Suchergebnisse

AbstractDespite the long‐standing connection between South Australia and the national development of immigrant multiculturalism, epitomised through the role of Premier Don Dunstan, recent policy developments have not yet been studied at the state level. This article evaluates the development and 'policy success' of multiculturalism in South Australia from 2007 to 2017, a period characterised by the so‐called 'backlash against multiculturalism' in many liberal democracies. The study is based on interviews with policymakers and policy stakeholders, triangulated against policy documentation and other grey literature. Overall, policy efforts by successive state governments can be characterised as 'quiet multiculturalism', in that they have become entrenched as the political norm. Multiculturalism tends not to be politically contentious, leaving policymakers to implement policies without much fanfare. At the same time though, there is a risk of fragility. Deeper structural barriers to equal opportunity may be overlooked due to an attitude that existing policies promoting 'access and equity' are sufficient or can be scaled down.

Refugees and asylum seekers on temporary visas typically experience interacting issues related to employment, financial precarity, and poor health and well-being. This research aimed to explore whether these issues were exacerbated by the social impacts of COVID-19. Interviews were conducted both prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic with 15 refugees and asylum seekers living in South Australia on temporary visas. While this research found that COVID-19 did lead to a range of negative health and other outcomes such as employment challenges, a key finding was the reiteration of temporary visas as a primary pathway through which refugees and asylum seekers experience heightened precarity and the associated pervasive negative health and well-being outcomes. The findings emphasize the importance of immigration and welfare policy. ; Les réfugiés et demandeurs d'asile détenant un visa temporaire font généralement face à des problèmes interdépendants en ce qui concerne l'emploi, la précarité financière et la fragilité de la santé et du bien-être. Cette recherche visait à explorer dans quelle mesure ces problèmes ont été exacerbés par les impacts sociaux de la COVID-19. Des entrevues ont été menées avant et pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 avec 15 réfugiés et demandeurs d'asile vivant en Australie du Sud et détenant des visas temporaires. Bien que cette recherche ait montré que la COVID-19 a mené à une variété de conséquences négatives sur la santé ainsi que dans d'autres domaines tels que les défis liés à l'emploi, l'une des constatations clés était la réaffirmation des visas temporaires comme principale voie par laquelle les réfugiés et les demandeurs d'asile font l'expérience d'une précarité accrue et de ses effets négatifs sur la santé et le bien-être. Les résultats soulignent l'importance des politiques d'immigration et de sécurité sociale.

Over the past twenty years interest has grown in the concept of social capital in international and Australian public policy. We explore how social capital is understood as a concept and used in practice for guiding policy development and program delivery in South Australian public health programs. The empirical research compared policy makers' and practitioners' understandings of social capital and how theories about social capital and health inequality were translated into practice in three case study projects. It found that there are shifting discourses between social capital and related concepts, including community capacity building, and social inclusion/exclusion. Policy makers reported less use of the concept of social capital in favour of social inclusion/exclusion reflecting changing political and policy environments where terms come into favour and then go out of fashion. In this transition period the two terms are often used interchangeably although there are some conceptual points of difference.

Participation in voluntary groups is potentially an important way to create health promoting social capital. This paper investigates women's participation in voluntary groups, utilising data from a postal survey of 968 female respondents and in‐depth interviews with 30 women. Logistic regression was conducted to examine factors associated with frequency of women's group involvement. Not working full time, living in a married relationship, and having a university education were all significantly associated with regular involvement. The qualitative data further illustrated some of the ways in which these three factors were linked with women's involvement in groups. We conclude that women who were able to regularly participate were those who already enjoyed levels of social and economic privilege. Policies to promote social capital via participation might focus on identifying what types of group involvement benefit women's health, and increasing the accessibility of such groups to include diverse groups of women.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited ; Background: This paper reports on a qualitative study of lay knowledge about health inequalities and solutions to address them. Social determinants of health are responsible for a large proportion of health inequalities (unequal levels of health status) and inequities (unfair access to health services and resources) within and between countries. Despite an expanding evidence base supporting action on social determinants, understanding of the impact of these determinants is not widespread and political will appears to be lacking. A small but growing body of research has explored how ordinary people theorise health inequalities and the implications for taking action. The findings are variable, however, in terms of an emphasis on structure versus individual agency and the relationship between being 'at risk' and acceptance of social/structural explanations. Methods: This paper draws on findings from a qualitative study conducted in Adelaide, South Australia, to examine these questions. The study was an integral part of mixed-methods research on the links between urban location, social capital and health. It comprised 80 in-depth interviews with residents in four locations with contrasting socio-economic status. The respondents were asked about the cause of inequalities and actions that could be taken by governments to address them. Results: Although generally willing to discuss health inequalities, many study participants tended to explain the latter in terms of individual behaviours and attitudes rather than social/structural conditions. Moreover, those who identified social/structural causes tended to emphasise individualized factors when describing typical pathways to health outcomes. This pattern appeared largely independent of participants' own experience of advantage or disadvantage, and was reinforced in discussion of strategies to address health inequalities. Conclusions: Despite the explicit emphasis on social/structural issues expressed in the study focus and framing of the research questions, participants did not display a high level of knowledge about the nature and causes of place-based health inequalities. By extending the scope of lay theorizing to include a focus on solutions, this study offers additional insights for public health. Specifically it suggests that a popular constituency for action on the social determinants of health is unlikely to eventuate from the current popular understandings of possible policy levers.