Poverty, Child Labor and the Industry Revolution - Research Paper Example

 Poverty, Child Labor and the Industry Revolution Introduction Industrialization started in some of them industrialized stated such as Britain and the United States, in the 1700’s (Cunningham, 2000). Prior to industrialization, individuals worked mainly at home through farming or producing handmade products. During this era – Industrial Revolution (1750-1900), goods production shifted from individual’s homes to well set-up factories. As factories continued to increase, more and more individuals went to labor in them and in the mines, which supplied the factories’ main source of power; coal (ILO, 2011). Children then labored outside their homes in large numbers for long hours just as their parents did in the mines and factories. A majority of the children worked during the Industrial Revolution since income was low and their families required the funds to survive. As the 20th century moved forward, more and more societies also started to industrialize. As it spread, a gap started to grow between those nations, which had fully industrialized, and the ones that were starting to industrialize. Rich, industrialized (developed) nations subjugated the world economy, leaving less industrialized nations behind. Largely due to widespread poverty, most worlds’ children workers currently work and live in less-industrialized states (Edmonds, 2007). Very few issues in developing states draw as much admired concentration as does child labor. The aim of this paper is to offer a thorough overview of the state of the current empirical literature on why and how children labor and the consequences of their labor. Definition of Terms Poverty is the status of lacking certain amount of material assets, as well as money. Total poverty or impoverishment refers to the lack or deprivation of basic human needs, which usually includes food, sanitation, water, clothing, health care, shelter and education. Virtual poverty is defined contextually as financial disparity in the society or location in which citizens live (Edmonds, 2007). Child labor is the enrollment of toddlers in any work, which deprives them of their childhood, obstructs with their capacity to attend normal school, and that is physically, mentally, morally or socially harmful and dangerous (Kirby, 2005). The industrial revolution, on the other hand, was the changeover to new manufacturing procedures in the period from about 1700 to sometime between 1800 and 1860. This change incorporated going from hand production techniques to machines, new-fangled iron production and chemical manufacturing processes, enhanced competence of water power, the growing use of steam power, as well as the growth of machine tools (Lord, 2011). Hypothesis Even though, a small group of determined and fashionable scholars had supported a gradual trickle of work on the financial history of childhood, lately, consistent with the Cannadine/Croce hypothesis, as well as the mounting concern regarding the welfare of children, the speed of publication has enhanced. Historians have revived child labor and granted fascinating new insight into its role during industrialization. They have proposed that child labor went beyond the mine and mills, which dominated some classic accounts (Cunningham, 2000). It was everywhere too in the traditional industries with small-scale production units and continued long into the 19th century. At the same moment, child labor had particular strategic significance in the premature water-power factories that were set up far from urban centers, and; therefore, had to be labored by imported laborers (Edmonds, 2007). They were selected in the form of pauper apprentices; an example of child labor whose contribute has been proficiently renovated from poor law records, as well as foundling hospital archives. Nevertheless, recent studies are either largely qualitative or restricted to the mid-19th century when survey records come on a stream of sources, which related solely to specific forms of work like pauper apprenticeship (Rostow, 2010). Therefore, this leaves the chronology of child labor doubtful. The lack of quantitative information, which can go back into the 18th century and concurrently involve the mid-19th century survey estimates, is predominantly problematic (Hindman, 2011). Thus, associations back to the normal drama of the industrial revolution are still rough and feeble (Goldin & Sokoloff, 2006). Unlike factors like coal and inventions, which have resurfaced in refurbished form to reprise old duties in the fresh accounts of industrialization, child labor remains in the backwoods. Current perceptions downplay but do not wipe out the offerings of the cotton factories, as well as its large industry (Horrell & Humphries, 2009). They maintain their strategic significance in industrialization (Cunningham, 2000; Wrigley, 2007). Therefore, the industry and the organizational novelty most powerfully connected to rising demand for child laborers remain to the fore. Method of Data Collection Cross-country projections of economic active groups originate from the ILO's LABORSTA records even though the current release omits the 10 to 14 years age groups. These LABORSTA projections of economically activity groups are mainly considered devaluing the extent of work since information on work inside the household is frequently not collected. This paper draws widely from Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) of UNICEF's from 2000 to 2001. This survey incorporates a child labor section, which asks children 5 to 14 years of age whether or not they have worked outside of their homes in the previous weeks or the last year and how many hours they have worked outside their homes in the previous weeks (Goldin & Sokoloff, 2006). The paper also gathers hours in the previous weeks for work in domestic duties and in their home businesses disjointedly. No information is accessible on industry of job employment, type of company, nor rewards. An attractive feature of the MICS information is that survey instruments are almost similar in each and every country (Goldin & Sokoloff, 2006). That being said questions are prone to be understood in diverse ways rooted in a local context. Analysis of Data The cross-country data on child labor and living standards propose a strong relation between economic status, as well as economic activity rates. Poverty is strongly connected to child labor, and the act emerged after the industrial revolution (Cunningham, 2000). Each state observation is envisioned as a circle where the magnitude of the circle signifies the size of the nation’s population of children between the ages of 10 and 14. Whereas child labor is enveloping in deprived nations such as Nepal and Ethiopia, child labor is odd in nations richer than others with a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of $US 8,400 (Edmonds, 2007). Variation in GDP per capita, from the UNICEF study explains 73% of the variation in the financial activity rates of children. Countries are different in numerous ways that might be related to economic activity rates and GDP per capita. Hence, any association cannot be thought about as causal. Efforts to tackle the endogeneity of income do little to influence the strong connection between economic activity rates of children and national income. Most nations-based studies on the connection between child labor and income are cross-sectional (Edmonds, 2007). They indicate a linear association between family income and some measure of work, and test the theory that the minor effect of family income on work is generally diverse from zero. In essence, researchers that evaluate deprived families to well-off families at one point in time, in a nation, find mixed proof of a link between child labor and poverty (Edmonds, 2007). Summary The current boom in empirical research on child labor has significantly enhanced people’s understanding of why toddlers work, as well as what the effects of that work may be. This survey assessed what people currently know about child labor and discussed some of the way the data was collected and also analyzed it. Child labor study should vigilantly to define accurately what limits of time allocation is being measured. Studies, which are too restricted, are prone to create misleading facts. Children are active in many roles and seem to substitute between them effortlessly. Therefore, if a child is seen working less in one task, someone cannot presume that he/she is working less. In addition, though salary work seems less likely to be connected to concurrent schooling, distinctions in schooling related to differences in hours worked are much greater compared to those related to location of work. Work is mainly categorized as domestic work or market work. References Cunningham, H. (2000). The decline of child labour: Labour markets and family economies in Europe and North America since 1830. Economic History Review, 53, 409–428. Edmonds, E. V. (2007). Child labor. In T. P. Schultz & J. Strauss, eds., Handbook of development economics, Volume 4. Amsterdam, North-Holland: Elsevier Science. Goldin, C., & Sokoloff, K. (2006). Women, children and industrialization in the early republic: evidence from the manufacturing censuses. Journal of Economic History, 23(19), 741-774. Hindman, H. D. (2011). The world of child labor: A historical and regional survey. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Horrell, S., & Humphries, J. (2009). The exploitation of little children: Child labour and the family economy in the industrial revolution. Explorations in Economic History, 32(5), 485–515. International Labor Officer (ILO). (2011). Children in hazardous work: What we know, what we need to do. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Officer. Kirby, P. (2005). A brief statistical sketch of the child labour market in mid-nineteenth century. Continuity and Change, 20(3), 229–246. Lord, J. (2011). Child labour in the Gold Coast: the economics of work, education and the family in late-colonial Africa, 1940-57. The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth, 4(1), 88–115. Rostow, W.W. (2010). The stages of economic growth: a non-communist manifesto. New York: Cambridge USA. Wrigley, E. A. (2007). Industrial growth and population change: a regional study of the coalfield areas of north-west Europe in the later nineteenth century. New York: Cambridge USA. Read More