Level of socio-economic disadvantage

SEIFA (Socio-Economic Indexes For Areas) is a suite of four summary measures that have been created by the Australian Bureau of Statistics from the 2006 Census information. The indexes can be used to explore different aspects of socio-economic conditions by geographic areas. For each index, every geographic area in Australia is given a SEIFA number which shows how disadvantaged that area is compared with other areas in Australia or within a State.

Each index summarises a different aspect of the socio-economic conditions of people living in an area. They each summarise a different set of social and economic information. The indexes provide more general measures of socio-economic status than is given by measuring income or unemployment alone, for example.

   Source: SEIFA, ABS

This is a general socio-economic index for the Pilbara that was created using measures of relative disadvantage as well as measures of relative advantage. There are 21 measures included, such as: low or high income, internet connection, occupation and education.

Roebourne(S) rated the highest of the four Pilbara local government areas in this index, reaching the top decile in the state and ranked 129 of 142 local governments. East Pilbara(S) rated the lowest, scoring in the 7^th decile and ranking 89 of all Western Australian local governments.

   Source: SEIFA, ABS

This index is a general socio-economic index for the Pilbara that summarises a wide range of information about the economic and social resources of people and households within an area. This index summarises 17 different measures, such as low income, low education, high unemployment and unskilled occupations.

Ashburton(S) and Roebourne(S) were both listed as having the equal lowest level of disadvantage in the Pilbara, scoring in the 9^th decile. In contrast, East Pilbara(S) registered a high level of relative disadvantage, ranking 22 of all WA local governments.

   Source: SEIFA, ABS

This index reflects the economic resources of Pilbara households within an area. There are 15 variables included to measure a wide range of concepts, such as: household income, housing expenditures (e.g. rent) and wealth (e.g. home ownership).

Roebourne(S) scored well above the other local governments and ranked 112 in Western Australia.  Second was Ashburton(S), ranked 77, followed by Port Hedland(T) and East Pilbara(S) ranked 66 and 25 respectively.

   Source: SEIFA, ABS

This index reflects the general level of education and occupation-related skills of people within an area. There are nine measures included in this index, including qualifications achieved and whether further education is being undertaken. The occupation information in this index includes occupations that require a high level of skills, occupations that require a low level of skills, as well as unemployment.

All areas of the Pilbara scored comparatively lower in this index than in the other SEIFA indices. Roebourne(S) ranked 64 and Port Hedland(T) ranked 45 of 142 local governments in WA. Ashburton(S) and East Pilbara(S) both scored within the 2^nd decile, ranking 24 and 20 respectively in WA.

Across all indices, Roebourne(S) generally scored highest of the Pilbara local government areas. Port Hedland(T) and Ashburton(S) were similar across most indices, while East Pilbara(S) scored the lowest in all areas.

The Pilbara fared markedly worse across the Education & Occupation Index, more so than any other index in the SEIFA collection. However, in the overall Relative Socio-Economic Advantage & Disadvantage Index, the Pilbara scored quite highly in relation to the rest of the state and country.

 <more data>

Distribution of income

Household incomes in the 0 to under $1200 a week ranges have been falling over successive periods from 1996, while the number of households receiving over $1200 a week have been growing each Census.  The most dramatic change over the ten year period has been those households earning $2000 or more.  While doubling in number between 1996 and 2001, the number of households with a combined income of $2000 a week has further increased by a factor of three between 2001 and 2006.

With the large increase in household wages attributed to the demand from the mining and construction sectors, it is important to note the equally high increases in the cost of housing and accommodation in the region over the same period.

 <more data>