Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project

AAPOLLOPOLLO BBAYAY CCOMMUNITYOMMUNITY CCAPACITYAPACITY PPROJECTROJECT

‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health in Apollo Bay’

FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 2001

Deborah Jennings and Peter McNair Victorian Public Health Training Scheme

Charles Gibson and Leanne Madden Performance and Quality Improvement Department of Human Services, Barwon-South Western Region

Under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee

AAPOLLOPOLLO BBAYAY CCOMMUNITYOMMUNITY CCAPACITYAPACITY PPROJECTROJECT

‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health in Apollo Bay’

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FINAL REPORT—DECEMBER 2001

Deborah Jennings and Peter McNair Victorian Public Health Training Scheme

Charles Gibson and Leanne Madden Performance and Quality Improvement Department of Human Services, Barwon-South Western Region

Under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee

Executive Summary Introduction

The Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project (ABCCP) resulted from the keen interest of the Barwon-South West Region of the Department of Human Services (DHS) to explore the measurement of social capital and apply the community capacity building model to improve health outcomes in small rural communities. Strengthening community capacity is considered a method of empowering communities to respond to the compounding effects of infrastructure decline, rapid change and increasing social difficulties. Measuring Social Capital and Health

The study has drawn on the range of issues being considered by government and academics with regard to community capacity building as a means to improve health outcomes. Increasingly, there is a strong role for government to support regional initiatives for growth and economic viability. Through access to educational opportunities, skills development, technological capacity, diversification of industry and promotion of rural areas as worthy investment choices, rural areas are able to readjust and be opportunist in the face of change. Resourcefulness, innovation and self-determination are recognised features of rural Australia and it is becoming increasingly clear that these strengths need to be encouraged and supported.

What is social capital?

There has been considerable debate and discourse regarding the definition of ‘social capital’. For the purposes of this project, the conceptual definition of ‘social capital’ utilised by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in their recent discussion paper Measuring Social Capital: Current Collections and Future Directions, is used. Hence, social capital refers to the processes between people which establish networks, norms and trust enabling co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit (Cox, 1995). Social capital is the ‘glue’ that holds communities and groups together.

Historically, rural areas and rural communities have been characterised by their ‘cohesiveness’, their strong social and environmental networks and their sense of ‘reassuring familiarity’ and ‘safety’. In short, rural life provided a sense of belonging for its members with inter-relationships built on trust. This was the ideal of life in the bush, a highly sought after retreat for many from the pace and anonymity of urban life, a self-selected ‘better quality’ way of life for individuals and their families. Yet, in sharp contrast, rural life can also result in a narcissistic, socially controlling, backward existence for those who can’t afford to, or choose not to, live in the cities. This is sometimes described as the dark side of social capital. This represents polar views of rural life and of social capital.

There are many advantages to living in a community built on trust, reciprocity and networks for mutual support. The enhancement of government performance and the effective functioning of democracy, the prevention of crime and violence, the improvement of population health and an increase in productivity and economic growth, are positive outcomes of a community rich in social capital (Cox 1995, Kawachi & Kennedy 1997, Guenther & Falk in press). Unfortunately, there are indications that social capital is eroding in many communities. People no longer feel safe in their neighbourhoods, they spend less time participating in community groups and clubs and there has been a loss of trust in governments and other forms of authority. Changed work practices and communication technologies have resulted in reduced opportunities for social networking and civic engagement. There have also been increasing demands for volunteers to contribute to community infrastructure. The existence of and capacity to build upon social capital represent great strengths present within rural communities. The development of trusting relationships and social networks is important for the sustainability of rural communities (Guenther & Falk, in press).

Increasingly there has been an interest from governments, researchers and non-government organizations in strengthening community capacity through increasing its social capital. There is a strong incentive for social capital to be recognised as a protective factor for the health and well being of communities, as well as for economic prosperity and other mutual benefits of trust and social networks. A partnership approach between government and community can result in a recognition of, and subsequent investment in, the social capital of rural communities.

Measures of social capital

There have been a number of studies that have attempted to quantify and measure social capital. These have focused on measures of social and civic participation, membership of community groups or organizations and evidence of social norms associated with reciprocity and trust.

Putnam calculated an index of ‘civic community’ for each region of Italy by combining sources of data providing information on people’s involvement in community life (Kawachi & Kennedy, 1997). Two of Putnam’s indicators for measuring social capital were: levels of civic trust and density of associated membership. He measured these by the extent of associational membership, newspaper readership and electoral turnout. Kawachi and Kennedy (1997) used Putnam’s indicators to measure social capital in a study in the United States by using the weighted responses to two items from the General Service Survey: per capita density of membership in groups (such as church groups, trade unions, sports groups and fraternal organizations) and the proportion of respondents who believed people could be trusted. They found strong correlations between income inequality with both low per capita group membership and low levels of social trust, and correspondingly with mortality rates.

Bullen & Onyx (1998) conducted a study in 1995-96, to investigate empirical measurement of social capital in five communities in NSW, which included rural and urban communities. Five Neighbourhood Centres in these communities administered a questionnaire. The outcome of the study was the identification of eight core elements of social capital:

· Participation in the local community

· Pro-activity in a social context

· Feelings of trust and safety

· Neighbourhood connections

· Family and friends connections · Tolerance of diversity

· Value of life

· Work connections.

In 1997, Baum et al carried out a ‘Health and Participation Survey’ in the Western suburbs of Adelaide. Researchers found that participation in social and civic community life in an urban setting was influenced by individual socio-economic factors, health and other demographic variables. The questionnaire was developed from a series of pre-existing instruments and some measures developed specifically for the project. Health status, social isolation, demographic characteristics, types and levels of social and civic participation were measured using a range of indices including:

· Social participation – informal (visits with neighbours, family, friends)

· Social participation – in public places (outings to cafes, restaurants, movies, dances, parties)

· Social participation – group activities (involved in sport, gym, class, hobby/music/support group)

· Civic participation – individual activities (signed a petition, contacted a local MP, contacted local council, letter to the newspaper)

· Civic participation – group activities (involved in community action group, trade union, political campaign, environmental action)

· Community group participation – mix of social and civic (volunteer group, ethnic group, service club, church group, school-related group)

The study identified that those with a low income and level of educational attainment tended to be lower participators in both social and civic activities. It also confirmed the importance of considering both social and civic participation as contributory factors to the development of networks and trust. The study provided empirical data with relation to social capital but also provided valuable descriptive data on the social spread of participation, important from a health, social policy and service planning perspective. Further investigation through follow- up case studies is planned to provide detail on the reasons why people participate or don’t participate in social and civic activities.

A Tasmanian research team has carried out a recent study in two rural townships in Victoria (populations: 1383 and 1096 respectively) (Guenther & Falk, in press). A ‘community trust survey’ was mailed to households, interviews were carried out with selected community representatives and focus groups were conducted with a number of community groups. The study took a matrix approach to the impact of historicity, externality, reciprocity, general trust and information sharing in relation to the following:

· Associational networks

· Leadership · Civic participation

· Feelings of security

Based on the results of this study, the survey instrument was adjusted and renamed the ‘community capacity survey’. It was found that where a community had strong associational networks, leadership, civic participation and feelings of security, it had a correspondingly better capacity for development and sustainability with regard to social, economic and environmental outcomes. These capacity variables were influenced by factors of information sharing, externality (bridges and linkages), historicity, reciprocity and norms and values. The ‘new’ community capacity survey was to be trialled later in 2000 in several regional centres in Tasmania.

Postcode 3233 - Apollo Bay, Marengo, Skenes Creek.

This project is an attempt to put theory into practice at a “grass roots” level in a rural community. Apollo Bay was selected as a potential project location based on consultation with staff from the DHS, Barwon South Western Region. Members of the Apollo Bay community were then formally consulted through Otway Health and Community Services to determine whether there was community interest and commitment to the project. Otway Health and Community Services (OHCS) expressed a keen interest to be a key player in both the project and the establishment of a community steering committee. OHCS was particularly interested in the prospect of measuring social capital in Apollo Bay, indicating that social capital was a strength present in their community that could be made more tangible as a concept through measurement and subsequent documentation. The strong community networks and considerable community capacity already present in Apollo Bay were discussed. The need for a community driven focus for the project was also emphasised.

A community steering group was established to oversee the project. The Committee of key community representatives and other key stakeholders such as the Colac-Otway Shire met with the project worker and decided to proceed with the project. The Committee played a key role in decision-making at all stages during the development and implementation of the project, including the appropriate geographic area to survey. It was decided that a total population survey of postcode 3233 be undertaken. This includes Apollo Bay, Marengo and Skenes Creek.

The Survey

Existing data collection tools and research approaches used in previous studies to measure social capital were identified through a review of the published literature. The existing tools were explored for their appropriateness in a community development project aimed at measuring social capital in a small rural community. This project is based on the project conducted by Baum et al (2000) in the Western suburbs of Adelaide in 1997 described above. The instrument is designed to provide a baseline measurement of social capital in a selected geographic area. Gathering information on self-assessed health information is also integral to the approach. The underpinning philosophy of our study is collaboration between the community and other key stakeholders. The Committee actively assisted in the customisation of the survey instrument to meet the needs of the Apollo Bay district. Prof Fran Baum provided academic consultation during the implementation of the ABCCP. Survey procedure

The project was a cross-sectional, self-completed, questionnaire survey distributed largely by hand in April 2001,with a small number (140) distributed by post. This procedure enabled the researcher to be very visible in the area and provided opportunities for community members to directly ask questions of clarification. The Ethics Committee, Department of Human Services (EC-DHS) approved the project (project # 8/01) on the condition that any posted material should be circulated to all members of the community.

All residents of the Apollo Bay area in Victoria (postcode 3233) whom were registered to vote with the Australian Electoral Commission were eligible to participate. Permanent residents who were not registered voters were able to request a questionnaire through Otway Health and Community Services, or by phoning the research team. Questionnaires could be returned to 10 separate destinations within the town of Apollo Bay. Reminders were published in the Apollo Bay News Sheet.

The questionnaire was distributed to 1268 residents, of whom 516 (40.7%) completed the questionnaire. The response rate was increased for residents age >45 years. The response rate was also higher amongst the Marengo and Skene’s creek residents. Of the 748 residences to which questionnaires were delivered, 344 (46.0%) residences had at least one respondent. Fifty seven percent (286/504) of respondents were female Results

Physical and Mental Health

On average, survey respondents were as physically and mentally healthy as the average revealed in other similar studies. There were however a larger than expected number who felt they were very healthy and a larger than expected number who felt they had poor health. This may be a reflection of the older average age of Apollo Bay and district residents.

An association was apparent between increasing age and a decreasing physical health score as one might expect. There was an association between perceived mental health status and age, with older people generally achieving better mental health scores.

There was no difference between men and women in average physical or mental health scores. Nor was there any correlation between people who owned/mortgaged their own home as compared with those renting or boarding.

Community Support and Participation

A strong sense of community support and participation was detected in Apollo Bay with around 80% of respondents having close friends and knowing many of the people in their community while only 25% of residents used the Internet for communication. More than 98% of respondents reported feeling safe in their homes and 37% are currently undertaking some form of volunteer work. Importantly, a significant number of these volunteer organisations appear to contribute, either directly or indirectly, to the success of tourism within the Apollo Bay area.

Most of the respondents had acted to solve a local problem in the past year. Many of these issues related to local government. This was reflected in the 20% of respondents who reported having confidence in the decisions of local government and responding that Local Government acted in their best interests. Responses to similar questions relating to State Government elicited confidence in approximately 25% of respondents. The most frequent issues which people cited were council obligations/maintenance; clear felling/logging/environmental issues; water shortage and building and development issues.

Caring for People with Disabilities

One hundred residents aged between 32 and 90, comprising just below 20% of respondents, reported caring for a disabled person in a voluntary capacity. 34 of these people provided care in their own home. Some of the findings of the study suggest that further local examination concerning meeting the needs of this group is warranted.

Transport

Car availability did not appear to be an issue for the majority of residents (approximately 95%). However availability of transport clearly impacts on the ability of a small number of people to undertake volunteer work. Transport may also limit the ability of residents in this area to access a range of services. The impact of any lack of transport in Apollo Bay area is brought into sharp relief when consideration is given to the basic services not available in Apollo Bay. These include many necessities such as shoes and general clothing. It was interesting that 63% of respondents provided transport for a neighbour and 38% accepted transport from a neighbour.

Although this report has much information that can be used to both inform government policy and direct local action, there is much to be learnt from further analysis of this data.

Recommendations

The information gained from this project will provide additional input into local and regional planning given that social capital is a potential predictor of health outcomes.

The project has uncovered many associations, however it has raised many questions. Some of these questions can be addressed using the current data; other questions prescribe further investigation.

From within the current data:

· Isolation. Classification of isolation using the “Nottingham scale” questions has not been attempted during the analysis of this study. All participants could be classified according to this scale and the impact of this on PCS and MCS evaluated. In addition, this could be cross-tabulated against time in current residence and time spent in Apollo Bay. There may be a hypothesis to be drawn between relocation and health due to having to set up new social networks in a new residential setting.

· Analysis of General Comments. There were many protracted general comments (Question 67) that could not be addressed within the tight time frame of this project. These general comments could be entered, grouped and analysed for themes. In many cases the free comments will overlap with comments made in other sections of the questionnaire. A project to analyse this material commenced in October 2001. Equally, there are other questions that provide an opportunity for comment that have not been grouped and analysed.

· Civic Participation. Participation in volunteer or community groups could be evaluated by at least age quartile, possibly using ten-year age brackets (e.g. 65-75etc). This would allow age standardisation for participation in other communities.

· West Adelaide comparison. Comparison of results for civic and community participation for comparison with the study by Baum et al. is recommended.

Additional studies from within the Apollo Bay area, potentially overseen by the ABCCC:

· Caring for people with a disability. A case series is required to tease out the issues around caring for a person with a disability with whom you live. Help via support groups may not be appropriate for these carers. A few targeted interviews may uncover strategies to provide efficiently targeted support for these carers.

· Volunteerism. In the case of volunteer organisations and community groups there is an opportunity to approach the groups to ascertain the number of known participants in each group and determine if they are over represented within the respondents. Also, there is an opportunity to get an indication of the proportion of residents participating in volunteer organisations.

· Focus Groups. Additional qualitative data could be collected by means of focus groups with selected population groups within the Apollo Bay community. These groups could be selected on the advice of the ABCCC. The information gained would supplement the data collected in the survey, and provide valuable additional detail and depth.

· Trends over time. There is an opportunity to obtain longitudinal data on civic and community participation and health. A case series conducted at least 12 months and within five years of the current study could detect changes within an individual over time that would be more reliable than cross-sectional associations. Such a project would be both statistically and ethically viable if recruitment involved a call for volunteers from those who participated in the previous study. This individual- controlled case study design is particularly powerful and would require many fewer participants (say 80-100). Although individuals were not identified by name, address for delivery of the previous questionnaire, year of birth and gender would provide adequate information for matching. There is more than enough other data that is not required for analysis that could be used to verify identity.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project

‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health and well being in Apollo Bay’

Deborah Jennings and Peter McNair (Victorian Public Health Training Scheme)

Charles Gibson and Leanne Madden (Performance and Quality Improvement Unit, Department of Human Services, Barwon-South Western Region)

Under the direction of the

Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee

Final Report December 2001 Contents

Background and Literature review...... 6 Setting the context...... 6 What is social capital? ...... 6 Social capital – the issues...... 7 Social capital and health status...... 7 Measures of social capital...... 8 Social capital – where to from here?...... 10 Demographic characteristics of Apollo Bay...... 11 Health status and Burden of Disease in the Colac-Otway Shire ...... 13

Aim ...... 14

Methods ...... 14 Engaging the community...... 14 Survey development ...... 16 Survey procedure ...... 17

Results ...... 20 Response rate ...... 20 Health Data...... 21 Community support and participation...... 24 Volunteerism and the support to tourism...... 24 Caring for people with disabilities ...... 25 Transport...... 26 Safety...... 27 Planning issues...... 28 Perceptions of Government...... 29 Internet utilisation...... 31

Recommendations...... 32

References:...... 33

Figures Figure 1: Distribution of age by gender of residents in Apollo Bay in 1999 (N=1665) ...... 11 Figure 2: Distribution of employed persons by industry in Apollo Bay, 1996 (N=400)...... 12 Figure 3: Apollo Bay SLA Population by Age Group & Gender ...... 20 Figure 4: Questionnaire Respondents by Age Group & Gender...... 20 Figure 5: Distribution of the PCS against a plot of the normal distribution for the SF-12...... 21 Figure 6: Distribution of the MCS against a plot of the normal distribution for the SF-12..... 22 Figure 7: Distribution of individual income groups...... 23

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 2 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Tables Table 1: 1996 Household Incomes in Apollo Bay (DOI, 1999)...... 11 Table 2: Crime statistics for Apollo Bay from 1996 to 1999 (Statsite, 2000) ...... 12 Table 3: Conditions causing premature mortality in the Colac-Otway Shire in 1996...... 13 Table 4: Frequency of responses to the questions “Have you assisted neighbours or friends/ neighbours or friends assisted you with the following activities in the last year?”..... 24 Table 5: Response to the questions “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays” and “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekends?” – all respondents...... 26 Table 6: Response to the questions “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays” and “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekends?” – respondents reporting having a drivers licence...... 26 Table 7: Frequency of responses to the question “In the past year, have you taken any of the following action to try to solve a local problem?”...... 29 Table 8: Response to five questions assessing confidence in local and state government ...... 29 Table 9: Frequency of responses to two questions regarding an individuals perception of their ability to influence community decisions...... 30 Table 10: Responses to the question “I use the Internet to communicate with friends and relatives”...... 31 Table 11: Responses to the question “In the past twelve months how often have you used the Internet for social communication?”...... 31

Appendices Appendix I: Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee - Terms of Reference:...... 36 Appendix II: Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee - Membership:...... 37 Appendix III: Results in Questionnaire format with response frequencies ...... 38 Appendix IV: Responses to five questions on confidence in government (Q. 40) ...... 58 Appendix V: Housekeeping ...... 59

Attachments Attachment I: Questionnaire Attachment II: Covering letter Attachment III: Explanatory statement Attachment IV: Participant Thankyou letter Attachment V: Project related articles and reports published in the Apollo Bay News Sheet

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 3 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Abbreviations

ABCCC Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee

ABCCP Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project

ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics

DHS Department of Human Services

EC-DHS The Ethics Committee, Department of Human Services

LE Life expectancy

MCS SF-12 mental health classification scale

NS not significant (Modified Bonferroni adjustment; a = 0.05)

OHCS Otway Health and Community Services

PCS SF-12 physical health classification scale

YLL total number of years of life lost due to premature mortality

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 4 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Abstract

The Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project (ABCCP) resulted from the keen interest of the Barwon-South West Region of the Department of Human Services (DHS) to explore the measurement of social capital and apply the community capacity building model as a means to improve health outcomes in small rural communities. Strengthening community capacity is considered a method of empowering rural communities to respond to the compounding effects of infrastructure decline and increasing social difficulties. This project was an attempt to put theory into practice at a “grass roots” level in a rural community.

Apollo Bay was selected as a potential project location based on consultation with staff from the DHS, Barwon South Western Region. Members of the Apollo Bay community were then formally consulted through Otway Health and Community Services to determine whether there was community interest and commitment to the project. A community steering group was established to oversee the project. The Committee of key community representatives and other key stakeholders such as Colac-Otway Shire met with the project worker and decided to proceed with the project. The Committee played a key role in decision-making at all stages during the development of the project, including the customisation of the survey instrument to meet the needs of Apollo Bay.

Existing data collection tools and research approaches used in previous studies to measure social capital were identified through a review of the published literature. The existing tools were explored for their appropriateness in a community development project aimed at measuring social capital in a small rural community. This project is based on a project conducted by Baum et al (2000) in the Western suburbs of Adelaide in 1997. The study measured social and civic participation in an urban community, participation being a fundamental element of ‘social capital’. Gathering information on self-assessed health status is also integral to the approach. Prof Fran Baum provided academic consultation during the implementation of the ABCCP.

A total population survey of postcode 3233 was undertaken. This includes Apollo Bay, Marengo and Skenes Creek. The questionnaire was distributed to 1268 residents, of whom 516 (40.7%) completed the questionnaire. The response rate was increased for residents age >45 years. The response rate was also higher amongst the Marengo and Skene’s creek residents..

Self-assessment of physical and mental health status detected a sample mean and standard deviation that was not different from the standard values, however, the distribution of both measures was skewed. There was an association between income group and physical health. This association did not hold for income and mental health, nor for accommodation status with either physical or mental health.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 5 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Although this report has much information that can be used to both inform government policy and direct local action, there is much to be learnt from further analysis of this data.

Background and Literature review The original concept for the project ‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health’, is based on conducting a community-building project in a small rural community in the Barwon-South West Region of the Department of Human Services (DHS). The approach involves selecting and piloting a community-building instrument which will scope the level of community and civic participation in the area. The instrument is designed to provide a baseline measurement of social capital in a selected geographic area. Gathering information on self-assessed health information is also integral to the approach. The underpinning philosophy is collaboration between the community and other key stakeholders. This has been implemented through a community development approach in developing and implementing the project. The study has drawn on the range of issues being considered by government and academics with regard to community capacity building as a means to improve health outcomes. This project is an attempt to put theory into practice at a “grass roots” level in a rural community.

Setting the context Rural and regional areas have been significantly impacted by the consequences of economic and political policy reform in recent years. Globalisation and economic rationalism have been necessary but ‘brutal’ policy objectives for rural areas. Advancements in technology, national competition policy and financial market deregulation have contributed to infrastructure decline and loss of services and employment opportunities in rural areas. Increasingly, there is a strong role for government to support regional initiatives for growth and economic viability. Through access to educational opportunities, skills development, technological capacity, diversification of industry and promotion of rural areas as worthy investment choices, rural areas are able to readjust and be opportunist in the face of change. Resourcefulness, innovation and self-determination are recognised features of rural Australia and it is becoming increasingly clear that these strengths need to be encouraged and supported.

What is social capital? There has been considerable debate and discourse regarding the definition of ‘social capital’. For the purposes of this project, the conceptual definition of ‘social capital’ utilised by the ABS in their recent discussion paper Measuring Social Capital: Current Collections and Future Directions, is used. Hence, social capital refers to the processes between people, which establish networks, norms and trust enabling co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit (Cox, 1995). Social capital is the ‘glue’ that holds communities and groups together. “It is created from the myriad of everyday interactions between people. … It is not located within the individual person or within the social structure, but in the space between people” (Bullen & Onyx 1998, p.2). The means of measuring social capital is expressed through trust, which underpins social capital and subsequent mutually beneficial social outcomes (Cox 1995, Guenther & Falk in press). Trust has “…elements of confidence, expectation, motivation, cooperation, collaboration, mutual obligation and reciprocation working together in complex milieu” (Guenther & Falk in press, p.3).

Historically, rural areas and rural communities have been characterised by their ‘cohesiveness’, their strong social and environmental networks and their sense of ‘reassuring

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 6 of 59 Final report - December 2001 familiarity’ and ‘safety’. In short, rural life provided a sense of belonging for its members with inter-relationships built on trust. This was the ideal of life in the bush, a highly sought after retreat for many from the pace and anonymity of urban life, a self-selected ‘better quality’ way of life for individuals and their families. Yet, in sharp contrast, rural life can also result in a narcissistic, socially controlling, backward existence for those who can’t afford to, or choose not to, live in the cities. This is sometimes described as the dark side of social capital. This represents polar views of rural life and of social capital.

“the concept of civic virtue is a collective rather than an individual manifestation of a truly civil society, …by giving people time, skills, encouragement and resources”. (Cox 1995, Lecture 2, p.5):

Social capital – the issues Unfortunately, there are indications that social capital is eroding in many communities. People no longer feel safe in their neighbourhoods, they spend less time participating in community groups and clubs, there has been a loss of trust for governments and other forms of authority and changed work practices and communication technologies have resulted in reduced opportunities for social networking and civic engagement. There have also been increasing demands for volunteers to contribute to community infrastructure. The existence of and capacity to build upon social capital represent great strengths present within rural communities. The development of trusting relationships and social networks is important for the sustainability of rural communities (Guenther & Falk, in press).

Increasingly there has been an interest from governments, researchers and non-government organizations in strengthening community capacity through increasing its social capital. Notwithstanding, there is a need for ‘real’ and meaningful partnerships between government, other key stakeholders and communities, and a commitment to retain and support community infrastructure. To enable trust there needs to be a shared vision and a commitment to inclusive policymaking.

Social capital and health status There have been a number of studies that have looked at the relationship between income differential and health status (Kennedy & Kawachi 1996, Kennedy & Kawachi 1998). Research indicates that the greater the gap between the wealthy and the poor, the greater the rates of mortality and disease. It has been suggested that this may be due to a breakdown in social cohesion due to resentment between those that are better off and those that are lacking, particularly where there are residential pockets of affluence and poverty. Kawachi & Kennedy (1997) relate income inequality to loss of trust and hence loss of social capital, resulting in increased crime and violence, a lack of confidence in government, impeded productivity and a poorly functioning democracy. “The effect of income inequality on mortality thus seemed to be mediated through the withering of social capital” (Kawachi & Kennedy 1997, p.4). To maintain or increase social capital is then likely to have a positive impact on the health status of a community.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 7 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Other possible explanations for the positive relationship between social capital and health have been hypothesised in the literature through notions of civic and social participation and the diffusion of innovation within communities where members know and trust each other Those noted by Kawachi and Kennedy and Baum et al includeCollective efficacy whereby neighbours exert social control over deviant behaviours such as adolescent smoking, alcohol and drug use;

· Collective commitment and action in community development and health promoting activities;

· Socially cohesive communities are more likely to work together to ensure access to services and amenities which include health, transport and recreational facilities;

· Psychosocial processes through support and providing a source of self-esteem and mutual respect for its members; and

· More egalitarian patterns of political participation resulting in policies that are protective of its members.

:(Kawachi & Kennedy 1999, Baum et al 2000):

In summary, there is a strong incentive for social capital to be recognised as a protective factor for the health and well being of communities, as well as for economic prosperity and other mutual benefits of trust and social networks. A partnership approach between government and community can result in a recognition of, and subsequent investment in, the social capital of rural communities. Blackwell and Colmenar argue that:

“… social changes have caused the rupture of communal life in our neighbourhoods and that the answer is community building: strengthening communities holistically, fostering participation and problem-solving, addressing issues of bigotry and poverty, and engaging institutions to work as partners with residents.” (Blackwell & Colmenar, 2000, p.161)

Measures of social capital There have been a number of studies that have attempted to quantify and measure social capital. These have focused on measures of social and civic participation, membership of community groups or organizations and evidence of social norms associated with reciprocity and trust.

The World Bank developed a tool for uniform measuring of social capital. The Social Capital Assessment Tool (SCAT) is a “…field tested set of indicators and methodologies that measure levels of cognitive and structural social capital in communities designated as

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 8 of 59 Final report - December 2001 beneficiaries of development projects”. (Krishna and Shrader, 1999 P.8) The SCAT is composed of three parts: a community profile, a household survey and an organisational profile. It collects both qualitative and quantitative data looking at the relationships between development indicators and accumulation of social capital in communities receiving funds for development projects.

· Participation in the local community

· Pro-activity in a social context

· Feelings of trust and safety

· Neighbourhood connections

· Family and friends connections

· Tolerance of diversity

· Value of life

· Work connections.

A generic factor for social capital was developed based on questions targeting each of these eight elements. Social capital was found to be independent of demographic factors and different among the five communities surveyed. Results of this project may not be able to be generalised to other communities due to systematic error associated with non-random sampling methods.

· Social participation – informal (visits with neighbours, family, friends)

· Social participation – in public places (outings to cafes, restaurants, movies, dances, parties)

· Social participation – group activities (involved in sport, gym, class, hobby/music/support group)

· Civic participation – individual activities (signed a petition, contacted a local MP, contacted local council, letter to the newspaper)

· Civic participation – group activities (involved in community action group, trade union, political campaign, environmental action)

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 9 of 59 Final report - December 2001 · Community group participation – mix of social and civic (volunteer group, ethnic group, service club, church group, school-related group)

· Associational networks

· Leadership

· Civic participation

· Feelings of security

Social capital – where to from here?

Social capital is a ‘hot’ agenda item for policy makers, politicians and researchers according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), who themselves are currently investigating data collection on social capital in Australia. Based on the current literature, ABS is considering measurement of social capital within the following contexts:

· Social networks and support structures

· Social and community participation

· Civic and political involvement and empowerment

· Trust in people and social institutions

· Tolerance of diversity

· Altruism, philanthropy and voluntary work

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 10 of 59 Final report - December 2001 It is the view of the ABS that data on social capital will be able to inform policy making. The danger here is that bureaucratic interpretations of social capital may not reflect the priorities of individual communities. There needs to be an intermediate step where communities are informed of the data and have capacity to input into its interpretation with regard to policy.

Demographic characteristics of Apollo Bay

Apollo Bay had an estimated total resident population of 1,655 in 2000 (DHS Statsite, 2000) comprising approximately equal proportions of males and females. This represents an estimated 59% increase in population since 1996 (population 979), with an estimated average annual increase of 14% between 1996 and 2000. As demonstrated by Figure 1, the majority (65%) of females are aged 35 years and older, peaking between 35 and 44 years of age and over 75 years. Males show a similar pattern with 53% aged between 35 and 74 years and dropping in number after age 75. Just over one quarter (29%) of the estimated total population in Apollo Bay are aged 65 years and over. After 75 years of age there are twice as many females as there are males.

Figure 1: Distribution of age by gender of residents in Apollo Bay in 1999 (N=1665)

140 120 100 80 Females 60 Males

Number 40 20 0 0-4yrs 5- 15- 25- 35- 44- 55- 65- 75+yrs 14yrs 24yrs 34yrs 44yrs 54yrs 64yrs 74yrs Age Group

Some demographic characteristics will relate to the 1996 census data, as this is often available at a postal area level. More recent data will be used where it is available.

In 1996, there were 825 private dwellings in Apollo Bay, with a vacancy rate of 49% (Towns in Time). Nearly three quarters of all households contained 1 to 2 people at this time.

Table 1 shows that more than three quarters of the households in Apollo Bay received an income of $33,335 or less (76%). In 1996, 41% of households were in the lowest quartile for income with an annual income of below $17,720. Only 6% of households were in the highest income bracket of greater than $55,918 per annum.

Annual Household Income Number of Households Proportion of all (N=394) Households (%) $17,719 or less 164 41.5 $17,720 to $33,335 137 34.7 $33,336 to $55,918 69 17.6 $55,919 or greater 24 6.2 Table 1: 1996 Household Incomes in Apollo Bay (DOI, 1999).

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 11 of 59 Final report - December 2001

In 1996, 400 people were employed and 49 unemployed with an unemployment rate of 11% and a 56% participation rate1 in the labour force (Towns in Time). Figure 2 provides an overview of industries where the working residents of Apollo Bay were employed on Census night in 1996.

Figure 2: Distribution of employed persons by industry in Apollo Bay, 1996 (N=400).

30 25 20

% 15 10 5 0 Utilities other storage etc. Finance, business services property & transport & personla & defence Community Recreation, Construction Agriculture, Manufacturing Public admin & forestry, fishing Wholesale/retail Industry

Looking at more recent data, Centrelink statistics for 2000 indicate the following:

· 96 (6%) people were unemployed, 73 of these for more than 26 weeks;

· 798 (51%) people were covered by a Commonwealth concession or benefit (health care card, pensioners concession card or seniors health card). Of these, 5% (42) were on the Disability Support pension, 33% (262) on the Aged pension, 17% (132) were in receipt of a parenting payment and 3% were on the Youth Allowance. Given that there were 359 people aged 65 years and over (1999 ABS estimated population), it would be reasonable to assume that a further 12% of people were Senior cardholders not in receipt of the Aged Pension.

Table 2 provides Victoria Police community crime statistics for Apollo Bay and shows a relatively low number of crimes but a gradual increase in the number of offences between 1997 and 1999, a 21% increase per year for total offences committed. Crime against property constituted 77% of all crimes in Apollo Bay in 1998/99, with crime against person being the next highest category at 10% of all crimes committed.

Table 2: Crime statistics for Apollo Bay from 1996 to 1999 (Statsite, 2000)

Offence 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 Drug offences 4 3 9 Crime against property 86 78 111 Crime against person 6 17 14 ‘Other’ crimes2 3 22 11 Total crimes 99 120 145

1 Proportion of people over 15 years of age either working or seeking work. 2 Refers to other indictable and other summary offences.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 12 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Health status and Burden of Disease in the Colac-Otway Shire The Victorian Burden of Disease Study provides assessment of the amount of ill health in Victoria in 1996 and projected to the year 2016. The data available from this study provides information on the ‘burden of disease’ in Victoria at a State, regional and local government area (LGA) level. Because of low numbers the Shires of Colac-Otway and Surfcoast are combined (hereafter referred to as the Shires population) Hence, the data needs to be viewed in the context of Apollo Bay representing a small part of the Shires population, and hence is not necessarily accurate at a local community level. Hospital separation data will supplement the burden of disease data and provide a more localised picture of health status in the Apollo Bay area.

Life expectancy (LE) at birth between 1992-1996 for the Shires population was 75.9 and 81.5 years, for males and females respectively. This is not significantly different to the average life expectancy for males and females in Victoria over the same period. The Shires ranked 17 for males and 20 for females out a total of 78 local government area LE rankings in Victoria. Accounting for years of life lost due to disability, life expectancy decreases by approximately six years for both males and females with a disability adjusted life expectancy in the Shires of 69.6 and 75.0 years for males and females respectively.

The total number of years of life lost (YLL) due to premature mortality in the Shires in 1996 was 1,662 years. Of these, cardiovascular disease was responsible for 38% of YLL, cancer for 31% of YLL and injuries for 8% of YLL. Similar to the State of Victoria, cardiovascular disease, cancers and injury account for around 75% of all years of life lost due to premature mortality.

The most prevalent cardiovascular diseases responsible for premature death in the Shires were ischaemic heart disease (63% of cardiovascular disease) and stroke (19% of cardiovascular disease). The most prevalent cancers leading to death were lung, breast and colon/rectum. Almost three-quarters (71%) of all injuries causing premature mortality were unintentional injuries in the Shires. Of these unintentional injuries, 64% were due to road traffic accidents. Of all injury mortality, road traffic trauma accounts for 45% of YLL and suicide (non- intentional injury) accounts for 26% of YLL. In Victoria overall, suicide followed by road traffic accidents are the major causes for injury mortality. Table3 shows the ranking of the top 10 conditions causing premature mortality in the Shires. These conditions are fairly representative of the National health priorities of cardiovascular disease, cancer, injury, mental health and diabetes.

Table 3: Conditions causing premature mortality in Colac-Otway/ Surfcoast Shire 1996.

Rank Condition (males) Condition (females) 1 Ischaemic heart disease Ischaemic heart disease 2 Lung cancer Stroke 3 Stroke Breast cancer 4 Road Traffic Accident Lung cancer 5 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 6 Prostate cancer Ovarian cancer 7 Suicide Colon/rectum cancer 8 Colon/rectum cancer Dementia 9 Diabetes Mellitus Road Traffic Accident 10 Brain cancer Brain cancer

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 13 of 59 Final report - December 2001 The Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset (VAED) indicates that there were 1566 occasions of service to people from Apollo Bay (postcode area 3233) between June 1998 and June 2000. Of these, approximately two thirds were male (64%).

In summary, the literature was reviewed to explore the concepts of ‘social capital’ and ‘community capacity building’ and to identify a tool for measuring social capital in a community. The discourse on ‘social capital’ was contentious and diverse. For the purposes of this project it was decided to use the definition of ‘social capital’ used recently by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2000) and proposed by Eva Cox (Cox, 1995) in the 1995 ABC broadcast Boyer Lectures. Social capital thus refers to the processes between people, which establish networks, norms and trust enabling co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit. Social capital represents the ‘glue’ that holds communities and groups together.

The data collection tool selected for the project was the “Health & Participation Survey” developed by Flinders University and utilised in the Western suburbs of Adelaide in 1997 (Baum et al, 2000). This survey provided a measure of health and social and civic participation, key components of ‘social capital’.

It was proposed to conduct a community development project aimed at measuring ‘social capital’ in a small rural community in the Region. Apollo Bay was selected due to its already strong community networks and sense of community identity. This would enable identification and quantification of social capital and highlight areas where further social capital could be generated.

Aim To initiate a community-led project to measure community and civic participation in Apollo Bay for comparison with self-perceptions of health and socio-economic status.

Methods

Engaging the community Initial consultation Initial consultation was carried out with staff from Otway Health and Community Services, the multi-purpose service located in Apollo Bay. Senior DHS staff and the project officer (DJ) met in Apollo Bay with senior staff from the health service. Information on the proposed project was provided and Apollo Bay was confirmed as a potential community in which to pilot the project due to its perceived strong stocks of ‘social capital’. A community development approach for the project was proposed. Hence, community commitment and active community involvement were fundamental elements of the project.

Otway Health and Community Services (OHCS) expressed a keen interest to be a key player in both the project and the establishment of a community steering committee. OHCS was particularly interested in the prospect of measuring social capital in Apollo Bay, indicating that social capital was a strength present in their community that could be made more tangible as a concept through measurement and subsequent documentation. The strong community networks and considerable community capacity already present in Apollo Bay were discussed. The community driven focus of the project was also emphasised.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 14 of 59 Final report - December 2001 A meeting of key community members was scheduled for the following month, to discuss the feasibility and outcomes of the project, and to gauge whether there was adequate community interest to conduct the project in Apollo Bay. Based on recommendations made by OHCS the following organizations were invited to attend a community consultative meeting:

· Otway Ranges Environmental Network

· Apollo Bay P-12 College

· Colac Otway Shire

· Chamber of Commerce and Tourism

· Lion’s Club

· Local volunteer/active community members

· Local police

· Otway Health and Community Services– Board member and staff member

· Primary Care Partnership

· Local Councillor

· Department of Human Services

Inaugural meeting of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee The aim of the first meeting of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee (ABCCC) was to decide whether Apollo Bay was a feasible community in which to conduct the project. Background information involved a general overview of social capital, community capacity building and the current rhetoric in the media regarding these issues. Representatives from DHS stated their keen interest in the role of social capital in communities and how this could be quantified and enhanced. DHS interest was in identifying what makes a community strong and looking at means of building on strengths, leading to the selection of Apollo Bay as a community in which to explore such strengths. The project sought to identify and measure ‘social capital’ and to provide a benchmark on which to compare other communities.

The process of the project and the project outcomes were also discussed. Other issues discussed included:

· Identifying the boundaries of the community

· Sample selection for the project

· Means to ensure the sustainability of the project based on previous research project experiences in Apollo Bay

· The need to consider environmental awareness in the research

· The need to keep Apollo Bay residents informed of the process of the project.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 15 of 59 Final report - December 2001 · The need for academic supervision from a specialist in social capital measurement

Benefits to the community and the Department were also discussed. Possible benefits of the project to Apollo Bay community included:

· Identifying and documenting community strengths

· Establishing a baseline to build upon, and identifying service gaps

· Developing a local area planning tool

· Contributing to a broader marketing strategy for Apollo Bay

· Improving the capacity for communication and linkages with government

· Providing useful information in applying for funding for community projects

· Achieving the long term documented benefits associated with cohesive communities

Possible benefits to DHS included:

· Establishing a pilot project as a benchmark for other communities

· Testing the rhetoric of ‘social capital’ in a real situation

· Providing ‘grass roots’ information at a local community level

· Informing current regional information with regard to health status

· Providing local community information for local and regional service planning

The community members supported the project proceeding in Apollo Bay. A steering committee for the project, the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee (ABCCC), was convened from the groups and individuals involved in the consultation process. Attention was also drawn to the importance of following up local government representation on the ABCCC.

A draft “Terms of Reference” for the ABCCC was circulated for comment and endorsed at a later meeting (Appendix I). The Flinders University ‘Health and Participation Survey’ was distributed and discussed as a potential measurement tool to quantify ‘social capital’ which could be customised to accommodate the Apollo Bay community. Members of the community consultative committee were keen to introduce the project to their community and arranged a local media release to inform residents about the project. A further meeting was set to review the proposed survey questionnaire.

Survey development A second meeting was held three weeks later in Apollo Bay to enable the ABCCC to have input into customising the existing survey form for implementation in the Apollo Bay community. The ABCCC actively participated in making changes to the questionnaire format, ensuring a document that was appropriate and user-friendly for the Apollo Bay community. The ABCCC decided to change the description of the area to be surveyed from ‘Apollo Bay & District’ to ‘Postcode 3233’ as this better described the population who would

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 16 of 59 Final report - December 2001 be receiving the questionnaire. A plain language ‘explanatory statement’ was distributed in draft format to the ABCCC for feedback at the next meeting.

Methods of distributing the survey forms were discussed with the most likely option being a combination of bulk mail-out and hand delivery to individual letterboxes. A number of sites were suggested as possible ‘drop-off’ points for return of questionnaires. These included: post office, school, newsagency, video shop, supermarket, OHCS and the local petrol station.

ABCCC members volunteered to respond to calls for help to fill in questionnaire. The project worker’s responsibility was to be limited to issues related to the construction, layout, delivery and collection of the survey form.

Further meetings between the project officer and the ABCCC were held to finalise the questionnaire and to finalise feedback on the explanatory statement.

Survey procedure The project was a cross-sectional, self-completed, questionnaire survey distributed largely by hand with a small number (140) distributed by post. This procedure enabled the researcher to be very visible in the area and provided opportunities for community members to directly ask questions of clarification. The Ethics Committee, Department of Human Services (EC-DHS) approved the project (project # 8/01) on the condition that any posted material should be circulated to all members of the community.

A self-administered questionnaire has been specifically developed based on a tool used in a study to assess social capital in West Adelaide, South Australia by Baum et al (2000) (Appendix III). Permission to use the modified questionnaire has been granted by Prof Baum who provided academic consultation for the project. The questionnaire was modified by the ABCCC to capture aspects specific to Apollo Bay. Many of the changes reflect the Committee’s concepts of neighbourhood and community. The wording and layout of all questions pertaining to the health assessment tools were unchanged.

A package including a covering letter, explanatory statement, project questionnaire, “Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project” pen and an envelope in which to return the questionnaire was delivered by hand during April 2001 (Attachments I, II and III). Of the 1458 eligible voters 1318 had a locatable postal address. The remaining 140 questionnaires were delivered through the postal service. 190 questionnaires were returned as destinations without residences (vacant allotments), were without residents or where one or more of the registered voters had moved or died. In total 1268 questionnaires were delivered to a total of 748 residences.

Participants were given three weeks in which to complete and return the questionnaire. Questionnaires could be deposited in sealed drop-off boxes located at:

· The office, Apollo Bay P-12 College

· Otway Health & Community Services, Community Services Centre (McLachlan St)

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 17 of 59 Final report - December 2001 · Apollo Bay Post Office

· Apollo Bay Pharmacy

· Apollo Bay Newsagency

· Ocean Entertainment Video Store, Apollo Bay

· Apollo Bay IGA Everyday Supermarket

· Apollo Bay Supermarket (IGA X-press)

· Colac Otway Shire Customer Service Centre (Nelson St)

· Mobil Service Station, Apollo Bay

Reminders were published in the Apollo Bay News Sheet. Although replacement questionnaires were available for people who had misplaced their questionnaire, none were required.

The posting of reminder letters to non-responders was precluded by the Ethics Committee- DHS, however, a letter thanking all those who had participated was posted to all questionnaire recipients shortly before the completion of data collection (Attachment IV).

Outcome measures and parameters Primary outcome measures for the project are nominal and ordinal measures of civic and community participation. Continuous outcomes included the SF-12 mental health classification scale (MCS) and the physical health classification scale (PCS).

Data entry Questionnaires were entered into a Microsoft Access 2000 database using mouse-click-driven input forms replicating the format of the questionnaire.

Statistical analysis: All statistical analyses have been conducted using Intercooled Stata 6. Tests included paired T-tests for continuous paired outcomes, Shapiro-Wilk analysis for rejecting non-normal distributions of continuous outcomes, c2 and Fischer’s exact tests for categorical data with additional Cuzick tests for trend for ordinal outcomes.

Levels of significance Significant results were determined by applying the Modified Bonferroni Method for multiple significance tests using an aggregated a level of 0.05. Where data were analysed using a series of statistical tests (e.g. analysed for trend as a result of significant c2 results) only the first test was included in the test count and aggregate value of a. Results with undefined (e.g. p < 0.00005) values were approximated to zero and not subtracted from the aggregate value of a.

Thirty-six hypothesis tests were conducted. Eighteen tests were significant at an undetectable level (approximated to zero). The remaining tests did not reach the significance level of p = a/18 = 0.0028 although a surprisingly large number of the hypotheses conducted (6/21) fell between 0.05 > p > 0.0028

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 18 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Age standardisation Participation rates were measured by applying the proportion of residents in each age group (as measured by the ABS) and multiplying this by the total number of residents to whom a questionnaire was putatively delivered.

Ethical Considerations Confidentiality Participant confidentiality has been maintained by respecting the anonymity of respondents. Respondents were not required to provide their name on the questionnaire and questionnaires were coded for address only. Names were only linked to addresses in cases where the address was equivocal and a name was required for questionnaire delivery.

Consenting Procedures The project did not request a formal consent form from participants. A formal consent form would require participants to provide their name when their identity is not required at any other time to assure their anonymity. Hence the return of the questionnaire was considered consent to participation. This is clearly explained in the Explanatory Statement (Attachment I).

Reporting small numbers of cases Any aggregations of physical or demographic characteristics that sum to five or less are reported as less than five to protect the anonymity of participants. Free comments and opinion-based responses do not require this aggregation, as there is no likelihood of individual identification through the project.

Sources of Bias External Sources Coverage through the local media will be a source of bias with regard to selectively encouraging those who read the local newspaper to respond to the project. Readership of the local newspaper is a bias for which we cannot control.

Selection (Response) Bias The selection of responders is likely to be skewed toward those who are more motivated toward civic and community involvement. This is likely to result in an over estimation of those who are involved in civic and community activities.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 19 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Results

Response rate 516/1268 (40.7%) residents completed questionnaires. This included 379/1035 Apollo Bay residents, 58/124 Marengo/Cape Otway residents and 58/109 Skene’s Creek/North residents. Residential region could not be identified for twenty-one respondents. Four residents actively declined the opportunity to participate in the project. Of the 748 residences to which questionnaires were delivered, 344 (46.0%) residences had at least one respondent.

Fifty seven percent (286/504) of respondents were female. Figures 3 and 4 show the population for the statistical local area that includes Apollo Bay and the number of respondents by age and gender respectively. Most of the respondents were age 45 to 74 years with an absence of the age distribution peaks at 35-44 years and 65-74 years for all residents.

Although the response rate appears lower than that for other studies (Baum et al 2000) participation exceeded that for other studies characterising the social capital of small regions (Guenther and Falk, in press). Also, studies that attempt to survey all members of a discrete population are inherently more powerful by virtue of the binomially distributed error associated with random samples. Interestingly, the number of questionnaires distributed is similar to the ABS predicted postcode 3233 population of 1,293 residents 18 years and older at June 30, 2000

Figure 3: Apollo Bay SLA Population by Age Group & Gender

250

200

150 male (N) 100 female (N)

Total Population 50

0 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 and > Age Group

Figure 4: Questionnaire Respondents by Age Group & Gender

250

200

150

100 male (N) female (N) 50 Total number of respondents 0 < 35 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 and > Age group

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 20 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Participation rates were higher amongst Skene’s Creek and Marengo residents than resident of Apollo Bay (c2 = 0.001). Interestingly, age standardised participation rates were not consistent across age groups. Participation rates were lower amongst people age <45 years in comparison with people age 45 years to 65 years (c2 < 0.0005, Fischer’s exact), and between people age <45 years in comparison with people age >65 years (c2 < 0.005, Fischer’s exact).

At least four people actively declined the opportunity to participate by either telephoning the research team (n<5), writing a short note and leaving it in a drop off box (n<5) or writing on their survey that they were not willing to participate (n<5). In general, the reasons for non- participation related to the invasiveness of the questionnaire and a reluctance to return a questionnaire that may be critical of government, to a government department. This is supported by the 21 people who removed the identification code before returning the questionnaire. Hence the inclusion of a geographical identifier is likely to have decreased the level of participation. Ethical approval being conditional on conducting the distribution and collection of the questionnaire in a manner that did not comply with the method recommended by Dillman (Dillman in Rossi et al 1983) is also likely to have impacted negatively on project participation rate. While ethical approval conditional on the absence of reminder letters that may identify non-responders is understandable, in hindsight reminder letters posted in unmarked envelopes may have been a suitable compromise.

Health Data

Distributions of the physical and mental health outcomes

Data were analysed using an algorithm for the SF-12 Mental Health Classification Scale (MCS) and the SF-12 Physical Health Classification Scale (PCS). Histograms of the distributions of scores for physical and mental health classifications are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6 respectively. Both MCS data (Mean = 52.20; S.D. = 9.55) and the PCS data (Mean = 47.18; S.D. =11.08) have means that are not significantly different to those set by the SF-12 algorithms (p < 0.00005; t-test) although both sets of observations appear to be skewed and are not normally distributed (p < 0.000005; Shapiro-Wilk).

Figure 5: Distribution of the PCS against a plot of the normal distribution for the SF-12 (Mean = 50, SD = 10)

100

50 Frequency

0 20 40 60 Standardised PCS

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 21 of 59 Final report - December 2001

There is an association between increasing age in tertiles and decreasing physical health score in tertiles (c2(4) = 84.2339 p< 0.0005; p < 0.005, nptrend). There was also an inverse association between mental health status above and below a cut-off indicative of clinical depression (MCS = 42) and age in tertiles, however this was inversely related to age. This relationship held for trend where the proportion of people below the MCS cut-off decreased with age (Pearson c2 (2) = 15.9191, p < 0.0005; p < 0.005, nptrend).

There was no difference in physical or mental health scores by gender (p > 0.05).

Physical health and mental health were estimated using the SF-12 PCS and MCS. Analyses of health data for the purposes of this project assumes: 1. That MCS and PCS are an adequate estimate of an individuals physical and mental health respectively, for the purposes of this project

2. That mental health and physical health are the outcomes of interest and dependent upon a raft of other variables.

Figure 6: Distribution of the MCS against a plot of the normal distribution for the SF-12 (Mean = 50, SD = 10)

100

50 Frequency

0 20 40 60 80 Standardised MCS

Although the distributions of the PCS an MCS are skewed in comparison to the normalised standard curves, the means are similar. The differences are unlikely to have resulted from random variation. It is not possible to determine whether the non-normal distributions of the health measures is an artefact of the sample population, the local population that includes a large proportion of people age 65 years or more, or an indication that the (normalised) SF-12 measurement does not reflect the physical and mental health status of the Apollo Bay population

Although there is no evidence to support the chronology of any association, our hypothesis is that health is a socially dependent variable.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 22 of 59 Final report - December 2001 The association between increasing age and decreasing physical health score is expected. An MCS score of 42 or below can be indicative of clinical depression. There is an association between an MCS score of 42 or below and age in tertiles. The inverse relationship between MCS cut-off and age is difficult to explain without further investigation.

Health and accommodation status The majority of respondents are the outright owner (303/486; 62.4%) or mortgagee (116/486; 23.9%) of the house in which they live. There is no association between owner/mortgagee status Vs renting/boarding and PCS in tertiles or MCS (p > 0.05).

Health and income Income group was clustered into tertiles for analysis (<$15,600pa; $15,600 –$36,399pa; >$36.399pa). There is an association between income and physical health (c2(4) = 22.7204; p < 0.0005). This association held for trend (z = 4.67; p < 0.005). There was, however, no association between mental health score and income (c2(2) = 0.2459; p = 0.884).

Figure 7: Distribution of individual income groups.

No. of participants 20

0 <6.2 8.3-10.4 15.6-20. 26-31.2 36.4-41. 52-62.4 78-104

Annual personal income in $ '000

Although the mean income for respondents to the ABCCP has not been calculated, it is not expected to differ greatly from the mean income for postcode 3233 ascertained by the ABS ($25,423). The association between income and PCS and the lack of association between income and MCS are consistent with the findings of other studies.

Kawachi (Berkman et al, 2000) adopts the assessment of the poverty line as 50% of the median household income for a community. The median income for respondents to the ABCCP is in the $15,600 to $20,799 group and linearly regresses to around $18,516. Hence the poverty line for an individual in Apollo Bay based on this cohort of 382 respondents is $9,258pa. However, this calculation is not useful in the case of most residents given that it does not account for owner /occupier status, partners and dependents.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 23 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Community support and participation Apollo Bay reflected a strong sense of community. Respondents to the questionnaire indicated that they knew many or most of the people in their neighbourhood (405/515; 78.6%) and in their community (408/512; 80.2%). Most people also felt that they had close friends within the community (430/512; 85.7%) and expectedly, not having close friends living in Apollo Bay was associated with the length of time living at your current address (c2(2) < 0.0005;: z =-6.10, p < 0.005, nptrend). Interestingly, more than half of respondents (261/508; 51.3%) did not have relatives living in other households in the area. This observation fits with the impression of Apollo Bay as a place to which many people retire having previously lived and worked in another place.

An attempt was made to evaluate whether people had assisted or been assisted by neighbours over the past year. The results of these questions are included in Table 4.

Apollo Bay people generally help and assist one another. As expected there were many more people providing help and assistance than those receiving help. Of interest is the lower rate of participation in the lending of money. Although many respondents did not feel that help was required in most other categories, it was evident from the small number who received help and the large number who did not receive help that many people may have needed money in the last 12 months but may not have been in a position to borrow money.

Provided help Received help Help not Yes No Yes No required Listen to problems 407 81 308 36 146 Help with odd jobs 342 135 285 56 146 Lend household equipment 265 192 194 108 171 Look after house or pets 259 213 251 83 155 Assist with shopping 172 281 129 111 239 Care for a family member 156 281 114 129 222 Lend money 81 354 37 174 253 Provide transport 292 173 183 101 196 Table 4: Frequency of responses to the questions “Have you assisted neighbours or friends/ neighbours or friends assisted you with the following activities in the last year?”

Volunteerism and the support to tourism The Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project asked residents about volunteer work. 186 (37.4%) of the 497 respondents to the question “Are you presently doing any volunteer work in the community?” reported doing volunteer work.

The type of volunteer work and the organisations described by respondents was extensive. Below are some examples of the organisations and type of volunteer work carried out:

· Apollo Bay Music Festival Committee · Visitor Information Centre · Apollo Bay Arts Council · Friends of Otway National Park · Landcare, Tidy Towns Group · Apollo Bay News Sheet · C.F.A., Rural Ambulance · Hospital Auxiliary

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 24 of 59 Final report - December 2001 · Otway Health & Community Centre · Meals on Wheels · R.S.L., Lions Club, Red Cross, Op Shop · Sporting Associations inc. youth clubs · Skate Ramp Committee · Church · School, Kinder and Playgroups · Various National Health Associations

Importantly, a significant proportion of these volunteer organisations appear to contribute, either directly or indirectly, to the success of tourism within the Apollo Bay area.

Volunteers undertake an extensive range of community work. Some of these require volunteers with specific and/or professional skills. Some of the work carried out includes:

· Fundraising by various methods · Revegetation of parklands and wildlife care · Providing information to tourists · Catering for various organisations · Working Bee’s · Committee participation and attending meetings · Canteen duties at schools and/or sporting clubs · Financial consultation · Organising events such as the Music Festival · Maintaining local memorabilia for the Historical Society · Providing physical and compassionate support to those in need

There appears to be a strong tradition of volunteering with more than 37% of respondents participating in at least one form of volunteer work. This rate is consistent with the level for rural and regional Australia of 38% and exceeds the level for capital cities of 28% (ABS, 2000). The range of volunteer organisations and work performed within these organisations is varied, and often requires special skills.

Most communities have volunteers involved in running sporting clubs and providing community support services (e.g. meals on wheels). However, much of the volunteer work in Apollo Bay contributes directly or indirectly to tourism by maintaining the environment and heritage of Apollo Bay, providing and maintaining facilities (particularly cleaning and gardening), staffing emergency services and providing free services for tourists. The significant proportion of work performed by these organisations appears to be a large contributor to the success of tourism within the Apollo Bay area.

Caring for people with disabilities One hundred respondents (100/504; 19.8%) reported caring for a disabled person in a voluntary capacity with 34 respondents living in the same house as a person who is disabled.

There were significant differences between people who live in the same house and those who live in a different house to the person for whom they provided care. Those living with a disabled person were more likely to be affected by having their activities restricted (c2(1)= 12.6622; p < 0.0005). There was no association demonstrated between experiencing stress (c2 (1) = 5.9769, p = 0.014) getting a sense of satisfaction from caring for their disabled co- tenant (c2 (1) = 8.0525, p = 0.005), financial stress (c2 (1) = 5.1808, p = 0.023), or physical stress (c2 (1) = 3.8947, p = 0.048) attending a support group (p = 0.024 Fisher's exact) and co-

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 25 of 59 Final report - December 2001 tenancy. There was no association between living with the disabled person for whom you were the carer and walking, gardening or playing sport for recreation (p > 0.05).

People caring for disabled people ranged in age from 32 to 84 years for those living in the same house and 35 to 90 years for those living in a different house. Many of those living in the same house as a person living with a disability also live with children in both the 0-6 years and the 7-18 year groups.

There were a surprisingly large proportion of respondents who reported caring for a disabled person in a voluntary capacity (19.8%) with almost seven percent of all respondents living in the same house as a person who is disabled. Although there was strictly no association demonstrated between co-tenancy and experiencing stress, getting a sense of satisfaction from caring for their disabled co-tenant, financial stress, or physical stress), all of these factors approach statistical significance (p < 0.05) as does the likelihood of not attending a support group. There are surprisingly few comments and responses from people who live with a person who is disabled. This may reflect a need for constraint by carers in completing this section questionnaire in the home environment. Hence the power of this study to detect an association is limited. Given the limited statistical power of this aspect of the study, it may be that living in the same house as a person who is disabled is associated with increased level of restriction and stress, and that support groups are not effective for people who live in the same house as the disabled person for whom they care. These findings warrant a small investigation dedicated to this issue.

Transport Although transport was not addressed as a major theme, many questions collected information regarding transport in Apollo Bay. Responses to the questions, “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays” and “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekends?” are included in Table 5. More than 10% of respondents do not always have a car available to them on weekdays or weekends

Always Sometimes Never Weekdays 452 (88.6%) 35 (6.9%) 23 (4.5%) Weekends 453 (89.2%) 29 (5.7%) 26 (5.1%) Table 5: Response to the questions “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays” and “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekends?” – all respondents

465/508 (91.5%) respondents reported having a drivers licence. Of these individuals one percent never had a vehicle available to them and five percent had a vehicle available sometimes or never (Table 6).

Always Sometimes Never Weekdays 439 (94.4%) 23 (5.0%) 3 (0.7%) Weekends 441 (95.3%) 17 (3.7%) 5 (1.1%) Table 6: Response to the questions “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays” and “Do you normally have a car available for use on weekends?” – respondents reporting having a drivers licence

Residents who did not have a car available during the week and during the weekend were more likely to be assisted by neighbours with transport (p < 0.0005 for both).

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 26 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Transport was a barrier for some people wishing to do volunteer work for community groups. Of the eleven people who cited transport as a barrier, seven never or sometimes had a car available to them during the week and eight never or sometimes had a car available on the weekend.

Car availability did not appear to be an issue for the majority of respondents (approx. 95%). However, availability of transport clearly impacts on the ability of a small number of people to perform volunteer work. Transport may also limit the ability of Apollo Bay residents to access a range of services both within and outside Apollo Bay. The impact of any lack of transport in Apollo Bay is brought into sharp relief when consideration is given to the basic services that are not supported in Apollo Bay. Most household goods (including shoes and general clothing) cannot be purchased in Apollo Bay and the closest major rural centre is more than 50kms away over a mountain range.

This hypothesis is further supported by the argel proportion of respondents who provided (292/465; 63%) or accepted (183/480; 38%) transport from a neighbour. This question was new to the ABCCP and hence there is no data available for comparison with previous projects.

Although public transport was not addressed in the questionnaire, it is surprising that transport did not feature in the free comments.

Safety

509/516 (98.6%) people completing the survey responded to the question “Do you feel safe in your home?” with 98.8% of respondents feeling safe in their home most or all of the time. The six respondents who reported that they did not feel safe in their home at least most of the time included all age groups and genders and were not clustered into any one town or region.

Seventy-seven respondents commented in the follow-up question “What makes you feel unsafe?” with many respondents commenting on more than one issue. Comments were with regard to:

· Unknown visitors to the area (including tourists) (n=31)

· People under the influence of alcohol/drugs (n=25)

· Intruders/ burglaries/ vandals (n=24)

· Unknown noises / weather (n=9)

· Isolation / being alone (n=7)

· Lack of police on duty /hours (n=3)

· Street Lighting (n=1)

· Dogs (n=1)

· Other (n=9)

In general, postcode 3233 residents feel safe in their homes at night. The six respondents who reported that they did not feel safe in their home at least most of the time included all age groups and genders and were not clustered into any one town or region. However, complaints

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 27 of 59 Final report - December 2001 regarding “people under the influence of alcohol/drugs” and “intruders/ burglaries/ vandals” were mostly (>90%) confined to the areas in the main township of Apollo Bay.

Interestingly, street lighting and dogs were only cited as affecting the safety of one resident in each case, although a greater number of people (two and seven respectively) indicated that they had taken these issues up with council.

Planning issues

The question “In the past year, have you taken any of the following action to try to solve a local problem?” was included in the questionnaire to elicited information about Civic Participation. Responses to this question are shown in Table 7.

Of the 516 respondents, 153 (29.7%) cited the issue on which they took action. Comments covered a wide range of areas and many respondents commented on more than one issue. Some of their concerns were with regard to:

§ Clear felling / Logging / Environmental issues (n=27)

· Water shortage (n=22)

· Building / Development issues (n=20)

· Road / Rates / Rubbish (n=14)

· Police / Crime / Nuisances (n=14)

· Swimming Pool (n=1)

· Dogs (n=10)

· Skate Park (n=8)

· Drainage (n=8)

· Car parking / Foreshore (n=7)

· Information Centre Volunteers (n=4)

· Marine Parks (n=3)

· Other council obligations / Maintenance (n=44)

· No specific category (n=7)

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 28 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Yes No Talked to your neighbours or friends about it 384 124 Contacted a local politician 101 401 Contacted the appropriate organisation to deal with the 215 285 problem (eg. Police, council) Attended a public meeting 183 318 Joined an action group 48 446 Written to the local news sheet 61 432 Table 7: Frequency of responses to the question “In the past year, have you taken any of the following action to try to solve a local problem?”

Most residents reported having taken action on an issue in the past year and almost 30% of respondents reported the issue on which they had taken action in the past year. Most of these issues were with regard to planning and local government issues. Many comments were made in the free comments section at the end of the questionnaire regarding development, density and infrastructure to support development. These data will be analysed in a future report.

In some cases, residents indicated that, although they had concerns and taken action to voice their opinion to various authorities, issues were not perceived to have been addressed. A number of respondents reported feeling discouraged and reluctant to pursue issues in the future.

Perceptions of Government There were a number of questions eliciting information regarding attitudes to government. A sequence of five questions attempted to gauge respondent’s confidence in both local and state governments (Table 8). A pictorial breakdown of how respondents answered these five consecutive questions is included in Appendix IV.

strongly moderately neutral moderately strongly agree agree disagree disagree I have confidence in the 5 102 118 160 126 decisions made by local 0.98% 19.96% 23.09% 31.31% 24.66% government Local government acts in my 8 91 133 152 114 best interests 1.58% 17.95 % 26.23% 29.98% 25.74% I have confidence in the 8 124 147 149 79 decisions made by state 1.58% 24.46% 28.99% 29.39% 15.58% government State government acts in my 6 99 172 140 89 best interests 1.19% 19.57% 33.99% 27.67% 17.59% In general, governments 120 139 136 85 23 cannot be trusted 23.86% 27.63% 27.04% 16.90% 4.57% Table 8: Response to five questions assessing confidence in local and state government

Two questions attempted to assess respondent’s perceptions of their ability to institute change at an individual and community level. The responses are included in Table 9.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 29 of 59 Final report - December 2001 strongly moderately neutral moderately strongly agree agree disagree disagree I can influence decisions that 28 144 160 94 75 affect my community 5.59% 28.74% 31.94% 18.76% 14.97% By working together, people in my community can influence 178 209 39 52 24 decisions that affect the 35.46% 41.63% 7.77% 10.36% 4.78% community Table 9: Frequency of responses to two questions regarding an individuals perception of their ability to influence community decisions

There was a strong message that participants did not have confidence in the state government or, even more strongly, local government, or that government acted in the best interests of respondents. This is consistent with responses to the questions regarding planning. In particular, almost ten percent of all respondents strongly disagreed with questions regarding confidence and actions of government with 36 respondents displaying an extreme lack of confidence in government in their answers to all five questions.

Of interest were the 76 participants who moderately or strongly disputed the ability of people working together to influence community decisions. These respondents were more likely to moderately or strongly disagree with the statements “I have confidence in the decisions made by local government” (c2 (4) = 36.8831, p < 0.0005; z = 5.53 p < 0.005, nptrend), “Local government acts in my best interests” (c2 (4) = 24.7029 p < 0.0005; z = 4.62, p < 0.005, nptrend) although this association did not hold for “I have confidence in the decisions made by state government” (c2 (4) = 11.0485, p = 0.026) nor for “Local government acts in my best interests” (c2 (4) = 7.9537, p = 0.093), nor for agreement with “In general governments cannot be trusted” (c2 (4) = 4.6275, p = 0.328). There was no difference between the instances of civic participation for these 76 participants and the respondents who did not strongly or moderately disagree that people could influence community decisions (talked to your neighbours or friends about it, (c2 (1) = 0.9106 p = 0.340), contacted a local politician (c2 (1) = 2.8895, p = 0.089), contacted the appropriate organisation to deal with the problem (eg police, council) (c2 (1) = 0.5275, p = 0.468), attended a public meeting (c2 (1) = 0.7793, p = 0.377), joined an action group (c2 (1) = 0.6496, p = 0.420), written to the local news sheet (c2 (1) = 2.8740, p = 0.090).

Hence the participants who responded that they could not influence community decisions appear to have become disillusioned with local rather than state government. This would be consistent with the comments regarding local planning issues.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 30 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Internet utilisation The questionnaire included three questions regarding Internet utilisation. Only 25% of participants reported using the Internet to communicate with friends and relatives (Table 10) and 4.5% of respondents reported using the Internet for community or group involvement. This finding was supported by the 74% of residents who have never used the Internet for social communication (Table 11).

Response Number Percent Never 380 74.36% Most Months 53 10.37% Most weeks 50 9.78% Most days 28 5.48% Table 10: Responses to the question “I use the Internet to communicate with friends and relatives”

Response Number Percent Once a week or more 47 9.27% A few times a month 30 5.92% Monthly 18 3.55% A few times a year 19 3.75% Rarely 28 5.52% Never 365 71.99% Table 11: Responses to the question “In the past twelve months how often have you used the Internet for social communication?”

An association was demonstrated between “I use the Internet to communicate with friends and relatives” and income tertile (c2 (6) = 33.0504, p < 0.0005; z = 4.82, p < 0.005, nptrend). Age in population tertiles was associated with decreasing likelihood of Internet utilisation for contacting family and friends (c2 (6) = 40.5810, p < 0.0005; z = -5.22, p < 0.005, nptrend) although there was no association with gender (c2 (3)= 2.5070, p = 0.474). There was also a strong association between education level and Internet use (c2 (18) = 73.7907, p < 0.0005; z = 6.91, p < 0.005, nptrend) .

There were surprisingly few comments regarding the Internet. Project respondents identified few barriers although the costs of computer hardware, STD dialling costs for ISP access and casual user costs (approx. $5 per half hour) are likely to be contributing to the low level of Internet use.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 31 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Recommendations The information gained from this project will provide additional input into local and regional planning given that social capital is a potential predictor of health outcomes;

The project has uncovered many associations, however it has raised many questions. Some of these questions can be addressed using the current data; other questions prescribe further investigation.

From within the current data:

· Classification of isolation using the “Nottingham scale” questions has not been attempted during the analysis of this study. All participants could be classified according to this scale and the impact of this on PCS and MCS evaluated. In addition, this could be cross-tabulated against time in current residence and time spent in Apollo Bay. There may be a hypothesis to be drawn between relocation and health due to having to set up new social networks in a new residential setting.

· There were many protracted general comments (Question 67) that could not be addressed within the tight time frame of this project. These general comments could be entered, grouped and analysed for themes. In many cases the free comments will overlap with comments made in other sections of the questionnaire.

· Equally, there are other questions that provide an opportunity for comment that have not been grouped and analysed.

· Participation in volunteer or community groups should be evaluated by at least age quartile, possibly using ten-year age brackets (e.g. 65-75etc). This will allow us to age standardise for participation in other communities.

· Current estimates of poverty are based on individual income. Recalculation could be undertaken using the median household income rather than the median individual income.

· Following this recalculation, multiple regression could be undertaken to predict whether people are happy with their level of income and the level of income required to survive in Apollo Bay using household income, accommodation status, children, PCS, MCS, age tertile at least. The small number of observations available may, however, substantially limit this analysis.

· It may be worth calculating a GINI coefficient (a measure of income inequality) as an estimate of income inequality from the participants in the ABCCP.

· Comparison of results for civic and community participation with the study by Baum et al. is recommended

Additional studies from within the Apollo Bay area, potentially overseen by the ABCCC:

· A case series is required to tease out the issues around caring for a person with a disability with whom you live. Help via support groups may not be appropriate for these carers. A few targeted interviews may uncover strategies to provide efficiently targeted support for these carers.

· In the case of volunteer organisations and community groups there is an opportunity to approach the groups for to ascertain the number of known participants in each group

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 32 of 59 Final report - December 2001 and determine if they are over represented within the respondents. Also, there is an opportunity to get an indication of the proportion of residents participating in volunteer organisations.

· Additional qualitative data could be collected by means of focus groups with selected population groups within the Apollo Bay community. These groups will be selected on the advice of the ABCCC. The information gained will triangulate and supplement the data collected in the survey, and provide valuable additional detail and depth.

· There is an opportunity to obtain longitudinal data on civic and community participation and health. A case series conducted at least 12 months and within five years of the current study could detect changes within an individual over time that would be more reliable than cross-sectional associations. Such a project would be both statistically and ethically viable if recruitment involved a call for volunteers from those who participated in the previous study. This individual-controlled case study design is particularly powerful and would require many fewer participants (say 80- 100). Although individuals were not identified by name, address for delivery of the previous questionnaire, year of birth and gender would provide adequate information for matching. There is more than enough other data that is not required for analysis that could be used to verify identity.

References: Australian Bureau of Statistics (n.p.) Measuring Social Capital: Current Collections and Future Directions. Discussion Paper, Nov 2000.

Australian Bureau of Statistics Voluntary Work, Australia 2000 (Cat. No.4441.0)

Baum, F.E.; Bush, R.A.; Modra, C.C.; Murray, C.J.; Cox, E.M.; Alexander, K.M. & Potter, R.C. (2000) ‘Epidemiology of participation: an Australian community study.’ J Epidemiol Community Health; 54: 414-23.

Berkman, L.F. & Kawach,I. (2000) Social Epidemiology Oxford University Press

Blackwell, AG. & Colmenar, R. (2000) ‘Community-Building: From Local Wisdom to Public Policy.’ Public Health Reports. 115(2-3), March, pp.161-66.

Bullen, P. and Onyx, J. (1998) Measuring Social Capital in Five Communities in NSW. Overview of a study. http://www.mapl.com.au/A2.htm

Cox, E. (1995) ‘A Truly Civil Society.’ The 1995 Boyer Lectures. Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Department of Infrastructure (1999) Towns in time: Data. 1981, 1986, 1991 and 1996 Census statistics for Victoria’s towns and rural areas. Melbourne: DOI.

Guenther, J. & Falk, I. (in press) Measuring trust and community capacity. Social capital for the common good.

Kawachi, I. & Kennedy, B.P. (1997) ‘Socioeconomic determinants of health: Health and social cohesion: why care about income inequality?’ BMJ 1997; 314; 1037 (5 April).

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 33 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Kawachi, I & Kennedy, RG. (1999) Eds. The Society and Population Health Reader: income inequality and health. New York: The New Press.

Kennedy, B.P. & Kawachi, I. (1996) ‘Income distribution and mortality: cross sectional ecological study of the Robin Hood index in the United States.’ BMJ 1996; 312: 1004-1007 (20 April).

Labonte, R. (1999) ‘Social capital and community development: Practitioner emptor.’ Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 1999; vol. 23; no.4: 430-433.

Public Health and Development Division, DHS. (1999) Victorian Burden of Disease Study. Mortality. Melbourne: State of Victoria.

Rossi,P.H., Wright, J.D. & Anderson, A.B. (1983) Handbook of Social Research London Academic Press

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 34 of 59 Final report - December 2001

NOTES

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 35 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Appendix I: Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee - Terms of Reference:

· To support/facilitate community involvement in the project · To act as a steering committee enabling community management of the project · To provide input of local community knowledge · To ensure effective communication between the community and the project · To market the project within the community · To provide an information point to community members with regard to social capital and the project · To ensure that the project is compatible with the norms and values of the community · To provide support to the project officer where possible, in the development and implementation of the project.

Overview of the process:

· Decision to set up a committee subsequent to consultation with key community representatives. · Community committee to be formed, comprising representation from the community and other key stakeholders (including service clubs, industry, health sector, local police, local school, small business, local government, DHS and the voluntary sector). · Monthly committee meetings. · Meetings to take place in Apollo Bay at mutually convenient times. · All documentation and project actions to be endorsed by the Committee. · A project officer will be provided by DHS but will work under the direction of the Committee. Day to day management, supervision, office space, computer access and other resource materials and support will be provided by DHS. Additional academic supervision will be made available to ensure rigor in research design and implementation. · A strategy to achieve project aims and objectives will be developed in consultation with the Committee and will require Committee input and endorsement.

Endorsed: Wednesday 7 February 2001.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 36 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Appendix II: Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee - Membership: Ms Fiona Nelson Otway Ranges Environmental Network

Mr Dick Lythgo Principal, Apollo Bay P-12 College

Mr Doug Bartram Community representative

Mr Greg Fletcher Manager Health and Community Services Colac Otway Shire

Ms Kath Gough Apollo Bay Lions Club

Deb Tovey Community representative

Senior Constable Michael Fischer Apollo Bay Police Station

Mr Allen Hokin Board Member Otway Health and Community Services

Charles Gibson Department of Human Services

Ms Jeanette Grant CEO Otway Health & Community Services

Ms Jacinta Bourke Manager of Community Services Otway Health & Community Services

Ms Lisa Deppeler Community Development Worker Otway Health & Community Services

Deborah Jennings Public Health Officer, Victorian Public Health Training Scheme

Peter McNair Public Health Officer, Victorian Public Health Training Scheme

Sandy Austin (Observer) Barwon Primary Care Partnership

Cr Carol Wilmink (Mailing list)

David Earl (Mailing list) Apollo Bay Chamber of Commerce and tourism

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 37 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Appendix III: Results in Questionnaire format with response frequencies Section 1: Your Health

These questions ask for your views about your health. Please try to answer each question as accurately as you can.

1. In general, would you say your health is: (please tick one box)

Excellent 82 16.08% Very Good 189 37.06% Good 153 30.00% Fair 69 13.53% Poor 17 3.33% These questions ask about activities that you might do during a typical day.

2. For moderate activities, such as moving a table, pushing a vacuum cleaner, bowling or playing golf, does your health now limit you a lot, a little or not at all? (please tick one box)

Yes, limited a lot 48 9.36% Yes, limited a little 136 26.51% No, not limited at all 329 64.13%

3. For climbing several flights of stairs, does your health now limit you a lot, a little or not at all? (please tick one box)

Yes, limited a lot 56 10.92% Yes, limited a little 157 30.60% No, not limited at all 300 58.48%

These questions ask about your physical health and your daily activities.

4. During the past four weeks, have you accomplished less than you would like as a result of your physical health? (please tick one box)

Yes 146 28.91% No 359 71.09 %

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 38 of 59 Final report - December 2001 5. During the past four weeks, were you limited in the kind of work or other activities you did as a result of your physical health? (please tick one box)

Yes 145 28.43% No 365 71.57%

These questions ask about your emotions and your daily activities.

6. During the past 4 weeks, have you accomplished less than you would like as a result of any emotional problems, such as feeling depressed or anxious? (please tick one box) Yes 100 19.42%

No 415 80.58%

7. During the past 4 weeks, did you not do work or other regular daily activities as carefully as usual as a result of any emotional problems, such as feeling depressed or anxious? (please tick one box) Yes 82 . 16.02% No 430 83.98%

8. During the past 4 weeks, how much did pain interfere with your normal work, including both work outside the home and housework? (please tick one box)

Not at all 254 49.80% Slightly 147 28.82% Moderately 55 10.78% Quite a bit 40 7.84% Extremely 14 2.75%

9. How much of the time during the past 4 weeks: (please tick one box for each question) All of the Most of A good Some of A little of None of time the time bit of the the time the time the time time

a) Have you felt calm 44 228 126 74 31 3 and peaceful? 8.70% 45.06% 24.90% 14.62% 6.13% 0.59%

b) Did you have a lot of 27 183 136 94 50 14 energy? 5.36% 36.31% 26.98% 18.65% 9.92% 2.78%

c) Have you felt down? 6 11 25 93 186 185 1.19% 2.17% 4.94% 18.38% 36.76% 36.56%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 39 of 59 Final report - December 2001 10. During the past 4 weeks, how much of the time has your physical health and emotional problems interfered with your social activities like visiting friends and relatives? (please tick one box) All of the time 13 2.55% Most of the time 20 3.93% Some of the time 57 11.20% A little of the time 89 17.49% None of the time 330 64.83%

11. If you had a serious personal crisis, how many people do you feel you could turn to for help and comfort? (please tick one box)

None 6 1.17% 1 - 2 people 105 20.51% 3 - 4 people 143 27.93% 5 or more people 258 50.39%

12. Listed below are some problems people may have in their daily life. (please tick yes or no for each problem). Yes No I feel lonely 63 12.60% 437 87.40% I’m finding it hard to make contact with people 56 11.24% 442 88.76% I feel there is nobody I am close to 30 6.04% 467 93.96% I feel I am a burden to people 31 6.20% 469 93.80% I’m finding it hard to get on with people 30 6.05% 466 93.95%

Section 2: Your Neighbourhood

13. How long have you lived at your current address? Less than 1 year 37 7.20% 1 - 3 years 108 21.01% 4 - 9 years 148 28.79% 10 - 15 years 74 14.40% More than 15 years 147 28.60%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 40 of 59 Final report - December 2001 14. How long have you lived in the following areas? (please tick one box for each area)

All of my Most of my Some of my Less than 1 life life life year a) Apollo Bay & District 52 71 171 30 16.05% 21.91% 52.78% 9.26% b) South West Victoria 8 122 160 49 2.36% 35.99% 47.20% 14.45% c) Melbourne 50 104 336 18 9.84% 20.47% 66.14% 3.54% d) Victoria 195 116 73 2 50.52% 30.05% 18.91% 0.52% e) Australia 255 69 44 3 68.73% 18.60% 11.86% 0.81% f) Overseas 1 11 115 108 0.43% 4.68% 48.94% 45.96%

15. Do you have family members who live in your community but not in your house?

Yes 247 48.62% No 261 51.38%

16. Do you have close friends who live in your community?

Yes 430 85.66% No 72 14.34%

17. Where do most of your family members and friends live? (please tick one or more boxes) Your Family Your Friends

In Apollo Bay and District 208 328 In other parts of South West Victoria 114 124 In Melbourne 267 238 In other parts of Victoria 175 162 In other parts of Australia 160 158 Overseas 78 81

18. I use the internet to communicate with friends and relatives: (please tick one box) Never 380 74.36% Most Months 53 10.37% Most weeks 50 9.78% Most days 28 5.48%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 41 of 59 Final report - December 2001 19. Which of the following fits your situation? (please tick one box):

I know most of the people living in my neighbourhood 165 32.04% I know many of the people living in my neighbourhood 240 46.60% I know few people in my neighbourhood, but most are strangers 106 20.58% I do not know people in my neighbourhood 4 0.78%

20. Which of the following fits your situation? (please tick one box):

I know most of the people living in my community 58 11.33% I know many of the people living in my community 350 68.36% I know a few people in my community, but most are strangers 101 19.73% I do not know people in my community. 3 0.59%

21. Have you assisted neighbours or friends with the following activities in the past year? (please tick yes or no for each activity) Yes No Listened to their problems 407 83.40% 81 16.60% Helped them with odd jobs 342 71.70% 135 28.30% Lent them household equipment 265 57.99% 192 42.01% Looked after their house or pets while away 259 54.87% 213 45.13% Assisted them with shopping 172 37.97% 281 62.03% Cared for a member of their family 156 35.70% 281 64.30% Lent them money 81 18.62% 354 81.38% Provided transport 292 62.80% 173 37.20%

Other (please specify) ______

22. Have your neighbours or friends assisted you with the following activities in the last year? (please tick yes or no for each activity)

No assistance Yes No required Listened to your problems 308 62.86% 36 7.35% 146 29.80% Helped you with odd jobs 285 58.52% 56 11.50% 146 29.98% Lent you household equipment 194 41.01% 108 22.83% 171 36.15% Looked after your house or pets 251 51.33% 83 16.97% 155 31.70% Assisted you with shopping 127 26.62% 111 23.27% 239 50.10% Cared for a member of your family 114 24.52% 129 27.74% 222 47.74% Lent you money 37 7.97% 174 37.50% 253 54.53% Provided transport 183 38.12% 101 21.04% 196 40.83%

Other, please specify ______

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 42 of 59 Final report - December 2001 What you think about the community that you live in.

23. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements: (please tick one box for each row)

strongly moderately moderately strongly agree agree neutral disagree disagree People in my community make it 9 24 96 81 289 a difficult place to live 1.80% 4.81% 19.24 16.23% 57.92% %

I am good friends with many 181 197 77 27 24 people in this community 35.77% 38.93% 15.22 5.34% 4.74% %

I have little to do with people in 18 65 72 132 206 this community 3.65% 13.18% 14.60 26.77% 41.78% %

I seem to get involved with most 38 171 165 83 45 local issues 7.57% 34.06% 32.87 16.53% 8.96% %

People in my community are very 2057 204 62 23 12 willing to help each other out 40.51% 40.32% 12.25 4.55% 2.37% % If I moved hardly anyone around 37 68 74 181 142 here would notice 7.37% 13.55% 14.74 36.06% 28.29% %

I find it difficult to communicate 15 7 1.40% 47 27 405 with people in my community 2.99% 9.38% 5.39% 80.84% because of language barriers

How much influence you feel you have in your life and community.

24. For the following statements, please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree: (please tick one box for each row)

strongly moderately neutral moderately strongly agree agree disagree disagree a) I have control over the 286 149 33 30 10 decisions that affect my life 56.30% 29.33% 6.50% 5.91% 1.97%

b) I can influence decisions that 28 144 160 94 75 affect my community 5.59% 28.74% 33.94% 18.76% 14.97%

c) By working together, people in 178 209 39 52 24 my community can influence 35.46% 41.63% 7.77% 10.36% 4.78% decisions that affect the community

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 43 of 59 Final report - December 2001

How you rate the neighbourhood that you live in

25. Please circle a number between 1 and 5 to show how you rate your neighbourhood for each of the following: (For example, if you think the area in which you live is very quiet, circle À)

VERY QUIET VERY NOISY 240 172 65 18 10 47.52% 34.06% 12.87% 3.56% 1.98%

VERY CLEAN VERY DIRTY 209 223 61 87 4 41.39% 44.16% 12.08% 1.58% 0.79%

A VERY FRIENDLY PLACE TO LIVE A VERY UNFRIENDLY PLACE TO LIVE 266 169 60 97 5 52.26% 33.20% 11.79% 1.77% 0.98%

A VERY SAFE PLACE TO WALK A VERY UNSAFE PLACE TO WALK AROUND AT NIGHT AROUND AT NIGHT 301 133 47 16 4 60.08% 26.55% 9.38% 3.19% 0.80%

MOST PEOPLE IN MY MOST PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBOURHOOD CAN BE NEIGHBOURHOOD CAN NOT BE TRUSTED TRUSTED 259 175 60 12 3 50.88% 34.38% 11.79% 2.36% 0.59%

MOST PEOPLE IN THE APOLLO MOST PEOPLE IN THE APOLLO BAY AREA CAN BE TRUSTED BAY AREA CAN NOT BE TRUSTED 165 206 114 17 3 32.67% 40.79% 22.57% 3.37% 0.59%

26. Do you feel safe in your home?

All of the time 389 76.42% Ø Go to Question 28 Most of the time 114 22.40% Some of the time 5 0.98% None of the time 1 0.20%

27. What makes you feel unsafe in your home?

……………………………………………………

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 44 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Section 3: Activities that you are involved in

This includes activities both within and outside of the Apollo Bay area.

28. In the past twelve months, how often have you done the following social activities? (please tick one box for each activity) once a a few a few week or times a monthly times a rarely never more month year Visited family/had family 171 112 69 133 20 5 visit 33.53% 21.96% 13.53% 26.08% 3.92% 0.98% Visited friends/had friends 175 170 56 86 11 6 visit 34.72% 33.73% 11.11% 17.06% 2.18% 1.19% Visited neighbours/had 139 130 58 84 73 22 neighbours visit 27.47% 25.69% 11.46% 16.60% 14.43% 4.35% Talked to friends or family 395 75 21 15 3 3 on the phone 77.15% 14.65% 4.10% 2.93% 0.59% 0.59% Attend church or a 52 12 4 30 121 288 religious group 10.26% 2.37% 0.79% 5.92% 23.87% 56.80% Gone to a social club 82 37 46 53 87 195 16.40% 7.40% 9.20% 10.60% 17.40% 39.00% Used the Internet for social 47 30 18 19 28 365 communication 9.27% 5.92% 3.55% 3.75% 5.52% 71.99% Gone to a cafe or 126 107 75 108 61 34 restaurant 24.66% 20.94% 14.68% 21.14% 11.94% 6.65% Gone to a club, pub or bar 76 61 62 107 111 87 15.08% 12.10% 12.30% 21.23% 22.02 % 17.26% Gone to the cinema or 3 26 317 157 152 137 theatre 0.59% 5.14% 6.13% 31.03% 30.04% 27.08% Gone to watch a sports 34 35 29 94 143 173 event 6.69% 6.89% 5.71% 18.50% 28.15% 34.6% Gone to a party or dance 1 10 46 138 175 136 0.20% 1.98% 9.09% 27.27% 34.58% 26.88% Attended a community 6 27 63 131 156 122 meeting 1.19% 5.35% 12.48% 25.94% 30.89% 24.16% Gone to a conference or 1 10 36 133 155 169 talk 0.20% 1.98% 7.14% 26.39% 30.75% 33.53% Gone to a gallery or 3 6 9 128 183 175 museum 0.60% 1.19% 1.79% 25.40 % 36.31% 34.72% Other - please specify 4 7 3 9 2 16

29. In the past 12 months, how often have you participated in the following sport, leisure or support activities? (please tick one box for each activity)

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 45 of 59 Final report - December 2001 once a a few a few week or times a monthly times a rarely never more month year Played sport 121 60 13 31 69 210 24.01% 11.90% 2.58 % 6.15% 13.69% 41.67 % Had social contact 35 31 16 46 89 289 through children’s 6.92% 6.13% 3.16% 9.09% 17.59% 57.11% sport Gone to the gym or 37 21 2 27 77 343 exercise class 7.30 % 4.14% 0.39 % 5.33% 15.19% 67.65% Gone to a pool 21 23 13 55 87 308 4.14% 4.54% 2.56% 10.85% 17.16% 60.75% Self-help or support 16 7 13 27 46 395 groups 3.17% 1.39% 2.58% 5.36 9.13% 78.37% Singing, acting or 12 13 5 18 49 410 played music in a 2.37% 2.56% 0.99% 3.55% 9.66% 80.87% group Been involved in a 17 18 19 38 62 351 hobby group 3.37% 3.56% 3.76% 7.52 % 12.28% 69.50% Gone to a class 18 10 10 93 89 283 3.58% 1.99% 1.99% 18.49% 17.69% 56.26% Played cards or 25 28 34 108 93 213 board games 4.99% 5.59% 6.79% 21.56% 18.56% 42.51% Walking 309 88 23 34 31 27 60.35 % 17.19% 4.49% 6.64% 6.05 % 5.27% Gardening 259 124 41 31 27 31 50.49% 24.17% 7.99% 6.04% 5.26% 6.04% Gone to a park or 202 119 32 67 54 33 spent time at the 39.84% 23.47% 6.31% 13.21% 10.65% 6.51% beach Reading 399 48 15 14 22 12 78.24 9.41% 2.94% 2.75% 4.31% 2.35% Study 82 44 25 52 103 189 16.57% 8.89% 5.05% 10.51% 20.81% 38.18% Other - please 19 9 3 3 0 10 specify 43.18% 20.45% 6.82% 6.82% 22.73%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 46 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Community and group activities

30. In the past 12 months, have you been involved in the following community or group activities? (please tick yes or no for each activity)

If yes, please state the name of the groups Yes No or organisations (if applicable) School-related group 78 418 ...... 15.73% 84.27% Service club (eg Lions, CWA) 78 418 ...... 15.73% 84.27% Ethnic group (eg Croatian, Italian 5 491 club) 1.01% 98.99% ...... Church related group 64 435 ...... 12.83% 87.17% Volunteer organisation or group 225 273 ...... 45.18% 54.82% Fundraising activity 202 296 ...... 40.56% 59.44% Local government 33 462 ...... 6.67% 93.33% Resident or community action group 77 418 ...... 15.56% 84.44% Campaign or action to improve social 92 373 or environmental conditions 18.66% 81.34% ...... Co-ops (eg food, housing) 12 486 ...... 2.41% 97.59% Political party, trade union or political 30 468 campaign 6.02% 93.98% ...... Professional group 65 428 ...... 13.18% 86.82% Made a donation (eg. money, clothes, 405 91 blood donation) 81.65% 18.35% ...... Other, please specify ......

31. Do you use the internet for community group involvement?

Yes 21 4.47% No . 449 95.53%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 47 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Carers

32. Apart from any paid work, do you care for, or help to care for, any person who is aged or has a disability or long-term illness? Yes 100 19.84% No 404 80.16% Ø If No, go to Question 35

33. Do you live in the same house as the person you care for? Yes 35 29.41% No 84 70.59%

34. Is caring for this person causing you any of the following: (please tick yes or no) Yes No To restrict your activities...... 32 34.41% 61 65.59% Financial hardship ...... 9 10.11% 80 89.89% Physical illness...... 7 7.87% 82 92.13% Stress ...... 37 39.36% 57 60.64% A good deal of satisfaction...... 69 72.63% 26 27.37% Other ...... 9 47.37% 10 52.63% please specify......

Volunteer work

35. Are you presently doing any volunteer (ie unpaid) work in the community?

Yes 186 37.42% No 311 62.58% Ø If No, go to Question 38

36. Please describe what volunteer work you have done in the past year:

Activity(ies) ......

......

Organisation(s) ......

......

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 48 of 59 Final report - December 2001 37. What are the main reasons that you do volunteer work? (please tick one or more boxes)

To help people...... 187 To gain a sense of satisfaction...... 147 To meet people...... 102 To increase my skills...... 61 To improve my chances of getting paid employment...... 11 To improve conditions in society...... 131 To improve and raise awareness of the environment ...... 61 To pass the time...... 23 Other, please specify ......

Section 4: Civic Participation

38. In the past year, have you done any of the following? (please tick yes or no) Yes No Attended a council meeting...... 64 13.31% 417 86.69% Written to the council...... 133 27.25% 355 72.75% Contacted your local member ...... 68 14.29% 408 85.71% Contacted your local councillor ...... 144 29.45% 345 70.55% Signed a petition...... 263 53.24% 231 46.76% Attended a protest meeting...... 79 16.39% 403 83.61% Written a letter to the editor of a newspaper ...... 64 13.25% 419 86.75%

39. How well do you know the following people? (please tick one box for each person)

not at all only through Have met know them well the media them Your local councillor 106 43 156 206 20.74% 8.41% 30.53% 40.31% Your local Mayor 253 138 93 23 49.90% 27.22% 18.34% 4.54% Your State member of 263 172 57 17 parliament 51.67% 33.79% 11.20% 3.34% Your Federal member of 260 171 67 11 parliament 51.08% 33.60% 13.16% 2.16%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 49 of 59 Final report - December 2001 What you think about the people that represent you.

40. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements: (please tick one box for each row)

strongly moderatel neutral moderately strongly agree y agree disagree disagree a) I have confidence in the 5 102 118 160 126 decisions made by local 0.98% 19.96% 23.09% 31.31% 24.66% government b) Local government acts in 8 91 133 152 123 my best interests 1.58% 17.95 % 26.23% 29.98% 24.26% c) I have confidence in the 8 124 147 149 79 decisions made by state 1.58% 24.46% 28.99% 29.39% 15.58% government d) State government acts in 6 99 172 140 89 my best interests 1.19% 19.57% 33.99% 27.67% 17.59% e) In general, governments 120 139 136 85 23 cannot be trusted 23.86% 27.63% 27.04% 16.90% 4.57%

41. In the past year, have you taken any of the following actions to try to solve a local problem? (please tick yes or no) Yes No Talked to your neighbours or friends about it ...... 384 75.59% 124 24.41% Contacted a local politician...... 101 20.12% 401 79.88% Contacted the appropriate organisation to deal with the problem(eg police, council)...... 215 43.00% 285 57.00% Attended a public meeting...... 183 36.53% 318 63.47% Joined an action group...... 48 9.72% 446 90.28% Written to the local news sheet ...... 61 12.37% 432 87.63% Other action, please specify......

Please describe the problem you took action on:

......

42. In the last ten years, have you helped start a group to make some improvements in your community? Yes 93 18.90% No 399 81.10%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 50 of 59 Final report - December 2001 43. Would you like to have been more involved in community groups to improve conditions, the environment, facilities or services within your community? Yes 174 36.71% No 300 63.29%

44. What are the main reasons that you have not been more involved? (please tick one or more boxes) I don’t have the time 163 Health reasons 55 I don’t know how to get involved 28 Lack of child-care 16 Lack of transport 11 Meeting times are not appropriate 56 I am nervous about being involved 30

Other, please specify ......

45. Do you feel that you currently participate in community activities more, about the same or less than in the past?

More 70 14.37% About the same 260 53.39% Less 157 32.24%

Why is this?

……………......

46. Have you used any of the services or facilities at the following places in the past year? Yes No a) Otway Health and community service 371 73.76% 132 26.24% b) P – 12 College Apollo Bay 115 24.42% 356 75.58% c) Regional library 185 38.14% 300 61.86% d) Visitor information centre 254 51.73% 237 48.27% e) Local Emergency Services 57 12.05% 416 87.95%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 51 of 59 Final report - December 2001

Section 5: Your Time

47. Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

strongly moderately neutral moderately strongly agree agree disagree disagree a) I find that I am under 62 127 111 78 113 a lot of time pressure 12.63% 25.87% 22.61% 15.89% 23.01%

b) I wish that I had more 142 180 75 41 58 time to do the things I 28.63% 36.29% 15.12% 8.27% 11.69% like to do c) I wish I had more 190 133 98 35 45 money to do the 37.92% 26.55% 19.56% 6.99% 8.98% things I like to do

48. How often do you read the following newspapers? (please tick one box for each newspaper) never sometimes once a week 2-3 times per everyday week a) Melbourne 21 68 100 103 207 Newspapers (eg 4.14% 13.41% 19.72% 21.89% 40.83% Herald-Sun, The Age, The Australian) b) The Geelong 208 195 39 11 14 Advertiser 44.54% 41.76% 8.35% 2.36% 3.00% c) The Colac Herald 132 188 51 100 10 27.44% 39.09% 10.60% 20.79% 2.08% d) The Apollo Bay 9 55 420 8 17 News Sheet 1.77% 10.81% 82.51% 1.57% 3.34%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 52 of 59 Final report - December 2001 49. On average, how many hours per week do you spend on the following types of activities? (please tick one box for each type of activity)

none 1-5 6-14 15-19 20-29 more than hours hours hours hours 30 hours Social activities 81 268 107 18 3 1 16.95% 56.07% 22.38% 3.77% 0.63% 0.21% Sport or leisure 95 211 138 30 13 2 activities 19.43% 43.15% 28.22% 6.13% 2.66% 0.41% Watching TV or 12 150 177 84 57 25 videos 2.38% 29.70% 35.05% 16.63% 11.29% 4.95% Community and 248 194 30 7 1 1 group activities 51.56% 40.33% 6.24% 1.46% 0.21% 0.21% Volunteer work 285 160 35 6 2 1 58.28% 32.72 7.16% 1.23% 0.41% 0.20% Caring for someone 387 57 16 5 3 17 who is aged or 79.79% 11.75% 3.30% 1.03% 0.62% 3.51% disabled

Section 6: About You

50. Are you male or female? Male 218 43.25% Female 286 56.75%

51. In which year were you born? 19 _____

52. Which of the following living arrangements best describes your household? House 1 House 2 Live alone 86 17.06% - Live with partner/spouse only 227 45.04% - Live with partner/spouse and child/ren 135 26.79 % - Sole parent with child/ren 19 3.77 % - Live with parent(s) 11 2.18% - Live with parent(s) and brothers/sisters 9 1.79% - Live with other related adults 9 1.79% 4 Live with other unrelated adults 7 1.59% 3

Other, please specify ......

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 53 of 59 Final report - December 2001 53. If there are children in your household, please state how many?

1 2 3 4 5 No. of children under 6 years 28 22 2 1 52.83% 41.51% 3.77% 1.89% No. of children age 6-18 years 44 48 10 2 1 41.90 45.71% 9.52% 1.90% 0.95%

54. What is your current marital status?

Never Married 57 11.29% Married 319 63.17% Defacto/ Partnered 44 9.11% Widowed 50 10.30% Divorced 22 4.55% Separated 8 1.58%

55. What is the highest level of education you have completed? (please tick one box)

No formal schooling 7 1.45% Primary School 35 7.25% Secondary School (High, Tech, etc) 210 43.48% TAFE Certificate course 34 7.04% Trade or Business Qualification 69 14.29% University Degree or Tertiary Diploma 104 21.53% Higher Degree 24 4.97%

Other, please specify

56. Which of the following best describes what you have been doing in the past two weeks? (please tick one box)

Full-time work in a job, trade, business or profession 163 33.06% Ø On average, how Part-time work in a job, trade, business or profession 86 17.44% Ø many hours per Home duties and not looking for work 59 11.97% week do you Student 5 1.01% work? Permanently unable to work 13 2.64% ______Retired 162 32.86% Unemployed - looking for work 5 1.01%

Other, please specify

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 54 of 59 Final report - December 2001

57. Which of the following is your main source of income? (please tick one answer only) Income 1 Inc-2 inc-3

Salary and wages - yours...... 146 29.61% 3 Salary and wages - your spouse/partner’s...... 51 10.34% 13 Unemployment benefits ...... 7 1.42% Pension...... 155 31.44% 3 Self-employed ...... 58 11.76% 4 Austudy/Abstudy...... 1 0.20% Supporting parent benefit ...... 5 1.01% 1 1 Sickness benefit...... 4 0.81% Income from business or property investment ...... 23 4.67% 10 2 Superannuation, insurance, interest, dividends ...... 43 8.72% 23 2 Other, please specify ......

58. What was your individual income, and your spouse/partner’s (if applicable) before tax in the last financial year? (If unsure, please estimate).

Annual income (Fortnightly income) Your Your income spouse/partner Less than $6,240 (less than $240) 27 6.41% 26 9.09% $6,240 - $8,319 ($240 - $318) 31 7.36% 19 6.64% $8,320 - $10,399 ($320 - $398) 63 14.96% 44 15.38% $10,400 - $15,599 ($400 - $598) 61 14.49% 41 14.34% $15,600 - $20,799 ($600 - $798) 50 11.88% 30 10.49% $20,800 - $25,999 ($800 - $998) 43 10.21% 22 7.69% $26,000 - $31,199 ($1,000 - $1,198) 40 9.50% 27 9.44% $31,200 - $36,399 ($1,200 - $1,398) 32 7.60% 20 6.99% $36,400 - $41,599 ($1,400 - $1,598) 22 5.23% 19 6.64% $41,600 - $51,999 ($1,600 - $1,798) 23 5.46% 15 5.24% $52,000 - $62,399 ($2,000 - $2,398) 10 2.38% 9 3.15% $62,400 - $77,999 ($2,400 - $2,998) 6 1.43% 5 1.75% $78,000 - $103,999 ($3,000 - $3,998) 4 0.95% 5 1.75% $104,000 or more ($4,000 or more) 9 2.14% 4 1.40%

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 55 of 59 Final report - December 2001

59. In the house or flat/unit where you are now living, are you? (please tick one box)

The outright owner/joint owner 303 62.35% Paying off a mortgage 116 23.87% Renting 50 10.29% Boarding 15 3.09% In hostel accommodation or nursing home 2 0.41%

Other, please specify ......

60. Do you identify yourself as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander?

Yes . Results with held due to small numbers No .

61. Do you usually speak a language other than English at home?

Yes . 26 5.18% No . 476 94.82%

62. Which other language(s) do you speak at home?

Arabicq Results withheld due to small numbers Cambodian....q Chinese ...... q Croatian...... q Dutch...... q German...... q Greek...... q Hungarian ...... q Italian...... q Lebanese ...... q Polish...... q Spanish ...... q Vietnamese....q

Other, please specify......

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 56 of 59 Final report - December 2001 63. Do you have a connected telephone in your home, and/or a mobile phone?

Yes . 504 99.21% No . 4 0.79%

64. Do you have a driver’s licence?

Yes . 465 91.54% No . 43 8.46%

65. Do you normally have a car available for use on weekdays? (Monday to Friday)

Always 452 88.63% Sometimes 35 6.86% Never 23 4.51%

66. Do you normally have a car available for use at the weekends? (Saturday and Sunday)

Always 453 89.17% Sometimes 29 5.71% Never 26 5.12%

67. Are there any other comments that you would like to make?

......

Thank you for your time

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 57 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Appendix IV: Responses to five questions on confidence in government (Q. 40) Choices attracting less than two percent (n=9) of responses have been deleted for clarity.

I have Local Gov’t I have State Gov’t In general confidence in acts in my confidence in acts in my Gov’ts decisions of best decisions of best cannot be local Gov’t. interests State Gov’t interests trusted

SA MA 36 MA 13 MD 46 MA 15 N 14 N

71 9 5 MD

MA 24 N 10 MA

100 MA 11 MA MA

14 9 516 participants 117 N 85 N 64 N 60 N 45 N

MD 159

MD 21 N 9 N

MA 11 MA 19 113 MD 15 N 10 N

19 69 MD 57 MD 29 MA 10 SD SD 9 SD 12 N

126 MD 10 MD

21 MA SD 13 101 SD 15 N 12 N

21 51 MD 15 MD Color Key = Strongly pro-government SD 48 SD 36 SA = Moderately pro -government Symbol Key

= Neutral NN = No. of respondents

SA = Strongly agree

= Moderately anti-government MA = Moderately agree N = Neutral = Strongly anti-government MD = Moderately disagree SD = Strongly disagree

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 58 of 59 Final report - December 2001 Appendix V: Housekeeping

Storage of records Questionnaires are stored in the Department of Human Services Barwon-South Western Region Office and will be kept for seven years following the completion of all reports. Databases and spreadsheets will also be stored in the Department of Human Services Barwon- South Western Region Office network.

Feedback to the community Feedback to the community has been made available to the community at three levels:

1. A series of short vignettes has been published in the Apollo Bay Newssheet (Appendix III).

2. A copy of this report has been provided to all members of the ABCCC with reference copies available in the Otway Health & Community Services office and the Colac- Otway Shire offices, the mobilre library and the P-12 college.

3. A copy of the report will be available on request to the Department of Human Services Barwon-South Western Region Office.

Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project Page 59 of 59 Final report - December 2001 AAPOLLOPOLLO BBAYAY CCOMMUNITYOMMUNITY CCAPACITYAPACITY PPROJECTROJECT

‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health in Apollo Bay’

‘ANY OTHER COMMENTS’ - A REPORT -

Ingrid Hindell

2nd Year Student—Community Services Diploma Gordon Institute of Technical and Further Education

Under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee and Department of Human Services Barwon-South Western Region

AAPOLLOPOLLO BBAYAY CCOMMUNITYOMMUNITY CCAPACITYAPACITY PPROJECTROJECT

‘Community capacity building: measuring social capital to improve health in Apollo Bay’

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ‘ANY OTHER COMMENTS’ - A REPORT -

Charles Gibson

Department of Human Services Barwon—South Western Region

Under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee A REPORT ON THE NARRATIVE QUESTION 67 “ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE?’

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

This document is a companion document to the Report written by Deborah Jennings and Peter McNair on the “Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project”. One of the recommendations of this latter report was that an analysis be undertaken of the narrative comments in the survey responses. This task was assigned by the Barwon-South Western Region, Department of Human Services (DHS) to Ingrid Hindell, a student on a second year placement in the Community Services Diploma (Community Development stream) of the Gordon Institute of Technical and Further Education (TAFE). Charles Gibson from DHS managed the project and provided supervision under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee.

BACKGROUND OF PROJECT

Measuring Social Capital

Otway Health & Community Services encouraged DHS to undertake this project, and to do it in a way which involved the local community. It was instigated with a view to discovering how to measure “social capital” to improve health and welfare in small (and/or rural) communities in which rapid change and loss of infrastructure are thought to be contributing to the social disruption, dislocation and feelings of insecurity in community members. This is seen as a factor in the loss of physical and mental well being in these same people.

What is Social Capital ?

There has been a great deal written on social capital by authors such as Eva Cox and Robert Putnam. Social capital is a difficult concept to define and describe, but it is recognised as being extremely important in keeping communities - and the people in them – robust and positive, with a capacity to cope with daily stresses in their lives. In its simplest form social capital is recognition that there are other types of capital than just the economic.

It has been suggested that social capital has two forms – bonding and bridging.

Bonding Social Capital has to do with the bonds that exist or can be built amongst groups of individuals that are more alike than not, eg. families, classes, interest groups, sporting clubs.

Bridging Social Capital refer to activities and educational processes that can “meld” disparate groups in a community together to the point where they “can agree to disagree” whilst still cohabiting harmoniously and without too much conflict.

Thus both bonding and bridging social capital refer to the processes between people that establish networks and trust. This enables co-ordination and co-operation between people for mutual benefit (Cox, 1995).

It has been determined that people who do not have an advanced level of social capital to call upon, particularly in crisis situations, may become more anxious or depressed, suffer from psychosomatic illness and commit crime or suicide, than those who do.

People who have an advanced level of social capital to call upon are believed to be better off emotionally, physically, and even economically (because of the networks of mutual help, co- operation and cohesiveness mentioned above) than those who do not.

Social capital is sometimes discussed as though it was an unqualified positive in the lives of a population. This is not always so. Social capital has a ‘dark side’ to it. Particularly in the bonding form, it can make communities intolerant and distrustful of people who are “newcomers” and of ideas, and situations that are in any way different to a population’s perceived notion of the “right” way of living and doing things. This can lead to a degree of conformity and rigidity that is definitely not conducive to the comfortable and smooth embracing of change. Thus the challenge for governments, the Department of Human Services and the community becomes one of fostering the “right” kind of social capital to benefit citizens. It was with this in mind that the Apollo Bay Project was conceived and carried out.

Why Apollo Bay, Marengo and Skene’s Creek?

It was known that “The Bay” (as it is known among long-term residents) was a strong, close- knit community. Local advice was that the community of interest included Marengo and Skene’s Creek. Yet the area was also was changing rapidly. More and more seasonal tourists are making Apollo Bay their destination and increasing numbers choose this attractive location for retirement. The town and surrounding localities, Skene’s Creek and Marengo, is beginning to burgeon with large and multi-level developments.

METHODOLOGY

The narrative material (Q. 67) analysed in this report augments the analysis of the quantitative answers analysed in the full report. The researcher used a thematic approach to collate and analyse these remarks. The comments were grouped in terms of age group and gender, and, to a much lesser extent, length of tenure and living arrangements. The findings will be presented following this basic pattern.

RESPONDENTS

124 respondents completed this question. The breakdown of the respondents by gender and age is shown in the following table:

AGE GROUP MALE FEMALE TOTAL

20 - 29 6 0 6

30 – 39 1 10 11

40 - 49 12 14 26 27* 50 – 59 11 14

60 – 69 5 14 19

70 - 79 9 12 21

80+ 0 7 7

Other 0 0 7 (No age or gender specified) TOTAL 44 71 124

* (Note: 2 in this age group did not record their gender)

RESULTS

MAJOR THEMES

After careful consideration of the data, five main themes become apparent in nearly all age groups. These were: THEMES 1. The Council. 2. Change. 3. Social & Civic Participation. 4. Tourism. 5. This Survey.

AGE GROUPINGS

The results were presented by age grouping and broken down within each group into male and female. These groups were also be analysed in terms of their civic participation profile. Below is a very broad summary of the major themes identified in each age group. For details see the full report.

20 – 29 Year olds.

o Only 6 Males responded in this age group

o Concern about the cost of living and the ability for the young to access housing

o Low civic participation in this group

30 – 39 Year olds.

o 10 Females and 1 Male responded

o Concern about the cost of living and housing

o Issue of the change of the balance between permanents and tourists - seen as detrimental to community involvement

o Criticism of the council for a variety of issues from development to signage, roads and footpaths

o One positive view that the of services in Apollo Bay were good

o Medium level of civic participation in this group

4 40 – 49 Year olds.

o Second highest response rate (26)

o Criticism of decision making and remoteness of council from Apollo Bay

o Concern about the volume of development and it’s effect on community participation

o Need for more activities for youth

o Need for mental health and disability services raised

o Three positive comments about Apollo Bay being a great place to live, being a supportive community and having good medical facilities

o Good level of civic participation in this group, particularly males

50 – 59 Year olds.

o Highest response rate (27)

o Concern about development and the rapid rate of change impacting on the sense of community and community participation

o Criticism that Apollo Bay’s voice was not heard in council

o Concern about the cost of living and lack of employment

o Issue about the lack of some basic services – eg. dental, basic clothing

o Suggested survey should have included more on youth issues

o Two positive views expressed about living in Apollo Bay and one about the value of Otway Health & Community Services

o Good level of civic participation in this group, particularly females

60 – 69 Year olds.

o 14 Females and 5 Males responded

o Concern about the present rate of development as a tourist town and its impact on the community

o Perceived difficulty in getting council to listen to local views

o Concern about the cost of living and housing

o Need for improved shopping, roads and recreational facilities

o One positive comment about the area being a great place to live

o This group very involved in civic activities

70 – 79 Year olds.

o 12 Females and 9 Males responded

o Critical of council for facilitating unchecked development, which was changing the character and feeling of the town, and for not listening to local people’s views

o More rate money should be spent in Apollo Bay

o Positive comments about the community health service, street cleaning, the friendly and caring community and the market

o A good level of civic participation in this group

80 – 100 Year olds.

o 7 Female respondents

o Concern about the cost of living

o Positive comments about the community looking after the town and the health service

o Medium level of civic participation with reference to higher involvement in earlier years

Unspecified groupings.

o 7 Respondents

o Concerns about council not adequately servicing Apollo Bay and lacking vision/a long term plan for the town

o Need to improve the taxi service

o Need to enhance shopping facilities such as clothing, a deli and fruit and vegetables.

o Positive comment about the beauty of Apollo Bay, support for older people in the town, Otway Health & Community Services and the street sweeping.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE DATA o There were more females (71) than males (53) who took advantage of the opportunity to compose a narrative comment in Q. 67 of the data. o It was discovered that just over 80% of the narrative comments came from the Apollo Bay township area, even though the participation rates for the whole questionnaire were slightly higher in Marengo and Skenes Creek. o The rate of the narrative respondents who were volunteers (almost 50%) was also discovered to be substantially higher than that of the average percentage of volunteers in rural Victoria and the rate for the total participants in this survey (37%). o Just over one third (40) of the narrative comments in Q. 67 were from people living in the township from four to nine years. o Quite a deal more than half (74) of the narrative comments were made by people who lived alone or with their partner/spouse. o The women in the 80+ age group were far more involved in the civic activities mentioned in this survey than were women aged 20-29. Unlike the 20-29 year group however, only about 4% of them (as against 85% approx.) had access to a car. o In each of the age groups, except the first, there was at least one person who had done all 13 civic actions examined in this report. o There were only 11 positive comments about life-style and living in Apollo Bay, with five people adding qualifying clauses to their comment. It is interesting to note that of the 11 comments six were from those who had lived in the town and environs for less than six years, and none from those who had lived at their current address for more than fifteen years. o The comments on the survey itself covered areas such as it’s size and methodology, whether it was worth doing and whether the results would be acted upon. Others felt that areas such as youth issues, what Apollo Bay people really want and self-funded retirees concerns should have been covered.

CONCLUSIONS

Five themes were identified in this report. Those focussing on the council, social change and tourism were seen by many as inter-connected and the comments were often expressed in strong terms. Some also made the connection between the rapidly changing nature of the community through development and tourism and the impact this had on the level of civic participation. The associated issues of the increasing cost of living and the need for improved infrastructure in a range of areas were persistently raised.

As the closest level of government to the community, the Shire of Colac-Otway was the subject of many comments, largely focussed around the perception that it is less responsive than is expected to the needs of this community. It was apparent that the most trenchant comments in the data were about the council and its role in the development of the town. The attitudes, which came through to the researcher, were predominantly those of resentment and disorientation.

The Shire of Colac-Otway is clearly perceived to have a strong influence on the way the town develops. This project acknowledges the strong role of the council as the local planning authority. There are also clearly parts of the planning process that are not totally within the control of the council. From a broader perspective, there are a also number of factors outside the local environment driving the rapid development experienced by this area.

The major influence driving this development seems to be that there are just more people in Australia who can afford holiday homes or who are choosing to retire to seaside locations. The Apollo Bay area has now been caught up in this trend in a similar way to communities such as Lorne. Some of these localities have become full to overflowing - very like the suburban environments some people may want to escape.

There are, in the researcher’s opinion, three main causes for this shift in the social order.

Firstly, according to figures published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), academics, and many welfare agencies, income inequality is growing apace in Australia and most other countries in the world This has been, partly, the result of global policies concerning privatisation.

Secondly, State Government policy and processes around building codes appear to have resulted in some decisions about development being ultimately taken out of the hands of local shire officers. This has enabled some developments to occur which many local people see as inconsistent with the valued character of the local built environment.

Thirdly, it has been documented by scholars that social, political/civic, sporting, religious and charitable engagement - social capital - is in decline everywhere when compared to 30 or 40

years ago. As Robert Putnam, in his book “Bowling Alone” (Simon and Schuster, 2000, p. 27-28), says, there is hard evidence to prove that “our schools and neighbourhoods don’t work so well when community bonds slacken, that our economy, our democracy, and even our health and happiness depend on adequate stocks of social capital”.

How can these issues and concerns be addressed? The Department of Human Services felt that the first step was to measure existing social capital in the still strong community of Apollo Bay. This, so to speak was “where we came in”. The project established processes to report the findings of this study back to residents through the Apollo Bay News Sheet to ensure the community was aware of the results of the study. In an environment of quite rapid change, the challenge now is to consider ways in which the issues raised can be actively considered by the Apollo Bay community together with Colac-Otway Shire Council. It is hoped that this process will result in outcomes that will build further on the strengths of the Apollo Bay/Marengo/Skenes Creek community.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 The Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee members explore options for responding to the comments presented in this report It is suggested that this be undertaken in partnership with the Colac-Otway Shire, the Chamber of Commerce and the Otway Forum.

2. Consideration be given to the use of focus groups of residents to explore solutions to the issues identified as priorities by the local community. For example, discussion has occurred since the survey about reviewing support to carers in the area.

3. In terms of further analysis of this data, future research projects could examine the following:

§ Analysis of the findings from the perspective of the length of tenure and living arrangements in order to compare the two sets of findings and discover any interesting comparisons.

§ Comparison of the data in this report as against the other questions in the survey with smaller sections of narrative.

§ Analysis of the comments around development in terms of the socio-economic status of respondents.

§ Analysis of the percentage of civic participation in total respondents compared with those who wrote narrative comments. This researcher had a glance at all 17 respondents in the 20-29 year old group and the civic participation level was almost the same.

9 A REPORT ON THE NARRATIVE QUESTION 67 “ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE?’

INTRODUCTION This document is an adjunct to the Report written by Deborah Jennings and Peter McNair on the “Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project”. One of the recommendations of this latter report was that an analysis be undertaken of the narrative comments in the survey responses. This task was assigned to Ingrid Hindell, a student on a second year placement in the Community Services Diploma (Community Development stream) of the Gordon Institute of Technical and Further Education (TAFE). Charles Gibson from DHS managed the project and provided supervision under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee.

BACKGROUND OF PROJECT The Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project was undertaken by the Barwon-South Western Region of the Department of Human Services (DHS). The project was under the direction of the Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee which was formed with assistance of workers at Otway Health & Community Services. This agency strongly supported the initiative from the beginning. It was instigated with a view to discovering how to measure “social capital” to improve health and welfare in small (and/or rural) communities in which rapid change and loss of infrastructure are thought to be contributing to the social disruption, dislocation and feelings of insecurity in community members. This is seen as a factor in the loss of physical and mental well being in these same people. Social Capital is a difficult concept to define and describe but it is recognised as being extremely important in keeping communities - and the people in them – robust and positive, with a capacity to cope with daily stresses in their lives. In its simplest form social capital is a recognition that there are other types of capital than just the economic. It has been postulated that social capital has two forms – bonding and bridging. Bonding Social Capital has to do with the bonds that exist or can be built amongst groups of individuals that are more alike than not, eg. families, classes, interest groups. Bridging Social Capital refer to activities and educational processes that can “meld” disparate groups in a community together to the point, for example, where they “can agree to disagree” whilst still cohabiting harmoniously and without too much conflict. Thus both bonding and bridging social capital can refer to the processes between people that establish networks norms and trust enabling co-ordination and co-operation for mutual benefit (Cox, 1995). It has been determined that people who do not have an advanced level of social capital to call upon, particularly in crisis situations, may become more anxious or depressed, suffer from psychosomatic illness and commit crime or suicide, than those who do. People who have an advanced level of social capital to call upon are believed to be better off emotionally, physically, and even economically (because of the networks of mutual help, co- operation and cohesiveness mentioned above) than those who do not. Bridging social capital may be even more important than bonding social capital for an individual’s physical, social, financial, mental and moral health in today’s multi-tiered, multicultural society.

1 Bonding social capital can lead to, or support, the forming of exclusive clubs, cliques, gangs, social and racial intolerance, indifference, lack of charity, compassion and understanding. The measurement of community capacity is therefore important for those dealing with a community’s health, for it is increasingly recognised that psychosocial stress has been “implicated for potentially aggravating and initiating disease in every system** of the body and in doing so effectively crossing the boundaries of medical specialisation…” (Sommer, 1993). This is especially highlighted in the exploding field of psychoneuroimmunology which has a mounting body of research emphasizing “that there is a feedback loop” between people’s centra1 nervous systems and their immune systems (Sommer, 1993) Consequently, social capital is sometimes discussed as though it was an unqualified positive in the lives of a population. As suggested above, this is not always so. Social capital has a ‘dark side’ to it. Particularly in the bonding form, it can make communities intolerant and distrustful of people who are “newcomers” and of ideas, and situations that are in any way different to a population’s perceived notion of the “right” way of living and doing things. This can lead to a degree of conformity and rigidity that is definitely not conducive to the comfortable and smooth embracing of change. Thus the challenge for governments and the Department of Human Services becomes one of fostering the “right” kind of social capital to benefit citizens. It was with this in mind that the Apollo Bay Project was conceived and carried out, as mentioned above. It was known that “The Bay” (as it is known among long-term residents) was a strong, close-knit community. Yet its “face” was changing rapidly as more and more seasonal tourists made Apollo Bay their destination and the town and surrounding localities, Skene’s Creek and Marengo, began to burgeon with large and multi-level developments.

METHODOLOGY The narrative material (Q. 67) augmented the information of the quantitative answers in the rest of the document. The researcher used a thematic approach to collate and analyse these remarks. The comments were grouped in terms of age group and gender, and, to a much lesser extent, length of tenure and living arrangements. The findings will be presented following this basic pattern.

** For example one study of 2320 male survivors of myocardial infarction found that those with social isolation and high levels of life stress had a four times higher mortality rate which was inexplicable by physical risk factors and access to medical care" (Sommer, 1993). 2 RESPONDENTS 124 respondents completed this question. The breakdown of the respondents by gender and age is shown in the following table:

AGE GROUP MALE FEMALE TOTAL

20 - 29 6 0 6

30 – 39 1 10 11

40 - 49 12 14 26 27* 50 - 59 11 14

60 - 69 5 14 19

70 - 79 9 12 21

80+ 0 7 7

Other 0 0 7 (No age or gender specified) TOTAL 44 71 124 *(Note: 2 in this age group did not record their gender)

RESULTS

INTRODUCTION Before she begins the main body of this report, the researcher would like to apologise to those who entered observations that could not be grouped.

MAJOR THEMES After careful consideration of the data, five main themes become apparent in nearly all age groups. These were: 1. The Council. 2. Change. 3. Social & Civic Participation. 4. Tourism. 5. This Survey.

1. The role of the Colac-Otway Shire Council. 2. Changes in a range of areas including the cost of living, the physical characteristics of the town and the lack of attention to new infrastructure needed to cope with Apollo Bay’s phenomenal influx of people –tourists, seasonal visitors and new residents. 3. The amount and type of social and civic participation in the community. 4. Tourism, which impacts on the three themes mentioned above. 5. Comments on the survey itself

3 AGE GROUPINGS

The results will be presented by age grouping and within each group broken down into male and female. These groups will also be analysed in terms of their civic participation profile.

20 – 29 Year olds.

Total responses: 6 (6 Males, 0 Females)

It was notable that there were no narrative comments among the females in this age group.

For the six 20 - 29 years old males who made comments, the cost of living (especially housing) and, perhaps surprisingly, too rapid change in the community of Apollo Bay, were of prime importance. “Where is the respect for people who live here and want to own a home?” asked the person who has lived at his current address for more than 15 years. One man also wondered about the usefulness of this survey.

There was little civic participation amongst this group of men: four had “Allowances talked to their neighbours, two had signed petitions, one had contacted the need to be made relevant organization about a problem concerning him; one had written to in the housing council; one had contacted a local councillor. Three of them knew people market for low in the three political spheres only through the media or did not know them single income not at all. One knew his local councillor well and had met the mayor and families who the fifth had met them both. Three did not trust local government or think that it acted in their interests. The others had mixed feelings toward local live and work government. They had mixed (but mostly negative) reaction toward state locally”. government. This group had mixed reactions to the statement that Governments could not be trusted. Looking at the overall data the rate of civic participation was slightly lower than for the women in this age group.

30 – 39 Year olds. THEMES Total responses: 11 (1 Male, 10 Females) 1. The Council. Amongst the 30 – 39 year olds, there was only one comment made by a male 2. Change. that did not touch on any of the five main themes in this report. Among the 10 3. Social & Civic responses by females, there were comments on all of the five themes Participation. mentioned above. 4. Tourism. A number were concerned with the way the town is changing and the cost of 5. This Survey. living, particularly the price of petrol and the cost of housing. “We are losing our little country town and have concerns that our children will never be able to afford to live here”. They cited these changes as being detrimental to health and well-being, asking questions like “How can you be part of a community when you are surrounded by empty holiday houses most of the year?” One respondent said she would like to see Apollo Bay have its’ “How can you be part of own council and another was highly critical of the current council. a community when you She, and others, mentioned the lack of footpaths and their state of are surrounded by repair. “Many [elderly] people suffer serious long term health effects due to the falls whilst others are then too afraid to go empty holiday houses walking despite minimal injuries”. most of the year?”

4 Other issues raised were the road signs being in the wrong places; local government taking money from developers instead of asking them to provide open public spaces; no overtaking lane on a local road being stressful for local motorists particularly in tourist seasons, and the fact that the council seemed not to want a public pool, which she, and others also, saw as beneficial to health, well-being and the social life in the community. One respondent thought the services in Apollo Bay were excellent for all age groups and hoped they would stay that way. She mentioned that the community was becoming more diverse but did not state whether she thought this was beneficial or detrimental to the welfare of herself or the community. There was one comment hoping this survey wasn’t a waste of money. Among these respondents living arrangements were diverse. Five lived in nuclear families, the rest lived in several different household arrangements. All had talked to their neighbours about civic issues and most had signed petitions. Some had contacted local councillors and some had gone to council and/or protest meetings about civic issues. Most had at least met or knew their local councillors personally. A couple knew them only by means of the media. Most did not know their mayor, or their State or Federal politicians, except through exposure in the media. Most were neutral toward, or actively distrusted to some degree, all arms of government. The woman who participated most in the life of the community agreed most strongly with the statements of distrust relating to all arms of government. THEMES

40 – 49 Year olds. 1. The Council. Total responses: 26 (12 Males, 14 Females) 2. Change. 3. Social & Civic The 40 – 49 year old females respondents Participation. also mentioned all five themes the “I feel the increasing 4. Tourism. growth and building researcher has identified. Five of these 5. This Survey. development in Apollo women raised criticisms and complaints Bay is a direct threat to about the local council. They included the distance of shire offices from Apollo Bay, decisions that favoured community Colac, and others about seeking people’s opinions after decisions participation” had been made by the Shire. These respondents were also dubious about the amount of development going on in Apollo Bay without the provision of the corresponding necessary infrastructure such as schools and parks. “…big developers should be forking out instead of sucking out profits” and “I feel the increasing growth and building development in Apollo Bay is a direct threat to community participation”. Another was also against development stating that “Rapid change undermines the feeling of “our town” and working for ‘our town’ as ‘tourist town’ is the label that looms and local life seems to take a backseat to development”. A couple mentioned the lack of a skate park for the young people when Colac and other towns of a comparable size to Apollo Bay already had theirs. Another thought that more activities for the young were needed such as a Saturday cinema in winter. It was also suggested that there be more art and craft opportunities for all. One respondent commented that Apollo Bay was a great place to live because of its diverse socio- economic groups - “…there is someone for everybody”. Another commented that the female members of a club she belonged to were very supportive to other members in trouble. One respondent felt the survey was “extremely long-winded” and another would have liked more questions included concerning recreation for the youth of the community, and “the effects [upon them] of living in an isolated community”. 5 Respondents in this group had diverse living arrangements, with the majority living in nuclear families. The single mothers in this age grouping had a lesser rate of civic participation than those in the last group, mainly due to the fact that one among them had done everything! The majority (10) had talked to their neighbours about civic issues and signed petitions. A few had contacted local councillors. One had gone to a council meeting and she and one other had gone to protest meetings about civic issues. Seven had contacted the appropriate organization about issues and six had been to a public meeting about a particular civic issue. Two had contacted their local MP and two had joined an action group. One had written to a local newspaper, two others to the Apollo Bay News Sheet about a matter concerning them.

Most of these women had contacted the council or a councillor about an issue 1. The Council. concerning them. Many had either met or knew their local councillors well. 2. Change. One knows her mayor and one did not know them. Each knew their State or Federal politicians through exposure in the media or not at all. Many were 3. Social & Civic neutral toward all governments, some trusted governments to a moderate Participation. degree and some actively distrusted all arms of government. 4. Tourism. 5. This Survey. The twelve 40 – 49 year old male respondents made a large number of miscellaneous comments, but did not mention the survey or tourism specifically. One respondent said local councillors and most politicians liked the sound of their own voices (it being election year!) but that they were usually misinformed. One person thought that developers and builders were ruining the town and that there was no proper regulation of building codes and construction work. He also

mentioned the lack of a skate park and the fact that residents had “The community in been waiting too long for it, the lack of (mental) health services in general is great with the area and the fact the foreshore is eroding and is being neglected. excellent support Another said a pool to use all year round would be highly groups and medical beneficial. A third said that living in Apollo Bay with a disabled facilities”. child was difficult. Services, especially respite, that his family needed, were usually far distant and expensive and hard to reach. He noted however that community acceptance helped a good deal. One respondent said he had recently returned to Apollo Bay because he wanted his children to grow up in the area. Another felt that “The community in general is great with excellent support groups and medical facilities”. This man felt there is a slight lack of recreational facilities for the young of the town, but was optimistic that the community would be able to absorb the new residents as well as the tourists. There were five comments made about this survey. One person wanted to know what the survey would achieve and how it would benefit him. Another felt question 37 (dealing with the reasons for volunteering) “was in very bad taste”. A third thought that that there had been no recognition of “split residence situations” (people living in two places during the week). A fourth stated that the survey seems too “soft” and the fifth just wanted somebody – not specified – to “keep an eye on these issues with the community in our area”. Most of these men’s level of civic participation was fairly high, double that of the women in this age group. Five had attended council meetings, four had written to council, five had contacted a local MP, seven had contacted a local councillor, six had signed petitions, three had attended a protest meeting, three had written letters to the editor of any newspaper, eight had talked to neighbours about civic issues, six had contacted a local politician about a civic issue, eight had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue, five went to a public meeting about a civic issue, two had joined an action group about a civic issue and the same two had also written to the local newssheet about a civic issue. The majority knew their local councillors well or at least

6 had met them personally. Length of tenure did not seem to impact on the degree of familiarity. Four had met the mayor, the rest knew them “through the media” or not at all. A few had met their State and Federal MPs, one knew them well and most knew of them through the media.

50 – 59 Year olds. Total responses: 27 (11 Males, 14 Females, 2 Gender not identified) Once again, women in this group had problems with developers and the council. One respondent said that Apollo Bay’s two councillors were easily outvoted. One woman thought that the town was “changing too fast” with the “rate and type of building” being most alarming. A second respondent thought council was “too developmental” and there was not enough land being left for recreation. Another three thought that shire councillors had no real understanding of, and did not listen to, the people of the Apollo Bay community. They thought that they had allowed themselves to become powerless as when they “Many people retire here from the “sacked” 35 volunteers from the local Information cities, bringing with them their city Centre, claiming “it was ‘an administrative’ decision ways. The distrust of others and and that they make other decisions too “without due consideration to the social infrastructure of the area”. the anonymity of city living. They do not feel obliged to join in works One of these respondents also felt that nobody had asked the townspeople whether they wanted the very for the community good. This can ugly footpath on the foreshore and that the footpath be seen by the good attendance fi- in the township itself was a disgrace. She also asked gures at the newly formed Probus where was the toilet on the Breakwater parking bay Club compared to the struggle to that townspeople had been wanting for 20 years. find enough volunteers for the Another was disturbed because low paid workers ‘meals on wheels’ service.” like cleaners had to live in tents or make alternative arrangements during the tourist season/s because homeowners found short-term rentals more “lucrative” than long-term leases. She made the point, also, that a great number of newer houses and units were empty more than half the year, leaving permanent residents without near neighbours. This person also felt that the temporary residents and newcomers were city folk with no real commitment to the town, citing the popularity of the Probus club against the paucity of volunteers for things like “Meals on Wheels” as an example and saying that retirees and some business people moved away from the area quite quickly. THEMES One person wanted a “community leadership program” to be taught by “good 1. The Council. leaders” who weren’t “defacto”. Another said employment opportunities were 2. Change. so lacking she had been commuting two hours a day for ten years and so did 3. Social & Civic not feel a part of either of the two communities. Another mentioned that Participation. logging in the Otways was having a detrimental effect on the quality of 4. Tourism. Apollo Bay’s water and air. 5. This Survey. One respondent said that the police could be on duty on Friday and Saturday nights and in the holiday season, presumably to deal with the arrival of the tourists. One respondent said she really liked living in Apollo Bay on a “general basis” even though prices for food, petrol and other things “are a little over the top”. She also mentioned that the V/line Bus was expensive, but felt it might cost the same if she drove her own car. One woman said that relationships and networks for the young had been omitted from this survey. She evidently thought this was an important omission for this lack caused stress on families and problems, like “underage drinking”, for the young people of the town.

7 Finally, another women, who had lived in Apollo Bay under three years, mentioned that filling out the survey had convinced her she had better become involved in more community activities if she wanted to be a part of the community. These women’s level of civic participation seemed to be nearly as high as the men’s in the last age group. Ten of these women had talked to their neighbours about civic issues and seven had signed petitions. A few had contacted local councillors, one had gone to a council meeting and three had gone to protest meetings about civic issues. Six had written to newspapers about a local issue, three to the local news sheet. Some had written to both. Eight had contacted the appropriate organization, and seven had been to a public meeting about a particular civic issue, whilst five had contact their local MP about an issue. Of the three women most involved in community activities and actions, two had lived at their current address for more than fifteen year and one between four-nine years. The majority had spoken to their neighbours about civic problems. Four had contacted the council and two others had contacted a councillor about an issue concerning them. Many had met or knew their local councillors well, except the two that had lived at their current address less than a year. Some know the mayor, most know him through the media. The majority knew their State or Federal politicians through exposure in the media, though one had met her Federal member and one knew both. Only one was neutral toward the statement that government can be trusted, the rest agreed with it either moderately or strongly. All distrusted local government most strongly. Some trusted to a moderate degree and some actively distrusted the State government and its actions. THEMES Like the women in this age group, the 10 males were concerned about council 1. The Council. and developers. One said “People would be more inclined to join in council, contact politicians and councillors if they felt they would be listened to and 2. Change. their concerns treated as important.” Another said that he was disappointed 3. Social & Civic that rates were rising to take advantage of the tourist trade which benefits Participation. “high powered people from around the globe”, business people, people who 4. Tourism. want to build “empires”. He also mentioned that Apollo Bay should be a part 5. This Survey. of the Surf Coast and that shire councillors seemed to be more interested in Colac. Another mentioned the lack of infrastructure planning in the town and was disturbed by the fact that there were no dental or taxi services, that one had to go to Colac for “day hospital” services, that there is still only one service station and no “basic clothes shop!” Another asked why Apollo Bay still had no skate park, why Apollo Bay still had level four water restrictions and why 35 volunteers from the local Information Centre

“…Why are the were no longer needed? Information Centre There were a number of comments on the survey from this group of volunteers no men. One wanted to know who comprised the consultative longer of use?” committee. Another said that the results of surveys such as this usually just allowed authorities to make rules that became “obstacles” and allowed them to do what they wanted to do “rather than helping the society evolve with guidance in an ecological framework of sustainability”. A third questioned this survey’s distribution and its collection methodology, but thanked the surveyors anyway. A fourth maintained that what was needed was “a survey on what the local permanent residents of Apollo Bay really want”. One man thought that Apollo Bay was a great place to live and stated that his “old time” contemporaries “live in the dark ages”. Of the two men most involved in community activities and actions one had lived at their current address for more than fifteen years (9/13 activities and actions) and one between four-nine years (8/13 activities and actions).

8 There was a marked drop in the civic participation of men in this age group as against the last, though 9/10 had talked to their neighbours about civic issues. Five had attended council meetings, two had written to Council and also had contacted a local councillor. Two had contacted a local MP, five had signed petitions, two had attended a protest meeting, two had written letters to the editor of any newspaper, two had contacted a local politician about a civic issue, eight had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue, four went to a public meeting about a civic issue, two had joined an action group about a civic issue, and none had written to the local news sheet about a civic issue. Four knew their local councillors well, three had met them personally and three did not know them. Again length of tenure did not seem to impact on the degree of familiarity. Two had met the mayor, one knew of them “through the media” the rest not at all. One knew his State MPs, one knew them well, most not at all. Six did not know their Federal MP, one knew of them through the media and one THEMES knew them well. 1. The Council. There were two people in this age bracket making comments who did not 2. Change. divulge their gender. 3. Social & Civic The first commented angrily on the lack of planning for open space because of Participation. arbitrary development. They also noted no recognition being given to the 4. Tourism. indigenous people of the area and the grave inappropriateness of a golf course 5. This Survey. being built on their ancestral burial ground. The second noted that the town and coast of Apollo Bay were being shamefully neglected in the shire’s attempts “to prop up the dying community of Colac”. They felt that Apollo Bay and surrounding areas should be a part of the Surf Coast shire and felt that the current councillors were

being dictated to by their staff – “it’s the tail wagging the dog!” they “The local council- said. lors are following They commented that Otway Health and Community Services was a the instructions of “great” one. They liked this survey and hoped to see the results. the staff - it’s the The first person was extremely active in the community. The only tail wagging the activity they had not done of the 13 activities listed in the survey was to dog!!” contact the local council about an issue. They had met their local councillor and mayor but did not know their State or Federal Members. They did not trust any level or form of government at all. The second person was not active in the community. They knew their councillor, mayor, State and Federal MPs only through the media. They did not trust local government at all, were neutral in their feeling toward the State government and agreed with the statement that government cannot be trusted.

“Hope that the present rate of 60 – 69 Year olds. development in the Bay does Total responses: 19 (5 Males, 14 Females) not have an adverse effect on Comments in this age group were similar to all the the solid residential community others. that made the Bay the wonderful Of the fourteen women who responded, 11 were living community that it is… with partners/husband, one with unrelated adults, one If ordinary people cannot afford was living alone and one with related adults. house prices or rents, then the Six of these respondents had felt rather negative toward present structure of the commu- the direction the town was taking. Two of them nity will crumble and we could mentioned that even though the council had the townspeople talking to costly consultants, the authorities become a tourist town with only were taking no notice of residents’ wishes. transient workers who will not invest in the community” 9 The first of these thought that since rates were now so high, the swimming THEMES pool should become a reality. The second thought that council attitudes were 1. The Council. “adding to” the depression of some residents “as their properties are now overlooked by two or more units”. 2. Change. 3. Social & Civic Another said that council was now only interested in how much money they Participation. could get from ratepayers and she and another respondent believed that developers were being allowed to evade a number of building regulations. A 4. Tourism. fourth mentioned that in the last 12 months the community had banking 5. This Survey. facilities closed, the price of fuel and water rise and water restrictions imposed. There had been “excessive” pressure put on the infrastructure and the services (provided by groups of its relatively small number of permanent residents of the town) due to ever-increasing tourists. The fifth said she had had a lot of help during her husband’s illness, but that house and rent costs would force even retired people away. These are the volunteers in many of the organisations. This would force the town into simply becoming a destination for tourists. One respondent thought that the town needed better shopping facilities (cheaper shopping for locals). She also thought that the town needed more rental housing and needed a full time cinema with more social opportunities, and more activities with which the children could get involved, such as a skate park One respondent (who had evidently lived in the area for more than 15 years) wanted to know why the postal service hadn’t amended her address from three years ago. Another two loved living in Apollo Bay. One of these said her neighbourhood had made her “very welcome”. She mentioned that she and her husband were kept busy enough doing the garden, keeping the roadside clean and tidy and with maintenance as they have “no postal delivery, no garbage pick up and no town water!!” Two respondents stated they were busy with grandchildren. One of these pointed out that the survey had not mentioned babysitting as a volunteer activity and also said that she spent a substantial part of the year travelling away from Apollo Bay. Another two respondents were pleased to “be part of” this survey. Another wasn’t sure whether the survey was meant for ‘week-enders’ like her household. This group were very occupied in civic activities. The majority (13) had spoken to their neighbours about civic problems. Four had attended council meetings. Half had written to council and another seven had also contacted a local councillor. Four had contacted a local MP, nine had signed petitions, five had attended a protest meeting, six had written letters to the editor of any newspaper, half had contacted a local politician about a civic issue, nine had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue, nine went to a public meeting about a civic issue, three had joined an action group about a civic issue, and four had written to the local news sheet about a civic issue. 10 of this group of women knew their local councillors well or had met them personally. Again length of tenure did not seem to impact on the degree of familiarity. Three knew the mayor well and two had met them. Two knew of them “through the media” and half did not know them at all. Three knew their State MPs well, one knew of them by exposure through the media, most not at all. Six did not know their Federal MP, four knew of them through the media and four had met them. The majority (10) of these women distrusted local government, many of

“Apollo Bay is them strongly. Even more did not agree that local government acted in their a great place to interests. Most distrusted the State government. Two had confidence in it and two did not, in varying degrees. With the statement that State live!” government acted in their interests, five were neutral, two agreed with it and the rest disagreed with it. Six disagreed that governments (in general)

10 could not be trusted: - two strongly and four moderately. Five were neutral. Three agreed with the statement, two moderately and one strongly. Only five men had comments to make in this section, one just saying “No”. Four lived with partner/wife and one alone. Two had lived in Apollo Bay under 15 years, two had lived there under three years and one had been there from four – nine years. One respondent stated that the questions had been hard to answer because of personal problems. Two of the respondents, living at their addresses under 15 years, had not participated in any of the 13 civic actions listed in the survey, one had taken part in seven, one had participated in five and one in two of them. One person stated that the shire council does not listen to the local elected councillors. Another said that the condition of, and repairs to, the roads were disgraceful. He also noted that the Apollo Bay area had a rat and mouse plague, which council should do something about. He wondered if this could constitute “a health problem”. One respondent, living in Apollo Bay under three years, believed it to be “a great place to live!”. Three of these respondents had spoken to their neighbours about civic problems. One had contacted a local councillor, and another his local MP about an issue that worried them. Two had signed petitions; one had attended a protest meeting. He and another went to a public meeting about a civic issue, and he had also joined an action group about a civic issue. Two had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue. THEMES Two men in this group had met their local councillors personally; one knew them by means of the media. One knew the mayor well, one had met them and three 1. The Council. didn’t know them at all. One knew his State and Federal Ministers through media 2. Change. exposure, and the other four did not know them. 3. Social & Civic Three of these respondents distrusted all levels of government, the local one most. Participation. Two of them trusted State government moderately. 4. Tourism. 5. This Survey.

“I would like to say that Apollo 70 – 79 Year olds. Bay is now being spoilt by high Total responses: 21 (9Male, 12Female). rise buildings being built on More than one third of women in the 70 – 79 year old every available block of land. age group answering the survey had narrative This place was once a lovely comments to make. haven for families but now it has Six of these women lived alone, six with changed and is on the way to partner/husband one didn’t indicate in what becoming like the Gold Coast circumstances she lived. Qld., because the Colac Otway Five respondents had lived at their current address for Council only sees the rates that more than 15 years, two from 10 to 15 years, three will come in for it.” from four to nine years, the rest under four years.

One of the respondents, living at her addresses under 10 years, had participated in each one of the 13 civic actions listed in the survey. The rest had not been so active in civic life.

There were four comments about council in this grouping, two linking developers and council together. The first said that Apollo Bay was not the “charming seaside town” she fell in love with 30 years previously. She thought council had given building permits haphazardly and had raised rates drastically.

11 She also thought that this did not seem to bother the tourists as much as it did the locals, especially elderly pensioners. She stated that many long-time residents had to move away and this had a negative effect on community life. The next said that high-rise building on “every available block of land” was ruining the character of Apollo Bay, which used to be a beautiful refuge for families, and also commented on the council’s overriding interest in escalating rates. A third respondent also mentioned high rates – she thought more rate money should be spent in Apollo Bay - and stated that the townspeople should have more representation on council. She also said that the local volunteers should be recalled, that more post-boxes were needed in the town, as was a better taxi service – subsidized by the council. The electricity service was dreadful and the rubbish bins should have lids that seal properly for optimal hygiene. She stated that the community health service and the weekly street cleaning was excellent, but that most pensioners couldn’t afford respite care to give themselves a break from looking after themselves or a family member with a disability. The fourth was of the opinion that even though people may have been able to influence council’s decisions in some cases, many important things had been done without the residents’ approval - for example, the location of the sewerage plant and the dumping of sewerage into the ocean. Other comments included one about the need for a swimming pool for arthritis sufferers. Another was concerned about the present water shortage, stating that another dam may be needed now. Several comments were about the survey itself. One respondent was heartily thankful she had finished; another said that her income was nobody’s business but hers; a third thought that a lot of the survey’s questions did not apply to people over 70 THEMES whilst a fourth that it was a practical, good questionnaire and congratulated the 1. The Council. researchers. 2. Change. Three of the respondents, living in Apollo Bay differing lengths of time, felt it 3. Social & Civic was a friendly, caring and supportive community in which to live, one stating Participation. that she particularly liked the Saturday market and the street stalls. One stated 4. Tourism. that she hoped it wasn’t growing too fast to keep its spirit. 5. This Survey. Twelve of these respondents had spoken to their neighbours about civic problems. Five had attended council meetings; five had also written to council; seven had contacted a local councillor; two had contacted a local MP; eight had signed petitions; four had attended a protest meeting about a civic issue; three had written letters to the editor of any newspaper; five had contacted a local politician about a civic issue; seven had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue; seven went to a public meeting about a civic issue; one had joined an action group about a civic issue, and one had written to the local news sheet about a civic issue. Six of this group of women knew their local councillors well and three had met them personally. Five of them had lived in Apollo Bay longer than 15 years and two less than one year. Three knew the mayor well, one knew of them “through the media” and the rest did not know them at all. Four knew their State MPs by exposure through the media and the rest not at all. Seven did not know their Federal MPs, four knew of them through the media and two had met them. One respondent did not answer the questions about government at all. The majority (12) of these women distrusted local government, many of them strongly. Eleven disagreed that local government acted in their interests (some strongly, some moderately), one was neutral and one agreed (moderately) that local government acted in her interests. Six distrusted the state government - three strongly and three moderately. Four had confidence in state government and one was neutral. In response to the statement that State government acted in their interests, two were neutral, four agreed with it and six disagreed with it. There were varying responses to the statement that governments (in general) could not be trusted.

12 Just over one quarter of the men in this age group had narrative responses to make. The majority lived with partner/wife and two lived alone. Four had lived in Apollo Bay under 15 years, four from four – nine years and one between 10 and 15 years. THEMES One of the respondents, living at his address under 10 years, had taken part in all but one of the 13 civic actions listed in the survey. Another had taken part in 1. The Council. 12. Both these respondents had lived 2. Change.

“Apollo Bay was really nice to in Apollo Bay between four and nine 3. Social & Civic years. Participation. be in, in the past 15 years. There were several comments as to 4. Tourism. Although fairly dormant and the changing face of Apollo Bay. 5. This Survey. backward it was a really good One wondered whether all the place to be (knew everyone), but tourist-focussed multi-story apartments that had come now it’s jumped in price and about since the amalgamation of councils and since the population (3-5 years). With changes in building regulations, were going to prove to tourism it seems to be losing its be of benefit to the town. ("sea changeless") community A second said due to rises in the (tourist) population and feel and becoming just a nice the cost of living, the town was losing its community looking suburb. (sea changeless) feeling and becoming just like a nice- looking suburb of a city. He cited the recently introduced Recent introduction of parking parking fines as evidence. fines is an example more like Another stated that he had been threatened by four dogs the city this place is becoming.” and he would like to see them restrained. He also said he would like the town’s footpaths to be cleaner it was starting to look “filthy to overseas tourists”. For example, he suggested more bins for cigarette buts. A fourth respondent wanted to sack the inefficient workers at the Information Centre and replace them with volunteers. One respondent said that “life is good”. Another said that while the hospital and aged care facilities could be a little larger, the Health and Community Services in Apollo Bay were possibly the best in the State. One person said that this survey should have asked some questions related specifically to the town, such as the effects of tourists, the Saturday market and the weaknesses in the infrastructure of the area. Another asked why self-funded retirees didn’t rate a mention in the survey. Only one of these respondents had not spoken to their neighbours about civic problems. Two had contacted a local councillor and also their local MP about an issue that worried them. Two had signed petitions and one of them had also attended a protest meeting. He and two others went to a public meeting about a civic issue, and he too had joined an action group about a civic issue. Three of them had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue. Five men in this group had met their local councillors personally or knew them well whilst one did not know the mayor. One knew the mayor well, one had met them, the rest knew of them. Most (six) knew their State and Federal Ministers through media exposure, and the others not at all. Many of these men were neutral toward or moderately distrusted all levels of government, distrusting the State the most. Only two of them agreed with the statement that all government can be trusted.

13 80 – 100 Year olds. Total responses: 7 (0 Male, 7 Female) In this last age grouping there were no narrative comments from men. Seven women responded. Six of these were living alone and one with unrelated adults. Five had lived at their current address for more than 15 years, the other two from four to nine years. One of these respondents wanted to “STOP THE CORRUPTION” and keep the council clean. She considered the community looked after the township very well. Another noted that she had been very involved with civic duties when she was younger, and even after she moved to Apollo Bay she had taken the initiative with several issues, writing to local members and council - all to no avail. A third was concerned with the rising costs of living impacting on the elderly. (See quote). A fourth said she soon would need help with tasks of daily living whilst another noted that she was very happy with the services offered by Otway Health and Community Services. One stated that she thought most questions in the survey didn’t apply to her as she did not live in own home, and one thanked the researchers for the free pen! The majority, those who lived alone, had spoken to their

“Why are the elderly, neighbours about civic problems. One had attended council meetings, one had written to council and another one had also especially those with a contacted a local councillor as well as her local MP. Three had single income being forced signed petitions, one had attended a protest meeting, two had to move out of their family written letters to the editor of a newspaper, and they and one due to the rising cost of other had written to the local news sheet about a civic issue. commodities?… Two had contacted a local politician about a civic issue, three It is very frightening.” had contacted an appropriate organization about a civic issue and two went to a public meeting about a civic issue. Two members of this group of women knew their local councillors well and one had met them personally. Once more, length of tenure did not seem to impact on the degree of familiarity. Three had met the mayor. One knew them because of their media profile whilst three did not know them at all. Four knew their State and Federal MPs by THEMES exposure through the media and three not at all. 1. The Council. Two of these women did not have any confidence in local government (strongly) 2. Change. and two moderately. Two were neutral and one had a moderate amount of confidence in local government. Four thought that local government did not act 3. Social & Civic in their interests - two strongly and two moderately. Two were neutral toward this Participation. statement and one didn’t say. Only one trusted the State government. Of the rest, 4. Tourism. half were neutral and half agreed that they could have confidence in state 5. This Survey. government (two strongly, one moderately). It was the same with the statement that State government acted in their interests. Two indicated neutrality toward the statement that governments in general could not be trusted and two strongly agreed.

Unspecified groupings. Total responses: 7 (1 Male, 4 Female, 2 Unknown) There are two more groups that wrote narrative comments for this survey. First there were the people who did not note down their birth dates so they could not be placed in an age grouping. The female respondent lived alone and had lived at her current address for more than 15 years. The males had all lived in the area under nine years with one under one year.

14 The female respondent’s comment was about the survey – she thought some of the questions were too personal. She had not been involved in any of the activities listed in the survey. She had met her local councillor but did not know the mayor or State and Federal Politicians at all. She moderately disagreed with the statements about having confidence in, or trusting the actions of local, and state governments and she strongly agreed with the statement that government in general could not be trusted.

The comments of the males in this group all touched upon the “Apollo Bay is a great council and the impact in some form or another of its’ decisions place to live when all the upon Apollo Bay. The comments included the person that pros and cons are stated that Apollo Bay was underrepresented on the shire council and that the council squandered residents rates weighed up. Isolation has elsewhere. He felt that the volunteers who were dismissed from kept Apollo Bay beautiful the Information Centre should be reinstated. He also said that but can negatively affect the respite care in the hospital was excellent, but far too the lives of some expensive for those on limited incomes. occupants.” A second respondent thought that the council lacked vision and that it’s long-term planning was seriously deficient. A third criticized the council for forcing them to accept council’s decisions without listening to what residents wanted. He made the point that, unlike the townspeople, councillors did not have to live with the consequences of poor choices. One person was concerned about the wellbeing of his community, and another mentioned the taxi service that he thought was unreliable and should be subsided by the government. Two of these men also mentioned that a seat at the shelter outside the Information Centre would be useful. One noted that Apollo Bay’s second post-box needed to be replaced and that the town needed a deli, fruit and vegetable, and clothing shops. THEMES 1. The Council. On the positive side, a person in this group commented that there was a great deal of support for the older members of the community in Apollo Bay, and that 2. Change. the street cleaning services were very commendable. 3. Social & Civic Participation. One man said he was looking forward to the findings of this survey. 4. Tourism. These men were quite active civically, having done almost half the activities 5. This Survey. listed in the survey. Also included was a person who had done none of the listed activities and did not know, or know of, any person in local, state or federal government, and did not place any reliance local or federal governments and believed in the state government only moderately. The others all had some knowledge of government, and had a variety of responses towards the three tiers of government, being most strongly distrustful of local government. The other group was one who had not given any indication of their age or gender. There were 2 narrative responses in this group, both living in Apollo Bay fewer than four years. One of these respondents thought that the council was too centralized in Colac, and as a result there was not enough listening to residents concerns at council meetings. One of these two people thought that Otway Health and Community Services delivered an excellent service and said that the powers- that-be should assist them in every way. The other thought that Apollo Bay was beautiful but isolated. These two respondents gave no information on length of tenure, civic activities, or knowledge, of and trust in, the three tiers of government.

15 OBSERVATIONS ON THE DATA

There were more females (71) than males (53) who took advantage of the opportunity to compose a narrative comment in Q. 67 of the data. It was discovered that just over 80% of the narrative comments came from the Apollo Bay township area, even though the participation rates for the whole questionnaire were slightly higher in Marengo and Skenes Creek. Other than this, the three areas were not differentiated for the purposes of this report. The rate of the narrative respondents who were volunteers (almost 50%) was also discovered to be substantially higher than that of the average rural population in Victoria and the rate for the total participants in this survey (37%). Just over one third (40) of the narrative comments in Q. 67 were from people living in the township from four to nine years. Since there were five sections in the length of tenure question, this number could have been expected to be approximately 26 – 28 only. The researcher has surmised that perhaps she got such a high response from this group because people living in Apollo Bay wanted to settle down in a homogenous community, only to find this community mushrooming from the effect of development just after they arrived. Significantly more than half (74) of the narrative comments were made by people who lived alone or with their partner/spouse. We could have perhaps said that these respondents have more time on their hands to think about their community and its concerns, if it were not for the fact that another 40 came from those in a nuclear family. The women in the 80+ age group were far more involved in the civic activities mentioned in this survey than were women aged 20-29. Unlike the 20-29 year group however, only about 4% of them (as against 85% approx.) had access to a car. In each of the age groups, except the first, there was at least one person who had done all 13 civic actions examined in this report. There were only 11 positive comments about life-style and living in Apollo Bay, with five people adding qualifying clauses to their comment. It is interesting to note that of the 11 comments six were from those who had lived in the town and environs for less than six years, and none from those who had lived at their current address for more than fifteen years. The comments on the survey itself covered areas such as it’s size and methodology, whether it was worth doing and whether the results would be acted upon. Others felt that areas such as youth issues, what Apollo Bay people really want and self-funded retirees concerns should have been covered.

CONCLUSIONS Five themes were identified in this report. Those focussing on the council, social change and tourism were seen by many as inter-connected and the comments were often expressed in strong terms. Some also made the connection between the rapidly changing nature of the community through development and tourism and the impact this had on the level of civic participation. The associated issues of the increasing cost of living and the need for improved infrastructure in a range of areas were persistently raised.

There were a small number of positive comments about living in Apollo Bay, Marengo and Skene’s Creek and the available services. It must be noted that the large majority of people in all age groups at least talked with their neighbours about issues concerning them. This would indicate that at least the people who vote in Apollo Bay (to whom the Apollo Bay Community Capacity Project was 16 geared) still belong to a closely-knit community - with the level of communication between neighbours being quite elaborate, even though some amongst them may believe this is also altering. As the closest level of government to the community, the Shire of Colac-Otway was the subject of many comments, largely focussed around the perception that it is less responsive than is expected to the needs of this community. It was apparent that the most trenchant comments in the data were about the council and its role in the development of the town. The attitudes, which came through to the researcher, were predominantly those of resentment and disorientation. The Shire of Colac-Otway is clearly perceived to have a strong influence on the way the town develops. This project acknowledges the strong role of the council as the local planning authority. There are also clearly parts of the planning process that are not totally within the control of the council. From a broader perspective, there are a also number of factors outside the local environment driving the rapid development experienced by this area. The major influence driving this development seems to be that there are just more people in Australia who can afford holiday homes or who are choosing to retire to seaside locations. The Apollo Bay area has now been caught up in this trend in a similar way to communities such as Lorne. Some of these localities have become full to overflowing - very like the suburban environments some people may want to escape. There are, in the researcher’s opinion, three main causes for this shift in the social order. Firstly, according to figures published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), academics, and many welfare agencies, income inequality is growing apace in Australia and most other countries in the world* . This has been, partly, the result of global policies concerning privatisation. ** Secondly, State Government policy and processes around building codes appear to have resulted in some decisions about development being ultimately taken out of the hands of local shire officers. This has enabled some developments to occur which many local people see as inconsistent with the valued character of the local built environment. Thirdly, it has been documented by scholars that social, political/civic, sporting, religious and charitable engagement - social capital - is in decline everywhere when compared to 30 or 40 years ago. As Robert Putnam, in his book “Bowling Alone” (Simon and Schuster, 2000, p. 27-28), says, there is hard evidence to prove that “our schools and neighbourhoods don’t work so well when community bonds slacken, that our economy, our democracy, and even our health and happiness depend on adequate stocks of social capital”.

* This can be gleaned by examining figures on the labour market. For example, a media release from the ABS, dated 04/07/2000 said, “in 1998, 27 per cent of employees were in casual work up from 19 per cent in 1988. New work arrangements, which are generally less secure, have been evolving. The earning’s gap widened: the difference between low and high income earners in full time jobs has been increasing with those at the top moving a head at a much faster rate. These statements are borne out and added to by Stephen Gianni, writing in the December 2001 edition of the Brotherhood of St. Laurence publication “Comment”. While reviewing the book “ Work rich, work poor: Inequality and economic change in Australia” (edited by Jeff Borland, Bob Gregory and Peter Sheehan) he tell us, among other things, that: - While the analysis shows that average earnings for full time employees increased by 25 per cent over the 1990’s this hides the true nature of the change. Managers received a 41 percent increase while labourer’s average earnings increased by only seven per cent.”

** By privatizing public utilities the mega-wealthy of most countries have robbed the poorest in their countries of what real little wealth they had – part ownership of those self-same utilities – and sold them in the form of shares mostly to the mega wealthy in the form of shares to service their life-styles. Indeed, though not commenting specifically on privatisation Joseph Stiglitz, former Chief Economist of the world bank, has this to say about the economics of money prevalent today: “ There never was economic evidence in favour of capital market liberalization. There still isn’t. It increases risk and doesn’t increase growth… There isn’t the intellectual basis that you would have thought required for a major change in international rules. It was all based on ideology.” 17 How can these issues and concerns be addressed? The Department of Human Services felt that the first step was to measure existing social capital in the still strong community of Apollo Bay. This, so to speak was “where we came in”. The project established processes to report the findings of this study back to residents through the Apollo Bay News Sheet to ensure the community was aware of the results of the study. In an environment of quite rapid change, the challenge now is to consider ways in which the issues raised can be actively considered by the Apollo Bay community together with Colac-Otway Shire Council. It is hoped that this process will result in outcomes that will build further on the strengths of the Apollo Bay/Marengo/Skenes Creek community.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 The Apollo Bay Community Consultative Committee members explore options for responding to the comments presented in this report. It is suggested that this be undertaken in partnership with the Colac-Otway Shire, the Chamber of Commerce and the Otway Forum.

2. The Shire of Colac Otway consider the perceptions and issues contained within this report in the context of their overall planning for the Shire and for the Apollo Bay, Skene’s Creek and Marengo areas.

3. Consideration be given to the use of focus groups of residents to explore solutions to the issues identified as priorities by the local community. For example, discussion has occurred since the survey about reviewing support to carers in the area.

4. In terms of further analysis of this data, future research projects could examine the following:

§ analysis of the findings from the perspective of the length of tenure and living arrangements in order to compare the two sets of findings and discover any interesting comparisons.

§ Comparison of the data in this report as against the other questions in the survey with smaller sections of narrative.

§ analysis of the comments around development in terms of the socio-economic status of respondents.

§ analysis of the percentage of civic participation in total respondents compared with those who wrote narrative comments. This researcher had a glance at all 17 respondents in the 20-29 year old group and the civic participation level was almost the same.

18 EPILOGUE

“Before October 29, 1997, John Lambert and Andy Boschma knew each other only through their local bowling league at the Ypsi-lanti, Michigan. Lambert, a sixty-four-year old retired employee of the University of Michigan hospital, had been on a kidney transplant waiting list for three years when Boschma, a thirty-three-year-old accountant, learned casually of Lambert’s need and unexpectedly approached him to offer to donate one of his own kidneys. ‘Andy saw something in me that others didn’t’, said Lambert. ‘When we were in the hospital Andy said to me, “ John, I really like you and have a lot of respect for you. I wouldn’t hesitate to do this all over again”. I got choked up’. Boschma returned the feeling: ‘I obviously feel a kinship [with Lambert]. I cared about him before, but now I’m really rooting for him’. This moving story speaks for itself, but the photograph that accompanied this report in the Ann Arbour News reveals that in addition to their differences in profession and generation, Boschma is white and Lambert is African American. That they bowled together made all the difference. In small ways like this – we … need to reconnect with one another. That is the simple argument of this book.” (Robert Putnam, “Bowling Alone”, Simon and Schuster, 2000, p. 28)

REFERENCES

Australian Bureau of Statistics Measuring Social Capital: Current Collections and Future Directions. Discussion Paper, Nov. 2000

Australian Bureau of Statistics Voluntary Work, Australia 2000 (Cat. No. 4441.0)

Cox, E., ‘A Truly Civil Society’ The 1995 Boyer Lectures. Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1995)

Putnam, R., Bowling Alone Simon & Schuster (2000)

Sommer, S., Stress and Illness and the Mind Body Connection. A Discussion Paper Department of Community Medicine Monash University (1993)