You can't expect a 15 minute conversation with a journalist to be published as anything more than a few condensed sentences (its just the nature of the media) so I thought this may help clarify my opinion on the matter should there be any clarification needed!
For those of you unfamiliar with fly-in fly-out or FIFO, it is a work roster system for workers employed on remote mines throughout Australia. In Western Australia, it is particularly common given this state’s dependence on the mining sector to fill its economic bucket.
The most recent Wheatbelt Development Commission strategic plan talks about the opportunities of FIFO for rural towns in a 200km arc around Perth.
In a SWOT analysis of the region it lists under opportunities to;
“Capitalise on fly-in fly-out industry associated with the State’s mining industry by offering necessary services and alternative lifestyle options.”, and “Population growth”
One would imagine that the thinking is that the former would feed the latter.
FIFO does indeed offer this region close to Perth the potential for increased population and I certainly wouldn’t begrudge any FIFO worker the opportunity to live in a rural town in this beautiful region and nor should they be discouraged. However, I do believe that the towns in this region need to ensure they can handle the changes that a large FIFO worker population would bring (good and bad) and think carefully about the sustainability of such an approach and the resilience of their community should things change rapidly in the future (increased levels of unemployment in the mining industry for example).
It’s certain that attracting FIFO workers and their families would increase economic activity in a rural town as the population builds and new housing and services are required but it also has the potential to bring with it other issues that may not have been considered. I’ll discuss these a little later.
From a Living Communities viewpoint we would say that, although attracting FIFO workers, or any other particular segment of the population for that matter, to live in your town would indeed help grow the local economy, towns should place their first priority in building a strong community with a clear purpose or vision to attract residents, rather than merely building a population for rapid economic benefit and hope it leads to a better community.
Are we against increased population in rural towns? Certainly not – for many communities it is exactly what they need and want. However, a population doesn’t necessarily need to be larger but it certainly MUST be diverse. Diversity of age, diversity of cultural background, diversity of ideas and diversity of skills are the difference between a flash in the pan development and a long-term resilient community.
Mere growth in size does not in itself deliver an increase in well being for the residents of a community (1). However, diversity delivers the ability to solve complex problems that communities in rural Australia are faced with all the time that inevitably affect the well-being of residents. So naturally we find there are many communities that have very high levels of well being with small populations.
Think about it another way; if the purpose of an increased population is to deliver a stronger economy to these rural towns, what is the purpose of a stronger economy?
I think most of us would assume that it is to provide higher levels of well- being, happiness, contentedness and freedom etc. So, population growth and economic development then, are really the means to the end not the end in itself. Surely the end really is well-being. That being the case, perhaps there are also other means we can apply too to reach the same end?
Ok, so let’s look more closely at what FIFO could mean for these towns. Would it bring an increase in well-being for the current residents? Would it be good for the FIFO workers and their families?
By all accounts from our economic gurus and policy makers, the mining industry in Western Australia is about to boom again (resource rent tax notwithstanding), after a brief hiatus during the Global Financial Crisis, because of the unending insatiable appetitie for natural resources by our giant northern neighbours, the Peoples Republic of China.
Because of this, we are told, WA will require more workers for these mines and most of these workers are FIFO, on 2 week on 1 week off shifts in general.
On that 1 week they have away from the mine, the workers return to their home to be with their families. The concept is that many of these FIFO workers could choose towns like Gin Gin, Toodyay, Goomalling, Northam, York and Beverley to make a home.
Each of these new settlers will require housing. This alone should increase economic activity. However, if the communities in question do not ensure that the people building these new homes come from the local area, the best the community can hope for in terms of economic benefit will be the odd hardware oversight from a Perth based tradesman or an increase in trade at the local lunch bar(2).
Once the new residents have moved in, school populations will grow and there could be potential for new schools opening as well as health services. New retail businesses can start with increased demand. It’s all pretty easy stuff to imagine.
However, none of this will prevent enormous leakage from these towns in respect to food, energy, housing costs, household items etc. if these towns expand without developing and encouraging local owned businesses to service these people.
There are no studies at hand to determine the level of expenditure that a FIFO worker has outside of their local economy as compared to inside it, so it is impossible to say if a FIFO population would cause more leakage in a local economy or not but it’s a sure bet that it wouldn’t stop it.
However, of more immediate concern is the anecdotal evidence from towns that already have a high commuter base and from studies done measuring the social effects of FIFO, that indicate an inability for commuters such as FIFO workers to participate in community life, so vital in rural towns. One more favorable study on FIFO, found that FIFO didn’t have a heavy toll on FIFO worker relationships but did find that up to 74% of FIFO workers stated that they find it hard to participate in ongoing community events.(3)
A strong resilient community needs participation, without it, a town stagnates. Ian Plowman’s study on successful innovative towns in rural Queensland recommended that to be successful towns should, “invest heavily in leadership rotation, responsibility sharing and the growth of civic responsibility.’ All these extra civic duties are hard to do when you’re only in town one week in three.
My own personal experience is it is often the newest people in towns that provide the greatest leverage and participation. So, although FIFO workers may want to participate they are saying they can’t.
What of the families of the FIFO worker? The partner left at home? Won’t they be able to take some of that responsibility? I would argue that sort of responsibility is harder when you are a sole parent for 2 weeks in 3.
Finally, how resilient would you make a community populated increasingly by people employed in one industry? Aren’t we just replacing a farming population with a mining one? If the rumblings coming out of economists like Marc Faber(4) (who predicted the Global Financial Crisis) are anything to go by, can we, or should we, rely on the Chinese Government to determine whether rural West Australian towns sink or swim?
A Living Communities believes that the means to the end may be different;
1. Ensures that the focus is on community building not population building. Focus on what makes your town unique. A ‘build it and they will come approach’, if you like.
2. A unique, innovative and strong community attracts many different types of people and they provide you with a unique, innovative and strong community! In other words, diversity is a feedback loop that keeps the community system going strong.
3. By building diversity in your population you guard against unforeseen shocks such as would be the case if the Chinese economic bubble burst and you had 20% of your population tied to the mining industry as FIFO workers. Resilience means you won’t be scratching your heads in 20 years wondering how to save your town when the mines inevitably slow down!
4. Make sure that economic leakage is kept to a minimum as par for the course, ensuring that wealth stays within the community no matter the size of the town’s population. You can’t fill a bathtub with the tap turned on full and the plug pulled out. Make local important again.
5. Understand how your town fit and work within the larger economic, social and environmental systems. This ensures sustainability. If we are about to hit a global peak in oil, does it make sense to rely on a commuting population? If city people are looking for a safe, friendly place to live, not just a wealthy place, what are the social priorities in the rural community that make it attractive to city immigrants? How does a community in a dry land area design its housing developments to ensure the people it attracts understand water conservation?
6. Encourage entrepreneurs. Risk takers save the rest of us from having to do the hard things that really get things done. Entrepreneurs should be encouraged and rewarded as they really make communities truly resilient. A town of workers is a town at the mercy of someone else’s decisions.
In short, build communities first and the population will sort itself out. FIFO is an opportunity but not the answer.
(1) Plowman, I, Ashkanasy, N M, Gardner, J & Letts, M "Innovation in rural Queensland: Why some towns prosper while others languish". 2003
(2) We’re assuming that tradesmen to build homes in the Wheatbelt will actually be available given the potential for a skills shortage of any new mining boom.
(3) The impacts of Fly-in/Fly-out commuting on employee’s stress, lifestyle, relationships & health. Susan Clifford, School of Anatomy & Human Biology University of Western Australia
(4) China may 'crash' in next 9 to 12 months: Marc Faber – The China Post, May 4, 2010
Comments