Tertiary students, not just working populations, might be experiencing feelings of burnout following the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. In the aftermath of a major disaster, the gap between the resources available to handle pressures (e.g., support) and the demands inherent in the pursuit of an academic degree (e.g., heavy workload) may lead to feelings of burnout among students. This study hypothesised that burnout dimensions (emotional exhaustion and disengagement) would be related to students’ perceptions of immediate institutional support, extended institutional support, peer support, family support, and work overload. Additionally, it was proposed that institutional and social support would moderate the relationship between work overload and burnout. Two hundred and seventy one third and fourth year students were sampled using an online questionnaire. These particular students were expected to be at greater risk of emotional exhaustion and academic disengagement because they were at the earliest stage of their tertiary education when the major earthquakes first hit. Family support and extended institutional support were found to be associated with decreased levels of emotional exhaustion and disengagement. Meanwhile, work overload was found to be related to increased levels of emotional exhaustion and disengagement. Furthermore, both peer support and immediate institutional support were found to have a moderating effect on the relationship between work overload and disengagement. This study has exposed unique findings which contribute to burnout research especially in a post-disaster context, and raises the importance of providing the right types of support for individuals who are particularly dealing with the consequences of a natural disaster.
The quality of multi-owned residential buildings and the capability to maintain that quality into the future is important in preserving not only the monetary value of such housing (Lujanen, 2010) but also the quality of life for its residents. The aim of this paper is to examine the governance and decision-making rules and regulations as they relate to the undertaking of major repairs in multi-owned residential buildings in Finland and New Zealand with particular regard to the Finnish Limited Liability Housing Companies Act 2010 (LLHCA 2010) and the New Zealand Unit Titles Act 2010 (UTA 2010). Currently, major building repairs are topical issues in both countries; in Finland as a result of ageing buildings requiring major re-fitting of pipes and other infrastructure, and in New Zealand as a result of earthquake damage in Christchurch and Leaky Building Syndrome nationwide. Major repairs can be a significant financial burden to unit owners and collective decisions can be difficult to achieve. Interestingly, new legislation that governs multi-owned housing was enacted in both countries in 2010. The recent enactment of this legislation provides an opportunity to examine the UTA 2010 and LLHCA 2010 with regard to how they address major repairs, improvements in housing stock and the financing possibilities associated with these undertakings. More specifically this paper explores housing intensification (i.e. building up, out or alongside existing multi-owned residential buildings on commonly owned land) as a means of financing major repairs. The comparison of governance and decision-making in two different shared ownership systems with different histories and cultural contexts provides a chance to explore the possibilities and challenges that each country faces, and the potential to learn from each other’s practices and develop these further. In this regard the findings from this paper contribute to the academic literature (Bugden 2005; Easthope & Randolph 2009; Dupuis & Dixon 2010; Lujanen 2010; Easthope, Hudson & Randolph 2013) concerning to the governance of multi-owned housing as it relates to intensive housing development and its wider social and economic implications.
