Introduction

Ethical Sugar – Introduction to Survey, The Sugar Cane Industry and Child Labour
Anne Trebilcock, Academic Adviser, Centre de Droit international, Université de Paris 10, Nanterre-La Défense.

Both the past and the present of the sugar industry are inexorably linked to the exploitation of labour, including child labour. Today, tools to combat child labour range from international treaties to national polices and local initiatives. Debates surrounding corporate social responsibility have also highlighted the importance of abolishing child labour in the varioussteps ofsugar cane
production. What are the problems these initiatives strive to address?

Children in families of agricultural workers may take part in the planting, cultivation, harvesting and primary processing of sugar cane. Sometimes older children will be involved in the further processing ofsugar cane in more industrial settings. Such work can expose children to significant hazards.        These range from insect or snake bites in the fields to skin cuts from the plant itself or, worse still, long-term damage to health from contact with pesticides or herbicides, from injuries caused by sharp machetes, knives or machinery, or simply from long hours labouring in the sun. Tools and equipment built to adultspecifications may presentspecial risksto smaller, younger and less inexperienced workers. The result may be loss of fingers or limbs or even death. In addition, the severe dependency of families of poorsugar cane workers on landowners and/or crew leaders may leave children, especially adolescent girls, open to sexual exploitation. There are also nutritional repercussions for sugar cane workers, since sucking on the cane offers immediate quelling of hunger pains, but leadsto longer term malnutrition and dental decay. These nutritional effects are most deleterious for children, whose growth may be stunted.       

Involving children in sugar cane production often exacts yet another price:        they are robbed of the chance to be adequately educated to pursue other options in life.  This perpetuates poverty from one uneducated generation to the next. Aggressively tackling poverty, eliminating child labour and expanding educational opportunities necessarily go hand in hand.

Such concerns have prompted the international community to act. The almost universally ratified International Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) protects children from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development (Art. 32). States are to set a minimum age for entry into employment, have appropriate regulations of hours and conditions of employment and fix appropriate penalties or other sanctions.

Building on earlier treaties that had fixed a minimum age for engaging in employment in various sectors, the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO), calls for pursuit of a national policy designed to ensure the effective abolition of child labor and to raise the minimum age for admission to employment to a level consistent with
the fullest physical and mental development of young persons. This meanssetting the minimum age for employment at an age that is no lower than the age at which compulsory education ends. In general the minimum age is fixed at age 15, although developing countries may opt for age 14 (and for light work, age 13). As of 23 August 2010, 155 States had ratified this Convention.

In 1999, the ILO adopted another instrument that has proved to be a formidable weapon in the battle against exploitative child labour: the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182). By 23 August 2010, 172 States had ratified it. Many have used it as a platform for developing national action plansto eliminate the mostsevere forms of child labour. In countries where sugar operations are important, these plans should target this sector.

Convention No. 182 provides guidance for eliminating child labour in the sugar industry in several ways. First of all, it highlights the urgency of prohibiting and eliminating the worst forms of child labour. Secondly, it defines a child in the same way as the International Convention on the Rights of the Child: any person under the age of 18. Thirdly, it categorizes the worst forms of child
labour in ways specifically relevant to the sugar sector. Any form of slavery or similar practice is banned; this includes debt bondage, a practice found in some sugar-producing countries, where the labour of children may be offered to repay a parent’s debt. Furthermore, the worst forms of child labour include “work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is
likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.”(Convention No. 183, Art. 3(d)). States that have ratified the Convention are required to identify the types of work they consider to fall under this provision; this would include most tasks in sugar cane cultivation and processing in countries where they occur.

But identification and prohibition are only the first step. Countries are also to “design and implement programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour”(ILO Convention No. 182, Art. 6). This is to be done in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers’ and workers’ organizations, taking into account the view of other concerned groups
(including children, of course). The programmes are also to take account of the importance of education in eliminating child labour,such as by preventing the engagement of children in the worst forms of child labour, ensuring access to free basic education, and noting the special situation of girls (ILO Convention No. 182, Art. 7). Enhanced international cooperation, including support for
poverty eradication programmes and universal education, is also foreseen (Art. 8). Projects like the Foundation for International Research onWorking Children (IREWOC) have analysed the effectiveness of interventions in the sugar  sector.       

The supervisory mechanisms that monitor compliance with the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and of ILO Conventions No. 138 and No. 182 provide some additional insights into how to step up efforts to eliminate exploitative child labour in the sugar cane industry. The independent experts serving on the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child have stressed that
children’s rights are a shared responsibility between developed and developing countries. And while the Convention recognizes that measures are to be taken by countries“to the maximum extent of their available resources,”it imposes an immediate obligation to undertake targeted measures as a matter of priority to satisfy the core minimum content of economic and social rights. The Committee has also encouraged the development of child-specific indicators that are tied
to time-bound targets to help measure progress. Such improvement would involve not just removing children from hazardous work in the sugar industry, but as well providing alternatives for families to earn sufficient income, better labour protection for adults, and greater educational opportunities for the children.

The ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, which monitors the implementation of Conventions 138 and 182 along with other ILO instruments, has similarly encouraged countries to develop indicators of this nature. It has asked countries for information on the prohibition, inspection and prosecution of cases involving the worst forms
of child labour in the agricultural sector and on plantations, as well as on the penalties actually imposed. Bonded or forced labour involving children is a special concern. The ILO’s International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (ILO-IPEC) has aided numerous States to design and implement stakeholder-based Time-Bound Programmes, normally with support from bilateral or multilateral international development assistance. These may encompass the removal of children from these types of activity along with rehabilitation and reintegration efforts involving the community. The IPEC Training Resource Pack on the Elimination of Hazardous Child Labour in
Agriculture is targeted at smallholding farmers. The incorporation of lessons learned from such initiatives in national and rural development plans and in poverty reduction strategies is particularly important. For this reason, ILO-IPEC seeks to position child labour elimination at the macroeconomic level in the context of poverty eradication, emphasizing the need to assess and monitor
the extent and nature of the problem and to strengthen institutional capacities. The Resolution concerning statistics of child labour adopted by the 2008 Conference of Labour Statisticians and ILO Recommendation No. 190 provide additional practical guidance.

Furthermore, the International Partnership for Cooperation on Child Labour in Agriculture brings together several international organizations and groups representing producers and workers to act towards effectively applying the
minimum age for work in agriculture, prohibiting hazardous work for children, and protecting children who have reached the minimum legal age to work by improving health and safety standards in the sector. This group points out
that, “A key to reducing child labour in agriculture is building strong rural institutions, which include farmers’ organizations and trade unions to collectively bargain to improve adult incomes, wages and labourstandards.”It also highlights programmes which transfer cash or food directly to households that send their children to school as helping to reduce child labour and increase school enrolment. Do these reach children in this industry?

In terms of corporate social responsibility, the 2008 Report of UN Special Representative recalled the State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and the need for more effective accessto remedies. The abolition of child labour is among the human rights principles identified in the report, which is based on
international instruments and cases documented on the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre website. To discharge their responsibility, companies must take due-diligence steps to become aware of, prevent and address adverse human rights impacts, looking to core ILO Conventions among othersources. The stepsinclude adopting a human rights policy, undertaking a
human rights impact assessment that is relevant to the industry, integrating human rights policies throughout the company, and monitoring and auditing performance. Among the information-sharing tools companies can use, the report mentions the Global Compact initiated by the United Nations, the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises and the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy. Taking the ILO’s cue, all of these include “the effective abolition of child labour” among the principles to which companies along the supply chain are to adhere.

The solid international foundation for the elimination of exploitative child labour in the sugar industry can serve as the basis for a check-list of practical measures for stakeholders seeking improvements.