• Anthropology
• Low and Middle Income Countries
• Social work
• Child Health
• Health Policy

The 2021 report from the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and UNICEF indicates a stagnation in progress towards eliminating child labour since 2016.1 While prevalence has declined in Asia, the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has experienced an increase in both the number and percentage of labouring children since 2012, surpassing figures in other regions. Globally, agriculture accounts for the highest proportion of child labour (70%), particularly among younger workers. In SSA, the child labour prevalence among children aged 5–17 stands at 24%, encompassing nearly 87 million children. Moreover, the region exhibits the highest global share of child labourers in agriculture (82%) and the largest proportion of youngest labourers (5–11 years).

The differentiation between child labour and child work is fundamental to the current global approach aimed at eradicating child labour. UNICEF and the ILO define child work as light, age-appropriate tasks within the family context, including assistance with household chores, family businesses and, notably, agriculture. Such work is considered conducive to child development and socialisation without impeding education, health or well-being. Conversely, child labour is often characterised as exploitative and detrimental to children’s mental, physical, social or moral development. It deprives children of their childhood and impedes their educational progress. Child labour frequently involves full-time work at an inappropriately young age, in hazardous conditions or for extended periods. While child work is typically unpaid, child labour may involve remuneration. This distinction, guided by ILO Convention No. 138 on minimum age for employment and ILO Convention No. 182 on the worst forms of child labour, forms the foundation for efforts to eradicate all forms of child labour.

Eminent scholars in childhood studies have identified three dominant discourses on child labour in Africa and Asia, regions with high concentrations of labouring children.2 The first is the work-free childhood perspective, which posits that childhood should be devoid of labour, emphasising education and play as the most appropriate activities for children. This perspective has significantly influenced international policies aimed at ending all child labour. The second, the sociocultural perspective, argues that children’s work must be understood within its specific cultural context. This approach recognises child work as an integral part of socialisation and the transition to adulthood. The third, the political economy perspective, contextualises child labour within broader economic and political transformations, examining the impacts of globalisation and macroeconomic policies, such as structural adjustment programmes, on children’s work.

The three perspectives of child labour in Africa and Asia are underpinned by distinct normative values and ideologies.2 While the work-free childhood perspective tends to categorise children’s work as either destructive child labour or more acceptable child work, the sociocultural and political economy perspectives conceptualise child work as existing on a continuum. These latter perspectives emphasise the importance of the work context, its nature and its impact on children rather than applying predefined categorisations that reflect Western idealised notions of childhood. An additional emerging perspective, concerned with the local context of children’s lives, advocates for decolonising research on childhood and children’s experiences.3 The decolonising perspective aims to challenge dominant Northern-centric ideologies, prevalent colonial assumptions, racial discrimination and adultism by incorporating indigenous, decolonial and postcolonial perspectives, particularly in Africa, Latin America and South Asia. It critiques international institutions’ efforts to protect the concept of a ‘global childhood’ through the dismissal of children’s labour as insignificant work and targeting it for elimination.

Upholding children’s voices, ensuring their participation and safeguarding their well-being are central tenets of children’s rights. Working children’s movements in Latin America began to emerge in the late 1970s, with corresponding movements established in Africa and Asia in the 1990s.4 Their stance aligns with the sociocultural and political economy perspectives outlined above. These movements’ pragmatic agenda reflects their lived experience and opposes one-size-fits-all global policies. They advocate for improved working environments, including safety measures and fair wages, while recognising and opposing exploitation. They argue that appropriate legal frameworks should protect working children’s rights rather than criminalising their work. The working children’s movements call for access to education that allows children to balance work and schooling, professional training tailored to their circumstances and quality healthcare. They demand participation in decisions affecting them locally, nationally and internationally. Instead of criminalising their work and boycotting their products, they argue that the root causes of working children’s situations should be addressed, particularly poverty. Acknowledging that child labour is most prevalent in agriculture, they advocate for enhancing the living conditions of rural children.

The recently published volume ‘Children’s Work in African Agriculture: The Harmful and the Harmless’ challenges conventional approaches to eliminating child labour.5 It argues for a contextual, relational understanding of children’s work by delineating the diversity of their tasks, economic realities and cultural context. While protection from exploitation remains necessary, the authors contend that, at times, blanket interventions to eliminate child labour cause collateral damage. Furthermore, the current global approach to child labour too often disregards children’s valuable financial contribution to survival and education. For instance, child labour frequently finances school attendance in SSA, a region with the highest number of out-of-school children. Paying particular attention to the concept of harm, the ever-changing, context-dependent line between harm and benefit is highlighted. The volume posits that work in SSA is a normative aspect of rural childhood, imparting vital skills for adult life; however, it concludes that the harmful work of children in African agriculture is not an unavoidable consequence of rural poverty. In line with working children’s movements, the authors advocate for a context-sensitive approach to mitigating harmful work and providing localised child protection, appropriate education, and quality health services.

Considering the high proportion of children in labour in SSA, global policies and interventions to eliminate child labour in recent decades have not been successful.1 Obviously, age and ability matter in allocating tasks; there is a significant difference between a 6–year-old child and a 16–year-old teenager. However, criminalising working children’s survival strategies and, at times, subjecting their communities to derogatory and demeaning discourses about ‘lost childhoods’ and ‘ingrained cultural traditions and attitudes’ is doomed to fail. It is imperative to adopt alternative approaches against exploitation and harmful conditions for working children while simultaneously enhancing their well-being and future prospects. These must be guided by respect for the communities to which the children belong and children’s rights, not least the right to have a voice and participate in decisions that affect them.