Explore the vast range of titles available.

Contemporary governments employ a range of policy tools to ‘activate’ the unemployed to look for work. Framing unemployment as a consequence of personal shortcoming, these policies incentivise the unemployed to become ‘productive’ members of society. While Foucault’s governmentality framework has been used to foreground the operation of power within these policies, ‘job-seeker’ resistance has received less attention. In particular, forms of emotional resistance have rarely been studied. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 80 unemployed welfare recipients in Australia, this article shows that many unemployed people internalise activation’s discourses of personal failure, experiencing shame and worthlessness as a result. It also reveals, however, that a significant minority reject this framing and the ‘feeling rules’ it implies, expressing not shame but anger regarding their circumstances. Bringing together insights from resistance studies and the sociology of emotions, this article argues that ‘job-seeker’ anger should be recognised as an important form of ‘everyday resistance’.

Social networks play an important role in helping people find employment, yet extant studies have argued that unemployed ‘job-seekers’ rarely engage in ‘networking’ behaviours. Previous explanations of this inactivity have typically focused on individual factors such as personality, knowledge and attitude, or suggested that isolation occurs because individuals lose access to the latent benefits of employment. Social stigma has been obscured in these debates, even as they have perpetuated stereotypes regarding individual responsibility for unemployment and the inherent value of paid work. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 80 unemployed Australians, this article argues that stigma-related shame is an important factor in networking decisions. First, it demonstrates that stigma is ubiquitous in the lives of the unemployed. Second, it identifies withdrawal from social networks and disassociation from ‘the unemployed’ as two key strategies that unemployed people use to manage stigma-related shame, and shows how these strategies reduce networking activities.

The global market in international education has grown almost without interruption over several decades. Increases in international student enrolments in Australia have been among the most impressive in the world, though they declined between 2010 and 2013. The decline was attributable to exchange rate movements and changes to student visa regulations, though an additional factor lay in reputational fallout from a series of violent physical attacks on Indian students, mostly in 2009. In response, Australian federal and State governments undertook diplomatic trips to India, established a raft of public inquiries to investigate the broader question of international student welfare, and made policy changes. Utilising the literature on public policy \"crises\", this paper presents government responses to the 2010-2013 downturn in terms of managing a \"long-shadow crisis\" (Boin et al., The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership Under Pressure; Cambrtidge University Press, 2005), which typically emerges quickly but has major political consequences, is only seen to be resolved incrementally, and calls for policy change rather than fine-tuning in response. The adequacy of the policy response to the crisis is not discussed. The article suggests that the crisis and the response acted to elevate the status of international education as an area of policy in general, though not as a mainstream area of social policy.

Crises affect international students’ overseas experiences, but crisis theory is rarely considered in international education studies. This article provides a comparative study of two countries, using a ‘most similar cases’ research design, to analyse host-nation government responses to crisis situations. The two countries are Australia and New Zealand. The crisis in each case relates to racial discrimination and violence against international students. The article finds that Australia and New Zealand each had a ‘long-shadow crisis’. Yet, Australia’s governmental response was more systematic and comprehensive, mainly because of the formation of a pro-action ‘advocacy coalition’ which was formed in the context of a federal political system. The article discusses key implications for international education studies, highlighting that governmental structures matter in crisis response, and that crisis theory is important to interpreting policy challenges, especially in the era of COVID-19.

Social policy represents a critical dimension of the governmental response to COVID-19. This article analyses the Australian response, which was radical in that it signalled an unprecedented policy turnaround towards welfare generosity and the almost total relaxation of conditionality. It was also surprising because it was introduced by a conservative, anti-welfarist government. The principal argument is that, though the generosity was temporary, it should be understood simultaneously by reference to institutional change and institutional tradition. The ‘change’ element was shaped by the urgency and scale of the crisis, which indicated an institutional ‘critical juncture’. This provided a ‘window of opportunity’ for reform, which would otherwise be closed. ‘Tradition’ was reflected in the nation’s federalist conventions, which partially steered the response. The central implication for other countries is that, amid the uncertainty of a crisis, governments need to consider change within the bounds of their traditional institutions when introducing welfare reform.

Using data from three provinces as part of a joint study by Monash University in Australia and China's Institute of Labour Science, an affiliate body of the national Ministry of Labour and Social Security, this article examines the extension of social rights and social security coverage to intra-national migrants in China as a public governance issue. More specifically, it analyses how central government regulations on improving the situation of migrant workers are being interpreted and implemented by local governments. In this regard, it offers a unique case study of difficulties encountered in the local implementation of policy directives issued by the central government.

The omission of international students from the Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee (AVCC) 2007 national study on student finances is indicative of a pattern of exclusion. The exclusion is unacceptable from a humane perspective and feeds the belief that Australians perceive international students primarily as 'cash cows'. This study partially compensates by drawing on information derived from indepth interviews with 200 international students across nine Australian universities. The data cast light on the sources and adequacy of international student income and how these students cope with the financial risks of living and studying in a foreign land. It is revealed that significant numbers of international students experience serious financial difficulties. Thus, we argue that government regulators and university managers should put into practice their affirmed belief that Australian university students should be treated in a consistent and caring manner. Further, we suggest the AVCC should immediately commission a study to examine the financial circumstances of Australian university international students. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

In Australia the main instruments of international student welfare regulation are contained within the Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Framework. Despite detailed formal provision in ESOS, however, in recent years a vigorous public debate on student life in Australia has emerged, with participants asking questions on whether international students' human rights are being respected. This article argues that at its heart ESOS is a top-down, nation-bound regime providing for the rights of students as education consumers but falling short of constituting the welfare instrument that it promises to be. [Author introduction, ed]

Housing is a major concern for many international students. This is especially so in those countries where students are mostly dependent on the private market for their accommodation. Australia is one such country, and is one of the world’s major destinations for international students. This article analyses governmental failure to address problems relating to international student housing affordability and conditions. Using theory on ‘policy inaction’ to frame the analysis, we draw on 20 interviews with policy stakeholders to explain the Australian government’s reliance on: (1) market-based housing provision for international students, and (2) a longstanding policy preference not to provide support. Interviewees were widely critical of the lack of action to address international student housing problems and understood inaction in relation, rather than in opposition, to the dominance of market-based action in housing and higher education. However, analysis of stakeholder perspectives also illuminates how policy-making action benefiting some emerges as inaction for others left behind or overlooked by the status quo. The interview data points to the need for government to overhaul its policy framework, and in doing so, to collaborate with higher education providers in revising the market-based regulatory approach. The main implications for theory and policy are discussed.

International education has generated complex problems of governance. As well as being beneficiaries of educational services and consumers of a product, international students are also migrants, workers and beings with civil rights. Arguably, the regulation of international student security as consumer protection fails to recognize this full range of human rights. The research consisted of 70 semi-structured interviews with international students at two institutions in New Zealand, which has devised a unique consumer protection regime embodied in the New Zealand Code of Practice for the Pastoral Care of International Students. Student problems in relation to language difficulties, finances, accommodation, personal safety and freedom from discrimination, and social integration are discussed. The study finds that support services do not fully cater for the needs of international students nor accord them the full range of potential rights. The Code covers some but not all aspects of student security; and the fact that international students know little about the Code constrains its efficacy as a regulatory framework. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).