The Situation of Child Labour in Thailand : An overview

The Situation of Child Labour in Thailand : An overview by 44649 Chantana Banpasirichot Chulalongkorn University Social Research Institute RECEIVED...
Author: Lenard Boyd
8 downloads 0 Views 773KB Size
The Situation of Child Labour in Thailand : An overview

by 44649

Chantana Banpasirichot Chulalongkorn University Social Research Institute

RECEIVED 7 :PR ;37 ILO

Lao t3IEL

211

IPEC THAILAND PAPERS No 1, December, 1996

C)! n)J Ct(it

c:;:r

The designations employed in this report and the presentation of matetherein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the International Labour Office concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities or concerning the delimitation rial

of its frontiers. Reference to the names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the International Labour Office and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval.

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION

PERCEPTIONS ON CHILD LABOUR 2.1. 19705 EMPLOYMENT PROMOTION 2.2. DISADVANTAGED CHILD LABOUR, 1980s 2.3. SOCIAL EXCLUSION AND CHILD RIGHTS 2.4 . ANALYTICAL OBSERVATIONS

SITUATION AND TREND OF CHILDREN IN THE LABOUR MARKET 3.1. CHILDREN IN THE LABOUR FORCE 3.2. WORKING CHILDREN 3.3. DISTRIBUTION OF WORKING CHILDREN 3.4. qHARACTERISTICS AND ATTITUDES OF CHILD WORKERS 3.5. TRENDS

PROBLEMS AND COMPLEXITY OF CHILD LABOUR 4.1. WORK CONDITIONS AND EXPLOITATION 4.2. DIFFICULTIES 4.3. COMPLEXITY

POLICIES AND ACTIONS ON CHILD LABOUR 5.1. AN OVERVIEW OF RESPONSES 5.2. LEGAL PROTECTION 5.3. POLICIES AND PLANS 5.3. RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF ACTIONS 5.5. ANALYTICAL OBSERVATIONS ON POLICY AND ACTION DEVELOPMENT

A DIRECTION FOR POLICY IMPROVEMENT 6.1. A RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDIES 6.2. THE CONSULTATIVE MEETING: ISSUES ON CHILD LABOUR

REFERENCES

8. TABLE APPENDIX

2 2

3 3

5 5 6 7 8 9

10 10 12 13

14 14 16 18

22 27 29 30 31

33

The Situation of Child Labour in Thailand An Overview1

Introduction

This report analyzes the situation of child labour in Thailand. by a review of policies and actions in combating the child labour problem. The project itself is titled A Comprehensive Report on the Situation of Child Labour in Thailand under the program of the International Programme for Elimination of Child Labour (IPECI ILO).

Although IPEC's primary concern is with policy and action on child labour, this report is by no means a policy evaluation project: this would require an empirical study to an extent far beyond the reach of this project. This report will provide information and data from secondary sources on the situation of the target population and the progress of actions against child labour

exploitation. Recommendations on policy and actions are to be considered as points for discussion and as directions for further investigation rather than the results of extensive empirical research with ready made answers.

The emphasis of this study project according to the terms of reference are in three areas, namely, education, legal protection, and actions. These three areas each have their separate reports by three authors who will discuss their topics in details. This overview Report provides a macro picture of the child labour problem and policy responses. It will capture the recent development of both the problem and responses rather than describe the characteristics of the already well known situation.

Aspects of the policies and actions which are, perhaps, the main interest of IPEC can be reviewed within certain constraints. In the past, implementation of policies and actions has been very limited, although there have been some major achievements. The implementation of

measures started as early as 1979 --the International Year of the Child-- but have been intensified only in the last two or three years.

Therefore to draw conclusions and learn lessons from the policies and actions is difficult, especially when most activities have not yet reach to maturity, and information is still limited. Although there are already some evaluation reports, they are not sufficient to tell much about the target groups affected by the actions. Evaluations are either. done internally or confined to operational aspects of the projects (See Supiri 1995). This report, therefore, will only look into the underlying assumptions and logic of policies and actions, and aims to generate a thorough discussion on the important issues rather than to provide a conclusive findings.

Perceptions on Child Labour

Over the past 30 years after a number of country-children began entering into nonhousehold work, working children in Thailand have been perceived in different ways. The traditional role of children in the household economy has been changing together with national economic conditions. The way people have looked at the issue through different periods has been influenced by a few factors as to how children have been used in the labour market, the impacts upon them, and the responses of national social policy. The issue started with the

1This report is a part of a study on "A comprehensive report on the situation of child labour in Thailand" commissioned by the International Programme for Elimination of child Labour (IPEC/ILO) in 1995. Detailed Terms of Reference for the study were provided by IPEC to guide the consultant in undertaking this important piece of research. The report was kindly edited by Prof. Malcolm Falkus, Department of Economic History, the University of New England, Armidale, Australia.

I

2.1. 1970s Employment Promotion Studies on child labour clearly appeared by 1968. The Department of Labour (now the

Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare) conducted a survey on child and women labour (Department of Labour, 1968). Children were already found in the textile industry around the Bangkok area (Nikorn Praisaengpech, 1968). The survey and other studies in the early period, however, did not emphasize working conditions of the young. With economic stagnation for several years in 1970s, concern focused on the inclusion of those unemployed or underemployed into the labour market. While children's working conditions were revealed frequently as deplorable, discussion of the issue was hindered both by insufficient information as to the extent of the problem and also by the lack of understanding where by children were drawn into the labour market.

2.2. Disadvantaged Child Labour, 1980s

By the end of 1970s, the issue of child labour was brought to the fore with in-depth documentaries and news on cases of exploited children in the workplace, which created an important political impact. The 1979 International Year of the Child also called for certain responses on child development. As a result, more studies began to shed light on the diversity of working children, covering different types of work, community studies of regions where children originate, and the process of job seeking in the labour market. It was certain that bringing child labour into the market had become a business in itself, i.e., private recruitment offices. Moreover, most studies indicated a concentration of child labour in the metropolitan and industrial areas. Child labour has been growing together with the industrial sector.

Once the channel whereby children were drawn into the labour market had been established, the concern for child labour in the early 1980s focused on the economic exploitation

of children. The analysis on the problem of child labour was reflected in the expression of "children in especially difficult situations" (Saisuree and Nisa, 1986) which concerns the employment of child workers in substandard working conditions. In 1988, the National Youth Bureau addressed the issue of working children and abandoned children in "The Second Asian Regional Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect" (National Youth Bureau 1988) which was said to be the beginning of the government's recognition of child labour problems.2

The situation of working children in non- agricultural industries revealed in the various

studies has altered our understanding of the traditional role of children in the household economy. The elements of 'work' and working environments have changed from a process of community socialization to economic exploitation, above all for migrant child workers.

Concern as to how children should be treated in the workplace raises the issue of basic needs for children. In order to guide a social policy for different disadvantaged groups (including

child labour), the National Youth Bureau has delivered an evaluation framework for child development based on basic minimum needs and services for children (National Youth Bureau 1990). It is clear that child workers have been deprived of certain basic services.

Following state recognition of the child labour problem as a social problem, discussion on child workers is now concentrated more on policy practice. By evaluating the availability and accessibility of the existing social services, working children are categorized by the National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) as disadvantaged group (CUSRI, 1992). The perception on child labour as being disadvantaged, in a way, has gradually shifted the discussion from child abuse and exploitation at the beginning of 1980s to the inadequacy of services in the later period.

2

Speech by Saisuree Chutikul at the "Consultative Meeting for a Research Project on A Comprehensive Report on the Situation of Child Labour in Thailand", National Youth Bureau, April 17, 1995.

2

2.3. Social Exclusion and Child Rights

The development of the labour market segmentation by the end of 1980s resulted in the expansion of market for unskilled labour, including children. It is observed that while economic growth has provided more employment opportunities, working children's welfare, on the contrary, is still based only on their own wage income. Thus, as the economic growth rate has reached its highest level by the second half of I 980s, the number of children in the labour market apparently did not decrease. The labour force survey indicates a rising participation rate of working children from 20 to 25 per cent of the 11-14 age-group in the labour force in 1984 and 1988 respectively (Chantana, 1992:11-12). It seems that some children and their families have tried integrate themselves in the greater economy by seizing opportunities in the labour market. We may question the quality of current economic integration by means of participation in

the labour market. Children who have to work for economic exchange are the second class labour, they do not belong to any institution such as a school or village community and, they, therefore, are excluded from the existing social service system. Their minimum income is not sufficient to improve their own living conditions and provide for personal development. The term "social exclusion" connotes a malfunction of the existing social system that neglects those who cannot afford services and take an active role in the society. The case of child labour reflects a development paradox, in that migrant child workers are integrated into the modern economy by means of being wage labour, yet, they do not benefit from industrial development (See Wolf 1994).

At the beginning of 1990s, NGOs reported numbers of immigrant child labourer from neighboring countries, especially Laos and Burma, to meet the demand for labour in some activities. The issue of children's rights is being raised again in the process of such child recruitment into the market. Immigrant child labourer are inevitably discriminated against, for being illegal, in the matter of labour protection and other services. A new child labour issue concerns whether immigrant child labourer should also be protected in the same way as Thai children. We may note, too, that among Thai children, discrimination is hidden within the Labour Protection Law itself because it protects only legally employed children and not otherwise. The limited coverage of the law and the lack of adequate services must raise th question of whether the child rights are being protected in the context of economic development. During the past 30 years, the issue of child labour has been largely perceived as a social problem with its causes stemming from economic maldevelopment. There has been less analysis on economic aspects of the problem, e. g, the economic efficiency of child labour utilization in the labour market and household economy. Especially, when looking into the problem of child labour as a social cost in the development process, there is almost no study to elaborate the extent of

the cost and the impact on the family, the community and the national economy as a whole. Concern for child labour problems have been focused mostly on the immediate impact of labour on child's development. The new approach of "social exclusion" should allow more questions of political awareness, commitment and intervention to be raised, and also allow examination of the role of different parties involved, i.e., the role of the state, business sector, and the community in general.

2.4. Analytical Observations

The special feature of Thailand is that the country is undergoing a course of rapid change towards a new NIC. It might be expected that the impact of growth will reduce the number of children entering into the labour market, yet this does not seem to be the case, and there is no guarantee about it. Although we might not be able to assess the number of children in the market, the complexity of the issue manifested by a widespread use of child labour in various activities, child labour linkages with street children and child prostitution, and immigrant child workers, shows the persistency of the problem.

3

In many societies working children are acceptable as part of the in socialization process. Some children may have to work for different reasons, and in most cases combine work with education. The question of child labour is therefore not solely based on the concern as to why some children have to enter the labour market, but rather on why they are exploited in the world of work. In this regard, there are three points that should be brought to attention. poverty and its changing connotation value conflicts and disappearing moral economy incomplete adjustment of traditional production relations

Poverty and its changing connotation: It was clear in the beginning that child labour came from poor families (See, for example, Alternative, 1983, Orathai and Richter, 1989, and Chantana 1993). There is no doubt that poverty is a driving factor. However recently, families and children have been developing a new attitude towards work and education. Before, children who had to work instead of continuing their education were those who have no choice. Today, there are more and more children and families who see that children have a choice to earn cash sooner because the labour market opens for more employment opportunities. This trend is also seen as an occupational shift in the younger generation from agricultural to non-agricultural occupations. It happens in parallel with the economic transition in which the agricultural sector is declining. Letting children enter the labour market is a way for them to be integrated in the mainstream economy because it could mean an improvement of their standard of living. For children, to work and to have an experience in a capital city like Bangkok is a kind of social mobility.

Value conflicts and disappearing moral economy: While economic transition is taking place in Thailand, the question is raised why some children have to bare the burden as cheap labour. This question is more relevant to children who have to work outside their community environment and social norms, i.e., migrant child workers. It is customary in Thai society that children share some of the household work including family economic activities. But to let children leave the household to earn money or to exploit children in their place of work is new phenomena. Child abuse is an issue where we still do not have enough understanding. However, it is observed that there is a value conflict between child's welfare and what is perceived as economic achievement. This conflict stems from a misperception of child rights. Economic rationality, at least in a narrow sense, may override the fundamental values of social integration and solidarity. Social responsibility and care for children is relatively weakening in family, community, business and government sector, because it does not match with the new ralities our children are facingS. Parents are found to have traded their children; business exploits their labour, and the government invests less on children's social security than economic growth promotion. This value conflict and misperception of child rights will require a universal campaign to raise the awareness of all adults concerned in order to soften the impact of economic rationality.

Incomplete adjustment of traditional production relations: The employer-employee relationship, especially in small scale enterprises, is a missing subject in the study of child labour despite its significance for policy formulation. It is observed that a large number of child labourer are caught in traditional relations of production where child labour depends on a paternalistic relationship with employers. Unfortunately, the paternalistic relationship is now operating in the new environment of a higher degree of competitiveness. Pressure is then put upon employees, especially those in the disadvantaged group like child labour. Reciprocity between employers and employees is deteriorating and might not provide a guarantee for social security for young workers. This area still needs further investigation, and obviously the existing labour protection cannot effectively deal with this type of relationship. Moreover, enforcement of existing laws still continues to be a problem, as it has been for a long time.

4

3. Situation and Trend of Children in the Labour Market 3.1. Children in the labour force

Even though child labour has been present in Thai labour market for almost three decades, judging from an official report on child labour in 1968, the sources of data for a review of the situation have not been developed accordingly. We still depend on conventional sources of statistics, i.e., Labour Force Survey, and Child and Youth Survey of the National Statistics Office, Industries and Workers Survey of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (MOLSW). These report the situation of working children by legal definition and do not necessarily reflect the reality. However, as long as alternative sources of information are not developed, conventional statistics are still useful for an overview.

Ideally, children in the same age-group as child workers are supposed to be in school completing their secondary level until grade 9 (Mor 3 in Thai schooling system) which is a custom of average Thai children between 12-15 years old. Until recently, the proportion of young children not in school was alarmingly high. Almost half of them did not continue to secondary level, not to

mention a number of them dropping out before completing M3. Since 1991, things appear to have been improving. Silaporn summarizes that there is an increasing proportion of school children in their school-age group and also a gradual rise of a number of children continuing to secondary school (Silaporn, 1995:71-74). In 1993, the statistics are even more exciting with 84.7 per cent of pupils in primary school remaining in school and up to 76 per cent going on to secondary level (Silaporn, 1995:75). Specifically, the figure from the Labour Force Survey between 1990-1 993 shows that the percentage of children studying age 13-14 is on the rise, from 53.9 per cent in 1990 to 71.1 per cent of children in the same age group in 1993 (See Table 1).

4.1 million children and youth (13-19) were in the labour force in 1993, an almost 16 per cent decline from 1990. Of these, at least 525,300 were children bebA,een 13-14 years of age (See Table 1, Al). If we include children younger than 13 years old and not in the labour force but might be engaged into some kinds of work, the number would be higher. The report of Child and Youth Survey 1993 finds that children between 6-14 who were not in school accounts for 1,470,200 (See Table A9). Table 1: The Situation of Children Group 13-14 Years of Age, 1990-1993 (in per cent)

Categories

1990

1991

1992

1993

Group population/Whole population

4.3

4.4

4.3

4.2

Group labourforce/ Whole labourforce

2.9

2.7

2.1

1.6

Group labour force 'I Group population

37.0

35.1

28.9

21.1

Group working children/ Group population

35.7

33.9

28.5

20.8

Group working children/Whole working pop..

2.9

2.7

2.2

1.6

Group studying children/ Group population

53.9

56.9

64.6

71.1

Sources: Data from The Labour Force Survey Round 3, August 1990-1993, the Na tional Statistics Office.

Note: 1/ Labour force includes those who are not in school and ready to work but may not necessarily be working at the time of the survey.

5

The main reasons for children not being in school are known to be two: one is the accessibility to the service in terms of location of schools or distance from home, and the affordability (52.7 %); and the other is the household's and child's needs to work for additional income (20%) (Table A7). The problems of accessibility (including affordability), and household needs for income are felt by a large number of children (7,012,800 cases), including no financial support (5,094,900), having problems with distance and transportation (289,500) , and needing to work (1,628,400) (Table A8). In summary, the child and youth population in 1992-93 which might be indirectly affected by the national policy and action on child lbour prevention and protection is classified as follows: Table 2: An Overview of the Number of Children who Might Enter the Labour Market

Child & youth labour force (13-19)

4,000,000 525,300*

Child labour force (13-14) Children not in school (6-14)

1 ,470,200

Children not in school (12-14)

696,700**

Children need to work (6-14)

1,628400 **

Sources: * The Labour Force Survey Round 3, August, National Statistics Office 1993 ** Report of the Children and Youth Survey, National Statistics Office 1992, p.61, 69

3.2. Working Children

The situation of a decreasing participation rate of children in the labour force has taken place only recently. The previous evaluation of the number of working children and the size of child labour force indicates a rising trend of working children of 11-14 years old during 1984 and 1988 (Chantana 1992:10-11). From 1990 on, the figure in Table I indicates a rather positive trend of more children in school, meaning that there are fewer children who have to work. Strict comparison cannot.be done with the previous study, because the age classification in the statistical report was not the same in 1988 and 1990 due to the raising of minimum age for child labourers from 12 to 13 years old, the latest four years trend (1990-1 993) gives us some hope for an improvement. The considerable change in the proportion of children in school and in the labour force took place only after 1991 which is the period when implementation of the universal education policy is taking its momentum. The number of working children as appears in the Labour Force Survey 1993 shows that there were 516,800 working children and another 17,600 who might engage in some kinds of work at any time, including those unemployed, looking for work and seasonally inactive. This number covers a wide range of work, but for children who are engaged in non-agricultural employment we have data in the Industries and Workers Stétistics. In 1990, there were at least 95,763 children (13-18) worked in such enterprises, accounting for 2.9 per cent of the whole employees in the country. There was very small number of children younger than 13 years old employed in enterprises and also some six thousand children aged between 13-15 (Table3, A2) reported in the statistics book. The following are the summary of working children who could be a direct target group of the national policies and plans.

6

Table 3: An Overview of the Number of Child Workers Children at work (13-14)

516,800*

Employed children (

N Vi

a' ,-

'.0

Cl

,-I

c

N 00

N N

0C) Cl C'i

Cl

In

'.0

a' a' -4

C '.0 30 0'.

In 00

oo

cli

,-4

Nil '0 N 00

-

Cf'o

1

C

N

Cl

Cli

N

Cli

00

'-:.

C-

N 0

C Cli C N

C'

a' '0 00

Cli

00

Cl

In

Vi

N

'-'

.-' tn

'.0

a'

00 00

Cl

N

'-'

a'

'.0

In

In .-

0 N

00

Cl

00

Cl

C o

In '.0

In

Cli

0 Cli

0

c

Cl

a'

-

In 30 If)

t

0'.

C-

cli

0'. c4i

ci

'.0

c'i

'.0 C '.0 C'

0'.

0

N

N -

-

'

00'.

C '.0

00

Cl

N

Cu

CI)

C

('4

Cl C

i 0i 0

cli

'.0

'.0 cli

0'.

Cl

ci

0ci

c-

30

0

z

Cu

(.4)

0) 0)

I 0 C

E Cli

.-

0'.

It a' .4

C'.

-

Sf)

In

Cl-0 ,-'

N

Cli

30

00

Cl

Cli

U

2 2 C)

2

Cl

30 Cli

Cl

Cl Cl

Cj 'ci

00

cli

oq

Cl

U)

(Ii In

a'

r

ci

r C

C'i

-.

- 'ci

'0

-

Cl

'q

2

Cli

cli

'.0

0'.

od C C-

a

0

0

0

0

Cli Cli Cli

cli Vi ('1

0

JO) (DO 1

o

-

C

0

m

'r 5

() 0

c)m 0

-3 CD

;

9(I

.P.

Cn-

..

-. C)

C)

a' C)

c

a. C

00

-u CD

a

CD

C)

C)

0.

0

C)

Cn

CD

Q

C).

fr

00

CO CD

0 -I 0 CD

CD

V 0 CD

Cl

14

Co

U)

0 CO

C)CD (CV COO)

ug

U)

'0 U)

t)

O

cc

r

-

-3

U) 14

0

'0

--3

*4

U)

'0

14 .

(I)

*4

0

cc

-

iii U

U)

14

0

0

-.

-'cc14 U)

U) U)

00

O

U)

.'O

U)

C)

*4 C.

-J

0

0

00

Cl

*4

o

P

o

0%

Ui

0

-

.o *4

0 b 0

.) o

-U)

P --

CD

34

'0

CD

*4

0

0

CD

CD

5 U)

U)

CO

0)

U) U) -J 00

U)

'0

*4

0

0 bob U)

-' U)

-

0

cc

o

00

-

U)

00

0 L 0

U)

U)

0 8

-

o

P

Q

C)

U)

,..

i-.

0T1U3

U)1PI 0

0

U) i 1

\c8 -0 OU) -

2 U)

A0 U'

U)

C)-

- VI

U'

2 U) .

U) 00

cc

-4 %0

b

-4

A

0

Ui

U'

'-

U)

14

,... U)

00

%O

-.4

00*40-40

.

*4

cc

U)

Cl

'0U)89 Q '0

DC

'0 cc

'0

-

0

0

'be

14

U)

'0

'be

P

U)

0_

00

Table A3: Number of Children and Youth 3-24 Years of age Attendinng School by Sources of Educational Finance, Region and Area

Source of Educational

Whole

Finance

Kingdom

Region

Bangkok

Central, Excluding Northern Northeastern Southern

Metropolis Bangkok Metropolis Total

12,766.7

1,568.4

2,803.5

2,337.4

4,102.5

1,954.9

10,805.9

1,258.0

2,305.7

1,976.0

3,612.9

1,653.2

1,034.1

184.2

248.6

207.8

258.6

134.9

Other members in household

627.5

85.4

176.6

85.3

148.5

131.7

Other relatives outside household

159.5

14.0

51.2

18.6

54.5

21.1

Income from self-working

52.4

226

12.7

8.8

3.7

4.5

Educational fund

61.5

1.1

4.3

34.1

15.7

6.3

Others

22.3

1.7

4.0

6.7

7.0

2.9

3.6

13

0.4

1.5

0.2

Father,mother in household Father,mother outside household

Unknown

Source: Report of Children and Youth Survey 1992, National Statistics Office, p.29

Table A4: Average Annual Expenditure on Education Per Person by Level of Educational Attendance and Type of School (Unit= Baht)

Level of Educational Attendance

Type of School

Average

Public School Private School 1,354

1,016

2,730

838

525

1,336

1,283

579

2,192

787

564

2,067

Lower Secondary

1,425

1,287

2,376

Upper Secondary

1,948

1,786

3,546

Upper Secondary of Vocational

3,274

2,505

4,082

University

4,228

3,584

5,845

Others

2,536

1,287

6,082

Unknown

2,097

2,585

1,804

Average of all Level Child Development Center Kindergarten Elementary

Source: Report of Children and Youth Survey

1992, National Statistics Office, p.-7-

Table A5: Percentage of Children and Youth 13-24 Years of Age Attending School and Working by age Group, Sex and Area (in thousand in bracket)

Age group

Municipal Area

Whole Kingdom

(years)

Total

Male Female Total

Total

100.0

100.0

(526.2) (282.6)

Non-Municipal Area

Male Female Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

(243.6)

(88.6)

(40.1)

(48.5)

100.0

Male Female 100.0

(437.6) (242.5)

100.0

(195.1)

13-14

35.0

32.4

37.8

9.8

10.0

9.5

40.1

36.2

44.8

15-19

48.7

53.2

43.7

39.5

41.5

38.1

50.6

55.1

45.1

20-24

16.3

14.4

18.5

50.6

48.5

52.4

9.3

8.7

10.1

Source: Report of Children and Youth Survey

1992, National Statistics Office, p. -25-

0

C

oq

.q

0

0

0

N

00

'

0

a

a

a

a

Cu

'C 0) Cl)

0. 2

..-.

-

00

-

N N

C

000'C\

00

N N

00

N N

N

0

*

*

Cfl

C

CI)

0)

C)

N N

C)

E

C

-4

an

C

a'

N

-4

N

*

*

*

0

'*

'-0

t

a-

'-4

Cu

0.

C)

'-

C

Cl

q

*

N

If)

Cl

'n

C-I

N '-4

0 a..

0

0

a

.9

V

q

If)

N

Cfl

c-i

d

c-i

c

0

.0

-1

N

(1

U U

0

Cfl

0

0

C

-.4

-

N

N

c-i

d

C)

CD

U) C) C

N

N

ad

d N

c.

Ij ç,

-

a'

'-4

-

.1-Ia'

.4 Q

00

0 N

'-0

00

N

If) '-4

'.0

'0

an

00

'-0

00 N

N

an

C

t

N

00 od

Cfl

-4

N

.-4

0

.-a

C.) C.)

0 U)

C)

4

C)

u C)

-4

'.0

C-I

'.0

Cfl

*

tfl a-

N an

-.4

C-I

'*

-a t-

*

'-0

'0

*

cfl

c

C-I

\

*

C-I

-4

an

c-i

cfl

cfl

c

0'.

tr

t a. Cu C.)

cfl

C

c

a'.

0

*

cn

(I)

o '.

C) 41)

o

o

o

d

d o o

*

o

Cu

(U

C

0

z Cu

0) 0)

an

*

'

-4 c-i

an c

.-4

a-

*

-4

d

'-0

N

00

'o

*

C')

-

In C)

0

C')

0

>-C

C (U

C

L()

tO) o

U)

'

C)

00

.

C'. 4 I

C'

-4

.

I

'n .

'tN i

C N

..

't'-4

0"

'd'

cn

i

'-'

an

oc-

44

i

-.4

'-4

N

-

"

.a

a

c a-a

0'. 4 a

an '-a

N 0N ECU

00)

(our

Table A7: Percentage of Children and Youth 6-24 Years of Age not Aft ending School by Reasons for not Attending School, Sex and Area n thousand

Reasons for not

Non-Municipal Area

Municipal Area

Whole Kingdom

Attending School

Total

Male

Female

Total

Male Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

(11,182.1) (5,615.7) (5,566.4) (1,310.2) (630.6)

100.0

(679.6) (9,871.9) (4,985.1) (4,886.8)

Less than Compulsory Age

6.0

6.2

5.7

3.6

3.8

3.4

6.3

63

6.0

Sickness, Physical Disability

2.5

2.6

2.4

2.8

3.4

2.3

2.4

23

2.4

No Financial Support

52.7

51.9

533

41.5

38.8

44.1

54.2

53.6

54.8

Distance of School and

3.1

2.6

3.6

0.6

0.4

0.7

3.4

2.8

4

Had to Earn Livelihood

20.2

19.5

20.8

29.8

28.9

30.7

18.9

18.3

19.5

No Interest in Studying

9.8

11.3

8.4

10.1

12.6

7.7

9.8

11.1

8.5

Cound not Admitted

1.8

2.2

1.4

3.3

3.6

3

1.6

2

1.2

Misconduct

0.4

0.6

0.1

1.4

2.2

03

0.2

0.4

0.1

Others

3.3

3.0

3.7

6

5.8

6.3

3

2.7

3.3

Unknown

0.2

0.0

0.4

0.9

0.5

1.3

0.2

0.1

0.2

or Mental Handicap

Problem in Communication

Source: Reiort of Chi'dren and Youth Survey 1992g National Statistics Office, p.-22-

o

cn

N

C

N

xG)

U)

0 0 Cl,

C)

C

*

N

C

C

N

N 'C © 00

N

o

U

1%q

-.

o

N

-

O

C

cj ('

Cfl

000 N

O

C. '"4

"

'.0

-

Ifl 0

Cfl

00

00

SI

rj

'.0

c C -.

-

r'

N

1

C

>

c)

C)

C)

N

*

cid(fl '.0

0'.

C)

N

0'.

U

I1

N -4 N

N N

00

N

-4

C

E

o

z

N

-'

0

U 5-

(4'

30

Cfl

'0'

CO0 '0

!j

0_ C.

C)

*

c Nr'N '.030

Ce'.

N

301O'.00N tfl N 30

'.0

0'.

30

N

'.00 N

*

00 '"4

cfl

N N

N N4

V

I

30

'0 N N Cfl

Ifl

-

N

00

1'. 0'.

°

0

00 30

N

'.0 '.0

N

t

1"

-4

'.0

30

0'.

2 E

8

o

z

o

U

0'.

-'t Ni

a'.

v

4

*

N NCN N cn

N

'Ct

C.

N In

'0

c'

'J

t

' 0'.

C

C '.0

(

N

't

tfl

30

0'.

N 0'.

N '0 'I"

N Cfl

'

)

v

E

'.0 '.0

'

*

0'.0'.0 '0

-0 If)

oq

r

*

0

0 CI

N

°.

"

-

30

PicC

II IL
..

in

N "0

Cl

00

0%

0 0 .c

0

in

N 00

41)

.-

00

0

.-4

0

"0

I1

0

00

-4-: -4

00

r

CI)

0% %0

00

Cl)

C)

C

0%

C

In

-

Cu

0

N N

d00

00

-

41)

0 in

-

0 C

0

C)

o

4-

ft

0

0

Ci %q

0%

'.0

E

c. C.)

in Cl Cl

00

o

a)

0'

N

>-

In

Cl

"0

'

.-

0 0 00

00

"0

in .4

.4

C)

"0 "0

0

Cl

NO00 ClN Cl

'0

-

00

00

.

Cl

C

-. in

00 N 00

Cl

0 ,-

-

0

00

Cl

t

t

0

0

0%

'

00

.

'0

N

C

.-.

00

oq

C

C

.-

''

Cl

C'

*

U) i-i Cl

N Cl

C

Ci

0%

N '-

00

in in

000% 0 ('1

C,,

-

U)

*

0

N

-

C'j

CC)

00

Cl

N

00

'0

00 00 00

Cl

>.

C

*

Cu

C

Cl

u

'

*

CC)

C)

Cl

0

00

.-i

'

0%

in

i-i

*

* in

In

.

0 C)

C

*

N %O

'-4 I-

a. C ECu

'0 C (C) N

'

o

0)0) 00 N 00

00

Cl

N

0%

CC)

00 00

0'

0%

Cl

'0

Cl

Q '

QC

%

*

%0

41)1(100 - 0

%Q

0%

'-4

CC)

U

%0

C')

CC)

0%

N '0

'.

N (f

*

N 00 -I

C

C

CC)

0% CC)

U)

N in

(0

'.0 CC)

N

.-4

CC)

I a)

P

a)

00

C

.-

0%

'-4

-4

-r

'

u

'-4

Cl

't-

0' .$

'Ct

'-4

Cl

-4

'-4

Cl

oC)41c C

Cl

-4

c416 Cl

a)

Cu

00

Table A16: Percentage of Working Children and Youth 13-24 Years of Age by Occupation and Work Status (in thouund in bracket)

Work Status Occupation

Total

Own Unpaid

Employee

Employer Go.

Unknown

Enterprise Private account family

worker worker 100.0

0.3

2.4

0.3

(7,832.6)

(24.4)

(188.1)

(26.1)

1.7

*

0.5

*

0.2

0.1

*

*

Clerical workers

3.5

*

0.6

0.1

Sales workers

10.3

0.1

*

Farmers

49.5

*

2.5

Total

42.7

.3

44.8

(3,344.3) (725.4) (3,511.8)

*

0.1

*

*

2.7

*

0.1

*

2.2

1.6

6.4

0.4

*

9.0

4.8

35.2

*

0.1

*

1.1

1.0

0.2

27.3

0.1

0.3

0.2

22.8

1.4

2.4

Services

4.3

*

0.3

*

3.5

0.3

0.2

Unknown

0.8

0.0

0.0

0.2

0.0

0.2

Professionnal/

1.1

0.2 (12.4)

Technical

Administrative/. Executive

Transport! Communication Craftsmen, Labourers

' 0.3

Source: Report of Children andYouth Survey 1992, National Statistics Office, p.-24-

Remark: * Less than 0.1

0.2

Table All: Inspected Establishment that Employed Child Labour and Compiled with Illegal Provision by size and Illegal Type, 1992

Size

Age 15 < 18

Age 13 < IS

Establishment

Working illegal time Working

Inspected Est.

Total

%

illegal time

.. COO

0

'- 0. 0.0CO0) C 0

.0 CO

a)

U. Il)

OC

Oc .

(C 2

>'13

0

E

w.

.2

Eo 00.2 wz .2 o

(10) C >,> m 0 ci)

'-

I.-

o >.

= 000

Coo 0)00 ur C

0.

0

Cci) oE

Ci)

U)W

..

> Cci 0

.0 0) Ii) C

0

Cci

E

00C O

E - vC ,

C U) CO

Cl)

ci)

> 0

a)

x

I-

0

w

C

C',

U-

C

0

z

Cu

0

C CU

0

.0 UI -J 9-

U)

0

C

ID

0 c') 0

U-

.2

C

C 0)

00)

o

0. E

00 zz

000 zo,S

a)

C

0). CO O = CO 0

Co