Skip to Content
 Close search

Influences on Indigenous labour market outcomes

Staff working paper

This staff working paper examines factors that potentially influence Indigenous labour market outcomes (LMOs).

The paper is authored by Annie Savvas, Clare Boulton and Ellie Jepsen and was released on 5 December 2011.

Download the paper

  • Key points
  • Contents
  • This paper uses data from the 2008 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey (NATSISS) to model the links between various personal characteristics and activities, and four Indigenous labour market outcomes. As causality may run in either direction, results are interpreted as associations.
  • Results typically differ between men and women, in part because of different responsibilities in relation to child rearing, broader family responsibilities and other specialisation in unpaid work. Of these differences, the most notable were those for educational attainment. Results suggest that for women, attainment of year 10 or above is associated with a higher probability of employment and labour force participation, whereas this is less evident for men.
  • Results confirm findings from previous research that other human capital factors, such as good health, are positively associated with Indigenous employment and labour force participation.
  • Arrest and imprisonment were found to be negatively associated with Indigenous employment and labour force participation. A history of arrest was found to have a larger negative association with employment for women compared to men.
  • Models that omit personal characteristics that might determine an individual's labour supply (such as ability, motivation and preferences) are likely to produce biased estimates of the effect of the human capital factors that are included in the model (such as education, health and disability).
    • One benefit of including variables in the model that represent cultural and social engagement is that they may act as proxies for unobserved personal characteristics, reducing the impact of this source of bias.
  • The cultural and social engagement factors were found to have statistically significant associations with Indigenous labour market outcomes for women, but not for men.
    • For women there were positive associations between employment and labour force participation, and engagement in social cultural events and the provision of support outside the household.
  • A greater understanding of the links between social capital and labour market outcomes could be explored using alternative econometric models. However, there are limits to the indicators that can be derived from the data.

Background information

Patrick Jomini (Assistant Commissioner) 03 9653 2176

  • Preliminaries
    • Cover, Copyright, Contents, Acknowledgements, Abbreviations and Glossary
  • Key points
  • Chapter 1 Introduction
    • 1.1 Policy context — an integrated, multidimensional approach to targeting Indigenous disadvantage
    • 1.2 What labour market outcomes are examined?
    • 1.3 Recent history of Indigenous labour market outcomes
    • 1.4 Why do empirical analysis?
    • 1.5 Outline of the study
  • Chapter 2 Analytical framework and literature
    • 2.1 What influences labour market outcomes?
    • 2.2Literature review
  • Chapter 3 Econometric model
    • 3.1 Benefits of regression analysis
    • 3.2 Model selection
    • 3.3 Interpretation of results
    • 3.4 Econometric issues
  • Chapter 4 Data and variables
    • 4.1 ABS 2008 NATSISS
    • 4.2 Explanatory variables
    • 4.3 Some data limitations
  • Chapter 5 Results and discussion
    • 5.1 Associations with health and disability
    • 5.2 Associations with educational attainment
    • 5.3 Associations with personal and demographic characteristics
    • 5.4 Associations with social and cultural factors
  • Chapter 6 Conclusion
  • Appendix A
  • Reference

Printed copies

This publication is only available online.

Publications feedback

We value your comments about this publication and encourage you to provide feedback.

Submit publications feedback