6.3 Sustainability
Review of the literature
Sustainability and urban renewal
Potential problems with issues of sustainability have been flagged for suburbs in major cities that are undergoing renewal. In recent years, many immigrants have moved to these suburbs. The areas in question were initially developed in the decades following World War II. They are now being subjected to major waves of social and physical restructuring (Randolph 2002). In these areas, there are concerns about the older poorer housing as well as the new housing that is replacing it in some places, particularly with respect to the energy efficiency of buildings. The influx of migrants may provide the investment capital necessary for change and appropriate design.
Sustaining urban infrastructure and amenity
Immigration has been singled out as causing problems in cities with respect to infrastructure provision, road congestion, declining urban amenity and pollution (see Burnley et al. 1997). Associated environmental deterioration might in part be dealt with by investment in urban infrastructure such as sewerage treatment works, urban transport and water recycling schemes. To attribute this requirement for investment to immigration is of course harsh because the current state of cities reflects conscious political and economic choices with a result that any decline in amenity should not be ascribed solely to immigration and population growth (Cunneen et al. 1997). The need to apportion blame for social unease, financial hardships and pollution can nevertheless make scapegoating new migrants an attractive option to some.
Immigration impacts in context
Concerns that short-term interests of groups which profit from population growth might be inhibiting honest consideration of long-term realities have led to calls for interdisciplinary empirical research by demographers and sociologists with respect to impacts of population numbers on the natural environment (Betts 2004; Jones 2001). While concern for depreciation of natural capital as a resource is appropriate, it seems unlikely that lower migration intake by itself will address most problems associated with natural capital.
Generalisations are of course clumsy but the major issues regarding impacts on the biophysical environment in Australian cities and regions include the nature of lifestyle and the economic system; the adequacy of policies and management; and the formulation and implementation of remedial Programmes. Immigrants’ effects on population growth and the comparative size of their ecological footprints, both before and after migration, are only some of the factors to be considered when addressing these issues.
6.4 Summary of benefits and costs
Interpretations of social costs and benefits of immigration to Australia with respect to natural capital and the literature are summarised in Table 6.1.
6.5 Overall Assessment
Clearly there are differing views with respect to impacts of immigration on population growth, pressure on the environment and sustainability with central issues for discussion varying depending on whether local, national or global viewpoints are addressed. The comparative size of immigrants’ ecological footprints after migration is most likely no greater than those of others who comprise the Australia-born population. Lifestyle, internal population migration, economic systems, adequacy of policies and management, and the formulation and implementation of remedial Programmes are among those factors with the potential to influence short- and long-term impacts. With fertility rates in Australia and in all developed countries at lower than replacement levels, intakes through migration are offered as the single option for population maintenance or growth; an imperative for some and an anathema for others.
Table 6.1: Natural capital issues – summary of social costs and benefits of migration
Social benefits Social costs
Migration h as been sug gested as a way to avoid popul ation decline.
Family reunion and humanitarian intakes are subject to challenge by environmentalists when there is opposition to population increase.
National population growth th rough migration is an extra neous factor with respect to env iron mental p ro blems because l and d egr adati on is not ca usally linked.
Population growth through migration places pressures on natural resources and the environment.
Limiting immigration and thus p opulation growth may in the sh ort term redu ce the imperative to tackle envir onmental problems.
‘Common property’ resources, such as fisheries and forests and, of course, water, might need careful management to avoid exploitation at unsustainable levels should the intake of migrants increase substantially in the long term.
Given inte rnational t rade and factor substitution possibilities, population growth might be expected to h ave little impact on depletion r ates of most non- ren ewable resources
Reduced population growth through reduced immigration could marginalise Australia in a global sense.
Migration reduction is prob ably an inapp ropr iate vehicle for p rotecting ecosystems if a g lobal perspective is adopt ed.
The potential for increased population levels to endanger ecosystems is an issue because population growth has a clear impact on habitat modification.
Settlement patterns of immigrants might counter rat her than ag gravate inter- a nd intra-state population movements.
Where immigrants live is critical in terms of their impact on natural capital.
The influx of migrants may pr ovide the investment capital necessary for chan ge and a ppro pr iate design.
It seems unlikely that lower migration intake by itself will address most problems associated with natural capital.
Potential problems with issues of sustainability have been flagged where there are concentrations of ethnic groups in suburbs undergoing renewal.
Apportioning blame for environmental deterioration can make scapegoating new migrants an attractive option, and open up new divisions that undermine social cohesion.
Share with your friends: |