A Case Study of Compulsory Income Management Programmes in Australia – An article by Philip Mendes
The compulsory income management or welfare quarantining programmes introduced by Australian governments over the past 11 years have provoked major public contention. One key source of conflict has been around whether these programmes have been introduced via co-design processes enabling the consent of local communities, or alternatively whether they are merely top-down programmes imposed with minimum consultation on specific geographical sites. This article argues that most consultation processes have been limited and tokenistic, and rarely included actual income management participants. An alternative bottom-up community development process is proposed based on the principles such as social inclusion, participation and empowerment.
SOURCE: Mendes, Philip. “Top-down Paternalism Versus Bottom-up Community Development: A Case Study of Compulsory Income Management Programmes in Australia.” The International Journal of Community and Social Development, Vol 1, Issue 1, 2019.
BROTHERHOOD STAFF – please contact the LIBRARY if you would like full text access to this article
OTHER USERS – see this LINK to publisher’s website
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
The Brotherhood of St Laurence acknowledges and recognises the Traditional Owners of the land upon which we live and work, and we pay our respects to their Elders both past and present
Produced by the librarians at the Brotherhood of St Laurence in Melbourne, Australia