CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the study findings in reference to the research objectives. Focus was put on presentation and discussion of findings in line with study objectives. The chapter first presents respondents’ background features, while other sections present the study findings study objective. The response rate was 100%, as all the 70 respondents responded positively to the study.

4.1 Background Characteristics of Respondents

Figure 4.1: Sex of Respondents

Source: Primary Data

According to figure 4.1 above, 42(60%) of the respondents were male while 38(40%) were female. This implies that majority of the respondents were male. Males were found to be more active in participation which explains their highest number. However, the involvement of both male and female sexes in the study was due to fact that they are prominent constituents of all households in Kisenyi.

Figure 4.2: Age Distribution of Respondents

Source: Primary Data

Figure 4.2 above revealed that 7.1% of the respondents were below 18years, 14.3% were between 20-25years, 17.1% of the respondents were between 26-30years, 35(50%) were in the age bracket of 31-50,  and 11.4% were 50 and above. This implies that majority of the respondents were in the age bracket of 31-50years because most of them were parents who are the key perpetrators of child labour and are equally the major stakeholders in the control of child labour in their families.

Table 4.1: Level of Education of Respondents

Source: Primary Data

Table 4.1 above shows that none of the respondents had attained a master degree, 8(11.4%) had attained degree, 4(5.7%) of them had acquired diploma, 30(42.9%) of the study respondents had attained secondary education, 16(22.9%) had attained primary education and 12(17.1%) of the respondents had not attained any education level. This implies that majority of the respondents had attained secondary education.

Table 4.2: Occupation of Respondents

Source: Primary Data

Table 4.2 above indicated that 3(4.3%) of the respondents were farmers, 39(55.7%) were business persons, 21(30%) of the respondents were civil servants and 7(10%) of them did others. This implies that majority of the respondents were businessman and the minority of the respondents were farmers. This shows that the respondents belonged to different occupations in different sectors-formal, semi-formal and informal, with varying incidence of child labour.

4.2. Socio-economic factors for Increasing Rates of Child Labour in Kisenyi

4.2.1 Meaning of Child Labour

Table 4.3: Meaning of Child Labour

Source: Primary Data

Results in table 4.3 show that 37(52.86%) of the respondents viewed it as subjecting children to harmful forms of work; 24(34.3%) viewed it as overworking children below 18 years; 6(8.6%) of the respondents viewed it as work that is abusive and denies children the right to go to school; 2(2.86%) defined it as making children do work beyond their ability. 1(1.4%) of the respondents defined child labour as a situation of adults exploiting children for personal gains.

So, it can be generally concluded that child labour was viewed to be physically and psychologically harmful to children, denies them chance to attend to school totally or regularly, and is normally imposed on them by adults. Thus, all respondents had abstract ideas as regards child labour and understood its basics, more especially the forms, perpetrators and key victims of the vice in their communities.

4.2.2 Existence of Child Labour in Kisenyi

The study established the respondents’ acknowledgement of the existence of child labour in Kisenyi.  Results were obtained and are presented below;

Table 4.4: Existence of Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

According to table 4.4, the majority of them, representing 68(97.1%) of the respondents, were fully aware of the existence of child labour in the area; 2(2.9%) were uncertain of its existence, and none of them denied its existence. This implies that majority of the respondents were aware of the existence of child labour in Kisenyi.

4.2.3 Various Forms of Child Labour in Kisenyi

The various forms of child labour in Kisenyi were established by the study. As presented below;

Table 4.5: Various Forms of Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

Table 4.5 above shows that the majority of the respondents 25(35.7%) cited domestic child workers, 19(27.1%) mentioned forced child labour, 6(8.6%) of the respondents cited drug tracking, 12(17.1%) of the respondents said cross boarder smuggling and 8(11.4%0 of them indicated urban informal sector activities. This implies that the major form of child labour in Kisenyi is domestic child workers. Therefore, from these findings, it can be concluded that child labour manifests itself in various dynamic forms in the study area.

4.2.4. Factors for Increasing Rates of Child Labour in Kisenyi

The factors for the increased rates of child labour in Kisenyi were also identified.

Table 4.6: Factors for Increasing Rates of Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

From table 4.6 above, 38(54.3%) cited insufficient resources and economic hardships as the main cause; 9(12.9%) cited high population growth, another 9(12.9%) of the respondents indicated large families, also 9(12.9%) of them said single parenting, 3(4.3%) cited high levels of literacy and 2(2.9%) cited parental unemployment. This implies that the main factor for the increasing rates of child labour was insufficient resources. Meaning most households in Kisenyi face a challenge of insufficient resources such as money to cater for the needs of their households.

4.3 Effect of Child labor on the educational achievement

4.3.1 Categories of Children Vulnerable to Child Labour in Kisenyi

Table 4.7: Categories of Children Vulnerable to Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

Table 4.7 above shows that orphans were noted by the majority 40(57.1%) of respondents, 21(30%) of the respondents cited girl-child especially in domestic activities as defined by their cultures and norms, 5(7.1%) said children living with relatives, 3(4.3%) of them mentioned school drop outs and 1(1.4%) of the respondents cited children living with single parents. This implies that orphans are the key victims as they are forced to make ends meet sometimes on their own or are exploited by relatives who take care of them.

4.3.2 Perpetrators of Child Labour in Kisenyi

The study further established different categories of persons responsible for the prevalence of child labour in Kisenyi. Results are presented below;

Table 4.8: Perpetrators of Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

From table 4.8 above, 28(40%) of the respondents quoted biological parents as key promoters of child labour as they subject their own children to this vice right from their own families as family-heads, 22(31.4%) of them identified business men and traders as they recruit children in trade activities like hawking and carrying merchandise; while 8(11.4%) held adult family members and close and distant relatives like brothers, sisters, uncles and aunties also perpetrated child labour. Also, factories and plantation farm owners were noted by 4(5.7%) respondents to recruit children in on-farm and off-farm labour; others cited schools as another place where teachers subject the school children to child labour on school farms. Other respondents argued that criminal groups promoted child labour by recruiting children in activities like drug trafficking. Thus, it shows that child labour in society is perpetuated by different categories of people and the community at large, starting from individual families, with biological parents playing a key role in promoting the vice.

Effects of Child Labour in Kisenyi to children

The study further presented the effects of child labour on children, where the majority of the respondents. Results were obtained and are presented in the table below;

Table 4.9: Effects of Child Labour in Kisenyi to children

Source: Primary Data

From table 4.9 above, 22(31.4%) of the respondents reported that child labour caused physical harm and injuries to children as victims, 13(18.6%) noted that it led to health hazards and diseases to children, 10(14.3%) noted low education levels and high school drop­outs among affected children as they are forced to balance work and school and most of them may drop out of school. Further, 9(12.9%) of them cited high child morbidity and mortality rates among victims of child labour as the effects may be so destructive and lead to death of victims; while 8(11.4%) noted that child labour led to psychological torture or depression and stress among children and children’s negative attitude and dislike for work when they graduate to adulthood due to horrible adulthood experiences at work. 7(10%) of the respondents noted increased child sexual abuse in commercial sex, 5(7.1%) of the respondents argued that child labour led to increased moral decline among children when engaged in illegal activities like commercial sex and 3(4.3%) argued that child labour led to family breakdowns, and perpetuated the vicious cycle of poverty in families. This implies that physical harm and injuries is the main effect of child labour in Kisenyi.

Therefore, it is clear that child labour leaves destructive effects on the children as its victims. It affects their physical, psychological, educational, moral and social spheres of life in the short, medium and long-term. It also spreads to families of such children, local communities, and the economy, leaving both short and long-term undesirable political, social, economic, and environmental outcomes.

4.4 Strategies to reduce on the prevalence of child labour among families

Responsibility for Fighting Child Labour in Kisenyi

The study also established different categories of stakeholders responsible for the fight against child labour are outlined.

Table 4.10: Responsibility for Fighting Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

Table 4.10 above shows that 22(31.4%) of the respondents emphasized that parents were the key people in fighting child labour, 15(21.4%) of the respondents said police and 14(20%) cited local leaders while 13(18.6%) cited community, 10(14.3%) of the respondents cited government 4(5.7%) cited children themselves and NGOs and civil society, and 2(2.9%) of them indicated labour unions responsible for fighting the vice of child labour. This shows that the elimination of child labour is a multi-stakeholder effort, starting with the family to the community, government, and other law enforcement bodies with key binding roles in the process.

Measures to Control Child Labour in Kisenyi

The different measures that can be taken to control child labour in Kisenyi were noted.

Table 4.11: Measures to Control Child Labour in Kisenyi

Source: Primary Data

From table 4.11 above, 15(21.4%) of the respondents cited the need for sensitization and awareness creation among masses on the forms, causes, effects and remedies of child labour to make them more vigilant in fighting the vice, 13(18.6%) of them forwarded the need for prosecution of perpetrators of child labour under national labour laws, 12(17.1%) urged for strengthening child protection laws against child labour. Also, 8(11.4%) of the respondents cited the need for strengthening labour laws and encouraging children to attend school. Further, 6(8.6%) of them suggested full exposure of child labour in the media and other platforms to create more awareness of its forms, causes and effects; while 5(7.1%) urged for partnerships among different stakeholders like community, police, local leaders and civil society to eliminate child labour.

Respondents urged the need for social, cultural and religious reforms, as well as enhancing political stabilization and border security to curb cross border child trafficking and use of children in illegal cross border trade. The counseling of victims of child labour, and controlling rural-urban migration among children. Therefore, the curbing of child labour involves different measures taken by different parties including government, police, parents, the community, local leaders and even the victims of child labour themselves.

4.5 Discussion of Study Findings

Discussion on Socio-economic factors for increasing rates of child labour

The major form identified was domestic workers. Most children are exposed to child labour through engaging in domestic worker such as selling food stuffs during school hours and many others. This is in line with Mugume (2008) who stated that some children are used by traders to avoid taxes and other legal trade mechanisms. The other major form of child labour was urban informal sector employment. The other forms of the vice were forced child labour, cross boarder smuggling and child trafficking.

The factors for increasing rates of child labour included insufficient resources such as money. The other factors included population growth, single parenting, large families, high levels of illiteracy and parental unemployment. Therefore, child labour, along with its numerous dynamic forms, originates from a wide range of economic, political and social factors. These findings are in line with Basu (1998) who used a theoretical model of child labour, where he showed the only reason parents send children to labour is because of their low income. Consequently poor parents cannot afford schooling for their children. Thus, mainly poor households are forced to send their children to labour instead of sending them to school. Rena (2009) shows that that poverty and underdevelopment drives child labour. According to the studies of Edmonds and Pavcnik (2005); O’Donnell et al. (2005) and Akarro and Mtweve (2011) they assume that tackling poverty can be a perfect solution to reduce child labour. Beside poverty, many factors influence the incidence of child labour which can be listed in the following points.

Discussion on Effects of Child Labour

The major victims of child labour were orphans, the girl-child, children living with relatives, school drop outs, children living with biological parents, delinquents, adopted and abandoned children. One respondent observed that: “In most families, girls are more abused by being made to perform most domestic activities like cooking and laundry. The reason is that they are being trained on how to perform their future roles when they get married”. The key perpetrators of child labour included biological parents, business men and traders, adult family members, close and distant relatives, factories and plantation farms, schools, rebel groups and other criminal groups. One respondent noted that, “The major people responsible for child labour in this area are parents. They directly involve children in heavy work and sometimes allow children to be so free to do anything including child labour activities like commercial garden work on other people’s farms or leaving the village at a young age to look for jobs in towns. These all agree with the findings of UYDEL (2007) and COMEECA (2011). The researcher intervenes, there are many perpetrators of child labour; but the influence of parents both in perpetrating and controlling the vice of child labour is fundamental.

The effects of child labour included physical harm to children as victims. It agrees with Emerson and Souza (2006) who noted that children do heavy work and their spines and pelvis leading to skeletal damage and it affects their physical stature by 30%. One child interviewed lamented that: “I also always feel tired and frequent headache because of heavy work at home”. The health hazards and spread of diseases to children were also noted just as did The Hague (2010) that observed that occupational and health and safety hazards cause immediate implications and skin irritations and long terms effects like cancer, IQ reduction and infertility. As one respondent admitted: “Some sicknesses that these children develop is because of the heavy work they do which is beyond their capacity”. Thus, the researcher also concludes that child labour causes physical and health hazards to children.

The low education levels and high school drop-outs was noted and this agrees with Canagarajah and Nielsen (1999) who noted that children who work face the risk of denial of education and school attendance is affected by time spent at work. One child lamented that: “Every week, I miss one school day to help my parents with farm work. And in the period of harvest, I can even miss school for a whole week”. Another child added: “I always go to school very late and tired after doing garden work for almost two hours. When I reach late, the teacher punishes me sometimes by caning or more garden work in the school garden”. The researcher’s view is that, work and school are two competing alternatives for some children in the study area; and the intensity of the former greatly undermines the latter. The others major effects included high child morbidity and mortality rates; psychological torture and stress among children; children’s dislike for work in adulthood; increased child sexual abuse and moral decline; family breakdowns, and vicious cycle of poverty.

Measures to reduce on the prevalence of child labour among families

To control child labour, parents, police, local leaders, community, government, children, NGOs, and labour unions were cited. The steps were: sensitization and awareness creation, prosecution of perpetrators of child labour; strengthening child protection and labour laws, encouraging children to attend school; exposure of child labour cases, partnerships among stakeholders, counselling of victims, controlling rural-urban migration; social, cultural and religious reforms; and political stabilization and security. One parent stresses that: “The parents have the greatest role to play in controlling child labour, being the heads of families where these children live. We cannot blame the police or other people when we are the very ones engaging children in heavy work in our homes”. Thus, controlling child labour is a multi-stakeholder task that requires their coordination as well.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDIES

5.0 Introduction

This chapter presents summary of findings, conclusion(s) drawn, recommendations, and areas for further research basing on study findings. The study involved an examination of factors for increased rate of child labour among families in Kisenyi, Kampala district.

5.1 Summary of findings

The factors for increasing rates of child labour included insufficient resources. The other factors included population growth, single parenting, large families, high levels of illiteracy and parental unemployment. Therefore, child labour, along with its numerous dynamic forms, originates from a wide range of economic, political and social factors.

The major victims of child labour were orphans, the girl-child, children living with relatives, school drop outs, children living with biological parents, delinquents, adopted and abandoned children. The effects of child labour included physical harm to children as victims. The low education levels and high school drop-outs was noted.

To control child labour, parents, police, local leaders, community, government, children, NGOs, and labour unions were cited. The steps were: sensitization and awareness creation, prosecution of perpetrators of child labour; strengthening child protection and labour laws, encouraging children to attend school; exposure of child labour cases, partnerships among stakeholders, counselling of victims, controlling rural-urban migration; social, cultural and religious reforms; and political stabilization and security.

5.2 Conclusion(s)

Child labour is a major concern for the government, NGOs, development agencies like 1LO, health practitioners and the entire population in Uganda and globally. Many conclusions can be drawn on the incidence, forms, perpetrators, victims, causes, effects, and remedies to the social vice of child labor. It burdens children below eighteen years to psychologically and physically harmful forms of work like farm work, child soldiers, cross-border smuggling and drug trafficking, urban informal sector work, self-employment, commercial sex, domestic child workers, child trafficking, forced child labour and apprenticeships. The victims are orphans, the girl-child, children living with relatives and even biological parents, school drop outs, delinquents, adopted and abandoned children; while the major promoters range from biological parents, business men and traders, relatives, factories and plantation farms, schools, or rebel groups.

Child labour is a product of the interplay of political, social, economic and external factors that relate to the local population or demographics, labour and child protection sectors, government and the extraneous environment. The major ones are: poverty and economic hardships; high population growth, agriculture, ignorance, urbanization, HIV/AIDS and orphan hood, child neglect, domestic violence, social, cultural and religious factors, children’s vulnerability, and weak national labour and child protection laws. Its effects include physical and psychological harm to children; health hazards and diseases; low education levels and high school drop-outs; high child morbidity and mortality rates; children’s dislike in adulthood; increased child sexual abuse and moral decline; family breakdowns, and perpetuating the vicious cycle of poverty in families. So, it is necessary to take measures to control this vice; including: sensitization and awareness creation, prosecution of perpetrators; strengthening child protection and labour laws, encouraging children to attend school; exposure of child labour, partnerships, controlling rural-urban migration; social, cultural and religious reforms; and enhancing political stabilization. This requires the joint effort of parents, police, local leaders the community, government, children, NGOs, civil society, and labour unions.

5.2 Recommendations

Basing on the study findings and the conclusion drawn, the recommendations derived for the public, government, children, laws enforcers, development agencies and other stakeholders include:

First and foremost, the study forwards the need for massive sensitization of parents, children, and the general public on child labour, including its forms, victims, perpetrators, causes, its effects on children and the community, and their roles and other responsibilities in curbing the vice. This will help to enlighten them so that they become collectively vigilant in monitoring and fighting the vice.

The study also recommends the need for educational reforms so that the education system and the major elements of the education processes are less burdening and yet more convenient for children to support their school attendance. This would minimise the tendency of some children dropping out of school early to seek odd jobs, especially in the urban informal sector.

There is also need for government, local leaders, and NGOs need to take measures to empower children as one way of curbing child labour. When empowered with knowledge and information on child labour and their rights, children can aid in the fight by identifying the forms of child labour they are subjected to and effectively reporting such cases to relevant authorities for action.

There is need to strengthen the national labour laws and the police force as the law enforcement body in a bid to curb child labour. The government should revise its labour laws to incriminate child labour and strengthen the police force and provide adequate resources to fight child labour.

Finally, the study forwards the need for the government to provide more economic opportunities for the predominantly poor rural families to increase their incomes and improve livelihoods. This will lure them away from exploiting young children to increase family earnings and improve welfare.

5.3 Areas for Further Research

The study identified the following areas for further research:

1. To conduct a comparative study on the incidence of child labour in all regions of Uganda.
2. To analyse the long-term effect of child labour on the growth and development of the child.

• To establish the major steps being taken to curb chid labour in Uganda.

1. To analyse the long term effect of child labour on national economic growth and development.