Name:
Institutional affiliation:
Date:
Child Labor and Globalization
Summary: Argument and Main Points
Eric V. Edmonds analyses the relationship between globalization and child labor. His article first attempts to distinguish various definitions and descriptions of child labor where a politician views child labor as any activity impeding the development and empowerment of a child. On the other hand, an economist views the vice as any economic activity involving children. The article illustrates the correlation between child labor, poverty and globalization. Using case scenarios such as Vietnam’s 1990s economic boom, the author suggests child labor is primarily castigated by poverty given it reduced significantly in Vietnam as economic conditions improved. More over, the author notes the high level of child labor, up to 30%, in countries with low household per capita income in this case $1500 (Edmonds 2002). The background is created to illustrate the effects of economic change associated with globalization. Among the links stated in the article is globalization gives advanced economies more influence on the nature of domestic policies formulated. Given most developed nations, do not condone the vice, developing countries eager for trade will align domestic policies to appease developed nations. This includes alleviation of child labor. Additionally, globalization will increase the per capita income of developing nations given enhanced trade consequently, reducing child labor. However, the author notes there are instances where globalization may increase the vice in developing countries. For instance, if globalization opens the country’s industries to foreign competition, decreased demand will resort to unemployment for parents who will likely opt to withdraw their children from school making them work to increase household income. There instances where the increased demand for agricultural goods produced by developing countries due to globalization may result to more children working in farms (Edmonds 2002).
Context of Child labor in Globalization
From Bhargava (2003) view, globalization defined is the progression where the world’s production is shared internationally coupled with increasing interdependence between the economic systems of different nations. Advanced information technology, improved transport systems and liberalized trade routes have greatly enhanced globalization. Globalization has several indicators such as percentage of non-trade tariffs or the level of control a government has on economic activity. Globalization has induced growth in demand for agricultural commodities mainly traded by developing countries where the vice is rampant. Additionally, the improved communication lines have made the production system more open therefore making it difficult to conceal the vice. Part of the globalization process is liberalizing cross border travel and transport a situation increasing workforce migration (Dagdemir & Acaroglu 2010). Typically, governments of developing nations are eager to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) thus, reduced regulations and restrictions in their labor sectors to entice multinationals who establish manufacturing plants. Globalization is such a context is viewed as a modern perpetuation of colonialism or imperialism where restrictions and regulations characteristic of sovereign states are loosed to allow corporations based in more economically powerful nations expand. Globalization has caused increased social inequality especially in developing countries further compounding alleviation of child labor. The increase inequality, the decentralization of production as corporations seek flexible labor and raising demand for cheap labor are factors characteristic of globalization impacting child labor. Conversely, globalization is characterized by decreased governmental bureaucracy and control while increasing demand for productive as well as skilled labor. Consequently, more importance is attached to human capital creating and incentive to educate children rather than make them work.
Analysis: argumentative opinion
Edmonds attributes the negative impact of globalization to misdirecting of accruing benefits typified by increasing inequality in developing countries. I agree with this observation given research findings demonstrating effects of globalization on child labor in reference to household per capita income. In countries where the per capita income is less than $7500, globalization decreased child labor incident while in countries with more than $7500 the vice increased (Dagdemir & Acaroglu 2010). Additionally, with increased FDI the vice increase even though the economy expanded. One reason for this is increased wages for child workers who opt to continue working than returning to school. However, the author’s stance is only applicable to a limited extent. Whenever wages increase, adults or parents prefer to educate their children as evidenced by the first result where regions with house hold per capita below $7500 record a decrease in child labor. Parents have observed because of globalization the importance of skilled and productive human capital thus prefer to educate their children. Additionally, in instances where children work to educate siblings, an increase in their wages will translate to more children enrolling for education. Furthermore, the study covered in Edmond’s article exhibits the same result where even after an increase in Vietnam’s rice industry wages, the rate of children joining school increased more than those preferring to work.
The article Globalization and the Economics of Child Labor by Edmond purports increasing inequality as the impediment in globalization’s course of alleviating child labor. The author notes globalization is only effective in nations where affected industries envisage majority of the income earners such as 70% of Vietnam income earners in the rice industry. In my opinion, this is a valid argument given inequality hinders eradication of consequences associated poverty such as child labor. The segment of the population living below the poverty line is likely to practice the vice regardless of a nation’s GDP increasing (Dagdemir & Acaroglu 2010). This is illustrated by the slow response of child labor to globalization economic empowerment effects. Research indicates the world’s top 50 million people earn as much as the world’s poorest 2.7 billion (Lieten 2003). This means in spite of increasing globalization, income disparity is worsening where in China 100 million more people live in poverty than five years ago. As fore mentioned, this justifies the authors perspective of globalization increasing child labor if measures to reduce the socio-economic inequality are not enforced.
In my opinion, the author’s perspectives on globalization or international trade effects on child labor are validated. Edmond articulates two perspectives the first highlighting the positive effect of international trade in reducing child labor. This is also validated by Dinopoulos and Zhao (2007) who present a model stating domestic interest rates are reduced due the access to global capital market. Consequently, falling interest rates are less enticing to higher returns from educating a child. Therefore, parents opt to educate their children as opposed to having them work. On the other hand, Edmond also depicts the negative effect of international trade on child labor where increased foreign competition leads to increased unemployment as well as poverty. I also agree with this statement in light of economic models depicting the relationship between trade liberalization and child labor. The models highlighted in the article by Dinopoulos and Zhao (2007) imply increase in demand for goods made through unskilled labor due to trade liberalization. If the demand for unskilled labor rises, then the anticipated returns on education decrease thus luring more children into employment. Additionally, trade liberalization entails loosening of migration regulations resulting to labor migration where children transverse borders searching for employment. This is illustrated by children in poor nations of Mali and Burkina faso migrating to work in cocoa farms in neighboring Ghana as well as Ivory Coast. Given the former example, I contend with Edmond’s suggestion of globalization being complimented by incentives to educate children. Lieten (2003), India has recorded a decreasing number of children workers in factories but surprisingly an increase in generic child labor. This is because much of the labor has shifted to household where the carpet making and weaving is done by children in their homes. In spite of government sanctions against the vice, globalization creates a market for goods made at home with no countering incentive for the children to be in school. Accordingly, incentives to keep children in school such as free meals should be integrated.
Conclusion
In reference to presented facts and perspectives, opposing globalization and associated international trade since they are probable enhancers of child labor is wrong on various levels. First, globalization can aid in economic empowerment of populations in developing nations by creating a market for domestic goods resulting to adults earning enough to send their children to school and alleviating child labor. Secondly, globalization decreases the influence of state governments in market systems thus creating the opportunity for developing nations to learn and acquire child protection regulations from developed countries. Additionally, advanced economies/countries can sway domestic governments to formulating and implementing labor regulations suppressing the vice. Integrating educational incentives and reducing socio-economic inequality will direct the benefits for globalization to fully eradicating child labor.
Reference
Bhargava, G. (2003). Child labour. New Delhi: Kalpaz Publications.
Dagdemir O. & Acaroglu H. (2010). The effects of globalization on child Labor in developing countries BEH – Business and Economic Horizons. Volume 2, Issue 2, pp2 -11.
Dinopoulos E. & Zhao L. (2007). Child Labor and Globalization. Journal of Labor Economics Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 2- 5.
Edmonds E. V. (2002). Globalization and the Economics of Child Labor. Neue Zürcher Zeitung, February 23/24, p29.
G.K. Lieten (2003). Globalization And Child Labor: Possible Consequences. Child Labor within the Context of Globalization: Problem Outline and Action Points, September 2003 conference.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]