Our industrial suburbs provide diverse employment opportunities

In Melbourne, industrial zones collectively support about 26% of all jobs while the CBD and surrounding areas hold about 15% of the metropolitan workforce.

The overlooked role of industrial land in creating equitable cities

Debates around equity and sustainability in Australian suburbs inevitably turn toward the challenges of delivering quality housing with access to essential community services. Urban policymakers seek to enhance suburban liveability while supporting major investment in transport infrastructure to give people better access to the jobs concentrated in our CBDs. Often ignored is the fact that more people spend their day at jobs located outside Australian city centres in suburban industrial zones. Despite this, industrial areas remain a largely overlooked “other” in Australian cities, devoid of amenity, accessibility, and sustainability potential.

The importance of industrial land

Industrial land use planning has important implications for equity in our cities and suburbs. In Melbourne, for example, industrial zones collectively support about 26% of all jobs while the CBD and surrounding areas hold about 15% of the metropolitan workforce [1]. Compared to other employment areas, jobs on industrial lands are also more diverse in terms of income and occupational skill sets (Figs. 1-2). This helps to mitigate the inequity built into the high and low-wage service economy that defines our city centers and metropolitan economies. Industrial zones in Greater Melbourne support a surprising range of activity from manufacturing and construction to creative industries, which guard against economic shocks as we saw most recently during Covid-19 [2]. They also support a range of community enterprises and essential services including auto and household repair, recycling, and workforce development centres for disadvantaged groups.

Figure 1: Average employee weekly income range by employment area in Melbourne

Figure 2: Occupational mix by type of employment area in Melbourne

Industrial areas remain a largely overlooked 'other' in Australian cities, devoid of amenity, accessibility, and sustainability potential.

Industrial land, as much as any other area of a city, can play a critical role in environmental sustainability. However, this potential has been largely ignored to date. Industrial precincts make up about 7% of Australia’s major cities but contribute only 3% of tree canopy cover. The often concentrated nature of industrial land exacerbates vexing issues such as landscape connectivity and urban heat island effect, with large and relatively treeless areas acting as habitat breaks and hot spots. There is significant potential to better support urban biodiversity, and urban greening and cooling in industrial areas. This can enhance environmental sustainability as well as provide local amenity and health benefits for workers. Recent proposals for “rewilding industrial land” show a way forward but implementation has been slow [3].

Alongside this, industrial precincts present opportunities for sustainability improvements via district level energy, water, and waste infrastructure. Cities may adopt what industrial ecologists refer to as “industrial symbiosis” strategies, which seek to establish more sustainable, closed production systems through shared infrastructure, utilities, and waste recycling. Emerging models of multi-story, vertical factories and higher density industrial spaces have potential to reduce sprawling land consumption on urban fringes.

Despite their critical roles in supporting urban equity and sustainability, the planning and development of industrial land focuses largely on the functional needs of industry broadly. While these areas contain a large proportion of the workforce, attention to amenity provision and the transport infrastructure to get people from home to work is limited and lags far behind the investment in white collar employment hubs creating equity disparities. This is partly because planning for industrial land tends to revolve around logistics concerns like land supply and freight transport accessibility for large-scale industry- most recently e-commerce warehouses- rather than approaching them as places where people work and where communities meet their everyday needs. It is also due to standardised zoning for industry - defined largely by use separation and a limited definition of industry- despite significant variations by location in industry mix, land uses, and built environments.

While these areas contain a large proportion of the workforce, attention to amenity provision and the transport infrastructure to get people from home to work is limited and lags far behind the investment in white collar employment hubs creating equity disparities.

Better planning and development of industrial areas is crucial, especially for suburban areas, with the potential to deliver more and varied jobs, training, and services closer to where people live, and improved amenity and sustainability outcomes for cities.

Lessons from the past, directions for the future of industrial land

Twentieth century land use planning underpins much of today’s industrial landscape [4] and continues to shape thinking about contemporary industrial activity [5]. Prevailing approaches to industrial zones in both Australian and US cities favour the protection of predominately single-use industrial areas concentrated in outer suburban areas [6]. Coupled with this is the continued influence of the late 20th century reaction to the downscaling of certain manufacturing sectors, a post-industrial framing that often saw industrial areas earmarked as declining or redundant. However, ‘post-industrial’ cities still need industrial land to meet basic needs, from food production and processing to waste remediation. Localised industrial activity becomes increasingly important in the face of global supply chain breakdowns and is an opportunity to reduce the effects of climate change.

Localised industrial activity becomes increasingly important in the face of global supply chain breakdowns and is an opportunity to reduce the effects of climate change.

Because current approaches stem from the planning logic of separation, suburbanisation, and post industrialization, they overlook the diversity of contemporary industrial land users. This includes emerging hybrid production-consumption business models and, with it, the nascent opportunities for higher-amenity and higher-quality job centres close to where people live. For instance, new forms of food and beverage manufacturing have emerged that blend production and consumption on-site. These businesses hold potential for new types of employment and amenity offerings in industrial areas, but this requires careful regulation that allows for innovation without harming the functionality of industrial districts.

Planners respond to economic changes: the challenge is to do so in ways which are not simply reactive or which close off future opportunities. The ways that plans and planners define industrial areas can constrain the availability of land, the capacity for new businesses and changing practices, and the sustainability of employment. Newer, smaller businesses navigate difficult planning categories – some of which apply disproportionately to new industries and to hybrid business models. Legacy approaches to zoning are important as they protect industrial areas. But our research suggests they can also constrain change and diversity within industries [5]. Covid-19 showed how exposed Australian cities and suburbs are to supply chain vulnerabilities. For a host of economic and environmental reasons, we need to support equitable employment areas across our cities and take a more inclusive approach to planning industrial lands. We have begun to explore these opportunities at Monash Urban Planning and Design with our students [7, 8].

Where might this leave the 21st century version of industrial land in Australia?

Protecting and separating areas of high impact industries remains a key facet of how Australian suburbs are planned. However, if we reconfigure the dominant focus on use separation, industrial suburbanisation and inner industrial, we can begin to shift the conversation to recognise the diversity of contemporary and emerging industrial activity and better catalyse the potential sustainability and equity contribution of industrial precincts. Planners and policymakers need to better understand and plan for industrial zones and this includes rethinking current planning and zoning in response to varying contexts and industry needs with attention to their equity and sustainability potential.

Given the crucial role of industrial zones in an equitable and sustainable city, we need public debate on these issues and the will to develop a people-based planning response that accounts for the role and diversity of industrial lands.

Carl Grodach

Carl is Foundation Professor and Director of Urban Planning & Design at Monash University. His key research focus has been on the urban development impacts of the cultural industries and the ways that arts and cultural planning efforts shape development outcomes. This work has evolved to focus more specifically on urban manufacturing economies and how zoning and other planning mechanisms shape industry development, interaction, and change. Carl leads the Australian Research Council project 'Urban policy and the changing dynamics of cultural production' which aims to identify new directions for urban cultural policy.

Joe Hurley

Joe is an Associate Professor and researcher in the Centre for Urban Research, lecturer in the Sustainability and Urban Planning program at RMIT University, and Deputy Director of the Clean Air and Urban Landscapes Research Hub where he leads a program of research called ‘Making Greening Happen in Consolidating Cities’. Joe’s work is underpinned by a commitment to sustainability and equity in cities. His research focuses on the intersection between urban planning and urban sustainability, and on the role of urban governance and policy in producing sustainable outcomes. Joe is an experienced research leader, managing teams of multi-disciplinary researchers to tackle complex urban problems. He takes a particular interest in the relationship between research and practice worlds and is actively involved in work to reduce the barriers to exchange and enhance collaboration as he believes these two worlds, when working effectively together, are critical to the future of great cities.

Declan Martin

Declan is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow with Urban Planning and Design at Monash University. His research investigates the impact of urban development and policy on rent-sensitive industries, with a focus on cultural production, urban manufacturing and industrial gentrification. His work can be found in leading urban studies journals, including International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Urban Geography and Journal of Urban Affairs. Throughout his research Declan has aimed to contribute knowledge and evidence toward a more diverse and equitable city.

Liz Taylor

Dr. Liz Taylor is a Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning and Design at Monash University. Often using spatial and historical perspectives, her research develops understanding of long-term urban change and the role of policy settings in it. Her research interests include car parking policies, liquor licensing history, Australia’s new city projects, affordable housing, and industrial land.