Immigrant settlement outside of Australia's capital cities

Immigrant Settlement Outside of Australia’s Capital CitiesGraeme Hugo*The National Centre for Social Applications of GIS, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia

these areas, although some regional communities are mobilising to cancel this out. There are also several elements in Australia’s new suite of temporary migration programmes which are funnelling migrants into regional areas. The paper examines student migration, the Working Holiday Maker programme and the Regional 457 long-term business migration programme. Most of these represent totally new elements in regional populations. While it is too early to make defi nitive judgements about the extent of this trend and its impact, immigration is bringing social and economic change to many non-metropolitan communities. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 21 April 2007; revised 16 March 2008; accepted 10 April 2008

Keywords: regional migration; regional development; temporary migration; migration policy

INTRODUCTION

Australia’s population geography is dominated by two elements – a high degree of concentration of the popula-

tion into a few large cities,1 and the signifi cance of international migration in shaping national population growth, composition and distribu-tion.2 These have been strongly linked during the post-war period because immigrants have shown an increasing tendency to settle in large cities, especially Sydney and Melbourne, which in 2006 had 34.1% of the Australia-born popula-tion but 53.1% of the foreign-born. The pattern of increasing levels of immigration and their con-centration in global cities is a common one in

POPULATION, SPACE AND PLACEPopul. Space Place 14, 553–571 (2008)Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/psp.539

ABSTRACT

The post-war migration programme has added more than 8 million to the Australian population, but the immigrants have overwhelmingly settled in a few metropolitan areas. At each successive census an increasing proportion of the overseas-born resided in capital cities until 2006 when there was a small reduction. The latter shift, while small, may herald a change in immigrant settlement. In 1996 the settler intake was divided into immigrants who could settle anywhere in Australia and those that were directed to designated areas. Predominant in the latter were non-metropolitan communities. This paper analyses how these policy shifts relating to permanent and temporary migration have created a new fl ow of immigrants into regional Australia. A number of developments in the Australian Immigration Program are taken in turn, and empirical evidence regarding their scale and impact in non-metropolitan Australia assessed. Firstly, a number of surveys of State Specifi c and Regional Migration (SSRM) settlers are analysed and show that while there is a high degree of satisfaction among both immigrants and employers, there are some labour issues. In addition, a signifi cant minority intend to leave their area of initial settlement once they had fulfi lled their residential qualifi cation. While refugee-humanitarian settlers are not compelled to settle in particular areas, many are channelled into regional areas. There is often a lack of support services for them in

* Correspondence to: Graeme Hugo, The National Centre for Social Applications of GIS, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. E-mail: graeme.hugo@adelaide.edu.au

554 G. Hugo

higher income countries (Benton-Short et al., 2005). However, immigrants have also been playing a signifi cant role outside of large cities in OECD countries, although this has received much less attention in the literature. This paper examines this phenomenon in Australia, a country more infl uenced by migration than most other OECD nations. While the majority of immi-grants are attracted to metropolitan areas, inter-national migration is playing an increasingly important role in non-metropolitan Australia. This is partly associated with labour shortage because low fertility and ageing impacts are exacerbated in these areas by loss of youth through internal out-migration. When this is combined with the post-productivist develop-ment of non-agricultural job opportunities in non-metropolitan Australia, labour shortages are perceived as a constraint on development. A dis-tinctive feature in Australia is changes in national immigration policy which channel some newly-arrived migrants into areas outside the major metropolitan poles which have traditionally attracted the majority of immigrants. This paper assesses the role played by these policies in non-metropolitan Australia and some of the implica-tions for the communities and the migrants themselves.

A NEW PARADIGM OF AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION

Australia’s international migration has experi-enced a paradigmatic shift since the mid-1990s in response to globalisation and other develop-ments within and outside Australia (Hugo, 1999, 2004). There have been several elements in this change, but two are of particular signifi cance here. Firstly, Australian immigration policy for the fi rst four post-war decades focused almost exclusively on permanent settlement and eschewed temporary worker migration. This policy was reversed in the mid-1990s which saw the expansion of a range of types of temporary skilled worker migration (Hugo, 2006). The intro-duction of a temporary business migrant (457) visa which allowed employers to bring in skilled workers was especially signifi cant (Khoo, Voigt-Graf, Hugo and McDonald, 2003) but there was also a massive expansion in full-fee-paying stu-dents (DIMA, 2007: 66) and of Working Holiday Makers (DIMA, 2007: 64). Figure 1 shows the

rapid increase in numbers of temporary migrants during the mid-1990s.

The second major change was the introduction in 1996–97 of the State Specifi c and Regional Migration (SSRM) visa categories. This virtually created two classes of permanent settler immi-grants to Australia: those entering under the standard Migration and Humanitarian Programs (DIMA, 2007: 17), and those under the SSRM Scheme which restricted where the immigrants could settle in their fi rst three years in the country. There had been isolated, small and short-lived earlier attempts to direct immigrants to settle in particular areas (Hugo, 1993, 1999). However, these were not on the scale of the SSRM initia-tives which sought to contribute ‘to the economic, demographic and social development of regional Australia and low population growth areas’ (DIMA, 2007: 41). Table 1 shows that SSRM schemes have increased their proportion of the national permanent settler intake each year and now account for over a fi fth of all settlers. The SSRM initiatives enable employers, State, Terri-tory or local governments or relatives to sponsor prospective skilled migrants who do not fully meet the Points Assessment Test3 requirements to enter Australia under the regular migration programme. There are a number of visas, but they require the immigrant to settle outside des-ignated high migration areas, several involve provision of a temporary resident visa for an initial period, and permanent residence is only granted after a period of at least two years, and if the settler has satisfi ed the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) that they have settled successfully.

A crucial element in the SSRM scheme is the defi nition of ‘regional’, since eligibility is con-fi ned to those areas. In the initial development of the schemes, three areas of concentrated immi-grant settlement were excluded from regional migration schemes, namely:

• The Sydney–Newcastle–Wollongong conur-bation

• The rapidly growing Southeastern Queens-land region of Brisbane–Gold Coast–Sunshine Coast

• Perth in the southwest.

However, more recently for some schemes a dif-ferent designation was adopted. This identifi ed communities with less than 200,000 inhabitants,

Immigrant Settlement in Australia 555

Table 1. Number of immigrants with visas granted under the State Regional Specifi c Migration mecha-nisms and their proportion of the total intake, 1997–98 to 2005–06.

Year Number % total intake

1997–98 1,753 2.31998–99 2,804 3.31999–2000 3,309 3.62000–01 3,846 3.62001–02 4,136 4.62002–03 7,941 8.52003–04 12,725 11.42004–05 18,697 15.22005–06 27,480 20.9

Source: DIMA Population Flows: Immigration Aspects, various issues; DIMA Immigration Update, various issues; DIAC, unpublished data.

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

3,592,591) from the areas initially excluded from regional migration schemes. The reason it was excluded was the strong pro-immigration stance taken by the Victorian State government, and especially its then Premier. ‘My personal belief is that Australia and Victoria have much to gain from a larger population’ (Bracks, 2003: 40). This view contrasted with that of the New South Wales government and its previous Premier who had a long history of seeking to discourage immi-grants from settling in Sydney because he per-ceived population growth as exerting pressure on environment and infrastructure in Sydney (e.g. Sydney Morning Herald, 23 May 1995: 1, 4; Withers and Powell, 2003).

In fact the different SSRM schemes vary in the parts of the nation to which they apply, and Melbourne is excluded from several. Some of the major differences are depicted in Table 2. What this demonstrates is that the SSRM scheme is not purely a scheme which directs migrants toward non-metropolitan parts of Australia, although all non-metropolitan parts of the nation are eligible for all SSRM categories.

The SSRM scheme is focused on the skill part of the Australian immigration programme,

Figure 1. Temporary migration to Australia, 1986 to 2006.Source: DIMA Population Flows: Immigration Aspects, various issues.

or that had a population growth rate of less than half of the national average over the last inter-censal period, as being eligible for the scheme. Among the capital cities this includes only Adelaide (2006 population 1,105,839).

What was notable is the absence of the Melbourne metropolitan area (2006 population

556 G. Hugo

although there are elements of family and busi-ness migration. Moreover, there are separate efforts to encourage settlers under the refugee-humanitarian part of the Australian migration programme4 to settle outside of the major foci of immigrant settlement. The federal government takes responsibility to help refugee-humanitar-ian settlers fi nd a place to live and assist the initial settlement process. This is achieved either by initially accommodating migrants in a hostel, or by linking them with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and communities in peripheral areas who undertake to assist in the settlement process.

Moreover, there have been developments in temporary worker migration which have favoured regional areas. For example, overseas students who opt to study in an institution in a designated regional area receive an automatic fi ve points in the Points Assessment Test if they subsequently apply for permanent residence on completion of their studies. There has also been the development of a Regional 457, Temporary Business Visa.

Hence there is now a raft of programmes which direct where many immigrants in Australia settle, at least initially. Some large Australian cities are

eligible for some of these programmes. Adelaide is currently eligible for all of them, although in 2007 this was being challenged by some other States. Nevertheless, there is a signifi cant and growing part of the immigration programme which is especially designed to direct immigrants into regional areas which are lagging or have signifi cant labour shortages.

IMMIGRANT SETTLEMENT IN NON-METROPOLITAN AUSTRALIA

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) divides settlements for census purposes into the follow-ing ‘Section of State’ (Hugo, 2007) categories:

• Major Urban (population clusters of 100,000 or more);

• Other Urban (population clusters of 1000 to 99,999);

• Bounded Locality (200 to 999);• Rural Balance (remainder of State/Territory);

and• Migratory.

Table 3 shows that immigrants are underrepre-sented in all but the major cities category. Moreo-ver, among recent arrivals 89% have settled

Table 3. Australia: persons by section of State by birthplace by year of arrival at 2001 Census.

Arrived before 1996

Arrived after 1996 Australia-born Total

No. % No. % No. % No. %

Major urban 2,778,580 80.6 584,872 89.0 8,163,240 59.9 11,526,692 65.0Other urban 417,236 12.1 51,543 7.8 3,443,950 25.2 3,912,729 22.1Bounded locality 43,479 1.3 3,806 0.6 410,248 3.0 457,533 2.6Rural balance 207,476 6.0 17,062 2.6 1,606,337 11.8 1,830,875 10.3Migratory 1,380 – 196 – 5,706 0.1 7,282 –Total 3,448,151 100.0 657,479 100.0 13,629,481 100.0 17,735,111 100.0

Source: ABS 2001 Census, unpublished tabulations.

Table 2. Locational requirements of selected SSRM visa classes.

Skill Matching South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, Tasmania (State sponsor)All areas except Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong, Melbourne, Perth,

Brisbane, Gold Coast (Regional employer)State/Territory Nominated Independent South Australia, Tasmania, VictoriaSkilled Designated Area Sponsored All areas except Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong, Perth, BrisbaneSkilled Independent Regional All areas except Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong, NSW Central Coast,

Melbourne, Perth, Canberra, Brisbane, Gold Coast

Source: After Birrell et al. (2006).

Table 4. Australia: distribution of Australian-born and overseas-born popu-lation between major urban, other urban and rural areas, 1947–2001.

1947 2001% change 1947–2001No. % No %

Australian-born Major urban 3,390,591 49.7 8,163,371 60.0 +140.8 Other urban 1,263,724 18.5 3,335,084 24.5 +163.9 Rural 2,173,068 31.8 2,131,230 15.6 −1.9 Total 6,827,383 100.0 13,629,685 100.0 +99.6Overseas-born Major urban 453,368 61.8 3,363,323 81.9 +641.9 Other urban 98,824 13.5 442,723 10.8 +348.0 Rural 181,180 24.7 299,398 7.3 +65.2 Total* 733,372 100.0 4,105,444 100.0 +459.8

Source: ABS 1947 and 2001 Censuses.* Excludes people with no permanent residence.

Table 5. Australia: number and percentage of overseas-born persons resident in capital cities by origin and length of residence, 2001.

Birthplace

Period of residence in Australia in 2001

0–4 years 5+ years

Number % of total resident in capitals Number % of total resident in capitals

MES origina 145,910 77.0 991,134 70.1NES originb 307,785 90.1 1,762,489 86.2Total overseas-born 453,695 85.4 2,753,623 79.6

Source: ABS 2001 Census.a Mainly English-speaking.b Non-English-speaking.

in major cities compared with 59.9% of the Australian-born and 80.6% of longer-standing immigrants. Nevertheless, after a period of longer residence in Australia, some overseas-born move to non-metropolitan areas as part of the counterurbanisation process like the Australia-born population (Bell and Hugo, 2000: Chapter 8). Internal migration data from the Australian Census indicate that recent immigrants tend to be attracted to the major cities and the overseas-born involved in internal migration out of major urban areas tend to be settlers of longstanding and/or settlers from Mainly English Speaking (MES) countries like New Zealand and the UK.

The tendency to settle in major metropolitan areas has increased during the post-war period. In pre-war Australia, immigrants were a sig-nifi cant part of non-metropolitan populations,

especially in areas of intensive agriculture like market gardening, sugar-cane farming and irri-gated agriculture (Borrie, 1954; Hugo, 1975). Immigrants did not, however, settle in the exten-sive dry farming areas of the wheat-sheep belt or the pastoral interior. There was some settlement in mining, fi shing, communication and large regional industrial centres like Newcastle, Wollongong, Geelong and Whyalla. However, the tendency for migrants to concentrate in major urban places has increased, and Table 4 shows that the proportion of the overseas-born living in these cities increased from 61.8% in 1947 to 81.9% in 2001. Over the same period the proportion of the Australian-born in these cities increased from 49.7% to 60%. The level of concentration in the largest cities is greater among the NES than among the MES born. Table 5 shows that among

558 G. Hugo

recent migrants, 90.1% of the NES born are in the nation’s capital cities, as are 77% of the MES origin migrants. These proportions are somewhat higher than for the longer-standing migrants. Moreover, there is an increasing concentration in Australia’s largest city. Table 6 shows that, between 1947 and 2001, there was an increase in the proportion of the overseas-born living in the two largest cities of Sydney and Melbourne from 42.5% to 53.2%. Over the same period the propor-tion of the Australia-born living in the two cities slightly decreased from 35.0 to 34.1%. The pro-portion in Melbourne has declined slightly, while that in Sydney has increased so that nearly 1 in 3 migrants in Australia live in Australia’s global city.

GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN IMMIGRANT SETTLEMENT IN NON-METROPOLITAN AUSTRALIA

While there can be no doubting the signifi cance of immigrants in major Australian cities, espe-cially Sydney, there are some indications that international migration is increasingly infl uenc-ing non-metropolitan areas, and that government policy is playing a role. In Australia’s large-scale post-war migration there have been some attempts by government to infl uence where immigrants settle after their arrival in Australia (Hugo, 1993, 1999). The federal government had a two-year bonding scheme for persons accepted as displaced persons in the early post-war years (Kunz, 1988). These allocated settlers to areas suffering labour shortages, often in remote non-metropolitan areas for large-scale construction projects such as the Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Scheme. At the end of the bond period,

many made their way to capital cities but sub-stantial communities remained. However, it was not until the mid-1990s that the Australian gov-ernment considered attempting to shape where immigrants settle on a large scale. There was an increase in government interest in regional areas following electoral swings against the federal government in traditionally conservative regional areas during the mid-1990s. The sustainability of rural and regional communities became an important item on the national agenda, with the establishment of a federal government depart-ment on regional development and the initiation of a rash of programmes to facilitate regional development. In May 1996 the annual meeting of Commonwealth, State and Territory Ministers for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs established a working party to examine ways in which a higher proportion of migrants might settle in regional Australia. Accordingly, a number of initiatives were taken to attract immigrants to areas which are currently receiving small intakes.

At the same time labour shortages began to be reported in regional areas. This was partly because the general tightening of the labour market that was occurring in Australia due to low fertility and ageing was exacerbated in regional areas by internal migration. Figure 2, for example, shows the substantial net internal migration losses of young adults that regional Australia sustained in the late 1990s. This net loss of working-age people from non-metropolitan areas has occurred at a time where there has been expansion of job opportunities in some industries and in some communities in post-productivist non-metropolitan Australia. Some of these developments include:

Table 6. Sydney and Melbourne Statistical Divisions: proportion of population overseas-born, 1947–2006.

Sydney Statistical Division Melbourne Statistical Division All Australia

% in Melbourne and Sydney

No. of overseas-born

% of all overseas-born

1947 191,107 25.7 125,258 16.8 744,187 42.51966 558,236 26.2 568,365 26.7 2,130,920 52.92001 1,233,487 30.0 954,037 23.2 4,105,444 53.22006* 1,307,414 29.6 1,038,431 23.5 4,416,037 53.1

Source: ABS 1947, 1966, 2001 and 2006 Censuses.* Preliminary release.

• A massive expansion of mining activity fuelled by the demand from China in remote areas of Australia, especially in Western Australia, Queensland and increasingly South Australia.

• Increasing food processing as Australia expands its exports of primary produce, especially to Asia.

• Expansion of the tourism industry, creating jobs in many non-metropolitan areas.

• Increasing retirement migration to coastal and other scenically attractive areas.

• Lifestyle, amenity-led migration into attractive ecological areas, especially in coastal, alpine and river areas within 2-hours drive of a major city (Burnley and Murphy, 2004).

Increasing reports of labour shortages in non-metropolitan areas in the mid-1990s saw the introduction of a special component in the migra-tion programme to channel immigrants into those areas. The essence of the SSRM programme is that it enables employers, State and local governments and families in designated lagging economic regions to sponsor immigrants without them having to meet the full requirements of

the Australian Points Assessment Scheme. There are an array of visa categories available under the Scheme, and some of their charac-teristics are:

• The Scheme focuses on skills, restricting most visa categories to people who narrowly miss reaching the high pass threshold of the Points Assessment Scheme.

• Some categories require settlers to live in a designated area as a temporary resident for three years, whereafter they are assessed regarding their degree of adjustment and given permanent residence. They are then free to settle anywhere in Australia.

• Foreign students who study in an institution in a designated area get fi ve bonus points in the Points Assessment Test.

• In addition, a ‘Regional 457’ was developed whereby concessions were granted which gave regional certifying bodies a greater role in supporting sponsorships in regional Australia, allowing them to grant exceptions from the gazetted minimum skill and salary require-ments for positions nominated under tempo-rary business visas, which are located in

-40000

-30000

-20000

-10000

5-9 10-14

Males Females

Figure 2. Australia: estimated net rest of State migration, 1996–2001 (area outside of the capital city statistical division).

Source: ABS, 1996 and 2001 Censuses.

560 G. Hugo

regional and low population growth areas and have been certifi ed by a Regional Certifying Body.

One of the spin-offs has been an unprecedent-edly greater involvement of State and local government in the immigration process. Under Section 5.51 (xxvii) of the Australia Constitution, the Commonwealth government is empowered to legislate for immigration. As Jupp (2002: 67–8) pointed out, before Federation in 1901 the States (then separate colonies) organised immigration control, assisted passengers and settlement serv-ices and continued to do so (in co-operation with the Commonwealth) until the end of the First World War. Thereafter the Commonwealth took over control of settlement and assistance, and apart from some minor exceptions (Hugo, 2005) the States have not been heavily involved in recruitment or settlement of migrants. This has changed. In the State of South Australia a State government instrumentality, Immigration SA, has been established to facilitate an increase in the numbers moving to that State. In addition, South Australian Regional Development Boards in non-metropolitan areas have appointed Migration Offi cers. Moreover, local governments in non-metropolitan areas have become proactive in attracting immigrants to settle in their communi-ties and assisting them in the settlement and adjustment processes.

TYPES OF IMMIGRANT SETTLEMENT IN NON-METROPOLITAN AREAS

The SSRM scheme is still in its initial stages, but some changes in immigrant settlement in Australia are evident. Table 7 shows that the pro-portion of newly arrived immigrants who settled in Australia’s capital cities fell from 86.3% in the

1991–96 period to 83.9% in 2001–06. While newly-arrived migrants overwhelmingly still settle in the nation’s major cities, this was the fi rst time in the post-war era that this proportion declined. Moreover in Sydney – the main destination of immigrants – the proportion settling fell from 37.3% to 30.6% between the last two intercensal periods. Since Sydney has only 20.7% of the national population, it is still receiving a dispro-portionate share of the immigrant intake, but a change has occurred. We will now turn to an examination of some of the types of immigration settlement in non-metropolitan areas, drawing on a number of studies of immigrant settlement and impact.

SSRM Scheme Immigrants

A number of studies have been made of SSRM migrants to examine their impact and assess their adjustment to life in Australia. One of the earli-est, in 2000, covered 248 SSRM migrants and their employers (Cully and VandenHeuvel, 2000). There was an endorsement of the Scheme by employers and employees, although a third of employees had left their original employers within the fi rst six months of their arrival. Almost all of the migrants (96%) were in full-time employment and almost a half owned, or were purchasing, their own home.

A more recent survey of 500 migrants who settled outside the major centres of Perth, Sydney, Wollongong, Newcastle, Melbourne, Brisbane and the Gold Coast was undertaken in 2004 (DIMIA, 2005a). Some of the main fi ndings were as follows:

• There was an overrepresentation of immi-grants from mainly english speaking (MES) countries, especially the UK (a quarter) and South Africa–Zimbabwe (23%), and an under-representation of Asians (25% including 10% from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangla-desh) compared with the skilled migration stream in general.

• The main reasons given for migration were employment considerations (46%), climate/lifestyle (36%), a better future for the family (23%) and change in lifestyle (23%).

• Some 90% of all migrants received settlement assistance from their employers.

• More than half of employers (who were also interviewed) had sponsored only one Regional

Table 7. Australia: percentage of immigrants arriving in fi ve years prior to the Census settling in capital cities and rest of State, 1991–2006.

Years Capital cities Rest of State Sydney

1991–96 86.3 13.7 37.51996–2001 85.5 14.5 37.32001–06 83.9 16.1 30.6

Source: ABS Population Censuses of 1996, 2001, 2006.

Scheme migrant and 12% had sponsored fi ve or more, refl ecting the fact that the Scheme has been much used by small and medium busi-nesses in regional areas. Over 80% of employ-ers rated the Scheme at eight or more on a scale of one to ten.

• At the time of interview, 9% of respondents had already moved to non-designated areas. Of those who had fulfi lled their 3-year resi-dence period, 18% had moved to a non- designated area. Another 8% of respondents in designated areas indicated that they intended to move in the future.

• There was a high degree of satisfaction among the respondents. Only 6% had experienced some unemployment, and more than 80% expressed satisfaction with their job. The median income of $926 per week was above those of all migrants surveyed around the same time (DIMIA, 2005a: 26).

• Overall, 93% of migrants had been involved in more than one community social activity since arrival, and on average migrants speak to 3.7 neighbours, while only 7% do not speak to any neighbours.

One of the areas most infl uenced by the SSRM scheme is the Riverina region in New South Wales, an irrigation and wheat–sheep area between the Murrumbidgee and Murray Rivers with around 175,000 residents. A study by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (2007) had a number of components including surveys of SSRM migrant settlers and their employers, as well as in-depth interviews and focus groups. In a survey of 129 migrants, three-quarters had lived in a major metropolitan area in their origin country. Most (77%) came to the Riverina because that was where they were offered a job by a sponsor. A signifi cant propor-tion plan to leave the Riverina once they have fulfi lled the residential requirement of their SSRM visa – 8% of those interviewed had already left and another fi fth intended to leave within the next year. The migrants performed well in the labour market, with participation and employ-ment rates close to the average Australian level. Some 70% said that they liked their job and only 3% disliked it. Their earnings were above the national average. There was, however, a higher level of job dissatisfaction among the partners of the Principal Applicants, and their levels of

unemployment were higher, and earnings lower, than the national average.

A recent evaluation of skilled migration to Australia (Birrell et al., 2006) used a 2005 survey of 9138 recent migrants around six months after their arrival in Australia. Of these, 3696 were Principal Applicants who came as skilled migrants, and of those 5% were Skilled Desig-nated Area Sponsored (SDAS) migrants. Although the numbers were relatively small, the study found that SDAS migrants had poorer labour-market outcomes than other skilled migration categories:

• 23% were unemployed at the time of interview;

• almost a third did not use their qualifi cations in their job;

• 22% did not like their job.

Accordingly the survey evidence on SSRM immigrant settlement is somewhat mixed, although the defi nitive analysis of the impact of the programme in regional areas remains to be done. One interesting dimension has been the way a number of regional communities have been proactive in attracting SSRM settlers and developing formal and informal programmes to assist settlers adjusting to life in Australia. This has involved provision of information and welcome packs, assistance with children joining school, and involving them in local organisations and events.5 There have been issues because regional communities are less likely to have both formal and informal culture-specifi c services available to new migrants, but there are several communities that have deliberately developed strategies to substitute local support for these services. Field studies indicate that the newcom-ers are valued not only because they are fi lling job vacancies6 of local signifi cance. They are often also seen as helping in the maintenance of health, education and other services in rural areas which are under threat because of declining population numbers and new modes of service provision, which are concentrating more services in larger centres. Housing is proving to be a problem in several growing communities, and their ability to attract immigrants is constrained by the lack of available, suitable housing.

The impact of SSRM migrants in increasing the diversity of regional communities can be sig-nifi cant. Since most qualify as skilled migrants

562 G. Hugo

they need to be able to speak English, and MES countries in which English is widely spoken are the main birthplaces of SSRM settlers. Nevertheless, less than a fi fth (19.6%) came from countries where English is the main language (UK, US, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa). Hence the SSRM Program is injecting a new element of cultural diversity into many regional communities. In the context of ageing of non-metropolitan populations, it is note-worthy that more than two-thirds (68%) of the SSRM Principal Applicants were aged less than 40 years old. Table 8 shows that the occupations of SSRM migrants are strongly con-centrated in the Professional category, indicating the signifi cance of doctors, nurses, teachers, and so on, among the migrants. However, it is also important to observe that tradespeople make up about a fi fth of immigrants, refl ecting the shortage of builders, electricians, welders, mechanics, and so on, in many parts of regional Australia.

Refugee and Humanitarian Migrants

Although refugee-humanitarian immigrants to Australia are not compelled to settle in particular parts of Australia, in reality they are often chan-nelled into particular areas. This is because they are encouraged to settle in locations where they can access support informally through family/ethnic-based support systems or formally through NGOs, State and local government. This is in recognition of the particular needs of this group who are often hampered in their settlement by

poverty, having experienced trauma or lan-guage and cultural barriers. Agencies sponsoring refugee-humanitarian settlers can apply for federal government fi nancial assistance (DIMIA, 2005b). The majority of refugee arrivals settle in capital cities but an increasing share are settling in regional areas, especially regional cities. A DIAC submission to a report by the Community Relations Commission for a Multicultural New South Wales (2006: 37) stated:

‘Humanitarian arrivals to regional areas have increased signifi cantly over the last fi ve years . . . This trend may be partially due to increased sponsorship of entrants under the Special Humanitarian Program (SHP) by established local charity groups.’

Increasingly, humanitarian settlers originate from the Horn of Africa, with over 25,000 entrants between 2001 and 2006, three-quarters of them from Sudan. This has created some diffi culties in regional communities in accessing specialised health, education and other services which cater to their specifi c language and cultural needs. There is also the issue that they represent a quite distinct and different group to the majority resi-dent population. One NSW city, Tamworth, went so far as the town council voting to reject the resettlement of fi ve Sudanese families in the city, although it later voted to overturn the decision (Asian Migration News, 15–31 January 2007). On the other hand, many other communities and local governments have been proactive in attracting refugees and welcoming them to the community.

Table 8. State Specifi c and Regional Migration Principal Applicant arrivals by occupation, 2001–06.

Number %

Managers and administrators 1304 14.0Professionals 4911 52.8Associate professionals 1082 11.6Tradespersons 1732 18.6Advanced clerical service 35 0.4Intermediate clerical sales service 217 2.3Intermediate transport and production 18 0.2Elementary clerical sales service 4 0.0Labourers 6 0.1Total 9309 100.0

Source: DIAC unpublished data.

One such community is Murray Bridge (2006 population: 18,364) in South Australia whose Mayor declared Murray Bridge a ‘Refugee Friendly Town’. The town was galvanised fol-lowing a desperate Afghani refugee committing suicide in 2002, and the community subsequently mobilised to support refugee and humanitarian settlers. Service clubs, church groups, local gov-ernment and the Regional Development Board have become involved in assisting refugee-humanitarian settlers to adjust. The town is a food-processing centre, and several refugees have gained work in these industries.

Some non-metropolitan communities have sought to attract particular refugee-humanitarian groups to fi ll unskilled labour shortages in agri-culture and food processing, especially in abat-toirs. Such workers cannot usually be brought to Australia under the SSRM or 457 Temporary Migration programmes because they do not fi t the skill and wages level criteria. Temporary Pro-tection Visa holders – asylum-seekers who have been initially interned in Australia, then later being recognised as mandated refugees – who were awarded three-year temporary residence visas, are especially important in this industry. Some communities with shortages of agricultural and abattoir workers sought to attract these migrants and retain them in the community.

Nevertheless, particular problems have been experienced by refugee-humanitarian settlers in non-metropolitan communities in gaining adequate work. This was undoubtedly behind reports of many initially settling in non- metropolitan areas subsequently moving to capital cities. Another factor has been the lack of appropriate housing in regional communities. While housing is an issue for all immigrants in regional areas, it is especially the case for some African families which are often quite large and cannot fi nd appropriate housing.

Temporary Business Migrants

One of the most substantial changes in Australian immigration has been the introduc-tion of temporary worker visa categories, which have made it possible for employers to bring in skilled workers more quickly and with less administration than is the case with permanent migrants. A regional version of the Skilled Temporary Business (Long Stay) 457 Visa was

introduced in 2002 with a number of ‘conces-sional arrangements . . . to refl ect the skill needs of regional Australia’ (DIMA, 2007: 46). These concessions included a lower minimum level of skill and salary than was the case for the regular 457 programme. They must be endorsed by the relevant State, Territory or regional certifying body, be at locally relevant wage levels, and be positions which cannot be fi lled locally. The numbers doubled from the previous year to more than 1600 in 2005–06.

A case study was made of the regional 457 in the State of South Australia. There the State gov-ernment is the only relevant certifying body other than the Department of Immigration and Citizen-ship (DIAC). The State receives less than 4% of the national intake of 457s (compared with having 7.6% of the Australian population). However, there has been a signifi cant increase in recent years. The largest occupational category was slaughter persons, an indication of the heavy use of the 457 category to meet the severe labour shortages in regional abattoirs. The workers would not be allowed to enter under regular 457 regulations since they do not meet the standard skill requirements. However, since 2002 . . . ‘con-cessional arrangements were introduced to refl ect the special skill needs of regional Australia. These provisions allow for a lower mismatch salary level and lower skill levels’ (DIMA, 2007: 46). This has been the subject of controversy since there have been accusations that employers have used the visa to undercut the wages and condi-tions of Australian abattoir workers. There have, however, been a number of rejections of applica-tions for Regional 457s where it is not considered that the applications meet the needs of the visa. For example, in the second half of 2006 the following occupations for Regional 457s were rejected by the South Australian Certifying Body: Tradesperson, Motor Mechanic, Pig Farmer, Child Care Worker, Beauty Therapist, Cook, Gardener, Personal Care Assistant, Deckhand and Fitness Centre Manager. In South Australia in the 18 months to the end of 2006 there were 378 Regional 457s granted, and Figure 3 shows where the sponsors were located, with 63.2% being outside of metropolitan Adelaide. The largest numbers were slaughter-persons (147), farm workers of various types (18), agricultural scientifi c offi cers (16) and operators/drivers (15). The origins of the Regional 457s are depicted in

564 G. Hugo

Figure 4, and it is apparent that while Europe and South Africa are important, most came from Asia. In particular, slaughter-persons from China and Vietnam, tradespeople from India and agri-cultural scientifi c offi cers from the Philippines are signifi cant. There are also other temporary migrants who enter regional South Australia through the traditional 457 system.

Two cases refl ect the key role that 457 tempo-rary skilled migrant workers can play in regional communities. A town located in the wheat belt north of Adelaide had experienced several decades of population decline until a former local returned to establish a global agricultural consul-tancy, which now provides an important part of the town’s economic base. However, the business found it diffi cult to attract scientists and con-sultants to live in the town from elsewhere in

Australia. Accordingly it has used the 457 visa to bring in scientists with relevant skills, especially from the Philippines.

A second case is the regional city of Whyalla (2006 population: 22,332) which does not appear on since there are no Regional 457s in the city, although there are more than 100 standard 457s. A survey of 148 businesses in Whyalla in December 2006 found that 9% of all job vacancies remained unfi lled, and for trades vacancies it was a quarter (Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, 2006). There is an expand-ing demand for tradespeople as a result of an expansion of the local iron and steel industry and the South Australian mining boom fuelled by China’s industrial expansion (Hugo and Smailes, 2007). A number of strategies are being adopted to recruit workers, but the 457 visa has become

Figure 3. South Australia: Regional 457 Temporary Business Migrants, July 2005–December 2006.Source: SA Department of Trade and Economic Development unpublished data.

–Dec

566 G. Hugo

especially important for the city’s largest employer (2860 workers), an iron and steel enter-prise. Particular diffi culty has been experienced in attracting mechanical and electrical engineers, so 65 have been recruited under 457 visas. A relationship has been developed with agents in South Africa from where most are recruited. Most bring their families and have become a sig-nifi cant social and economic presence in Whyalla. In addition the company has recruited trades-people, mostly from the Philippines.

Working Holiday Makers

One of the categories of temporary migration which has increased in scale over the last decade and which has impinged on non-metropolitan Australia is Working Holiday Makers (WHMs). This programme involves:

‘. . . the temporary entry and stay of young people wanting to combine a holiday in Australia with the opportunity to supplement travel funds through incidental employment.’ (DIMA, 2007: 64)

They can stay for a period of a year and work in a single job for up to 3 months. They are espe-cially involved in the hospitality, horticultural and rural industries, and many of the jobs are located outside of Australia’s major cities. Hugo (2001) showed, for example, how this group has become fundamentally important in provid-ing seasonal harvest labour in horticultural, irrigated fruit-growing and grape-harvesting activities. Indeed, they have been so signifi cant that since late 2005 WHMs ‘who have under-taken seasonal work in regional Australia for a minimum of three months’ (DIMA, 2007: 64) are eligible to apply for a second 12-month WHM visa.

In 2005–06 there were 111,973 WHM visas granted, an increase of 7.3% over the previous year and a doubling since 1997–98. Hence they have become an important element in the popu-lation of particular rural communities on a sea-sonal basis. The harvesting industry in Australia has been very active in lobbying the federal gov-ernment for permission to bring in unskilled agricultural workers from Asia and the Pacifi c, but has not been successful. The WHMs are fi lling niches in regional seasonal labour markets, which in countries like the US, New Zealand, Canada

and in Europe are fi lled by seasonal agricultural worker migrations (Hugo, 2001).

Students

Australia has become one of the world’s pre-eminent destinations for international student migrants, especially those involved in higher education. In 2005 there were 239,495 foreign students in Australian universities, 25.3% of the total student body. While the majority (72.5% in 2005) study in Australian capital cities, a signifi -cant number opt to attend a regional university. In 2005 there were 65,758 foreign students study-ing in universities in Australia located outside of the capital cities. There is some incentive for foreign students to select to study in regional universities. Apart from cheaper living and housing costs, studying in a regional university qualifi es them for bonus points in the Points Assessment System, should they decide to apply for permanent residence at the end of their studies. Of course, against this many foreign students desire to live in a large city. Regional universities have been very active in recruiting foreign students, and have in some cases been encouraged and assisted by local government.

Student migration is having a signifi cant impact on the regional communities which have universities. They are generally in an age group in which regional communities are experiencing net internal migration losses. They are permitted to work 20 hours a week during term time, and full-time during vacations, so they are an element in local labour forces (Hugo, 2006). Some regional communities such as Ballarat in Victoria are tar-geting local foreign students to seek permanent residence using State Specifi c and Regional Migration programmes, so that their residence in the community can become permanent.

GROWTH IN ESTABLISHED ETHNIC COMMUNITIES

Pre-war immigration to Australia was dominated by settlers from the UK and Ireland. Among the relatively small numbers from non-English-speaking (mainly southern European countries), a higher proportion lived outside the large metropolitan areas (47.2%) than was the case for those from English-speaking backgrounds (37.2%). However, they did not settle in dry

farming and pastoral areas where Anglo-Saxons dominated, but in areas of intensive farming. Hence they concentrated in irrigation areas such as along the Murray River System, cane-growing, fruit and vegetable growing, market-gardening areas around the major cities, and vine-growing areas. These pre-war settlements formed the anchors for an expansion of immigrant numbers with the greatly increased southern European immigration to Australia of the 1950s and 1960s (Hugo, 1975). Chain migration has continued to these locations in recent years, albeit at a much lesser rate because of a tightening of family migration regulations and the waning of south-ern European migration to Australia. Neverthe-less there are regional areas where chain migration has continued to be of signifi cance. Carswell (2005: 28), for example, documented a wave of Albanian migration to immigration communities along the River Murray in Victoria following the fall of Communism in Albania in 1990. She also showed how Turkish migration to these com-munities has continued along well-established social networks of earlier migrants.

An interesting development in the non-metro-politan communities that have a history of south-ern European settlement has been that several have absorbed waves of new migrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds quite different to those of the original settlers. Many of the new migrants have come from Asian backgrounds. The area of Virginia to the north of Adelaide, for example, was settled in the early post-war years by Italian market gardeners. However, more recently it has been Vietnamese who have become a major presence. In several of the irrigation-based communities along the River Murray, pre-war settlement of Greeks, Italians, Yugoslavs, Albanians and Turks have been overlain by new settlers from India, Vietnam, Cambodia and else-where in Asia. Clearly these new settlers did not move along the networks established by the earlier generation of southern European settlers. Why did the pioneer migrants from the new countries settle in these communities? Obviously a desire to own, and work on, intensive agricul-tural land was a major motivating factor, as it was for the original southern Europeans (Price, 1955; Hugo, 1975). However, it also may well be partly associated with the fact that these com-munities have strong multicultural traditions and are used to diversity. They may be more

receptive to ‘others’ as a result of the decades of southern European settlement. A social exclusion explanation has been advanced by Missingham et al. (2006: 136) based on their work in northern Victoria:

‘First generation NESB migrants . . . experi-enced constraints on employment and economic opportunities . . . Fruit picking and seasonal work in intensive horticultural areas such as the Goulburn Valley and Sunraysia often gave an introduction to the district and some horticultural skills such as picking and pruning. Purchasing small-scale farms pre-sented opportunities for advancement for immigrants and others with limited opportu-nities for social mobility in other sectors of the economy.’

This explanation is verifi ed in other studies (Hugo, 1975; Collins et al., 1995).

DISCUSSION

In common with other OECD nations, Australian non-metropolitan areas are experiencing sub-stantial change (Cocklin and Dibden, 2005). On the one hand the impacts of ageing and low fertil-ity are exacerbated by youth out-migration. On the other there are a number of developments which are seeing an expansion of job opportuni-ties in particular regional areas. As a result, labour shortages are being reported widely across regional Australia and these defi cits are con-straining the extent to which regional communi-ties can take advantage of new opportunities and also maintain or enhance levels of service provi-sion. Although there have been counterurbanisa-tion trends in common with other OECD nations (Burnley and Murphy, 2004), these have been spatially restricted to particular coastal and peri-urban areas, and much have not involved working populations. Accordingly, in the dis-course on regional development in Australia there is an increasing focus on the shortage of people, especially skilled workers, as being one of the major challenges facing regional communities.

In this context, international migration has been seen as one of the solutions. For most of the post-war period Australian immigrants have overwhelmingly settled in major metropolitan areas, but in 1996 immigration policy was

568 G. Hugo

changed in order to channel a signifi cant number of newly-arrived immigrants into regional and slow-growth areas. This paper has discussed the range of permanent settlement and temporary migration programmes which have been intro-duced to facilitate immigrants living and working in rural areas, and made a preliminary assess-ment of their impact. In fact these programmes are in their earliest stages, and defi nitive judge-ment of their success or failure cannot yet be made. Nevertheless there can be no doubting that a change has been wrought in the pattern of immigrant settlement in Australia, and that immigration-settlement policy has played a role.

There are a number of issues associated with the new pattern of immigrant settlement in regional Australia. Firstly, the immigrants add an element of diversity to what in many regional areas have been strongly Anglo-Saxon domi-nated societies. It is true that immigrants from MES countries make up the majority of regional settlers, and most are skilled migrants who are not likely to have substantial language and cul-tural barriers to adjustment. Nevertheless, the numbers from more diverse backgrounds are sig-nifi cant. Regional communities lack both formal post-arrival services as well as established com-munities of similar ethnic backgrounds that can provide informal support during initial settle-ment. A particular problem relates to the lack of interpreter services which can be a barrier to non-English-speaking groups accessing health, edu-cation and other services. The dearth of formal and informal support services has in some areas been countered by the mobilisation of local com-munity groups, organisations and local govern-ment. In several instances it has been one or two local leaders who have played a key role in this respect; indeed, it may be that this is necessary for such mobilisation of local social capital. The types of assistance which have been given by communities includes organising welcoming events, appointment of a local sponsor family for day-to-day assistance, development of welcome packages including not only information but coupons for local services and shops, and assist-ance in getting children into school and local sporting organisations.

The enthusiasm with which some com-munities have welcomed migrants has been at odds with conventional stereotypes of regional

populations having conservative and even racist attitudes. Indeed, in many cases the newcomers are seen as valuable additions to communities which have been struggling to maintain services, losing young populations and not able to fi ll job vacancies, while the cultural diversity they add has been embraced with enthusiasm. There have, however, also been instances of backlash. In one South Australian community the local abattoirs recruited a number of Chinese workers and an individual circulated a letter which expressed strong views in opposition. However, this was quickly counterbalanced by the general commu-nity organising a welcome barbeque and the local newspaper running a large banner headline ‘WELCOME’ on the arrival of the migrants. Issues remain, however, about the injection of new elements of diversity into regional commu-nities which have not previously been multicul-tural. Undoubtedly the adjustment of new migrants in regional communities and of the communities to the migrant is a topic of needed research.

There are a number of work-related concerns. Birrell et al. (2006) showed that regional skilled migrants experience more problems in entering the Australian labour market than any other cat-egory of skilled settlers. The causes of this need to be investigated. It is not clear whether there are issues of migrant selection or of particular local labour-market problems, or both. Labour shortages continue to be reported across regional Australia, and if immigration is to play a role in fi lling these, there needs to be a better under-standing of the particular problems faced in regional labour markets. Housing problems are substantial not only for immigrants but also for other newcomers to regional communities. The lack of suitable housing, especially for large refugee families, is a major problem in regional communities. Satisfactory entry into regional labour and housing markets will be a critical factor in attracting and retaining immigrant families in regional communities.

One issue which will need to be faced is that in many regional communities the labour short-ages which are emerging require unskilled or semi-skilled labour, whereas the bulk of immigration visa categories which are available relate to skilled migrants. Job opportunities in regional areas associated with agriculture, mining, tourism, forestry, fi shing and personal

care often require workers with low levels of skill, and increasing diffi culty is being experi-enced in accessing such workers from within Australia. Already there is pressure from several employer lobby groups for the federal govern-ment to relax the skill requirements of the immi-gration programme, in particular to allow the temporary migration of unskilled workers. The focus has been strongly on regional employers in this lobbying (Senate Standing Committee on Employment, Workforce Relations and Employ-ment, 2006). Thus far the government has resisted pointing to the 4.5% unemployment level within Australia and arguing that it would work against the integrity of the Australian immigration pro-gramme (Hugo, 2005). However, these pressures seem likely to increase and it could be advisable for the Australian government to develop a pilot programme to assess the effi cacy of a temporary labour migration strategy. This could perhaps be focused on particular industries (e.g. harvesting, aged care) and particular countries of origin (e.g. some Pacifi c nations). New Zealand has begun such a programme.

A major issue relates to the question of reten-tion of immigrants in regional areas once they are free to settle wherever they wish. The evidence presented here indicates that there is likely to be signifi cant leakage out of regional areas. There is strong international precedent for this. Hammar (1993) showed that in Sweden in the 1970s there was a policy of dispersal of immigrants, and most ‘leaked’ back to Stockholm. Also studies in the UK (Robinson and Hale, 1989; Robinson, 1993) and Australia (Burnley, 1989) showed that Vietnamese refugees settled in dispersed loca-tions later gravitated to major metropolitan centres. This presents a challenge for local com-munities to assist newcomers, so that during the period of compulsory residence outside major cities they develop an attachment to the local community which will increase the chances that they remain. This is a challenge which many regional communities are taking up, and it will be interesting to see how successful their efforts turn out to be.

Regional Australia could be entering a new era in terms of its population development. Hitherto during the post-war era, immigration has played a much smaller role in the demography of regional Australia than it has in metropolitan areas. The development of a regional component

of the Australian immigration programme in 1996 was a signifi cant change, and there are small but signifi cant signs that it has had an impact. The Australian Labor Party, the alternative federal government at the time of writing, proposed in 2004 that 45% of all immigrants to Australia should settle in regional areas (Roxon and Crean, 2003). While this would appear most unlikely in the short or even medium term, immi-grant settlement in Australia has changed, and immigration to regional Australia will increase. However, the bulk of our understanding of immi-grant settlement in and adjustment to Australia is based on metropolitan-based research, and there is an urgent need to better understand regional migration and settlement processes and impacts.

(1) Seventy-six per cent of the national popula-tion lives on the 0.33% of the land, which has a population density of 100 or more people per km2.

(2) Over 40% of the national population are an immi-grant or the child of an immigrant, and more than half of post-war population growth is due to immi-gration. Without post-war migration the national population would be 12 million rather than the present 20.9 million.

(3) A points test is used in Australia to assess appli-cants for migration under the Skill Program ‘against a range of skill-related factors. The number of points prescribed for each factor refl ects their rela-tive importance in the context of an applicant’s potential contribution to Australia. The skill, age, English language, work experience and MODL components therefore earn the highest points. Other factors recognized include Australian quali-fi cations, spouse skills, designated investments, work experience obtained in Australia and fl uency in a community language other than English’ (DIMA, 2007: 24).

(4) The numbers coming under the refugee- humanitarian scheme each year are around 12,000.

(5) Some of these activities can be observed on special websites maintained by regional communities, such as:

http://www.griffith.nsw.gov.au/Page/Page.asp?Page_Id=219&p=1;

http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/Community_and_Culture/Community_Development/Migration_Project_-_Ballarat/index.aspx;

570 G. Hugo

http://www.warrnambool.vic.gov.au/Files/c_s_i_d.pdf.

(6) This is especially the case where the settlers fi ll crucial local vacancies such as in health, education, trades, and so on.

REFERENCES

Bell M, Hugo GJ. 2000. Internal Migration in Australia 1991–1996: Overview and the Overseas-Born. AGPS: Canberra.

Benton-Short L, Price M, Friedman S. 2005. Globalisa-tion from below: the ranking of global immigrant cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 29: 945–959.

Birrell B, Hawthorne L, Richardson S. 2006. Evaluation of the General Skilled Migration Categories. AGPS: Canberra.

Borrie WD. 1954. Italians and Germans in Australia: A Study of Assimilation. FW Cheshire: Melbourne.

Bracks S. 2003. An outward-looking population policy for Australia. In Australia’s Population Challenge, Vizard S, Martin HJ, Watts T (eds). Penguin Books: Victoria: 39–43.

Burnley IH. 1989. Settlement dimensions of the Viet Nam-born population in Sydney. Australian Geographical Studies 27: 129–154.

Burnley I, Murphy P (eds). 2004. Sea Change: Movement from Metropolitan to Arcadian Australia. UNSW Press: Sydney.

Carswell S. 2005. From Albania and Turkey to Shepparton: the experiences of migrants in regional Victoria. Around the Globe Winter: 26–31.

Cocklin C, Dibden J (eds). 2005. Sustainability and Change in Rural Australia. UNSW Press: Sydney.

Collins J, Gibson K, Alcorso C, Castles S, Tait D. 1995. A Shop Full of Dreams: Ethnic Small Business in Australia. Sydney: Pluto Press.

Community Relations Commission for a Multicultural New South Wales. 2006. Investigation into African Humanitarian Settlement in NSW. New South Wales Government.

Cully M, VandenHeuvel A. 2000. An Evaluation of the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme (RSMS) and the State and Territory Nominated Independents (STNI) Initiatives. National Institute of Labour Studies, Flinders University of South Australia.

Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. 2006. Whyalla Survey of Recruitment Experiences. Labour Supply and Skills Branch, Labour Market Strategies Group.

Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC). 2007. Evaluation of Skilled Migration to the Riverina. AGPS: Canberra.

Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA). 2005a. Analysis of the Skilled Designated Area Sponsored Subclass. AGPS: Canberra.

Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA). 2005b. Australia’s Support for Humanitarian Entrants. AGPS: Canberra.

Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA). 2007. Population Flows: Immigration Aspects. AGPS: Canberra.

Hammar T. 1993. The ‘Sweden-wide strategy’ of refugee dispersal. In Geography and Refugees, Black R, Robinson V (eds). Belhaven: London; 105–117.

Hugo GJ. 1975. Postwar settlement of southern Europeans in Australian rural areas: the case of Renmark, South Australia. Australian Geographical Studies 13: 169–181.

Hugo GJ. 1993. The Changing Spatial Distribution of Major Ethnic Groups in Australia, 1961–1986. Revised version of a report prepared for Offi ce of Multicultural Affairs, April.

Hugo GJ. 1999. A new paradigm of international migration in Australia. New Zealand Population Review 25: 1–39.

Hugo GJ. 2001. International Migration and Agricultural Labour in Australia. Paper presented at Changing Face Workshop, Imperial Valley, California, 16–18 January.

Hugo GJ. 2004. A New Paradigm of International Migra-tion: Implications for Migration Policy and Planning for Australia. Research Paper No. 10, Information, Analysis and Advice for the Parliament, Information and Research Services, Department of the Parlia-mentary Library.

Hugo GJ. 2005. Migration policies in Australia and their impact on development in countries of origin. In International Migration and the Millennium Develop-ment Goals, UNFPA Expert Group Meeting. United Nations Population Fund: New York; 199–216.

Hugo GJ. 2006. Temporary migration and the labour market in Australia. Australian Geographer 37: 211–231.

Hugo GJ. 2007. Space, place, population and census anal-ysis in Australia. Australian Geographer 38: 335–357.

Hugo GJ, Smailes P. 2007. Socio Economic Analysis of the Placement of Whyalla in the New Uniform State Govern-ment Regions. Report prepared for the South Austral-ian Government Reform Commission, April.

Jupp J. 2002. From White Australia to Woomera: The Story of Australian Immigration. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Khoo S, Voigt-Graf C, Hugo G, McDonald P. 2003. Temporary skilled migration to Australia: the 457 visa sub-class. People and Place 11(4): 27–40.

Kunz EF. 1988. Displaced Persons: Calwell’s New Australians. Australian National University Press: Sydney.

Missingham B, Dibden J, Cocklin C. 2006. A multi-cultural countryside? Ethnic minorities in rural Australia. Rural Society 16: 131–150.

Price CA. 1955. Italian Population at Griffi th. Australian National University Press: Canberra.

Robinson V. 1993. North and south: resettling Vietnamese refugees in Australia and the UK. In Geography and Refugees, Black R, Robinson V (eds). Belhaven: London; 134–153.

Robinson V, Hale S. 1989. The Geography of Vietnamese Secondary Migration in the UK. Warwick University Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations: Coventry.

Roxon N, Crean S. 2003. Smarter settlement of new migrants can benefi t all. Available at http://www.alp.org.au/media/1003/20005954.html [accessed 4 October 2008].

Senate Standing Committee on Employment, Work-force Relations and Employment. 2006. Perspectives on the Future of the Harvest Labour Force. Senate Print-ing Unit, Department of the Senate, Parliament House: Canberra.

Withers G, Powell M. 2003. Immigration and the Regions: Taking Regional Australia Seriously. A report prepared for the Chifl ey Research Centre by Applied Economics P/L, October.

Immigrant settlement outside of Australia's capital cities

Documents

Serving Immigrant Families: Using Knowledge Translation to ... · Serving Immigrant Families: Using Knowledge Translation to Inform a Family Approach in the Settlement Sector Tania

Immigration and Immigrant Settlement in Australia: Political

Immigrant Integration and Immigrant Segregation · Immigrant Integration and Immigrant Segregation 1 Immigrant Integration and Immigrant Segregation: The Relationship Between School

2005-2006 Human Resources, Labour and Employment Annual … · grants to designated external agencies for immigrant settlement services; ... opportunities for finding meaningful employment

Immigrant Settlement and Integration. 2 enables successful economic, social and cultural outcomes for immigrants/refugees develops program supports

An Examination of the Settlement Pathways of Newcomer Youth€¦ · Susan S. Chuang, University of Guelph & Canadian Immigrant Settlement Sector Alliance / Alliance Candienne du Sector

Jewish Immigrant Settlement Patterns in Manchester and

What are the Settlement Experiences of Newly …...Survey (Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2012), the Alberta Settlement Survey (Esses et al., 2012), the Landed Immigrant Data

AUSTRALIA'S DEFENCE

Immigrant Women’s Settlement Transitions in an Era of

Australia's government 2011

2. Flores CBP TRO Amicus Brief FINAL - Michigan€¦ · The Flores Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) is the guiding document applicable to all immigrant children in federal

Australia's Partnership Act

Australia's Cutting Edges

Immigrant Settlement Support Funding Guidelines

Australia's economy

Immigrant service provider resource kit...Immigrant Settlement Organization (ISO) and WorkBC Employment Services Centres (ESC) representatives in the fall of 2015. The Guidelines are

STUDY OF INNOVATIVE AND PROMISING PRACTICES WITHIN …p2pcanada.ca/.../CISSA-ASCEI-Promising-and-Innovative-Practices-Re… · PROMISING PRACTICES WITHIN THE IMMIGRANT SETTLEMENT

Chapter 1: Changing Spatial Patterns of Immigrant …press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p113381/pdf/ch012.pdfChapter 1: Changing Spatial Patterns of Immigrant Settlement 3 Figure

Australia's Manufacturing Future