomes to achieve.

“This research also points to the precariousness of life for people on low incomes in Australia, 39 per cent of whom are unable to cover three weeks of lost income. There’s also a need to bolster the social safety net so that unemployment does not inevitably lead to poverty.”

The report notes that although the situation is markedly worse of late, it isn’t new. Between 2003 to 2021:

• home ownership among people aged 25 to 29 fell from 44 per cent to 38 per cent and among people aged 30–34 it fell from 57 per cent to 50 per cent
• the proportion of median household disposable income required to service a typical home mortgage rose from 27 per cent to 41 per cent
• the proportion of median household disposable income required to pay the median rent rose from 26 per cent to 31 per cent.

Out of almost 50,000 rental listings surveyed by Anglicare Australia in May 2022, only seven were affordable (costing less than 30 per cent of income) for a single adult on Jobseeker Payment. Just nine were affordable for a single parent on Jobseeker Payment with one child.

Previous  reports in this series  have shown how the early pandemic-related income supports and rental assistance offered by the government helped to lift people out of poverty. This report shows that, with a return to ‘normal settings' and the end of those supports, mortgage increases and higher rents are putting people on low and modest incomes under incredible financial pressure.

Household wealth inequality

The study found that household wealth in Australia is very unequally divided.

• The highest 10 per cent of households by wealth has an average of $6.1 million or 46 per cent of all wealth.
• The next 30 per cent has an average of $1.7 million or 38 per cent.
• The majority – the lower 60 per cent – has an average of $376,000 or just 17 per cent of all wealth.

Over 130 billionaires in Australia each hold an average of $3600 million in wealth.

As there is less inequality in owner-occupied housing wealth than other assets such as shares and investment property, the recent boost to housing wealth eased the growth in wealth inequality underway for the last two decades. The top 10 per cent of households by wealth held 42 per cent of all wealth in 2003, rising to 47 per cent before COVID in 2018, then fell back to 46 per cent in 2021.

This report also shows that due to our high and rapidly growing home prices and relatively easy access to credit, Australian households are overcommitted or ‘more indebted’ than many other wealthy nations. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) regards households in the lowest 40 per cent by income with debt at least three times their annual disposable income as ‘over-indebted’ and nearly a third of Australia’s low-income households are currently in this position.

The report’s key findings

• Households in Australia are on average the fourth richest in the world, but many are financially vulnerable due to high debt or low financial buffers.
• Household wealth grew as much over the past three years as in the previous 15 years. Two-thirds of the increase in wealth came from house price inflation. Residential property values rose 22 per cent through the year to December 2021 – the highest annual increase in 35 years.
• Wealth inequality rose sharply from 2003 to 2018, then declined slightly in the pandemic. Rising house prices moderated overall wealth inequality, as housing is distributed more evenly across the population than other kinds of wealth, but it shut younger people and those with low incomes out of home ownership.
• Household wealth is still shared very unequally: the richest 10 per cent of households has an average of $6.1 million and almost half of all wealth (46 per cent), while the lower 60 per cent (with an average of $376,000) has just 17 per cent of all wealth.

This is the fourth and final report in the partnership’s  Build Back Fairer  Series which aimed to help us understand the impacts of the COVID pandemic and government responses to it, on people’s incomes, wealth, employment and housing and to assess which groups and regions were most affected.

Share this story

• Share this page on Twitter
• Share this page on Facebook
• Share this page on LinkedIn
• Share this page on Email
• Share this page on WeChat
• Share this page on WhatsApp
• Share this page on FacebookMessenger
• Share this page on Copy

Media enquiries

Belinda Henwood UNSW Media & Content Manager Tel: +61 412 270 034 Email:  [email protected]

Related stories

Research shows the harmful effects of removing the Coronavirus Supplement

Report highlights post-pandemic housing affordability pressures and rapid rent inflation

INEQUALITY IN AUSTRALIA

• August 2018
• Publisher: Australian Council of Social Service and UNSW Sydney
• ISBN: 0 85871 081 1

• UNSW Sydney

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Advertisement

Social inequalities: theories, concepts and problematics

• Published: 17 May 2021
• Volume 1 , article number  116 , ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Renato Miguel Carmo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0052-4387 1  

2382 Accesses

4 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This article aims to present a concise perusal of the different approaches developed in the study of social inequalities and in the relationships that they establish with manifold social processes and problems. The text does not intend to be exhaustive from the theoretical point of view, but rather to present an overview of the analytical complexity of the inequalities systems and demonstrate that they should be tackled in a multidimensional, systemic and multiscale perspective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Commentary on “From unidimensional to multidimensional inequality: a review”

By Way of Summary: Substantive Contributions and Public Policies for Dealing with Social Inequalities

Socio-Economic Inequalities: A Statistical Physics Perspective

Data availability.

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

The most recent configuration of the ACM typology is composed of the following class categories: “ Employers and executives are employers or directors at private companies or in the public administration. They may be recruited from any of the groups in the occupational structure. Private Professionals are self-employed and very qualified in certain specialised professions, such as lawyers, architects, and so on. Professionals and managers are employees in upper or mid-level intellectual, scientific and technical jobs. They are different from the previous category essentially because they are not self-employed. Self-employed workers work on their own account without employees in administrative or similar occupations in services and commerce. They include craftsmen and similar workers, farmers and qualified workers in agriculture and fishery. Routine employees are administrative and similar personnel, service employees and salespeople. Industrial workers are manual workers employed in less qualified occupations in construction, industry, transports, agriculture and fishery (Carmo and Nunes 2013 , p. 378).

This section is based on Carmo ( 2014 , pp. 134–138).

Aboim S (2020) Covid-19 e desigualdades de género: uma perspetiva interseccional sobre os efeitos da pandemia. In: Carmo RM, Tavares I, Cândido AF (eds) Um Olhar Sociológico sobre a Crise Covid-19 em Livro. Observatório das Desigualdades, CIES-Iscte, Lisbon, pp. 130–148: https://www.observatorio-das-desigualdades.com/2020/11/29/umolharsociologicosobreacovid19emlivro

ADB—Asian Development Bank (2012) Outlook 2012. Confronting Rising Inequality in Asia s.1., ADB.

Atkinson AB (2015) Inequality: what can be done? Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Book   Google Scholar  

Barata A, Carmo RM (2015) O Futuro nas Mãos: de Regresso à Política do Bem-Comum. Tinta-da-China, Lisbon

Google Scholar  

Bhir A, Pfefferkorn R (2008) Le system des Inégalités. La Découverte, Paris

Bourdieu P (2010[1979]) A Distinção: uma crítica social da faculdade de juízo. Edições 70, Lisbon.

Cantante F (2019) O Risco da Desigualdade. Almedina, Coimbra

Carmo RM (2009) Coesão e capital social: uma perspetiva para as políticas públicas. In: Veloso L, Carmo RM (eds) A Constituição Social da Economia. Mundos Sociais, Lisbon, pp 197–230

Carmo RM (2014) Sociologia dos Territórios: Teorias. Estruturas e Deambulações, Mundos Sociais, Lisbon

Carmo RM, Nunes N (2013) Class and social capital in Europe: a transnational analysis of the European Social Survey. Eur Soc 15(3):373–387

Article   Google Scholar  

Carmo RM, Rio C, Medgyesi M (eds) (2018) Reducing inequalities: a challenge for the European Union? Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

Castells, M (2000) The information age. Economy, society and culture. 2ª ed., Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

Costa AF (1998) Classificações Sociais. Leituras: Revista da Biblioteca Nacional 3(2):65–75

Costa AF (2012) Desigualdades Sociais Contemporâneas. Mundos Sociais, Lisbon

Costa AF, Mauritti R (2018) Classes sociais e interseções de desigualdades: Portugal e a Europa. In: Carmo RM et al (eds) Desigualdades Sociais: Portugal e a Europa. Mundos Sociais, Lisbon, pp 109–129

Hill Collins P (2019) Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press, Durham

Massey D (2007) World city. Polity Press, Cambridge

Milanovic B (2012) Global income inequality by the numbers: in history and know. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 6259: 1–28

Milanovic B (2016) Global inequality. Cambridge, Belknap

OECD (2011) Divided we stand. Why inequality keeps rising. OECD Publications, Paris

OECD (2015) In it together: Why less inequality benefits all. OECD Publications, Paris

OECD (2018) A broken social elevator? How to promote social mobility. OECD Publications, Paris

Parkin F (1979) Marxism and class theory: a bourgeois critique. Tavistock, London

Piketty T (2020) Capital and ideology. Cambridge, Belknap

Rawls J (2001) [1971] Uma Teoria da Justiça, 2nd edn. Editorial Presença, Lisbon

Sassen S (2000) Cities in a world economy. Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks

Sen A (1980) Equality of What? In: McMurrin S (ed) Tanner lectures on human values, vol I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Sen A (2003) Desenvolvimento como Liberdade. Gradiva, Lisbon

Therborn G (ed) (2006) Inequalities of the world new theoretical frameworks: multiple empirical approaches. Verso, London

Therborn G (2013) The killing fields of inequality. Polity Press, Cambridge

Tilly C (2005) Historical perspectives on inequality. In: Romero M, Margolis E (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Social Inequalities. Blackwell, Malden, pp 15–30

UNDP (2019) Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: inequalities in human development in the 21st century. Human Development Report 2019.

Wilkinson R, Pickett K (2009) The spirit level. Why more equal societies almost always do better. Allen Lane, London

Wright EO (1994) Análises de classes, história e emancipação. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais 40:3–35

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was developed within the project EmployALL—The employment crisis and the Welfare State in Portugal: deterring drivers of social vulnerability and inequality, funded by the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (PTDC/SOC-SOC/30543/2017).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

ISCTE – University Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Renato Miguel Carmo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renato Miguel Carmo .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Carmo, R.M. Social inequalities: theories, concepts and problematics. SN Soc Sci 1 , 116 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00134-5

Download citation

Received : 11 April 2021

Accepted : 16 April 2021

Published : 17 May 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00134-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Inequalities
• Social theory
• Public policy
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Home — Essay Samples — Economics — Income Inequality — Inequality As A Wicked Problem In Australia

Inequality as a Wicked Problem in Australia

• Categories: Economic Inequality Income Inequality Public Service

About this sample

Words: 1217 |

Published: Jun 6, 2019

Words: 1217 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Critical Analysis of the Attempts to Address the Problem

Novel idea to address the problem.

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Economics Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 984 words

8 pages / 3678 words

2 pages / 944 words

1 pages / 657 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Income Inequality

Why teachers deserve higher pay? This essay delves into the vital role teachers play in shaping the future of our society and argues for the importance of providing them with competitive compensation. Education is the foundation [...]

Should teachers be paid more? This question is at the forefront of discussions surrounding education reform and the value we place on the educators who shape the future of our society. Adequate compensation for teachers is not [...]

Income inequality has wide-ranging effects on society, and one of its most critical aspects is its impact on healthcare access. This essay delves into the disparities in healthcare access within low-income communities through [...]

Wealth inequality is not just how much a particular nation possesses, rather it concerns how wealth is shared within a society. Every society has a variety of factors that make them different; inequality leads to a host of [...]

This film happens in 2008. During that time, the world had a big economy. In 2011, the Wall Street has a big revolution and demonstration. Breaking the serious gap between the rich and the poor in the US society. The film [...]

The current minimum wage is $7.25, which equals two gallons of milk, one fast food meal or two gallons of gas. Can you imagine yourself working 12-hours a day and only having enough money to pay for rent and put food on the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Social Welfare in Australia Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Social security and welfare of the Australian populations has become the major issue on the agenda. In particular, the Australian government expressed concerns with the state of the Australian Welfare State due to the constantly increasing unemployment rates, as well as income inequality among the citizens.

As a result, the reform has undergone major change to avert the critical situation. A number of political and economic underpinnings, including post-war revival and economic recession, have contributed to the causes of changes.

Major Changes to the Nature and Scope of the Australian Welfare State between 1945 And 1996

In simplistic terms, the Australian Welfare State was aimed at enhancing the employment rates in the country after the Second World War.

The government introduced social security reforms and provided the nation with conditions that should have allowed them to enhance their financial position and improve the overall economic and social situation in Australia (Keating 1996).

One of the tangible changes to the welfare state was greater access of women to various social policy programs and benefit schemes. The government paid specific attention to supporting and reinforcing gains in the sphere of employment and wages (Wiseman 2000).

The most notable shifts include expanding public childcare insurance, delivering equal access to income security policies, and creating new entitlements that would meet the needs of women.

The changes, however, also affected the institutional state model that introduces new social citizenship that differed from the established male breadwinner model.

However, the hybrid structure was inconsistent with the establishment of the conservative government and radical system of wage policies in Australia.

Shift to individual rights in Australia is another feature of the welfare state policies that needs to be reconsidered because certain controversies. In particular, adhering to an individual-centred model cannot be regarded a realistic alternative for governing the public sector (Keating 1996).

The inappropriateness of the model is explained by inability to adopt the model in Australian context because it had been applied previously in Scandinavian countries.

In addition, both the gender shifts and individual focus face certain contradictions in terms of employment, sphere of care, familial ideology, and entitlement.

Political and Economic Causes Underlying the Pattern of Structural Change

According to StillWell (2005), the emergence of the 1945 White Paper signified “a foundation stone for a post-war settlement between capital and labour, based on the assumption that the workers could share …economic growth through full employment” (p. 24).

However, this promise turned out to be failure because of the long boom initiated in the 1970.

The attempts of the Australian Welfare State to contribute to the employment rates in the country failed due to a number of political, social, and economic pre-conditions in the countries, as well as various purposes pursued by political activists, the Australian government, and other social organizations.

The failure is explained by the inability of the post-war government to adequately assess the peculiarities and possibilities of the Australian economy, as well as what social and political consequences the reform would contribute to the overall welfare of the nation.

According to Mendes (2009), the inconsistency of the reforms was due to the fact that “social work has been divided between those would emphasise the treatment and cure of individual problems and deficiencies, and those who prefer to emphasise structural inequities and the importance of social reform” (p. 17).

In other words, the reform introduced to movements among which there were those who believe that changing the individual is the priority for the welfare of the society and there were those who were more concerned with the changing the society to satisfy the needs and concerns of the individual.

Antagonistic approaches provided a number of challenges for the Australian government.

The fact that Australia is the country of immigrants that unites many cultures is undeniable (McClelland & Smyth, 2010). Being the land of social justice, the Australians adhere to the concept of faire distribution, which is imprinted in Australian culture and national identity (Jump 2000).

Moreover, Australians strongly associated welfare with employment, as well as with self-reliance of those who are able to work and with compassion for people who are not able to work. Although social expenditures on welfare have augmented over time, they did not contribute significantly to unemployment rate reduction (McClelland & Smyth, 2010).

Therefore, because the government provided assistant to socially unsecure people and to those who are unable to work, Australia can be regarded a liberal country which greater control taken on the welfare system.

The changes to the Australian Welfare State are also predetermined by complex economic underpinnings. Due to the fact that the Australian government focused on reducing unemployment, they paid little attention the importance of advancing economic growth in the country.

In addition, the new economic rationalist approach also requires tangible economic improvements, which were impossible to achieve because of the deregulated and internationalised markets (McClelland & Smyth, 2010).

As a result, employment growth did not ensure high salaries, which was especially problematic for working women. As a result, the increased employment rate contributed to the economic recession and instability.

The economic roots of social problems in Australia are strongly associated with four major determinants of economic development – ideology, state, market, and class. In this respect, Stillwell (2005) refers to the connection between market and state because they characterize best social and capitalism.

The impossibility of promoting individual-centred approach to the welfare of the country is connected with the economic roots as well.

In particular, “Class relationships almost inevitably contain the seeds of conflicting interests, simmering underneath the cooperative relationships necessary to make the existing system work” (Stillwell, 2005, p. 27).

Therefore, class-structured society often faces contradictions that premised on the connection between wages and economic surplus. In particular, high wages increase the production costs and, therefore, they destruct the economic surplus that is necessary to promote economic growth.

At the same time, high wages are needed to foster adequate consumers’ demand because of the increased amount of produced goods and services. Overall, the illustrated contradiction in political economy can influence social development.

Analysis of Cumulative Effect of These Changes on the Degree of Income Inequality in Australian Society

Despite the rational and straightforward course on increasing the number of working places, as well as on the development of egalitarian society, the government failed to fill in the fast-growing gap between the rich and the poor.

At the threshold of the 1990s, the major part of Australian households had incomes below the poverty line (Garton 1994). The emerged inequality was the result of the excess focus on shifts in labour distributions and the economic problems, which could be associated with the period of the Great Depression in the United States.

The dichotomy between individual and structural visions on economic and social development stands at the core of the causes of the emerged changes as well as the increased income inequality in Australia.

In fact, the highlighted distinction is premised on various approaches to considering social change in society.

In this respect, Mendes (2009) argues that the emerged contradictions between personal and structural views on social welfare are predetermined by conventional and critical views on the stage of social transformation.

In order to define the factors contributing the income inequality in Australia, specific reference should be made to the wage income distribution among full-time workers.

This particular group is especially importance because it constitutes the primary labour forces and, therefore, it can be influenced by the cumulative effects of wage and income policies in past and present policies of the Australian Welfare State.

Further, analysis of the identified groups necessitates investigating demographic and employment characteristics. In this respect, the welfare reform in Australia proved to introduce increase in population size due to the greater participation of women (Jamrozik, 2005).

It has also been defined that Australia does not attain much important to transformation of labour market programs and, as a result, unemployment rates increased as soon as prices on oil increase.

According to Saunders and Fritzell (1995), “policies which seek to influence the overall level of wages or the structure of wages amongst different classes of workers…have the potential to have far-reaching effects on income distribution” (p. 7).

The main point is that the Australian authorities consider wage to be the most important resource of income in the country’s economy. Nonetheless, wage income depends largely on the level of employment and wages, which has a potential influence on economic development and individual welfare.

In this respect, the character of wage policies, along with the employment pattern, identify the character of income distribution. The extent of influence of wage on unemployment is similar to that of income inequality.

Wage determination in the country is predetermined by the comparative wage justice and wage compensation principles.

Due to the fact that the Australian Welfare State was more focused on increasing productivity and efficiency, wage distribution principles encourage labour and market flexibility (Saunders and Fritzell, 1995).

According to the Australian government, focus on increased productivity could contribute to competitiveness and increased motivation among the employees.

Dealing with these patterns of wage the distribution, however, does not improve the situation for the better (Saunders and Fritzell, 1995).

On the contrary, focus on productivity did not allow the government to ensure equal wage distribution because of various abilities and opportunities employees had to work efficiently.

At the end of the 1990s, the inequality situation in Australia aggravated significantly because the distribution of net incomes related to the wage income only.

As a result, wealth distribution depended largely on individuals who could contribute to profitability and productivity of the country. Apparently, excess concern of the government with the social welfare of individuals deprived the citizens of the motifs to remain more self-reliant (Saunders and Fritzell, 1995).

The extent to which the Australian Welfare State contributes to equal distribution of resources is questionable because of the significant discrepancies in ideological approaches and social structure peculiarities.

The period of income inequality is strongly connected to the period of various patterns distributions of income growth. On the one hand, uniformity in distributing income to society excludes the possibility of competition, which is also an important factor of economic growth (Jamrozik, 2005).

On the other hand, social security intervention excludes equal distribution of wages among the employees because societal welfare should be a priority. As a result of such discrepancies, the inequality issues are still on the agenda.

Recommendations on Further Introduction of Changes

In order to contribute to the welfare of Australian society, as well as reduce the unemployment rates and income inequality, specific emphasis should be placed on uni-dimensional approach to improving social welfare and security in the country.

In particular, the government should focus on adequate distribution of resources and define new strategic approaches to establishing labour market. Labour distribution principles should be delivered in accordance with workers’ capabilities and level of experience and efficiency (Bryson, 1996).

Second, shift in gender labour distributions should also be handled in a more rational way. In particular, the government should provide equality to define which positions can be taken by male and female workers.

In other words, the government should strictly define the values in accordance with which labour distribution should be accomplished.

Aside from the establishment of priorities, it is necessary to strike the balance between the needs of individuals and the goals of the society in general. In particular, the government should reconsider social security and spending issues and invent alternative resources of profit (Bryson, 1996).

Wages, therefore, should be primarily sources of income distribution among the population. In addition, rational approaches to labour and income distribution does not provide strong economic basis for improvement.

On the contrary, the course should be taking on expanding economic discourse at the international level to solve the problems in larger context.

Local conditions, therefore, should be reconsidered with regard the peculiarities of the global process occurring in Australia.

In conclusion, the government should be able to adjust the existing trends in labour market distribution to the ongoing changes in the global community (Stilwell, 2005).

In such a way, it will be possible to reduce the poverty and unemployment rates. Progressive economic course is beneficial for the Australian Welfare State because it establishes new principles of dealing with economic challenges.

Bryson, L. (1996). Transforming Australia’s Welfare State-Social Policy under Labor. Just Policy , 6, pp.35-38.

Garton, S. (1994). The Emergence of Welfare, In M. Wearing and R. Berreen, Welfare and Social Policy in Australia: The Distribution of Advantage . Australia: Harcourt Brace & Company, pp.31-38.

Jamrozik, A. (2005). Social Policy in Australia, In A. Jamrozik, Social Policy in the Post-Welfare State: Australian Society in the 21st Century . Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia, pp.70-82.

Jupp. J. (2000). Immigration and the Australian Welfare State, in A. McMahon, J. Thomson & C. Williams (Eds.), Understanding the Australian Welfare State: Key Documents and Themes . Croydon, Vic: Tertiary Press, pp.137-153.

Keating, P. (1996). The Labor Government and Social Policy: 1983-1995. Extract from a speech delivered by the Prime Minister at the National Social Policy Conference . Sydney. Just Policy, 5, pp.3-8.

McClelland, A. & Smyth, P. (Eds.) (2010). The Historical Context for Action, In A. McClelland, and P. Smith: Social Policy in Australia: Understanding for Action (second edition). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press, pp. 95-111.

Mendes, P (2009). Tracing the Origins of Critical Social Work Practice, in J. Allean, L. Briskman & B. Pease (Eds.), Critical Social Work: Theories and Practices for a Socially Just World (second edition). St. Leaonards: Allen & Unwin, pp. 17-29.

Saunders, P., and Fritzell, J. (1995). Wage and Income Inequality in Two Welfare State: Australia and Sweden, SPRC Discussion Paper, 60, 1-56.

Stilwell, F. (2005). Work, Wages, Welfare, in A. McMahon, J. Thomson & C. Williams (eds), Understanding the Australian Welfare State: Key Documents and Themes . Croydon, Victoria: Tertiary Press, pp.23-28, 39-40.

Wiseman, J. (2000). All for One or One for All? The Past and Future of the Australian Welfare State, in A. McMahon, J. Thomson, & C. Williams (Eds.) Understanding the Australian Welfare State: Key Documents and Themes . Croydon, Vic: Tertiary Press, 229-247.

• Nation Development Theory
• John Rawl’s Philosophy of Liberalism
• Compare and Contrast: American Cultures and Scandinavian Culture
• Nozick Entitlement Theory of Justice
• The Concept of Person-Centred Care
• Theory of Andre Gunder Frank
• How Is Today’s Capitalism Society Changed by the “New Left?”
• The Conceptions of Power and Domination Found in the Works of Karl Marx, Max Weber and Michel Foucault
• Should Canada legalize prostitution?
• How Does Technology Figure into Struggles over Power?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, April 11). Social Welfare in Australia. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-welfare-in-australia/

"Social Welfare in Australia." IvyPanda , 11 Apr. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/social-welfare-in-australia/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Social Welfare in Australia'. 11 April.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Social Welfare in Australia." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-welfare-in-australia/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social Welfare in Australia." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-welfare-in-australia/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social Welfare in Australia." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-welfare-in-australia/.

• Institute of Advanced Studies
• Education inequalities in Australia

In all countries, education performance varies markedly between high and low socio-economic groups. The achievement gap can be partly explained by genetic influences but it is also due to differences in resources and opportunities.

The first section of the paper explains why it is in the national interest for governments to address education inequality problems. The second section examines the evidence on spread of education performance in Australia and suggests that Australia may be under-investing in education for the disadvantaged. The final section identifies a few of the specific education inequalities needing policy attention.

Why governments should be concerned about education inequalities

Longitudinal studies across the world indicate that education success rates at school and post-school are in good part determined by social class origin - in particular parents' wealth, occupational status, education and aspirations. Education inequality then flows to employment inequality.

The aim of government regulatory and fiscal involvement is to reduce this parental advantage by helping disadvantaged individuals to achieve their desired education capabilities and preferences. By making education outcomes more dependent on intelligence, motivation and effort, government intervention, well targeted and implemented, can also benefit society as a whole.

Many people are unable to make informed choices because they have limited knowledge of the income returns they can expect from various education inputs. Nor are they able to exercise their preferred choices because of limited resources. Again, employers are discouraged from training up low-educated employees because of the high cost and risk of poaching. So, on their own, education markets work very imperfectly in maximising utility. More importantly, they cannot take account of 'third party' societal spin-offs (positive 'externalities') from the wider access of citizens to education and training. We note four such externalities below.

First, wider education access enhances the political health of the nation : voters are better able to participate in social, community and political life and make intelligent, balanced choices. It also minimises the risk of excessive concentration of political power.

Second, wider access to education can reduce social tensions arising from perceived inequalities of opportunity . Even people who tell pollsters they are prepared to live with wide inequalities of outcome strongly believe that people of equal ability should be given an equal chance to succeed at school and in employment - irrespective of parental wealth, status and power 2 . Ordinary citizens are seeing a widening gap in median earnings between those completing at least high school and those with less than a high-school education (e.g. in USA from 19% in 1979 to 42% now) 3 . They are being told that the trend is driven by technological change, which has become more skill-intensive (requiring more educated people) and raised the productivity of high skilled workers more than low-skilled workers - and by shifts in patterns of demand, stemming in particular from international trade liberalisation and outsourcing of services, which have favoured economic activities that require post-school training. And they may understand all that. But they will still resent the growing premium paid by employers for education qualifications if they felt that access to education was unequal.

A third reason for governments to encourage wider access to education is that it can improve the efficiency of the labour market and employment participation rates . Globalisation and rapid technological change require a reasonably mobile and flexible labour supply. This is less likely to happen if education choices are constrained by financial considerations or structural market failures. With the prospect of an ageing population and increasing dependency ratio, all developed countries are looking to improve employment participation among people who are currently unemployed, under-employed or on the margins of the workforce - mainly early school leavers or people with disabilities. And research studies are showing that government initiatives to improve transitions from school and adult learning outcomes can yield big gains in workforce participation and hence higher incomes per capita 4 and that completing year 12 in Australia can greatly reduce the risk of unemployment 5 .

A final 'external' benefit from more equal access to education is its impact on the nation's productivity potential (output per hour) . The existence of unequal education opportunities is a sign that the economy is under-performing 6 . Reducing these inequalities allows intelligent, well-motivated people to more closely realise their education and employment potential, lowers the incidence of crime, decreases the need for health care and welfare and delivers a more resilient and innovative economy 7 .

The case for government involvement is overwhelming. The problem for policy makers and advisers is in deciding how much government subsidisation and regulation of education is optimal and what areas of education offer the highest additional returns. These questions are discussed in the rest of this paper.

Are Australians under-investing in education for the disadvantaged?

Australian governments are already intervening heavily in the education markets e.g. public education is compulsory and relatively free and university students are heavily subsidised (although less than they were). Isn't that enough to equalise opportunities? My answer is guardedly no - for several reasons.

First, Australia's international position is worrying. It is true that on most international benchmarks, Australia has high education standards: by comparison with their counterparts in 27 OECD countries, Australian 15 year olds on average rank second in literacy, sixth in mathematics and fourth in problem testing 8 . Nor is there evidence of any recent systematic decline in average standards.

Where we lag behind most other developed countries is not in average standards but in levels of education access by the more disadvantaged . The differences in academic performance between our highest and lowest performing students (and even between the lowest and the median) are large in Australia and more dependent on the influence of class, family and social background than in many other countries such as Canada, Ireland, Austria, Korea, Finland and other Scandinavian countries. The OECD puts us in the 'high quality/low equity' box in its international comparisons of reading literacy 9 .

The reasons are not hard to find. Governments in Australia spend less on education and active labour market programs such as training than a majority of developed OECD countries and what is spent on education flows proportionally more to the more advantaged students. Our education system is relatively more dependent on private financing. The best-off Australian families spend about 2.6 times more on each of their children than the poorest 20% of families 10 and much of that spending is on their education.

The effects of education inequality manifest themselves in the labour market, with Australia suffering from relatively large inequalities of private income among the working age population (before taxes and government benefits) 11 , wide differences in the distribution of work across income units and stubbornly high rates of under-employment and joblessness among low-skilled, low-educated workers. As well, we have a relatively high proportion of low-skilled occupations requiring low education qualifications 12 .

Imperfect policy targeting of education resources is evident in many parts of Australia's education and training arrangements. The next section outlines a few of the specific deficiencies.

What are most pressing education inequality problems in Australia?

The problems are evident at all levels of education.

(i) Early childhood education and care (ECEC)

The seeds of education and employment disadvantage are sown early in life. Yet ECEC has been a long standing area of neglect in Australia. Participation in preschool programs in Australia is very low compared with other OECD nations and so too is total public expenditure for pre-school education and care. This is reflected in wide inequalities of access to pre-schooling.

Better access to ECEC for children of disadvantaged backgrounds, especially between ages 2 and 4, would give these children a better start in life. It would contribute greatly to their cognitive (and to a lesser extent non-cognitive) development and health and, when they become adults, facilitate their entry into employment 13 . The long term benefits to society will come in the form of lower welfare dependence and crime and higher national productivity.

(ii) Secondary education

Although full-time students at private schools receive less government funding than students in public schools, the gap is narrowing 14 . As well, parents are stepping up their per capita investment in private school education. So we are seeing a large and widening gap between the total education resources (public and private) deployed on rich children relative to poor children. The total per capita spending on education is (on average) a quarter to a third more for children attending private schools than for children in a public secondary school 15 . And the gap is wider if capital spending is taken into account.

Children in private schools enjoy cumulative advantages by interacting with other children who have well-educated and ambitious parents. Public schools with a high proportion of disadvantaged kids (which applies to most of the smaller schools) offer less favourable peer pressures, school facilities and buildings 16 and have more difficulty attracting good teachers. A recent study found that in addition to childhood IQ and family resources, grade outcomes are greatly affected by teenage peer and school factors 17 . In the increasingly intense competition between public and private schools, there is a vicious circle at work. With a steady exodus of the better students, the public schools are left with a rising proportion of slow-learning, ill-disciplined kids as well as a relatively higher cost per student. Within the public school system, disadvantaged kids are not sufficiently targeted, with only 5 to 10 per cent of government funding based on needs.

Another problem is that children and youth living in low socio-economic homes have less access to information and communication technologies, especially if they live in outer urban and remote communities. By comparison with other OECD countries, the digital divide is unusually great in Australia 18 . With the development and spread of digital connectedness based on faster broadband technology, the technological divide may widen in the future. Better access to information technologies can play a major role in improving learning skills and the motivation to learn of low achieving students.

There are also serious geographical disparities in education standards - both within urban Australia and between urban and rural/remote young people. Country students are less likely to finish school, tend to perform more poorly than urban students and have a more restricted choice of subjects. Education performance is also relatively low in almost all outer suburbs of the major cities because of the more limited choice of schools available 19 .

So it is no surprise to find that in the last decade the achievement gap between rich and poor kids has widened 20  and the gap in performance between schools with a high proportion of disadvantaged students and the rest has also widened 21 . It is estimated that 20% of adults (nearly all from disadvantaged backgrounds) now have poor literacy skills and computer literacy is even lower 22 . From a national perspective, under-achievement stemming from socio-economic barriers represents a huge waste of potential human capital. It is a crucial factor in the onset and persistence of disadvantage 23 . The Schools Resourcing Task Force of the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment and Youth Affairs has argued that an additional $2.4 billion per annum is needed to ensure all public schools achieve the agreed national goals of schooling

In short, while our secondary education system is still mildly progressive, the trend is disturbing.

The current political debate on secondary education in Australia is centred on 'cultural' issues and quality of teaching. These are not unimportant but the focus should be more on disadvantaged kids. In particular, we should be addressing inequalities stemming from: - the physical deterioration occurring in public schools; - the exclusiveness of non-government (non-Catholic) school enrolment policies; - the defective socio-economic formula used for allocating grants; - the lack of incentive for good teachers to teach poor kids; and - more generally, the inadequate targeting of public education funds.

(iii) University education

Fewer than 20 per cent of year 12 students go to independent schools yet they receive about one-third of all university offers - up more than 4 percentage points from 2000.

The large and possibly growing under-representation of students from low social backgrounds and from government schools 24  could be in part due to credit constraints or the prospect of running up a HECS debt or the rising costs of university education. However, the bigger problem with low income students by far is that they are unable to meet the 'entrance' qualifying scores required, so the problem should be principally traced back to the secondary education system more than to universities per se.

That said, there is evidence indicating that low incomes and the stress of combining studies with long hours of paid work seriously hamper the education efforts of poorer Australian university students. This problem may be set to get worse as a result of the Government's ban on compulsory student unionism. Students from really low socio-economic backgrounds were by far the biggest users of the union facilities and subsidies; they are now the biggest losers and are being forced to rely on charities 25 . The Vice-Chancellor's Committee recently warned that "fifty per cent of students were neglecting their studies to work and advocated an increase in the youth allowance and more financial assistance to those in lower socio-economic groups" 26 .

(iv) Adult vocational education and training (VET)

Until recently, we have been seeing a trend decline in levels of participation in vocational education and training (VET) by some disadvantaged social groups in Australia. This may stem in part from the relative decline in government funding and increased user pricing. But another factor has been that employers in the public and private sectors have chosen to invest less in in-house training - whether due to outsourcing, fiscal stringency or an increasing focus on short term financial performance in a more competitive market. Low apprentice wages may also have deterred able applicants and the attrition rate is high. At the same time, hours of training have been tending to decline with the replacement of apprenticeships by short term traineeships.

OECD reports have frequently pointed to the wider economic benefits of adult learning programs targeted at low-skilled or older workers and a recent Australian study has found that a well-designed investment in intensive training would so appreciably increase employment participation rates that it would more than pay for itself over time as it would lead to much higher tax revenues and lower government expenditure 27 .

With around 40% of school leavers now entering a university at some stage of their lives, and with the urgent need to increase the employment participation rates of the under-educated, it is arguable that the higher education debate has been too centred on university and not enough on VET. Fortunately, at Federal and State levels, there has been a considerable reawakening of interest in this area. For example, the Federal Government is now investing directly in technical colleges and offering Work Skills Vouchers. Although this has been described as "policy on the run and not aimed at the fundamental causes of the (skill) crisis" 28 , it is a useful beginning. One anomaly deserves a critical look: TAFE students do not have parity with university students in terms of access to funds to support their training and living expenses (FEE-HELP and HECS are not available to most TAFE students) and this is hard to justify.

The various inequalities of education opportunity outlined above are causing our economy to under-perform. They constitute a serious breach of the Australian 'fair go' - the belief that people of equal intelligence should have an equal chance in life if they are prepared to study and work hard. Inequalities will always persist but governments have an obligation to spread education opportunity as widely as possible - from kindergarten through to secondary school, university and adult vocation training. The aim should be to remove impediments to education achievement stemming from "poverty, poor nutrition, ill health, ignorance, social distance and poor or zero child care, to say nothing of conditions in schools" 29 .   Education and training is not appropriate for everyone. For some with complex patterns of disadvantage, other measures such as relocation assistance, wage subsidies, the creation of more unskilled jobs, are needed to facilitate the transition to work. But a coordinated federal/state assault on education inequalities, targeted at disadvantage in early childhood, public schooling and VET, would make a big contribution to a fairer and more productive society.

• The author was a high level Federal policy adviser. Since his retirement in 1991, he has written extensively on the interaction between social and economic issues. His two most recent papers are: 'Equality of Opportunity in Australia: myth and reality'( Australia Institute discussion paper no. 85 , April 2006) and 'Employment Policy and the Clash of Values', Journal of Public Policy , forthcoming-.
• See Fred Argy,'Equality of Opportunity in Australia: myth and reality', Australia Institute Discussion Paper 85 , April 2006, section 4.5.
• Chairman Ben Bernanke, 'The level and distribution of economic well-being', Economist's View , 6 February 2007. 
• See Productivity Commission, 'Potential Benefits of the National Reform Agenda', Research paper , December 2006, Chapter 12. 
• See ACOSS Media Release 5 March 2007. 
• Argy op. cit. page 59ff
• The Productivity Commission, op. cit., reviews some of the recent evidence on p.248. One earlier study found that changes in aggregate skill levels over the last century accounted for an important part of the gains in annual per capital economic growth in Australia (Chapman and G. Withers (2001), Human capital accumulation in reshaping Australia's economy edited by J. Nieuwenhuysen, P. Lloyd and M. Mead, CUP 2001). Few economists question the positive externalities from education (although there are exceptions such as Alison Wolf).
• Programme for International Assessment (PISA), Education at a Glance , 2005, OECD Paris.  
• OECD (2004),Education and Equity, OECD Observer February 2004.
• Based on a study cited by Ross Gittins in Gittinomics (Allen and Unwin 2007)
• The bottom quintile accounts for 1.6% of market incomes in Australia - the lowest of all the 0ECD countries and compared with an OECD average of 4.5% (Forster and d'Ercole 2005, Annex Table A.4).  
• Argy ibid  section 4.4
• OECD (2006), Starting strong: early education and care , ISBN 92-64-03545-1 and F. Cunha and J. Heckman (2007), The technology of skill formation, NBER Working paper 12840 . There is also a recent study by Vinson reported by Adele Horin, SMH 26/2/07. 
• Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services , 2006, page 3.27 to 3.29. 
• Professor Richard Teese, article in The Age March 5, 2007.
• Independent schools spend nearly five times more per student on buildings and grounds than the NSW government spends on the public schools (Professor Vickers in Impact Summer 2007).
• G. Kalb and S.A. Maani, "The importance of observing early school leaving and peer characteristics in analyzing academic performance", Melbourne Institute Working paper no. 05/2007 . 
• Argy ibid, section 4.5.
• There are, for example, "enormous inequalities between schools in wealthy suburbs and those in Melbourne's west" ( The Age report 22/1/07)
• Study edited by Teese and Springer cited by Adele Horin in SMH March 3, 2007.
• Andrew Norton (his blog 7/3/07) examined year 12 retention data by SES background over the period 1997-2005. He found that the gap widened in that period -  mainly because of a 5 point gain by the top third and a point decline in the bottom third. 
• Professor Vickers, Impact Summer 2007. M. Keating, "Investing in VET", Centre for Public Policy Conference 2007
• Report by Emma Madonald, Canberra Times 27/2/07
• Andrew Norton blog 17/1/07. 
• Lisa Macnamara, The Australian , 8/1/07
• ABC Online 15 March 2007
• See M. Keating, ibid pp. 12-16. Also Competition and Cohesion, New Matilda , 16/2/07 p.4
• Ken Wiltshire in CEDA 'Chief Executive', February 2007.
• Teese op cit.
• The New Critic
• Issue 5 - May 2007
• About the IAS
• Public lectures
• Symposia and Workshops
• Masterclasses
• IAS Fellowships
• Gledden Visiting Fellowships
• Issue 13 - December 2010
• Issue 12 - August 2010
• Issue 11 - March 2010
• Issue 10 - August 2009
• Issue 9 - December 2008
• Issue 8 - September 2008
• Issue 7 - May 2008
• Issue 6 - Oct 2007
• Issue 4 - Jan 2007
• Issue 3 - November 2006
• Issue 2 - August 2006
• Issue 1 - May 2006

Social Equity in Australia

Introduction.

In every nation, some communities face obstacles that obstruct their ability to fully participate in the nation’s political, social and economic life. In addition to discriminatory attitudes, beliefs, or perceptions, these groups may be excluded not just via legal systems, property, and labour markets but also through other social institutions. A person may be disadvantaged due to various circumstances, including but not limited to their gender, age, location, profession, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Other factors may also play a role. In this way, people who are excluded from society are robbed of their dignity, their chance for security, and the possibility of leading a more fulfilling life. Making efforts to guarantee that everyone has equal access to opportunities is social inclusion (Filia et al., 2018). The multifaceted process aims to create circumstances that permit full and active involvement of every member of society in all parts of life, such as civic, economic, social, and political activities, and also participation in decision-making processes. Inclusion in society may also be seen as how societies work to reduce the effects of social exclusion and poverty (Kwilinski et al., 2020). The goal of social inclusion is to provide those who are economically disadvantaged and socially marginalized the tools they need to participate in the expanding possibilities available on a global scale. It guarantees that individuals have a voice in choices that impact their lives and equal access to markets, services, and social, political, and physical places. Additionally, it guarantees that individuals have a voice in decisions that affect their communities.

Australia as an Egalitarian

Australia’s civilization is intricate and diversified. Nevertheless, several characteristics of Australian society indicate that it is more equitable than other nations. In Australia, for instance, social mobility is relatively high, which indicates that individuals may move up or down the socioeconomic ladder more readily than in other nations. Moreover, Australia has a culture of mateship that emphasizes equality and fairness. Nonetheless, it is essential to acknowledge that Australia is not a fully egalitarian society. There are still substantial socioeconomic gaps between groups of individuals, with some groups being more impoverished than others. Furthermore, Australia’s history of prejudice against particular groups, like Indigenous Australians, reveals that its society has not always been equitable. Australia is a highly equal nation, yet there is a need for improvement in some areas.

Concept of Social Inclusion

There are numerous advantages to social inclusion (Lambert, 2020). A community may become more cohesive and supportive if everyone is given the same opportunities to engage in society. Inclusion in society may also assist in lessening the incidence of crime and other social issues, enhancing economic results for everyone. However, participating in social life does not come without its challenges. People who profit from the present system of social exclusion, which makes accomplishment more complex, have a potential incentive to oppose change. Despite this, social inclusion should be a primary focus for those working toward creating a more fair and equal society. In an attempt to create social equity, Australia has introduced a variety of initiatives. Among them include the implementation of anti-discrimination legislation, the expansion of access to training and education and the provision of targeted support to underprivileged communities. In addition, several government programs that boost social inclusion have been established recently, including the Closing the Gap strategy and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Measure Adopted by Australia to Achieve Social Equity

By preventing individuals from being treated unjustly based on their traits, anti-discrimination laws serve a crucial role in attaining social equity (Blackham & Allen, 2019). These rules prohibit discrimination based on other characteristics, ethnicity, race, age, religion, gender, and disability. This implies that everyone is subject to similar rights and opportunities regardless of background. The rules create a fair playing ground in society, which may improve economic development and social cohesion. Furthermore, these laws convey that prejudice is not tolerated in Australian culture. This may assist in altering discriminatory attitudes and actions that perpetuate social exclusion.

Increasing education and training access is one of the most fundamental ways Australia has moved towards social equity (Anderson & Boyle, 2019). This involves offering free or low-cost education, expanding student financial aid, and enhancing rural and distant access to education. Making education accessible allows the playing field to be levelled, and everyone is given an equal chance to achieve. Additionally, accessibility to education and training may help break the cycle of poverty since those who have it are more likely to get excellent employment and earn a living wage. Providing targeted aid to underprivileged people is one of Australia’s primary strategies for achieving social equity. Ensuring that the most underprivileged have access to opportunities and the resources necessary for success helps to level the playing field and gives everyone an equal opportunity to participate in society. In addition, this kind of aid may help to end the cycle of inequality, making it much simpler for subsequent generations to attain social equality.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme, often known as the NDIS, is a program started by the Australian government that offers support and assistance to people who live in Australia and have a disability (Olney & Dickinson, 2019). As a direct result of the outcomes of the Productivity Commission’s research into disability care and support, the National Disability Insurance Scheme was established in 2013. The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is a government program that strives to increase social inclusion by guaranteeing that persons with disabilities have equal access to opportunities and services. Funding is made available via the program for items like personal care, therapy, and medical equipment. In addition to this, it assists those who are disabled so that they may live freely and take part in their communities.

The Closing, the Gap approach, is yet another government program to enhance social inclusion (Altman, 2018). It was started in 2008, after the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission’s 2007 Social Justice Report release. The approach focuses on reducing the inequality between Non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australians regarding health and life outcomes. It involves boosting access to training and education, enhancing career possibilities, and offering targeted health services.

Although there is still a long way to go, implementing these policies has contributed to improving social equality in Australia. However, it is essential to remember that social equality is not something that can be accomplished immediately. Continued work and dedication are required from all members of society to develop a society that is more accepting of many perspectives and more just for all people.

Altman, J. (2018). Beyond closing the gap: Valuing diversity in Indigenous Australia. Canberra, ACT: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR), The Australian National University.

Anderson, J., & Boyle, C. (2019). Looking in the mirror: Reflecting on 25 years of inclusive education in Australia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 796-810.

Blackham, A., & Allen, D. (2019). Resolving discrimination claims outside the courts: alternative dispute resolution in Australia and the United Kingdom.

Filia, K. M., Jackson, H. J., Cotton, S. M., Gardner, A., & Killackey, E. J. (2018). What is social inclusion? A thematic analysis of professional opinion. Psychiatric rehabilitation journal, 41(3), 183.

Kwilinski, A., Vyshnevskyi, O., & Dzwigol, H. (2020). Digitalization of the EU economies and people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(7), 142.

Lambert, S. R. (2020). Do MOOCs contribute to student equity and social inclusion? A systematic review 2014–18. Computers & Education, 145, 103693.

Olney, S., & Dickinson, H. (2019). Australia’s new National Disability Insurance Scheme: Implications for policy and practice. Policy Design and Practice, 2(3), 275-290.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Hap: an interdisciplinary approach to health policy, a comparative analysis of chester a. arthur and william mckinley’s presidential perspectives, strategies for encoding, retention, and retrieval, the significance of cultural psychology, alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology analysis, annotated bibliography: seeking the truth: the polygraph (“lie detector”) is an accurate means of detecting dishonesty., popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail