Residents of Sydney’s north shore, northern beaches and the Hills District enjoy higher incomes, better health and a safer environment compared to those in greater western Sydney and parts of western New South Wales, a new wellbeing index has found.
Using only data from publicly available sources, the SGS Australia wellbeing index is the first to rank regions according to both economic and social quality of life indicators.
An interactive dashboard allows 334 regions to be compared on seven indicators of wellbeing, including economy, income and wealth, employment knowledge and skills, housing, health, equality and environment.
Overall, residents of the Australian Capital Territory had the highest levels of wellbeing, followed by Sydney and Melbourne. The index shows a clear divide between the 17.3 million Australians who live in capital cities compared to 8.4 million in regional areas.
Unsurprisingly, inner city regions with strong economies and high levels of home ownership performed well on the index, however, so did some regional areas which scored lower on economic metrics but higher on health, environment and quality of life.
Gosford, the Illawarra region, and Kinglake scored highly on equality and environmental factors
Gosford and the Illawarra region which flank the Sydney metropolitan area, and Kinglake in regional Victoria bucked the lower scoring regional trend, scoring highly on equality and environmental factors.
The index reveals a large disparity between the highest and lowest performing suburbs in state capital cities.
While Sydney’s northern suburbs were among the highest performing regions, the greater western suburbs of Mount Druitt, Fairfield and Canterbury, which performed low on education and access to employment, and on environment, had the lowest levels of wellbeing.
“Where you live within a city strongly influences your level of well-being and how you experience society, the economy and the environment,” SGS principal Julian Szafraniec said.
While wealthier regions performed better overall, some had lower equality, community and work-life balance outcomes.
In some regions of Perth where a lot of residents are employed in the mining sector, the fly in fly out nature of their employment means that they work long hours and are less connected to their local community. They also scored poorly on the gender balance of domestic household labour, which is measured in the equality indicator.
“Rockingham and Mandurah scored low on wellbeing and quality and gender balance – because they are the source of so many FIFO workers,” SGS economist Dr Marcia Keegan explained.
“Having a single income earner in the household can make the family more vulnerable to shocks – say if the sole income earner is unable to work.”
The index is the first analysis to consider wellbeing in a broader sense than purely economic terms that offers insights on a regional level – using the ABS’ 3A statistical division.
The inclusion of health, environment and social equality indicators “takes a more holistic view of what creates happier, healthier, more sustainable and resilient lives,” according to the SGS report that accompanies the dashboard.
The index allows for the weightings of the wellbeing indicators to be shifted according to priority. This will allow policymakers to concentrate on a single issue affecting a region, such as housing, to identify areas of inequality or additional need.
Policymakers and investors can examine local conditions rather than relying on statewide data to make investments and other decisions based on community needs.
“We are hoping that it can inform policy and investment decisions across the public and private sector to understand some of the key issues affecting a particular location,” Dr Keegan said.
The index could be used to evaluate the benefits of a particular policy, program or infrastructure development beyond simply economic growth and job creation, she added.