Demography.
Demographic and residential patterns in Australian cities in general
and in Adelaide in particular are characterized by several unique points:
1. Economic and social classes are usually distributed in a sector pattern,
as opposed to the classic concentric ring theory. For example, wealthier
citizens will live on one side of town, and the poorer people will
be on the other side of town, not necessarily at a different proximity
from the city center.
2. Adelaide has had suburbs since the 1840's; that is to say, outlying
communities that were dependent on the city itself for most of their services
and jobs. However, the phenomenon of the suburb in Australia obviously appeared
well before the automobile, so they tend to be more compact and gridded
than American made-for- the-car suburbs.
3. In Adelaide, there is an unusually high degree of ownership of homes:
by 1900, half of the Australian population owned their own home thanks to
cheap, abundant land and relatively high wages for everyone. In 1991, 38.9%
of housing was owner-occupied, and an additional 29.7% was in the process
of being purchased by the owner. The high degree of ownership means that
residential patterns are especially meaningful, since a greater degree of
choice goes into where people live. Adelaide also displays generally low
density in residential neighborhoods. Further, density does not decrease
with distance from city center because of the presence of economic/social
sectors rather than rings. |
Population growth from 1911-1971; the top line is total
population growth in all of Australia; the fourth line from the top is Adelaide's
growth during this period, the third largest city for most of the century. |
|
Population Growth.
Australia's population has grown steadily since its foundation. From
1947-1971, it experienced what is known as the "Long Boom," when
all Australian cities began to grow more rapidly. During these years alone,
Adelaide grew 120% (to 843,000 people), and overseas immigration accounted
for 55% of this growth. The Long Boom was also partly thanks to the demise
of the "White Australia" policy, which had previously put harsh
restrictions on immigration from certain foreign countries to Australia.
Urban Primacy.
The metropolitan primacy of Australia's capital cities within their respective
states has been reinforced throughout history. By 1891, 49% of Australians
lived in cities/towns of 2500 or more people. In 1851, Adelaide already
was home to 28% of South Australia's total population, and that percentage
has steadily climbed throughout the decades to 59% in 1947, 72% in 1971,
and 73.1% in 1991, to become the capital city with the highest degree of
primacy (followed closely by Perth with 72% and Melbourne with 71.2%). The
chart to the left (click to enlarge) details the population growth and percentages
for all the mainland capitals from 1851-1991. |
Geography
of Power.
While Adelaide and other Australian cities are often praised for their
egalitarian way of life, as any capitalist city there are clearly neighborhoods
that are nicer than others, a fact which is reflected in income data.
The maps to the right (click to enlarge) show that in the decade between
1976-1986, the poorer northern suburbs of Salisbury and Elizabeth only got
poorer, while the wealthier suburbs towards the Adelaide Hills only got
wealthier. We can see on the lower map that the center city also increased
in higher-income residents, indicating gentrification.
Elizabeth is approximately 25 km north of Adelaide city, and was established
by the South Australia Housing Trust years ago. Now it has a 24% unemployment
rate (that's 4 times higher than the unemployment rate of the more affluent
suburbs), unusually low female workforce participation, and a low car ownership
(despite the suburban train system in Adelaide, it is now primarily a driving
city). Evidently these residential patterns suggest that, while many neighborhoods
are fairly middle-class and static, there are definitely locations where
the rich are getting richer, and the poor, poorer.
To some extent, the geography of power was built into Adelaide's planning
as well, with East Terrace being the best example of this. "The shape
of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide were fundamentally affected by the powerful
within these cities for whom the ownership and control of land was a central
aspect to their accumulation of wealth (Kilmartin p.98)." |
|