|
The five big trends could increase inequality here
We’ve been hearing a lot about inequality lately, as the fuel behind the referendum outcome in Britain and the election results in America. So it’s alarming to realise that many of the trends outlined in the LGNZ paper 'The 2050 challenge: future proofing our communities' have significant potential to increase inequality in New Zealand. The LGNZ paper identifies more urbanisation, changing demographics and employment, automation and climate change as the five big issues we are likely to be tackling over the next 30 years. Trend 1 - urbanisation Large cities will expand and populations in many regional centres and rural areas will contract. Trend 2 - changing demographics In just over 30 years, four out of every 10 people will be at least 65 years old - including almost everyone who is reading this article! If most of us stay in our existing homes there is likely to be even more pressure on housing. As well as being older, there will also be a much higher proportion of Maori, Asian and Pasifika people in New Zealand. Trend 3 - more flexible employment arrangements Our communities are increasingly moving away from ‘9 to 5’ permanent employment. One third of New Zealand’s working population now work in jobs that are not salaried full time employment For half of these people, this is a great outcome because it offers them freedom and flexibility. For the other half it’s just a big dose of uncertainty and financial stress. Trend 4 – automation of existing jobs Parents are even less likely to understand what their children do at work than is currently the case. Automation of up to 46 percent of existing jobs has been predicted by some, meaning people will need different skills in order to find work. The impact of these changes is likely to be felt much more severely by people in lower-skilled, lower-paid jobs. It will also have an uneven impact across the country, depending on the industries which become the most automated. Trend 5 - climate change Individuals and communities will be differently affected by climate change, particularly sea-level rise, changes in rainfall, and the occurrence of natural disasters. Council responses to these trends What roles will local government have in addressing these uneven impacts, and helping people to adapt to the new reality? Councils have a clear mandate to be involved in planning and infrastructure provision related to urbanisation, as well as adaption to climate change. They will need to decide whether communities as a whole contribute to managing these impacts or whether a direct user pays approach should apply. It is less clear what role councils could have in helping people to adapt to more flexible working conditions and automation of existing jobs. It may be that the main role for councils will be as a strong voice to central government on the impacts of the changing work environment on their communities. As demographics change, there’s even more risk that the interests of the 40% of people over 65 years’ old will carry more weight around council tables than the concerns of younger people. After all, older people have more time to make submissions, attend meetings, and will be a significant proportion of the home-owning ratepayers of an area. The LGNZ paper notes that conventional consultation models are unlikely to capture representative input and new engagement strategies are needed. I imagine social media will become increasingly important and provides an opportunity for councils to be more connected to people whose concerns would not otherwise be represented. What do you think?
7 Comments
17/11/2016 04:04:46 pm
One would think electronically and via social media. But having said that the 'e-noise' is already becoming deafening so I don't know how your get your message to the top of peoples 'quick scan'.
Reply
17/11/2016 04:50:20 pm
Thanks for your comment, Linda. I know what you mean about the e-noise! In an earlier draft of this blog I talked about the use of Facebook groups, as I have found that a good way to cut through the noise to the things I really want to be updated about. I deleted reference to Facebook groups because I figure technology and social media will move on a lot over 30 years!
Reply
Rob Harris
25/11/2016 08:59:02 am
The five key issues are okay as far as it goes. I would however change one, that of climate change and put in its place natural events, trends and cycles, as this includes a fuller range of malign and positive influences arising from the natural world and our interaction with it. Secondly, using alternative means is essential, but we need to test participants giving input against reality, i.e. facts and constraints. The use of reference groups is one option. They ideally would be inclusive and balance 'politicos' against others who are naturally less vociferous. Electronic and in person panels can be called in for everything from the most 'blue sky' topics to specific matters like what recreational facilities are provided and where. Outcomes from this input can then go outwards for wider comment. This in-depth approach could improve the quality of input and provide more guidance to the statutory decision-makers. Something lacking in most western style democracies.
Reply
25/11/2016 09:58:45 am
Thanks for your comments Rob.
Reply
Rob Harris
25/11/2016 10:15:43 am
It would depend on the topic, but for some it would clearly require the agency or council to actively recruit from a database where interests are signaled. Database membership would be actively advertised in various media to pick up the requisite range of people. For some matters for example, anything requiring knowledge of finance or ecology, or natural hazard response or underground infrastructure the council might need to supply experts or community figures to facilitate, some of those internal, some external. The facilitation is important as some people just yammer in the absence of good facilitation and a predominance of certain interests and known views is also not ideal. Conflicts of interest should be declared as part of an initial housekeeping for each participation exercise. Room for comment that identifies related issues outside the main issue or issues should be available to participants and room to disagree also.
Debra Bradley
25/11/2016 10:45:45 am
Thanks Rob. Do you think if people could see their feedback was being taken seriously, and influencing policy development, that this would be enough to motivate people to take part?
Reply
Robert Harris
25/11/2016 10:56:13 am
Yes, that is the usual psychology. It isn't a 100% cure for disinterest as there are many other factors, but feeling involved and part of a process instead of external to it is an essential ingredient for democracy at any scale.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorDebra Bradley Categories
All
|