Education – The Next Economy

Building the economy we could have: Beyond ‘Lifestyle Drift’

Overview:

Too much focus on individual action and change puts responsibility for change at the feet of individuals, as if they were separate and not touched by the wider dynamics wrought by policy and economic dynamics.

In public health this is called ‘lifestyle drift’.

This lets the economy – and those who shape it – off the hook, while individuals bear the brunt of wider economic trends.

Rather than blaming individuals for ‘wilting’ when the conditions around them don’t enable them to thrive, it is those economic trends are where change is most urgent: including decent work; businesses that harness profitability is a means, rather than a goal in its own right; and economic activity generated from the local up via community wealth building.

The economy is a major upstream cause of many of the problems Australians face downstream. The economy creates the causes that compel certain behaviours, invoke certain reactions, and deliver harmful impacts.

Yet often the emphasis of policies and programs is choices and changes individuals needs to make. In the public health sphere, this shift in emphasis from the wider context to individual lifestyle choices has been referred to as ‘lifestyle drift’. Here Dr Katherine Trebeck shares her thoughts on the need to move beyond it.

What lifestyle drift means

Firstly, let’s look at what lifestyle drift actually means. It’s a term used by public health scholars and, as you may have suspected, it’s not as fun as it might sound. It’s what happens when those designing policies might understand the external conditions (upstream factors) that drive health inequalities, such as the quality of work and access to decent housing. However, when it comes to action, the focus drifts downstream to questions of lifestyle, where the individual is in the frame, rather than the economy.

Another way to think about the problem with such an approach is ‘wilting-plant-syndrome’, a concept described by poet and clinical psychologist Dr Sanah Ahsan.

Ahsan wrote: ‘If a plant were wilting, we wouldn’t diagnose it with “wilting-plant-syndrome”; we would change its conditions’.

‘Wilting-plant-syndrome’ is seen all too often in policy and economic thinking today, where downstream individual action is seen as the problem, not the wider conditions causing the problems. The consequence of the thinking inherent in both lifestyle drift and wilting-plant-syndrome is that the onus of action is placed on individuals, as if they were separate and not touched by the wider dynamics wrought by policy and economic systems.

What lifestyle drift looks like

Health is an area where it is hard to avoid seeing the lifestyle drift phenomenon play out.

As Kriznnik et al say ‘the main assumptions underpinning interventions to address health inequalities … remain focussed on individual responsibility’. For example, when people are struggling with their mental health, they are offered therapy or antidepressants. This might help someone manage, but it won’t address the challenges they face in their lives such as poverty, a hostile workplace, the stress of being unable to pay bills, or the anxiety of precarious housing. You can see a focus on individual action in a recent briefing about tackling obesity, where the suggested changes mostly revolved around mechanisms that supported or compelled individuals to act differently.

Lifestyle drift is also evident in a 2025 Australian Productivity Commission report calling for a National Prevention Investment Strategy. In all 95 pages of the report, the word “poverty” appeared only twice (once in a reference), and the word “inequality” only three times. To its credit, its list of primary prevention measures included economic support for families (while important, arguably transfers are also an after-the-fact response downstream). But in the same vein, it also described parenting education (where the onus is on the individual parents to change).

We Aussies aren’t the only ones at risk of wilting plant syndrome and lifestyle drift:

A few years ago, the World Health Organisation published a list of ‘best buy’ interventions on non-communicable disease, which positioned the individual as the unit where change needs to happen (through education, taxes on unhealthy food etc). Poverty was mentioned only in passing and inequality ostensibly ignored.

In the UK ‘policies designed to reduce health inequalities’ largely assume that ‘human behaviour is a major determinant of health, and that behaviour is largely a matter of individual choice’. For example, a UK alcohol policy is described as largely directed to helping individuals make ‘healthy choices’.

These individualised framings cut through. For example, poor diets are often attributed to bad individual choices. Research found that in the UK Victorian-era notions of deserving and undeserving poor prevail, with the researcher observing that some providers of foodbanks depicted food charity as a ‘choice’, seeming to endorse ‘the classic deserving/undeserving divide while individualising food insecurity and obscuring the systemic issues’.

Shifting the blame for environmental harm

Shifting of responsibility to individuals, often by large corporations, is rife in environmental issues, from litter to the concept of a personal ‘carbon footprint’. For example:

An ad launched in the US a few years ago showed an actor canoeing through polluted water, then walking toward a highway, only to see someone throwing rubbish out of their car window. The end of the ad states that ‘People start pollution. People can stop it’. This was part of the Keep America Beautiful campaign, an initiative designed and funded by packaging business, such as American Can Co, Owens-Illinois Glass Co, Coca-Cola and Dixie Cup.

The term ‘litter bug’ was coined by the plastics industry, just as it was oil company BP that created the concept of an individual ‘carbon footprint’, with the carbon footprint calculator created in 2004 by a public relations firm working for BP.

How lifestyle drift dodges the real issue

The problem with all this focus on individuals is that overly emphasising individual action lets the real culprit off the hook: the economic system itself and the rules and players within it that create a misalignment with what people and planet need. It ignores the political decisions and deep-seated assumptions that have carved out the shape of the economy of today.

As scholars writing in the Lancet conclude, individualised framing absolves corporations and government of blame. It serves to ‘effectively [neutralise] the effects of social context and airbrushes out of the picture a number of important contextual agents and institutions—specifically the state, markets and industry’.

Well-known epidemiologist Professor Michael Marmot and colleagues warn that:

an ‘individualistic approach to health … is a convenient mechanism for those in and with power, and wider society, to abrogate responsibility for creating the conditions for a healthy society’.

Time to put the spotlight on the economy

The reality is that it is the economy that drives many of the challenges Australia confronts today, from people’s sense of grievance and lack of hope for the future to species loss; from homelessness to increasingly chaotic weather. The economy is a major upstream cause of the many problems Australians face downstream. The economy creates the causes that compel certain behaviours, invoke certain reactions, and generate harmful impacts.

Take the unhealthy behaviours, such as lack of exercise or reaching for processed food. Many are not so much a matter of free choice, but options taken when agency is bounded and curtailed. Sometimes people simply do not have the extent of autonomy and choice that the prevailing economic discourse, with its emphasis on individuals maximising their own self-interest, might imply.

‘Causes of the causes’ is how Professor Michael Marmot describes the social pressures that drive harmful behaviours: such as reduced physical activity due to safety concerns, or stress leading to smoking or overeating.

A leading authority on the social and economic determinants of health, Professor Sharon Friel, documents the various evidence of how and to what extent the economy matters to health. Socio-economic inequalities are critical factors: it was recently reported by health scholars Dr Sarah Hill and Dr Edward Jegasothy that one-fifth of ill-health in Australia could be avoided if everyone had the same socio-economic conditions as the top 20 per cent.

So, where to from here?

The story that needs to be told is how many economic policies are deepening inequality, and how deliberate policy choices – like tax concessions for the wealthy, weakened unions, and the emergence of precarious work – have shifted wealth upward and eroded protection for workers, while increasing insecurity and instability for many.

When policy and decision makers are discussing outcomes, they need to take account of how market logic and profit motives have reshaped access to basic needs in areas such as housing, education, and often health and care provision. This transfers risk from institutions to individuals and undermines collective support, and spurs an understandable response: people turning to personal insurance for support when sick and to their homes and share markets to provide a decent livelihood in their old age.

Conclusion: what would be better?

‘An indigenous analysis of the same thing would look more at the context to try and find out what actually happened’ – Tyson Yunkaporta, Indigenous scholar

The alternative to lifestyle drift and wilting plant syndrome is looking upstream to how the economy operates: the terrain of jobs, what sort of work is paid for, ownership of firms, costs of goods and services, and provision of core services. Instead of just instructing and coaxing individuals to change, it means turning to the realm of the economy as a critical arena for prevention. It is the economy where risks such as poverty, precarious work, and homelessness, can be truly addressed, as opposed to simply patched up.

The economy we could have means implementing policy instruments that ensure, for example:

People are paid enough, have job security and conditions that support a healthy life

Profitability is a means, rather than a goal in its own right

Economic activity is generated from the local up via community wealth building, rather than hoping in vain for it to trickle down

Basic needs such as food, shelter, education, and health care are affordable

Sources of unearned wealth, such as inheritance and rent and land values, are taxed more than income

Economic activities which make money from people’s struggles or profit as a result of doing harm to the planet are, if not banned, at least minimised

Prices of goods and services reflect their true cost in terms of what it took to make them, both in environmental terms and via people involved being compensated for their efforts

Success is measured in ways that reflect what people and planet need.

The economy we could have means grappling with the purpose, design, and delivery of the economy and resisting lifestyle drift.

Fortunately, there is no shortage of ideas and practices that show what is possible.

Check out our series, ‘Building the economy we could have’ for more.

Announcing: Erinch Sahan’s Australian tour in partnership with The Next Economy

At The Next Economy, we are excited to team up with Erinch Sahan for his Australian tour to share ideas, provocations, and proof of what is possible in the world of business and investment.

Businesses and investment matter in Australia. They have a significant role in shaping economic, ecological, and social outcomes – for good, and sometimes for ill. So how can business and investment ensure that their activities and ways of working contribute to an Australia that future generations will be proud of?

Erinch is a globally renowned thought leader with expertise in business design and investment. Join us to hear from Erinch and widen the discussion about the critical role of business and investment in building the economy we could have.

Who is Erinch Sahan?

Growing up in Sydney in the 1980s and 1990s to Turkish immigrant parents, he began his professional life in the corporate sector, and from there, has increasingly focused on making businesses a positive force in the world.

His experience is varied: he has been CEO of the World Fair Trade Organization, a senior associate at the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, and recently the Business and Enterprise Lead at Doughnut Economics Action Lab. He is currently leading the investment portfolio at the UK’s Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), driving its move to mission-related investing.

TNE’s Economic Change Program Director, Dr Katherine Trebeck, has worked with Erinch over the years and is constantly inspired by his ability to question what business can do and how it needs to change to enhance its positive impact. She describes him as “not just one of the boldest thinkers in business design, but someone who shares incredible case studies and stories of innovative business leaders delivering tangible impact”.

Find out more about Erinch:

👂Listen to Erinch’s episode on the BBC’s Bottom Line – Decisions That Made Me: https://www.bbc.com/audio/play/p0l7c12y

👀 Watch Erinch’s latest TEDxPrague:

Get involved!

These are the public facing events in the works. We will be updating this as we get closer to the dates so subscribe to our newsletter for updates, and follow our LinkedIn and Instagram so you don’t miss out!

Melbourne:

Erinch Sahan, in conversation Regen Melbourne and Social Traders.

📅 Date: Tuesday 6^th of October, early evening

📍 Location Greater Melbourne Foundation Hub

🌍 Hosted by: The Next Economy and Greater Melbourne Foundation

🎟 Tickets: Event page and tickets coming July!

Canberra:

Redesigning business and finance to unlock economic transformations: Australian National University Saving the World Webinar.

📅 Date: Thursday 8^th of October, 12.30pm-1.30pm

📍 Location: Online webinar

🎟 Tickets: Register here.

Sydney:

Erinch Sahan in conversation with the Paul Ramsay Foundation.

📅 Date: Wednesday 14^th of October, 6pm-8pm

📍 Location: Yirranma Place, Darlinghurst

🎟 Tickets: Coming in August!

This trip is generously supported by WWF, Paul Ramsay Foundation, and Greater Melbourne Foundation.

If you would like to support this trip or find out more about events, please email j.foster@nexteconomy.com.au

Building the economy we could have: Predistribution

To build the better economy we could have in Australia, we need to think differently. Dr Katherine Trebeck, economist and Economic Change lead, is a big fan of predistribution. Here she explains why.

I often use a ‘jigsaw puzzle’ as a metaphor to explain the array of shifts in policy and practice needed to build an economy in service of people and planet. No single piece is sufficient on its own, but together, enough changes have potential to build towards to an economic system that gets things right for people and planet first time around.

To grapple with this array of actions, it can help to loosely cluster the pieces into the four corners of that jigsaw puzzle: the ‘4Ps’ of purpose, prevention, predistribution, and people power.

Here, I want to offer a few notes on the predistribution corner as it is so often missing from the conversation about the economy, with focus instead on taxation and how to better fund programs for those who are impacted by the inequalities built into our current system (‘compensating the losers’ as a report from a US think tank rather bluntly puts it).

Australia used to do fairly well in terms of predistribution (that is, for white, able-bodied males). But no longer; we’ve become an ‘assetocracy’ where access to assets tends to be what shapes peoples’ life chances and life choices.

*Credit: Jess Harwood, for The Next Economy*

Predistribution is about pre-emption and prevention, and a critical element of upstream change that builds a better economy for all of us.

‘It is not enough to…try to balance the inequalities generated in the market through retrospective tax and transfer. It is necessary to transform and democratise the institutional content of the market economy, rather than just compensate for its inequalities.’ – Gabriella Ramos et al

Origin story

The term predistribution was coined by the American scholar Jacob Hacker who describes it as ‘market reforms that encourage a more equal distribution of economic power and rewards even before government collects taxes or pays out benefits’.

Predistribution’s political moment in the sun came in 2011 when Ed Miliband, then leader of the UK opposition Labour party, was in the audience for a speech that Hacker gave in Oslo. Miliband returned to the UK and – briefly – championed the idea.

But predistribution is one of the most important ideas that should be high on the political agenda. Let’s look at why it matters, what it is, how it plays out in practice, and the implications for policy.

What does predistribution mean?

The essence of the idea of predistribution is ensuring that the market economy does more of the heavy lifting in delivering a more balanced divvying-up of resources. British scholar Martin O’Neill explains it as ‘the particular ways in which the economy can be shaped to disempower the privileged and to empower the disadvantaged’. Its focus is on market mechanisms that determine the distribution of wages, profits, and other flows and stocks of money.

Government comes into the predistribution story via its role in creating and shaping markets so that the results are aligned with public goals: using rules, incentives and other levers to shape market outcomes. This includes boosting (or curtailing) the bargaining power of market players such as workers, employers, and wealth holders.

Therefore, it differs from government using tax and benefits to shape the distribution of economic resources after market outcomes have emerged: this is redistribution.

We’ll come to some specifics in a moment, but you could expect to see predistribution in the form of:

Strong standards for workers (such as regulation, procurement, support for unions, and living wages).

Regulation of the financial system and corporate governance; including provisions to stop harmful activities.

Ensuring more people have a share of capital ownership, including owning businesses via worker or commubity cooperatives.

Spending to bolster people’s opportunities and bargaining power in the labour market (think education and other public services: so they are not dependent on someone’s income) and groups like unions who can stand up for workers.

Addressing how affordable certain goods and services are (for example, via price caps, subsidies, or direct provision): rather than only focusing on how much money is in people’s pockets; also being concerned with how far it stretches.

Why it matters

Inequality arises in and can be addressed via two realms. Firstly, what is sometimes called the ‘primary’ realm of work, wages and occupational pensions, and then in the secondary realm comprising taxes and benefits. Predistribution is about action in the primary realm. Here the wages that workers earn are the outcome of ‘a complex process of implicit and explicit bargaining between workers, employers, and (where they exist) unions’: the influence of each compared to the others matters, and is a function of various rules and regulations.

This is of interest to anyone interested in economic inequality because this realm is where the bulk of the balance or imbalance of economic resources arises: the ‘biggest single factor in determining the distribution of market income is the relative shares going to wages on the one hand and to capital incomes (rent, interest, dividends, and capital gains) on the other’.

In Australia, ‘capital gains arising from accumulated wealth have produced large increases in passive, unearned income that have added further to the wealth of the rich‘.

Evidence from around the world bears this out too: in global terms, four fifths of inequality stems from what was going on prior to the government getting involved via tax and transfers, with only one fifth being the result of tax and transfers. The lower levels of inequality in Europe ‘cannot be explained by more equalizing tax and transfer systems… “Predistribution”, not “redistribution,” explains why Europe is less unequal than the United States’, according to Blanchet, Chancel and Gethin.

So, there are a range of reasons which mean that predistribution is worth focusing when thinking about how to achieve a more balanced distribution of economic resources:

Redistribution is not enough. As Hacker says, taxation and benefit payments ‘cannot do the work on their own’.

In contrast, predistribution can shift substantial levels of resources, more so than would be possible via taxes and benefits.

Thus, Hacker talks of predistribution as ‘where the action is’. The problem is that in recent decades, policy decisions of various governments (such as privatisation, deregulation of finance, patent and copyright laws, union rights) have shaped markets in ways that enable more wealth extraction. As a result ‘markets have been shaped in ways that have benefited those at the top far more than those in the middle and bottom’.

Predistribution, in contrast, does not require government to spend substantial quantities of public money. Instead, in reducing inequality at source governments can generate fiscal savings by reducing the need for spending downstream (on benefits), thus freeing resources to spend elsewhere.

There are a range of real politik reasons why redistribution is harder to pull off:

Policies that are about spending (for example welfare payments) are challenging politically given concerns (reasonable or otherwise) about budget deficits and overall debt.

Governments that do seek to be proactive on the redistribution front often face resistance and even backlash, as Hacker describes. He explains that the wealthiest have a tendency to complain – loudly – about increased taxes on their income and wealth.

Inequality itself can undermine the political context necessary for government to be able to pursue a tax and spend redistribution agenda.

On the other hand, it is often easier to harness the ‘political space’ for action on predistribution measures than it is for taxing and benefits provision.

Finally, although not noted by its original proponents, predistribution also matters because of the growing recognition that economic growth-based agendas are incompatible with keeping the world’s environment within planetary boundaries. Redistribution tends to rely on the economic growth: grow, tax, and spend back via welfare. So taking the science around the environmental limits to growth seriously compels consideration of mechanisms to ensure a good life for more people without having to rely on the grow and redistribute recipe.

Implications for action

Convinced that predistribution is worth getting behind? Superb. What might you want to think about encouraging – or, if you happen to work in the right place in government, actually implementing?

Actions that policy makers need to be prepared to implement to promote predistribution include:

Support for worker owned cooperatives (for example, via reduced taxes, simplified legislation, and education of ancillary services so they are more supportive of cooperatives).

Legislation for worker rights and conditions (such as job security, being able to request flexible schedules and access to paid leave for family care).

Regulations to strengthen the position of trade unions (what Hacker describes as a ‘countervailing power’) and corporate governance that puts workers on company boards.

Enactment, and enforcement of minimum wages set at the level of living wages.

Curbing extremes of high pay (for example, increased taxes when CEO to median pay exceeds a certain ratio).

Broad based service provision that bolsters people’s endowment of human capital (such as decent education, vocational training, and health services).

Addressing affordability of basic needs (for example, via provision of affordable housing, price caps on important services, and competition policy).

Support for people who would otherwise struggle in the labour market to access good jobs (perhaps even a job guarantee).

Regulation of financial markets and promotion of financial stability: for example, of how financial institutions behave (reducing high frequency trades, for instance); shifts in corporate governance; and ensuring capital flows to productive activities (rather than subsidising harmful activities and products).

Promotion of fair trade.

Taxation of wealth, in particular unearned wealth.

Public procurement with social goals in contracts.

Conclusion

Predistribution is a critical lever for generating a more balanced distribution of wealth. It’s an upstream mechanism that heads off inequality before it arises by shaping market outcomes to be fairer, rather than depending on government to even things up once inequality has emerged. There are a range of actions governments and other economic players can take to predistribute economic resources. Now it’s time to start talking about it more and putting the changes in place to make the most of its potential to create the economy we could have!

NB A shorter version of this piece appeared in The Point: https://thepoint.com.au/opinions/260428-redistribution-or-predistribution-another-way-to-think-about-tackling-inequality

Download our printable/shareable resource about Predistribution.

Predistribution Explainer

Read ‘The economy we could have’: https://nexteconomy.com.au/work/the-economy-we-could-have-new-paper-out-now/

Check out the series: https://nexteconomy.com.au/work/new-series-building-the-economy-we-could-have/

New series: ‘Building the economy we could have’

‘Building the economy we could have’ – A series of ideas, case studies and concepts exploring how we move to an economy that works for people and planet.

Australia’s future depends on whether we can move beyond piecemeal reforms to embrace systemic change.

Last year, we released The Economy We Could Have – a paper that looks under the bonnet of Australia’s economy: rising inequality, the erosion of the ‘fair go’, but also a story of hope. Of momentum growing across the country, and of enterprises and communities already leading the way.

The response was one of excitement, speaking to a deep desire for transformative economic change rather than the same old, tired recipes. Now, with Australia facing new economic pressures including an oil crisis, the impetus to act is greater.

Cartoon by Jess Harwood for The Next Economy

So, we are doubling down. The ideas that politicians and decision makers reach for in a crisis matter. We want those ideas to be the ones that put wellbeing at the centre: dignity, purpose, participation, fairness, and nature. As a foundation, rather than an afterthought.

That’s where our new series comes in.

Building The Economy We Could Have explores the ideas, case studies and concepts that show how we get there. Right now, there are many isolated or ‘Lego wins’, the examples that show what can be done better, yet scattered and disconnected. We are turning our focus to see these as building blocks: things worth doing more of, and connecting across the country.

We’ll share examples that show another way is possible and outline the potential of wellbeing economic concepts in practice, with case studies, explainers, interviews, and of course drawing on our work in regional communities looking to build resilient and thriving communities through times of change. ‘

The series includes:

Explainers on wellbeing economy concepts and how they are showing up in Australia

Case studies of enterprises, communities and policy makers doing differently

Australian history showing we have charted different approaches before

Interviews with people bringing fresh ideas and approaches.

We are excited to uplift the work that is steadily charting the way forward, drawing on Australian’s strengths as people who back their neighbours, champion local ideas, and have a long track record of showing the world what policies that work for people and planet can look like.

This series is a starting point for deeper thinking and conversation. We’d love to hear what resonates, or what we are missing. Contact us here.

Read our first case study:

Earthworker Cooperative Network

Read our first explainer:

Predistribution

Building the economy we could have: Earthworker Cooperative Network

Earthworker Cooperative Network gives us a glance into a wellbeing economy in action, where workers build the things we need in a worker-owned factory in Morwell.

When writing ‘The economy we could have’, our Economic Change lead Dr Katherine Trebeck came across countless ‘Lego wins’. These were the examples of a wellbeing economy in action in Australia that we could look to for inspiration on the way forward, even if there aren’t enough of them yet to add up to complete system change.

A great example is in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley, where Earthworker Cooperative, Australia’s first worker-owned factory, operates several enterprises. This includes the Earthworker Energy Manufacturing Coop, which produces heat pumps and solar hot water systems – its function first and foremost: to serve its worker owners.

Earthworker has a vision that brings a wellbeing economy into practice:

“…a world in which people everywhere are able to democratically determine the means of their existence, collectively meeting their needs while recognising our interconnection with each other, other species, and the environment in which we exist.”

Earthworker has expanded to become a network of cooperatives that are committed to sustainability, both in social and environmental terms given the link between environmental harm and social injustice.

Inside the worker-owned Morwell Factory (Photo contributed by Earthworker for our report)

What co-ops make up the Earthworker network?

Earthworker Energy Manufacturing Coop: produces new energy technology in Australia’s first worker-owned and run factory in the Latrobe Valley. Based in the Earthworker Morwell factory, it manufactures quality and high-performing stainless steel storage tanks for heat pump and solar hot water systems.

Earthworker Smart Energy Cooperative helps households improve their home’s thermal efficiency and so their family’s comfort through assessments and draught-proofing. This in turn helps households save money and have more control over their energy use.

The Earthworker Construction Cooperative provides residential construction, landscaping and maintenance services such as cabinet making, plumbing, pergola building, decking and more. Their motto is ‘Another world is being built’!

Cooperative Power (CoPower) is an energy retailer jointly created by unions, environmental NGOs, community groups and Earthworker.

There is clearly purpose behind what is being delivered by these cooperatives. Worker ownership is a mechanism of predistribution (as financial wealth goes either to workers or to the enterprise) and of economic democracy that enhances people power. By enhancing energy efficiency and being part of the renewable energy roll out, Earthworker is also helping prevent environmental challenges getting worse. In providing job opportunities to those who might otherwise face unemployment, they prevent the harm of job loss.

So Earthworker speaks to all the ‘4Ps’ of a wellbeing economy in practice: purpose, prevention, predistribution, and people power. It demonstrates what we need more of to build an economy that serves people and planet.

*Earthworker’s logo, showing symbols of the Australian environmental and labour movements.*

What makes Co-ops part of a wellbeing economy?

A wellbeing economy requires a substantial shift in how the economy is thought about and approached, looking for ways to benefit people and planet rather than profit for the few.

Cooperatives (whether worker-owned co-ops, consumer co-ops such as groceries, or agricultural co-ops) are a great way to do this as they are owned, controlled and run by and for their members, creating economic democracy and a people-powered economy. They are democratically managed by ‘one member, one vote’, meaning everyone has an equal vote.

Co-ops enhance predistribution because surpluses go back to members or the enterprise, so community wealth that stays in the community.

Why Latrobe Valley

The Valley has largely powered Victoria with brown coal for a century. When the coal power stations and State Electricity Commission (SEC) were privatised* in the 1990s, thousands of people lost their jobs and Victorians lost ownership of this essential infrastructure. (*Although since 2024, the SEC has been partially revived as a government-owned renewable energy company, with legislation that specifically protects it from privatisation).

The number of people employed in the power industry dropped from about 11,000 in the late 1980s to about 2,600 in 2001, causing the population to shrink significantly with nine per cent of the region’s residents leaving between 1991 and 1996. (See also The Latrobe Valley, Victim of Industrial Restructuring by Bob Birrell)

Since then, the Valley has experienced high rates of disadvantage. In 2017 French-owned corporation Engie, announced the closure of Hazelwood mine and power station and roughly another 750 jobs were lost.

How did Earthworker seek to address this economic injustice?

The founders of Earthworker could see that the apparent conflict around jobs versus the environment wasn’t the full story and reflected a narrow lens. They recognised that there was a need to work together for just transition in the La Trobe Valley, and there was a dire need to create jobs that were better for workers and jobs that could contribute positively to the local community.

Latrobe is one region where this is necessary, many other regions are also on the frontlines of economic transition that must include solutions that put wellbeing at the core, and the principles of prevention, predistribution, people power and purpose.

Australians are dissatisfied with the status quo and open to rethinking economic priorities that put people first. Earthworker shows a different model of business that can build an economy that works for people and for planet as a foundation, rather than an afterthought.

Resources:

Read our full report: ‘The economy we could have.’

Check out more about Earthworker here.

Find out more about Co-ops at BCCM, the peak body in Australia for Co-ops and Mutuals.

Empowering Hay: A community-led transition roadmap

The Hay Region Economic Transition Roadmap demonstrate how regional Australian communities can shape their own economic futures. The Next Economy has been proud to work with the Hay Shire Council and the local community to develop a sequenced, practical pathway for economic growth.

Why Hay is leading the way

Located at a strategic intersection of renewable energy zones and key transport routes, Hay is acting early to ensure change happens with the community, not to it. The Roadmap focuses on:

Local leadership: Building on rural enterprise and natural resources.

Strategic levers: Seven accelerator actions to increase regional capacity, including dedicated coordinators for housing and workforce development.

Shared value: Creating conditions for industry and government to align with community-defined priorities.

This project demonstrates what is possible when local insights are backed by strong collaboration. Hay is ready, the momentum is real, and the invitation is open for collaborators to join us in unlocking the full impact of this vision.

Read the full report

Our evidence to the NSW REZ inquiry: lessons from the ground

Energy lead Saideh Kent appeared before the NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into the impact of renewable energy zones on rural and regional communities and industries in late March. It was an opportunity to highlight the great work communities in renewable energy zones are progressing and reinforce the critical role regions play in the development of renewable energy, says Saideh.

The Next Economy has been working alongside Hay Shire Council in the South West REZ and Uralla Shire Council in the New England REZ for the past two years, and both councils endorsed reports of our work in the fortnight before Saideh appeared. Working closely with councils,Saideh says “you see how they are getting on with development, managing challenges and seeking the best outcomes for their communities”.

Here Saideh shares some of her reflections…

What we’re hearing on the ground

The picture is more positive than the headlines often suggest. Communities are getting on with it, working alongside developers, EnergyCo and government departments to plan for what is coming and find solutions that work for them. We have seen genuine improvements in the NSW planning framework over the past two years, with greater clarity emerging around community engagement, landholder payments and benefit sharing, and EnergyCo’s funding support for local government has made a real difference to what councils can actually do – though they do remain very overstretched.

Housing is a good example of communities turning a challenge into an opportunity. Both Hay and Uralla are progressing innovative housing solutions with developers and private investors, where short-term workforce demand creates the market conditions for investment in housing that will benefit the community long after construction is complete.

Community engagement needs to be genuine

Communities in REZ areas are not short of opportunities to be consulted, but the quality of that engagement matters enormously. People do not want to be asked by eight different project developers how they would like to spend community benefit funds. What they need more of is real involvement in decisions about transport routes, housing and workforce planning, all things that will affect their lives.

Working in place provides the opportunity to bring all parties to the table to work through challenges and determine what is the best solution for local communities. In some areas local employment targets are effective, in others, they can add stress to existing workforce shortfalls, so engaging communities in local solutions is so important.

Local government belongs at the table

Councils in REZ areas are doing an enormous amount of work. Coordinating across agencies, planning for cumulative impacts, facilitating community engagement, often holding the process together in ways that are not always visible. The Next Economy supports Hay Shire Council’s call for councils to be recognised as strategic partners in the REZ planning framework, with concurrence required from councils in the development of conditions of consent. This would allow councils’ requirements and policies to be incorporated into the general terms of approval and give communities greater certainty. Continued and enhanced funding for council capability through the development and construction phases will also be essential.

EnergyCo’s mandate and development outside the REZs

EnergyCo’s coordination role has been valuable, but its broader authority rests on changeable footing under the current legislation. We would like to see that role clarified and reinforced so it has the ongoing mandate and funding to support communities across the full life of each REZ. I also raised the situation facing councils dealing with development outside the REZ access schemes, where cumulative impacts are just as real, but coordination support is much thinner and called for the REZ access merit criteria to be extended more broadly.

Nature and local knowledge

Reflecting on my evidence, an issue I did not get to raise at the inquiry but sees as critical: communities we have engaged with care deeply about the land and want to see nature-positive outcomes from these developments, which is entirely compatible with renewable energy. The University of New England is already undertaking research on biodiversity in solar farms, local farmers are keen to participate in biodiversity offset programs, and there is deep environmental expertise in the region that should be drawn on actively. We support the inquiry’s earlier recommendation calling on the NSW Government to identify ecological protection and restoration priorities for each REZ and encourage developers to contribute to positive regional environmental outcomes.

What gives me confidence

What stays with me after two years of this work is how capable these communities are., . Councils are coordinating across agencies, planning for large incoming construction workforces, facilitating community engagement across multiple projects, and doing most of it with constrained resources and a planning framework that has not always kept pace with what is happening on the ground.

The opportunity on the other side of all this is significant. Better housing, lasting infrastructure, stronger local economies, nature-positive outcomes from development that is done well. But those things do not happen automatically. They take resourcing, coordination, and a framework that treats councils as partners who need support to get the best outcomes for their communities.

That is ultimately what I wanted to leave the committee with, examples where the real challenges are being addressed by communities, that have done the hard work of showing up, engaging honestly and pushing for something better.

Saideh at the inquiry with fellow speakers Chris O’Keefe and William Churchill from the Clean Energy Council.

Download the SaND Report

Download the Hay Report

What freight decarbonisation means for regional Australia

Land Sector Program Lead Jacqui Bell ponders what freight decarbonisation means for regional Australia off the back of a commercial vehicle decarbonisation summit at Parliament House.

Our Land Sector Program Lead Jacqui Bell attended Freight Forward summit on commercial vehicle decarbonisation at Parliament House on 30 March 2026, hosted by Energy Futures Foundation. This event could not have been timelier, as we grapple with fuel security as a nation. It’s also deeply relevant to our work with regional communities here at The Next Economy.

Jacqui heard how Australia imports 90% of our transportation fuel and moves more freight per person than any other country. She also learnt that 98% of businesses in Australia’s freight transport system are owned by small to medium businesses, 2% by owned by large corporate freight and logistics operators. Those big businesses have the power to send signals down the supply chains to make the transition work, but those signals must be backed by investment, education and support to shift.

Here are some more of Jacqui’s reflections post-summit about what she heard and what this might mean for our work with regional communities.

I’m really curious about the “lopsided economics of transport” (to quote Transport Workers Union National Secretary Michael Kaine). While large logistics companies move a significant share of Australia’s freight through linehaul networks, the system relies heavily on small and medium operators (think local businesses and independent drivers) to complete last-mile delivery and provide regional coverage from depot to door/gate. They make up around 98% of freight businesses in Australia and are critical to how the freight system actually functions. These businesses are embedded within large supply chains, not separate from them. Additionally in many regions there are more unlikely suspects that will be affected by the sector transition – think the farmer who owns machinery and trucks or the locally owned and managed service station which plays a role similar but different to the local pub.

Australia’s freight and logistics system in Australia is important for regional Australia and communities. Australia’s freight system in many cases keep regional economies moving, and are critical to the viability of local industries and businesses and local spend. Changes in this sector aren’t going to just impact the trucks we see on the road or how and where they charge to ‘refuel’, sectoral change in technology, ownership, power and system design have the potential to create a ripple effect or more likely a tsunami of impacts for other regional communities, local businesses and industries, regional economies and serviceability across more rural and remote parts of Australia. Not to mention have significant implications for other sectors in transition such as energy.

There are practical challenges for freight decarbonisation in regional Australia. Much of our local infrastructure, like roads and bridges, are no longer fit-for purpose for the future transport and freight system we need to transition well. There’s also questions about energy access including poles and wire infrastructure, which is not reliable or extensive enough to provide energy where it is going to be needed. There’s the fragmentation of the industry between technologies, ownership, scale and size. And that’s not to mention the practicalities of dealing with digitisation of machinery, and their serviceability etc. We hear of farmers who are stockpiling trucks and machinery because malfunctioning digital systems in machines are too disruptive for day-to-day operations.

While there are challenges, there are also opportunities. Regions like Hay in NSW could be partners for investment; they have space for microgrids, potential for their own energy production (e.g., wind turbines) and the region is already strategically located on major trucking routes. How do we support a region like Hay to establish its own charging and servicing infrastructure and move away from providers just ‘coming in over’, doing their own thing and taking spend out of the local economy?

We need regional voices. They need to be in the room and around the table of these conversations to make sure that workers, and small to medium business owners and regional agencies are part of the process and involved in shaping the solutions.

This conversation goes beyond reducing emissions. Freight is one of the biggest vulnerabilities to our nation’s economy, and its decarbonisation is also about building resilience.

The transition of the sector is probably going to require a mix of technologies. It’s not just electrification of vehicles, but there may also be discrete roles for green hydrogen and biofuels in some cases (although the jury seems still a bit out on this). It is a question of the right mix – the right trucks for the right segments.

Ultimately, this is not a technical challenge; this is a socioecological challenge. The technology is here for decarbonisation of freight and many commercial vehicles are due to be changed over. This is an implementation challenge. Some stats suggest we are in a ‘window of opportunity’ where a large number of vehicles are due to be upgraded in the next 5 years; the push is to shift from diesel to EV now. While there is a high upfront capital price, ongoing fuel prices make the shift favourable. Panels from Woolworths, Fortescue, and IKEA, for instance, noted that the business case (for transition) stacked up even with pre-crisis prices. But how do we support this to happen? There was a lot of talk about misinformation, knowledge, and understanding.

There’s a big question around the overall design of the system. Air Vice-Marshal John Blackburn, former Deputy Chief of the Air Force, current Chair, Institute for Integrated Economic Research Australia made this point, noting we appear to be arguing the components. There was also much discussion about charging infrastructure, the need for it, how to roll it out and who owns and accesses it. What will this mean for the majority of small to medium businesses that need to use that infrastructure?

My final take home is that there is different work that needs to be done in this moment. We need to navigate through this crisis, making sure that we don’t lock ourselves into something we can’t easily undo. And then we need to get realistic about a ‘funded’ transition that is fair, sustainable, keeps people safe, keeps the industry viable, and supports regional communities and economies.

Questions I’m still thinking about:

What happens to small ‘Ma and Pa’ independent fuel stations who play such an important role in regional communities?

How do we take care of society of our people and places as we transition so we continue to be a place that we want to live, where prosperity is shared?

How are people in the sector thinking about these social elements of this challenge and transition?

How can regions whose economies rely a large part on freight and logistics to keep their economy going, be a part of this conversation about enabling infrastructure and system redesign?

If transport comes to a standstill and/or if it shifts into a totally different system that locks out local businesses and operators, how do we prepare communities and build the socioeconomic conditions and capacity required to endure and adapt?

If most freight and logistics companies are run and owned by small to medium business owners around Australia, how do we support that system to move in a way that doesn’t involve carrying the cost burden of change without having a share in the rewards of moving?

Making sense of the ISP

The ISP runs to hundreds of pages and helps guide energy decisions across the country, yet few people read it. We chatted with climate and energy specialist Franzika Curran to break down its importance.

The Australian Energy Market Operator’s Integrated System Plan, usually shortened to the “ISP”, is not the kind of document most people would pick up for a casual read. It is a large technical report full of modelling, forecasts and system planning – and it quietly shapes decisions that play out across the country.

To help unpack what it is and why it matters, we caught up with climate and energy specialist Franziska Curran, who helped contribute to our recent ISP submission and who has spent time sifting through the hundreds of pages of the draft plan.

Franziska, for people who have never heard of it – what is the Integrated System Plan?

At its core, the ISP is a very large piece of analysis that asks a fairly simple question: what is the lowest cost way for Australia to meet its future energy needs while also meeting government policy goals?

To answer that question, the Australian Energy Market Operator draws on years of data, modelling and consultation. It considers how demand might change, what kinds of energy generation are likely to be built, how much transmission will be needed, and how all of that fits together as coal power stations retire and new energy sources come online.

The result is a long-term plan that outlines what the electricity system could look like over the next two decades, and what infrastructure would likely be needed to support it.

It does not directly approve or build projects. Instead, it acts more like a map. It shows the pathway that planners, investors and governments are expected to follow when making decisions about new infrastructure.

If it is a technical planning document, how does it shape what happens in real places?

A successful energy transition requires a significant amount of new infrastructure. That includes new generation such as wind and solar, as well as the transmission lines that move electricity across the system.

AEMO has a responsibility to plan for the transmission network needed to support that system and the ISP helps fulfil that role.

By setting out the direction the system is expected to take, the plan sends signals to investors, network companies and planners about where new infrastructure will likely be required. Those signals then flow through into more detailed planning and investment decisions.

Over time, those decisions shape what gets built and where.

What changes when a project is labelled “actionable”?

Within the ISP, some transmission projects are labelled as “actionable”.

That label matters as transmission projects cannot progress through the regulatory approvals process unless they are identified as actionable within the plan. In that sense, the ISP acts as a gatekeeper.

Once a project receives that designation, the project proponent can move into the next stages of regulatory approval and planning. Future versions of the ISP then continue to check that those projects still align with what the electricity system needs.

Why do regional areas tend to host so much of this infrastructure?

Much of the renewable energy Australia needs will be built in regional areas, and this is for a number of reasons.

One reason is the quality of renewable resources. Wind and solar generation tends to be strongest in specific geographic areas. Building projects in places with strong resources allows the system to generate more energy more efficiently.

Another factor is scale. Large renewable energy projects require significant land and are often built in clusters that make the most of existing or planned transmission infrastructure.

Concentrating development in areas with strong renewable resources and suitable space can make better use of the network that connects them. If large projects were spread thinly across the entire country, significantly more transmission infrastructure would be needed to connect them all.

What tends to determine whether this development benefits a community?

For me, one of the most important factors is supporting local leadership.

Where communities are actively planning for the future they want and organising around that vision, they are often better placed to shape the opportunities that come with new infrastructure.

That kind of leadership can help ensure projects align with local development goals and that benefits are captured locally.

That is also why I think the work of The Next Economy is so important. Taking the time to understand what communities want – and do not want – in their future, making sure people have access to clear information about what is coming and how decisions are made, and helping communities articulate their priorities. This is so important in ensuring development supports local aspirations rather than working against them.

What is often misunderstood about the ISP?

For many people, the ISP can feel quite distant or abstract. It is a large technical document, and it can be easy to dismiss it or criticise it without looking closely at what sits behind it.

But the plan represents years of analysis, modelling and consultation. It attempts to map out a pathway for a very complex transition, bringing together data about energy demand, infrastructure, technology and policy.

It may not always make for easy reading, but it is a significant piece of work that plays an important role in shaping how the electricity system evolves over time.

The final AEMO ISP 2026 is expected to be released in June this year.

Walking Together: A conversation with Darryl French-Majid, CEO of Esparq Ventures

Esparq Ventures is quietly reshaping the Indigenous business landscape across Northern Australia. In less than two years, its community-led model has supported dozens of Indigenous entrepreneurs to launch and grow ventures across sectors like tourism, agriculture, technology and education. These businesses are creating jobs, building founder confidence, and strengthening local economies – all while staying grounded in culture and Country.

Esparq Ventures is an Indigenous-led organisation working alongside Indigenous entrepreneurs to grow strong, successful businesses and a thriving First Nations business ecosystem. Founded in 2024, Esparq exists to back Indigenous founders with the tools, networks and support they need to take their ideas to market and succeed on their own terms. This includes building ventures, unlocking new market opportunities, and strengthening the infrastructure needed to support a connected and resilient Indigenous economy. Everything we do is grounded in self-determination and a belief in what’s possible when communities have the resources to shape their own futures. Esparq has 100% Indigenous membership and a majority Indigenous Board.

 To find out more visit: www.esparq.com.au

Darryl Majid, founder and CEO of Esparq, is modest about his own achievements – but when he speaks about his team, their work, and the people they walk alongside, his enthusiasm is unmistakable. In this conversation, Darryl shares the thinking behind Esparq’s approach, the lessons learned from walking alongside entrepreneurs in Far North Queensland and the Torres Strait, and the bold vision driving the company’s next chapter.

This conversation accompanies Walking Together, Esparq’s first official report, co-authored with The Next Economy, and explores the challenges, opportunities and stories shaping a new Indigenous-led business ecosystem.

Tell us about your journey – what’s your background, and what inspired you to start Esparq Ventures?

I started out working in the space as a First Nations Lead, alongside some incredibly talented and passionate people. We were making early progress in building Indigenous social enterprises, and that experience gave me a real sense of what was possible. But it also highlighted the limitations of traditional structures for Indigenous businesses.

In August 2023, I made the decision to leave and build something new. I’d just become a father, so part of it was necessity – I needed to bring in income. But I also knew I had a unique skill set and a deep passion for this work. I’ve always thrived on the challenge of raising capital and pitching ideas, it scratches a competitive itch for me.

More importantly, I saw that there were all sorts of people and funders who genuinely wanted to support Indigenous businesses but didn’t know how to connect with the right people or navigate the cultural context. Esparq was born out of that gap – to walk alongside entrepreneurs, unlock opportunities, and build something that could truly shift the landscape.

You often talk about ‘walking alongside’ entrepreneurs, and it’s the name of the paper, what does that look like in practice?

It means going the long route. We’re not just handing over a business plan and walking away. We pitch for our clients, call out bad actors, ring government on their behalf. We pool shared resources like bookkeeping. It’s a tough model – expensive and time-intensive – but we believe the long-term investment will pay off.

We’re deeply embedded in the work. We’re part of the business, not just advisors. That’s what walking alongside really means.

What are the biggest barriers Indigenous entrepreneurs face – especially in remote or regional areas? Why haven’t traditional investment models worked?

Capital is the biggest barrier – always. There are lots of other barriers, but they all come back to money. Non-Indigenous entrepreneurs are more likely to have access to family savings or assets they can leverage. That’s not the reality for most Indigenous people. If you don’t have money, you can’t get money.

Traditional investment models assume that kind of access. They’re built around people who can self-fund or bootstrap. That’s why they haven’t worked – they don’t account for the structural disadvantage Indigenous entrepreneurs face.

What kind of future do you imagine for Indigenous entrepreneurship, and how does Esparq help bring that to life?

I imagine a future with more access, more exposure, and more maturity in the Indigenous business sector. Right now, a lot of businesses are sole traders or joint ventures – many are dependent on grants, not loans; not independently owned or scalable. We need to build models that allow Indigenous entrepreneurs to grow and thrive, not just survive.

Esparq is about creating those models. We’re building businesses that can replicate and scale across northern Australia – like Bush Beef, which allows Indigenous cattle breeders to supply into a single entity to better access markets. Through one business, we can create many. It’s about solving our own problems and using those learnings to drive systems change.

What strengths do you see in the businesses you work with, and what are some common misconceptions?

One big misconception is that Indigenous people aren’t entrepreneurial – but that couldn’t be further from the truth. There’s a genuine entrepreneurial spirit in our communities. People are running multiple micro-businesses, juggling jobs, and constantly innovating. In the past two weeks alone, we’ve had leads ranging from drone tech to AI tools for classrooms. The ideas are out there.

The strength lies in the people.

We look for founders with tenacity, creativity and character … the kind of high-agency individuals who move with urgency, challenge the status quo and find a way to keep going when others stop looking. Like the woman who catered for a full group from a tiny kitchen with a single burner — and still delivered unforgettable food, by boat. Or the tourism founder who couldn’t get funding, but rallied volunteers, built partnerships and got a bus on the road to market his vision. You can’t help or teach this stuff. The rest – pricing, bookkeeping, operations – we can help with.

What does success look like for Esparq, beyond just the numbers? How should we be measuring value in Indigenous business?

Success is about empowering people to create wealth and autonomy. If people have money, good things follow. We don’t need to define impact narrowly – we just need to record the great things that happen when communities are empowered.

Measuring jobs, revenue, and businesses supported has its role. But a job in Cairns isn’t the same as a job in remote Cape York. We need to tell the stories of what happens when people are given wealth and autonomy – that’s the real impact.

What did the Esparq Partner Experience in Cairns and the Torres Strait mean to you – personally and professionally?

It was surreal. I’ve never had many traditional jobs, so I’m always figuring things out. Professionally, it opened new opportunities for Esparq and the businesses we support. Personally, it was more relief than excitement – just knowing it worked, and it all came together.

The trip wasn’t about showcasing our work – it was about introducing people to the communities we work with. That’s the difference. We’re not saying, ‘come see what we’ve done’ – we’re saying ‘come meet the people we’re walking alongside’.

What’s next for Esparq, and what are you most excited about in this next phase?

We’re shifting toward building scalable businesses and co-founding with community. Bush Beef is another good example – one head business that Traditional Owners can supply to. We’re piloting tourism and logistics networks to break down barriers of remoteness. It’s about replicating and scaling models across northern Australia.

We’re also using those learnings to shape new products – like our Futures Fund, alongside shared services. It’s about solving our own problems and building systems that work for our communities.

What message would you share with investors, policymakers, or aspiring Indigenous entrepreneurs reading your new report?

There’s a quote I relate to: ‘It’s human nature to overestimate risk and underestimate opportunity’. The risks aren’t as big as you think, and the opportunities are bigger. Despite all the barriers, people are still finding a way to win. Imagine what we could do if we unlocked those barriers.

For entrepreneurs, I don’t want to sugarcoat it – business is hard. It’s not for everyone. But if you’re still keen after hearing that, then maybe it is for you. We’re here to walk alongside those who are ready to take that leap.

Read Walking Together: Building Indigenous Business in Northern Australia – a new report by Esparq Ventures, co-authored with The Next Economy.

Walking Together: Building Indigenous Business in Northern Australia

A new report by Esparq Ventures, co-authored with The Next Economy

Esparq Ventures is working with Indigenous entrepreneurs across northern Australia to grow successful businesses grounded in culture, community and self-determination.

Walking Together shares early insights from this work. It highlights the challenges and opportunities facing Indigenous businesses, and how Esparq’s model is helping to grow a more connected, resilient and thriving Indigenous business ecosystem.

Co-authored with The Next Economy, the report features stories from the ground, reflections from the team, and lessons to inform policy, funding and systems change. It also captures the spirit of Esparq’s approach – walking alongside communities and backing their vision for the future.

Read the full report here

Find out more in our Q+A with the CEO of Esparq Ventures: Walking Together: A conversation with Darryl French-Majid

Nature, people and place: why Australia’s environmental laws are critical for regions

Australia is rewriting its national environmental laws in response to widespread recognition that the current system is failing both nature and communities. In our submission to the reform process, we shared what we’ve heard from regional Australians around how to make these laws work for people, place and the environment.

Australia’s national environmental laws (commonly referred to as the EPBC Act) are under reform, a long-awaited response to widespread recognition that the existing system has been failing both nature and communities.

Regional Australians and communities are on the frontline of economic and environmental change. Major infrastructure and industry projects are reshaping landscapes, economies and communities at a pace not seen for decades. These developments will often fall under the scope of these reforms, and how the new national environmental laws are designed and implemented will directly affect regional people, places and industries. Getting it right for the regions is key to getting it right for the country.

Lake Moondarra in Mt Isa, an important water resource for locals. Credit: Chris Grose

At The Next Economy, we made a submission to the recent national review process. Drawing on years of work alongside regional communities, we highlighted how clear and effective national environmental laws are essential not only for protecting biodiversity, but for ensuring regional communities can participate in, inform, and benefit from sustainable development.

We made a number of suggestions in our submission – including the need to involve regions as active partners in decisions around land, water, biodiversity and cultural heritage. Done well, this approach can build trust and provide long-term certainty for communities, industry and government.

Regions care deeply about the environment, and want a say in looking after it

People in regional areas have a deep connection to their local environments. First Nations peoples continue to care for Country they have for thousands of years. Farmers, land managers, and local organisations are restoring landscapes, protecting biodiversity, and trialling regenerative practices.

The clear message from across our engagement is: people want to contribute to environmental stewardship, not be excluded from decisions that shape the places they live and work in. In turn, national environmental laws should reflect and support this shared responsibility.

We’re not asking for handouts. We want the government to help us build sustainable, thriving and diverse regional communities.
Hunter Valley, NSW, resident

The pace of development is accelerating, and planning needs to keep up

From energy infrastructure to new mines and transport projects, many regional communities of Australia are experiencing a scale of development not seen before in their lifetimes. While most recognise the importance of reducing emissions and diversifying local economies, there is also legitimate concern the speed of development could damage the ecosystems they depend on.

For example, regional councils and planning bodies are under pressure, often managing overlapping project proposals without the resources or tools to coordinate them well. Proposed reforms to introduce bioregional planning could help manage cumulative impacts most effectively if the plans are developed transparently, with strong national environmental standards and meaningful community input.

National Environmental Standards set the rules and benchmarks that guide how environmental decisions are made. Embedding the intent of the Standards into the reform bill itself avoids the risk of processes being inconsistent, politically vulnerable, and failing to meet their intended goals.

What we have left in terms of biodiversity is precious and irreplaceable.
Uralla, NSW, resident

Community hopes and concerns around how renewables might impact nature and land use, Uralla NSW. Credit: Lyndsay Walsh

Community engagement is essential to building trust

Across every region we work in, from coal regions to those with agriculture and primary production as their foundation, people are asking for the same thing: early, clear and respectful engagement. They want to be involved in shaping the future, not just responding to decisions after they’re made.

Good engagement can’t be rushed and should be covered in its own Standard. It needs to be local, inclusive, and transparent – especially when dealing with complex planning issues. Structured dialogue, space for different views and clear feedback loops are essential to making engagement meaningful.

Staying informed, sharing what we are witnessing on the ground, and engaging in new ideas helps us better support Mount Isa families and individuals in need.
Mount Isa, Qld, resident

What’s needed to make these reforms work for regional Australia

Our submission to the reform process highlighted several opportunities to improve outcomes through the EPBC Act:

1. Participatory regional planning

Our experience working with regions highlights that effective regional planning considers cumulative environmental, social, economic and cultural impacts. Processes should be place- based, participatory and inclusive of diverse local voices including Traditional Owners and communities, who have local knowledge of land, water and climate pressures.

2. Safeguards around fast-track pathways

While faster assessments may be beneficial, they should not come at the cost of strong environmental standards or community input. Trust in planning systems relies on transparent, consistent rules that apply to all projects – including large and high- risk developments.

3. Local benefits from offsets and restoration

Offset mechanisms provide an opportunity to support environmental repair in the regions they affect. That means investing in locally governed land care and restoration efforts that create jobs, strengthen drought resilience, and go some way in compensating for damage and impacts to local ecosystems.

4. Embedding First Nations leadership

It is critical that environmental laws respect cultural values and rights, including Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Recognising First Nations knowledge, governance and land management is essential to ecological restoration and climate resilience.

5. Adapting to climate risk

Assessment frameworks must account for a changing climate, not just today’s conditions. Climate risk and future impacts on ecosystems, water and communities should be central to all planning and approvals.

We will know we are achieving a good energy transition when the environment is protected and nurtured.
Latrobe Valley, Vic, resident

Looking ahead: implementation will be the true test

Sunset on the Hay Plains, NSW. Credit: Jacqui Bell

Legislation matters, but what matters more is how it’s applied on the ground. For our national environmental laws to be effective, implementation should happen in ways that:

Deliver real improvements for the environment

Support strong, inclusive regional economies

Build public trust through transparency and accountability

Reflect the values and knowledge of local communities.

Regional Australia is where these reforms will play out – in our forests, farms, waterways, landscapes and towns. The knowledge and leadership already present in these communities is a critical part of getting it right.

Transition in South West Queensland: local views and questions

In November, The Next Economy travelled through South West Queensland, meeting councils, industry and local leaders to explore what transition means for the region. In this piece, our energy project officer Lyndsay Walsh reflects on the trip and how planning can reflect its realities, strengths and priorities.

We’re working alongside the South West Queensland Regional Organisation of Councils (SWQROC) – a collaboration of six councils – to identify practical, locally driven opportunities that can help guide investment, attract funding, and support the region to manage change on its own terms.

We talk a lot about transition needing to be locally defined and nowhere is that clearer than here. South West Queensland is vast, roughly the size of Malaysia, but home to around 25,000 people. That scale and spread brings unique challenges, from maintaining road and energy networks across long distances, to adapting to an increasingly variable climate.

Reanna, Lyndsay and Saideh visiting Roma saleyards, in Maranoa.

As many of the people we spoke to pointed out: a policy written in Canberra or Brisbane simply can’t be copied and pasted here. It needs to be grounded in these local conditions, build on regional strengths, and help communities shape change in ways that work for them.

The drivers of change affecting us all

Right across the country, people and businesses are feeling the effects of changes happening globally. Climate extremes, shifting markets, new supply chain requirements and changing investment decisions are all influencing how regions grow and plan.

There’s growing attention on things like food security, clean energy, land stewardship and infrastructure. Net zero targets, geopolitical uncertainty, and the push for secure, sustainable supply chains are shaping decisions about what gets built, where industries invest, and who they partner with.

These aren’t abstract issues for South West Queensland. They are already showing up in tangible ways – from how weather affects freight and crops, to pressure on local infrastructure, or in rising insurance costs and supply chain expectations. This all points to the need for forward planning, not only to manage risk, but to actively shape the region’s future based on its own strengths and aspirations.

Listening to how people are making sense of change

That’s what we set out to support. Driving further west, the bitumen fading to gravel and the soil deepening from orange to red, we sat down with people in council chambers, on farms, in paddocks and over café counters.

We workshopped with councillors grappling with long-term planning in the face of immediate pressures. We stood in the dust at Roma Saleyards, witnessing the operations of the largest cattle market in the southern hemisphere. We toured cotton farms and vegetable farms, seeing how water, land, climate and policy meet in complex ways. And we spoke with business owners and community leaders in main street shops and offices, talking through the changes they are seeing on their streets, their challenges, and what they’re excited about for the future.

Everywhere we went, people were already doing the work of thinking ahead, weighing up risks and testing new ideas. The questions they’re asking are practical, grounded, and focused on one thing: how to make sure their communities stay strong, whatever lies ahead.

Reanna facilitating discussion at one of our council workshops, in Balonne.

Local perspectives on transition, and our insights on managing change well

Throughout our conversations, we heard a wide range of views about transition: what it means, why it matters, and whether it’s even the right word.

We often hear these kinds of questions and reflections in our work. They’re thoughtful, valid, and worth taking seriously, so we felt it might be helpful to share how we responded in this context.

“Transition will happen whether we like it or not, and we need to capture the benefits that relate to our shire.”

Transition is often not a choice – it’s happening. But how it plays out locally is up to the region. With a clear strategy, communities can position themselves to attract investment, support existing industries to adapt, and pursue new opportunities that reflect their priorities. Doing nothing risks those benefits being missed altogether and exposing yourself and your community to the risks of an unmanaged transition.

“Why do we need to manage change? Why can’t we just let it happen ‘organically’?”

Change is already underway and often driven by forces outside of local control. Letting it play out without planning usually means responding late, after the impacts have already landed. Planning isn’t about forcing change. It’s about getting ahead of it, understanding what’s coming, and shaping outcomes in a way that benefits the region.

“If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Things might be holding up for now, but many people are already feeling the cracks – whether it’s rising energy costs, workforce shortages or the loss of services. Waiting until it breaks makes it harder and more expensive to respond. Planning now protects what’s working and helps steer change in ways that make the region stronger.

“Don’t kill the patient by solving the issue.”

This is a valid concern – sometimes well-meaning solutions do more harm than good. That’s why local and meaningful participation is critical. This work is not about imposing answers from outside. It’s about working with people who know the place best, to find the right balance between protecting what matters and evolving where needed. A careful, practical approach can manage change without causing harm.

“We don’t fully understand what our opportunities are. What are we even transitioning to?”

There’s no single answer to this. The drivers of change – from climate and markets to policy shifts – are largely global and national. But how a region responds is deeply local, and depends on its industries, people, landscape and goals. The goal isn’t to meet someone else’s definition of transition, but planning for change in a way that’s practical, grounded and focused on managing it well. Or, in other words, transition to a future state where planning is informed by an understanding of the risks and opportunities being created by change, appropriate to local conditions, and deliberate about the outcomes the region wants to achieve.

The Cunnamulla fella taking in the sunset, in Paroo.

Developing the South West Queensland Regional Transition Strategy

This Strategy, due out in March 2026, is about helping the region plan for change on its own terms. It will set shared priorities, highlights local strengths and constraints, and identify practical actions to guide investment, shape policy and build collaboration across the region.

We recognise the real limitations that scale and distance create out west, the scale of change communities are being asked to navigate, and the limits of doing so without the right support. This strategy will aim to ease that challenge by setting clear regional priorities, identifying practical opportunities, and helping councils and communities advocate for the resources, partnerships and investment they need to respond in ways that work for them.

Watch this space for further updates on the project.

The Economy We Could Have – Webinar

Australia’s economy has delivered prosperity for some, but left many behind. The divides in housing, health, income and opportunity are widening — and they’re not inevitable. They’re the result of decisions, shaped by values and power.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Across Australia and around the world, communities are already building alternatives — from cooperative energy projects and regenerative food systems to new legal frameworks and circular design. These examples show that change is not only possible: it’s already happening.

In this one-hour session, The Next Economy CEO Lizzie Webb joins lead author Katherine Trebeck to unpack insights from The Economy We Could Have — a new paper that looks under the bonnet of the Australian economy and reveals how we can move beyond isolated ‘Lego wins’ toward a wellbeing economy that prioritises dignity, fairness, connection and ecological care.

📅 Date: Thursday, 12pm AEST (1PM AEDT), 4 December 2025

📍 Location: Online

🎟 Tickets:  This event has already happened – watch the video below!

🎤 Speakers: The Next Economy CEO Lizzie Webb in conversation with lead author Katherine Trebeck.

🔗 Explore the paper here

Watch the video

The Economy We Could Have: new paper out now

Australia’s economy looks strong on the surface, but behind the averages lie deep divides in housing, work, health and opportunity. Our new paper, The Economy We Could Have, asks what our economy is really designed to do, who it is working for, and how it can support people’s wellbeing.

Australia is at a pivotal moment. While headline statistics suggest strong performance, looking under the bonnet of these numbers reveals widening divides in housing, health, income, and opportunity. Rising inequality and climate disruption demand a closer look at our economic system: what is it designed to do – and who benefits?

The Economy We Could Have explores how Australia’s economic story has shifted over the decades, the divides created along the way, and the alternatives already being built. It sets out practical steps for governments, enterprises and communities to move beyond isolated “Lego wins” and instead embed a wellbeing economy – one that puts dignity, fairness, connection and ecological care at its centre. 

As lead author, Katherine Trebeck, puts it:

Transformational change is possible. Australia has done it before – from Medicare to minimum wages – and we can do it again. 

The challenge

The paper traces Australia’s shift from predistribution – fair wages and public investment – to a model marked by precariousness, asset accumulation, and financial advantage for a few. It also highlights how system-compliant fixes and short-term crisis responses can stall deeper progress.

One in seven Australians live in poverty. Many face insecure work, unaffordable homes and stretched services that respond to crisis rather than prevent it. These outcomes are not inevitable. They are the result of decisions – shaped by values and power – that have concentrated advantage for some and shifted risks onto others. 

The alternatives

The good news that is change is possible. The economy is a human-made system, and it can be redesigned. Across the country, communities are already showing what that momentum for change is growing. Australians are increasingly dissatisfied with the status quo and open to rethinking economic priorities.

One promising framework is the wellbeing economy, which according to the Wellbeing Economy Alliance can deliver the following needs:

Nature, connection, dignity, fairness, participation

There are plenty of examples of these goals already being delivered in practice:

Earthworker Cooperative (Latrobe Valley, VIC)	Australia’s first worker-owned factory, producing solar hot water systems to serve its worker-owners.
Food Connect Shed (Brisbane, QLD):	A cooperative food enterprise owned by 500+ ‘careholders’, rooted in equity and regeneration.
Marlinja Power Project (NT):	Community-installed solar panels and battery storage enabling near energy self-sufficiency – an example of climate resilience.

Governments are beginning to respond. The Federal Government’s Measuring What Matters statement is expanding how national success is defined, incorporating indicators for health, sustainability, and social cohesion. In Victoria, the Early Intervention Investment Framework is embedding preventative health and social approaches into budget decisions, valuing long-term wellbeing over short-term fixes.

Australia’s future depends on whether we can move beyond piecemeal reforms to embrace systemic change. By learning from community-led initiatives and adopting frameworks like the wellbeing economy, we can build a more inclusive, resilient, and caring society – one that works for everyone.

Read the full report here:

DOWNLOAD REPORT

Powering the transition while championing diversity

March 5 2025: Reimagining Diversity in Clean Energy Careers launches today.

The rapid expansion of clean energy development is driving demand for hundreds of thousands of workers with diverse skills but right now many of those roles remain unfilled.

This shortfall presents an opportunity. The Next Economy’s Reimagining Diversity in Clean Energy Careers report shows that by removing barriers to workforce participation for people from marginalised groups and communities, Australia can achieve a faster and fairer energy transition.

It finds that fostering greater diversity and inclusion in the clean energy workforce can improve outcomes for individuals and communities, all while generating benefits for businesses and regional economies and helping Australia meet its renewable energy targets.

*Fostering greater diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the workforce can improve outcomes for individuals and communities, as well as generate benefits for businesses and the economy.*

The task is significant, but there are practical actions that can be taken to remove barriers to participation and build a workforce that delivers a faster, fairer and more inclusive transition to net zero.

The report outlines several opportunity areas to help drive this change:

Foster a thriving workforce development ecosystem: connecting diverse stakeholders, creating the conditions for collaboration while supporting marginalised individuals and regional economies

Strengthen inclusive career development pathways: providing equitable access and opportunities for all learners and workers

Create supportive and inclusive workplaces: ensuring employees from diverse backgrounds feel welcome, valued and supported at work

The report shows these opportunity areas work best when underpinned by a core principle of putting people at the centre of all workforce development efforts.

Stakeholders from different sectors across Gladstone have set directions for their future and are working together to manage the net zero transition. Pictured here is a representative of the Queensland Department of State Development and Infrastructure, explaining the history of Gladstone’s industrial transitions to visiting philanthropists and investors. Source: The Next Economy / William Debois.

Developed through research, interviews and workshops and drawing on insights from The Next Economy’s work with regional communities at the frontline of the energy transition, the Reimagining Diversity in Clean Energy Careers report is a resource to support stakeholders take a broader view of what diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace can look like. It highlights actions that leads to workforce development in the clean energy sector that benefit everyone.

To find out more, read the report here and share it among your networks.

Download Report

Curious to learn more about the report? We’ll be hosting a briefing session in April 2025. Register your interest to be notified of upcoming dates by filling out this form:

Mixed signals and missed champions: regional transition trends

(October 2024) Across Australia, communities are leading the transition to net zero – navigating multiple, compounding disruptions along the way – after years of minimal action or even discussion on climate change at a national level.

TNE’s Jacqui Bell, Dr Katherine Trebeck and Dr Amanda Cahill share key insights, ranging on topics from regional transition trends to nature and land use trade-offs to wellbeing economy principles, at the 2024 Better Futures Forum in September 2024. Photo credits: BFF/Gab Connolle

Here are five key trends or themes Dr Amanda Cahill, CEO of The Next Economy, and the team has observed in recent months:

Missing champions: The lived experiences of communities actively navigating the transition—experimenting, innovating, and addressing local needs—are often missing from the national conversation. From a community group in Gympie installing solar panels on local infrastructure to support vulnerable populations, including domestic violence shelters, to energy companies focused on creating long-term community benefits like housing, there are so many people getting on with it. We should be celebrating and learning from them.
Mixed signals: Regional communities are largely committed to the transition, but mixed signals from state and federal governments are not only frustrating they’re also undermining confidence to move forward with the real work. While there’s more investment in renewables and policies for net zero today than even a few years ago, new fossil fuel projects are still being approved even when expert bodies like the International Energy Agency say fossil fuel use must peak by 2025.
Models questioned: One of the most striking trends is the growing shift in how people think about the economy. For example, beyond day-to-day concerns like the cost of living, more communities are questioning the broader purpose of the economic system itself. The key question being asked is: if the economy isn’t directly benefiting local communities, what is its real value? Another question that keeps coming up is why development proponents decide whether their project will have social and environmental impacts on a community instead of a single, independent process and regulator. This shift in perspective signals a deeper rethinking of what good economic development really looks like. Read more: Rethinking economic responses: tackling the root causes of today’s challenges
Many forms: The net zero transition is taking different shapes for different communities. For example, Mount Isa in Queensland is exploring how they can help the world to decarbonise and what it will take to develop their critical minerals processing potential while navigating the complexities that come with it. Meanwhile, in Hay and Carrathool in NSW’s Riverina region, communities are exploring how they are moving towards a future in agriculture and land use that’s both resilient to the impacts of climate change while responding to the decarbonisation of global supply chains.
Moving forward: We are now in the implementation phase of the net zero transition. It’s going to be challenging for a while, but we need to stay on course and remember that the decisions we make now really do matter. Right now, the infrastructure we invest in, the industries we promote and support, and how we build the capacity and mechanisms to ensure enduring community benefits, are all going to determine whether we reach our 2050 net zero goals – let alone the more ambitious ones that the science tells us we should be striving for. We can find a way forward that works for people and the planet.

The good news is, we have the knowledge, technology, skills and resources to draw from, we just need to get on with it.

TNE staff at Heading Upstream Lab in August 2024, where leaders driving change across Australia convened to explore ways to put people and the planet first when it comes to the economy.

Five ways to empower regions in clean energy workforce development

The Australian Government can play a key role in helping regional communities prepare for the economic changes brought on by the clean energy transition.

As many clean energy jobs will be concentrated in regional renewable energy zones, building the capacity of regional communities to manage development, attract investment for enabling services and infrastructure, and address workforce challenges is essential.

With effective resources and support, local stakeholders can lead efforts to create training programs, support services, and initiatives that ensure a skilled and diverse workforce while fostering sustainable regional development.

In September, The Next Economy provided a submission for the National Energy Workforce Strategy Public Consultation process. In it, we identified a range of insights on increasing inclusivity in the clean energy workforce (read more here), as well as five examples of actions that already are or have to potential to empower regions in clean energy workforce development:

Coordinate planning and development of clean energy projects, associated infrastructure and other industries within a region. Regional coordination and phased planning can manage workforce demand and support worker mobility. Co-locating new manufacturing and industry precincts within renewable energy zones also have the potential to stabilise clean energy workforce demand and create lasting careers. Developers and industry benefit from these approaches with clear roles, responsibilities, and timelines, along with cost certainty and transparent infrastructure investment programs.

For example: the Victorian Planning Authority (VPA) works with councils, government departments and the community to provide employment, transport, public space and housing planning in the context of an increasing population. The VPA has identified the staged development of housing lots and required infrastructure such as roads and utilities.
Develop place-based training and education initiatives and partnerships: that aggregate skill and expertise demand from across sectors and co-designs and delivers courses with industry in a region.

For example: in the Upper Spencer Gulf, Uni Hub is working with local industries to ensure their needs are connected with training providers and potential students.
Support local businesses to adapt and scale up their operations for greater participation in the sector. In many regional areas where new energy development is proposed, the scale of workers required outstrips the local labour market. In addition, the essential services and infrastructure required to support workforce and population growth are limited or non-existent.

Currently, local content requirements from state governments are aimed to drive regional economic benefits. However, often insufficient existing workforce capacity, the cost to prepare businesses to be ready to tender for clean energy development contracts, and uncertainty around long-term work security all limit the capacity of local businesses to scale their operations and bring on new workers.

For example: TNE’s work with Hay and Carrathool shire councils on climate adaptation and economic transition this year has shown that local businesses are interested in tendering for large renewables projects but lack the capacity and resources to adapt. Uncertainty around work pipelines, contracts, timing, and qualifications prevents businesses from scaling, investing in workforce development, or hiring. Early engagement and ongoing support are crucial for scaling regional workforce development. Accessible, up-to-date local data is needed to improve transparency, workforce planning, and equitable recruitment strategies.
Provide resources for local government and local stakeholders: to carry out the feasibility and business planning activities necessary to develop the case for investment in local services, coordination activities and infrastructure.

For example: in the Cradle Coast Region, developers are working together to address housing shortage as they understand it is a key constraint to renewable energy development. In Gladstone, the economic roadmap process delivered by the local council identified the lack of birthing facilities as a key barrier to retaining workers once they are married and look to start families. Improving access to health services in Gladstone is seen a core strategy to retain the workforce. In NSW, the Murrumbidgee Council has negotiated to improve health services through the community benefit agreement.
Embed additional capacity within local governments: to manage and coordinate regional clean energy related activities. Regional local governments play a key role in coordinating clean energy activities, managing community benefits, and supporting the infrastructure and workforce needs of the energy transition. In Renewable Energy Zones, local governments are dedicating significant resources to these tasks, often diverting attention from regular operations due to limited funding and staff. Many are handling large, complex projects unseen in their region for decades, requiring new expertise to manage the technical, legal, and managerial aspects of energy development.

For example: An NSW Government initiative is providing $250,000 of funding for local governments to carry out planning over the next 3 years is an example of the type of support required; however additional and enduring funding (for the duration of the energy infrastructure development in the region) is necessary to cover the true cost that local governments will bear to manage the energy transformation effectively in their region.

To find out more, read more about our Inclusive Clean Energy Workforce project.

Increasing inclusivity in the clean energy workforce

New research from UTS Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) shows the electricity workforce alone needs to double within five years to meet Australia’s 2030 renewable energy target. More than 80 per cent of these roles will be in renewables, with energy storage jobs soon surpassing domestic coal and gas sectors.

This research highlights the big opportunity to address workforce shortages, especially in regional areas, by fostering inclusive policies that ensure equitable benefits and meaningful employment across all communities. Prioritising inclusion and equity in workforce development is key to a just and fair transition toward a net-zero future for all Australians.

In September, The Next Economy provided a submission for the National Energy Workforce Strategy Consultation Paper. We identified five examples of actions that already are or have to potential to empower regions in clean energy workforce development (read more here) alongside the following key insights:

The benefits of enhancing diverse participation and meaningful employment

Every Australian should benefit from clean energy development, including the opportunity to access and meaningfully participate in the workforce. Research shows Australia’s clean energy workforce, like many other industries, has room to improve in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Factors like competition with other industries and projects, lack of training, the characteristics of clean energy jobs, and insufficient regional consultation contribute to workforce shortages in the sector overall.

Greater attention to diversity, equity and inclusion in workforce development carries broad benefits. Companies who have engaged in inclusive hiring processes have reported benefits such as access to a larger talent pool, higher retention and satisfaction rates, improved workplace culture and greater performance and productivity. In turn, inclusive and equitable workforce development practices facilitate pathways into jobs for people who often face systemic barriers to employment. It also promotes greater workforce diversity, fosters a workers’ sense of belonging and inclusion, enhances health and social outcomes and ensures workers are treated with respect and dignity and more likely to be retained.

An opportunity to power First Nations Jobs

The clean energy transformation is an opportunity to increase workforce participation of First Nations Peoples. The Powering First Nations Jobs in Clean Energy report, by the First Nations Clean Energy Network, is a detailed resource that identifies pathways and options for First Nations Peoples to be supported to enter the clean energy workforce and access quality job opportunities and career pathways as they emerge.

Consistent, long-term Government investment in job readiness and business support programs that are led and codesigned by and for First Nations Peoples is needed. Such investment can support the scaling of efforts underway by the private sector in implementing partnerships and employment pathway programs tailored to First Nations Peoples. For example, in the Department of Defence’s Shoalwater Bay Training Area, Downer Defence worked with a range of partners to deliver training programs and initiatives that support small and medium sized Indigenous businesses to enter and thrive in the defence industry.

Support for migrants, refugees, people with a disability and those recently out of prison

Our research has found that affordability of training, lack of awareness around the need for workforce equity and inclusion, misconceptions about abilities, procurement requirements, development speed, and the culture of clean energy workplaces, all impede on the diverse participation in the clean energy workforce.

Strategies tailored to people and their unique context can drive greater participation in the clean energy workforce for different groups. These include building awareness, inspiration and attraction to clean energy careers across diverse populations, improving access to affordable higher education, ensuring ‘wrap around support’ is available for people transitioning into work, cross sectoral collaborations and partnerships, and fostering a workforce culture that is inclusive and values the abilities and contributions of all.

The rapidly growing clean energy sector is well poised to develop a diverse, equitable and inclusive workforce at the scale and pace required to achieve national targets. Other related sectors have experienced the benefits of a diverse and inclusive workforce over the years and developed significant body of knowledge on how to support workforce development in an inclusive and equitable way. The clean energy sector has the advantage of drawing on this existing knowledge and ensure that opportunities in the clean energy workforce benefits all Australians.

Building a wellbeing economy: A deep dive with Sandrine Dixson-Declève

As part of The Next Economy’s mission to reimagine Australia’s economic future, we are excited to co-host Sandrine Dixson-Declève, co-president of the Club of Rome and Executive Chair of Earth4All, during her visit to the country in late October 2024.

A global thought leader in sustainability and economic transformation, Sandrine will offer critical insights at a pivotal moment for Australia. With debates around emissions, energy, and housing intensifying, her perspective on building a wellbeing economy that addresses both environmental and societal challenges will be invaluable.

In this Q&A, Sandrine explores the political, social, and global dimensions of creating a fairer, more sustainable future.

Join Dixson-Declève in Australia for the Survival Guide for Humanity – October dates and ticket information here. Read more about TNE’s work on economic systems change:

Rethinking economic responses: addressing the roots of challenges, August 2024
What’s a wellbeing economy? Q+A with our Economic Change Lead Dr Katherine Trebeck, May 2024
The Wellbeing Economy in Brief, Dr Katherine Trebeck and Warwick Smith, Centre for Policy Development, February 2024

Sandrine Dixson-Declève, head of the Club of Rome, will visit Australia in October 2024.

What is Earth4All and what are some of the key points from that project? 

Fifty years ago, The Limits to Growth warned of the dangers of pursuing endless growth on a finite planet. Earth4All is a collective of economic thinkers, scientists and advocates from across the world building on the legacy of that report in the light of the interlinked crises we’re seeing today and setting out the changes we need to address them. We’ve used the latest computer modelling techniques to explore two future scenarios for the planet: one in which we carry on with business as usual – we call this Too Little, Too Late – and one where societies embark on a new path to a sustainable world by 2050, the Giant Leap. The results were published in 2022 in Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity.  

What we have found is that the Giant Leap scenario is still achievable, but to get there the world needs nothing less than five extraordinary ‘turnarounds’: ending poverty, addressing inequality, reaching gender equity, transitioning to clean energy and making our food system healthy for people and planet. The case for this is evident when you see the immoral windfall profits made by the fossil fuel companies and industrial agricultural producers on the back of growing energy and food poverty. These issues need to be addressed together and must go hand in hand with an upgrade of our current extractive economic system to one that centres human and planetary wellbeing, not endless growth. 

Earth4All outlines bold steps toward a fairer, more sustainable future. How do you gauge the political and social feasibility of implementing such systemic changes?  

It’s clear that economic growth isn’t serving the majority. Societies are more unequal than ever; wellbeing is low and social tensions are on the rise. People are feeling the impact of the climate crisis. 

This year we undertook a major survey of G20 countries to understand public attitudes to our proposals for changing the economic system. We found that a strong majority of people want change: over two thirds of people think the goal of the economy should be human and planetary wellbeing, not just growth. The same proportion think we should implement a wealth tax on the very rich to fund changes to our societies. And we found that over half of people supported all our policy proposals for improving wellbeing, from investing in green energy and public healthcare, to a universal basic income. So socially, these changes are absolutely feasible, but politicians need to catch up with public opinion.

There are hopeful signs in the achievements of wellbeing governments like Iceland, Scotland, Finland, New Zealand Costa Rica and Wales, but there is much more to be done to get wellbeing economy proposals to the top of the political and policy agenda. 

What do you see as the main obstacles to transitioning to a wellbeing economy, and how can governments and institutions overcome them? 

We’re seeing the rise of misinformation and democratic backsliding. It’s clear that the public wants better wellbeing, a fairer economy, but our recent survey results also show a lack of trust in government to make good decisions, especially in Europe. The current crises are already being exploited by far-right populists proposing false solutions. We need to protect and reinforce strong democracies to ensure policies that truly benefit the majority. Increasing citizen participation, for example through citizen’s assemblies, is one way to rebuild trust. 

We also know that the transformation of our economies and societies will be disruptive. We need to change everything, and fast, and that will cause shocks. But these shocks will be less painful if we prepare for them with resilient systems.

We also have to remember that the cost of inaction on climate change, poverty and inequality are higher that the cost of action now, so governments and policymakers need to ensure that the transition is fair and provides the essentials as soon as possible and before 2030.

That’s why one of Earth4All’s policy proposals is a Universal Basic Dividend, a kind of universal basic income, that will help absorb some of the shocks of this transition period and bring the majority on board with the changes we need.

How can Australia and other countries ensure the shift toward sustainability and a wellbeing economy addresses global inequalities, especially in the Global South?  

Many of the inequalities we see today globally are the result of an international financial system that is outdated, immoral and unjust. And this system is perpetuated by rich countries who consistently refuse to take bolder action on debt. Wealthy countries must cancel debt to low-income countries and support urgent reform of the global financial architecture so that these countries can take full advantage of their own resources and invest in the policies and infrastructure needed to increase wellbeing. 

Consumption in wealthy countries also needs to be addressed. In the case of Australia, it needs to tackle both its fossil fuel exports and the level of emissions and consumption. Australia has done well at taking up, for example, rooftop solar, and there are many incredible circular economy businesses in the country [The Federal Government’s Measuring What Matters initiative is a welcome step towards bringing a wider range of outcomes to the fore]. But Australia also has some of the biggest houses in the world, the environmental impacts of flying are rarely discussed (and in many locations there aren’t good public transport options), and there is huge scope for making more buildings more energy efficient.

Ensuring First Nations communities benefit from renewables projects is also critical.

In your view, how can technological innovation support the goals of a wellbeing economy, and what risks should we be wary of in the process?  

AI and other technological innovations have huge potential for advancing the goals of a wellbeing economy – ensuring decarbonisation and optimising energy and water use through smart technologies and innovations, but the digital sector also has to seriously reduce its own emissions.

Most importantly we must ensure that the use of these technologies is focused on improving people’s lives, not just lining the pockets of the few. Left unchecked, these innovations risk exacerbating existing inequalities. 

We must also be wary of leaning too heavily on technological solutions to global crises. Our focus should be on the root causes of the polycrisis and shifting away from an extractive, GDP-focused economy to one focused on wellbeing, empowerment and addressing inequality, and that is something that technology alone cannot fix.  

What key international trends or movements (good or bad) do you see emerging around sustainability and wellbeing economics, and how can countries like Australia learn from or contribute to these global shifts?  

Conversations about wellbeing economics are no longer on the fringes, we’re seeing them happening in more international institutions and businesses – the World Economic Forum, OECD, the US Business Roundtable have all spoken out about the importance of other priorities besides growth.

Regarding sustainability we are seeing a two-speed approach: on the one hand you have backlash against ESG in the US but on the other you have more and more companies realising that sustainability across their business models and their value chains is the only way to build resilience to future shocks and stresses. My worry is that as a growing number of companies know decarbonisation is our future, many incumbents, especially the fossil energy companies, are backtracking.

Then of course there are the examples of countries like Finland, Iceland, Wales, New Zealand, Costa Rica and Scotland that are implementing elements of wellbeing economics into their policies, like tracking complementary growth metrics beyond GDP.

Building broad movements with both high-level champions and grassroots support is crucial, as well as consistently celebrating positive visions of a wellbeing economy in the country to bring people on board.

Katherine Trebeck [pictured below, The Next Economy], the instigator of the Wellbeing Economy Governments partnership (WEGo) recently published an Earth4All deep-dive paper exploring their experiences and what can be learned from them.

Katherine Trebeck, The Next Economy’s Economic Change Lead and instigator of the Wellbeing Economy Governments partnership (WeGo).

In the Australian context, what unique challenges or opportunities do you see in advancing the wellbeing economy, and what are you most looking forward to exploring during your visit here? 

69% of Australians think that the country’s economy should prioritise the health and wellbeing of people and nature – this is pretty close to what citizens are saying across the G20. There is clearly an appetite for wellbeing economy proposals, and this is fantastic opportunity to centre them. Australia has no shortage of good examples to build on, whether that is pioneering businesses such as circular economy initiatives or employee-owned enterprises, or community banks or the growing community wealth building agenda. There are many creative innovators coming up with technological solutions. Various levels of government are starting to create multidimensional wellbeing frameworks to widen conceptions of success. 

Now is an important time, when many people realise that business as usual cannot carry on but are unsure about what changes need to be made and are even anxious about that change. I look forward to talking with people about the need for change and the benefits it can bring, advancing the conversation in Australia alongside partners already doing fantastic work in the space like The Next Economy, and together building momentum towards a wellbeing economy. What we need now is to show Australians and citizens across the globe is that there is a plausible alternative future, one which reverses negative environmental and social tipping points, and Earth4All’s Giant Leap scenario shows the way.

Join Dixson-Declève in Australia for the Survival Guide for Humanity – dates and ticket information here.

Join Sandrine Dixson-Declève in Australia for the Survival Guide for Humanity

As part of our mission to reimagine Australia’s economic future, The Next Economy will co-host Sandrine Dixson-Declève, co-president of the Club of Rome and Executive Chair of Earth4All, during her visit to Australia this October.

Dixson-Declève is an internationally renowned thought leader. She leads the Club of Rome’s Earth4All program and recently co-founded the System Transformation Hub.

Building a Wellbeing Economy: A TNE conversation with Sandrine Dixson-Declève

Among her many appointments, Dixson-Declève serves as an ambassador for the Wellbeing Alliance (WEAll) – an international collaboration working to transform the economic system co-founded by The Next Economy’s very own Dr Katherine Trebeck.

Read more about The Next Economy’s work on economic systems change:

Rethinking economic responses: addressing the roots of challenges, August 2024
What’s a wellbeing economy? Q+A with our Economic Change Lead Dr Katherine Trebeck, May 2024
On the wellbeing economy, is Australia at risk of dropping the ball?Opinion piece by Dr Katherine Trebeck in Croakey Health Media, 14 May 2024
The Wellbeing Economy in Brief, Dr Katherine Trebeck and Warwick Smith, Centre for Policy Development, February 2024

In a time when Earth has crossed multiple planetary boundaries and inequality is driving instabilities in societies worldwide, Dixson-Declève offers vital insights into how we can navigate these challenges.

Trebeck, TNE’s Economic Change Lead, said: “Sandrine’s visit comes at a crucial time for Australia. Debates around our emissions, our energy future, housing, and the cost of living are raging, but they often miss a critical element: what sort of economy needs to be built to enable the society we want on the planet we need?

“Sandrine has an incredible vantage point on this question and does not just offer a reality check on the implausibility of business as usual. She brings a suite of ideas for change and examples of tangible hope.”

Opportunities to hear from and meet Sandrine while she is in Australia include:

Canberra: Wednesday 23 October (6 to 7pm AEDT), ANU’s Planetary Health Equity Hothouse will host a public lecture. Register

Online via Zoom: Thursday 24 October (11am AEDT), Dixson-Declève joins The Australia Institute to explore critical issues and her work on Earth for All, a survival guide to humanity. Register

Melbourne: On Monday 28 October (5.30 to 7.30pm AEDT), join Dixson-Declève and the Centre for Policy Development at the State Library of Victoria. Register

Building a Wellbeing Economy: A TNE conversation with Sandrine Dixson-Declève

Community unites: More than 85 people collaborate on Resilient Economy Roadmap

MORE than 85 passionate community members have come together to explore ways to future-proof communities as part of Hay and Carrathool Shire Council’s Resilient Economy Roadmap Project.

The workshops – held in Hay, Rankins Springs, Hillston, Carrathool, Goolgowi and Merriwagga in late June – built on the picture of the region in NSW’s Riverina painted through earlier discussions, workshops and a community survey under the Roadmap project.

Alison McLean, Executive Manager – Economic Development and Tourism at Hay Shire Council said: “From farmers to business owners, grandparents to students, it was great to see such a diverse, passionate range of people show up with a wealth of knowledge and skills and ready to connect with one another and help bring about positive change.

“Together, they worked to identify common challenges, such as strengthening pathways into local employment, as well as opportunities that have the greatest potential to strengthen resilience across the region like diversifying our regional economy and continuing to grow the next generation of community leaders.”

Participants also identified strategies and actions councils, businesses, industries and communities can take over the next decade to leverage new opportunities, address current and emerging challenges and prepare for any future disruptions or change.

Of the experience, one participant noted: “The genuine buy in and contribution from the community members was invaluable”. Another said: “Our region has an optimistic ability to accept change and drive opportunities”.

Insights from the workshops will directly inform the development of the Resilient Economy Roadmap to be delivered in late 2024. Feedback on a draft Roadmap will be sought from the community in the coming months.

McLean added: “I can’t thank participants enough for their time and invaluable knowledge and insights. The voices of the community are vital in the success of this project – and the future of our region.”

The Resilient Economy Roadmap initiative is a collaboration between Hay and Carrathool Shire councils, The Next Economy, The Australian Resilience Centre, and communities across the region. Running from March to October 2024, it is funded jointly by the Australian Government and NSW’s Future Drought Fund and is part of the Regional Drought Resilience Planning Program.

To stay up to date on the project, follow the Resilient Economy Roadmap Facebook page. For further project information, please contact j.bell@nexteconomy.com.au

Can we improve inclusiveness in the clean energy workforce?

Have you ever wondered how inclusive the clean energy workforce is – or could be?

Australia is now firmly in the implementation phase of the energy transition, with more and more employment opportunities in the clean energy workforce. In fact, nearly half a million workers are projected to be needed to reach Australia’s 2030 renewable energy target alone.

The Next Economy is working with a range of stakeholders to explore how to expand the renewable energy workforce to include people who often face systemic barriers to employment. Specifically, in regions with growing demands for workers in clean energy.

The Inclusive Clean Energy Workforce (ICEW) project aims to ignite discussion about how we can work together to enhance diversity, equity and inclusion.

Our current discussion paper captures pivotal themes and insights drawn from a desktop review of literature and interviews with stakeholders across the clean energy sector, social services and employment sectors.

In mid-July 2024, we’re hosting a range of workshops to get feedback on this initial piece of work and to dive deeper into opportunities and practical strategies to enhance diversity, equity and inclusion in the clean energy workforce.

Opportunities and insights will be captured and shared in a series of sector resources and webinars in the second half of 2024.

Early findings and key points:

Every Australian deserves access to the benefits of clean energy development, including new and existing jobs required for the workforce

The current clean energy sector can improve on diversity, equity and inclusion despite already outperforming other energy sectors including coal and gas

Greater diversity, equity and inclusion not only improves outcomes for individuals, but also can for companies, communities, the sector and the economy

From access to training and education to workplace culture characteristics, there are several systemic, cultural and broader factors and barriers marginalised groups face accessing jobs in the clean energy workforce

Working together, stakeholders from industry, education and training, and civil society can enhance diversity, equity and inclusion in the clean energy workforce

If you’re interested in finding out more, or want to share your insights with us, please contact Jacqui Bell.

What’s a Wellbeing Economy?

We ask Dr Katherine Trebeck, Economic Change Lead at The Next Economy

In a nutshell, what is a wellbeing economy?

An economy designed deliberately to work for people and the planet, not the other way around as so often seems to be the case today. It’s about creating a context in which people thrive, first time around, rather than having to deploy loads of resources trying to fix and repair after damage has been done. This means initiatives that speak to the purpose of the economy, prevention, predistribtion (not just redistribution), and a people powered economy.

So, it requires thinking about what activities we need more of because they help create that context and finding ways to expand those activities: being selective about what is growing, rather than pursuit of any sort of growth.

Are there any examples of using this framework successfully? If so, how?

Think about the wellbeing economy not so much as a framework, but more as a paradigm. It requires a substantial shift in how the economy is thought about and approached. It is about seeing the economy as a mechanism to meet our real goals, and certainly not something to which all other goals are subservient. Not only are we seeing a growing conversation and emerging such as the Wellbeing Economy Alliance initiatives where people are coming together to promote the agenda or its component parts, but there are loads of examples of governments and enterprises making the sort of changes that are necessary. For example:

Multidimensional measurement dashboards (Australia’s Measuring What Matters statement is an example of this) and support for social enterprises (the recently announced Social Enterprise Development Initiative, for example)
Circular economy production and public transport systems
Community or worker owned businesses such as the Earth Worker Cooperative in Victoria
Considering the environmental cost of the things we buy.

The challenge is that while there is no shortage of examples, often they are the exception that proves the rule. One nice illustration of the potential for this is seen in the Community Wealth Building work happening in places like Cleveland in the US and in Preston in the UK (plus in various parts of Australia too). In Preston, there has been research which shows the council’s efforts to procure locally, to support local businesses and local employment has meant the local economy has been more resilient, but also people’s mental health and reported personal wellbeing has improved.

How might the principles of a wellbeing economy help address current challenges posed by high cost of living pressures?

A key feature of a wellbeing economy approach is to look at the root causes of an issue, and not just respond crisis to crisis, symptom to symptom.

So in terms of cost-of-living pressures and high housing costs as a key part of that, a wellbeing economy approach would entail examining the way the housing market operates – who owns the houses? What taxes and incentives encourage the sort of ownership patterns that are forcing up prices? Why aren’t there more community housing cooperatives and other modes of providing housing in Australia?

It would then step back and reflect on what the ultimate goal is – shelter for people in Australia’s towns and cities. It would then think about what needs to change in the economy for more people to have access to good quality shelter – perhaps that means shifting taxes to discourage people owning more and more homes as investment devices? Perhaps that means changing planning laws to enable more community groups to co-own housing? Perhaps that means ensuring homes are built with high energy efficiency standards so once people move into them, they aren’t spending huge amounts on heating and cooling them.

And speaking of energy efficiency, a wellbeing economy approach is also about being ambitious for flow-on benefits – so if housing is being built, can it help address environmental challenges by needing less carbon and using more recycled materials? Can it help address equity and inclusion by being built by companies employing local people, which have gender balance in their teams, and which pay living wages etc? And can it help roll out models of enterprise that have a social purpose at their heart, so could the houses be owned by a housing cooperative?

How might Australia adopt a wellbeing economy framework? What are the steps that need to happen?

There’s a precondition for government acting – that’s people talking about it, and being able to imagine an economy that serves them, not the other way around: an economy that doesn’t generate so much inequality and put so much pressure on the planet. That will be helped by learning about examples of this in practice, even in small scale. Then policy makers need to step in to design the rules of the game so those good examples are common place.

What would a state or federal budget for a wellbeing economy look like?

It would use things like taxes and subsidies to support the sort of activities which are good for people and planet, and to discourage those that aren’t. In other words, it would ask what we need more of and how can mechanisms in the budget help cultivate them?

With the support of the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation, The Next Economy is convening an ‘Upstream Lab’ to explore the economic root causes of many of today’s challenges, including how to take action where there is scope to prevent harm happening in the first place. More details to come as we roll out this exciting initiative.

Find out more:

On the wellbeing economy, is Australia at risk of dropping the ball? Opinion piece by Dr Katherine Trebeck in Croakey Health Media, 14 May 2024

The Wellbeing Economy in Brief, Dr Katherine Trebeck and Warwick Smith, Centre for Policy Development, February 2024

International Roundtable on achieving positive social and economic outcomes in the energy transition

Co-hosted by Melbourne Climate Futures on 17 February 2022, The Next Economy organised an International Roundtable which brought together over 40 leading Australian, German and Polish thinkers who are deeply engaged in the question of how we manage change in the energy sector.

View the report

Webinar: What Regions Need

The Next Economy hosted a report back and Q&A along with special guests, Professor John Wiseman and Dr Gareth Edwards on Wednesday, 11 May 2022.

Just Transitions Strategies

Case study examples, reports and resources (Click bolded titles for link)

Australian reports and resources

Wiseman, J. and Wollersheim, L. Building Prosperous, Just and Resilient Zero Carbon Regions, Melbourne Climate Futures, University of Melbourne, 2022
Regional communities making the transition to Net Zero, ABC Big Ideas, 11 November 2021
Edwards, G. Towards A Just Transition from Coal in Australia, Sydney Environment Institute, 2022
Centre for Policy Development, Who’s Buying, The Impact of Global Decarbonisation on Australis’ Regions, CPD, 2022
Blueprint Institute, Powering the Next Boom , Blueprint Institute, 2021
Beyond Zero Emissions, Regional economic transition resources
Centre for Climate and Energy Policy, Australian National University, Coal Transitions Project

International reports and resources

World Resources Institute, Just Transition and Equitable Climate Action Resource Centre
International Trade Union Confederation, Just Transition Centre
CEE Bankwatch, Just Transition case studies
International Institute for Sustainable Development, Real People, Real Change, Strategies for Just Energy Transitions
European Commission, Just Transition Platform
Climate Chance, Climate Action Case Studies
Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Just Transition Initiative
The B Team, Building a Just Transition
World Bank, Just Transition for All
UN Principles for Responsible Investment, The Just Transition
Galgóczi, B. Phasing out coal – a just transition approach. Working Paper. ETUI, 2019
International Labour Organisation, Green Jobs resources
Sartor, O. Implementing coal transitions: Insights from case studies of major coal-consuming economies. .IDDRI and Climate Strategies, 2019

What Regions Need on the Path to Net Zero

Australia speaks in landmark report

A major new report from The Next Economy released today has found that regional Australia is undergoing an economic transformation, with historical coal and gas heartlands like Central Queensland, The Hunter Valley and the Latrobe Valley in pole position to capitalise on the global shift to net zero emissions – with appropriate Federal Government leadership, investment and support.

For ‘What regions need on the path to net zero’, The Next Economy engaged with over 500 people and organisations across regional Queensland, NSW, Victoria, WA and the NT to assess the support communities with close ties to fossil fuels need to manage the inevitable and accelerating transition to net zero emissions.

Participants included representatives of government, the energy sector, diverse industries, unions, economic development agencies, social services, universities and training institutions, Traditional Owners and First Nations groups, community members and environment organisations.

The research revealed a high level of consensus on a key theme – greater leadership is needed from the Federal Government, revolving around three key calls to action:

An honest conversation: The Federal Government must be open and honest about what the changing energy system means for regional Australia.
A clear, well resourced plan: The Federal Government needs to put in place the appropriate targets, policies and regulatory frameworks to guide investment, and to ensure that regional workers and communities are not left behind – such as a national transition authority.
A strong democracy: The Federal Government must put in place measures to improve the health of our democracy – such as protection of public servants and decision-making from political interference, banning political donations, and a national corruption watchdog.

Dr Amanda Cahill, CEO of The Next Economy, said “The discussion about energy futures in regional Australia has changed dramatically since the federal election in 2019.

“When we started our consultations two and a half years ago, most people were questioning the whole concept of the energy transition. Now people see that things are changing quickly, with early closure announcements for coal plants, our trading partners increasing their climate ambitions and the rapid expansion of renewable energy projects across the country. They want to see a clear plan and support so they can manage these changes.

“If we want to take advantage of the wide range of new economic opportunities available – in renewable energy generation and storage, the mining and processing of critical minerals needed for renewable energy, and the manufacturing of projects like green hydrogen, batteries, renewable energy components, biofuels and other products – we need to act now.

“Business has been leading the way in terms of investing in the new industries we need to develop to reduce our dependence on coal and gas export revenue. But it’s not enough and even industry players are now calling on the Federal Government for greater policy certainty and new regulatory frameworks to ensure that development is done well and actually benefits regions over the long term.”

“The new federal government has a lot of work to do”, Dr Cahill said. “I hope it shows the leadership and vision to grasp this once-in-a-generation opportunity, and to step up to the task of supporting our regions as the energy system changes.”

Download the report

To view our presentation of the report, click below to watch our webinar on Wednesday, 11 May where we were joined by Professor John Wiseman and Dr Gareth Edwards, followed by a Q&A session with participants.

View Webinar