{"title":"Seasonal Worker Programs: A Four-Country Comparison","authors":"Stephen Howes","doi":"10.1002/app5.70079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper compares the seasonal worker programs of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. All four programs have experienced rapid growth over the last decade, and they have all become significant parts of their countriesʼ agricultural labour forces. But they have also all become more controversial over time, with accusations growing that these programs are both intrinsically and in practice exploitative. Since the programs have become both bigger and more controversial, not surprisingly they have all become more tightly regulated to better protect workers. What impact this greater level of regulation will have on scheme growth remains to be seen, but there is a risk that greater regulation will lead to lower or even negative growth. The article concludes with several recommendations drawn from the authors of the country studies in this special collection for ways to protect workers while containing costs to employers.</p>","PeriodicalId":45839,"journal":{"name":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/app5.70079","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.70079","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper compares the seasonal worker programs of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. All four programs have experienced rapid growth over the last decade, and they have all become significant parts of their countriesʼ agricultural labour forces. But they have also all become more controversial over time, with accusations growing that these programs are both intrinsically and in practice exploitative. Since the programs have become both bigger and more controversial, not surprisingly they have all become more tightly regulated to better protect workers. What impact this greater level of regulation will have on scheme growth remains to be seen, but there is a risk that greater regulation will lead to lower or even negative growth. The article concludes with several recommendations drawn from the authors of the country studies in this special collection for ways to protect workers while containing costs to employers.
期刊介绍:
Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies is the flagship journal of the Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University. It is a peer-reviewed journal that targets research in policy studies in Australia, Asia and the Pacific, across a discipline focus that includes economics, political science, governance, development and the environment. Specific themes of recent interest include health and education, aid, migration, inequality, poverty reduction, energy, climate and the environment, food policy, public administration, the role of the private sector in public policy, trade, foreign policy, natural resource management and development policy. Papers on a range of topics that speak to various disciplines, the region and policy makers are encouraged. The goal of the journal is to break down barriers across disciplines, and generate policy impact. Submissions will be reviewed on the basis of content, policy relevance and readability.