Child Labour Comparative study - University of Management and ...

Fact about Child Labor 1FACT ABOUT CHILD LABORAnother Real Fact about Child Labor: A Comparative Study between Districts of Two Provincesof PakistanAbdul Khaliq Malik, Niaz Ahmed Bhutto, Danish Shaikh, Erum Akhter, Falahuddin ButtSukkur Institute Of Business Administration, Sukkur SindhProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 2ABSTRACTChild 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 realeconomics of child labour can have better policy to tackle this issue. Using primary data fromtwo districts one from Sindh another from Punjab, study examines supply side determinants ofchild labour comparatively and finds significant relationship between average wage set by hisemployer and labour decision of child. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression is used toestimate results. Though household income, parental education and family characteristic docontribute, but study also determines perception of parents regarding job uncertainty anotherfactor that increases supply of child labor in case of Sindh. Legislative sanctions(e.g. ban) cannot only be the proper solution for this quandary, drawing a survey from 350 poor householdstudy also determines some effective policy implications for government to overcome this curseas well.Key Words: Child labor, Sukkur, Multan, Individual, Combined, EstimationProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 31. INTRODUCTIONInternational 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 laborand over eight million are engaged in dangerous and abusive forms of child labor. Pakistan has asignificant number of children participating in economic activities and contributing considerablyto household income. 5–14 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 thestreets, while some are working in formal and informal sectors of market. Rana Eijaz (2008)defines child labour as ―the participation of school-age children (5–15 years) in the labour force,i.e., work for wage or in household enterprises to earn a living for themselves or to supporthousehold income‖. There is not a well-documentation of the extent of participation of thesechildren (Jafri & Rashid, 1997). However, the issue of child labor is very complex because, onone hand it may take the child out of school and adversely impact human capital accumulationand lifetime earnings, on other hand, labour work a child does can be a vital risk copingmechanism, 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 alldeterminants are same in these provinces that are causing supply of child labour that is alsoexplored by ( Barki and Fasih, 1998). It is not necessary that all determinants of child labourparticipation will be same in both provinces exploring the contribution of those factors in theseprovinces that how much each factor contributing. There is a shortage of quantitative work ratherqualitative in Pakistan, and now there is a shift towards econometric analyses that helps evenbetter in getting true results and decision making. Therefore, this paper analyses dataquantitatively and then econometrically as well. There are many variables that can be the causeProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 4of child labor, hence most important variables are included and paper also measures intensity ofeach 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 thinkhaving 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 andwhich 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 theoverall essence of this paper.The paper is organized in sections, section 2 contains some review of the literature, section 3describes data collection method and model used for data, section 4 describes comparativedescriptive 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 combinedestimation of both districts by OLS regression method. Finally section 6 concludes wholediscussion of results.2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREChild labour phenomenon is common in developing countries and there is growing literature onthis 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 generalhouse-helps. The lack of information is major cause of not having thorough analysis of incidenceand nature of child domestic workers in many Asian countries. However, there is not asignificant reduction in child labour participation, especially in Asia. Two main characteristics ofAsian child labour that distinguish it from child labour elsewhere is that a large part of Asianchild labour is in the form of child domestic workers; and the bulk of Asian child labour is in theProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 510–14 years age group ( Ray, 2004). Poor households are more probably to use child labor andschooling reduction as strategies to mitigate with socioeconomic shocks, (Vásquez & Bohara,2010). Delap (2010) used data from Bangladesh Dhaka slums and proposed that householdpoverty and income stability are key economic determinants of children‘s work; Low householdincomes 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 atonce 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 thepoverty line. Ray and Lancaster (2005) found negative relationship between child learning andchild work. Krisztina and Günther (2005) also supports poverty hypothesis because families needthe supplementary income because they are too poor to survive. Therefore they sacrificeseducation of child.The Government of Pakistan has enacted the Employment of Children Act of 1991 which hasbanned employment of children below the age of 14 years and if someone who is employingthem will be punished, imprisoned and fined. There are some cultural differences among fourprovinces of Pakistan not all the determinants are same in these provinces that are causing supplyof child labour, that is also explored by Barki and Fasih(1998), reported that ―Due to cultural anddemographic differences between the four provinces, we expect that determinants of child labourcould differ across provinces‖. Our focus of research is also to see factors that differ and lead tosupply of child labour between Sukkur and Multan. Majority of children are helping parents intheir daily businesses. As children are hardly ever responsible for their own choices, there is aneed of understanding those factors that influencing the decision of parents that whether to sendchildren to school or at work.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 6Canagarajah 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 5–14years at 250 million. Of these, 120 million work full-time, and 24 million are below the age of10. In absolute terms child labor is most prominent in Asia, because about 150 million workingchildren live in Asia. In Asia and Latin America, which are more urbanized, child labor is alsoconsidered an urban phenomenon. Child workers are equally liable to the dangers faced by adultworkers under parallel conditions, but they are more fatally affected because of their differentanatomical, physiological and psychological characteristics. Unlike adults, children do not fightagainst their coercion through unions‖. Those poor household, which are living, close to thesubsistence level, and if they are induced to send their children to school instead of work, anexogenous shock (for example, poor harvest) would have an unreasonably harsh impact on theirwelfare (Canagarajah and Nielsen, 1999).Mother‘s education is also most important factor of child labour supply and it reduces childhours of work in both Pakistan and Ghana irrespective of their culture, continent, and if level ofliving is controlled, study conducted by ( Bhalotra, et al, 1997). Employment of mothers and thatof their children cannot be thought of as independent or random events; increase in theprobability of women‘s employment also increases children‘s likelihood of work(Meltem, 2008). Poverty alone is not only the factor that is forcing children to work but therealso have some other factors that compel children to work (H. Congdon, 2010). Therefore wehave added some other factors as well and we will see comparison between two districts ofPakistan one from Sindh and one from Punjab to see the quantitative differences between thevariables. Emerson and Knabb (2006) who explained that poverty only may not be the root causeof child labour. They presented a model in their paper that proposes a different methods throughwhich child labour may be transmitted through the generations of a family; differences inProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 7opportunity. ‗Opportunity‘ is broadly defined to include such things as differences in educationalquality, access to high paying jobs, access to information on the returns to education andprejudice 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 couldlead to its reduction and eventual elimination (Ray, 2001). Many researchers have extended theirwork on this issue like increase in population, female labour force participation and fertility alsoincreases the child labour participation as, Joelle ( 2010) reported that ―Average child labor rateacross countries increases with the size of the rural population, female labor force participationand fertility, while it falls with rise in GDP per capita, the part of public educational expendituresin gross national income, life expectancy and the share of the labor force in industry oragriculture‖.Much of the research papers have focused this issue all over the world specially for developingeconomies. Internationally there has a comparative study on this issue; like comparative studybetween continents (Pushkar & Ray, 2002), comparative study between countries like Pakistanand 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 comparativework between two districts (Pakpattan and Faisalabad) of Punjab by (Rana, 2003). By reviewingthe literature still there is a gap we find in Pakistan that of a comparative study on child labourparticipation between Sindh and Punjab. Different authors have extracted data from differentsources like; Ray (2000, 2000a) obtained data for children in the age group of 10–14 years fromPakistan Integrated Household Survey 1991, Burki and Shahnaz (2001) used data for children inthe age group of 10–14 years from the Labour Force Survey 1996-97. Apart from these reviewsmany 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 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 83. DATA COLLECTION & MODELTwo districts of Pakistan one from Sindh and one from Punjab is selected for this study. Sukkuris selected from Sindh, which is known as hub of Sindh in commercial activities and Multanwhich is also one of the commercial and small scale manufacturing centre of Punjab. Most of thechildren in Pakistan are working in informal sectors of economy like retail shops, autoworkshops, home business, technical shops, repairing shops and as a servant in many servicebusinesses. Therefore we have selected this sector to collect data of our research by filling upquestionnaires face to face from their current household head. Convenient sampling technique isused and data is collected by household survey, 150 sample size is taken from Sukkur districtand 200 from Multan because of having large population than Sukkur.3.1 MODELIn 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 withnumber of working children. Significance level is also tested by controlling omitted variablebiasness effect, first by evaluating each district individually then study compares results andcombined data is also estimated for measuring labour decision of child.WhereProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 9Yi = is dependant variable denotes number of working children and data is cross sectional. α isan intercept and β 1 …..β 7 are coefficients of each respective variable. Fm denotes members of anindividual family, Hi is Household Income of family head, Fe and Me is father and mothereducation respectively, Amw is Average monthly wage of all Children within a family, Wmdenotes 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). ԑ i is anerror term.3.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICSChild labor is an acute problem prevailing within the developing economies like Pakistan aswell. A Great deal of attention is especially on developing countries has made this issuedebatable as every researcher has tried to support his opinion and found diversified results; likesome has supported poverty a main cause, while other supported mother education mostimportant factor like; Bhalotra, et..al (1997), in his study found inverse relationship betweenmother‘s education and child labor. Labor work of mother, father education, and other familycharacteristic affects labour decision of child studied by many researchers. Proposed research hasfound 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 tonote here is deviation of average family members, in Sukkur average result may vary by 1.7while in Multan the rate of deviation is 2.1. Average number of children in household is slightlygreater 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). Averagenumber of working children in each district is approximately same, but prominent difference instandard deviation can be observed, with 0.763 in Sukkur and 1.151 in Multan that suggest aProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 10deviation in mean result for both districts. The factor of urgency is very profound in Multan, asminimum age of first working child is 5 years and it continues till 16 years while in Sukkurminimum age is 7 years and maximum is 14 years.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 11Descriptive Statistics Minimum Maximum Mean Std.DeviationProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 12Suk Mul Suk Mul Suk Mul Suk MulFamily members 3 3 13 14 6.67 7.95 1.933 2.169No: of CHL 2 1 11 12 4.65 5.66 1.868 2.045No: of WC1 1 4 5 1.81 2.06 .763 1.151WS age. FC7 5 14 16 10.19 11.33 1.951 2.633Avg WS age of all CHL7.00 6 14.00 16 10.3404 11.48 1.62154 2.379FC WG400 200 2500 3000 1138.33 1322.93 410.737 784.865Avg : WG of all CHL (m)300.00 200 2500.00 3000 1018.2 1273.95 392.46685 728.507FC .WH 6 6 12 15 10.08 10.99 1.834 1.810Avg: WH of all CHLHH income (m)6.00 6 12.00 15 10.1150 11.01 1.48731 1.6404000 1800 14000 12000 9574.67 4709.94 2823.682 1867.533Table: 4.1Note: [CHL = children, Avg = average, WC = working children, FC = first child, WS = workstating, WG = wage, WH = working hours, HH = household head income monthly]Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 13It 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 Multanrespectively. 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 thatis Rs/= 1138, result suggests that in Multan first child average wage is higher than in Sukkur, butone thing also kept in mind that average working hours for first child in Multan is also higherwith deviation of Rs/784 in markets than in Sukkur. Higher deviation from mean illustrates thelevel of uncertainty in wage structure, but working conditions are same in both districts for firstchild but overall Multani child is working one hour more. Higher average working hour can befactor of high average wage in Multan. Table (4.1) shows difference of Rs/260 in averagemonthly wage of all children. From many studies it is found that household income is consideredto an influential determinant of child labor. Sakellariou and Lall (2000) used data fromPhilippians and states that poverty has been main and persistent cause of child labour. Theprobability of child labour is higher if the household is poor. Meltem (2006) says that childrenfrom poorer families stand at a superior risk of employment. A huge difference between averagehousehold income can be found for both districts with standard deviation of Rs/= 2823 in Sukkurand Rs/=1867 in Multan. Since it is visible that in district of Multan child labor is very muchsensitive 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 workLess household income, outstanding debt, wish to start own business in future, High dependencyratio and many others reason that include illness of family head, a gap in employment due to jobswitching that causes temporary unemployment were the main causes of being sending childrenProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 14to market, frequency distribution is shown in Table (4.2). Out of 150 respondents, 62 chose lesshousehold income as a reason for sending child to work that is 41.33%, while in Multan 96respondents out of 200 chose this factor, that account for 53%. This result suggest it is thepoverty that is one of prominent reason why children are being sent to market in district ofMultan this account for more than 50% of the sample opposite to district of Sukkur where thisaccount for 41%. Income do affect parent‘s decision and reduce child labour as Tasnim & Rashid(2010), support this view they say, income level of head of household reduces the child laborin both urban and rural areas but the effect is stronger in urban areas. However outstanding debtis one reason that is more leading in Sukkur that is out of 150 respondents 51 chose this reasonfor sending children to work in markets and only 26 respondents out of 200 selected this optionin Multan which accounts for only 14.4% as compare to 34% in Sukkur. Respondent alsoselected one reason of sending children to market is the wish that they want their children mustlearn required skills from market at initial stage of their age and then start their own business infuture because it is necessary for survival in society study conducted by (Togunde & Carter,2006), he suggests that ―children‘s work is crucial to both the economic survival of thehousehold and to the future professional well-being of the children‖. 11.34% respondent inSukkur chose this reason while in Multan 13.3% of respondents selected this reason why theirTable: 4.2Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 15child work in markets. High dependency ratio is more visible in Multan, family heads selectedone reason why their children work in market is that their income is less but family size is largerto meet all expenses, so it was the number of consumers in household that were inducing theirrespective family to send their children in market it accounts for 12.7% in Multan and none ofthe respondent chose this option in Sukkur. As notified earlier that other reason that contributetowards child labor include illness of family head, temporary unemployment that is createdduring job switching and unemployment of family head are major reason why children work inmarkets, in Sukkur these factors collectively cause 13.33% and 6.6% in Multan.FrequencyPercentSuk Mul Suk MulLess household income 62 96 41.33 53.0Outstanding debt 51 26 34 14.4Start own business in future 17 24 11.34 13.3High dependency ratio 0 23 0 12.7Any other reason 20 12 13.33 6.6Total 150 181 100 100Factors of not sending to schoolProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 16Uncertainty of job market, high cost of schooling, low quality of education, unavailability ofschool near to home and other reasons were main contributors why children are not sent toschool by their respective family heads.Perception of Uncertain job market in future has discouraged poor even more. They think there isvery high risk that either we can get a return of our investment in child education or not, sopoverty is not only the cause of child labour, two most important risk, income (or resource) riskthat the household faces while its children are in school and the risks related with uncertaintywhether they will have significant return on investment that they have done on their childrencapital (Lyon and Rosati, 2006). 32.67% respondent of Sukkur has job uncertainty as comparedto 9.4% in Multan, shown in table (4.3). Quality of education is even worst in Sukkur. Howevermajor contributor for not sending children is high cost of schooling that accounts 66.9% inMultan as compared to 28.66% in Sukkur. Parents claims that no free books is given to ourchildren except one or two, teachers use to sell books on low prices, while governmentannounces 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 toschool, withdrawal from parents because of teachers in school use to get their personal workdone from child rather to study them, poor facilities within government school etc collectivelyaccounts for 13.8% in Multan and 8.66% in Sukkur.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 17FrequencyPercentSuk Mul Suk MulPerception of Uncertainty ofjob market in future49 17 32.67 9.4High cost of schooling 43 121 28.66 66.9Low quality education 39 17 26 9.4There is no school in yourarea6 1 4 .6Any other reason 13 25 8.66 13.8Total 150 181 100 100.0TABLE: 4.3Child 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 theythink will be needed shown in table(4.4). In Sukkur 47.33% of sample chose if they have properjob or business then they will send their children to school and 42% of respondent in Multanselected this option. Furthermore facility of credit was also the option that 23.34% of respondentselected in Sukkur while 34.8% of sample in Multan, 14% of respondents in Sukkur demandedProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 18quality education in schools; the number is slightly low in Multan that is 10.5%. If householdhave assurance of job after education then 15.33% of sample in Sukkur are agree to send childto 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 offacilities such as good condition of school, water availability etc, then they will send theirchildren to school.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)Fact about Child Labor 19

Fact about Child Labor 20FrequencyPercentSuk Mul Suk MulProper job or business tooperate71 76 47.33 42.0Facility of credit 35 63 23.34 34.8Quality education is provided 21 19 14 10.5Certainty of employment infuture23 18 15.33 9.9Table: 4.4Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 21Any other reason 0 5 0.0 2.8Total 150 181 100.0 100.0(Above mentioned results can be used for designing the policies for motivating parents to sendtheir children to school than to work)Measure of educationIn literature review we noticed that there are many studies that suggest education level ofhousehold head either father or mother of child plays a vital role in exercising the practice ofchild labor. Table (4.5) shows that ratio of uneducated father and mother is higher in Multan thanin Sukkur, while mother education is going up to middle level in Multan as compared to justhaving primary level in Sukkur. This low level of education among parents of the children ispotential cause of child labor within respective area. It can be a reason that higher education inpoor household leads to high earning as father from Sukkur earning more money than of Multanas show in table (4.5).These results highlights the role of education that is if the child parents areuneducated there will be more chance that their children will work in market as compare toparents who are somehow educated.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 22Table: 4.5Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 23FrequencyPercentF= FatherM= MotherF M F M F M F MSuk Mul Suk MulUneducated 69 108 119 156 46 72 65.7 86.2Primary 45 42 54 21 30 28 29.8 11.6Middle 30 0 7 4 20 0.0 3.9 2.2Secondary 6 0 1 0 4 0.0 .6 0Total 150 150 181 181 100.0 100 100.0 100.04. RESULTS & DISCUSIONS4.1 Individual District EstimatesEmployment of child is a common phenomenon exists in developing countries not just in ruralbut in urban area as well. Child works as street salesperson, blue collar worker in smallmanufacturing, restaurant worker, and in service sector of economy. Study explores differentdimension 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 Multanrespectively. Number of family members is common and positively correlated with number ofworking children and significant in both districts as well. Household income is also significantand negatively correlated with child labor. Poverty hypothesis supported by many researchersProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 24that lesser the income of household leads to child to work in market as expenses of householdcan be compensated easily. Results shows average monthly wage also significant in both districtswith 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 ifaverage 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 inboth district, may be because of limitation of data, larger the size of sample can have effect ofworking mother as well. Result also shows interesting dissimilarities like Multan has fivesignificant variables as compared to just three in Sukkur. Father and mother education issignificant at 5% in Multan. But variability in number of working children is higher due tocontrol 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 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 25Table: 5.1 (a)…. SukkurRegressor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Constant 0.0299(0.1658)3.5558*(0.1438)3.5543*(0.1435)3.5519*(0.1478)3.6204*(0.1457)3.6214*(0.1464)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*(0.000008)-0.0002*(0.0000084)-0.00023*(0.0000093)-0.00022*(0.0000093)-0.00022*(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 0.00197(0.0464)R 2 0.4584 0.9127 0.9137 0.9137 0.9188 0.9188 0.9188Adjusted 0.4547 0.9116 0.9120 0.9114 0.9159 0.9154 0.9148R 2Dependant Variable: Number of Working Children(Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, values in bracketsdenotes standard error.)Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 26Regressor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Table: 5.1 (b)…. MultanDependant Variable: Number of Working ChildrenProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 27Constant 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)-0.00024**(0.0001)-0.00024**(0.0001)Wm 0.0176(0.1511)0.0097(0.1512)Jf 0.1797(0.1605)R 2 0.1799 0.2448 0.2922 0.3113 0.3328 0.3328 0.3385Adjusted 0.1753 0.2363 0.2802 0.2956 0.3137 0.3098 0.3108R 2(Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, values in bracketsdenotes standard error.)4.2 Combined Districts EstimatesDespite 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 economyProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 28affects this segment along with others especially when we look at child labour and itsexploitation. A serious concern of society that has captivated child from his study and pleasantlife to hazardous working condition environment which is ultimately physiologically andpsychologically harmful for child‘s health. Among four provinces of Pakistan, Sindh and Punjabhave high concentration and intensity of child work. Therefore study also estimates result oncombined data as major part of this problem can be covered in a country. Table (5.2), presentsresults on combined data of both districts. Worth noting difference is the effect of joint family onchild labor that was not in individual estimation. Positively correlated with significance level aswell. So it is clear that if household families are living together, then those household have hightendency of sending children to labor work than individual living household. May be the effectof one family‘s attitude towards child work also affects other family as well, but other variablescan also affect the child work. Father education has become significant at 10% while it was notin case of Sukkur district. Significance level of average monthly wage is 1% while in Multan it ison 5%. But in combined data it has significant relationship as well like it is in individualestimation. 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 intable (5.2).Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 29Table: 5.2Dependant Variable: Number of working childrenRegressor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Constant 0.1968(0.1684)1.2559*(0.2423)1.2541*(0.2406)1.2679*(0.2362)1.6593*(0.2397)1.6638*(0.2447)1.6147*(0.2414)Fm 0.2376*(0.0219)0.1759*(0.0234)0.1774*(0.0232)0.1735*(0.0228)0.1753*(0.0220)0.1753*(0.0220)0.1691*(0.0218)Hi -0.00009*(0.000015)-0.00008*(0.000016)-0.000065*(0.000016)-0.000066*(0.000015)-0.000066*(0.000015)-0.000082*(0.0000157)Fe -0.1448**(0.0613)-0.1118***(0.0608)-0.1010***(0.0586)-0.1016***(0.0590)-0.1097***(0.0581)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)-0.00032*(0.00007)Wm 0.0082(0.0873)0.00109(0.0860)Jf 0.3016*(0.0903)R 2 0.2629 0.3322 0.3435 0.3695 0.4173 0.4173 0.4377Adjusted R 2 0.2607 0.3282 0.3374 0.3617 0.4083 0.4065 0.4246(Note: * significant at 1% level, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 10%, and values inbrackets are standard error.)Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 305. CONCLUSIONNowadays it has become a growing interest for every academics, professionals, and media toconsider an issue of child labor. It is universally acceptable that child labor is undesirablephenomenon but main concern is to tackle this problem. Proposed paper identifies keydeterminants that has relation with child labor and provides comparative results quantitativelyand econometrically as it can better help in policy implications for both provinces (Sindh &Punjab) of Pakistan. Regional disparity between two districts have some significant differenceslike child labour has significant relationship with family members, household income, fathereducation, mother education and average monthly wage child is getting in Multan as comparedto Sukkur where father and mother education is not significant. Ratio of working children inMultan is higher than in Sukkur, because Multan has high sensitivity in relation with householdincome. Low average monthly wage of child forcing family to send other child in market in bothdistricts. One of the interesting result study discovers, is perception of parents regarding unstablejob market, it means employer is also responsible in shaping culture of child labour. They thinktoday about unemployment of their child in future, it may be because of seeing existing jobmarket structure or might any member from family have experienced no gain from education. Itis clear that countries current job market structure not just affect graduates but poor householddecision 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 opportunitycost 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 itshould 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 theyProceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 31could 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 motivationalfactors that can reduce child labour and will make a child from labour to only school goingstudent.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 32REFERENCESRay, R. (2000) ―Analysis of child labour in Peru and Pakistan: A comparative study‖ Journal ofPopulation Economics, 2000, Volume 13, Number 1, Pages 3-19Maitra, P. and Ray, R. (2002) 'The Joint Estimation of Child Participation in Schooling andEmployment: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents', Oxford DevelopmentStudies, 30:1, 41-62Joelle, S-L. (2010) ―A cross-national study of child labor and its determinants‖ The Journal ofDeveloping Areas, Volume 44, Number 1, pp. 325-344Ray, R. (2001) ―Simultaneous Analysis of Child Labour and Child Schooling: ComparativeEvidence from Nepal and Pakistan‖ Pakistan Development Review.Maitra, P. and Ray, R. (2010) ―The Joint Estimation of Child Participation in Schooling andEmployment: Comparative Evidence from Three Continents ―Oxford, 1469-9966,Volume 30, Pages 41 – 62Ersado, 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. 455–480Ray, R. and Lancaster, G. (2005) ―The impact of children‘s work on schooling: Multi-countryevidence‖ International Labour Review, Vol. 144 (2005), No. 2Helena, 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 oftheir Determinants‖ Australian national university, ASARC Working Papers.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 33Rana, Eijaz (2008) ―Gender Analysis of Children‘s Activities in Pakistan‖, The PakistanDevelopment Review 47:2 pp. 169–195Barki, Abid.A and Fasih, Tazeen (1998) ―Households‘ Non-leisure Time Allocation for Childrenand Determinants of Child Labour in Punjab, Pakistan‖ The Pakistan DevelopmentReview 37: 4 Part II, pp. 37:4, 899–914Addison, T., Bhalotra, S., Coulter, F. and Heady, C. (1997) ‗Child Labour in Pakistan andGhana: a comparative study‖ Centre for Development Studies, University of Bath, UnitedKingdom.Delap, Emily (2010) ―Economic and Cultural Forces in the Child Labour Debate: Evidencefrom Urban Bangladesh‖ Journal of Development Studies, 1743-9140, Volume 37, Issue4, Pages:1 – 22Dayolu, Meltem (2006) 'The impact of household income on child labour in urban Turkey',Journal of Development Studies, 42: 6, 939 — 956Dayolu, Meltem (2008) ―Mother's and Children's Employment in Turkey‖ The Journal ofDeveloping Areas, Volume 42, Number 1, pp. 95-115William, F., Bohara, K. (2010) ―Household Shocks, Child Labor, and Child Schooling Evidencefrom Guatemala‖ Latin American Research Review, Volume 45, Number 3, pp. 165-186Rana, T. and Rashid (2010) ―A Comparative Analysis of Rural and Urban Child Labor inPakistan‖ European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, ISSN1450-2275Togunde, D., Carter, A. (2006) ―Socioeconomic causes of child labor in urban Nigeria‖,Journalof Children and Poverty, 1469-9389, Volume 12, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 73 – 89Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 34Krisztina, K-K. (2007)‖ Does globalization reduces child labor?‖The Journal of InternationalTrade & Economic Development: An International and Comparative Review, 1469-9559,Volume 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 71 – 92Sakellariou, C. and Lall, A. (2000), ―Child Labour in the Philippines: Determinants and Effects‖Asian Economic Journal Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages: 233–253Patrick, M., Emerson, W., and Shawn, D.K. (2006) ―Opportunity, Inequality and theIntergenerational Transmission of Child Labour‖ Economica (2006) Volume 73, Issue291, Pages: 413–434Heather, C.F. (2010) ―Child Labour: A Review of Recent Theory and Evidence with PolicyImplications‖ Journal of Economic Surveys Volume 25, Issue 2, April 2011Krisztina, K-K., and Schulze, G. (2005) ―Regulation of child labour‖ Economic Affairs Volume25, Issue 3, Pages: 24–30,Suryahadi, A., Priyambada, A., and Sumarto, S. (2005) ―Poverty, School and Work: Childrenduring the Economic Crisis in Indonesia‖ Development and Change Volume 36, Issue 2,Pages: 351–373,Lyon, S., Rosati, F.C. (2006) ―Tackling child labour. Policy options for achieving sustainablereductions 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) Childwork in Zambia: A comparative study for survey instruments .Social ProtectionDiscussion Paper Series, no.0228. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)

Fact about Child Labor 35Blunch, N. H., Dar, A., Kim, B., and Sasaki, M. (2002) Participation of children in schooling andlabor 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: TheGhanaian 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 ofHousehold unobservable.Cockburn, J. (2001) ―Child Labour versus Education: Poverty Constraints or IncomeOpportunities?‖Proceedings of 2 nd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-06-6)