Estimating winter losses for managed honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies is critical for understanding hive productivity and health. This study reports estimates of overwinter colony losses in New Zealand, which has seen exponential growth in the number of managed colonies in recent years. Over 35% of all beekeepers, and 50% of all commercial beekeepers in the country responded to the internet-based 2016 New Zealand Colony Loss Survey, providing detailed information on over 275,000 colonies (over 40% of all registered colonies) that entered winter 2016. Using three different methods, we estimate overall winter losses to be below 10%. However, nearly 29% of beekeepers lost more than 15% of their colonies over winter 2016, and nearly 25% of beekeepers lost more than 20%, indicating considerable skewness. These results are subject to strong regional variation, with the highest losses reported in areas with significant mānuka resources. Similarly, non-commercial beekeepers report substantially higher loss rates than commercial beekeepers. Beekeepers who lost colonies over the winter of 2016 most frequently attributed the cause to colony death, queen problems, or wasps. However, varroa and competition for apiary sites were also identified as important areas of concern. In this analysis, we explore variation in both region and operation size for all five of these challenges. Pé rdidas invernales de colonias de abejas melíferas en Nueva Zelanda en 2016 La estimació n de las pérdidas invernales para las colonias manejadas de abejas melíferas (Apis mellifera) es crítica para comprender la productividad y la salud de las colmenas. Este estudio reporta estimaciones de las pérdidas de colonias de invierno en Nueva Zelanda, en donde se ha visto un crecimiento exponencial en el número de colonias administradas en los últimos años. Más del 35% de todos los apicultores, y el 50% de todos los apicultores comerciales del país respondieron a la Encuesta sobre la Pérdida de Colonias de Nueva Zelanda, realizada por Internet en 2016, la cual proporcionó informació n detallada sobre más de 275,000 colonias (más del 40% de todas las colonias registradas) disponibles en invierno de 2016. Usando tres métodos diferentes, estimamos que las pérdidas totales de invierno están por debajo del 10%. Sin embargo, casi el 29% de los apicultores perdieron más del 15% de sus colonias en el invierno de 2016, y casi el 25% de los apicultores perdieron más del 20%, lo que indica una considerable asimetría. Estos resultados están sujetos a fuertes variaciones regionales, con las mayores pérdidas reportadas en áreas con importantes recursos de manuka. Del mismo modo, los apicultores no comerciales registran pérdidas sustancialmente mayores que los apicultores comerciales. Los apicultores que perdieron colonias durante el invierno de 2016 lo atribuyeron con mayor frecuencia a la muerte de las colonias, a problemas de la reina o las avispas. Sin embargo, la varroa y la competencia por los sitios de colmenares también fueron identificadas como situaciones im...
Agenda 21 (UNCED, 1992) highlighted the role unions and workers might play in fostering the principles of sustainable development. It targeted the movement's traditional focus on human rights, equity, democracy and fair, decent and sustainable employment. The international union discourse on sustainable development that preceded the WSSD (2002) indicated that unions see themselves as part of a social movement towards deliberative democracy focused on sustainable development.The paper draws upon an evolving research relationship between academics and the union movement in New Zealand. The inquiry examines conceptions of sustainable development held by union members; how the concept relates to the workplace in New Zealand; what function it may play in 'union renewal' and the potential role of unions in promoting sustainable development in the workplace and broader community. In this initial paper, an account is provided of conceptions of sustainable development held by senior union officials in New Zealand.
In New Zealand in the 1990s, labour market decentralization and new employment legislation precipitated a sharp decline in unionism and collective bargaining coverage; trends that continued well into the 2000s even after the introduction of the more supportive Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA). The ERA prescribed new bargaining rules, which included a good faith obligation, increased union rights and promoted collective bargaining as the key to building productive employment relationships (Anderson, 2004; May and Walsh, 2002). In this respect the ERA provided scope for increased collective bargaining and union renewal (Harbridge and Thickett, 2003; May, 2003a and 2003b; May and Walsh, 2002). Despite these predictions and the ERA's overall intent, the decline in collective bargaining coverage begun in the 1990s has continued unabated in the private sector. It has naturally been questioned why the ERA has not reversed, or at least halted, this downward trend. So far research has focused on the impact of the legislation itself and much less on employer behaviour and perceptions, or on their contribution to these trends. This article addresses the paucity of employer focused research in New Zealand. The research explores views of employers on the benefi ts of collective bargaining, how decisions to engage or not engage in collective bargaining are made and the factors instrumental to them. It is demonstrated that the preferred method of setting pay and conditions continues to be individual bargaining. This is especially so for organizations with less than 50 employees, by far the largest majority of fi rms in New Zealand. Frequently, these smaller organizations see no perceived benefits from collective bargaining. Overall, these fi ndings suggest that despite a decade of supportive legislation there are few signs that the 20 year decline in collective bargaining coverage in New Zealand will be reversed.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to determine the attitudes of employers in a de‐regulated institutional industrial relations framework, and whether they are still willing to engage in collective bargaining (CB).Design/methodology/approachA cross‐sectional survey design using a self‐administered postal questionnaire, seeks information on employers' attitudes to a range of issues. Included are employers within all 17 standard industry classifications used by previous New Zealand researchers.FindingsThe paper quite convincingly shows that unless employers are prepared to engage in dialogue with employees or third parties and unless the benefits to be gained from such a dialogue are more widely accepted it is unlikely they will engage in CB. Therefore, involvement would appear to be limited to those areas that do not hinder managerial freedom.Originality/valueThis is one of the first studies in New Zealand of employers' attitudes to CB since the 1990s. The paper provides valuable data for policy makers, unions, employers and employment relations researchers.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to place empirical research on New Zealand employers’ attitudes to collective bargaining and legislative change within the context of the long running debate of flexibility. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey design using a self-administered postal questionnaire, covering private sector employers with ten or more staff and including employers within all 17 standard industry classification. To explore particular issues, an additional in-depth interviews were conducted of 25 employers participating in the survey. Findings It is found that employers support overwhelmingly recent legislative changes though there are variations across industries and firm sizes. There is also considerable variation in terms of which legislative changes are applied in the workplace. Despite fewer constraints on employer-determined flexibility, there was a rather puzzling finding that most employers still think that employment legislation is even balanced or favouring employees. Originality/value Cross-sectional survey findings of New Zealand employer attitudes to legislative changes are few and provide valuable data for policy makers, unions, employers and employment relations researchers. The paper also contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of pressures to increase employer-determined flexibility in many western countries.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.