MEDIA RELEASE
March 26, 2008	Embargoed 11.30 am (AEDT)	24/2008

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released today a series of four measures, called Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), which compare the relative social and economic conditions of cities, towns and suburbs across Australia.

According to the ABS the most disadvantaged areas of Australia are located in remote areas of Northern Territory and Queensland, while the most advantaged areas are located in capital cities such as Canberra, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Melbourne (ranked using the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage).

SEIFA is calculated on a range of variables from the 2006 Census. Each index summarises a different aspect of the socio-economic conditions of people living in an area. The indexes broadly compare areas and therefore areas ranked at the top and bottom are likely to show similar levels of advantage or disadvantage.

The four indexes in SEIFA 2006 are:

1. The Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage: is a continuum of advantage (high values) to disadvantage (low values), and is derived from Census variables related to both advantage and disadvantage. Media are recommended to use this index.
2. The Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage: focuses primarily on disadvantage, and is derived from Census variables like low income, low educational attainment, unemployment, and dwellings without motor vehicles. Note: This index cannot be reversed to show advantaged areas.
3. The Index of Economic Resources: focuses on the financial aspects of advantage and disadvantage, using Census variables relating to residents' incomes, housing expenditure and assets.
4. The Index of Education and Occupation: includes Census variables relating to educational attainment, employment and vocational skills.

Further information can be found in Census of Population and Housing: Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), Australia - Data only 2006 (cat. no. 2033.0.55.001) and Information Paper: An Introduction to Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), 2006 (cat. no. 2039.0).

Media note: Socio-economic status is a complex concept to capture. The ABS recommends caution when reporting. The indexes show an average ranking of an area. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged, and vice versa. Due to the design of the indexes it is not possible to measure socio-economic changes over time.

The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Australia, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There were a total of 1,395 SLAs with SEIFA scores in Australia.

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top twenty are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom twenty are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.

To compare socio-economic conditions between larger geographic areas, such as capital cities or States, please refer to:SEIFA Population Distributions for Larger Areas, 2006 (ABS cat. no. 2033.0.55.001)






The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in New South Wales, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Sydney, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 153 LGAs with SEIFA scores in New South Wales, and 64 SLAs in Greater Sydney (i.e. the Sydney Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Fairfield - East SLA was ranked the most disadvantaged (i.e. the lowest ranked) SLA in Sydney. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that around one-third of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while the other two-thirds lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.




The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Victoria, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Melbourne, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 80 LGAs with SEIFA scores in Victoria, and 79 SLAs in Greater Melbourne (i.e. the Melbourne Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Hume - Broadmeadows SLA was the lowest ranked SLA in Melbourne. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts the ABS found that around half of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while the other half lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.




The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Queensland, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Brisbane, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 157 LGAs with SEIFA scores in Queensland, and 215 SLAs in Greater Brisbane (i.e. the Brisbane Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Caboolture - Central SLA was among the lowest ranked SLAs in Brisbane. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that less than half of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while the other half lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.






The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in South Australia, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Adelaide, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 70 LGAs with SEIFA scores in South Australia, and 54 SLAs in Greater Adelaide (i.e. the Adelaide Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Salisbury - Central SLA was one of the lowest ranked SLAs in Adelaide. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that around one-third of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while two-thirds of residents lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.


The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Western Australia, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Perth, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 142 LGAs with SEIFA scores in Western Australia, and 37 SLAs in Greater Perth (i.e. the Perth Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Kwinana SLA was the lowest ranked SLA in Perth. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that around one-fifth of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while four-fifths lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.


The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Tasmania, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 43 SLAs in Tasmania.

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Brighton SLA was the lowest ranked SLA in Tasmania. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that slightly less than half of residents fell into the most disadvantaged areas while more than half lived in less disadvantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.

The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Local Government Areas (LGAs) in the Northern Territory, and the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in Greater Darwin, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 34 LGAs with SEIFA scores in the Northern Territory, and 40 SLAs in Greater Darwin (i.e. the Darwin Statistical Division).

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Karama SLA was one of the lowest ranked SLAs in Darwin. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that around one-eigth of residents lived in relatively advantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.

The above tables list the top and bottom ten ranked Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) in the Australian Capital Territory, according to the Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage. There are a total of 103 SLAs in ACT.

Here we have listed only a small selection of the most advantaged and disadvantaged areas for one of the four SEIFA measures. Due to the complexity involved in measuring socio-economic status, the ABS recommends some caution when reporting. Areas ranked in the top ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic advantage, and areas in the bottom ten are likely to have similar levels of socio-economic disadvantage. Ranking for areas will change depending on which index is used.

SEIFA indexes show an average ranking for areas. The socio-economic conditions of individual residents in any one area will vary, and there may be relatively advantaged residents living in areas labelled as disadvantaged and vice versa. For example, the Charnwood SLA was one of the lowest ranked SLAs in the ACT. However, on breaking this area down into Census Collection Districts, the ABS found that around one-quarter of residents lived in relatively advantaged areas.

For background information on different areas the ABS recommends using Census QuickStats or Census Basic Community Profiles, available at <www.censusdata.abs.gov.au>.