By Research Fellows Hiya Harinandini and Dr Teesta Prakash and Research and Policy Officer Maisha Samiha
India has overtaken England as the top country for Australians born overseas. This change marks a notable shift in Australia’s demography given its history with a large British-derived population. This is the first time a non-British-origin migrant group has become the largest diaspora, reflecting how Australia’s multicultural fabric has evolved – and, with it, its national identity.
This change of demographic makeup has brought challenges. An upswell in anti-immigration movements in Australia – illustrated by events such as “March for Australia” – shows that the Indian diaspora faces real barriers to full acceptance within the broader Australian community.
The way Australia approaches its diaspora communities, particularly its Indian-origin community, has not kept pace with the realities of modern multicultural democracies. Existing studies on the Indian diaspora, while useful for gauging the pulse of the national collective, have fixated on outcomes – be it economic or sentiment-focused.
The processes informing Indian diaspora participation and levels of trust in public life remain underexplored. For too long, complex diaspora communities have been reduced to digestible metrics, with a fixation on how much they earn and how well they integrate, but not nearly enough on how they feel or engage.
The bird’s eye view of the Indian diaspora in Australia reveals two contradictory problems. The Indian diaspora is framed as an economically successful model minority – a social, cultural and political monolith ripe for research and measurement. Yet at the other extreme, Indian Australians are viewed as surplus actors slipping through the cracks in the immigration system.
Neither of these two perspectives tells the full story or capture the prospects for social cohesion. Given demographic shifts, the Indian diaspora must be understood as a diverse cohort whose internal stratifications – stemming from class, caste, language, religion, residency pathways, and generational identities – shape its members’ experience in distinct ways. The experience of a temporary visa-holder navigating cost-of-living pressures is not the same as that of a permanent resident, or that of an Australian-born Indian negotiating identity and belonging. The same divergence extends to their political views, media consumption habits, and the processes through which they cultivate and maintain trust in Australian institutions.
Rising anti-immigration rhetoric operates on generalist assumptions – the same community once celebrated for its economic contributions has been recast as a pressure on infrastructure and jobs, and a perpetual cultural outsider.
The stubborn blind spot in diaspora research makes this pivot easier – with gaps in understanding how different segments of the Indian diaspora engage with public institutions, other migrant groups, and how those intercultural bonds drive their sense of belonging, wellbeing and societal trust . Without these insights, policy will continue to be shaped by prejudicial public campaigns designed to divide.
Studying the diaspora purely to instrumentalise it also weakens the foundations of the Australia–India relationship. It narrows cooperation to trade and mobility pipelines, overlooking the civic, security, and political dimensions that sustain long-term partnerships. Where diaspora communities are used for narrow strategic gain without corresponding investment in their wellbeing or inclusion, they also become more susceptible to bad actors driving foreign interference and fuelling social divisions.
In the words of Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs Julian Hill, social cohesion simply put is all about “how we live well together”. The recognition and respectful acceptance of human diversity – within and across multicultural groups – matters. But what tends to be overlooked is the harder, more consequential task of building what Hill calls “bridging” social capital – the ties that connect communities to one another.
When public discourse leans too heavily on communal identities, it risks reinforcing silos and weakening the sense of shared purpose that holds a society together. If cohesion is the goal, then the focus must shift beyond representation towards deliberate, sustained engagement across distinct socio-cultural identities.
This is particularly urgent in the case of Australia’s Indian diaspora – now the country’s largest overseas-born population. Building bridging capital is not optional but foundational to a modern democracy built on trust and respect across lines of difference. Understanding how its diverse segments engage not only with the broader Australian public but also with other multicultural groups is critical to shaping policy and support services that sustain trust, strengthen democratic participation, and avoid reducing cohesion to a purely transactional exercise.