Elimination of one form of child labour may often lead to another worse form. An outright banning of girl child, say, from carpet industries may lead to child trafficking and prostitution

Child labour can never be a deliberate policy choice of any government in the world. No government would ever like to see children working in the harsh fields or inside dingy factory rooms. If child labour is not a deliberate policy choice why do we find many children toiling against their will? The conventional answer to this question will be: poverty. Poverty breeds children and hence the child labour. However, things get complicated when we find child labour not to be a persistent feature in all poor countries. Countries may be equally poor and yet have relatively high or relatively low levels of child labour. If this is true, then there must be other explanations.

Poverty is definitely an important factor but not a sufficient condition. Take the case of a girl child in Nepal, who will be attending every bit of domestic chores while their male counterpart will be studying or, simply, relaxing. In Nepal, the girl child’s economic participation rate is higher than for the boys. And this difference is more pronounced in rural than in urban areas. What we have here is socio-cultural explanation. In a patriarchic society, high value, both economic and cultural, is placed on a male child.

The poverty and socio-cultural explanation for child labour are purely supply-driven. There can be demand-driven explanation for child labour. Children come free or with little cost to the management. There is also “nimble finger” argument, for example, children are good at picking up leaves in narrow passages inside tea estates or weaving carpets or squeezed into small spaces in micro buses and three wheelers without sacrificing a passenger’s seat. Other demand side explanations may include: Children do not form unions and put pressure on management, they can be hired and fired at will, and they do not fuss over poor working conditions.

In the short run, child labour can provide a relief to a poor family through income support. However, the worst impact is that child labour takes away the job of an adult member in the economy and exacerbates the problems of unemployment and underemployment. Therefore, in the long run, child labour depresses economic growth and development.

One consistent problem in the process of eliminating child labour is the problem of defining who is a child and what constitutes child labour? Shall we go by age factor, type of work performed, hours spent or should we take into account the money earned?

A child has to be protected (negative) as well as developed (positive). It is with the negative effects the child needs to be protected.

The emotive and human rights issues related to children need to be carefully observed. Like informal business, elimination of one form of child labour may often lead to another worse form. An outright banning of girl child, say, from carpet industries may lead to child trafficking and prostitution. If you cannot provide a better alternative you also do not have a right to deny the child from working.

One idea to get out of controversy on child labour is to focus on eliminating the worst forms of child labour. It is no wonder, among eight ILO conventions related to four fundamental principles at work (forced labor, discrimination, trade unions and collective bargaining and child labor), the convention on the worst of forms of child labour (No. 182) is being ratified by the highest number, or 180 countries. The convention has defined the worst forms of child labour to include slavery, debt bondage, trafficking, serfdom and forced labor, including forced recruitment of children in armed conflict; use of the child for prostitution, production of pornography; the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, like the production and trafficking of drugs; and any work likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.

In Nepal, 621 thousand children are estimated to be working in the hazardous forms of child labour. This is about 8 per cent of child labour. There is now an international commitment, including the one made by Nepal, to eliminate the worst forms of child labour by 2016 and all forms of child labour by 2020. With the crippled economy as a result of earthquake, political agitations and economic blockades, it will be extremely difficult for Nepal to meet this goal.

A program is underway in Bhaktapur district to declare it as a child labour free district in Nepal. Because of high intensity of brick manufacturing works in Bhaktapur district, a large number of children can be found working in brick kilns. In addition to this, child labour can be found in domestic works, hotels and restaurant business, transportation, embroidery and carpet industry. The total estimated number of child labour in the district is 2,561 with nearly half of them in hazardous jobs. With community monitoring of child labour, including rescue and rehabilitation of rescued child labour, a program by the name of Green Flag Movement against Child Labor (GLMCL) is being implemented. As per the program, green flags and stickers are issued to units and enterprises without child labour. Once all units and enterprises are able to secure green flags and stickers, the whole of the district will be declared as a child labour free zone. Bhaktapur is the smallest district of Nepal; can it make a big leap in eliminating child labour? The question remains to be answered.