You are on page 1of 35

Fact about Child Labor

FACT ABOUT CHILD LABOR

Another Real Fact about Child Labor: A Comparative Study between Districts of Two Provinces of Pakistan Abdul Khaliq Malik, Niaz Ahmed Bhutto, Danish Shaikh, Erum Akhter, Falahuddin Butt Sukkur Institute Of Business Administration, Sukkur Sindh

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

ABSTRACT Child is not born for work rather to study, but wall of encumbrance either in financial term, economic term or in social term made him compelled for labor work. Understanding real economics of child labour can have better policy to tackle this issue. Using primary data from two districts one from Sindh another from Punjab, study examines supply side determinants of child labour comparatively and finds significant relationship between average wage set by his employer and labour decision of child. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression is used to estimate results. Though household income, parental education and family characteristic do contribute, but study also determines perception of parents regarding job uncertainty another factor that increases supply of child labor in case of Sindh. Legislative sanctions(e.g. ban) can not only be the proper solution for this quandary, drawing a survey from 350 poor household study also determines some effective policy implications for government to overcome this curse as well. Key Words: Child labor, Sukkur, Multan, Individual, Combined, Estimation

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

1. INTRODUCTION International Labour Office (ILO) defines child labor as any activity other than study or play, paid or unpaid, that is carried out by a person under the age of 15 (14 in certain countries). According to ILO estimates, over 200 million children are engaged in some form of child labor and over eight million are engaged in dangerous and abusive forms of child labor. Pakistan has a significant number of children participating in economic activities and contributing considerably to household income. 514 years of children are performing a wide range of business activities. Some are helping their parents in house-keeping, some are selling newspapers or cigarettes in the streets, while some are working in formal and informal sectors of market. Rana Eijaz (2008) defines child labour as the participation of school-age children (515 years) in the labour force, i.e., work for wage or in household enterprises to earn a living for themselves or to support household income. There is not a well-documentation of the extent of participation of these children (Jafri & Rashid, 1997). However, the issue of child labor is very complex because, on one hand it may take the child out of school and adversely impact human capital accumulation and lifetime earnings, on other hand, labour work a child does can be a vital risk coping mechanism, which may be necessary in alleviating the poverty of a household in the short-run ( Dar et al, 2002).There are some cultural differences among four provinces of Pakistan not all determinants are same in these provinces that are causing supply of child labour that is also explored by ( Barki and Fasih, 1998). It is not necessary that all determinants of child labour participation will be same in both provinces exploring the contribution of those factors in these provinces that how much each factor contributing. There is a shortage of quantitative work rather qualitative in Pakistan, and now there is a shift towards econometric analyses that helps even better in getting true results and decision making. Therefore, this paper analyses data quantitatively and then econometrically as well. There are many variables that can be the cause
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

of child labor, hence most important variables are included and paper also measures intensity of each variable, like; what benefits parents are perceiving in sending their children to work, uncertainty of job market does not allow parents to send their children to school and they think having some working skills will be the ultimate source of immediate income for their household. Working conditions, wages children are getting, and reason of not sending children to school and which of the determinant from given parameters is contributing less and high in which province ( Sindh & Punjab) and econometric estimation of variables for drawing out true results is the overall essence of this paper. The paper is organized in sections, section 2 contains some review of the literature, section 3 describes data collection method and model used for data, section 4 describes comparative descriptive results and frequency distribution tables, section 5 is divided into two sub-sections, 5.1 discusses individual estimation of both districts Sukkur and Multan, 5.2 discusses combined estimation of both districts by OLS regression method. Finally section 6 concludes whole discussion of results.

2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Child labour phenomenon is common in developing countries and there is growing literature on this issue and empirical evidences as well. Asia has a large number of child domestic workers. These include children working as child minders, maids, cooks, cleaners, gardeners and general house-helps. The lack of information is major cause of not having thorough analysis of incidence and nature of child domestic workers in many Asian countries. However, there is not a significant reduction in child labour participation, especially in Asia. Two main characteristics of Asian child labour that distinguish it from child labour elsewhere is that a large part of Asian child labour is in the form of child domestic workers; and the bulk of Asian child labour is in the
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

1014 years age group ( Ray, 2004). Poor households are more probably to use child labor and schooling reduction as strategies to mitigate with socioeconomic shocks, (Vsquez & Bohara, 2010). Delap (2010) used data from Bangladesh Dhaka slums and proposed that household poverty and income stability are key economic determinants of childrens work; Low household incomes are linked with high rates of both child income generation and housework. Maitra and Ray (2010) used data from three countries Peru, Pakistan and Ghana to examine at once child labour and child schooling. They argue that poverty is the major cause of child labour. The Pakistani results also draw attention to the need to target households living below the poverty line. Ray and Lancaster (2005) found negative relationship between child learning and child work. Krisztina and Gnther (2005) also supports poverty hypothesis because families need the supplementary income because they are too poor to survive. Therefore they sacrifices education of child. The Government of Pakistan has enacted the Employment of Children Act of 1991 which has banned employment of children below the age of 14 years and if someone who is employing them will be punished, imprisoned and fined. There are some cultural differences among four provinces of Pakistan not all the determinants are same in these provinces that are causing supply of child labour, that is also explored by Barki and Fasih(1998), reported that Due to cultural and demographic differences between the four provinces, we expect that determinants of child labour could differ across provinces. Our focus of research is also to see factors that differ and lead to supply of child labour between Sukkur and Multan. Majority of children are helping parents in their daily businesses. As children are hardly ever responsible for their own choices, there is a need of understanding those factors that influencing the decision of parents that whether to send children to school or at work.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

Canagarajah and Nielsen (1999) reported that Child labor is common in the developing world. ILO estimates for developing countries indicate total number of working children aged 514 years at 250 million. Of these, 120 million work full-time, and 24 million are below the age of 10. In absolute terms child labor is most prominent in Asia, because about 150 million working children live in Asia. In Asia and Latin America, which are more urbanized, child labor is also considered an urban phenomenon. Child workers are equally liable to the dangers faced by adult workers under parallel conditions, but they are more fatally affected because of their different anatomical, physiological and psychological characteristics. Unlike adults, children do not fight against their coercion through unions. Those poor household, which are living, close to the subsistence level, and if they are induced to send their children to school instead of work, an exogenous shock (for example, poor harvest) would have an unreasonably harsh impact on their welfare (Canagarajah and Nielsen, 1999). Mothers education is also most important factor of child labour supply and it reduces child hours of work in both Pakistan and Ghana irrespective of their culture, continent, and if level of living is controlled, study conducted by ( Bhalotra, et al, 1997). Employment of mothers and that of their children cannot be thought of as independent or random events; increase in the probability of womens employment also increases childrens likelihood of work

(Meltem, 2008). Poverty alone is not only the factor that is forcing children to work but there also have some other factors that compel children to work (H. Congdon, 2010). Therefore we have added some other factors as well and we will see comparison between two districts of Pakistan one from Sindh and one from Punjab to see the quantitative differences between the variables. Emerson and Knabb (2006) who explained that poverty only may not be the root cause of child labour. They presented a model in their paper that proposes a different methods through which child labour may be transmitted through the generations of a family; differences in
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

opportunity. Opportunity is broadly defined to include such things as differences in educational quality, access to high paying jobs, access to information on the returns to education and prejudice against some groups in an economy. There has not been much attempt, until recently, to examine systematically causes of child labour with a view to identifying factors that could lead to its reduction and eventual elimination (Ray, 2001). Many researchers have extended their work on this issue like increase in population, female labour force participation and fertility also increases the child labour participation as, Joelle ( 2010) reported that Average child labor rate across countries increases with the size of the rural population, female labor force participation and fertility, while it falls with rise in GDP per capita, the part of public educational expenditures in gross national income, life expectancy and the share of the labor force in industry or agriculture. Much of the research papers have focused this issue all over the world specially for developing economies. Internationally there has a comparative study on this issue; like comparative study between continents (Pushkar & Ray, 2002), comparative study between countries like Pakistan and Ghana (Bhalotra, et al, 1997), Pakistan and Peru (Ray, 2000), Pakistan and Nepal (Ray, 2001) Cambodia, Vietnam, India, and China etc. Within Pakistan there has also a comparative work between two districts (Pakpattan and Faisalabad) of Punjab by (Rana, 2003). By reviewing the literature still there is a gap we find in Pakistan that of a comparative study on child labour participation between Sindh and Punjab. Different authors have extracted data from different sources like; Ray (2000, 2000a) obtained data for children in the age group of 1014 years from Pakistan Integrated Household Survey 1991, Burki and Shahnaz (2001) used data for children in the age group of 1014 years from the Labour Force Survey 1996-97. Apart from these reviews many other researchers have also worked out on this issue like; (Blunch & Verner 2000; Deb & Rosati 2004; Blunch et al & Dar et al 2002; Cockburn 2001).

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

3. DATA COLLECTION & MODEL Two districts of Pakistan one from Sindh and one from Punjab is selected for this study. Sukkur is selected from Sindh, which is known as hub of Sindh in commercial activities and Multan which is also one of the commercial and small scale manufacturing centre of Punjab. Most of the children in Pakistan are working in informal sectors of economy like retail shops, auto workshops, home business, technical shops, repairing shops and as a servant in many service businesses. Therefore we have selected this sector to collect data of our research by filling up questionnaires face to face from their current household head. Convenient sampling technique is used and data is collected by household survey, 150 sample size is taken from Sukkur district and 200 from Multan because of having large population than Sukkur.

3.1 MODEL In order to assess the effect of different variables on child labor, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression is used. Seven variables are used in equation each is regressed one by one with number of working children. Significance level is also tested by controlling omitted variable biasness effect, first by evaluating each district individually then study compares results and combined data is also estimated for measuring labour decision of child.

Where

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

Yi = is dependant variable denotes number of working children and data is cross sectional. is an intercept and 1..7 are coefficients of each respective variable. Fm denotes members of an individual family, Hi is Household Income of family head, Fe and Me is father and mother education respectively, Amw is Average monthly wage of all Children within a family, Wm denotes working mother that either mother does any labour work or not, it is a dummy variable, Jf is joint family and dummy as well (if yes then equals to 1 and if no then equals to 0). is an i error term. 3.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS Child labor is an acute problem prevailing within the developing economies like Pakistan as well. A Great deal of attention is especially on developing countries has made this issue debatable as every researcher has tried to support his opinion and found diversified results; like some has supported poverty a main cause, while other supported mother education most important factor like; Bhalotra, et..al (1997), in his study found inverse relationship between mothers education and child labor. Labor work of mother, father education, and other family characteristic affects labour decision of child studied by many researchers. Proposed research has found some of the prominent results from survey. Table (4.1) shows descriptive results of study. It is a general phenomenon that family size contributes a lot towards child labor, one thing to note here is deviation of average family members, in Sukkur average result may vary by 1.7 while in Multan the rate of deviation is 2.1. Average number of children in household is slightly greater in Multan as compare to Sukkur, with standard deviation of 2.04 and 1.86 respectively. Maximum working children is higher in Multan than in Sukkur, as shown in table (4.1). Average number of working children in each district is approximately same, but prominent difference in standard deviation can be observed, with 0.763 in Sukkur and 1.151 in Multan that suggest a

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

10

deviation in mean result for both districts. The factor of urgency is very profound in Multan, as minimum age of first working child is 5 years and it continues till 16 years while in Sukkur minimum age is 7 years and maximum is 14 years.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

11

Descriptive Statistics

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std.Deviation

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

12

Suk

Mul

Suk

Mul

Suk

Mul

Suk

Mul

Family members

13

14

6.67

7.95

1.933

2.169

No: of CHL

11

12

4.65

5.66

1.868

2.045

No: of WC

1.81

2.06

.763

1.151

WS age. FC

14

16

10.19

11.33

1.951

2.633

Avg WS age of all CHL

7.00

14.00

16

10.3404

11.48

1.62154

2.379

FC WG

400

200

2500

3000

1138.33 1322.93

410.737

784.865

Avg : WG of all CHL (m)

300.00

200

2500.00

3000

1018.2

1273.95 392.46685

728.507

FC .WH

12

15

10.08

10.99

1.834

1.810

Avg: WH of all CHL HH income (m)

6.00 4000

6 1800

12.00 14000

15

10.1150

11.01

1.48731 2823.682

1.640 1867.533

12000 9574.67 4709.94

Table: 4.1 Note: [CHL = children, Avg = average, WC = working children, FC = first child, WS = work stating, WG = wage, WH = working hours, HH = household head income monthly]

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

13

It reflects that there is high chance in Multan a child will come sooner in market than in Sukkur, however the rate of variation from mean is also notable with 1.93 and 2.63 in Sukkur and Multan respectively. Wage taken by a child is also an important determinant of child labor supply. Average earning for first child in Multan is Rs/= 1323 while the amount is lower in Sukkur that is Rs/= 1138, result suggests that in Multan first child average wage is higher than in Sukkur, but one thing also kept in mind that average working hours for first child in Multan is also higher with deviation of Rs/784 in markets than in Sukkur. Higher deviation from mean illustrates the level of uncertainty in wage structure, but working conditions are same in both districts for first child but overall Multani child is working one hour more. Higher average working hour can be factor of high average wage in Multan. Table (4.1) shows difference of Rs/260 in average monthly wage of all children. From many studies it is found that household income is considered to an influential determinant of child labor. Sakellariou and Lall (2000) used data from Philippians and states that poverty has been main and persistent cause of child labour. The probability of child labour is higher if the household is poor. Meltem (2006) says that children from poorer families stand at a superior risk of employment. A huge difference between average household income can be found for both districts with standard deviation of Rs/= 2823 in Sukkur and Rs/=1867 in Multan. Since it is visible that in district of Multan child labor is very much sensitive to household income, or poverty is inducing them to send their children in market. However, average household income of family head in Sukkur is greater than of Multan. Factors causing child work Less household income, outstanding debt, wish to start own business in future, High dependency ratio and many others reason that include illness of family head, a gap in employment due to job switching that causes temporary unemployment were the main causes of being sending children

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

14

to market, frequency distribution is shown in Table (4.2). Out of 150 respondents, 62 chose less household income as a reason for sending child to work that is 41.33%, while in Multan 96 respondents out of 200 chose this factor, that account for 53%. This result suggest it is the poverty that is one of prominent reason why children are being sent to market in district of Multan this account for more than 50% of the sample opposite to district of Sukkur where this account for 41%. Income do affect parents decision and reduce child labour as Tasnim & Rashid (2010), support this view they say, income level of head of household reduces the child labor in both urban and rural areas but the effect is stronger in urban areas. However outstanding debt is one reason that is more leading in Sukkur that is out of 150 respondents 51 chose this reason for sending children to work in markets and only 26 respondents out of 200 selected this option in Multan which accounts for only 14.4% as compare to 34% in Sukkur. Respondent also selected one reason of sending children to market is the wish that they want their children must learn required skills from market at initial stage of their age and then start their own business in future because it is necessary for survival in society study conducted by (Togunde & Carter, 2006), he suggests that childrens work is crucial to both the economic survival of the household and to the future professional well-being of the children. 11.34% respondent in Sukkur chose this reason while in Multan 13.3% of respondents selected this reason why their

Table: 4.2
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

15

child work in markets. High dependency ratio is more visible in Multan, family heads selected one reason why their children work in market is that their income is less but family size is larger to meet all expenses, so it was the number of consumers in household that were inducing their respective family to send their children in market it accounts for 12.7% in Multan and none of the respondent chose this option in Sukkur. As notified earlier that other reason that contribute towards child labor include illness of family head, temporary unemployment that is created during job switching and unemployment of family head are major reason why children work in markets, in Sukkur these factors collectively cause 13.33% and 6.6% in Multan.

Frequency Suk Mul Suk

Percent Mul

Less household income Outstanding debt Start own business in future High dependency ratio Any other reason Total

62 51 17 0 20 150

96 26 24 23 12 181

41.33 34 11.34 0 13.33 100

53.0 14.4 13.3 12.7 6.6 100

Factors of not sending to school

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

16

Uncertainty of job market, high cost of schooling, low quality of education, unavailability of school near to home and other reasons were main contributors why children are not sent to school by their respective family heads. Perception of Uncertain job market in future has discouraged poor even more. They think there is very high risk that either we can get a return of our investment in child education or not, so poverty is not only the cause of child labour, two most important risk, income (or resource) risk that the household faces while its children are in school and the risks related with uncertainty whether they will have significant return on investment that they have done on their children capital (Lyon and Rosati, 2006). 32.67% respondent of Sukkur has job uncertainty as compared to 9.4% in Multan, shown in table (4.3). Quality of education is even worst in Sukkur. However major contributor for not sending children is high cost of schooling that accounts 66.9% in Multan as compared to 28.66% in Sukkur. Parents claims that no free books is given to our children except one or two, teachers use to sell books on low prices, while government announces for free book distribution. Unavailability of school within vicinity accounts very less. Other reason includes lack of interest from children even their parents initially sent them to school, withdrawal from parents because of teachers in school use to get their personal work done from child rather to study them, poor facilities within government school etc collectively accounts for 13.8% in Multan and 8.66% in Sukkur.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

17

Frequency Suk Perception of Uncertainty of 49 job market in future High cost of schooling Low quality education There is no school in your 6 area Any other reason Total 13 150 25 181 TABLE: 4.3 8.66 100 1 4 43 39 121 17 28.66 26 17 32.67 Mul Suk

Percent Mul

9.4

66.9 9.4

.6

13.8 100.0

Child to school rather to work (Motivational factors) When respondents were asked for agreeing to send their children to school than to work, predetermined options were given to them to choose from, as well as any other option if they think will be needed shown in table(4.4). In Sukkur 47.33% of sample chose if they have proper job or business then they will send their children to school and 42% of respondent in Multan selected this option. Furthermore facility of credit was also the option that 23.34% of respondent selected in Sukkur while 34.8% of sample in Multan, 14% of respondents in Sukkur demanded

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

18

quality education in schools; the number is slightly low in Multan that is 10.5%. If household have assurance of job after education then 15.33% of sample in Sukkur are agree to send child to school rather to work. Results also highlights some other reason in case of Multan is 2.8% such as, incentive must be given to them and schools must be equipped with good number of facilities such as good condition of school, water availability etc, then they will send their children to school.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

19

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

20

Frequency Suk Proper job or business to 71 operate Facility of credit Quality education is provided Certainty of employment in 23 future 18 15.33 35 21 63 19 23.34 14 76 47.33 Mul Suk

Percent Mul

42.0

34.8 10.5

9.9

Table: 4.4

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

21

Any other reason Total

0 150

5 181

0.0 100.0

2.8 100.0

(Above mentioned results can be used for designing the policies for motivating parents to send their children to school than to work) Measure of education In literature review we noticed that there are many studies that suggest education level of household head either father or mother of child plays a vital role in exercising the practice of child labor. Table (4.5) shows that ratio of uneducated father and mother is higher in Multan than in Sukkur, while mother education is going up to middle level in Multan as compared to just having primary level in Sukkur. This low level of education among parents of the children is potential cause of child labor within respective area. It can be a reason that higher education in poor household leads to high earning as father from Sukkur earning more money than of Multan as show in table (4.5).These results highlights the role of education that is if the child parents are uneducated there will be more chance that their children will work in market as compare to parents who are somehow educated.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

22

Table: 4.5
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

23

Frequency

Percent

F= Father M= Mother

F Suk

F Mul

F Suk

F Mul

Uneducated Primary Middle Secondary Total

69 45 30 6 150

108 42 0 0 150

119 54 7 1 181

156 21 4 0 181

46 30 20 4 100.0

72 28 0.0 0.0 100

65.7 29.8 3.9 .6 100.0

86.2 11.6 2.2 0 100.0

4. RESULTS & DISCUSIONS 4.1 Individual District Estimates Employment of child is a common phenomenon exists in developing countries not just in rural but in urban area as well. Child works as street salesperson, blue collar worker in small manufacturing, restaurant worker, and in service sector of economy. Study explores different dimension of this issue and shows some of the similarities and dissimilarities between districts. Table (5.1, a) and (5.1, b) shows estimation results of both districts Sukkur and Multan respectively. Number of family members is common and positively correlated with number of working children and significant in both districts as well. Household income is also significant and negatively correlated with child labor. Poverty hypothesis supported by many researchers

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

24

that lesser the income of household leads to child to work in market as expenses of household can be compensated easily. Results shows average monthly wage also significant in both districts with inverse relationship. Wage taken by child is also an important determinant of child labor, study shows that low average monthly wage creates high child work in market. It means if average wage of two children is low ultimately it will force third child as well to work in market, and significance level in Sukkur is lower than Multan. Working mother remains insignificant in both district, may be because of limitation of data, larger the size of sample can have effect of working mother as well. Result also shows interesting dissimilarities like Multan has five significant variables as compared to just three in Sukkur. Father and mother education is significant at 5% in Multan. But variability in number of working children is higher due to control variables in Sukkur because of having high R-square which increased from 45% to 91% as shown in table (5.1, a) as compared to 17% to 33.8% in Multan as shown in table (5.1, b). Joint family has a positive impact but not a significant in individual estimation.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

25

Table: 5.1 (a). Sukkur Regressor Constant 1 0.0299 (0.1658) 2 3.5558* (0.1438) 3 3.5543* (0.1435) 4 3.5519* (0.1478) 5 3.6204* (0.1457) 6 3.6214* (0.1464) 7 3.6190* (0.1578)

Fm

0.2672* (0.0238)

0.0663* (0.0120)

0.0672* (0.0120)

0.0673* (0.0121)

0.0692* (0.0118)

0.0693* (0.0119)

0.0693* (0.0119)

Hi

-0.0002* -0.0002* -0.00023* -0.00022* -0.00022* (0.000008) (0.0000084) (0.0000093) (0.0000093) (0.0000093)

-0.000219* (0.00000941)

Fe

-0.0274 (0.0212)

-0.0274 (0.0212)

-0.0244 (0.0207)

-0.0251 (0.0213)

-0.0251 (0.0214)

Me

-0.0034 (0.0469)

-0.0005 (0.0457)

-0.0002 (0.0462)

-0.00021 (0.0464)

Amw

-0.00015* (0.000048)

-0.00014* (0.000048)

-0.000145* (0.00049)

Wm

-0.0054 (0.0371)

-0.00518 (0.0377)

Jf R2 Adjusted R2

0.00197 (0.0464) 0.4584 0.4547 0.9127 0.9116 0.9137 0.9120 0.9137 0.9114 0.9188 0.9159 0.9188 0.9154 0.9188 0.9148

Dependant Variable: Number of Working Children (Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, values in brackets denotes standard error.)

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

26

Regressor

Table: 5.1 (b). Multan Dependant Variable: Number of Working Children

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

27

Constant

0.2712 (0.2958)

1.1403* (0.3611)

1.1971* (0.3510)

1.2725* (0.3489)

1.4580* (0.3531)

1.4456* (0.3696)

1.4330* (0.3695)

Fm

0.2250* (0.0359)

0.2094* (0.0347)

0.2099* (0.0337)

0.20391* (0.0335)

0.2041* (0.0330)

0.20455* (0.0333)

0.1981* (0.0338)

Hi

-0.000158* (0.0000404)

-0.00013* (0.000039)

-0.00013* (0.000039)

-0.000113* (0.00004)

-0.00011* (0.000040)

-0.00011* (0.00004)

Fe

-0.428893* (0.1246)

-0.337146** (0.1300)

-0.3108** (0.1288)

-0.3112** (0.1292)

-0.3093** (0.1291)

Me

-0.3975** (0.1800)

-0.3687** (0.1781)

-0.3675** (0.1789)

-0.3538** (0.1792)

Amw -0.00024** (0.0001) Wm

-0.00024** (0.0001) 0.0176 (0.1511)

-0.00024** (0.0001) 0.0097 (0.1512) 0.1797 (0.1605)

Jf R2 Adjusted R2

0.1799 0.1753

0.2448 0.2363

0.2922 0.2802

0.3113 0.2956

0.3328 0.3137

0.3328 0.3098

0.3385 0.3108

(Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, values in brackets denotes standard error.) 4.2 Combined Districts Estimates Despite 64 years of existence, Pakistan is in serious situation showing inability of labor market, and has remained passive in making efficient trend; a country having roller coaster economy

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

28

affects this segment along with others especially when we look at child labour and its exploitation. A serious concern of society that has captivated child from his study and pleasant life to hazardous working condition environment which is ultimately physiologically and psychologically harmful for childs health. Among four provinces of Pakistan, Sindh and Punjab have high concentration and intensity of child work. Therefore study also estimates result on combined data as major part of this problem can be covered in a country. Table (5.2), presents results on combined data of both districts. Worth noting difference is the effect of joint family on child labor that was not in individual estimation. Positively correlated with significance level as well. So it is clear that if household families are living together, then those household have high tendency of sending children to labor work than individual living household. May be the effect of one familys attitude towards child work also affects other family as well, but other variables can also affect the child work. Father education has become significant at 10% while it was not in case of Sukkur district. Significance level of average monthly wage is 1% while in Multan it is on 5%. But in combined data it has significant relationship as well like it is in individual estimation. Earning power of one child does matter in labour decision of other child in Pakistan. Best fit equation for combined estimates results is seventh one with high R-square (43.77 %) because of reduced omitted variable bias effect, while initially it is (26.29 %), as shown in table (5.2).

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

29

Table: 5.2 Dependant Variable: Number of working children Regressor Constant 1 0.1968 (0.1684) 0.2376* (0.0219) 2 1.2559* (0.2423) 0.1759* (0.0234) -0.00009* (0.000015) 3 1.2541* (0.2406) 0.1774* (0.0232) -0.00008* (0.000016) -0.1448** (0.0613) 4 1.2679* (0.2362) 0.1735* (0.0228) -0.000065* (0.000016) -0.1118*** (0.0608) 5 1.6593* (0.2397) 0.1753* (0.0220) -0.000066* (0.000015) -0.1010*** (0.0586) 6 1.6638* (0.2447) 0.1753* (0.0220) -0.000066* (0.000015) -0.1016*** (0.0590) 7 1.6147* (0.2414) 0.1691* (0.0218)

Fm

Hi

-0.000082* (0.0000157) -0.1097*** (0.0581)

Fe

Me

-0.3889* (0.1060)

-0.3425* (0.1025)

-0.3432* (0.1028)

-0.3134* (0.1017)

Amw

-0.000359* (0.00007)

-0.00031* (0.00007) 0.0082 (0.0873)

-0.00032* (0.00007) 0.00109 (0.0860) 0.3016* (0.0903)

Wm

Jf R2 Adjusted R2

0.2629 0.2607

0.3322 0.3282

0.3435 0.3374

0.3695 0.3617

0.4173 0.4083

0.4173 0.4065

0.4377 0.4246

(Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, and values in brackets are standard error.)

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

30

5. CONCLUSION Nowadays it has become a growing interest for every academics, professionals, and media to consider an issue of child labor. It is universally acceptable that child labor is undesirable phenomenon but main concern is to tackle this problem. Proposed paper identifies key determinants that has relation with child labor and provides comparative results quantitatively and econometrically as it can better help in policy implications for both provinces (Sindh & Punjab) of Pakistan. Regional disparity between two districts have some significant differences like child labour has significant relationship with family members, household income, father education, mother education and average monthly wage child is getting in Multan as compared to Sukkur where father and mother education is not significant. Ratio of working children in Multan is higher than in Sukkur, because Multan has high sensitivity in relation with household income. Low average monthly wage of child forcing family to send other child in market in both districts. One of the interesting result study discovers, is perception of parents regarding unstable job market, it means employer is also responsible in shaping culture of child labour. They think today about unemployment of their child in future, it may be because of seeing existing job market structure or might any member from family have experienced no gain from education. It is clear that countries current job market structure not just affect graduates but poor household decision as well, as they do not want to send child to school. Legislative sanction like banning child labour cannot be a final solution it could have opportunity cost for society, but efficient action plan regarding policy can reduce child labour in Pakistan. Making efficient job market by creating employment opportunities especially for poor but it should be necessary after certain level of education, quality education schools with facilities, subsidized education, credit facility for poor, trained and qualitative teachers in schools as they

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

31

could not waste time of child for their personal work, quality assurance authorities for schools, incentives for parents who send children to school rather to market, are some of the motivational factors that can reduce child labour and will make a child from labour to only school going student.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

32

REFERENCES Ray, R. (2000) Analysis of child labour in Peru and Pakistan: A comparative study Journal of Population Economics, 2000, Volume 13, Number 1, Pages 3-19 Maitra, P. and Ray, R. (2002) 'The Joint Estimation of Child Participation in Schooling and Employment: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents', Oxford Development Studies, 30:1, 41-62 Joelle, S-L. (2010) A cross-national study of child labor and its determinants The Journal of Developing Areas, Volume 44, Number 1, pp. 325-344 Ray, R. (2001) Simultaneous Analysis of Child Labour and Child Schooling: Comparative Evidence from Nepal and Pakistan Pakistan Development Review. Maitra, P. and Ray, R. (2010) The Joint Estimation of Child Participation in Schooling and Employment: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents Oxford, 1469-9966, Volume 30, Pages 41 62 Ersado, L. (2005) Child Labor and Schooling Decisions in Urban and Rural Areas: Comparative Evidence from Nepal, Peru, and Zimbabwe World Development Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 455480 Ray, R. and Lancaster, G. (2005) The impact of childrens work on schooling: Multi-country evidence International Labour Review, Vol. 144 (2005), No. 2 Helena, S.C., Nielsen, S. (1999) Child Labor and Schooling in Africa: A Comparative Study World Bank Social Protection Discussion Papers 20456. Ray, R. (2001) Child Labour and Child Schooling in South Asia: A Cross Country Study of their Determinants Australian national university, ASARC Working Papers.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

33

Rana, Eijaz (2008) Gender Analysis of Childrens Activities in Pakistan, The Pakistan Development Review 47:2 pp. 169195 Barki, Abid.A and Fasih, Tazeen (1998) Households Non-leisure Time Allocation for Children and Determinants of Child Labour in Punjab, Pakistan The Pakistan Development Review 37: 4 Part II, pp. 37:4, 899914 Addison, T., Bhalotra, S., Coulter, F. and Heady, C. (1997) Child Labour in Pakistan and Ghana: a comparative study Centre for Development Studies, University of Bath, United Kingdom. Delap, Emily (2010) Economic and Cultural Forces in the Child Labour Debate: Evidence from Urban Bangladesh Journal of Development Studies, 1743-9140, Volume 37, Issue 4, Pages:1 22 Dayolu, Meltem (2006) 'The impact of household income on child labour in urban Turkey', Journal of Development Studies, 42: 6, 939 956 Dayolu, Meltem (2008) Mother's and Children's Employment in Turkey The Journal of Developing Areas, Volume 42, Number 1, pp. 95-115 William, F., Bohara, K. (2010) Household Shocks, Child Labor, and Child Schooling Evidence from Guatemala Latin American Research Review, Volume 45, Number 3, pp. 165-186 Rana, T. and Rashid (2010) A Comparative Analysis of Rural and Urban Child Labor in Pakistan European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, ISSN 1450-2275 Togunde, D., Carter, A. (2006) Socioeconomic causes of child labor in urban Nigeria,Journal of Children and Poverty, 1469-9389, Volume 12, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 73 89

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

34

Krisztina, K-K. (2007) Does globalization reduces child labor?The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development: An International and Comparative Review, 1469-9559, Volume 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 71 92 Sakellariou, C. and Lall, A. (2000), Child Labour in the Philippines: Determinants and Effects Asian Economic Journal Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages: 233253 Patrick, M., Emerson, W., and Shawn, D.K. (2006) Opportunity, Inequality and the Intergenerational Transmission of Child Labour Economica (2006) Volume 73, Issue 291, Pages: 413434 Heather, C.F. (2010) Child Labour: A Review of Recent Theory and Evidence with Policy Implications Journal of Economic Surveys Volume 25, Issue 2, April 2011 Krisztina, K-K., and Schulze, G. (2005) Regulation of child labour Economic Affairs Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages: 2430, Suryahadi, A., Priyambada, A., and Sumarto, S. (2005) Poverty, School and Work: Children during the Economic Crisis in Indonesia Development and Change Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages: 351373, Lyon, S., Rosati, F.C. (2006) Tackling child labour. Policy options for achieving sustainable reductions in children at work UCW Working Paper Series. Blunch, N. H., Dar, A., Guarcello, L., Lyon, S., Ritvalo, A.R., and Rosati, F.C. (2002) Child work in Zambia: A comparative study for survey instruments .Social Protection Discussion Paper Series, no.0228. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor

35

Blunch, N. H., Dar, A., Kim, B., and Sasaki, M. (2002) Participation of children in schooling and labor activities: A review of empirical studies. Social Protection Discussion Paper Series, no. 0221. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Blunch, N. H., and Verner, D. (2000) Revisiting the link between poverty and child labor: The Ghanaian experience .World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2488. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Deb, P., Rosati, F.C. (2002) Determinants of child labor and school attendance: The role of Household unobservable. Cockburn, J. (2001) Child Labour versus Education: Poverty Constraints or Income Opportunities?

Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)