Welcome to Research Commons

Research Commons is the University of Waikato's open access research repository, housing research publications and theses produced by the University's staff and students.

Communities in Research Commons

Select a community to browse its collections.

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Recent Submissions

The elephant in the room: Precarious work in New Zealand’s universities
(University of Auckland, 2022) Simpson, Aimee B.; Jolliffe Simpson, Apriel D.; Soar, Max; Oldfield, Luke; Roy, Rituparna; Salter, Leon A.
Precarious working arrangements, defined by temporary casual and fixed-term employment agreements, are a complex, often hidden feature of academia in Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa hereafter). At present, little is known about the conditions of insecure academic work, the size of this workforce, nor how these workers have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This report provides an insight into the reality of insecure academic work in universities from those who responded to the 2021 Precarious Academic Work Survey. We highlight that in Aotearoa we have a highly trained, casual and fixed-term academic workforce who are engaged in long-term cycles of precarity. Among the 760 participants surveyed, more than one-quarter (28.9%) had been precariously employed for five years or longer. Further, nearly sixty percent (59.2%) had accepted extra work to support themselves or their whānau, even when it jeopardised their other responsibilities (e.g., completing their degrees). Over half (52.7%) of all students, and nearly two-thirds (64.4%) of PhD students surveyed, had held three or more employment agreements at a university in the last 12 months. Financial need (71.6%) was most frequently cited as an important factor in participants’ decisions to engage in precarious work, and over half (52.4%) of participants experienced a rise in their living costs due to working from home during the pandemic. Our report also adds further evidence of inequities present in the academic pipeline. Just one in ten Māori (10.8%) and one in thirteen Pasifika (7.7%) participants were PhD graduates, a smaller proportion than the nearly one-third (31.5%) of New Zealand European/Pākehā. Over two-thirds (66.8%) of international students indicated they were employed in the most insecure forms (Casual or fixed-term contracts of six months or less) of precarious work, compared with 60.5% of domestic students. Of those precarious workers completing a PhD, domestic students in our survey were far more likely to be receiving a stipend (73.9%) compared to international students (50%). Further, 63.2% of participants who were international students without a stipend reported that they lacked confidence in having sufficient ongoing academic work in the next 12 months. Instances of discrimination, bullying, and harassment were also reported by survey participants, with 33.7% citing that they had been impacted by such issues. Other workplace safety concerns were evident: nearly half of participants (45.7%) described their workloads as always or often unsustainable and negatively impacting their health and wellbeing. Meanwhile, one-quarter (23.9%) of precarious staff rated their current stress level as an eight, on a scale of zero (no stress) to ten (completely stressed). Two-thirds (66.3%) of participants were not confident they would receive adequate support from their employer in the event of a future crisis (e.g., a natural disaster or outbreak of infectious disease). On this basis, we encourage universities to do better for their casual and fixed-term employees through increasing job security, reducing inequities for Māori and Pasifika precarious staff, and improving conditions for postgraduate students, both domestic and international. In our final recommendations, we implore the government to work alongside universities to realise this change by investigating workloads, increasing, and rebalancing sector funding, and reinstating the postgraduate student allowance.
The Geographic Classification for Health: Methodology and classification report
(Otago University, 2021) Whitehead, Jesse; Davie, Gabrielle; de Graaf, Brandon; Crengle, Sue; Smith, Michelle; Lawrenson, Ross; Fearnley, Dave; Farrell, Noella; Nixon, Garry
The GCH is based on population and drive time data that was used in the development of the Urban Accessibility (UA) classification (Statistics New Zealand, 2020). The UA is in turn based on the Statistical Standard for Geographic Areas 2018 (SSGA18) which includes the urban rural 2018 (UR2018) classification (Statistics New Zealand, 2018). The authors of this report have applied a framework to the UA classification that considers a health services discourse to determine appropriate population and drive time thresholds. We have tested both the quantitative and ‘on-the-ground’ validity of the GCH, in partnership with the Ministry of Health’s National Rural Health Advisory Group (NRHAG). The GCH is comprised of five categories, two urban and three rural, that reflect degrees of reducing urban influence and increasing rurality. The GCH applies these categories to all of New Zealand’s Statistical Area 1s (SA1s, small statistical areas which are the output geography for population data) on a scale from ‘Urban 1’ to ‘Urban 2’ based on population size, and from “Rural 1’ to ‘Rural 3’ based on drive time to their closest major, large, medium, and small* (*As defined in the Statistical Standard for Geographic Areas 2018 (Statistics New Zealand, 2018)) urban areas. Like the UA, the GCH is based on population size and density, with drive time used to indicate increasing rurality. Unlike the UA, which is a generic classification, the population and drive time thresholds used in the GCH have been developed from a health perspective, in consultation with more than 300 individuals from 20 organisations. The nature of the functional relationships between urban areas and rural surrounds have also been considered through a health lens. In this paper we discuss concepts and issues with previous ‘generic’ urban-rural classifications being used in health research in Aotearoa New Zealand. We also describe the GCH methodology and classification, discuss limitations, and illustrate the GCH with maps.
How differing methods of ascribing ethnicity and socio-economic status affect risk estimates for hospitalisation with infectious disease
(Cambridge University Press (CUP), 2019) Hobbs, Mark R.; Atatoa Carr, Polly; Fa'alili-Fidow, Jacinta; Pillai, Avinesh; Morton, Susan M. B.; Grant, Cameron C.
Significant ethnic and socio-economic disparities exist in infectious diseases (IDs) rates in New Zealand, so accurate measures of these characteristics are required. This study compared methods of ascribing ethnicity and socio-economic status. Children in the Growing Up in New Zealand longitudinal cohort were ascribed to self-prioritised, total response and single-combined ethnic groups. Socio-economic status was measured using household income, and both census-derived and survey-derived deprivation indices. Rates of ID hospitalisation were compared using linked administrative data. Self-prioritised ethnicity was simplest to use. Total response accounted for mixed ethnicity and allowed overlap between groups. Single combined ethnicity required aggregation of small groups to maintain power but offered greater detail. Regardless of the method used, Māori and Pacific children, and children in the most socio-economically deprived households had a greater risk of ID hospitalisation. Risk differences between self-prioritised and total response methods were not significant for Māori and Pacific children but single-combined ethnicity revealed a diversity of risk within these groups. Household income was affected by non-random missing data. The census derived deprivation index offered a high level of completeness with some risk of multicollinearity and concerns regarding the ecological fallacy. The survey-derived index required extra questions but was acceptable to participants and provided individualised data. Based on these results, the use of single-combined ethnicity and an individualised survey-derived index of deprivation are recommended where sample size and data structure allow it.
Telomere length in early childhood is associated with sex and ethnicity
(Springer Nature, 2019) Ly, Kien; Walker, Caroline; Berry, Sarah; Snell, Russell; Marks, Emma; Thayer, Zaneta; Atatoa-Carr, Polly; Morton, Susan M. B.
Telomeres are repetitive DNA sequences at the end of chromosomes that function to protect chromosomes from degradation. Throughout the life course, telomere length decreases with age and is influenced by environmental factors and health conditions. This study aimed to determine the relative telomere lengths in a diverse cohort of about 4000 four-year-old children in New Zealand. Linear regression was used to investigate the relationship between telomere length, child gender, ethnicity, paternal age and deprivation. We observed substantial variation in telomere length according to sex and self-identified ethnicity. Telomere length was longer in females compared to males (coefficient of 0.042, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.024–0.060). European children had shorter telomere than both the indigenous Māori (coefficient of 0.03, CI 0.007–0.055) and Pacific children (coefficient of 0.15, CI 0.12–0.18). The data suggest that telomere lengths are highly variable and variability between individuals arise from early age, influenced partly by sex and ethnicity. Longer telomeres in indigenous Māori and Pacific children may reflect the heritability of telomere length in genetically less complex populations. This study increases our understanding of telomere dynamics in young children since the majority of telomere studies are conducted in adults.
Critical reflection for researcher–community partnership effectiveness: The He Pikinga Waiora process evaluation tool guiding the implementation of chronic condition interventions in Indigenous communities
(CSIRO Publishing, 2019) Rarere, Moana; Oetzel, John G.; Masters-Awatere, Bridgette; Scott, Nina; Wihapi, Ray; Manuel, Carey; Gilbert, Rewa
Critically reflecting on researcher–community partnerships is a key component in implementing chronic condition interventions in Indigenous communities. This paper draws on the results and learnings from a process evaluation that measures how well two research–community partnerships have followed the He Pikinga Waiora (HPW) Implementation Framework while co-designing chronic condition interventions in primary care. The HPW framework is centred on Indigenous self-determination and knowledge surrounded by community engagement, cultural centredness, systems thinking and integrated knowledge translation. The evaluation included in-depth interviews and online surveys with 10 team members. The findings demonstrate that the HPW framework was followed well, with strengths particularly in community engagement and relationship building. Areas for improvement included systems thinking and integrated knowledge translation to support sustainability of the interventions. The need for partnerships to use process evaluation results to support critical reflection is asserted, which helps build strong trust and synergy, power sharing and effective and sustainable implementation practices. It is concluded that the HPW framework is well suited to evaluating implementation of health interventions in primary care as it assists in the facilitation of better collaboration between researchers and Indigenous communities, and encourages the implementation team to reflect on power and privilege.