Does eliminating child labor mean banning all children from all kinds of work?
The short answer is no. Although some groups and individuals may use the term to refer to any economic activity carried out by a child, the term, as used in Target 8.7, has a narrower definition.
The International Labour Organization’s (ILO) describes child labor as “work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development.” [1] More specifically, the term refers to work that:
- is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and/or
- interferes with their schooling by: depriving them of the opportunity to attend school; obliging them to leave school prematurely; or requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work. [2]
ILO points out that what is and what is not considered child labor will depend on the age of the child, the type of tasks they carry out, the number of hours they work for, and the conditions they work in. And if that’s not confusing enough for you, the boundaries of this category also shift from country to country, and from sector to sector.
ILO has also highlighted a sub-category called “the worst forms of child labor” as a priority for elimination. This category includes: “children being enslaved, separated from their families, exposed to serious hazards and illnesses and/or left to fend for themselves on the streets of large cities – often at a very early age. ” [3]
While these definitions clearly exclude children conducting safe, age-appropriate work in their free time, they still leave a lot of room for interpretation. What’s more, cases of children in work will rarely fit neatly into either the category of safe, empowering work or that of exploitative and dangerous work, because the number of variables involved is truly endless.
In a feature article for openDemocracy, children’s rights researchers Claire O’Kane and Ornella Barros tackle the complexity of the issue head-on:
Children’s work and labour is a complex and multi-faceted issue, and understanding and responding effectively to it isn’t easy. There is evidence to show that children’s work can be both a means to, and a violation of, children’s rights to survival, development, protection and participation. For many working children, positive and negative aspects co-exist. Recognising this and the diversity of children’s work is where any serious conversation on addressing this topic must begin. [4]
How can anti-child labor activism be harmful?
When campaigning against the exploitation of children, we sometimes risk falling into the trap of presenting child labor as an inherently evil phenomenon which should be stamped out entirely. We imagine a child being kept away from their parents and forced to work in gruelling conditions from dawn until dusk. And while these cases do occur, they lie on the extreme end of a broad spectrum.
It’s worth noting the role of the ‘white savior complex’ in this oversimplification. Many organizations and individuals who campaign against child labor are based in the Global North whereas child labor is most prevalent in communities in the Global South. Experts have highlighted how campaigners’ own cultural lens can lead them to misunderstand the issue. “The current global effort to eradicate child labor is based on the experiences of the ideal of white, Western, middle-class childhoods,” as Tatek Abebe, professor of childhood studies at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim, told Thomson Reuters Foundation. [5]
This overly simplistic approach naturally leads us to focus more on prohibitionary action, rather than taking a more systemic view of the issue, and working toward structural changes that would improve the conditions of working children. And by banning children from working without addressing the factors that motivate them to work, we risk causing real harm to them and their families.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence of child labor around the world rose. With their caregivers affected by illness, food insecurity and other crises, children and young people had to take on a more active role in looking after and generating resources for their families.
With the impact of the pandemic in mind, 101 professors and researchers wrote an open letter to the UN, UNICEF, and the UNCRC Committee, asking them to reconsider the goal and its timeline. They write:
Currently, there is a great danger that working children’s precarious situations can be further damaged by well-intentioned, but ineffective and potentially counterproductive pre-COVID-19 norms and practices that are primarily based on ideological and emotional convictions instead of scientific evidence and working children’s own experiences. [6]
Instead, they call for the sector to take into account and build on the strategies which children and their families are currently using to mitigate hardship.
