Meet the Author:
Donna James
Dr Donna James is a Lecturer in Heritage and Tourism Studies and Academic Program Advisor for Tourism, Hospitality, and Events at Western Sydney University. Also an author of our journal Tourism Geographies, her research explores the studies in tourism, migration, and social sustainability, with a focus on Working Holiday Makers.
Recognised for her impactful work, Dr James has advised government, published in top-tier journals, and received multiple awards including the 2025 Early Career Researcher Award from the Association of American Geographers. She is also an active contributor to academic communities and editorial boards, and brings rich cross-cultural teaching experience from Australia and Indonesia.
In this insightful Q&A, we dive in deeper about her article “Precarious labour geographies of working holiday makers: querying sustainability“ where she investigates the exploitation faced by Working Holiday Makers in Australia, revealing how visa-linked work conditions create systemic vulnerabilities. Framed through the lens of mobility justice, her research calls for urgent policy reform.
Dr James published her article Open Access (OA) making it free to read for all. She was able to do this through the CAUL agreement, between Taylor & Francis and Australia & New Zealand institutions, which you can read more about here.
What prompted you to investigate the Australian Working Holiday Program (AWHP), and explore the themes of mobility justice and sustainability?
While recruiting participants for a separate study on ‘Tinder Tourism’, I joined Facebook groups for backpackers in Australia. I was struck by the volume of posts from Working Holiday Makers (WHMs) describing experiences of exploitation and sexual harassment by employers or contractors. These stories were echoed in media reporting, but there was limited academic research, and no national survey, documenting the scale of the issue.
This prompted me to launch a national survey (n = 573) and follow-up interviews (n = 11) to better understand both the extent and context of these harms. As I analysed the data, I noticed patterns of unequal mobility. WHMs from less privileged backgrounds (especially from lower-income countries or with limited English) were often more vulnerable to exploitation and became ‘stuck’ in poor working conditions. In contrast, those from wealthier, English-speaking countries had more freedom to move on from bad jobs. These patterns reflected broader global inequalities.
Framing the findings through mobility justice and sustainability helped me to demonstrate how global mobility regimes reproduce power imbalances. These regimes have sustainability implications because they not only shape who can move freely but also hinder wider efforts towards social and economic equity.
Your research highlights how fear of visa cancellation or deportation often prevents Working Holiday Makers (WHMs) from reporting abuse. How do these conditions of ‘double precarity’ contribute to a culture of silence, and what real-life consequences do they have for WHMs?
‘Double precarity’ explains the intersecting insecurities that Working Holiday Makers (WHMs) face both in their visa status and employment conditions. WHMs are acutely aware that their right to remain in Australia is conditional and can be revoked. Their employment is also unstable, with visa rules limiting them to six months with any one employer.
Those seeking to extend their stay beyond the first year need to prove completion of specified work in critical industries and eligible regions. The work needs to be completed by the end of the year which adds immense pressure. WHMs need to collect payslips from their employers to prove the work has been completed. This results in power imbalances with employers. The pressure and power imbalances open opportunities for exploitation. Some WHMs fear that if they speak out against abuse or unsafe conditions, employers might fire them or withhold the documentation they need for visa extensions, or worse, report them for potential breaches which could result in them being deported.
The difficulty of finding alternative work, especially in rural or regional areas, further discourages WHMs from reporting exploitation. Many choose to stay silent, weighing the risk of losing their job and their chance to remain in Australia against the cost of enduring exploitation or poor treatment. This culture of silence not only harms individuals but reinforces a broader system of exploitation. As one participant explained in my study, employers are often aware that WHMs will not complain and so they know they can mistreat them. They also know there is a steady supply of other WHMs willing to accept substandard conditions out of desperation to gain a visa extension, which makes it more difficult.
Based on your current research, do you see parallels between precarities faced by WHMs’ and those experienced by other mobile or migrant groups, such as international students or hospitality workers?
I see strong parallels between the experiences of international students and those of Working Holiday Makers. International students are also highly vulnerable to labour exploitation. Many arrive in the host country with limited knowledge of the local labour market or their work rights. In Australia international students must abide by a work-hour restriction. They can only work 48 hours per fortnight during study terms. Some employers encourage students to exceed these limits by working cash-in-hand, which creates significant risks. If students are mistreated when working under these conditions, they often feel unable to report the abuse due to fears of being reported for visa breaches, which could result in deportation.
In a current project with my colleague Dr Julia Kantek, we are exploring how international students use Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) to navigate challenges in Australia. Several participants have shared that they use GenAI tools to check whether their pay and working conditions are legal. In some cases, they only realise through these tools that they are being underpaid or exploited. Even when they realise, many are hesitant to speak up because their employment is precarious, and they don’t want to lose their income. Many international students, like WHMs, depend on precarious jobs to support themselves. This financial pressure, combined with visa restrictions, produces a power imbalance that employers can exploit.
I’m also working with colleagues from Griffith University and The University of Queensland on a national study of the Australian hospitality industry, as part of the Global Hospitality Research Alliance. While our current data collection is ongoing, earlier research by some members of our team found that 12% of hospitality workers in Australia (n = 383) were being paid below minimum wage, and nearly half were not receiving overtime or penalty rates. Non-compliance was widespread. In our current project, we’re collecting data on workers’ visa and residency status. This should offer a clearer picture of whether visa precarity (such as that faced by WHMs or international students) is linked to higher rates of exploitation in hospitality and related sectors.
Looking beyond the academic findings, what core message or reflection would you most like readers to take away from your article?
Temporary migrant work programs urgently require stronger, enforceable regulatory frameworks that prioritise the protection of workers’ rights. Without these safeguards, such programs risk enabling systemic exploitation and deepening global inequalities. Ensuring fair treatment for temporary migrant workers is a matter of social justice and global responsibility.
Your article is published Open Access. In your view, how can greater accessibility to academic research shape public discourse or policymaking – especially on issues as urgent as labor rights and mobility justice?
Publishing Open Access is essential for ensuring that academic research reaches beyond the university and into the hands of policymakers, practitioners, and the broader public. While contributing to disciplinary knowledge is important, real-world impact depends on visibility and accessibility.
I was particularly grateful to see my paper cited in a federal government inquiry into food supply chains in Australia, which highlighted the need to address labour exploitation. That inquiry has since informed proposals for a national food security strategy discussed in recent budget estimates. Open Access publishing played a key role in enabling that visibility and influence; something that’s crucial when research engages with urgent issues like labour rights and mobility justice.
What would you say to a researcher considering publishing Open Access in an agreement such as this one with CAUL? How has this agreement supported you in producing socially impactful work?
I would absolutely encourage it, especially if the resources are available to support it. Publishing Open Access through the CAUL agreement ensured my paper was accessible to a wider audience, including those in policymaking roles. This visibility is crucial when research addresses real-world issues like migrant worker exploitation.
About the Journal
Tourism Geographies is the flagship social science journal focused on tourism from a geographic perspective. The journal publishes critical, multidisciplinary work from social science fields such as geography, anthropology, sociology, area studies, urban and regional planning, environmental studies, and geospatial sciences. Tourism Geographies is committed to publishing manuscripts based on rich empirical and theoretically rigorous scholarship that engages with and advances tourism geographies knowledge.
