How might we look at ‘Urban Drift’ in the Northern Territory?

A recent workshop organised by the NT Department of Justice brought attention to a perception of high levels of ‘urban drift’ occurring in the Northern Territory and largely impacting (as destinations) Darwin and Alice Springs. The workshop discussed both what the extent of the ‘drift’ might be, and its implications primarily for government. The focus was on movements of Indigenous people from rural areas into the larger towns. Our research team is looking at how we might conceive of rural-to-urban migration in the NT context, and whether the causes and consequences can be explained using existing theories of internal migration. Our research then looks to suggest what could be done from a policy and research perspective to help alleviate the negative consequences of urban drift while maintaining the positive outcomes that can result from urbanisation.

Census statistics since 1971 have shown a pattern of urbanisation of Indigenous people in the NT evidenced by more rapid population growth in Darwin and Alice Springs. Natural population growth (births outnumbering deaths) explains some of this, but the rest is largely explained by internal (within the NT) migration. In the past two or three Census periods we have seen a ‘flow’ of people from smaller to larger places. That flow is represented in the map below. So rural people move into towns, small town people move to bigger towns and so on. The exception recently has been Nhulunbuy, which has attracted a lot of intra-Territory migration probably because of increased job opportunities there.

At the surface, there are some clear reasons for urban drift in the NT – moving into town for sporting events, medical care, school, work, because of exile from home communities, or to improve access to drugs and alcohol. Many of these movements of individuals then resulted in predictable and unpredictable movements of other individuals. Predictable movements, for example, could be around hospitalisation of a community member meaning other community members would move into town to be near the sick person. Less predictable movements could be around people choosing to spend some time in town because they now knew somebody who was there and had access to housing or money or some other ‘facilitating’ commodity.

Broadly speaking, two streams of theory on migration help explain what happens in these cases. Labour related migration theory (notably the Harris-Todaro models) have done a very good job of predicting who will move where for overtly economic reasons (usually meaning finding work), and who will move with them. Other theories relating to “ghettoisation” and social mobility, and specifically the ideas of institutional economics, help explain the less obviously financially motivated movements.

We currently have a discussion paper looking at how these theories might apply circulating among our research team. We will formally publish the paper later this year. The paper also looks at the issues with getting good data on urban drift. The Census data is one lens – but data about circular, seasonal and ‘informal’ movements is really hard to get, and we are looking at how we might address that issue. There have been some other efforts to quantify ‘urban drift’ – specifically research by Tangentyere Council and Desert Knowledge CRC in Alice Springs  and the Larrakiah Nation in Darwin. With our research, we want to go beyond quantifying to try and explain and offer models for managing outcomes.