Supporting cross-cultural brokers is essential for employment among Aboriginal people in remote Australia

CSIRO PUBLISHING

The Rangeland Journal, 2011, 33, 327–338 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/RJ11022

Supporting cross-cultural brokers is essential for employment among Aboriginal people in remote Australia Yiheyis T. Maru A,B and Jocelyn Davies A A

CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, PO Box 2111, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia. Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

B

Abstract. Employment is generally considered as essential for improving individual and social livelihoods and wellbeing in Australia. Typically, employment rates are low among Aboriginal people living in remote regions of Australia. Often this is attributed to a lack of mainstream labour markets. However, Aboriginal employment participation is low even in remote places where there are employment opportunities, creating a seemingly paradoxical situation of lots of job vacancies and lots of unemployed locals. Social networks are one of the factors that contribute to this phenomenon, and that can potentially help to address it. We applied social network and social capital theory in research in the Anmatjere region of central Australia. Our findings indicate that Aboriginal people have strong and dense bonding networks but sparse bridging and linking networks. While the existence of such ties is supported by research and observation elsewhere in remote Australia, the implications for employment have not been considered from the perspective of social network theory. Dense bonding networks reinforce, and are reinforced by, Aboriginal norms of sharing and reciprocity. These underpin the Aboriginal moral economy but can have negative influence on motivation to engage with mainstream employment opportunities that are driven by workplace and market norms. Brokers who can bridge and link Aboriginal individuals and their dense social networks to potential employers are essential for Aboriginal people to be able to obtain trusted information on jobs and have entrée to employment opportunities. Brokers also foster new norms that mediate the conflicting values and expectations held by potential Aboriginal employees and employers, who are generally not Aboriginal people. Social network theory suggests that bridging and linking provides advantage to the broker. However, stress and burnout are readily suffered by the people who broker networks with divergent values in cross-cultural settings. To improve employment outcomes and expand livelihood options for Aboriginal people in remote Australia, it is essential to recognise, support and recruit brokers. Additional keywords: brokerage, closure, Indigenous livelihoods, social capital, social networks. Received 2 May 2011, accepted 11 October 2011, published online 29 November 2011

Introduction Employment is not only dependent on what you know (skills, qualifications – human capital) but also on whom you know (social relations and acquaintances – social capital). However, not all the people in one’s social network are equally effective at providing information and facilitating employment. As Granovetter (1973) noted in his seminal paper ‘The strength of weak ties’, weak ties or acquaintances lead to more successful employment outcomes than strong ties with families and close friends. This is because the people to whom one is weakly tied are more likely to move in social circles different to one’s own and thus have access to different and more diverse job information (Granovetter 1973; Lin 1984). The weak ties that bridge otherwise discrete and disparate social networks are the site for crucial brokerage of a variety of information, including information about jobs. People at the end of these weak bridging ties inadvertently or deliberately become brokers, which is a role that accrues significant social value both to themselves and to the dense network clusters they connect (Burt 1992, 2000, 2005). Journal compilation Ó Australian Rangeland Society 2011

Our aim in this paper is to explore the role of social capital and brokers in job outcomes for Aboriginal people in central Australia. We do this through a case study from the Anmatjere region. Before introducing the case study, we consider the nature and extent of unemployment, particularly Aboriginal unemployment, in remote regions of Australia. We then present our case study methods and findings. These inform our discussion of social capital and broker roles in the Anmatjere region and other cross-cultural settings of remote Australia. Finally, we conclude that supporting existing and recruiting new cross-cultural network brokers can play a significant role in improving Aboriginal employment in mainstream economic activities. Unemployment in remote Australia: context and causation Unemployment remains an important socioeconomic problem internationally and in Australia (Creed and Watson 2003). While employment has been one of the major strategies to improve individual and community livelihoods and wellbeing, www.publish.csiro.au/journals/trj

328

The Rangeland Journal

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

unemployment has been causally linked with a variety of poor wellbeing indicators such as higher incidences of alcoholism, higher divorce rates and higher suicide rates (Stiglitz 2002). Studies that compared employed and unemployed people have found evidence that unemployed people have lower levels of selfesteem (Muller et al. 1993) and higher incidence of psychological distress (Waters and Moore 2002) and depression (Waters and Moore 2001). Unemployment is significantly higher among Indigenous people than other Australians. In 2009, the national unemployment rate for the Indigenous population aged between 15 and 64 years was more than three times the rate for other Australians. The discrepancy in unemployment rates for Indigenous and other Australians is even higher in remote areas (ABS 2009) (see Table 1). However, even these high rates do not illustrate the true extent of unemployment for Indigenous Australians in remote areas. This is because ABS data consider Indigenous people as employed if they are working in the Community Development Employment Projects program (CDEP), which is essentially a requirement for unemployed Indigenous people in these areas to receive income support. If CDEP is not considered as employment, the Indigenous unemployment rate rises even higher. In 2001, it was estimated at 43% and was projected to increase to a total of 50% by 2011 (Hunter et al. 2003). In the Northern Territory, analysis that treated CDEP as unemployment showed that the Aboriginal unemployment rate was as high as 64% in 2001 (Taylor 2003). The unemployment rate, expressed as a proportion of the total labour force, does not convey a clear picture of Indigenous engagement with mainstream economic activities. A significant portion of the Indigenous population is ‘not in the labour force’ – that is, they are not employed and have not been seeking employment. As shown in Table 1, the proportion of Indigenous Australians ‘not in the labour force’ in 2009 was almost twice that of other Australians. In remote areas, the ‘not in labour force’ gap between Indigenous and other Australians is even larger, almost three times (ABS 2009). Remoteness and associated lack of labour market are often raised as significant factors limiting Indigenous employment in mainstream economic activities (Altman 2000; ABS 2006a). However, this is contested by Hughes and Hughes (2010), who note that there are always labour demands in, and around, all areas

Table 1. Unemployment rate and ‘not in labour force’ rate for Indigenous and other Australians aged 15–64 years, estimates from the Labour Force Survey 2009, with CDEP participation considered as employment (ABS 2009; cat. no. 6287.0)

Australia wide Indigenous Other Australians Remote areas (remote and very remote regions in ABS Australian Statistical Geography Standard) Indigenous Other Australians

Unemployment rate (%)

Not in labour force (%)

18.1 5.5

41.9 23.3

9.8 2.6

49.0 16.7

of Australia, including remote regions. They argue that the main factors preventing Indigenous people from gaining and maintaining employment are lack of capacity, excessive welfare income, welfare dependency, institutional disincentives to work and ‘pretend’ jobs such as those that were supported by CDEP. Their view is supported by observations that there are some places, such as the Anmatjere region in central Australia, where there are demands for labour together with resident Aboriginal populations that have high rates of unemployment or non-participation in the labour market. In such regions there is the seemingly paradoxical situation of lots of jobs and lots of unemployed people. We understand the causes of limited Aboriginal engagement in mainstream economic activities to be due to interactions among a host of structural and behavioural factors, including capacity and institutional issues. Historically, significant attention has been given to capacity building through programs on literacy, numeracy and specific job skills (Australian National Training Authority 2004) and institutional measures such as policy interventions to address behavioural factors (DIMIA 2005; Productivity Commission 2009). In contrast, there is relatively little attention to the impact of social relations and norms on Indigenous employment. In this paper we will highlight the importance of different types of networks and norms in remote Aboriginal Australians’ employment in mainstream economic activities. Anmatjere region case study Location, demography and economy The Anmatjere region is 200 km north of Alice Springs and named for the Aboriginal people and language, Anmatjerr. Up to 1 July 2008, the region was loosely defined to encompass several Aboriginal settlements serviced by the Anmatjere Community Government Council (ACGC), as well as the adjoining pastoral and horticultural lands and roadhouse communities (see Fig. 1). From that date, local government in the area was reconstituted with the Anmatjere Ward of Central Desert Shire encompassing both Aboriginal and other Australians in the Aboriginal settlements, pastoral leasehold lands and roadhouse communities. Ti Tree is the largest settlement and is the centre for local administration. Our research in the region, guided by requests from the ACGC, focussed on understanding how Aboriginal people view local employment opportunities and constraints in the region in the context of their broader livelihood activities and aspirations (Davies et al. 2010). Our broader goals were to identify constraints and opportunities as well as linkages between jobs, livelihoods and regional sustainability (Davies and Maru 2010). People of Aboriginal descent comprise 85% of the population of the Anmatjere region, which in total was estimated at ~1100 people in 2006 (ABS 2006a, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). They live in several settlements distributed across the region (Fig. 1). The Aboriginal population is youthful with a median age of 21 years (cf. 32 years for other people in the region), a relatively higher fertility rate and shorter life expectancy than other people in the region. The region maintains strong and diverse Aboriginal languages. Anmatyerr is the predominant language spoken:

Fig. 1. Map of the Anmatjere region including Aboriginal settlements and pastoral stations.

Supporting brokers for improved Aboriginal employment The Rangeland Journal 329

330

The Rangeland Journal

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

54% of the population of the region speak Anmatyerr at home. English is the next most common language, being spoken by 18% of the population. Warlpiri and Arrernte are spoken at home by ~11% of the population (ABS 2006a). The Anmatjere region has relatively diverse economic sectors for a remote region, including various government and community services, cattle grazing (pastoralism), horticulture, arts services for highway travellers and tourists, and mining. Pastoralism has been the longest standing market economic activity and is the most extensive land use. Historically many pastoral activities were labour intensive and engaged local Aboriginal people. However, technological change and labour costs mean the pastoral properties in the region, which are largely owner-operated, now generate only a few, seasonal employment opportunities. Groundwater-based horticulture was established and has expanded over the last three decades. It generates largely seasonal employment opportunities. Government and community services provide the largest number of ongoing employment opportunities for Aboriginal people. There is also extensive mining exploration in the region, with the Tanami gold mining operations, located ~700 km north-west of Ti Tree, being a major employer. Ten Aboriginal people from the Anmatjere region were working there in November 2007. A rare-earth mine is proposed to start full operations at Nolans Bore, west of Aileron, in 2013. The mine is expected to have a life of at least 20 years. The operator intends to employ locally and plans to develop an Indigenous Employment Strategy in partnership with the Central Land Council and the region’s Aboriginal people (Arafura Resources Limited 2011). Anmatjere presents an example of the labour demand–supply conundrum observed in some remote regions where there is a local labour market and demand but no matching local supply despite high levels of unemployment and many people being not in the labour force. Only 40% of all people in the region aged 15 and over are in the labour force, that is, are working in a

LIVELIHOOD ASSETS H VULNERABILITY CONTEXT Shocks Trends

N

S Influence & access P

F

job or actively looking for work (ABS 2006b). Researchers from Centrefarm, a local Aboriginal horticulture development organisation, observed that in 2007 there were 78 seasonal and full-time jobs in the horticulture industry but only one Aboriginal person was employed (Centrefarm 2008, pers. comm.). Most horticultural work is undertaken through short-term engagements of labour from interstate or overseas. Methods Research framework Livelihoods is a core concept that has been widely used internationally to capture and express the meaning of what people in remote and rural areas do to ‘make a living’ (Chambers and Conway 1992; Scoones 1998; UK DFID 1999). Livelihood refers to a portfolio of activities, resources and other tangible and intangible assets that support people’s families. The Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) was introduced (Fisher 2002; Maru 2003) and further adapted (Davies et al. 2008) as a valuable framework for research on livelihoods with people in Australian desert regions. The case study applied the SLF to investigate opportunities and constraints to employment in the wider context of local livelihoods. A full account of case study fieldwork and findings is presented in Davies et al. (2010). The value of SLF for this research was that it allowed the context of people’s lives and aspirations to be explored without drawing specific attention to questions of employment. This guarded against interviewees’ responses being unduly influenced by the strong normative place of employment in the cultural beliefs of the non-Aboriginal interviewers. The SLF integrates components essential to livelihoods: assets, activities, aspirations, outcomes, and institutions that influence making a living in a given context (Fig. 2). The SLF makes the case that people have to access and use assets (including capital) to do their activities (livelihood strategies) in

TRANSFORMING STRUCTURES & PROCESSES STRUCTURES Levels of government Private sector

LIVELIHOOD OUTCOMES

LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES

PROCESSES Institutions culture

Key N = Natural capital P = Physical capital F = Financial capital

Fig. 2. The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (source: UK DFID 1999).

Livelihood security Improved wellbeing Ecological sustainability

S = Social capital H = Human capital

Supporting brokers for improved Aboriginal employment

order to generate livelihood outcomes and achieve aspirations. In terms of the framework, institutions, or ‘transforming structures and processes’ (Scoones 1998), are the norms, rules and policies that influence access to assets (especially public and common assets) and determine what livelihood strategies or activities are available to people. Institutions also affect the risks and vulnerabilities people face in their livelihood system.

Interview data and analysis Interview questions were designed to elicit people’s views about local employment issues in a wider livelihoods context. Seventytwo people were interviewed from four settlements in the region. These settlements were on or close to the Stuart Highway, the main road that runs north–south through the region (Fig. 1), and in nearby localities. With the aid of community-based research assistants, sampling was targeted to match the demographic profile of the region as established from ABS Census data (ABS 2006a). However, achieving this aim was constrained by the time frame of the project resulting in non-Aboriginal people, who were relatively easier to arrange to interview, being somewhat overrepresented in the sample. However, the samples of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people were each reasonably representative of the age and gender profile of the region’s Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations. Forty-nine of the interviewees (68%) were Aboriginal and most of these people were not in employment. The remaining 23 interviewees (32%) were nonAboriginal people. All were either employers or were employed. Questions that arose from the analysis of the interviews were discussed in two focus groups (one involving Aboriginal men and the other Aboriginal women). Results from the interview and focus group analyses were further considered by a workshop of Aboriginal leaders and trainees from the region and staff of agencies active in training and employment services. This was to further develop and triangulate research findings. Constant comparative analysis from grounded theory research methodology (Glaser and Strauss 1968; Glaser 1992) was used to generate concepts and context-relevant theories about the employment opportunities and constraints in the region. The software NVivo was used to assist analysis of the data sourced from interviews, focus groups and the workshop. Dense ties, brokerage and strong sharing norms amongst Aboriginal people were among the conceptual categories that emerged from this analysis. These emergent conceptual categories directed the literature review to understand how they fit with established theories. We focus here on responses to interview questions and focus group discussions that are most pertinent to understanding social networks, cultural norms and perspectives on job availability (see Table 2). The questions were broad, with some simple prompts to assist interviewees to understand them. For example, for questions related to social capital, the prompts given were about relationships and community strength. While questions were designed to probe participants’ understanding of various elements of the SLF, the SLF itself was not introduced to participants. Further, since we were interested in participants’ understandings, no attempt was made to provide our own definitions of any of the SLF elements.

The Rangeland Journal

331

Results Cultural strength and cultural norms Interviewees were asked to assess the importance and state of culture in the region (questions 12i and 12ii, see Table 2). Their responses reflect interviewees’ own interpretations of the term ‘culture’ as it was deliberately not defined by interviewers. We expect most interviewees were thinking about ‘classical’ Aboriginal culture, including rights and responsibilities to kin, land and the spiritual world, associated knowledge and creative manifestations in songs, ceremony, dance, painting and language. Most Aboriginal interviewees described culture in the Anmatjere region as strong. Some interviewees stated that culture is now less strong than in the past. Aboriginal elders and other adults shared a concern about the lack of cultural interest and understanding among Aboriginal youth. Though few in number, non-Aboriginal interviewees who responded to the question tended to see culture as less strong than did the Aboriginal interviewees. Strong Aboriginal culture underpins shared norms that influence perceptions of gender appropriateness of livelihood activities, responsibilities to family and land, reciprocities and obligations about sharing. Excerpts from interviews and focus groups below illustrate these perceptions. These represent a selection of interviewee comments from various parts of interview and focus group discussions that express concepts of cultural norms, rather than being only from interview responses related to the questions in Table 2. On gender appropriateness of livelihood activities ‘Men are more hands on – doing work like lifting; females are more literacy, office work and stuff. You wouldn’t see guys sitting in the office doing work – you’d be the odd one out. Community social behaviour you can see very easily. A lot of people do know how to do stuff. Gender appropriateness plays a big part.’ ‘The person who does my job needs to be an Aboriginal and a man.’ ‘Yes, only men can take men out bush. Some work only a man can do, like cutting trees to make boomerangs. I learn what the old men do.’ ‘There’s men’s side and women’s side [physically and in work tasks]; we’re not allowed to have workers who have wrong skin, got to make sure workers are okay to work with each other and with clients. [E.g.] on the food run, certain workers are not allowed to give certain people food. The workers let you know.’ ‘Usually men don’t even go in to women’s centre, only if we have a party. They just cut grass and collect rubbish.’ On family demands, responsibilities and sharing obligations ‘An Aboriginal person from this settlement could not do this job because it conflicts with other demands and culture of family obligations.’

332

Table 2.

The Rangeland Journal

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

List of Anmatjere case study questions that generated responses pertinent to the impact of networks, norms and social capital on employment in Anmatjere region SLF – element

Interview question

Q12i. Tell me about what is strong or good in your community (indicate on a scale of 1–10, or draw where they sit on a line from bad to good) Buildings and roads Physical capital Trees, water and land Natural capital Funding and money? Financial capital Knowledge and skills Human capital People (community strength and relationships) Social capital Culture Institutions Q12ii. How much of the following helps you do the things you do? (Various capitals) Livelihood strategies – job included Buildings (what transport and equipment do you need?) Land (what do you use from the land/water?) Social/people (what people and relationships are important?) Money (are money or grants important?) Skills and knowledge (what do you need to know?) Culture? What organisations help you to do the things you do? Ways of doing things (institutions) Q17i. If you wanted to help someone start to do what you are doing, what advice would you give them? Livelihood strategy – job included Q17ii. If someone wanted to do what you are doing, what help could they get? Livelihood strategy – job included Focus group question We want to talk about how people search for and get a new job Do people search for jobs? Are there many people who search for jobs? How do people search for jobs? Why does one person get the job and not someone else? Do they have to talk up and put themselves forward? Does the boss choose that person? How does family help people get a job? Does it help if you have family who are already working there? What is the best way to get a job? Getting a job Discuss being picked for a job Discuss working in a job in turns Discuss the role of ‘picking up rubbish’

‘That’s how it is. We share things together. We ask each other for help.’

down. Now I say “If it’s really important, you mob can call me. Not for little things”.’

‘They just do it as a favour, for family, as a family group, that’s the way we are, that’s our culture. We always share things.’

On obligations to participate in funerals and mourning

‘[We] share money with family. Family is working together if you’re sharing money. I can’t let my family down. Kinship obligations make me give my money.’ ‘[There is] a lot of family humbug, “get this one for me first”.’ ‘People say “you’re my brother, you have to give me stuff”. I just say no. People blackmail me constantly. They say “give me money, I’m your Mum”, “I’m your Dad”. I say no. No one else in my community that I know says no. People take advantage of others.’ ‘[humbugging can be hard]. It’s really hard, you can’t say no. You’ve got to be really strong. I used to pay all their bills [family’s], years ago, 15 years ago. I had to put my foot

‘Sorry business is a big problem, people are travelling further and there are more deaths. . . Sorry business means that they will go away to Lake Nash or wherever for weeks. . . [Therefore a] job that should take 2 weeks [because of long absence for sorry business] took 9 weeks.’ Social capital Interviewees were asked to assess the strength of relationships and community in the region. They were also asked about the contribution of these elements to their ability to do what they do in their lives (questions 12i and 12ii, Table 2). These questions were among those that aimed to establish participants’ views on the contribution of social capital in their livelihoods. Both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people assessed relationships and

Supporting brokers for improved Aboriginal employment

community as important. Aboriginal interviewees were slightly more likely than non-Aboriginal interviewees to perceive social capital as strong (P = 0.016). Social networks and employment Aboriginal interviewees and focus group discussants articulated the importance of social networks in employment. Employed Aboriginal interviewees frequently mentioned being ‘picked’ (chosen for) or ‘invited’ into their job or spoke directly of the importance of relationships in getting access to jobs (excerpts below are from responses to questions 17i and 17ii in Table 2). ‘Someone might ask you, [then] you can start. That’s what everybody does.’ ‘Someone invites you.’ ‘Need to get picked by [that person].’ ‘I’d invite him. Maybe just join him in, start work.’ ‘See me and I will introduce them to key people.’ ‘Go talk to [this person] or [that person].’ ‘Come [here] and talk with me and I’ll talk to the boss.’ ‘Tell them to talk to supervisor or boss.’ ‘They should come along, they can ask someone.’ ‘Turn up at 7.30 in the morning and [that person] will introduce him to the supervisor.’ These comments indicate that employed Aboriginal interviewees see social networks as the key to getting employment. These comments applied across all the sectors where Aboriginal interviewees were working or had worked, which included health, education, local government services, horticulture and pastoralism. Some said that they would willingly help others by facilitating contacts with supervisors or they would directly invite job seekers to come and start work. Further, some interviewees pointed out that the strong employment record from particular families in some work places showed the effectiveness of this process. Pastoral employers from the region also told us stories that indicate the significant role of social networks in their engagement of Aboriginal seasonal workers. One spoke of contacting a particular elder in the neighbouring Aboriginal settlement who would then tell younger men that they were needed for work, and who would also tend to hold the young workers accountable if they did not do the job well. Another said that his regular Aboriginal employee would find a substitute if he was not available to work. One other employer, speaking of the challenges of engaging seasonal labour in the region, spoke of his need for ‘one initial contact person who you could go to, to organise local workers – maybe a local person, some sort of leader’.

The Rangeland Journal

333

starting points for getting a job, several Aboriginal interviewees mentioned ‘picking up rubbish’ as an activity that they could do. They indicated their tacit understanding that those people who ‘pick up rubbish’ around their settlement are more likely to get ‘picked’ by non-Aboriginal staff for other work or other responsible roles. Perceptions about job availability Many Aboriginal interviewees perceived a shortage of jobs as the problem, as indicated by the interview excerpts below (representing a selection of comments from various parts of interviews and focus group discussions). ‘[Young people] wait too long, when they go to Jobshop, they have to wait too long, two months, two or three months, four months. It takes too long. ‘Cos there aren’t any jobs available. It takes too long.’ ‘[I can’t get a job as a teacher here because] they already have someone here working at the school. Back home our school had 64 kids [which meant more jobs]. There are only a few jobs.’ ‘No jobs and juggling childcare [makes it hard].’ ‘We need more jobs but what can you do?’ ‘No jobs here. [There are] no jobs at Anmatjere [CGC] because CDEP is finished.’ ‘Not a lot, I don’t think so. Bit of mechanics.’ ‘[There are] not that many jobs [on grape farms]. Just picking, pruners, harvesters, planting trees.’ These Aboriginal views are contrary to those of employers and other stakeholders who indicate there is a strong and growing labour market in the region. This includes jobs in the horticulture industry, for example, even though an interviewee (see last quote) viewed horticulture as not providing many jobs and went on to list as exceptions the same tasks that employers assessed as offering considerable opportunity for employment. The contrasts indicate differences in access to information about available and forthcoming job opportunities, limited social networks between unemployed people and employers, cultural norms of what constitutes appropriate work and gendered work roles for Aboriginal men and women, and constraints among unemployed people in access to physical assets (e.g. low car ownership). Such factors mean that job opportunities in the region tend not to be recognised by Aboriginal people unless they are within settlements where people live and there are no cultural impediments to do the work involved in the jobs. Discussion Guided by the findings on networks, norms and perceptions related to jobs presented in the preceding section, we review and discuss literature on social capital and social networks, to give insight into the case study findings presented above.

Volunteering and being noticed Employed Aboriginal people recommended that the unemployed should volunteer for tasks as a pathway to paid work and should be forthright about registering their interest in work. In discussing

Social capital theory Social capital is a collectively owned asset that can be called upon by its members (Bourdieu 1986). It is manifested in

334

The Rangeland Journal

the structure of relations among persons and among groups of people (Coleman 1990). Like other forms of capital, social capital is productive: its presence facilitates or makes possible certain things such as sharing and employment (Putnam 1993). It explains how some people do better than others, such as in employment, because they are somehow better connected with other people (Burt 2005). Burt defines social capital as advantage available to individuals by the way they are connected to others (Burt 2005). While networks, or ties among a group of people, form the fundamental structures of social capital, norms such as trust, reciprocity and cooperation form its cognitive/ cultural aspects (Bourdieu 1986; Maru 2003; Hunter 2004). Three different types of networks are identified in the social capital literature: bonding, bridging and linking networks (Woolcock and Narayan 2000; Stones and Hughes 2003). Bonding networks are dense or closed ties among immediate family and friends. They help people through their daily lives. In bonding networks, frequent interaction results in people having implicit understandings of how other people in their immediate circle of family and friends will behave: they have a shared culture or way of doing things through commonality of norms or informal institutions. Bridging networks are sparse or weak ties among different groups that make information and resources available across networks. Linking networks are similar to bridging networks except that they refer to vertical social relationships with those in authority or positions of power, which are also useful for securing resources (Hunter 2004). Dense bonding networks are considered to be the core network structure that generates social capital (Coleman 1990). The reasons were that dense networks allow information to pass rapidly while shared norms within dense networks allow the trustworthiness of information to be rapidly assessed. These shared norms also make sanction mechanisms effective: people who might want to behave differently from other members of the social network are discouraged from changing by the expectations and behaviours of other members of the densely bonded group. Studies in business and management organisations recognise closure and brokerage as two complementary network structures, both of which are fundamental to social capital (Burt 2005). Closure refers to clusters of dense social connections: people that share socially significant attributes and interests (such as culture, race, language and profession) are more likely to form densely bonded networks with relatively few or no links to other groups. The non-existence or sparse links between groups leads to social structural holes (Burt 1992). These structural holes provide opportunities for bridging and linking ties across groups to be created by people termed as brokers. Brokerage refers to the bridging relations between densely clustered social networks. Burt (2005) highlights the positional advantage of brokers. By bridging structural holes, brokers accrue more advantage than people in the densely clustered networks that they bridge. The position of brokers means that they have early access to a diversity of information, from each of the densely clustered networks that they bridge. They are also in a position to exercise control over how that information is diffused into each of the networks that they bridge. This provides brokers with opportunities for arbitrage and strategic deployment of information, whether or not those opportunities are used

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

intentionally or deliberately by the broker to seek personal gain or advantage (Burt 2005). Social capital in the Anmatjere region The perception of Aboriginal people in Anmatjere that they have strong social capital (relationships and community) reflects the dense and strong family and kinship ties described by previous studies in the region (Young and Doohan 1989) and in Aboriginal domains elsewhere in remote Australia (Memmott et al. 2006). Such Aboriginal kinship networks do not strictly follow only blood relationships but develop and expand over a person’s lifetime such that ‘as a person grows older, the field of those considered to be relatives increases in breadth and complexity’ (Myers 1991; p. 163). However, this doesn’t mean that all Aboriginal peoples in Anmatjere or elsewhere form a giant, densely connected network. Although similar norms may be shared across Aboriginal groups there are other important, more specific determinants of the basic structures of Aboriginal dense bonding networks. These include family bloodline and adoptive relationships, customary law on who can share information and other resources with whom, place of residence, shared occupancy of a house, and regular interaction in shared social events such as sport and attendance in ceremonial events. At a conceptual level, Gerritsen and Straton (2007) term these ‘primary trust networks’. The confluence of these various Aboriginal networks means that social capital of Aboriginal people in the Anmatjere region comprises several intersecting densely bonded networks that are only weakly linked to the core networks of non-Aboriginal people in the region. Network clusters A1, A2 and A3 in Fig. 3 reflect these observations on Aboriginal dense bonding networks. The grey, relatively less dense network reflects observation on ties among non-Aboriginal people in the region. Role of densely bonded social networks in maintaining cultural norms There is a close relationship between dense networks and cultural norms in that people who have strong social relationships tend to have shared ways of doing things. Dense and strong networks that tend to closure are maintained through exercise of some regularised behaviour or norms. In turn it is those dense social networks that maintain and perpetuate distinctive cultural norms and rules. Dense bonding networks are thus essential for maintaining cultural identity. They provide a structure to exercise regularised behaviour or norms such as sharing, customary laws and even language. They generate information and practices that are easily accessed, reinforced and stored by members. By increasing visibility, dense networks prevent non-confirming behaviours and facilitate enforcement of informal as well as formal sanctions. As noted by interviewees and focus group participants, sharing is one strong cultural norm that is widely practiced among Aboriginal people in Anmatjere. This reflects other observations from remote Aboriginal Australia, that sharing, (which is more appropriately termed ‘demand sharing’ since it is not entirely driven by generosity and choice) is a deeply embedded social practice through which Aboriginal people establish, validate and maintain their relationships with others (Peterson 1993, 2005).

Supporting brokers for improved Aboriginal employment

Fig. 3. Sparse bridging and dense bonding networks (A1 A2 and A3 represent Aboriginal dense network clusters; nA is a non-Aboriginal employer network; star-shaped nodes represent Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal brokers).

Legitimised sharing within densely bonding networks is useful for spreading risks, particularly in highly variable climatic and institutional environments. When they are reciprocated, kinship relations are important conduits for social and financial support during difficult times and are far more predictable than the labour market (Schwab 1995). They facilitate reciprocal obligations and exchange of food, consumer goods, cash and services (Martin 1995). Peterson and Taylor (2003) characterise this sharing as having a ‘central constitutive role’ in the Aboriginal ‘moral economy’ that reallocates, and distributes resources and restricts the accumulation of material wealth and income. Negative impacts of densely bonded Aboriginal social networks for engagement with employment The dense Aboriginal bonding networks and norms, while a source of social capital, may potentially have negative features that constrain Aboriginal employment in mainstream economic activities and discourage Aboriginal people from taking up paid work. Drawing from the results of interviews and focus group discussions with employed Aboriginal people, we observe three implications of the bonding network structure in the Anmatjere region. First, Aboriginal people who undertake paid work and adhere to cultural norms of acquiescence to relatives’ demands to share their income may end up financially little better off than their nonworking counterparts, at least in the short term. This happens because reciprocity cannot be achieved within the dense network given the prevailing disparity between the few who engage in income-generating activities and the many of whom do not. Furthermore, a paid worker who in the course of their work has access to valuable items such as vehicles and equipment may

The Rangeland Journal

335

experience demands from relatives to share those items. Apart from the personal hassle of dealing with ongoing requests, the worker must balance the risk of social ostracism if they refuse against the risk of jeopardising their employment if they acquiesce. Similar observations have been made by other authors (e.g. Woolcock and Narayan 2000) about situations where internal demands for strong loyalty in dense and closed networks siphon off hard-won assets or foster a climate of ridicule towards efforts to study and work hard. These situations strip incentives for individuals to take up employment and behave differently from the rest of their social group. Second, dense networks that maintain traditional norms may come in conflict with market-based workplace norms. Aboriginal kinship networks, like any dense social network, exert a strong influence on individuals to conform to customary laws and group norms. Customary practices, such as extended sorry business, can directly conflict with employer requirements and workplace norms, particularly during time-critical seasonal work. Although not as densely connected as Aboriginal people, the Anmatjere region employers, who generally are non-Aboriginal people, also form a social network that shares similar norms about work (see Fig. 3 – the network cluster in grey colour). For some of these employers the experience and anticipation of conflicts between Aboriginal norms and their own, and associated economic losses for business, have influenced them against hiring Aboriginal people. Labour market discrimination against Aboriginal Australians has been noted by many authors (Daly 1991; Hunter and Daly 1998; Hunter 2005). Discrimination is more likely to occur in the process of securing and retaining employment than in the wage-setting process (Hunter 2004). Employer practices are perpetuated through the clash of values and norms that result from both employers and Aboriginal unemployed people operating in dense social networks with very few inter-linkages. This situation helps to account for the perception of Aboriginal interviewees in the Anmatjere region that there are very few jobs, in contrast to non-Aboriginal interviewees and stakeholders who perceive an abundance of work opportunities. Third, while our findings indicate that Aboriginal people in the Anmatjere region depend heavily on networks for access to employment opportunities, densely bonded networks can be quite ineffective for this purpose. Job searching involves searching for new information. However, dense networks often hold redundant information and tend to isolate members from new information. Weak ties or ties less activated, that are not part of one’s dense network but are connected to other clusters of networks, have a better chance of receiving new employment-related information and thus can act to a job-seeker’s advantage (Granovetter 1973). These observations are important given that Hunter and Gray (2006) found that Aboriginal people rely disproportionately on friends and relatives as a source of information about jobs. However, Hunter and Gray (2006) doubted the effectiveness of these contacts in securing work in the mainstream job market because most of the friends and relatives of unemployed Aboriginal people are themselves unemployed. Even when networks include employed people, these are generally in lowpaid and low-status jobs rather than positions of influence, and hence are of less use to job seekers. Similarly, although some of the employed Aboriginal interviewees in the Anmatjere

336

The Rangeland Journal

region stated that they can introduce unemployed people to their bosses, many are not in a position to influence employment outcomes. Brokers in cross-cultural settings Brokers play a significant role in facilitating Aboriginal employment in the Anmatjere region. Brokers in the region comprise the few Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people who have managed to build ties that bridge the Aboriginal and nonAboriginal clusters. Bridging has occurred either through their employment and lived experiences in cross-cultural settings, through their visibility as trusted elders, or as people linked to both clusters through marriage (see Fig. 3, the links and nodes between the black and grey coloured networks). Whether through education, employment or other mechanisms, these brokers have developed in-depth understanding and ways of operating under both Aboriginal cultural norms and the non-Aboriginal norms of workplace culture. Brokers in the Anmatjere region, as noted in the findings above, go beyond making information about jobs available to people in their social networks. They are active in selecting or ‘picking’ Aboriginal people for jobs. Picking and assigning an unemployed Aboriginal person to a job may be influenced by many factors such as the relationship between the broker and the unemployed Aboriginal person as well as accessibility of the workplace to the unemployed person. However, to maintain trust within the social networks that they link, in all cases brokers need to make effective judgments about the suitability of the job to the person and of the person to the job. Some brokers in the Anmatjere region have shown innovation in doing this. For example, they have assigned and rotated two or more people to a job to manage risks arising from conflicts between the person and the job role resulting from clashes between Aboriginal cultural and workplace norms or other factors. Brokerage in cross-cultural settings such as the Anmatjere region is not easy. The broker position is liable to stress and burnout from excessive demands to share and offer a variety of services for others as well as from managing expectations from two, at times conflicting, sets of norms. This is in contrast to the portrayal of brokers in social capital theory, informed by research in corporate business and management domains, as the people who extract great advantage from their position in bridging network clusters (Burt 2005). The contrast is explained by differences between social networks in business and management, where various densely bonded networks of friends and associates can be expected to share the same ontology about life and lifestyle and many of the same values. This contrasts with the Anmatjere region where people within densely bonded Aboriginal networks and the less densely bonded employer networks have quite different ontologies and values about work and livelihoods. Employment is an action arena where the different values and norms meet and can conflict, forcing people to make decisions to subdue one norm to the other. The role of the employment broker includes mediating and resolving conflicts among values and norms. This accounts for it being a stressful role in the Anmatjere region. This insight from the region contributes to social capital theory’s as yet undeveloped understandings of the particular characteristics of brokers in cross-cultural settings.

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

The role of networks and brokers in improving Aboriginal employment Due recognition needs to be given to the importance of understanding social capital, as expressed in densely bonded networks and broker roles, for addressing Aboriginal employment in remote regions. Often programs on Aboriginal employment focus on factors such as capacity building, and a variety of policies and rules to push and motivate people into searching for and taking up jobs. While building skills and improving job readiness through appropriate training and institutions are important, it is also critical to pay attention to the strategies that Aboriginal people initiate and use in searching for and linking up with jobs. Aboriginal people rely more heavily on personal connections in job searching than on other job search methods, possibly due to low levels of literacy and the high regard and trust they place in established social relationships. However, not all personal relationships are valuable in accessing employment. In the Anmatjere region, there are few people who have brokerage relationships, that is, relationships of trust with both unemployed Aboriginal people and with potential employers who pick and assign people into jobs. While our research in the Anmatjere region identifies the importance of these brokers in the job search strategies of the region’s Aboriginal people, we observe that the number of brokers is too few for the strategies to be effective, as evidenced by the prevalence in the region of lots of unemployed people and lots of jobs. Developing a more detailed understanding of brokers is important to facilitating Aboriginal employment in mainstream economic activities. Ethnographic research would be valuable to generate a nuanced understanding of how people undertake brokerage, and their motivations, incentives and disincentives for undertaking the broker role. Further, because brokerage in cross-cultural settings is challenging, encouraging and supporting brokers is important to sustaining employment outcomes. Recruiting new brokers is essential for filling structural holes created when some leave a region for various reasons, including stress and burnout. It is also important in situations where densely bonding networks may have no effective bridging ties with government and private employers (as shown in Fig. 3, A3 cluster). Working through social network structures for employment outcomes, as well as for other services, can be expected to reduce transaction costs and promote effective engagement between service providers and Aboriginal people (Gerritsen and Straton 2007). We speculate that a sufficient increase in the number of brokers linking unemployed Aboriginal people to employment opportunities may lead to threshold changes in Aboriginal cultural norms in remote regions. These could include a reduction in excessive demand sharing, which would enable Aboriginal people to better engage in workplace cultures and still maintain other cultural norms that underpin their identity. Modelling of change in social network structures with changing demographics and various scenarios for employment would contribute to understanding such social change processes. Conclusions In some remote areas such as the Anmatjere region of central Australia, a labour market situation exists where many job

Supporting brokers for improved Aboriginal employment

vacancies are filled by labour migrants even though many local people, mostly Aboriginal people, are unemployed or not engaged in the labour force. Structural factors, such as lack of appropriate skills, and behavioural factors, such as lack of motivation to work and welfare dependency, have attracted significant attention in explaining this situation. However, little attention has been paid to the role of social networks in facilitating or hindering Aboriginal employment. In the Anmatjere region, dense bonding networks with family and kin are important to maintain customary law and traditional livelihood activities. Further, norms such as sharing and attending ceremonial and sorry business practices contribute to defining Aboriginal identity. The need for employed Aboriginal people to also comply with the very different norms prevalent in workplaces generates disincentives to Aboriginal people taking up employment. Aboriginal people in the Anmatjere region depend heavily on social networks to find jobs and indeed to carry out many other livelihood activities. This echoes social network theory, informed by research findings from many other very different contexts. Sparse and weak bridging ties with potential employers are relied on by Aboriginal people for linking with jobs. These are, however, too few and thus not yet effective in addressing the prevalent situation in the region where large numbers of Aboriginal people who are unemployed or not in the labour force co-exist with relatively large local demand for labour. The structure of social networks contributes to explaining this situation. There are relatively few people in broker roles, linking between the dense networks of Aboriginal people and the networks of employers. Unlike the situation in other contexts, such as corporate and managerial settings, the advantages to people of being in the broker role are not readily apparent. The role is stressful in the cross-cultural settings of the Anmatjere region and similar areas of remote Australia where Aboriginal unemployment is high, since it involves cross-cultural brokering of job information, mediating and inventing arrangements that accommodate both Aboriginal and workplace norms. These observations have theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, social capital and network theories on brokerage need to be informed by better understandings about the challenging roles of cross-cultural brokers. Practically, in order to improve Aboriginal employment in remote regions, it is important to take stock of and recognise the role of brokers, provide them with support to reduce the stress and burnout that their role entails, and increase the number of brokers. Acknowledgements We are grateful for the participation and support of local people during our research in the Anmatjere region and that of Centrefarm Aboriginal Horticulture Ltd, Northern Territory Government, Central Land Council, Tangentyere Job Shop, the (former) Anmatjere Community Government Council and Central Desert Shire Council. We also acknowledge valued contributions by Hannah Hueneke, Robyn Grey-Gardner, and other members of the CSIRO project team and by community-based research workers, and helpful critique on a draft of this article by Silva Larson and Anne Leitch. We are grateful for constructive reviews and edits by two anonymous reviewers. The research reported here was supported by funding from the Australian Government Cooperative Research Centre Program through the Desert

The Rangeland Journal

337

Knowledge CRC (2003–10); the views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of Desert Knowledge CRC or its participants.

References ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2006a). ‘Census of Population and Housing: Census Collection District by Indigenous Status and Labour Force Status.’ Cat. No. 6287.0. (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 21 March 2011). ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2006b). ‘Population Characteristics, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 2006.’ Cat. No. 4713. (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 21 March 2011). ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2007a). ‘2006 Census Quick Stats: Anmatjere (CGC) (Indigenous Area).’ (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 30 November 2008). ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2007b). ‘2006 Census Quick Stats: Anmatjere (CGC) (Local Government Area).’ (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 30 November 2008). ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2007c). ‘2006 Census Quick Stats: Apatula (Indigenous Region).’ (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 30 November 2008). ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2009). ‘Population Characteristics, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians 2009.’ Cat. No. 6287.0. (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Available at: www.abs.gov.au (accessed 21 March 2011). Altman, J. C. (2000). ‘The Economic Status of Indigenous Australians.’ CAEPR Discussion Series. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, The Australian National University: Canberra) Arafura Resources Limited (2011). Nolans Project. Fact sheet 02. Available at: http://arafuraresources.com.au/images/facts/ (accessed 23 March 2011). Australian National Training Authority (2004). Australia’s National Strategy for Vocational Education and Training 2004–2010. Available at: www. anta.gov.au/dapStrategy.asp (accessed 20 March 2011). Bourdieu, P. (1986). ‘The Forms of Capital.’ (Greenwood Press: New York.) Burt, R. S. (1992). ‘Structural Holes: the Social Structure of Competition.’ (Harvard University Press: Cambridge.) Burt, R. (2000). The network structure of social capital. In: ‘Research in Organizational Behavior’. (Eds R. I. Sutton and B. M. Staw.) pp. 345–423. (CT7 JAI Press: Greenwich.) Burt, R. S. (2005). ‘Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital.’ (Oxford University Press: Oxford.) Chambers, R., and Conway, G. R. (1992). ‘Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st Century.’ IDS Discussion Paper 296. (Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex: Brighton.) Coleman, J. S. (1990). ‘Foundation of Social Theory.’ (Harvard University Press: Cambridge.) Creed, P. A., and Watson, T. (2003). Age, gender, psychological wellbeing and the impact of losing the latent and manifest benefits of employment in unemployed people. Australian Journal of Psychology 55, 95–103. doi:10.1080/00049530412331312954 Daly, A. E. (1991). ‘The Employment of Aboriginal Australians in the Labour Market.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper 16. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) Davies, J., and Maru, Y. (2010). Living to work or working to live: intercultural understanding of livelihoods. Dialogue 29, 18–37. Davies, J., Maru, Y.M., Hueneke H., Grey-Gardner, R., and Chewings, V. (2010). ‘Outback Livelihoods: Employment, Sustainable Livelihoods and Development in Anmatjere Region, Central Australia.’ Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre Research Report 61. (Ninti One Ltd: Alice Springs.)

338

The Rangeland Journal

Y. T. Maru and J. Davies

Davies, J., White, J., Wright, A., Maru, Y., and LaFlamme, M. (2008). Applying the sustainable livelihoods approach in Australian desert Aboriginal development. The Rangeland Journal 30, 55–65. doi:10.1071/ RJ07038 DIMIA (2005). Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Shared Responsibility Agreements. Available at: www. Indigenous.gov.au/sra/kit/table.pdf (accessed 21 March 2011). Fisher, S. (2002). A livelihood less ordinary: applying the sustainable livelihoods approach in the Australian Indigenous context. Available at: www.icat.org.au/media/Research/work%20and%20livelihoods/ Livelihood-less-ordinary.pdf (accessed 6 February 2010). Gerritsen, R., and Straton, A. (2007). Coping with a tragedy of the Aboriginal common. In: ‘Sustainable Resource Use: Institutional Dynamics and Economics’. (Eds A. Smajgl and S. Larson.) pp. 162–176. (Earthscan: London.) Glaser, B. G. (1992). ‘Emergence vs Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis.’ (Sociology Press: Mill Valley, CA.) Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. L. (1968). ‘The Discovery of Grounded Theory.’ (Aldine: Chicago, IL.) Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78, 1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469 Hughes, H., and Hughes, M. (2010). ‘Indigenous Employment, Unemployment and Labour Force Participation: Facts for Evidence Based Policies.’ CIS Policy Monograph 107. (The Centre for Independent Studies: St Leonards.) Hunter, B. H. (2004). ‘Indigenous Australians in the Contemporary Labour Market.’ Cat. No. 2052.0. (Australian Bureau of Statistics: Canberra.) Hunter, B. H. (2005). The role of discrimination and the exclusion of Indigenous people from the labour market. In: ‘Culture, Economy and Governance in Aboriginal Australia’. (Eds D. Austin-Broos and G. Macdonald.) pp. 79–94. (University of Sydney Press: Sydney.) Hunter, B. H., and Daly, A. E. (1998). ‘Labour Market Incentives Among Indigenous Australians: the Cost of Job Loss Versus the Gains from Employment.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 159. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) Hunter, B. H., and Gray, M. C. (2006). The effectiveness of Indigenous job search strategies. The Economic Record 82, 1–10. doi:10.1111/j.14754932.2006.00289.x Hunter, B. H., Kinfu, Y., and Taylor, J. (2003). ‘The Future of Indigenous Work: Forecasts of Labour Force Status to 2011.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 261. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) Lin, N. (1984). Social resources and instrumental action. In: ‘Social Structure and Network Analysis’. (Eds P. V. Marsden and V. Lin.) pp. 131–145. (Sage Publications: Beverly Hills.) Martin, D. F. (1995). ‘Money, Business and Culture: Issues for Aboriginal Economic Policy.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 101. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) Maru, Y. (2003). An integrated approach to regional dynamics systems analysis. In: ‘Options for Understanding Regional Dynamics in Northern Australia: Regional Modelling Scoping Study Project Final Report’. (Ed. D. M. Stafford Smith.) pp. 71–80. (Tropical Savannas CRC: Darwin.) Memmott, P., Long, S., and Thomson, L. (2006). ‘Indigenous Mobility in Remote and Rural Australia.’ Final Report No. 90. (Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute: Brisbane.)

Muller, J., Hicks, R., and Winocur, S. (1993). The effects of employment and unemployment on psychological well-being in Australian clerical workers: gender differences. Australian Journal of Psychology 45, 103–108. doi:10.1080/00049539308259126 Myers, F. R. (1991). ‘Pintupi Country, Pintupi Self: Sentiment, Place and Politics Among Western Desert Aborigines.’ (University of California Press: Berkeley.) Peterson, N. (1993). Demand sharing – reciprocity and the pressure for generosity among foragers. American Anthropologist 95, 860–874. doi:10.1525/aa.1993.95.4.02a00050 Peterson, N. (2005). What can pre-colonial and frontier economies tell us about engagement with the real economy? In: ‘Indigenous Life Projects and the Conditions of Development’. (Eds D. Austin-Broos and G. Macdonald.) pp. 7–19. (Sydney University Press: Sydney.) Peterson, N., and Taylor, J. (2003). The modernising of the Indigenous domestic moral economy. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 4, 105–122. doi:10.1080/14442210310001706407 Productivity Commission (2009). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators. Available at: www.pc.gov.au/gsp/reports/indigenous (accessed 20 May 2010). Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The American Prospect 13, 35–42. Schwab, R. G. (1995). ‘The Calculus of Reciprocity: Principles and Implications of Aboriginal Sharing.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 10. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) Scoones, I. (1998). ‘Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis. IDS Working Paper 72.’ (Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex: Brighton.) Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Employment, social justice and societal well-being. International Labour Review 141, 9–29. doi:10.1111/j.1564-913X.2002. tb00229.x Stones, W., and Hughes, J. (2003). ‘Social Capital: Empirical Meaning and Measurement Validity.’ (Australian Institute of Family Studies: Melbourne.) Taylor, J. (2003). ‘Indigenous Economic Futures in the Northern Territory: The Demographic and Socio-economic Background.’ CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 246. (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra.) UK DFID (United Kingdom Department for International Development) (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. Available at: www. livelihoods.org/info/info_guidancesheets.html (accessed 5 April 2007). Waters, L. E., and Moore, K. A. (2001). Coping with economic deprivation during unemployment. Journal of Economic Psychology 22, 461–482. doi:10.1016/S0167-4870(01)00046-0 Waters, L. E., and Moore, K. A. (2002). Reducing latent deprivation during unemployment: the role of meaningful leisure activity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 75, 15–32. doi:10.1348/ 096317902167621 Woolcock, M., and Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy. The World Bank Research Observer 15, 225–249. Young, E., and Doohan, K. (1989). ‘Mobility for Survival: a Process Analysis of Aboriginal Population Movement in Central Australia.’ (ANU Press: Darwin.)

www.publish.csiro.au/journals/trj