This paper examines the understanding of social cohesion by policymakers, practitioners and residents, with particular reference to migrant concentration areas in Sydney and Melbourne. Ten suburbs we focus on had a high proportion of Muslim Australian residents and were socioeconomically disadvantaged at the time of the 2016 Australian Census. The paper is based on 52 in-depth, semi-structured interviews, mainly with professionals delivering local programmes and services, but also with residents. Based on interview data, the paper seeks to unpack the concept of social cohesion, particularly as it is applied to local programmes and discuss the understandings of the relationship of social cohesion with ethnic diversity and socioeconomic disadvantage. We found that most respondents considered “social cohesion” a positive feature of local and broader society, but the concept was variously understood. The understanding of its relationship with ethnic diversity and socioeconomic status of a local area also varied, but the predominant view was that social cohesion is put under stress by socioeconomic disadvantage. In some cases, “social cohesion” was understood, and criticised, as a coded policy formula for “preventing violent extremism” policies, especially in Muslim concentration areas, therefore with a potential to alienate local communities instead of helping them.

中文翻译：

---

重新审视社会凝聚力：悉尼和墨尔本移民集中区的政策和实践

本文考察了政策制定者、从业者和居民对社会凝聚力的理解，特别是悉尼和墨尔本的移民集中区。我们关注的 10 个郊区拥有高比例的穆斯林澳大利亚居民，在 2016 年澳大利亚人口普查时社会经济处于不利地位。该论文基于 52 次深入的半结构化访谈，主要是与提供当地项目和服务的专业人士以及居民进行的访谈。基于采访数据，本文试图解开社会凝聚力的概念，特别是当它应用于地方项目时，并讨论对社会凝聚力与种族多样性和社会经济劣势关系的理解。我们发现，大多数受访者认为“社会凝聚力”是当地和更广泛社会的积极特征，但对这一概念的理解各不相同。对其与种族多样性和当地社会经济地位的关系的理解也不尽相同，但主要观点是社会凝聚力受到社会经济劣势的压力。在某些情况下，“社会凝聚力”被理解和批评为“防止暴力极端主义”政策的编码政策公式，特别是在穆斯林集中地区，因此有可能疏远当地社区而不是帮助他们。但占主导地位的观点是，社会经济劣势使社会凝聚力受到压力。在某些情况下，“社会凝聚力”被理解和批评为“防止暴力极端主义”政策的编码政策公式，特别是在穆斯林集中地区，因此有可能疏远当地社区而不是帮助他们。但占主导地位的观点是，社会经济劣势使社会凝聚力受到压力。在某些情况下，“社会凝聚力”被理解和批评为“防止暴力极端主义”政策的编码政策公式，特别是在穆斯林集中地区，因此有可能疏远当地社区而不是帮助他们。