Australians are feeling less hopeful about the country’s future. But the latest research also shows something encouraging: our local connections, with neighbours, clubs and community groups, are still holding strong.
The Scanlon Foundation Research Institute’s Mapping Social Cohesion 2026 report, based on responses from more than 10,000 people, takes the pulse of the nation on trust, belonging, multiculturalism, immigration, economic security and community participation.
For councils, planning authorities, developers and social planners, the findings raise a practical question: how do we understand, measure and support social cohesion through planning decisions, community infrastructure and genuine engagement?
At Meliora Projects, this question sits at the heart of our social impact assessment, social planning and community engagement work across NSW. The 2026 findings reinforce what we see on the ground: good outcomes come from evidence that is specific to each place and its people.
What is social cohesion, and why does it matter in planning?
Social cohesion describes the strength and quality of relationships in a society. It covers whether people feel they belong, whether they trust each other and their institutions, whether they take part in community life, and how they respond to diversity.
It has many dimensions. A community can have strong relationships between neighbours while also facing economic disadvantage, poor access to services or low trust in government.
Diversity on its own doesn’t tell you whether cohesion is strong or weak. What matters more is how people interact, whether they can take part, and whether they have fair access to opportunities.
In NSW urban and regional planning, social cohesion connects to several areas of practice:
- Social infrastructure planning: understanding demand for community facilities, cultural spaces, recreation and places where people can meet
- Community engagement: finding the barriers to participation, reaching underrepresented groups and giving people a real say
- Social impact assessment: assessing how development and land use change might affect community identity, access, relationships and wellbeing
- Strategic planning: considering how population growth, housing, transport and services shape inclusion and connection
- Local government policy: building evidence-based social plans, community strategies and investment priorities
Importantly, social cohesion isn’t fixed. It shifts with economic conditions, population change, access to infrastructure, trust in institutions and opportunities to participate. That means planning can make a difference.
Mapping Social Cohesion 2026: the key findings
Here are five trends from the Scanlon Foundation’s latest research, and what each one means for planning practice.
1. Pessimism is rising, even though the overall index is steady
The Scanlon Index of Social Cohesion scored 78 in 2026, the same as the previous three years. But that steady headline hides a more worrying picture underneath:
- 46% of Australians feel pessimistic or very pessimistic about the country’s future
- 58% believe hard work brings a better life in Australia, down from 63% in 2025 and around 80% in the early 2010s
- Trust in people, government and political institutions is falling
In short, a stable overall score doesn’t mean everything is fine.
What this means for social planning: People can be unhappy about the economy or politics while still feeling positive about their own street or suburb. Community research and engagement should separate concerns about the national picture from people’s real experience of their local area. That way, broad national trends aren’t wrongly pinned on a particular community.
2. Local connections are still a vital source of resilience
One of the clearest messages from the research is the gap between how people feel about society at large and how they experience their own community day to day.
Neighbourhood relationships, informal support networks and chances to bump into each other give people something to lean on, especially in uncertain times. These connections grow through community organisations, sporting clubs, cultural associations, faith groups, local businesses and shared public spaces.
But not everyone has the same access. People living with disability, financial hardship, language barriers, social isolation or limited transport can find it much harder to join in.
What this means for social infrastructure planning: Planning community facilities is about more than how many, how big and where. Good questions to ask include:
- Who uses existing facilities and community spaces now?
- Which groups face barriers to access?
- Do facilities suit different cultural, religious, social and recreational needs?
- How do transport, cost, opening hours and accessibility affect who comes?
- Could existing facilities be shared or used in more than one way?
- How can we build links between established and emerging community groups?
These questions are relevant to community infrastructure needs assessments, social planning studies, local strategic planning and social impact assessments for development. The aim isn’t just more infrastructure. It’s infrastructure that responds to real needs and helps people take part.
3. Economic security and social cohesion go hand in hand
Concerns about fairness, opportunity and financial security run through the 2026 findings. Only 58% of Australians now believe hard work leads to a better life, a big drop over the long term, and financial stress continues to shape how people see things.
Economic insecurity can weaken social cohesion in several ways. Money pressures can stop people joining sport, cultural or community activities. Housing instability can break up relationships and local support networks. Poor access to transport, healthcare and essential services adds more barriers.
These pressures are especially important when assessing the social effects of population growth and new development.
What this means for Social Impact Assessment in NSW: A thorough SIA looks at how a development or policy could affect different groups, including people already facing disadvantage. Depending on the proposal, this might include:
- Housing affordability and supply
- Access to jobs and economic opportunity
- Availability and accessibility of community services
- Possible displacement or disruption of established communities
- Who gets the benefits and who bears the impacts
- Changes to community identity, wellbeing and social connection
This reflects an approach to SIA that recognises change is felt differently by different people. Not every development will have a measurable effect on social cohesion, though. Whether an impact is relevant and significant needs to be shown through proportionate, project-specific evidence.
4. Multiculturalism is still valued, but views on immigration are shifting
The 2026 report paints a nuanced picture:
- 59% of Australians think immigration levels are too high, up from 52% in 2025
- 76% believe multiculturalism has been good for Australia
- 87% believe immigrants can be just as good citizens as people born in Australia
The takeaway is clear: views about immigration levels shouldn’t be read as views about migrants themselves. The research also records experiences of discrimination in some culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities.
For social planners, this underlines the need to understand both community perceptions and the lived experience of different groups.
What this means for culturally inclusive engagement: Good engagement is accessible, culturally appropriate and able to capture a wide range of views. In practice, this can mean:
- Partnering with established multicultural and community organisations
- Providing translated or plain-English information where it helps
- Choosing culturally appropriate methods and settings
- Recognising that long-established communities and newly arrived residents have different needs
- Offering ways to take part beyond traditional public meetings
- Not assuming one organisation or leader can speak for a whole cultural or faith community
The right approach depends on the community. A one-size-fits-all method rarely works across different places.
5. Respect, trust and participation are the foundations
Australians place a high value on mutual respect. Respondents were far more likely to say respecting others despite differences matters for social cohesion than to say people need to share the same culture or views.
This is a useful reminder for community engagement and collaborative planning. Communities don’t have to agree on everything to take part constructively in decisions about their future. Different priorities and perspectives are a normal part of planning, especially where land use change, infrastructure investment or competing needs are involved.
The goal of engagement isn’t to make disagreement disappear. It’s to help people understand each other’s views, look at the evidence together, find common ground and reach decisions transparently.
For councils, that also means showing people how their input was considered and explaining why decisions were made.
What does the research mean for NSW councils?
Mapping Social Cohesion 2026 has several practical lessons for councils working on social planning, strategic planning and community infrastructure.
Understand local conditions before choosing solutions
National research provides useful context, but it can’t replace local evidence. Every community has its own mix of people, settlement patterns, economic conditions, infrastructure and social networks.
The needs of a fast-growing regional centre, for example, can look very different from those of an established metropolitan suburb or a rural town with a shrinking population.
A place-based assessment draws on several sources, which may include:
- ABS Census and demographic data
- Local housing and population projections
- Community infrastructure and service inventories
- Health, wellbeing and community safety indicators
- Existing council strategies and past engagement findings
- Targeted community and stakeholder engagement
- Local knowledge, including First Nations perspectives and lived experience
The aim is an evidence base that reflects local realities and supports proportionate, defensible recommendations.
Recognise what social infrastructure can (and can’t) do
Community facilities and shared spaces give people places to meet, learn, play, express their culture and get involved. But building a facility doesn’t automatically create a more connected community.
What makes the difference is how accessible and affordable it is, how it’s managed and programmed, whether people feel safe there, and whether it responds to what the community actually needs.
So a social infrastructure assessment should look at both the bricks and mortar and the social factors that shape how places are used. This is especially important when planning multipurpose community hubs, shared-use facilities and spaces meant to serve diverse groups.
Move beyond consultation to genuine participation
The findings also highlight how much trust and participation matter. For councils, that means looking beyond how many people turned up to how inclusive and meaningful the process was.
A strong engagement strategy asks:
- Do participants reflect the full range of affected interests and experiences?
- Are the methods right for the communities involved?
- Is the information balanced and easy to understand?
- Is it clear what the community can and can’t influence?
- Are different priorities and views recorded?
- Is there a transparent process for reporting back and explaining decisions?
These questions reflect well-established principles of inclusive, transparent community engagement.
Why social cohesion matters for Social Impact Assessment
Social cohesion is becoming more relevant when assessing the social impacts of development and land use change. Housing growth, urban renewal, major infrastructure and changes to community facilities can all affect how people access services, connect with each other and experience their neighbourhood.
Potential impacts can include changes to:
- Community identity and sense of place
- Access to social infrastructure and services
- Opportunities to connect and take part
- Perceived safety and community wellbeing
- Relationships between existing and new residents
- Accessibility for vulnerable or disadvantaged groups
How significant these impacts are depends on the proposal, existing conditions, who is affected and how much change is expected.
A robust SIA identifies the relevant pathways of impact, tests them against the evidence, considers who wins and who loses, and recommends practical mitigation or enhancement measures. Social cohesion should be assessed where the project context supports it, not treated as a generic impact that comes with every development.
From national research to place-based planning
One of the biggest lessons from the 2026 research is that you can’t understand social cohesion through a single number. A national index shows broad trends, but local planning decisions need a much closer look at each community.
For councils, the challenge is turning research into practical questions:
- What helps people connect here?
- Who faces barriers to taking part?
- Which existing community strengths can we build on?
- What changes to planning, infrastructure or services could improve social outcomes?
Answering them takes a mix of data, qualitative research, stakeholder engagement and professional judgement. It also means recognising that no community is uniform. Different groups can experience the same place, facility or development in very different ways, and understanding those differences is key to fair, inclusive and locally appropriate planning.
How Meliora Projects supports social planning and community engagement in NSW
Meliora Projects is a NSW-based consultancy specialising in statutory and strategic planning, Social Impact Assessment, and community and stakeholder engagement. We bring together planning expertise, social research, regulatory know-how and practical engagement methods to support evidence-based decisions.
We work with councils, government agencies, developers and project teams on:
- Social Impact Assessments: identifying, assessing and managing the social impacts of development proposals, infrastructure projects and land use change
- Social planning and research: analysing demographic trends, social conditions, community needs and infrastructure requirements to guide strategies and investment
- Community and stakeholder engagement: designing and delivering proportionate engagement that supports inclusive participation, informed discussion and transparent reporting
- Social infrastructure and community needs assessments: reviewing existing provision, access, use and emerging needs to plan for the future
- Engagement evaluation and recommendations: turning research and consultation findings into practical recommendations and evaluation frameworks
We believe good planning means understanding both the physical environment and the people who live, work and take part in it.
Conclusion: building social cohesion through better planning
Mapping Social Cohesion 2026 is a reminder that social cohesion is complex and closely tied to wider social and economic conditions. Australia’s steady overall index sits alongside growing pessimism, worries about economic opportunity and shifting views on immigration. At the same time, strong support for multiculturalism, mutual respect and local connection gives us a solid foundation to build on.
For NSW councils and planning practitioners, the findings point to three priorities:
- Understand local communities through reliable, place-specific evidence.
- Recognise the links between social infrastructure, accessibility, participation and belonging.
- Turn research and engagement into action through practical planning and investment decisions.
Strengthening social cohesion isn’t just about responding to division. It’s about creating the conditions that let people take part, build relationships and feel they belong.
At Meliora Projects, we believe better planning starts with understanding people, places and the connections between them.
Talk to us about your social planning or engagement project
Are you developing a social plan, assessing community infrastructure needs or preparing a Social Impact Assessment for a project in NSW?
Contact Meliora Projects to find out how our planning, social research and engagement expertise can support your project.
- Website: meliora-projects.com.au
- Phone: 1300 713 581
Frequently asked questions
What is social cohesion?
Social cohesion is the strength and quality of relationships in a community or society. It includes a sense of belonging, trust in other people and institutions, participation in community life and acceptance of diversity.
What did the Mapping Social Cohesion 2026 report find?
The Scanlon Index of Social Cohesion held steady at 78 for the fourth year in a row. However, 46% of Australians feel pessimistic about the country’s future, belief that hard work leads to a better life fell to 58%, and trust in people and government is declining.
Do Australians still support multiculturalism?
Yes. 76% of Australians believe multiculturalism has benefited the country and 87% believe immigrants can be just as good citizens as people born here, even though 59% think immigration levels are too high.
How does social cohesion relate to Social Impact Assessment in NSW?
Development can affect community identity, access to services, opportunities to connect and relationships between existing and new residents. A good SIA considers these effects where the project context supports it, using proportionate, project-specific evidence.
How can councils support social cohesion through planning?
By building a local evidence base, planning social infrastructure around real community needs and access barriers, and running inclusive engagement that clearly explains how community input shaped decisions.
Research source
Scanlon Foundation Research Institute (2026), Mapping Social Cohesion 2026.
The national research findings are used as contextual evidence. The planning implications and professional commentary in this article are Meliora Projects’ interpretation and should not be attributed directly to the Scanlon Foundation Research Institute.
