Respondents to the 2002 NATSISS aged 15–64 years were asked to indicate the main reason for their last move. Answers to this question are grouped into four broad categories: housing, family, employment and accessibility (to services), and while this provides for some comparison with findings from the former ABS Internal Migration Survey, this is only true for the housing and employment categories. From Table 5.3, it is clear that factors associated with family and housing dominate in the calculus of mobility decision-making. Among the family reasons provided, the single largest sub-category was a desire to be close to family and friends. This is consistent with repeated findings from case studies of Indigenous mobility that stress the importance of kin location in shaping the frequency and pattern of mobility (Gale & Wundersitz 1982; Taylor & Bell 2004: 20–21; Young & Doohan 1989).
Table 5.3. Reasons for last move by age group: 2002 NATSISS
|
Age group % |
||||||
|
Reason for last move |
15–24 |
25–34 |
35–44 |
45–64 |
All |
Estimated population (no.) |
|
Family |
45.5 |
35.4 |
30.8 |
38.2 |
38.2 |
32 400 |
|
Housing |
25.4 |
39.8 |
38.3 |
33.3 |
33.3 |
28 400 |
|
Employment |
12.6 |
9.2 |
13.3 |
10.9 |
10.9 |
9300 |
|
Accessibility |
4.4 |
2.4 |
2.6 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
2800 |
|
Other |
11.7 |
12.9 |
15.0 |
14.0 |
14.0 |
11 900 |
|
Don’t know |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.0 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
200 |
Source: Customised cross-tabulations from the 2002 NATSISS MURF
As for housing, once again the impact of reliance on rental housing has been highlighted in the literature as an important factor in stimulating Indigenous mobility (Gray 2004), although the results of the NATSISS multi-variate analysis suggest that this is especially so for those in private rental accommodation. The overall level of housing reported reasons (33%) is similar to the 29 per cent reported by the general population in 1987, although in the latter case this was predominantly for home purchase (ABS 1987: 13). Of particular note in Table 5.3 is the fact that the estimated numbers moving for employment reasons is relatively low, although this is not much lower than the 14 per cent reported for the total population in the 1987 ABS survey. Likewise, movement to access services appears very limited, which is surprising given the spatial separation of many Indigenous population clusters from basic services such as high schools, hospitals, banks, shops, and government offices (Taylor 2002). Although the category ‘other’ is equal in size to employment and access reasons combined, it is not clear what this category comprises.