Economic restructuring and welfare reform are driving new forms of urban poverty in the global north. Shadow care infrastructures is a new frame for conceptualising the complex and interconnected practices through which marginalised people seek survival in this context. It remaps welfare landscapes across a continuum that includes formal and informal, established and improvised practice, the not-for-profit sector, informal community networks and exchange and the black market. Conceptually, it centres the care practices that sustain life and the infrastructures that sustain them. Activating a ‘shadow geographies’ tradition it foregrounds care infrastructures that are necessary, but rarely visible within, welfare discourse.

No abstract

There is mounting evidence of increased international student financial and work precarity over the last decade in Australia. Yet, there has been a little scholarly analysis of which students are most affected by precarity and its sources. Drawing on two surveys of international students in Australia's two largest cities, conducted before and during the pandemic, we investigate the financial and work vulnerabilities of international students. We demonstrate that vulnerability is related to characteristics which describe particular cohorts of students: being from low-income countries, working class families, seeking a low-level qualification, enrolled in a non-university institution, and being without a scholarship. The concepts of “noncitizenship” and “work precarity” are used to explain how the mechanisms of each characteristic heighten vulnerability, thereby contributing to a broader evidence-base about the causality of international student precarity.

This article addresses the prominence of ‘vulnerability’ as a way of making sense of disadvantage and suffering in both social policy and social science. It examines the interplay of vulnerability as a material phenomenon and cultural script by foregrounding the experiences of the most marginal benefit claimants in Australia’s residual social security system. The article questions whether the everyday disruptions and challenges that unsettle yet settle-into life in poverty are intelligible within authorised idioms of vulnerability that govern access to support. By examining what people surviving on benefits are vulnerable to and how they are compelled to demonstrate their status as vulnerable, it contributes a critical account of lived experiences of vulnerability that holds both its discursive and phenomenological dimensions in view.

No abstract