Editors: Kerry
Download 18.21 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 6: Natural Capital
- 6.1 Population impact
5.4 Overall assessmentMigrants contribute in positive ways to the productive diversity of Australia through investment in housing, the transformation of urban areas, the creation of new businesses, the supply of products, the provision of new and different skills, and through other types of entrepreneurial activities. They also create demand for a range of goods and services and also infrastructure such as roads, schools and water supplies. For this reason, it is sometimes argued that increased migration levels put pressure on resources and cause shortcomings in infrastructure and services, particularly in Australia’s cities which attract the bulk of new migrant settlers. According to this view, continued population increase through migration will cause further housing shortages and resultant price rises. Herein lies the dilemma. Because intake levels tend to be highest when the Australian economy is growing strongly and also because migrants boost Australia’s supplies of human and social capital, it can be argued that increased migration should provide the additional resources needed to prevent shortfalls in existing infrastructure and services. Of course, provisioning for many of these factors may take years to plan and implement. However, intake levels can fluctuate according to a range of parameters and with comparatively short lead times. Furthermore, the ethnic mix can varied substantially, creating new and different types of demands, sometimes in locations without a history of adapting for the types of services that might be required. What has been suggested is for the various levels of government to ensure that allocations and resources are made available where they are most needed. For this to happen, reliable information on proposed immigration levels as well as on birthplace and language groups would need to be made available in a timely fashion. Of course, the historically fluctuating nature of immigration suggests this can be difficult to provide. How this challenge is responded to will influence the level of benefit from productive diversity afforded by immigration for Australia. 6: Natural CapitalGrowing environmental awareness has been one of the hallmarks of Australian society in the last twenty years. Nevertheless, major debates continue about the role of population pressure on the atmosphere, on the hydrological cycle, on soils, vegetation and fauna, and on landforms (especially beaches) (Bridgman et al. 1995). Clearly, immigration impacts on the biophysical environment through its contribution to population growth (Cocks 1992; 1996; 1999; Lowe 1996). However impacts are mediated by lifestyle. Consequently not all migrants have the same ecological footprint and nor does footprint impact necessarily remain the same before and after migration. This point was dramatically illustrated in a Sydney Morning Herald article (1 August 2005:1) which pointed out: “If everyone lived like they do in Mosman, we would need seven extra earths to cope with them”. Mosman is, of course, a wealthy Sydney suburb with high levels of consumption. It is also characterised by relatively low levels of migrants. 6.1 Population impactReview of the literature Migration policy and population growth Because immigration is a major contributor to population growth, intake levels have often been central to discussion about relationships between population size, rates of population growth, environmental quality and sustainable development. Migration has been suggested as a way to avoid population decline and substantial falls in the size of the labour force, with a net intake of around 80 000 suggested by some (Birrell et al. 2005; Econtech 2004; Garnaut et al. 2003; Glover et al. 2001; McDonald and Kippen 1999). It is inappropriate for this report to explore these issues or the potential for immigration intake levels to offset ageing (Dowrick 2002; Garnaut et al. 2003) other than to note increasing scepticism about the argument that higher intakes can retard population ageing (McDonald and Kippen 1999; C. Richardson 2002). Views on migrant intake levels and the environment Contradictory messages have been received with respect to how people feel and think about migration intake levels and the environment. On the one hand, those involved in the sustainability movements have generally opposed population increase (Jupp 2002). However, this approach made it impossible to defend family reunion and humanitarian intake Programmes without abolishing all other immigration and inadvertently becoming aligned with racially inspired views on immigration. On the other hand, some people who are concerned about the state of the environment favour immigration (Betts 2004; 2005a). Characteristics of supporters of migration Overall trends show that, by 2004, Australians were generally less concerned about immigration levels than at any time since the beginning of the 1990s but patterns based on education and occupational group did not produce uniform results (Betts 2005a). Managers, administrators and professionals, in particular people working in the social professions such as teaching, media, the arts, social work, and religion, were less likely to believe intake levels were too large and more likely to believe they were not large enough. The pro-immigration stance was especially marked for university graduates and indeed the data showed that support for immigration was highest among graduates (Betts 2005a:34-35). Challenges to notions of national identity People who acknowledge a strong attachment to Australia demonstrate more cautious approaches to immigration. This might be associated with national identity whereby many Australians have a sense that they belong to and identify with a distinctive national community and are proud to do so. Immigration and multiculturalism are sometimes seen as synonymous and thus potentially challenge some people’s notion of community: if migrants do not integrate, some people are concerned that Australia might become divided along ethnic lines (Birrell and Betts 2001). State and Territory differentiations Differentiations are also apparent geographically. Among the five mainland states, opposition to immigration has been shown to be highest in New South Wales, especially in the outer Sydney and regional areas, and lowest in Victoria. It was even lower in the Australian Capital Territory. Inner metropolitan areas also tended to score low (Betts 2005a: 37). The media, of course, influence many people’s opinions about immigration, population policy and the environment. Ambiguous views in society are understandable given that an analysis of newspaper articles has shown that few Australian journalists make a population-environment connection (Goldie 2002). Directory: sites -> default -> files -> documents -> 01 2014 documents -> Ace abi catair customs and Trade Automated Interface Requirements documents -> Mobile audio/video recording systems documents -> The south australian government gazette documents -> All public acts appearing in this gazette are to be considered official, and obeyed as such documents -> Union interparlementaire inter-parliamentary union 01 2014 -> Voices Shaping the 01 2014 -> Muslim Voices – Hopes and aspirations of Muslim Australians Centre for Muslim Minorities & Islam Policy Studies 01 2014 -> Prepared by: Kais Al‐Momani Nour Dados Marion Maddox Amanda Wise C Download 18.21 Mb. Share with your friends:
|