Declining Youth In-migration in Rural Western Australia: the Role of Perceptions of Rural Employment and Lifestyle Opportunities

162

Geographical Research

•

June 2008

•

46(2):162–171

doi: 10.1111/j.1745-5871.2008.00507.x

Blackwell Publishing Asia

Original Acticle

A. Davies:

Declining Youth In-migration in Rural Western Australia

Declining Youth In-migration in Rural Western Australia: the Role of Perceptions of Rural Employment and Lifestyle Opportunities

AMANDA DAVIES

School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley, 6009 WA, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Received 25 September 2006; Revised 8 March 2007; Accepted 30 November 2007

Abstract

Over the last two decades there has been a steady decline in youth migration toAustralian rural communities. Generally, inland agricultural communities are themost seriously impacted by this trend. Coupled with high rates of youth out-migration, many rural communities face difficulties in attracting young peopleto fill skilled job vacancies and apprentice positions. Declining youth in-migrationalso has social consequences, effectively reducing the capacity of rural communi-ties to replenish their skill base and social networks. This research identifies howurban-based youth perceive rural lifestyles and employment opportunities andhow this is linked to their willingness to move to rural areas. The study revealsthat young people attach undesirable aesthetic values to the physical environ-ment of inland rural communities and perceive them as socially isolating and ashaving minimal opportunities for career advancement. However, the perceptionsof those who live, or had lived, in rural areas are far more positive than thosewho have had little experience in rural communities. Accordingly, those whohad previously lived in inland regions were far more likely to move to rural areasthan those who had limited lived experience of rural communities. Overall, theresearch found that perceptions of lifestyle and employment opportunities wereimportant influences on young people’s willingness to move to rural communities.

KEY WORDS

rural youth; youth migration; rural migration; regional develop-ment; lifestyle; employment; place perception

Introduction

Youth out-migration from rural areas is not anew trend. From the earliest days of Europeansettlement in Australia, young people have leftrural towns to access the education, employmentand social opportunities offered in large centresor cities (Alston and Kent, 2001). Traditionally,

many young people returned to rural communitiesin their early to mid twenties to work on familyfarms or to pursue other rural-based lifestyle orcareer opportunities (Alston, 2004). However,over the last decade or so, there has been a

noticeable trend of fewer rural young peoplereturning to rural communities following theireducation and training in the cities (AustralianBureau of Statistics (ABS), 1996; 2001). Further-more, fewer young people from city backgroundsare moving to rural areas (ABS, 1996; 2001).This has proven to be problematic for theeconomic resilience of rural communities withfewer skilled young people moving into theworkforce (Department of Transport andRegional Services, 2006). In terms of socialimpact, declining youth in-migration has also

A. Davies:


163

© 2008 The AuthorJournal compilation © 2008 Institute of Australian Geographers

had significant negative impacts, particularly forsporting clubs, community organisations andother ‘traditional’ social networks (Tonts, 2005).

This paper explores the idea that perceptionsof rural places are important in shaping thesetrends. It examines youth perceptions of the‘rural’, particularly in respect of lifestyle andemployment, with the aim of identifying bar-riers to rural in-migration. It presents the findingsof a research project which elicited the percep-tions of Western Australian rural places held bycity-based university students, some of whomoriginated from inland Western Australia (WA).The WA Central Wheatbelt was one of theregions selected for special focus in the research,and the study sought to identify if those wholive, or who had previously lived, in this regionperceived it differently from those who had hadlimited exposure to it. In addition, the authorwas concerned to establish if this experienceinfluenced their willingness to move there foremployment. More generally, the paper con-siders if background, gender or career goals wereinfluencing factors in young people’s perceptionsof employment and lifestyle opportunities inrural communities. The paper reflects on theproblem of declining youth in-migration toinland rural areas and discusses some of thepossible causes of this trend.

The focus of this research is novel in that itaims to identify the perceptions of urban basedyouth of living and working in inland rural areasand to consider how these understandings influ-ence their willingness to move to these areas forwork. Previous studies have tended to focus onthe intentions of young rural people to leavetheir ‘home’ region. The current research adopteda well-accepted behaviouralist approach (Walmsleyand Lewis, 1984), which differs from neo-classicaland deterministic economic interpretations ofmigration in several ways. Describing andexplaining migration patterns using a ‘distancedecay’ model, or simply examining ‘push’ and‘pull’ factors, both fail to identify the extent towhich broader, systemic conditions influencemigration and further ignore the evaluative pro-cesses that individuals use in their migrationdecision-making. Walmsley and Lewis (1984,136) observe that, ‘(t)he decision to migrate ismade on the basis of perceived opportunities.Essentially, it is these perceived differences inopportunities that are important rather than anyresponse to some ‘objective’ factor such as eco-nomic wage-rate fluctuation’. Rather than focuson purely structuralist economic rationales, this

study sought to identify individuals’ perceptionsof place as an explanation for their willingness(or not) to migrate.

The problem of declining youth in-migration

Declining youth in-migration into rural com-munities and declining youth employment inrural industries both have significant ramifica-tions for the social and economic sustainabilityof rural Australia (Allan, 2002; Hemingway,2002; Alston, 2004; Eversole, 2001). Many ruralcommunities face difficulties in attracting andretaining skilled labour (Department of Trans-port and Regional Services, 2006). A synopticanalysis of skilled employment trends in theagricultural communities of Western Australiafrom 1991 to 2006 shows that, while some com-munities attract increased youth employment inthe café and accommodation sector, in nearly allother sectors, and particularly in agriculture andmanufacturing, youth workforce participation isdecreasing (Davies and Olejnik, 2006). Thereare a variety of reasons for this. First, miningbooms have drawn working-age rural youth to themining sector, which has a large, metropolitan-based, fly-in fly-out workforce. In this situation,workers are flown to the mine site to work foran extended shift (say, two weeks or more) andgiven temporary accommodation until the endof their shift when they are flown back to theirmetropolitan base. Second, the relatively lowsalaries in some traditional rural industries, suchas agriculture, have encouraged many rural youthto leave farming regions. Third and finally, theperceived high start-up costs and low returns forrural businesses have been identified as a furtherbarrier to rural in-migration (McKenzie, 2003).

In response to some of these concerns, industry,State and local governments have developednumerous strategies to assist people to establishbusinesses, or to undergo training and educationin rural communities (Department of Transportand Regional Services, 2006). Some local govern-ments also reduce the operational costs of localbusinesses through subsidised rents and rates. Inaddition to more general strategies to attract orretain skilled people, there are a range of pro-grammes specifically targeted at youth. Suchprogrammes usually focus on providing careerincentives, training or competitive salaries as ameans to attract or retain young people. Anecdotalevidence, however, suggests that the overallunwillingness of urban-based populations torelocate to rural areas is due to lifestyle reasons,and that this is seen as the largest and most

164


•

June 2008

•

46(2):162–171


difficult barrier to overcome. Despite the effortsof governments and industry, demographic trendssuggest that young people are increasinglyless likely to move to rural areas. Through itsanalysis of the perceptions of rural WA held bymetropolitan-based youth – including thoseyoung people who have moved in from inlandregions – the paper explores whether or not thisanecdotal evidence is indeed correct. In doingso, this paper attempts to contribute to regionaldevelopment knowledge and to inform strategiesaimed at overcoming behavioural barriers toyouth in-migration to rural areas.

Perceptions of living and working in Western Australia’s Wheatbelt region

A survey of 720 Western Australian universitystudents was conducted in 2006 to provide abroad indication of how young people perceivedthe social and employment opportunities in ruraland regional areas, and in particular the WheatbeltRegion of Western Australia. The survey aimedto identify if there was any variation in percep-tions between youth from rural communities andthose who had little previous association with orexperience of rural communities. The study alsoexplored whether course of study and genderwere important influences in perceptions of theattractiveness of rural areas. The participants

were selected from the general student bodyattending the University of Western Australia,Curtin University of Technology and the Univer-sity of Notre Dame and were resident in thePerth metropolitan region at the time of thesurvey. The survey was conducted on-line, withparticipants informed of the study and directedto the on-line survey through a general emailsent to more than 2000

1

students from across thethree universities. Of the survey participants,94 per cent were between 17 and 25 years of age,70 per cent were female and 30 per cent weremale. Two per cent of the survey respondentswere Indigenous Australians, which equates tothe proportion of the Indigenous population inuniversity education. Thirteen per cent of theparticipants had moved to the city from rural areasto further their education, with the remainder havinglived in metropolitan areas all of their lives.

The survey asked participants to considerwhat they thought about living and working inthe Wheatbelt region of Western Australia. TheWheatbelt region is adjacent to the Perth metro-politan region (Figure 1) and consists of morethan 40 local government areas, with most urbansettlements containing less than 1000 people.The region is dominated by broadacre cropfarming and, in comparison to the South Westregion of the State, is popularly perceived as

Figure 1 The Wheatbelt Region, Western Australia.

A. Davies:


165


having low aesthetic value. Thus, the Wheatbeltregion has experienced little of the ‘sea-change/tree change’ in-migration phenomenon that hasdriven population growth in the south-west ofWestern Australia (Selwood

et al.

, 1996; Tontsand Grieve, 2002). It has also been largelybypassed by the regional population growth asso-ciated with the State’s mining boom, which hasbeen concentrated in the Goldfields-Esperance andPilbara regions. Agriculture remains the maineconomic activity and employment sector in theWheatbelt. The region is currently facing popula-tion decline, declining levels of in-migration– particularly in the youth age cohort – and anassociated skilled labour shortage. As such, itprovides a good case study because the regionfaces similar problems to those of many otheragriculturally-dependent rural communitiesthroughout inland Australia.

Participants in the survey were asked theirviews on living and working in the Wheatbeltregion using two different question formats.First, participants were asked an open-ended

question about the Wheatbelt region. This questionwas designed to enable the participants to give adescriptive personal account of their reflectionson the Wheatbelt and on rural life. Second, theparticipants were asked to rank their level ofagreement with a series of statements about theregion. The statements presented to participantsduring this section (Table 1 and Table 2) weredeveloped from participants’ perceptions duringan earlier pilot study. In the survey, the openended question, ‘When you think about theWheatbelt region what are the first thingsbrought to mind [in respect to living and work-ing in the region]?’ was asked before theprompting statements in an attempt to reducethe level of influence the statements may havehad on the participants’ initial reflections on theregion.

Young people’s perceptions of the Wheatbelt

Over 60 per cent of the survey respondentsrelated the Wheatbelt to farming, drought andlimited employment opportunities. In response

Table 1 Perceptions of social opportunities in the Wheatbelt.

Perceptions of Social Opportunities Agree (%) Disagree (%) Unsure (%)

The Wheatbelt region offers a safe and secure place to raise a family 55 9 35The Wheatbelt region offers caring and friendly communities 60 9 30The Wheatbelt region offers a variety of housing types and standards 31 23 46The Wheatbelt region offers opportunities to participate in sport to my

desired level28 31 40

The Wheatbelt region offers me as many social opportunities as I would utilise in larger metropolitan areas

10 67 22

The Wheatbelt region is associated with isolation and cultural barriers 53 21 25The Wheatbelt region has an aesthetic quality that appeals to me 35 31 33

Table 2 Perceptions of employment opportunities in the Wheatbelt.

Perceptions of Employment Opportunities Agree (%) Disagree (%) Unsure (%)

The Wheatbelt offers opportunities for career advancement 24 42 33The Wheatbelt offers opportunities to take on leadership

and management roles in the workplace39 23 37

The Wheatbelt offers limited opportunities to broaden career experience

45 26 28

The Wheatbelt offers opportunities to earn large amounts of money

36 25 38

The Wheatbelt offers limited opportunities for training and advancement in the workplace

35 27 37

The Wheatbelt offers a diverse working environment 35 28 36The Wheatbelt offers a challenging work environment that

provides a more enriching experience than could be found in metropolitan work places

30 30 39

166


•

June 2008

•

46(2):162–171


to the open ended question, the majority ofrespondents considered it to be substantiallydependent on agriculture and, in particular, onsheep and wheat farming. Interestingly, themajority of those respondents who associatedthe region with agriculture also associated itwith drought and hard work. For example,respondent #25 described the Wheatbelt as,‘salinity, farming, agriculture, drought [and]remoteness’. While Wheatbelt communities areheavily involved in agricultural activities, peri-urban and coastal communities also exist in theregion. However, less than 5 per cent of therespondents associated the Wheatbelt regionwith peri-urban and coastal lifestyles or physicalenvironments.

A common theme in many participants’responses associated the ‘farming/agricultural’imaginary of the Wheatbelt with the perceptionthat social opportunities in rural areas were sig-nificantly different from those in metropolitanareas. In particular, participants frequentlyrelated the Wheatbelt to a ‘sense of community’.There was a perception that the communities ofthe Wheatbelt were ‘close-knit’ and were placeswhere ‘someone would always be there to lenda hand’. Such attributes were viewed as positive,particularly in terms of lifestyle and employmentopportunities. Interestingly, there was somevariation in the imaginaries of ‘community’between those who permanently live, or had livedin the region, and those who had never visitedthe region. Over 90 per cent of the former groupperceived rural communities to be friendly. Thisgroup also indicated that the ‘close community’structure of rural towns was a positive thing. Ofthose who had very limited personal connectionwith the region, only a few noted ‘close com-munity’ as a positive characteristic. Despite thisvariation, most respondents did associate theWheatbelt region with ‘close communities’. Forexample, respondent #10 associated the regionwith ‘community spirit, country lifestyle, openspaces’ while respondent #181 referred to‘dusty, country, small towns, and communityatmosphere’.

A second common theme was the associationof rural social opportunities with formal sport-ing organisations. The perception that formalsporting organisations were important to thesocial structure and lifestyles of rural dwellerswas common. For example, respondent #106commented that the Wheatbelt consists of ‘smallstrong communities, agriculture, weekend foot-ball and hockey teams, [and] the local pub’,

respondent #118 stated the region was made upof ‘country towns [and] football’, and respond-ent #723 summarised the character of the regionas ‘farming, beer [and] football’. Again, thosewho live permanently, or had lived, in the regiongave more detailed descriptions of the import-ance that organised sport had in the region. Theperception that social activities and opportunitiesin rural communities are closely tied to sportsupports Tonts’ (2005) findings that the socialwellbeing of many Wheatbelt rural communitieswas closely linked to sport, but that formalsporting networks were being slowly eroded byrural economic and social restructuring.

A large number of respondents commentedon the social opportunities that they perceivedwere available (or indeed were not available) inthe Wheatbelt region. For the most part, com-ments on social opportunities dominated thecontent of participants’ responses, with observa-tions concerning the economic and environmentalcharacteristics being less frequent. This suggeststhat perceptions of social opportunities, or barriers,are at the forefront of young people’s mindswhen thinking about the Wheatbelt and are,therefore, likely to be dominant factors influenc-ing to decisions to move there or to similar areasof Australia. There were both negative and posi-tive comments about the social opportunities inthe Wheatbelt region. Of the negative comments,respondents suggested that the region wassocially isolating and had limited opportunitiesfor entertainment. For example, respondent#392 characterised the region as ‘nothing much,pretty boring area, dry, hot, middle of nowhere,uninteresting place to visit, barren’; and respon-dent #538 suggested that living in the regionwould mean ‘isolation from family and friends[and would be] unable to access many serviceswith ease’. Two thirds of respondents felt thatthe region offered limited social opportunities.However, a number of those respondents whoexpressed negative perceptions regarding thesocial opportunities in the region also notedsome positive characteristics in the open endedquestion. These positive characteristics weregenerally associated with safe communities orhealthy natural environments. For example, respon-dent #336 referred to the Wheatbelt as, ‘sprawling,sparsely inhabited, technologically backward andinaccessible for most conveniences of modernlife. Cleaner air and environment though’.

Although the majority of respondents didassociate the region with limited social oppor-tunities and limited access to facilities, there

A. Davies:


167


were some respondents who indicated positiveperceptions of lifestyle opportunities in theregion. For example, respondent #525 charac-terised the region as, ‘countryside, fresh air, laidback, peace and quiet, away from modern facil-ities’. Almost all of the respondents who feltthat the Wheatbelt had good social opportunitieswere, or had been, residents of the region.

In relation to employment opportunities andconditions, respondents tended to describeemployment opportunities in the region inmostly negative terms. Forty per cent associatedthe region with hard and physically demandingwork: an undesirable quality. A number ofrespondents also perceived difficulties in findingfull time employment, and similarly some sug-gested that career advancement opportunitieswere limited. In the words of selected respond-ents, the Wheatbelt was associated with:

‘horizons, hard work, low academia, hard toleave’ (respondent #231);‘dust, hot, hard work, nice people, motorbikes’ (respondent #321);‘farming, agriculture, heat, erratic weatherand rainfall patterns, hard life’ (respondent#696);‘friendly, good community resources, butlack of education and work advancing opport-unities’ (respondent #141).

Terms such as ‘hot hard work’, ‘long sufferingfarmers’ and ‘isolation’ were also common, andwere frequently associated with negative com-ments about rural social issues such as youthsuicide and rural decline. For example, respon-dent #7, who had lived in the region, felt that theregion offered ‘not a lot to do for young people,not enough other young people, [was] shrinkingin size and making these problems worse, [andthere were] no jobs if not a farmer’. Respondent#198, who had limited connection to the regionfelt that the region was a ‘desert [and] boring[and had issues of] rural suicide and depression’.In summary, many young people surveyed tendedto perceive career, employment and lifestyleopportunities in the Wheatbelt in mainly negativeterms.

The final major theme evident in the partici-pants’ perceptions concerned the physical environ-ment of the Wheatbelt. Thirteen per cent ofthe respondents regarded the whole region asbeing environmentally degraded. For example,respondent #4 commented that the region was‘salt affected, degraded [and had] ruined landand waterways’. Respondent #593 stated that

‘the Wheatbelt at the moment [is] stricken bydrought and poor seasons, [has] high levels ofsalinity in some areas, [and as a consequence] alot of families [were] having to sell up [leadingto] amalgamation of farming properties’.

Not all respondents characterised the socialand natural environment of the region, or per-ceived employment opportunities, in the sameway. Although some felt that the region wasenvironmentally degraded and offered little inthe way of social or employment opportunities,others nevertheless felt that there were goodemployment opportunities available. Further-more, some respondents felt that the region offeredgood social and employment opportunities (seeTables 1 and 2). The general indifference toinland regions such as the central Wheatbeltheld by young city-based people was also evi-denced in the very substantial proportions ofparticipants who were unsure about what socialor employment conditions existed in the Wheat-belt (see Tables 1 and 2). Respondent #484 com-mented that the region was ‘nothing out of theordinary, it’s a part of Western Australia, aninteresting part, but not one I think about a lot.It’s just there I guess’. Irrespective of whetherrespondents perceived employment and socialconditions in the Wheatbelt positively or nega-tively, the responses revealed that perceptionswere likely to be influenced by respondents’prior association with or exposure to the region.

Factors influencing young people’s perceptions of lifestyle and employment opportunities in the Wheatbelt

An understanding of the factors underpinningyouth perceptions of rural environments couldhelp regional development authorities, ruralindustries and local communities better targetmarketing initiatives and programmes to attractskilled youth in-migration. This section examinessimilarities and differences in the respondents’perceptions of the Wheatbelt according to theirpast experience of and exposure to the region,current region of residence, current course ofstudy (which indicates future skills set and jobaspirations) and gender.

In reviewing the responses of the 720 surveyparticipants to the prompting statements, theWheatbelt region was generally associated withisolation and cultural barriers. Two-thirds of therespondents did not feel that the social opport-unities offered in the region compared favoura-bly with those available in metropolitan centres.Thirty per cent also felt there were inadequate

168


•

June 2008

•

46(2):162–171


opportunities to participate in sport or othersocial opportunities. However, 60 per centagreed that the region had friendly communities,55 per cent agreed that it was a safe place toraise a family and 30 per cent agreed the regionoffered a variety of housing types. In terms ofperceived employment opportunities, 36 percent agreed that the region offered opportunitiesfor earning large incomes, while one-quarterdisagreed with this statement. Similarly, while35 per cent of respondents agreed that the regionoffered good prospects for further training andhad a diverse and rewarding working environ-ment, 27 per cent and 28 per cent disagreed witheach statement respectively. These results indi-cate some variability in youth perceptions of thelifestyle and employment opportunities availablein regional and rural areas.

To assess whether the respondents’ genderhad any significant impact on their perceptions,comparisons were made between male andfemale responses. Overall, there was no remark-able variation in perceptions between the twogroups. Males did, however, record a slightlyhigher level of disagreement to the statements:‘The Wheatbelt offers a diverse working environ-ment’ and ‘The Wheatbelt region offers me asmany social opportunities as I would utilise inlarger metropolitan areas’. Generally, though,there was little evidence from this study tosuggest that gender plays a significant role ininfluencing youth perceptions of rural areas. Inaddition, there was little variation betweenmales and females regarding the incentives thatwould entice them to the Wheatbelt (Table 3), ortheir preferred location of work following theircompletion of studies (Table 4). This contrastswith previous research that has highlighted thegender dimensions of actual rural youth migra-tion trends (e.g. Alston, 2004; Bell, 2005;Walmsley

et al.

, 2006).

Compared to gender, location of residenceappeared to be more of an influence over youngpeople’s willingness to live in rural areas. Inthe survey, the postcode of each respondent’snon-semester (or permanent) residence wascollected. This information was then used todetermine the distance each respondent wouldhave to travel to reach Perth from their permanenthome. The results showed that those who livedwithin 30 minutes travel time (by car) from thecity were only prepared to live less than onehour from a major metropolitan centre. Further,of those who lived less than one hour travel timefrom Perth, between 30 and 40 per cent indi-cated that they were only prepared to live lessthan one hour’s drive from a major metropolitancentre. For those currently living more than onehour’s drive from Perth, over 65 per cent wouldbe prepared to live more than three hours froma major metropolitan area, and more than 40 percent would be prepared to live more than fivehours from a major metropolitan area. This sug-gests that those who would be most willing torelocate to rural areas are those who already livemore than one hour’s drive from Perth. Thosewho currently live in the central metropolitanarea are least likely to move to rural areas.

Table 4 Preferred work location following completion of degree.

Location Percentage of total female respondents

Percentage of totalmale respondents

Metropolitan Perth 57.1% 63.1%Regional Western Australia 38.0% 36%Interstate regional 12.3% 14.2%Interstate metropolitan 29.7% 37.8%Overseas 48.7% 56.9%Not Stated 0% 0.4%

Note: Respondents could select multiple locations.

Table 3 Incentives that would entice respondents to moveto the Wheatbelt.

Incentives Females Males

Career Advancement 44.8% 45.3%High Salary 56.4% 59.5%Ongoing Training 20.7% 18.7%Incentives would still not entice me 26.0% 26.0%Not Stated 2.2% 2.2%

Note: Respondents could select multiple categories.

A. Davies:


169


The relationship between current non-semesterresidence and willingness to move to rural areasis further demonstrated in Table 6. Respondentswere asked where they would like to work follow-ing the completion of their degree. Those lessthan one hour’s drive from metropolitan Perthchose the city as their favoured location,whereas those who lived over one hour’s drivefrom Perth favoured regional Western Australiaas their preferred future work location. It is alsointeresting to note that most of those who hadmoved to Perth from regional areas stated thatthey would like to return to regional areas forwork. However, despite this intention, statisticsindicate that only a low proportion of youngpeople originating from regional areas actuallydo return before the age of 29 (ABS, 2001).This suggests that, while geographical origindoes have an influence on young people’s will-ingness to move to rural areas, more detailedresearch is needed to identify what factorsinform the decisions of those young people whodo not move back to rural areas.

As discussed above, many of those surveyedwere not willing to move away from Perth tothe Wheatbelt for employment. Therefore, the

results were analysed to ascertain if there wasany difference in response depending on currentcourse of study (which was used to indicatefuture occupation). The results revealed thatthose undertaking studies in agriculture and edu-cation were more prepared to move to regionalWestern Australia than those in other coursesof study. It should be noted that the WesternAustralian education system strongly encour-ages teachers to work for a period of five yearsin rural communities in order to obtain a perma-nent teaching position in the public schoolsector. It is likely that this policy has had asignificant influence on graduate teachers’ will-ingness to move to rural areas. There are also anumber of programmes to support graduatedoctors to work in rural areas, which could haveinfluenced the reasonably high level of prepared-ness of medical students to move to regionalWestern Australia. Young people undertakingengineering, earth science and environmentalscience chose Perth and overseas as their favouredwork location, though regional Western Australiaalso featured highly (45 per cent). By comparison,those studying law, business and social scienceselected large metropolitan centres as their

Table 5 Travel time youth would be willing to live from a major metropolitan centre by the travelling time between theirplace of residence and university.

Current travel time to University

Maximum travel time willing to live from a major metropolitan centre

Less than 1 hour (%)

Between 1 and 2 hours (%)



Over 5 hours (%)

0 to 15 mins (152) 54.6 15.8 9.9 3.3 16.415 to 30 mins (278) 49.6 21.9 7.9 5.0 15.530 to 45 mins (97) 33.0 20.6 14.4 11.3 20.645 to 1 hour (20) 40.0 25.0 5.0 10.0 20.0Over 1 hour (74) 13.0 8.3 13.0 22.5 43.3

Note: The value given in brackets in the first column represents the total number of respondents in that category.

Table 6 Preferred working location by the travelling time between place of residence and university.

Current travel time to University Perth (%) Overseas (%)

Regional WA (%)

Interstate Urban (%)

Interstate Regional (%)

0 to 15 mins (152) 65.8 53.3 25.7 34.9 11.215 to 30 mins (278) 69.1 53.2 25.5 37.8 10.130 to 45 mins (97) 61.9 55.6 38.1 34.0 13.445 to 1 hour (20) 70.0 35.0 20.0 35.0 10.0Over 1 hour (74) 36.1 42.0 71.0 20.1 18.9

Note: Respondents were able to select more than one category. The numbers in brackets in the first column shows the numberof respondents in each category.

170


•

June 2008

•

46(2):162–171


favoured work locations, with law students theleast inclined to move to regional WesternAustralia (Table 7). The results indicated thatperceptions of future employment opportunitiesare a major influencing factor of young people’swillingness to move to rural areas.

Conclusion

This assessment of Perth university students’perceptions of living and working opportunitiesin the Wheatbelt provides insights into the influ-ences underlying young adults’ decisions to liveand work in inland rural areas. The results indi-cated that willingness to move to rural areas bythis group is strongly influenced by perceptionsof social and employment opportunities, irre-spective of whether or not such perceptions haveany basis in reality. To a lesser extent perceptionsof the aesthetic and environmental condition ofthe region also influenced willingness to move.Perceptions were found to be influenced by pastexposure to regional areas and to current geo-graphical location. Future field of employment(based on current course of study) was alsoinfluential on both perceptions of living andworking conditions and willingness to move.Those who were seeking future employment inagriculture, education and health were morelikely to move to rural areas than those studyingbusiness or law. For those rural communitieswhich are currently facing high levels of youthout-migration, skilled employment shortagesand declining levels of youth in-migration, it isimportant to understand the role that perceptionsof employment and social opportunities play inprospective migration trends. Local governments

and regional development agencies, amongstother institutions, will need to develop well-resourcedand carefully targeted marketing campaigns,together with actual employment and town beau-tification programmes, in order to overcome thestigma with which many dry, broadacre inlandregions are currently tarred.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe funding for this research was provided by the WheatbeltDevelopment Commission, Western Australia. The authoracknowledges the helpful comments of the two referees onthis paper and the editors of this special edition. The authoralso acknowledges the assistance of Ms Carmen Elrick inadministering the on-line survey and managing the database.

NOTE1. Due to privacy laws, administrative staff from each uni-

versity sent the email and survey link to students. Theuniversities did not release the details of the exactnumber of students emailed to the researchers. As such,the researchers are unable to provide an exact responserate for this survey.

REFERENCESAllan, T., 2002:

An Overview of the Demographic and Eco-nomic Conditions in Maine: A Background for Workforceand Tax Policy Considerations

. University of Maine,Maine.

Alston, M., 2004: You don’t want to be a check-out chickall your life: youth out-migration of young people fromAustralia’s small rural towns.

Australian Journal of SocialIssues

39, 299–313.Alston, M. and Kent, J., 2001:

Generation X-pendable:Young, Rural and Looking for Work

. Centre for RuralSocial Research, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1996: Census of

Housingand Population, 1996

. Australian Bureau of Statistics.www.abs.gov.au.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2001: Census of

Housingand Population, 2001

. Australian Bureau of Statistics.www.abs.gov.au.

Table 7 Preferred working location by current area of study.

Current area of study Preferred working location

Perth Overseas Regional WA Interstate Urban Interstate Regional

Agriculture (39) 41.0 43.6 64.1 15.4 20.5Business (76) 67.1 53.9 21.0 47.4 7.9Earth Science (58) 58.6 62.1 48.3 31.3 20.7Education (71) 50.7 36.6 60.56 16.9 2.8Engineering (131) 57.3 64.1 44.3 35.1 19.8Environmental Science (82) 53.7 56.1 45.1 30.5 23.2Law (160) 69.4 56.9 10.6 53.1 3.75Medicine (112) 56.3 38.4 56.3 17.9 14.3Social Science (109) 63.3 56.0 20.2 40.4 9.2

Note: The numbers in brackets indicate the number of respondents in each category. Respondents were able to select morethan one category.

www.abs.gov.au

www.abs.gov.au

A. Davies:


171


Davies, A. and Olejnik, M., 2006:

Synoptic Analysis of theGeography of Skilled Labour in the Wheatbelt, South Westand Great Southern Regions in Western Australia

. Insti-tute for Regional Development, The University of WesternAustralia, Perth.

Department of Transport and Regional Services, 2006:

Skill Shortages in Australia’s Regions

. Working PaperNo. 68, Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics,Canberra.

Eversole, R., 2001: Keeping youth in communities: educa-tion and out-migration in the South West.

Rural Society

11, 85–98.Gabriel, M., 2006: Youth migration and social advancement:

how young people manage emerging differences betweenthemselves and their hometown.

Journal of Youth Studies

9, 33–46.Hemingway, M., 2002: Maine’s disappearing youth: implica-

tions of a declining youth population. Maine LeadershipConsortium, Augusta. Retrieved 2 June, 2006 from:<http://www.umaine.edu/mcsc/GEDC/presentations/Merritt%20Heminway%20brief.pdf>.

Hodkinson, P. and Sparkes, A., 1997: Careership: sociolog-ical theory of career decision making.

British Journal ofSociology and Education

18, 29–44.

James, R., Wyn, J., Bladwin, G., Hepworth, G., McInnis, C.and Stephanou, A., 1999:

Rural and Isolated School Studentsand their Higher Education Choices: a re-examination ofstudent location, socio-economic background and educa-tional advantage and disadvantage

. Commissioned ReportNo. 63, Higher Education Council Australia, Canberra.

McKenzie, F., 2003: Regional skills shortages: an overviewof demographic, economic and social influences.

Sustain-ing Regions

3, 5–15.Selwood, J., Curry, G. and Jones, R., 1996: From the turn-

around to the backlash: tourism and rural change in theShire of Denmark, Western Australia.

Urban Policy andResearch

14, 215–225.Tonts, M., 2005: Competitive sport and social capital in

rural Australia.

Journal of Rural Studies

21, 137–149.Tonts, M. and Grieve, S., 2002: Commodification and crea-

tive destruction in the Australian rural landscape: the caseof Bridgetown, Western Australia.

Australian Geographi-cal Studies

40, 58–70.Walmsley, D.J. and Lewis, G.J., 1984:

Human Geography:Behavioral Approaches

. Longman Group Limited, London.Wyn, J., 2004: Youth transitions to work and further education

in Australia. Paper presented to the American EducationalResearch Association April 2004, San Diego.

http://www.umaine.edu/mcsc/GEDC/presentations/Merritt%20Heminway%20brief.pdf

Documents

Declining Youth In-migration in Rural Western Australia: the Role of Perceptions of Rural Employment and Lifestyle Opportunities