SECTOR Home | What's New | About SECTOR | Meetings | Publications | Discussion Forum | Contact Us | Links | Site Map

Child labour in small-scale mining:
Examples from Niger, Peru & Philippines

Edited by Norman S. Jennings

Introduction

Norman S. Jennings ⁽¹⁾

The three case studies in this working paper were commissioned as part of the preparatory work for a tripartite meeting on Social and labour issues in small-scale mines, held in Geneva on 17-21 May 1999. Some of the information in them was included in the report that was prepared for the meeting ⁽²⁾. The three situations described here, In Niger, Peru and the Philippines are each fairly typical of their region.

Like most economic activities, small-scale mining has positive and negative aspects. It is closely linked to economic development, particularly in the rural sector in many developing countries; it helps to stem rural-urban migration, maintaining the link between people and the land; it makes a major contribution to foreign exchange earnings; it enables the exploitation of what otherwise might be uneconomic resources; and it has been a precursor to large-scale mining. Moreover, it provides employment for about 13 million people -- including substantial numbers of children -- and affects the livelihood of 80-100 million.

Boys and girls work in small-scale mining in many developing countries. Even when the mining is legal, their work is not. Children working in small-scale mining are not only exposed to immediate risk but they are also jeopardizing their long-term development -- both physical and socio-economic. The means to eliminate child labour in mining, especially extreme forms, without delay are being developed and implemented by a number of agencies and organizations, notably the ILO through its International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC).

Only 2% of the replies to the Office's questionnaire on small-scale mining cited child labour as one of the three most important issues for the sector. That is not to say that hundreds of thousands of children do not work in small-scale mines, some of them in intolerable conditions. The few countries that provided data on child labour acknowledged 10,000-250,000 children working full time or part time in small-scale mines. This low priority given to child labour as an issue is more indicative of the respondents' perception of the need to address the other major problems cited than of not considering child labour per se as important. Fixing up access to credit, improving productivity, providing training, focusing on safety and health will lead to improvements in small-scale mining that, in turn, will have a positive impact on child labour. Only when small-scale mining is on a sound and sustainable economic footing will the issue of child labour become more important in the eyes of those concerned. This does not mean that child labour should be ignored until other issues are dealt with. Quite the reverse. Every effort should be made to eliminate it. But it is part of a wider problem that must also be tackled. If child labour in small-scale mining is approached in isolation, its long-term elimination is unlikely.

Working conditions and health and safety risks affecting children in small-scale mining differ widely according to whether work is underground or on the surface, the type of mineral being mined, and the type of processing that is carried out and children's involvement in it. Clearly those at greatest risk should be the primary focus of programmes to stop their participation and prevent it recurring.

The hazards faced by children are the same as for adult miners (inundation, cave-in, asphyxiation, overexertion, malnutrition, TB, malaria, diarrhoea, trips and falls, lack of hygiene, dust, noise, vibration, mercury and other chemicals) but the risks to immature bodies are much more severe.

The main causes of child labour in small-scale mining are: poverty; lack of opportunities or incentives to go to school; no prospects for regular employment; the lack of a coordinated policy to stop child labour; the lack of law enforcement; a reluctance to invest in small-scale mining to improve its performance; and a reluctance or inability to make the social investments necessary to stop child labour.

Most children work to support their family or to earn money for themselves. Although their parents are aware of the hazards and risks associated with small-scale mining, they see no alternative; their families need the money and there is no other employment available. At least the families stay together.

The more remote and more informal a small-scale mining activity, the more likely children are to be involved. Remoteness means that child care or schooling no longer offer an alternative to children working. It also removes the likelihood of there being other, less dangerous employment for them and the possibility of regular inspection to ensure that labour codes are being adhered to. The more informal the operation, the less the regard for regulations that limit the involvement of children in paid or unpaid work.

The difficulty of obtaining reliable data is compounded by the remoteness of many mine sites, the opposition of some employers to any "prying" into their practices regarding young workers, and the reluctance of the workers themselves to jeopardize their position by being outspoken.

With no pay and no choice of other work child mineworkers face a bleak future -- hoping to be taken on a payroll as they get bigger, scavenging in the hope of finding some minerals to sell, hoping for a paid job in town, or anywhere -- but with few prospects.

A "typical" child worker in small-scale mining is a boy aged 10-15, mainly working above ground, in a family group, digging, crushing or grinding ore, or transporting it in sacks weighing 10-25 kg over distances up to 600 metres. He uses adult-size tools (bar, pick, hammer, shovel) and is most unlikely to use any proper protective equipment.⁽³⁾ He receives no direct pay, rather he contributes to the expanded earnings of his family. If he goes to school (unlikely if he is over 12 years old) he works two to three hours a day after school and all day at the weekends and during vacations. If he does not go to school he is more likely to work independently of his family, doing whatever he is told to do with little or no concession to his age. If he is involved in the processing of gold-bearing ore, he is likely to show signs of mercury poisoning. He is likely to have respiratory problems, skin disorders and musculo-skeletal problems no matter what sort of mining he is involved in. The considerable number of girls who are involved in various aspects of small-scale mining have the added problem of being more likely to be targets for abuse, such as sexual exploitation.

The type of work that children undertake covers all the tasks in small-scale mining from cooking and cleaning to the extraction of ore underground and on the surface, its transport and separation and subsequent metal production. In some cases children are expected to do less than adult workers, but often they are required to do the same work, but for less pay, if any. In underground mines in several countries children are used to dig small tunnels and to mine in spaces that are too small for adults or, because of their small size and agility, to fetch and carry for adult miners.

Children's involvement in small-scale mining falls into two broad categories. Where single women or parents with very young children work in small-scale mining operations, the children often accompany them to the site as there is no alternative means of looking after them during the working day. At some sites the youngest children play, sometimes under the supervision of one of the women workers who take it in turn to mind them, or under the eye of an elder child. Depending on the effectiveness of any supervision, this often means that children play near to where their parents are working, leaving themselves open to many of the risks run by the workers, but without any knowledge of them. Older, school-age children may not have the opportunity to attend school and therefore work in mining, may prefer to assist their parents, or may have to assist them in order to maximize the family income. They are often not paid -- their efforts being recognized in the larger payments received by one or both parents.

A worse form of child labour in small-scale mining occurs when children are employed separately from their parents, often going away from home to work. This type of employment becomes prevalent during gold rushes and when subsistence farming is no longer able to provide a living for young people in rural areas. Moreover, working in mines (and sometimes sleeping in them) is often the only opportunity to obtain what appears to be a high and regular wage. The reality for many child workers, however, is that once the cost of food, tools and sometimes medication has been deducted from their earnings they are left with nothing. Occasionally children are able to work on their own account -- on Sundays for example, provided they meet the cost of all materials required. While this activity holds out the prospect of some real earnings, it does so at the expense of their health. But the alternative -- informal employment in the services sector -- is often considered to be worse.

Young workers engaged by concession holders to work in small-scale mines are attractive for a number of reasons. Firstly, as they are working illegally, any complaints regarding wages or working conditions would likely be ignored. Secondly, young workers are generally compliant and tend not to question the tasks assigned to them and the living and working conditions they are faced with. The fact that wages are often not received until after the end of a work contract is undoubtedly a constraint on rebellion. Lastly, for many rural young people there is no alternative wage employment outside the small-scale mining sector; subsistence farming is neither attractive nor sustainable.

The living and working environment in which the children grow up also has an impact on their intellectual capacity. The complete lack of medical and health facilities at or near many mining locations means that there is no screening and no indication of the effects of harsh working conditions on any of the workers. The precarious nature of small-scale mining makes it important to find alternative sources of income for the children at risk, especially those who show evidence of mercury poisoning and of an affected intellectual capacity, or withdraw them from work altogether.

Reducing poverty and providing education opportunities are the keys to the elimination of child labour. If small-scale mining can be more profitable there will be less need for children to work to supplement the family income. By forming groups, possibly cooperatives in some areas, production and processing could be carried out more efficiently and marketing made more effective. Improvements in community and occupational health will also pay dividends for all who are working in mining, especially children.

The need for children to contribute to the family income is recognized and widespread. However, until the means are available to make it possible for children not to work, merely removing them from work will not necessarily resolve their problems. Rather it will replace one set with another. The family may descend further into poverty, forcing the children to leave home and find themselves in even worse straits. But the absence of national means to alleviate the plight of child miners and impoverished small-scale miners generally points to it remaining unchanged unless outside help can be mobilized. Action programmes must therefore be sufficiently broad to ensure that adequate infrastructure exists to accommodate the needs of children removed from these extreme forms of work (box).

International Labour Organization (ILO): Contact us | Site map |

Copyright and Permissions 1996-2008 International Labour Organization (ILO) - Disclaimer