Search

This paper explores a number of the ways in which globalization can accentuate the uncertainties and risks borne by Australians with retirement savings in superannuation funds or who are receiving superannuation benefits. It begins by addressing the impact of globalization on job prospects as a result of off-shoring. It then turns its attention to the impact of globalization on domestic inflation. The third area addressed by this paper is the vulnerability of superannuation funds to the ‘regular’ financial crises of the world financial system. Here, particular attention is given to the way international hedge funds operate in bear markets. Finally, the paper describes the increasing prominence of sovereign wealth funds and explores the implications of their growing role for future superannuation fund earnings. A major conclusion of the paper is that the certainty of the financial uncertainties and risks associated with the occupational superannuation pillar means that Australia's retirement income system needs to be modified in order to limit the exposure of workers' retirement savings and benefits in payment to some of the consequences of a globalized financial system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As Leader of the Opposition in 1987, the current Prime Minister of Australia John Howard, stated unequivocally that he would dismantle Medicare at his first opportunity. By April 2000, the Health Minister in a Howard-led government proudly proclaimed to the Australian Parliament the Coalition was 'the best friend Medicare ever had'. Such a shift in ideology and policy position appears remarkable, overturning more than 60 years of conservative opposition to a universal, publicly funded, health care system. This paper traces the shift from the lead-up to the 1996 election until 2000, interrogating official policy texts to map how the Coalition reconfigured its own policy narrative about the Australian health care system. This paper argues that in order to understand contemporary reforms to the health care system, we must consider the way in which those reforms provide solutions to discursively, rather than objectively constructed, policy problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing recognition that investment by governments on children in their early years is an important part of social policy. However there is currently little information either about how much governments invest on children of different ages, or about what the optimum investment in the early years would look like. Using currently available Australian datasets, this article explores two approaches to estimate the adequacy of investment in early childhood; comparing government expenditure between countries, and analysing one country (in this case Australia) in terms of expenditure over time on children of different ages. We find that, overall, Australia spends more than the average of OECD countries on the early years, but that a much higher proportion of this expenditure is spent on cash transfers to parents rather than on early care and education. Furthermore, spending on the early years has grown proportionately to spending on older children over the past several years. The paper ends with a number of suggestions for further research which will refine the analysis of investment in the early years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of social capital has acquired some currency amongst policy analysts to refer to the social norms, networks and trust that facilitate co-operation and provision of mutual support within or between groups. As yet there is no agreed definition of the concept; however influential Australian policy bodies are developing measures to track changes in social capital and relate these to policy changes. Most research is concerned with exploration of the concept in locality-based communities and its application to developing societies. This paper reviews research undertaken in Australia and overseas to determine the elements of social capital that may have importance in relation to policy development in response to an ageing population. It concludes that the concept could be of considerable value in understanding the determinants of policy success or failure, but that further research is required to understand the nature of social capital as it relates to older people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years policy makers and social scientists have devoted considerable attention to wellbeing, a concept that refers to people’s capacity to live healthy, creative and fulfilling lives. Two conceptual approaches dominate wellbeing research. The objective approach examines the objective components of a good life. The subjective approach examines people’s subjective evaluations of their lives. In the objective approach how subjective wellbeing relates to objective wellbeing is not a relevant research question. The subjective approach does investigate how objective wellbeing relates to subjective wellbeing, but has focused primarily on one objective wellbeing indicator, income, rather than the comprehensive indicator set implied by the objective approach. This paper attempts to contribute by examining relationships between a comprehensive set of objective wellbeing measures and subjective wellbeing, and by linking wellbeing research to inequality research by also investigating how subjective and objective wellbeing relate to class, gender, age and ethnicity. We use three waves of a representative state-level household panel study from Queensland, Australia, undertaken from 2008 to 2010, to investigate how objective measures of wellbeing are socially distributed by gender, class, age, and ethnicity. We also examine relationships between objective wellbeing and overall life satisfaction, providing one of the first longitudinal analyses linking objective wellbeing with subjective evaluations. Objective aspects of wellbeing are unequally distributed by gender, age, class and ethnicity and are strongly associated with life satisfaction. Moreover, associations between gender, ethnicity, class and life satisfaction persist after controlling for objective wellbeing, suggesting that mechanisms in addition to objective wellbeing link structural dimensions of inequality to life satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politica y Sociedad is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Children's poverty has long been a central concern for policy makers and policy researchers. The body of extant research conducted and the range of programmatic interventions undertaken by successive governments in this and other countries is extraordinary. Nevertheless, children remain in poverty. Clearly there are many reasons for this, not least of which is the maintenance and intensification of market capitalism with its attendant blatant inequalities. Even so, the moral, political, social and economic imperatives for developing workable responses to children's poverty remain. This paper argues that we, in Australia, should adopt an approach increasingly taken in the UK. Drawing on, among other things, the new sociology of childhood, this approach begins not with the expertise of adult researchers and policy makers, but with that of children. In doing so, the case is made for why children's perceptions and experiences of poverty are key concerns for policy. The paper outlines in theoretical terms why children's voices matter. Invoking the new sociology of childhood and the sociology of identity, a conceptual framework for understanding why policy scholars and makers should carefully attend to the voices of their subjects is sketched - in this case, the subjects are children. Finally, some methodological implications of this for undertaking policy research informed by this approach are outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social capital and community capacity have become key concepts in social policy responses to marginalised individuals and communities. Policy making has occurred in the context of heated debate about the roles of government and business institutions in strengthening community capacities. In this paper, we wilt explore theoretical positions about the role that these institutions play in building local social capital. We argue that the dominant conceptions of social capital in Australia fail to recognise the potential for non-local institutions to strengthen local community capacity. Drawing on a study of four geographically diverse communities we show that a substantial proportion of community members were disconnected from non-local government and business institutions. We conclude with some initial suggestions for extending the social capital discourse to recognise and build the role of non-local institutions in strengthening local communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers the path of social policy and democracy in Australia and the latest set of welfare reforms under Labor. The reforms can be seen to mark a reaction to the excesses of neoliberal government on the one hand, but they also represent continuity in neoliberal thought and policy on the other. As we shall see, engrained ideas about individualist wage-earning welfare, that were established during the formative years of the 20th century, continue to shape, if not constrain collectivist solutions to some of the inherent social risks faced by Australian citizens today. In this light, efforts to create a welfare state geared towards meeting the needs of ‘hard-working’ Australian families appear much sharper. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The official public policy related to recreational drug use and abuse in Australia is harm minimization or harm reduction. Definitions of harm minimization vary but a general statement is that harm minimization is a policy or programme intended to decrease adverse health, social and economic consequences of drug use, even though the user may continue to use psychoactive drugs. This type of definition is most often compared to a zero-tolerance policy that aims to eliminate all recreational drug abuse by legal and other means. Sociologists have historically scoffed at this latter policy. Unfortunately, what this has meant is that harm minimization in all its forms has not been the object of analytical work on the part of sociologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]