Date post: | 17-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | bernadette-baker |
View: | 218 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Community Adversity and Resilience:the distribution of social disadvantage in Victoria and New South Wales and the mediating role of social cohesion
Community Adversity and Resilience
SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE FACTORS
• Unemployment
• Long-term Unemployment
• Low Income
• Early School Leaving
• Non-completion Yr12 Schooling
• Unskilled Workers
• Low Birth Weight
• Child Abuse
• Psychiatric Hospital Admissions
• Criminal Offence Convictions
• Child Injuries
• Imprisonment
• Threat Severance Electric Supply
• Mortality
• Disability/Sickness Allowance
Community Adversity and Resilience
Unequal in Life (1999)
Community Adversity and Resilience
Unequal in Life (1999)
Community Adversity and Resilience
30% 43%
27%
Community Adversity and Resilience
SOCIAL COHESION FACTORS – *VICTORIA
• Participation in organised recreation/sports groups
• Volunteering
• Availability of informal help
*(277 of the 647 Victorian postcodes met criteria for inclusion – ie, minimum of 10 respondents for each of the three data sets used)
Low social
cohesion
High social cohesion
Limited Education
and Low Birth Weight
are strongly associated
(0.45)
with
with
The connection is even stronger
(0.55)
The connectionis much weaker
(0.12)
Community Adversity and Resilience, Tony Vinson, March 2004 (Jesuit Social Services) Ch 5
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONSDRIVE A WEDGE IN THE CYCLE OF DISADVANTAGE
Community Adversity and Resilience
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS DRIVE A WEDGE IN THE CYCLE OF DISADVANTAGE
Early School Leaving
across local population
and Imprisonment
are strongly associated
(0.47)
Low social
cohesion
Connection remains strong
(0.46)
Connection is very much weaker
(0.11)
High social
cohesion
with
with
Community Adversity and Resilience, Tony Vinson, March 2004 (Jesuit Social Services) Ch 5
Community Adversity and Resilience
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS DRIVE A WEDGE IN THE CYCLE OF DISADVANTAGE
Low social
cohesion
The connection is even stronger
(0.75)
The connectionis greatly reduced
(0.22)
High social
cohesion
with
with
Unemployment rate
and rate of
Imprisonment
are strongly
connected
(0.65)
Community Adversity and Resilience, Tony Vinson, March 2004 (Jesuit Social Services) Ch 5
Community Adversity and Resilience
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS DRIVE A WEDGE IN THE CYCLE OF DISADVANTAGE
Low social
cohesion
Strength of association
remains about the same
(0.63)
The association is considerably
weaker(0.28)
High social
cohesion
with
with
Early School
Leaving
is strongly
associated with
rate of
Unemployment
(0.64)
Community Adversity and Resilience, Tony Vinson, March 2004 (Jesuit Social Services) Ch 5
Community Adversity and Resilience
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS DRIVE A WEDGE IN THE CYCLE OF DISADVANTAGE
Low social
cohesion
The strength ofthe relationship
remains unchanged(0.46)
There is adramatic reduction
in degree of association
(0.10)
High social
cohesion
with
with
Low Work Skills
and rate of
Imprisonment
are strongly
connected
(0.47)
Community Adversity and Resilience, Tony Vinson, March 2004 (Jesuit Social Services) Ch 5
Community Adversity and Resilience
Community Adversity and Resilience
TABLE 5.1 – CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ANTECEDENT AND OUTCOME VARIABLES FOR DIFFERENT DEGREES OF SOCIAL COHESION IN VICTORIA
OverallCorrelation
(Vic sub-sample)N=277
LowSocial
CohesionN=83
MediumSocial
CohesionN=120
High Social
CohesionN=74
Unemployment/Low Birth Wt. .46** .46 .39 .28
Early School Leaving/Low Birth Wt. .45** .56 .36 .16
Year 12 Incomplete/Low Birth Wt. .45** .55 .38 .12
Unemployment/Imprisonment .65** .75 .64 .22
Unemployment/Early School Leaving .64** .63 .65 .28
Unemployment/Court Convictions .73** .70 .73 .50
Community Adversity and Resilience
TABLE 5.1 – CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ANTECEDENT AND OUTCOME VARIABLES FOR DIFFERENT DEGREES OF SOCIAL COHESION IN VICTORIA
(cont’d.) OverallCorrelation
(Vic sub-sample)N=277
LowSocial
CohesionN=83
MediumSocial
CohesionN=120
High Social
CohesionN=74
Early School Leaving/Imprisonment .47** .46 .43 .11
Low Family Income/Imprisonment .55** .62 .52 .18
Year 12 Incomplete/Imprisonment .35** .26 .32 .03
Low Work Skills/Imprisonment .47** .46 .44 .10
Unemployment/Child Abuse .68** .56 .72 .40
Low Family Income/Child Abuse .68** .53 .72 .45
Community Adversity and Resilience
FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF TENANTS IN A PUBLIC HOUSING ESTATE:
• What factors could explain why residents participated in resident association action groups?
• What type of person was more likely to assume a greater degree of responsibility in such organisations?
Community Adversity and Resilience
PARTICIPATION WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GENERAL DEGREE OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION RESIDENTS POSSESSED WITHIN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD:
• How long they had lived in the area
• Whether they intended remaining there
• The extent of their local social networks
• The balance between family needs, personal aspirations and competing commitments
Community Adversity and Resilience
THE PROFILE OF AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT, LIKELY TO BECOME A COMMUNITY LEADER:
• Female
• Dependent children (not pre-school age)
• Australian born
• High sense of belonging to the area
• Working part-time or unemployed
• Already active in other associations
CONCLUSION
SOCIAL EXCLUSION BREEDS SOCIAL ALIENATION,
WITH INCREASES IN:
• CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT
• YOUTH SCHOOL DROP OUT
• MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER
• SUBSTANCE MISUSE
• CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS
• PRISON EXPANSION
Community Adversity and Resilience
Community Adversity and Resilience
CONCLUSION – cont’d
• SUCH HIGH BUDGET ITEMS ABSORB AN
INCREASING PERCENTAGE OF THE STATE’S
BUDGET, BUT GENERALLY FAIL TO CREATE
A MORE COHESIVE SOCIETY.
• STATE GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES WOULD BE
MORE EFFECTIVE IN BUILDING SOCIAL COHESION
BY TARGETTING AREAS OF ENTRENCHED SOCIAL
DISADVANTAGE.
Community Adversity and Resilience:the distribution of social disadvantage in Victoria and New South Wales and the mediating role of social cohesion