Rethinking ‘brain drain’: What can planning do to help retain Adelaide’s young adults?
This article forms Part 1 of a two-part series, based upon an Honours research thesis completed by the author.
For years, political parties and the media in South Australia have lamented the consistent migration of our young adults to the cities of the Eastern states[1]. While numerous theories have been offered, there is one that has consistently stuck and continues to shape the way we view this problem: the economy and jobs. The story goes that young people, especially university graduates, are lured East by greater economic opportunity and a better chance at getting a job, creating a so-called ‘brain drain’ in Adelaide. Therefore, within the current perspective, the only logical solution for the State to reverse this trend is to grow the economy and increase jobs. However, what if there were other motivations for young adults? What if their built environment and lifestyle preferences could be planned for, making Adelaide a more attractive city in the process?
Adelaide’s Urban Context
It is undeniable that Adelaide loses a significant amount of young adults to interstate migration, suffering net losses of this demographic in each of the last 10 years[2]. Whilst COVID-19 may have temporarily interrupted the flows of people between states, the strengths of these migration patterns[3] suggest that young people will continue to move interstate once they are once again able to.
While it is true that economies of the Eastern states currently outweigh South Australia’s, we have always occupied a spot behind these places in the Australian urban hierarchy[4]. The concentration of jobs and investment along the East coast is also no new phenomenon and it is unlikely that South Australia will be able defy history and leapfrog its way to the top of the economic pile.
However, this focus on pure economics by State policymakers also leaves out a range of other avenues for intervention, and minimises the opportunities for planning to influence this form of migration. Put simply, if we are failing to acknowledge all the possible motivations, we will fail to find all the possible solutions.
The Urban Preferences of Young Adults
When young adults move away from Adelaide, that is not the end of the story. They are also choosing where they want to live. Understanding their unique preferences may provide an opportunity for planning to better cater to their desires. These preferences are distinct from previous generations, due to the influences of the society they have grown up in, with an impending climate crisis, delayed family formation and job insecurity all playing a part[5].
The outcome of these influences is a desire to live in neighbourhoods with higher density, higher amenity and access to good public transport options. Neighbourhoods with these features, and those that provide a greater amount of housing choice, have been found to attract a greater share of young adults, a trend that has been termed ‘youthification’ by academics[6]. This trend is often the end result of the migration process, where young adults leave cities like Adelaide and congregate in certain, desirable pockets of their destination city. Not only are physical characteristics an important attractant, but the brand and lifestyle of places are increasingly being used to draw new residents in[7].
What Else Drives Migration?
Besides lifestyle, the built environment and the economy, there are also personal and subjective factors that drive migration amongst young adults. This stage of life is seen as a time for people to remake themselves, grow up and be independent for perhaps the first time in their lives[8]. The value of being mobile is increasing, particularly amongst young, university educated adults who see staying in one place their whole lives as undesirable. So how can planning, a place based profession, cater to the desires and preferences of those who wish to be mobile?
What Can Planning Do?
The tools of planning are able to do a great deal to cater to the preferences of young, university educated adults. Minimum density zoning, a greater range of choice in housing supply and providing good, reliable public transport are the bread and butter of planning policy and create outcomes that this demographic is attracted to. Planning can also be a powerful force in creating a desirable lifestyle and influencing the brand that is attached to a place like Adelaide[9], which suffers from a somewhat unfair reputation as a boring city. While there are limited examples around the world of cities that have pursued this kind of tailored planning strategy, places such as Austin[10] and Portland[11] in the US have created their own niche as progressive, attractive and innovative cities that attract far greater than there fair share of young, university educated adults.
Rethinking ‘brain drain’?
Planning’s current ability to influence the migration of young adults is stifled by the ‘brain drain’ argument that preferences economics above all else. However, if the full range of motivating factors are considered, planning can take the lead or play a part in many of them. The tools to do this already exist, all that is needed is the bravery, coordination and foresight by planners and governments to apply them.
These insights form the basis of further research that was conducted into the ability for planning in Adelaide to assist in the retention and attraction of this demographic. Part 2 of this article will explain the findings uncovered through interviews with soon to be university graduates seeking to move interstate and an analysis of the policies of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.
Charlie Dubois is a final year Urban and Regional Planning student at the University of South Australia and is in the process of completing his Honours thesis on the role that planning can play in the ‘brain drain’ debate. He is passionate about the power of planning and Adelaide’s urban future.
[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-13/young-south-australians-leaving-the-state/9537030
[2] https://auth.censusdata.abs.gov.au/webapi/jsf/dataCatalogueExplorer.xhtml
[3] Hugo 2012
[4] Forster, CA 2004, Australian cities : continuity and change
[5] Lee 2020
[6] Moos 2016
[7] Florida 2002
[8] Holdsworth 2009
[9] Belabus, Eshuis & Scholten 2020
[10] Florida 2002
[11] Jurjevich & Schrock 2012