Adam Smith is widely regarded as the father of political economics, and as one who provided the philosophical underpinnings of much of neoclassical economics. Since the mid-1970s there has been renewed interest in, and reinterpretation of, Smith’s work. This paper looks at two aspects of this reinterpretation, the first of which is Smith’s writing on wages. Smith was an advocate of high wages, a view that strongly contrasted with the received wisdom of the day. He considered that a wage which provided for a reasonable standard of living was essential for the development of an economy. The second aspect encompasses Smith’s notion of the subsistence wage which traces its historic lineage to the Greek philosophers. The paper concludes that Smith, the champion of ‘liberty’ and non-government interference in markets, would probably have supported the notion of minimum wages, such as are now mandated in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia. Nevertheless, the mandating of minimum wages is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the achievement of living wage outcomes.

The allocation of any benefit that arises from worker-generated innovation is complicated by the importance of three separate areas of law — employment law, intellectual property law and equity — and the distinction between those types of innovation that attract intellectual property rights and those types that do not (the latter being a category that is often referred to as ‘know-how’). The purpose of this article is to engage with the legal scholarship on the principles that are relevant to innovation. To date, the discussion has focused on two distinct approaches — what may be termed the economic and the fairness perspectives. The former may be seen as a justification for the current regime, while the latter has focused on the perceived needs of workers (in large part in opposition to the employers). Our argument is that these two approaches are both incomplete. In an attempt to get closer to a workable framework for the effective allocation of benefits, we offer a third approach; one that is based on the practices that are central to the employer-worker relationship.

This article provides a brief introduction to a research program which has been under way since 2007 to examine, using data from a large-sample panel survey, whether jobs in Australia are becoming more or less skilful over time. It redefines the debate on deskilling which ran through the 1970s and 1980s by expanding the focus beyond simple job quality to issues of current policy interest, notably the contribution of skill to innovation and productivity. To map this kind of dynamism it is necessary to use a metric capable of capturing change over short periods. This is achieved by adding a third dimension, skill-intensity, to Spenner’s classic definition of skill in terms of two loosely related constructs, worker autonomy/control and substantive job complexity. Data drawn from the first eight waves of HILDA are analysed to demonstrate that this metric is capable of capturing statistically significant change in the average skill content of jobs over much shorter periods than was possible with the metrics used in earlier decades. The broadly parallel aggregate trendlines for skill-intensity and autonomy/control suggest that these two dimensions are linked in the way Spenner suggests, even though major discrepancies appear between them in some industries and occupations.

This article reviews the arguments and evidence on the role and contribution of the vocationally trained workforce and vocational training system in technical innovation. The primary focus in terms of the vocational workforce is on skilled production workers and, in particular, tradespersons and technicians. These occupations and the vocational training system are found to have a unique role and make a significant contribution to innovation in both production and Research and Development (R&D). The primary role of the VET system in innovation is technology diffusion. However, there are a number of impediments to achieving this role. These are sustained budget cuts and exclusion of the VET system from national innovation policy, programmes and advisory structures. The latter is attributed largely to the failure of the innovation studies discipline, which has strongly influenced government policy in this field, to study in detail the role of VET occupations and training system in the innovation process. This conclusion is paradoxical as the discipline’s own analysis of innovation makes a compelling case that these occupations and training system should be central agents in this process.

Vocational education and training (VET) and industrial relations systems are inherently linked. The Federal Government aims to increase the number of workers with VET qualifications but it is unclear how this policy is being supported through the industrial relations framework, in particular by the new system of modern awards. Research into training outcomes has shown that job-related factors are linked to completion rates among apprentices and trainees. An analysis of a cross-section of relevant modern awards reveals that award modernisation has had a small negative impact on the wage arrangements for apprenticeships. Modern awards continue to provide no recognition for some categories of workers who have undertaken VET qualifications through traineeships.

This article discusses the concept of the skill ecosystem in the context of the network oriented literature on learning and skill acquisition. Three critical features of skill ecosystems are identified and then applied to an analysis of the abattoir sector of the Australian meat processing industry. The analysis highlights the important role of the employee union in the skill ecosystem, including maintaining a flow of new entrants into the sector. The article then examines the impact of major institutional change, through the deregulation of industrial relations, on the ecosystem. It concludes by discussing the applicability of the skill ecosystem concept to a mature, low-skill industry such as meat processing and then draws some conclusions about the limitations of the skill ecosystem concept itself.

Academic discussion of social challenges and the government interventions which might address them are overlooking social innovation as an option. Contemporary trends at the community-public management interface, however, show an upsurge of interest in social innovation as a way of simultaneously creating social benefit and economic opportunity. While this indicates that the idea has genuine substance our observation of international and Australian developments convinces us that there is now sufficient experience upon which to base an understanding of what social innovation is and why it has policy significance. In this article we identify some components of social innovation practice and indicate how these might be theorised into generally applicable models.