A. Congressional Mandate and Legislative Requirements

This publication is the seventh congressionally mandated report on international child labor prepared by the Department of Labor’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). As requested by the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the report identifies countries in which abusive and exploitative child labor is prevalent and describes “policies and initiatives by relevant foreign governments to reduce the exploitation of children.”³¹ The report also includes requested information on adult unemployment rates, military spending, and social spending, including expenditures on health care and education.³²

The Senate Committee requested that ILAB work from its 1998 report, By the Sweat & Toil of Children: Efforts to Eliminate Child Labor , and make efforts to include countries not analyzed in previous reports. With this goal in mind, this report builds upon the 16 countries profiled in ILAB’s 1998 report, and includes information on additional countries as requested in the Congressional language. Additional countries were selected based on ILAB’s ongoing research and data collection on the incidence of child labor and efforts to address the problem. In addition, the second chapter of this report provides a more global perspective on the problem of child labor, with examples of some of the hazardous forms of work that involve children as well targeted efforts to address some of these forms drawn from over 50 countries.

In the third chapter of the report, a more detailed assessment is made of the child labor situation in 33 countries where more information is available on both the problem and strategies being employed to address it. The countries included in this section of the report are Bangladesh, Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Romania, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, and Zambia.

In reviewing the evidence presented in the 33 country profiles in chapter 3, it is important to note that these countries do not reflect a listing of those with the most extensive child labor problems. Rather, the chapter examines a range of countries at different levels of economic development and at various stages in their efforts to address the complex problem of child labor.

Many of the countries profiled in this chapter are notable for the level of efforts being undertaken to address child labor and promote educational opportunities for children. The following section presents in more detail the structure according to which the 33 country profiles are organized.

The 33 country profiles included in this report provide information under the following structure:

The first section reviews estimates of the incidence of child labor in each of the 33 countries and provides examples of the types of sectors and activities in which children are reported to work. Evidence on where children work is drawn from a variety of sources. The types of child labor cited are intended to reflect the scope of the child labor situation in each country.

Statistics on the labor force activity of children are often reported as a single estimate, and are not disaggregated for work that is exploitative or harmful to children, “child labor.” It is important to note that statistics presented in these profiles do not necessarily reflect that the work performed by children is considered child labor. Work that is considered “child labor” prevents children from attending and participating effectively in school, or is performed by children under hazardous conditions that place their healthy physical, intellectual or moral development at risk. Some work performed by children, however, is not considered to be harmful or exploitative. This could include performing light work after school, household chores, or legitimate apprenticeship programs.

There is no internationally endorsed definition on working children, or universally prescribed methodology for collecting data on child labor. The lack of concepts and methods for collecting child labor data makes it difficult to obtain comparable and reliable statistics across countries on working children. Therefore, statistics measuring the incidence of working children in the individual country profiles vary by age ranges and the definition used to measure child labor.

This report includes two types of sources of data on working children. First, all the country profiles include the most recent (1998 or 1999) available estimates on children’s labor force activity rates from the ILO’s database on Estimates and Projections of the Economically Active Population, 1950-2010 or ILO’s Yearbook of Labor Statistics for children between the ages of 10 and 14 years.³³ Second, where available, statistics are also presented from national surveys designed specifically to measure the extent and nature of working children. Even though some statistics from such surveys may date prior to 1998 or 1999, they are still of value since they represent a broader population of working children by age range and definition compared to statistics collected from the ILO’s database, which is based on traditional labor force or government surveys. Estimates on the number of working children from the ILO’s Estimates and Projections of the Economically Active Population, 1950-2010 are generally founded on the definition of the “economically active population,” which typically excludes children below the age of 10 years, and does not include children working in informal work settings, non-economic activities, or “hidden” forms of work such as domestic service or child prostitution, or children in armed conflict. While child labor surveys may not capture all of the worst forms of child labor, the definition of working children is extended to include children 5 years of age and older, and children working in the informal work sector such as agriculture and household work.³⁴

The second section provides a brief assessment of the level of children’s involvement in schooling. Where available, primary school enrollment and attendance figures are presented, along with estimates of the percentage of children reaching the fifth grade and the number that repeat a grade of school, where available. Again, where gender, ethnicity, or the rural/urban dynamic are particularly significant, information pertaining to these issues is presented. Likewise, where specific obstacles exist to children’s participation in schooling, such factors are reviewed.

In cases where primary school attendance rates are unavailable, enrollment rates should only be considered as a relative indicator of child labor. While enrollment rates indicate a level of commitment to education, they do not always reflect a child’s participation in school. Countries with a higher incidence of child labor tend to have lower school enrollment rates, and countries with a lover incidence of child labor tend to have higher school enrollment rates.³⁵ However, school enrollment rates sometimes do not capture this relationship in absolute terms because (1) children may be “enrolled” in school, but do not actually “attend” school, or (2) children who are enrolled in school, may combine school and work. Therefore, it is possible in some instances for countries to report a high incidence of child labor, and a relatively high rate of enrollment. In general, attendance rates should appear lower than enrollment rates.

The third section reviews major laws and policies related to child labor and evidence regarding implementation. Laws and policies covered in this section include those that establish a minimum age for work and those that set related standards for light work, apprenticeships, permitted hours of work for children of different ages, and requirements of parental approval.

Special attention is given to laws and policies that prohibit children’s involvement in certain hazardous forms of work.

In addition, where available, information on penalties for violations of child labor laws and policies are described, as is information pertaining to enforcement and prosecution. The institutional mechanisms set up to promote adherence and enforcement of child labor laws are also reviewed. Finally, the section notes whether a country has ratified ILO Conventions No. 138 on Minimum Work Age and No. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor, the ILO’s two principal conventions on child labor.

The fourth section of the country profiles considers countries’ measures to address child labor. While child labor laws represent an important step toward addressing exploitative child labor, these regulations apply and tend to be enforced primarily if not solely in the formal sector. In many countries, however, most children engage in child labor in unregulated sectors of the economy. In such instances, laws may not be sufficient to address the immediate needs of children facing abuse and exploitation. With this in mind, this section considers other steps to address child labor.

This part of the country profiles is divided into two subsections. The first subsection considers efforts undertaken at the national level to address the incidence of child labor, in some cases by attacking its root causes. In a number of countries, governments have developed national plans of action that include a combination of strategies. Such programs generally seek to raise awareness about child labor, develop capacity to address the problem, and seek to withdraw children from exploitative work and offer them valuable alternatives. National programs often seek to enhance the effectiveness of existing institutional mechanisms or develop new mechanisms where needed. In some instances, the prevalence or severity of child labor in a particular region or sector may require more immediate action. Targeted efforts to reduce child labor generally go beyond withdrawing children from exploitative work by ensuring that they have valuable educational alternatives and that their families have access to income generating opportunities that help reduce their dependence on the labor of their children.

The second subsection provides an overview of efforts aimed at enhancing children’s participation in school as well as the benefits they derive from education. Laws and policies that set educational requirements in each country are presented, along with examples of major initiatives and other efforts aimed at promoting quality schooling for children are considered.

It is important to note that the projects described in this section do not represent an exhaustive list of efforts under way, but rather, examples of the kinds of actions being undertaken in each country to address exploitative child labor and promote schooling for children.

For instance, USAID has funded child labor programs in 14 of the countries profiled here.³⁶ They include basic education initiatives targeting child workers and at-risk children, programs addressing child trafficking, services to former child soldiers, the removal of indentured children from agricultural employment, the mobilization of grass-roots organizations and labor unions, and advocacy at the national and international levels.

The fifth and final section of each country profile contains information on selected government expenditures expressed as a percentage of gross national product (GNP) in the form of a bar chart. This chart shows education spending as well as government expenditures on the military, health care, and debt servicing. Where available, data are also presented on government education expenditure specifically dedicated to primary education.

The chart and the related tables on government spending and unemployment provided in Appendix B (Tables 14 through 21) respond to the congressional request to the extent possible from published information to “include an analysis of the countries’ adult unemployment rate, military spending and social spending to include expenditures on health care and education.” In preparing this report, the Department of Labor initially sought to present information on the percentage of total government expenditure devoted to education, military, public health, and debt servicing. Such information, however, was not available for each of the 33 countries covered in this report, and for this reason information is presented instead on government expenditures as a percentage of GNP.³⁷

In preparing this report, the U.S. Department of Labor relied on a wide variety of reports and materials collected by ILAB’s International Child Labor Program. As requested by the Congress, ILAB drew upon the information on international child labor presented in the first six volumes in the By the Sweat and Toil of Children series. The Department also has utilized information received from U.S. embassies and consulates abroad, and information from other U.S. Government sources referenced, as well as materials from a number of international organizations (including ILO-IPEC, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the World Bank), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), trade unions, and employers groups.

In preparing this report, the U.S. Department of Labor issued a public request for information that was published in the Federal Register . The Federal Register notice requested interested parties to submit written information to the Department of Labor on the incidence and nature of child labor as well as efforts to address child labor and promote schooling opportunities for children.³⁸ Information was received from different groups including responses from foreign governments and communications from nongovernmental organizations that work on issues related to child advocacy, human rights, and labor relations. This information was included, as appropriate, in the writing of this report.

Representatives of the U.S. Department of Labor traveled to all 33 of the countries profiled in chapter 3 of this report, as well as a number of the countries covered in chapter 2, during the period from June to November 2000 to gather information on the extent and nature of child labor and ongoing efforts to eradicate the problem. In preparing for field visits, U.S. Department of Labor officials conferred with U.S. Department of State country and regional desk officers, and officials of the Department of State’s Office of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. USAID was also consulted on the country, regional and global child labor programs that it has funded. During the course of country visits, officials of the Department of Labor were assisted by labor reporting officers, labor attachés, and other officials in U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.

U.S. Department of Labor officials conducted interviews in each country with as many individuals and organizations concerned with children’s issues as possible. Among those contacted were representatives of government, employer and worker organizations, civil society, human rights groups, academic institutions, the media, international organizations, nongovernmental organizations, as well as children and their families. Whenever possible, U.S. Department of Labor officials conducted site visits of factories, workshops, farms, and other places of work.

It is important to note that not all work performed by children is considered detrimental or exploitative. The term “child labor” generally refers to work performed by persons under the age of 15, in agreement with the standard set forth in ILO Convention No. 138 on Minimum Age for Employment.³⁹ Child labor does not usually refer to performing light work after school or legitimate apprenticeship programs. Rather, the child labor of concern is work that prevents children from attending and participating effectively in school or that is performed by children under hazardous conditions that places at risk their healthy physical, intellectual and moral development.

In the case of activities considered among the “worst forms of child labor” (see further discussion below), the term “child labor” may also include activities by persons up to the age of 18, in agreement with the standard set forth in ILO Convention No. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor.⁴⁰

The term “worst forms of child labor,” as used in this report, is intended to coincide with the definition presented in ILO Convention No. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor and related ILO Recommendation No. 190. Convention No. 182 defines the worst forms of child labor as comprising all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labor, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in relevant international treaties; or any work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.⁴¹

Recommendation No. 190 defines the worst forms of child labor as “work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.” The recommendation notes that such forms would include work that exposes children to physical, psychological, or sexual abuse; work underground, under water, at dangerous heights, or in confined spaces; work with dangerous machinery, equipment or tools, or work under circumstances which involve the manual handling or transport of heavy loads; work in an unhealthy environment that exposes children to hazardous substances, agents or processes, or to temperatures, noise levels, or vibrations damaging to their health; and work under particularly difficult conditions such as for long hours, during the night or under conditions where children are unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer. The phrase, however, is generally not meant to apply to situations in which children work for their parents on bona fide family farms or holdings.⁴²

The primary vehicles for gathering information on working children are through national census, household surveys, work establishment surveys, or general labor force surveys. Data collected on child labor from census surveys and household surveys are generally based on a definition of the “economically active population.” The standard definition of “economically active” includes work performed for a non-family-owned enterprise, whether or not pay is involved. It also includes work performed within the home for one’s own family if the work done contributes in some way to overall household income.

The line between the formal and informal sectors of a country’s economy is difficult to define. In general, the formal sector is regulated by the government and subject to laws and regulations. By contrast, the informal sector is generally described as the part of a country’s economy that is largely unregulated.⁴³ The informal sector is often comprised of small enterprises or self-employed individuals in economically marginal activities, generally involving little capital and frequently clandestine or unregistered activities. Employers in the informal sector are generally not held accountable for meeting labor or occupational safety standards. Many children work in the informal sector, in part because laws restricting child labor are generally not enforced. Since adherence to regulations is less likely in the informal sector, there may also be an increased risk that children working in this sector will be exploited or injured on the job.

The “gross” school attendance rate represents the number of children (regardless of age) in a given country that are in attendance in a specific school level, such as primary or secondary, divided by the total number of children in the country that are of the official age for that level of schooling. As such, gross attendance rates can exceed 100 percent. This generally suggests either that children are not starting school at the official age or that children are repeating years of schooling.

The “net” school attendance rate is the number of children of the official age for a schooling level who are in attendance in that level divided by the total number of children in the country that are of the official age for that level of schooling. Unlike gross attendance, net attendance rates cannot exceed 100 percent.

Similar to the discussion on primary gross and net school attendance rates; primary gross and net school enrollment rates follow the same definitional concepts described above. The primary “gross” enrollment rate is the rate of total enrollment, regardless of age, to the population of the age group that officially corresponds to the level of primary education, which can exceed 100 percent.

The primary “net” enrollment rate is the rate of the number of children of official school age, as determined by each country, who are enrolled in school to the population of the corresponding official school age, and cannot exceed 100 percent.⁴⁴

³¹ This report has been prepared in accordance with the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill of 2000, Senate Report No. 106-166, 106 th Congress, September 29, 1999. The full text of S.R. 106-166 can be found at: ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/cp106/sr166.txt

³² Data in this report come from published sources. Because published adult unemployment rates by country were unavailable, total unemployment rates are presented instead. See Appendix B for a list of detailed tables.

³³ World Bank (2000), World Development Indicators 2000, The World Bank: Washington, D.C., p.49. See Also International Labor Organization (1999 ), Yearbook of Labour Statistics (Geneva: ILO, 1999), International Labor Organization (2000 ), Yearbook of Labour Statistics (Geneva: ILO, 2000), and Table 1 in Appendix B.

³⁴ For a more detailed discussion on child labor measurement see Appendix A.

³⁵ Bureau of International Labor Affairs, By the Sweat and Toil of Children (Volume VI): An Economic Consideration of Child Labor (2000), 5.

³⁶ These countries include Bangladesh, Brazil, Cambodia, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Romania, Tanzania, and Uganda.

³⁷ Public expenditure on education offers one indicator of the level of government commitment to reduce child labor. Evidence suggests that countries are generally placing a higher priority on funding for primary education than they did in 1990; see UNESCO, Institute for Statistics, Education for All: Year 2000 Assessment (Paris, 2000) [hereinafter Education for All: Year 2000 Assessment ]. According to UNESCO, in every region except Central Asia and Central and Western Africa, the percentage of public expenditure devoted to primary education has, on average, risen in relation to gross national product (GNP). The median average for all regions rose from a range of 0.8 percent to 2.2 percent in 1990, to a range of 1.3 percent to 2.3 percent in 1998. Average spending on education as a percentage of GNP, however, amounted to less than 1.7 percent of GNP in 1998; see Education for All: Year 2000 Assessment at 12-13. An ILO study estimated that at least 10 percent of a country’s per capita GNP should be spent on primary education in order to adequately educate one primary school student for 1 year; see James Hough, Costs and Benefits of Establishing Universal Primary Schooling as a Means toward the Elimination of Child Labour, ILO Working Paper (Geneva: International Labor Organization, 1997), 22.

³⁸ “Request for Information on Efforts by Certain Countries to Eliminate the Worst Forms of Child Labor,” Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Register 65, no. 156 (August 11, 2000), 49, 465-67.

³⁹ ILO Convention No. 138 on Minimum Age for Employment permits countries whose economy and educational facilities are insufficiently developed to initially specify a minimum working age of 14 (rather than 15), and reduce from 13 to 12 years the minimum age for light work. ILO Convention No. 138 defines “light work” as work that is not likely to harm a child’s health or development, or prejudice his or her attendance at school. The convention prohibits all children under the age of 18 from undertaking hazardous work—that is, work that is likely to jeopardize their health, safety, or morals. For the full text of ILO Convention No. 138 on Minimum Age for Employment, see Appendix C.

⁴⁰ For the full text of ILO Convention No. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor, see Appendix D.

⁴¹ Ibid.

⁴² For full text of ILO Recommendation No. 190, see (http://ilolex.ilo.ch:1567/scripts/convde.pl?R190).

⁴³ International Labor Organization [On-line, site visited on 3/30/01]. Informal Sector: Who are they? On-line: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/informal/who.htm

⁴⁴ World Development Indicators 2000 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2000).