Labor practices in the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria with a focus on the role of children

Labor practices in the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria with a focus on the role of children Findings from a 2001 survey of cocoa producing households

J, Gockowski and S. Oduwole

UTA

Intcmarionallnstilute 01 TropKaI AgriaJltw<

Q-

I

l Cocoa Research .

International 1M. ) Ins;tute of N;geria ~ ~ Labo< O<garnz.Don

Labor practices in the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria with a focus on the role of children

Findings from a 2001 survey of cocoa producing households

J. Gockowski' and S.Oduwole2

Intemationallnstitute ofTropical Agriculture (IITA)' Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (CRIN)2 with the assistance and collaboration of: the Intemational Labor Organization (ILO) Enterprise for Development International

Š International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). 2003 lbadan. Nigeria Telephone:(+2342)2412626 Fax: (+2342)2412221 E-mail: lita@cgiar.org Web: www.iita .org To Headquarters from outside Nigeria: do lamboum (UK) ltd carolyn House 26 Dingwall Road. Croydon CR9 3EE. UK W~hin

Nigeria: PMB 5320 . Oyo Road lbadan. Oyo State

ISBN 9781312157 Printed in Nigeria by IITA

Correct citation: J . Gockowski and S.Oduwole: Labor practices in the cocoa sector 01 Southwest Nigeria with a special focus on the role 01 children. STCPIIITA Monograph IITA. Ibadan. Nigeria.

ii

Executive Summary A baseline survey of rocoa producers in southwest Nigeria was conducted to provide information necessary for the implementation of the Sustainable Tree Crops Program (STCP).

The survey is among the activities that were approved during the regional implementation workshop held from 22 to 26 May 2000 in Accra, Ghana and is designed to provide informacion needed for formulating effective project interventions and to assist in monitoring and assessing impacts. The overall goal of the STCP program in West Aftica is: To improve the well-being of smallholder farmers through the development of suswnable tree crop systems that increase productivity. generate income,

conserve biodiversity. use natural resources sustainably and offer stable, socially responsible development prospeCts for producers and their workers.

Following the Ghana workshop, journali", reported slavery-like ptactices and trallicking involving child workers on cocoa farms in Wcst Africa, spurring the STCP to investigate the role of child labor in the cocoa sector ofW..t Africa. To assist in addressing this highly complex issue, the STCP solicited the expertise of the Imernational Programme on the Elimination of Child Labot (IPEC) of the International Labor Organization (ILO). The guiding framewotk for the child labor investigations and interventions cureenely being developed within the STCP is [LO Convention 182 o>nc.eming the Ptohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor.

Articles 3(a) and 3(d) of Convention 182 proscribe "all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery such as the sale and trallicking ofchildren, debt bondage aod serfdom and forced or compulsory labor" and "'work which, by its naruce or the circumstances in which it is carried out is likely to harm the health, safety, Ot morals of children."

Paragraph I ofArticle 4 notes that "the type of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by th~ competent authority, after consultation with th~ organization of employ~rs and workers concerned taking into consideration

relevant international standards in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendations 1999."

Given this new context, the labor practi= section of the STCP baseline survey was significantly amended and expanded following consultation with the [LO and implemented in August 200 1. The findings from the baseline survey will be used to target and develop appropriate STCP pilot project interventions aimed at eliminating the worst forms of child labor.

A random sample of 1083 hou.seholds in 32 villages of Ondo State and two villages in Osun State were interviewed in August 2001. In the survey visits, a toral of 1080 cocoa producers were identified and information o>llected through structured interviews.

iii

For the representative sample producer, producing a toral of 1753 kg of cocoa on slightly under 5 ha, the total annual labor demand for the seven major tasks associated with cocoa production was calculated at 219 person days. Approximately 68% of the annual labor demand is estimated to occur during the harvest season from October to December.

In meeting this labor demand, the usc of salaried child labor was reported by a small proportion of the sampled cocoa producers (1.1 %). This is the type of worker category in which Convention 182 Anicle 3(a)-rype abuses were reported by journalists. A total of 28 boys under the age of 18 were employed with all but one worker coming from either southeast Nigeria or the middle belt region. Three of the boys were between 10 and 14 years of age and the rest 15 and 17 years of age. Two primary modes of recruitment were indicated: either through recourse ro a labor contractor acting as an intermediary, or as a condition for awarding a farm to a sharecropper. Under the latter, the sharecropper was

expecred [0 furnish a child worker as a condition of the sharecropping agrec:menr. Further investigation into child uafficking by labor intermediaries to cocoa producers in southwest Nigeria is recommended.

One of the common explanations for why producers use child workers is the lower cost.

Evidence of this motivation was found. The mean annual payment reported by producers for the child workers was only 56% of the mean payment per adult worker.

Characteristics of the subgroup of producers who use salaried child labor were compared to those who did nor. The moSt norable differences exist in rhe production systems with users found to have markedly lower mean yields and larger cocoa farms. The average yield of these producers was 55% of the level of nonusers and farm size was nearly double that of nonusers.

Tenanr sharecropping was the moSt common labor type used overall and was reported by 70% of the producers interviewed. The practice of providing a child worker as a condition of the sharecrop agreement was anecdotally reported by some of the survey team members. The practice may have been underreported here because this study did not interview sharecroppers and because of the sensitive nature of the issue. The mean producer allocated two of his cocoa farms ro tenant sharecroppers accounting for 70% of all the farms in the sample.

The most typical arrangement was a one-third share to the sharecropper, and a two-thirds share to the owner with the owner responsible for purchased inputs while the sharecropper provided labor. Sharecroppers were for the most part migrant workers predominantly from the middle belt and southeast of Nigeria. Further investigation of the sharecropping institution in southwest Nigeria is strongly recommended to shed

light on the practke and

its implications for children.

Ten producers indicated hiring casual workers (workers hired on a cask basis) under the age of 18 years. The mean worker pay by task for those under 18 was N579', which was significantly lower than the mean pay of N1555 reported for crews of only adult

IUSSI - 120 Naira

iv

casual workers. Casual workers under the age of 18 accounted for slightly less than 3% of the casual work force reported by producers. Overall, over 30% of households reported using adult casual labor with 76% of the tasks undertaken by migrant workers and 24% by local workers. Among migrant workers, 45% were from the southeast and 40% were from the middle belt of Nigeria with the remainder from the southwest with the exception offive producers who indicated using migrant workers from Togo. Given the importance of casual labor for Nigerian cocoa production, a follow up investigation with direct interviews of casual workers is recommended during the harvest season (October to December) to gather more information about the livelihood strategies of casual workers and the importance of casual cocoa employment in those strategies.

Such an investigation should also examine in more depth the experiences of children among casual workers.

The employmenr of family children on the household cocoa farm was the most widely reported form of child labor, indicated by 14% of cocoa producing households. The mean producer using household children employed slightly more than two children per task for a combined total of 311 working days and engaged these children on 2.6 tasks. The most commonly reported tasks were drying and field transport. The most serious employment from the standpoint of Article 3 (d) ofILO Convention 182 was for pesticide application (3% of producers reporting) and clearing cocoa farms with machetes (7% reporting). A risk analysis on the portfolio of tasks done by children is recommended in order to get a clearer idea of the exact nature of the work and the risks invoh路ed in this particular tasks in order to bener suggest how those risks can be eliminated or minimized.

The potential effcct of work on school enrollment is a concern. The enrollment rate among family children assisting on their parents' farm was significantly lower than the mean enrollment rate of households where children were not reported to be employed in cocoa production. The underlying reasons for [he lower enrollment rates among working children requires further investigation of the factors (income, tree stock assets, gender) influencing the parents' decision to invest in their children's eduation.

A cross tabular analysis of the influence of the size of the cocoa holding, the productiviry of the holding (measured by yield per hal, and household labor endowment on the producer's labor choice was made in order to bener target interventions.

As cocoa farm size increases the proportion of households using only family labor and! or reciprocal labor declined significantly. Conversely, the reported use of paid casual and salaried labor in combination with sharecropping arrangements all increased; these labor types appear to be the preferred means of attempting to maimain the labor input per ha.

There was a nominal increase in the employment of family child labor as the scale of production increased. Households with abundant endowments of family labor were expected to be less frequent users of hired casual labor. paid salary, and sharecropping arrangements and conversely, more frequent users of family labor and child labor.

Strong evidence in support of this h)'pothesis was nOt found. The frequency of sharecropping acrually increased with the household's endowment oflabor. An explanation for this apparent anomaly could be due to a strategy among labor abundant households to

v

e:mploy those labor assets to create: tree: stock assetS, i.e., cocoa facms. which ace men placed under a sharecropping arrangement. Family child labor employmen( did increase wi<h <he household labor cndowmenr.

The productivity of <he producers cocoa production system. which is closely correlated with gross revenues per ha. can influence <he choice oflabor used. The working hypo<hesis is that low levels of productivity per ha <hrough (heir effect on gross revenues constrain the producer's labor options and lead to greater u(i1iza(ion of low cost labor and fumily labor.

Family Jabor. specificaUy child labor. producers own labor. and spouse's labor were all more frequently reported among low productivity producers. Among low productivity producers. 14.1 % indicated only using fumily labor versus 7.6% among high productivity producers. Similarly. <he proportion indicating <he employment of child labor declined from 20% among the lowest productivity class to only 9% among the highest. The use of children in the pocentially hazardous occupations of pesticide application and cocoa farm cleating also declined with increased productivity. The conclusion is that increasing the productivity of cocoa farms may contribute to lower demand for child labor including those employed in hazardous occupations.

In Nigeria (as well as Ghana and Cameroon) the proportion of households engaging sharecroppers increases wi<h productivity. A likely explanation is that farms with sharecrop arrangements have a higher labor input per ha combined with the suong motivation for that labor to maximiu output in order to maximize: the workers' share. There was also a higher reported use of casual workers among high productivity farms.

vi

Contents Execu rive Summary .........................â&#x20AC;˘.................................................................. _...

Introduction ..........................................................................................................

Methodology.. .......... .......... ....... .... ........ .... ........... ............ ........... ...... ..... ... .......... ...

The study area ....................................................................................................

The sample design ..................................................... ......... ................................

Survey implementation ......................................................................................

Survey Results ........................................................................................................

An overview of cocoa producing households in sOUlhwest Nigeria......................

Labor demand .in southwest Nigerian cocoa systems...........................................

Variation in laDor types utilizod..........................................................................

TIme a1loca,ion, school enrollmen, rates, and numi>ers of employed family children.. ......... ............. ........... ........ ..... ........ ........... .. .............. ......... ......... .........

Casual workers: their employment and remuneration .........................................

Salaried child workers. ............. ........ .... ............ ............ .... ..... ... .......... ...... ..... ......

Worker conditions ........................................................ ,............. ,..................

Producer characteristics .... ............ ,................................................................

Conclusions and Recommendanons.......................................................................

Tables Table 1. D istribution of sample in sou,hwest Nigeria ............................................

Table 2. land and family labor resources by size of cocoa holding ...... ...................

Table 3. Mean number of cocoa farms by producer size class ..................................

Table 4 Mean percentage of 'enure arrangements by producer ,ize class .................

Table 5. Mean levels of yidd, input use, shade, and age of cocoa stocks by producer size class. ............................. .... ............................... ........... ........................

Table 6. Varia,ion in producer u,ilization of !aDor types by size class, Nigeria, 2000101. ................. ........... ... ........ .................. ........... ... ....... ....... .............

Table 7. Frequency variation in producer utilization oflabor types by yield class, Nigeria, 2000101 ........ ............ .......... .. ............. ........ ...... ....... ........ .... ........

Table 8. Variation in producer utiliza,ion of family child laDor by task and productivity class ............... ..................................................................... .

TaDle 9. Frequeney variation in producer utilization oflaDor types Dy laDor endowmen, class................. .......................... ............................................

TaDI. 10. Descriptive statistics on cocoa employment and school enrollment of household children over all reported laDor ,asks........................................

Table II. Summary s,atistics for casuallaDor employment ....................................

vii

11

1

4 4 4 5 7 7 11 13 19 22 22 22 24 27

6 8 9 10 10

16 17 18 19 21 22

Table 12. A comparison of child and adult worker payment and producer employment demand................. ... ......... ............... ....... ................ ...........

Table 13. Mean comparison of producer characteristics across those indicating use of salaried child workers and rhose not indicating use, Nigeria 2001 Table 14. Mean comparison of demographic variables across producers not indicating use of permanent child workers with rhose indicating use, Nigeria 200 I .... .......................................................................................

23 25

26

Annex Table I. Descriptive statistics on cocoa employment and school enrollment of household children employed in dearing cocoa farms ................ ...............

Table 2. Descriptive staristics on employment and school enrollment of household children employed in applying pesticides ..................................................

Table 3. Descriptive statistics on employment and school enrollment of household children employed in pod breaking ............. .. .. ...................... ...

29 30 31

Figures Figure. I. Size distribution of cocoa farms ..............................................................

Figure. 2. Frequency by producer of the different labor types employed in the southwest Nigeria cocoa ~ctor ............ ............. ............ ............. .............

Figure. 3. Frequecy offarnily children employement by task .... .......... ................... .

Figure. 4. Proportion of reported family child labor supplied by age and gender groups ....................................................................................................

viti

7

14 14 20

Labor practices in the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria with a focus on the role of children Introduction A baseline survey of cocoa producers in the major cocoa growing area of southwest Nigeria was conducted

to

provide information necessary for the implementation of the Sustain-

able Tree Crops Program (STCP). It forms part of activities thar were approved during the regional implementation workshop held from the 22 to 26 May 2000 in Accra, Ghana.

The survey is-designed to provide information needed for formulating effective projects and to assist in monitoring and assessing project impacts. The overall goal of the STCP program in West Africa is: To improve the well being of smallholder farmers through the development of sustainable tree crop systems that increase produclivicy, generate income, conserve biodiversity, use natural resources sustainably and offer stable socially responsible development prospecrs for producers and their workers.

It constitutes coordinated effortS made by industty, governments, and research, development and conservation agencies to facilitate the improvement ofsmallholder systems based on tree crops in Africa.

The objectives of STCP are to promote public- and private-sector partnerships in support of farmer organizations and cooperatives in order to: •

Increase the productivity of uee crop production systems while conserving the natu-

ral resource base by transferring appropriate technologies through cooperative-based exrension services.

• Increase the capacity of farmer organizations to collectively market their commodities with efficiency gains translating inro higher farmgate prices.

• Improve: the socioeconomic situation offarming communities by improving access to education and other social services.

Following the Ghana workshop, journalistic accounts revealed slavery-like practices and trafficking involving children on cocoa plantations ofWcst Africa. To assist in addressing this highly complex issue in cocoa sector ofWestAfrica, the STCP solicited the expertise of the International Ptogramme on the Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC) of the International Labor Organization (ILO). The guiding framework for the child labot investigations and interventions of the STep is ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action fur the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labot.

me

Articles 3(a) and 3(d) of Convention 182 proscribe "all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labor" and "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." Paragraph 1 of Article 4 notes that "the type of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by tbe comperent authority, after consultation with the organization of employers and workers concerned caking into consideration relevant inter·

national standards in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendations 1999."

Given this new context, the labor practices section of the STep baseline survey was significantly amended and expanded following consulration with the ILO and implemented in the field in August 2001.

The specific objectives of the survey in regards to child labor were to: •

Determine the type, extenc. and magnitude of child labor utilized in the oocoa sec~

tors of Cameroon, COte d'lvoire, Ghana, and Nigeria with a particular regard to the issues raised in Articles 3(a) and 3(d) of ILO Convention 182.

•

Provide information needed for designing effective interventions for addressing the

issue of child labor abuse in the pilot projects currently under development.

To efficiently address the program objectives, a pilot phase of drom is being developed that will provide a framework for implementing and measuring the feasibility and impact of technical interventions and services aimed at raising the social and economic cirrumstances of workers, households , and communities involved in cocoa production . The focus of the

pilot phase will be a series ofintegrated community-based projects (one each in Cameroon, Ghana, Guinea, and Nigeria, and three in Cote d'Ivoire) to be implemented with a range of stakeholders including farmer organizations, research and excension, marketing agents,

NGOs. and child advocacy groups. The findings from the baseline SU!vey will be used to targer and develop appropriate interventions to meer local needs. Each pilot project is in the process of planning interventions aimed ar: •

•

Strengthening farmer organjzations.

Implementing technical packages to increase productivity and enhance environmental services.

•

•

Establishing child labor programs.

Developing trade and information systems within panicipating farmer otganizations.

The goal of these pilot phase interventions is to create the capacity and motivation for smallholder farmers in the region to form strong business-oriented associations. This outcome should be founded on productive cropping systems and environmentally friendly and socially responsible production techniques that do not lead to additional deforestation or entail abusive labor practices. The purpose of the pilot projects is to rest with smallholder farmers an integrated package of services, which will include sensitization on child labor issues. The pilot ptojects will also seek to improve the management of namral resources and the conservation of biodiversity. It is expected that participating farmers would be provided

2

with greater access to training, extension. finance. markets. and information through their cooperative association.

In Nigeria. the STep baseline survey focused on cocoa produced in the southwest. which accounts for approximately 70% of national production. As the pilot project activities will occur in Ondo State. the basdine survey sample was drawn mostly from among producers in Ondo State. Ondo State rontributes 40% of national production. which is the largest shate of any Nigerian state.

T he survey questionnaire addressed six areas: I. The agticultwal system and rural livelihoods (demographics. other enterprise. fum size, capital inventory).

2.

Rural service provision (input markets. credit markets. market and production information , rural organization).

3. Tree stocks by age. replanting. uprooting. and new planting.

4. Agronomic practices and output by plot.

5. Labor practices.

6. Postharvest practices and marketing.

The Nigerian situation Nigeria is classified by the World Bank as a low-income economy. The population was estimated at 71 million with an annual growth rate of 3% in 1980. Extrapolated estimates of the current population are around 123.9 million (World Bank Development Report 2000/01) .

Approximately 27% of the population lived in the urban areas in 1980 and it increased to 43% in 1999. indicating rural-urban drift. In terms of agricultural exports. cocoa remains the most important in terms offorcign exchange earnings. Annual production reached a peak of 303000 tonnes in 1970171 and declined thereafter until 1985. Annual production has remained relatively constant in the last 10 years. fluctuating between 130000 and 160 000 tonDes. and is produced almost exclusively on small. family-owned fum â&#x20AC;˘.

3

Methodology The study area Producer sampling was restricted to the three most important cocoa producing divisions in Dndo and Osun states, which are the most important cocoa producing areas of southwest

Nigeria (Table 1). Together the administrative divisions sampled in the three zones account for around 45% of national production disuibuted among the three divisions as follows: Ile-Oluji/Ondolljesha-18%. IdanrelOwena-16%. and AkurelOwo-ll %.

The sample design A sample of 1000 households was desired. The intended sampling universe was the population of cocoa producing households in southwest Nigeria. A {Wo-stage cluster sample design was proposed. The sample size in each division was proportional to its cocoa production and within each subdivision was proportional to its cocoa production within irs division.

Thus the sampling fractions were. n 1000 â&#x20AC;˘ Y tr. y where.

n,

"

0

the number of producers sampled in division p and pol . 2. 3. the annual production of cocoa in division p

0

~

,

0

and where,

the number of producers sampled in subdivision d of division p. and Y", = the annual production of cocoa in division d of zone p.

A cluster sample was proposed with the sample size at the second stage n, equal to 30 households per village duster. Thus a total of 10001 n, = 34 sample clusters were required.

The number of dusters per division and subdivision was equal to: Can 130 n", =

< ~+130 =

where,

Cp

=

C",

0

number of dusters sampled in division p number of dusters sampled in subdivision d of zone p.

As reliable information on production by locality was not available. all villages in each administrative division were enumerated and the required number of villages randomly drawn without replacement.

Upon arriving in the village the survey teams were instructed to enumerate all households in the village (N). And then using a randomly drawn starting number in the interval [1. NlnJ systematically sample evety Nln, household.

4

Survey implementation Using adminiscracive maps, a lise of all villages in the targeted. administrative divisions was developed. From !his liSI, me required sample fraction was selected randomly. The .ctual dimibu';on of sampled villages and households by adminim.live division and subdivision are reported in Table I. The cluster siz< actUally implemented was not uniform, ranging from seven to 57 households, wirh â&#x20AC;˘ mean of 31 households. In 101al, 35 villages were sampled and 1083 households visited. Of rhe 1083 households, 1080 were actUally producing cocoa.

The implemenlalion of rhe survey .t rhe second stage was not well controlled. In many cases rhe systematic random sampling of all households in rhe village as described above was not implemented for a series of reasons. Upon arriving in the survey area, the teams visited rhe local village aurhorities and administrative officials prior to implementation in order to inform rhem of rhe survey and its purposc and ro fix a rendezvous for rhat village.

At rhe time of rhe rendezvous rhe team would often find rha! a group of producers had been assembled by rhe local village chief and were wailing to be interviewed. When this was rhe case, insread ofinsisting on rhe systematic sclection from among all households in Ihe village rhe teams often acted opporrunistically and drew a random sample from rhis group of producers.

This presents several potential bi.ascs. First of all rhe cstimated proportion of cocoa versus noncocoa producing households can no longer be made as rhe village universe was no longer all fumers but rather a subset of only cocoa producers .t least in some villages. Another potential bias may have been the tendency for village aurhoriri .. to convoke higher profile cocoa producers, i.e., rhose wirh larger cocoa fums and greater production. However, given that large fums have larger labor demands and show more variation in practice from the viewpoint of rhe survey objectives on child labor practices, such a bias may actually shed more light on potenlially abusive forms of child labor practice.

One of rhe inilial objectives of including all rural households in rhe sample design was to establish statistically reliable estimates of the proportion of cocoa producing households in a given region. Anorher objeclive of chis sampling approach was to model the factors at rhe household level related to rhe decision to produce or not to produce cocoa. It. i! seems only cocoa producing households (wirh rhe exception of three) were interviewed, neirher of these objectives can be me! with rhe curren! da.. SCt. The field data collection began on 30 July 200 1 and was completed on 3 September 200 I. In terms of rhe cocoa agriculrural calendar, rhis is an active period wirh fums being slashed in preparation for harvest, which starts in September and runs through December.

The period is also one in which fumers actively combat blackpod disease rhrough pesticide applications. Borh of thcse acliviti.. may be considered potentially injurious to child work¡ ers. The peak labor demand occurs during rhe harvesting period when low cost child labor is most likely to be employed in harvesting, pod breaking, and transportation.

5

Table 1. Distribution of sample in southwest Nigeria.

State

Division

Ondo

Idance/Owena Idanra

AkureJOwo

l\e路Oluji/ Ondo/ljesha

Subdivision

Village

Households surveyed

Teju Agbajo Gberiwojo Ipoba I lIanarowa Gbalegi Aponmu/Owode Apon mu/Okemaye Onikokojiya lra路O lorun lpaba/Balogu n

20 18 31 34 57 35 18 12 27 25

n~ru-moba

42

lIoro Olugede Ayadi Ojumu Kajola Baikini Subtotal Akure North Oda Igbaroro lIu Abo Subtotal Akure South Ipogun Aule Ibule Subtotal Emure lie Owo Eporo Subtotal lIe路Olujil Sade Oke-Igbo Oluwasola Bamikemo Subtotal Ondo East Bernaso

28

Bolorunduro

Osun

7

lfe South lpetu ljosha

La.agba Wasinimi Subtotal Itetedo Garage Olode Owena-Jesha Total

6

23 16 53 36 16 498 35 35 30 100 40 35 35 110 35 35 70 33 47 38 118 31 24 36 34 125 26 36 1083

Survey Results An overview of cocoa producing households in southwest Nigeria Cocoa production in southwest Nigeria is essentially small scale. The mean cocoa farm was 4.7 ha with the sample d istribution positively skewed (Figure I). The skewedness of the distribution implies potential growth versus equity tradeoffs for development interventions through the cocoa sector. The differences berween large and small farms are analyzed across the terciles of this distribution.

In addition to cocoa most farms also produce food crops and some include other ~ren­ nial crops sueb as cirrus or oil palm plantations. Farmers with larger cocoa holdings have more land resources of all types than those with small cocoa holdings and devote a higher proportion of their total land resources (72.3%) to cocoa than small-scale farmers (55.7%).

Conversely, the proportion ofland allocated to annual crop and associated fallow fields is more than double among small cocoa farmers (38.9%) than for large fiumers (15.6%). This is an indication of the stiU important role of food crop production for meeting household food demands among smaller, land-scarce households. In contrast those households more abundantly endowed with land eboose to invest in cocoa land assets. The lack of forested land for conversion to cocoa, averaging only 0.2 ha per farm implies that expansion of the cocoa sector in southwest Nigeria will have (0 rely on funher intensificarion of existing cocoa systems possibly with some conversion of fallow lands to cocoa land.

0.06 0.Q7 (1.47 J .nrr . I M)

0.06

i

% of farms

%of area

Small fiums

36

12

0.0 2

Medium

33

26

0.01

Large

31

62

0.06

.!! 0.04 "0 0.03

..

40 Medium

t...g<

0.4 to 6 aCId

6.1 to 12 aoa

"-390

n •

12.1 + at7eS n·390

Sm.JI

3-19

60

Source: STep N~ri:.J. Baseline Survey 2001

Figure 1. Size distribution of cocoa farms.

7

80

100

The overall importance of cocoa in the livelihoods of rural people in southwest Nigeria is high, accounting for more than two-thirds of household income. The average sample producer produces approximately 1700 kg annually, which generares mean gross cocoa incomes that have ranged from NIOOOOO to N240000 (equivalent to 833 ro U5$2000) in recent years depending on world price. Interesringly, smaller producers are significantly more dependent on cocoa revenues (70% of total cash revenues) than are large-scale farmers although the difference is slight (Table 2). The cocoa revenue sample distribution reflects the skewedness of the size distribution with the result that the largest tercile accounts for over 70% of total sales versus less than 8% for the smallest tereile.

T he average household consists of slightly over 10 persons, of whom 3.5 are children.

Most family children of school age were enrolled in school and the household head typically had less than four years of formal schooling. The average age of Nigerian cocoa producers was high and increased with cocoa size. Positive correlations exist berween age and size (r = 0.10, P = 0.001), between cocoa area and family size (r = 0.247, P < 0.001), and between the age of the household head and family size (r = 0.14, P < 0.001). This suggests the dependency inter alia of tree stock asset accumulation on the life cycle of the producer and [he availability of family labor resources.

The sample proportion of women cocoa producers was II % with a significantly larger proportion of female-headed cocoa farms in the small size class of producers. Women's long histoty in cocoa produCtion across West Mrica and the historical importance of cocoa production in southwest Nigeria warrant filCther study of women's access to resources for tree crop production. The restricted access to land resources for women should be among the fucal points of sueh study.

Table 2. Land and family labor resources by size of cocoa holding.

Si:z.e of cocoa farm Small Med Large Annual crop fields (ha) Fallow fields (ha) Cocoa (ha) Other perennial tree crops (ha) Forest land (ha) Total farm sizc (ha) Family size (no.)

Men 18-54 (no.)

Children (no.)

School enrollment of children 0/0 Education HH (years) Age HH (years) Female HH % Cocoa crop revenue share %

0.7 0.41 1.59 0.08 0.14 2.85 8.7 2.7 3 89 3.3 53.7 15 70

1.12 0.57 3.7 0.2 0.15 5.55 10 3.2 3.5 92 3.8 55.7

9 67

8

2.04 1.2 9.39 0.4 0.35 13 12.1 4 4.1 90 3.7 57.3 8 66

Mean

Prob.

1.26 0.72 4.74 0.22 0.21 6.93 10.2 3.3 3.5 90 3.6 55.4

<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.025 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.5 0.2 0.01 <0.001 0.01

II

68

The mean producer had slightly under three producing cocoa farms and the mean number of newly established cocoa farms was 0.45 (Table 3). Thirty-two percent of producers indicated a newly established plantation. which is surprisingly high given the apparent land constraints of the region. Further study of this subset of farmers and their strategies and methods for creating additional tree stock assets is indicated. Fifteen petcent of sample farmers indicated having abandoned a cocoa fann. Among those abandoning. low productivity was cited by 60% as the main reason followed by labor constraints (cited by 14%). The number of abandoned farms was significantly higher among large cocoa farmers. Thirteen percent of the farmers indicated that they were either renting or had pledged a cocoa farm (given to another farmer in exchange for a loan , with the farm returned to the owner once

the loan was repaid) and 8% indicated having sold a cocoa farm. The mean number offarms sold and rented also increases significantly with farm size. Although low. these frequencies are significantly highÂŤ than those seen in Ghana or Cameroon and indicate a relatively more developed land market in southwest Nigeria. A more commerciali""d land market is also borne our by the mode of land acquisition. While the main mode of acquisition remains family inheritance, the importance ofland. transactions, either the purchase of a cocoa farm or the purchase of land for creation of a cocoa farm. was rdatively high (Table 4).

One of the most striking characteristics of the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria is the

high proportion of land that is under sharecropping arrangements. The mean producer had twO out of a total of 2.85 cocoa farms under such arrangements. The most common tenancy arrangement was a one-third share to the sharecropper. and a two-thirds share to the owner. with the owner responsible for purchased inputs and the sharecropper supplying the required labor. The number of cocoa farms placed under sharecropping arrangements increases with farm sizc as does the proportion of total farms. Among small farmers. 62% of farms are sharecropped whereas among large farmers the proportion is 75%. Some of the faCtors influencing the labor aspects of sharecropping are explored in more detail below.

Table 3. Mean number of cocoa fanms by producer size class.

Size of cocoa farm

Small

Med

Large

All

F tcst

Producing

1.99

2.85

3.83

2.85

< 0.001

Newly established

0.25

0.45

0.68

0.45

< 0.001

Abandoned

0.11

0. 17

0.29

0.19

< 0.001

Rented

0.082

0.2

0.22

0.17

0.006

Sold rocoa farms

0.04

0.05

0.19

0.09

< 0.001

Farms sharecropped

1.23

1.91

2.97

2

< 0.001

Proportion of all farms sharecropped

0.62

0.64

0.75

0.67

< 0.001

9

Table 4. Mean percentage of tenure arrangements by producer size class.

Size of cocoa farm

Farms/fields inherited from f.unily member Farms/fields purchased Land inherited and farms/fields created by yourself Land purchased and farms/fields created by yourself Farms/fields renredlleased

Small 26.7 18.9 47.2 19.2 4.7

Med 26.8 19 44.4 31.7 4.9

Large 31.1 22.2 43.2 33.7 5

All Chi test 28.1 0.34 20 0.47 45 0.54 27.8 <0.001 4.9 0.97

Similar to the situation in Ghana and Cameroon, smaller producers in Nigeria have the highest yields (Table 5). This obselVation is related to several factors; first and most

imporcancly is the higher level of fungicide and insecticide use per unit area among smallscale farmers. No difference is noted among size classes in terms of the frequency of pesti-

cide application, but rather in the higher levels applied per ha. Small producers spend 2.8 times and 2.2 times more per ha on fungicides and insecticides, respectively, than do large producers. Secondly, the ratio of family labor per ha of cocoa is also higher among smallscale farmers. This additional labor input contributes to higher yield" A [hird contributing faccor is [hat the operator's management input on a per ha basis will be higher among small producers. A farmer with only one cocoa farm will manage to implemem more yield augmenring prac.ices tha[ large producers are forced to implement more extensively.

Despi.e the higher yields among small producers, their average production in 2000/0 I was only 37% of .he mean produc[ion attained by the largest size class. The conclusion is tha[ small producers because of limited land availabilicy tend to produce more intensively, Table 5. Mean levels of yield, input use, shade, and age of cocoa stocks by producer size class.

Size oHarm

Yield per ha Fungicide coS[ per ha (Naira) Insecticide coS[ per ha (Naira) Weeding. per year Fungi spraying' per year Insect sprayings per year Total fungi expense (Naira) Total insect expense (Naira) Shade index (,caIe â&#x20AC;˘ 0 to 3) Total cocoa production (kg) Average age of cocoa farms

Overall

Small

Medium

Large

Mean

F-teS[ (prob).

686 5278 2119 2.1 5.3 2.1 7100 2901 1.47 989 24.0

407 2896 1317 2.1 5.2 2.5 10273 4636 1.53 1458 24.2

308 1893 964 2.1 5.2 2.6 16469 8920 1.58 2704 25.9

475 3405 1483 2.1 5.2 2.4 11101 5370 1.52 1681 24.7

<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.08 0.77 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.070 <0.001 0.077

Source: STep Nigeria baseline survey (2001).

10

while producers in the large size dass opt for the creation oflarg. cocoa holdings through mobilization of family labor. These producers then pursue a relatively extensive strategy of cocoa production using lower levels of purchased inputs per ha. In the section that follows we shall examine how size and yield vary with choice of labor and the role of children in these production systems.

labor demand in southwest Nigerian cocoa systems The initial step in the interview on labor allocation was to esCiblish the labor types used.

Nine categories oflabor type were identified a priori: 1. Own labor--the producer's own labor input.

2. Ext,tukdJamily labor-work provided by member's of the producer's extended family.

3. Paid casuallabor--<iefined as workers hired on a piece rate or daily basis to effectuate a particular task.

4. &ciprocai labor-nonmonetary labor exchange betwc:en the producer and a group of other producers where tasks are undertaken together by the group.

S. Spouse, labor- the work contribution by the household head's spouse.

6. Family child labor-the work contribution by the ehildren residing in the household.

7. Shartcropping--the supply of labor by a third party in exchange for a share of the harvest proceeds (typically one-third or one-half).

8. Paid D<tm<kd fomily lahor--<iefined as paid workers hired on a piece rate, or daily basis who belong to the producers' extended family.

9. Paid salary labor--<iefined as paid workers hired on a semipermanent basis to effectuate multiple tasks associated with the production of oocoa and paid either a monthly salary or a lumpsum at the end of harvest.

The producer was asked to identify for each labor category whether or not this labor type was employed in the seven major labor tasks associated with cocoa production. These labor tasks are: I. CleariDgfweeding the undentorey of the cocoa farm . This task is usually underClken rwice a year, once in May/June and again prior to the harvesting season in September/Oerober. The typical practice is to slash the vegetative growth at ground level using a sharpened machete. Depending on the amount of undergrowth, dearing one hectare typically requires betwc:en three to seven person days of labor.

Given an average farm .iz.c: of 4.7 ha, the mean Nigerian producer in the sample would require somewhere between 28 and 47 person days of labor for daring. A labor saving alternative to slashing is to apply herbicides, which has in the past been recommended by research and extension especially on newly established farms. The reported incidence of herbicide application was however very low.

2. Agrodtemica1 (pesticide) application. The high incidence of cocoa blackpod disease and capsids (plant sucking bugs) obliges rbe spraying of fungicides and insecticides. The mean Nigerian producer reported applying fungicides and pesticides five times during the course of the year. It is estimated that one person with a backpack

11

sprayer can apply fungicides/insecticides to approximately 1.0 ha per 6路hour work day and therefore the mean Nigerian producer would require 23 person days for applying pesticides. Other than fungicide and insecticide. an extremely limited number of producers were also applying fertilizers (3.0% of producers) and herbi路 cides (0.6% of producers) to thcir cocoa farms.

3. Harvesting cocoa pods. Once the pods are ripened on the tree they are harvested and transported to a central location typically within or at the edge of the cocoa plan ration. Harvesting cocoa requires some experience to be able to identify ripe from unripe pods. To produce 1753 kg of marketable cocoa bean (the mean quantity sold per producer in the sample) would require harvesting somewhere on the order of 47 000 cocoa pods. Assuming one person can harvest approximately 650 pods per day. a total ofn person days would be required to harvest the cocoa produced by the mean producer'.

4. Cocoa pod breaking. After the cocoa pods have been harvested they are broken open and ,he we, beans extracted from the mucilage of the pod prior to fermentation. At a rate of 2000 pods per person-day. a total of 24 person days would be required.

S. field transport. After the we< beans have been separated from the pods. they are then transported usually back to the farmer's concession where they will be fermented and dried. To produce 1753 kg of dty marketable cocoa ,equires transporting approximately 4330 kg of fresh beans. The mean reported travel time in Nigeria from the plantation to the home is 45 minutes. Assuming that one person could carty 50 kg of fresh beans per trip. taking 105 minutes per roundtrip. the labor demand for transport is calculated at 25 person days.

6. Fermentation. Afrer the cocoa beans are separated they are fermented for four to seven days depending on the ptoducer. The process involves mixing the beans evety 48 houts.

7. Drying. Once the cocoa has finished fermenting. it is dried It is estimated that the fermentation and dtying of 1753 kg would require 28 person days of labor.

The above tasks form the bulk of the annual labor demands on a producing cocoa farm. For the representative sample producer operating 4.7 ha of cocoa land and produc. ing a toW of 1753 kg the total annual labor demand for the tasks listed above is calculated at 219 person days. Approximately 68% of the total annual labor demand occurs during the harvest season from October to December. Using a coefficient of 125 person-days per tonne of cocoa. the reported production of 180 000 ronnes of cocoa in 2001 would have required 22.5 million person days of on-farm labor (representing full-time employment for approximately 98 000 persons').

2A cocoa pod weighs be~n 200 and 1000 g, the average pod weighs "'00 g and yidd5 35-40 g of marketable dried cocoa beans. Th~ r.ario of marmabk cocoa beans to fresh cocoa beans iJ 0."'0 to 0.44. It is estimated that 16 personda)'S of tabor are required. to f~nt and dry one tonne (Ministere cit: la Coopbadon Franc:aisc:. 1993. Memmttl M I~l'"""'" p. 9n) . lFull time employment is hen: defined as 230 work days per )'C2l.

12

Most cocoa enterprises in Nigeria are a component in a diversified. farming system with food crop production for household consumption and local urban markets the other chief preoccupation. Mean cocoa revenues accounted for 67% of the. households reported cash income in our sample (Table 2).Once the overall portfolio oftabor types by tasks utilized by the producer was established, the interview then gathered infOrmation on int<r alia: • the time allocation and school enrollment rate of family children employed in the various tasks of producing cocoa • the number of casual workers employed by task and their remuneration (including those under the age of J 8) • the incidence of child workers among permanent salaried workers and the conditions under which they worked.

The analysis of the survey findings begins with an examination of the labor choices made·by producers and the variation in those choices over the sitt of the cocoa holding, the productivity of the holding (measured by yield per hal, and household labor endowment.

From there the analysis examines quantitatively the employment offamily children in the cocoa enterprise, the employment of children as casual workers, and finally the employment of children as permanent salaried workers.

Variation In labor types utilized A major difference between Nigeria and other cocoa producing countries in West Mrica is the preeminent position of sharecropper labot. In Cameroon, COre d'Ivoire, and Ghana, while irnportam, shatecropping was never reported by more than 30% of producers. However in Nigeria it is the most frequently cited labor type utilized by 70% of its producers (Figure 2). This is followed in importance by the producers' own labor which was cited by 52% of producers, a much lower value than in the other cocoa producing counrries.

Nigeria, with more than one hundred million inhabirants has evolved a cocoa production system unlike any other in West Africa.

Casual labor hire is another important labor source reported by 31 % of cocoa producers. The wife of the producer contributes labor on 28% of the sampled farms and family children were employed by about one in every seven producers. Slightly more than one in every fOur produce.. reported the employment of paid salaried workers. Unlike in Ghana and Cameroon reciproeallabor exchange is of minimal importance.

The concern with the worst forms of child labor necessitates a task-by-task examination to see to what extent cocoa producing households (CPHs) are employing family children in potentially hazardous activities (Figure 3). Heading the list is the drying of cocoa beans.

This activity which involves ruming the COCOa beans throughout the day and then gathering up the beans at the end of the day should not pose any particular health or safery risk

ro children as described by Article 3 (d) ofiLO convention 182.

Field transport was the next most frequently cited activity in which children were employed. Given the long distance between the home and the cocoa plantations (mean distance was a 50-minute walk) this cask could pose serious risks of hernia and other physical injuries ifloads are 100 heavy. The survey did not go into the details of this activiry

13

Own labor supply

Paid ca.uallabor spou••·• labor supply Paid salaried labor Family child labor supply Extended family labor supply R.clproc:allabor supply

.

Paid ext.ncktd family I~ L -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

o

20

10

Percentage of households

Figure 2. Frequency by producer of the different labor types employed in the southwest Nigerian cocoa sector.

and its inclusion in an activity risk analysis for child workers should be considered. Factors to examine include the distance traveled. the age and gender of the child. and the weight of the load.

The ptincipal Article 3(d) "worst form" concerns with regards to cocoa production are the employment of children for clearing the cocoa plantation and their employment in applying pesticides.

One in every fourteen cocoa producer reponed employing family children to clear cocoa farms. This task is most often achieved using a sharpened machete with a steel blade of approximately 50 em in length and weighing approximately 600-700 g. Knowing how to properly handle a machete is a requisite skill for the slash and burn farming systems of southern Nigeria. But there are risks. Under the hot and humid conditions common to Drying

Field tranaport Cl .... ng

Pod bruklng

F.rmenUitlon P.atk:kIe appl

0.0

2.0

4.0

5.0

'.0

Prod...... (110) Indicating ""

Figure 3. Frequency of famHy children employment by task.

14

10.0

southwest Nigeria, the perspiration generated by slashing often causes the grip to slip resulting in frequent and serious lacerations. The clearing of cocoa fields by adoles""nts of 15 to 17 years of age for several hours at a time should probably be considered a normal part of the social development procc:ss. More serious is the prolonged use of younger children in such acrivity. The issue of time allocation and age of family children employed in this

activity is examjned in

mor~

derail below.

Three percent of households indicated the employment of household children in applying pesticides on cocoa farms. There are several tasks associated with applying pesticides, the most labor demanding of which is drawing and carrying water which is the most common medium for applying chemical pesticides. Children employed in this usk faa: the risk of pesticide contamination if they also participate in the mixing of the water with the

chemicals. More worrisome is the actual application of pesticides. which is often effected with little or no protective clothing. The interview did not go into the derails of pesticide application and (he role of children in this activity requires further investigation.

Pod breaking was the fourth most commonly reported employment offamily children.

Whether or not this task poses any risk depends on whether or not the child uses a machete ro open the cocoa pod. Although this is not the recommended means of opening the pod

(because of the potential damage that the bean can incur), it is common pracrice. The survey did not however gather information on how pod breaking was practiced by children and inclusion of this task in a risk analysis of child work is recommended.

The anaJysis now o:amines how the producers' choice oflabor rypes varies across cocoa

F.um size, cocoa farm productivity, and household labor endowments.

Variation in the types of labor utilized across cocoa farm size As cocoa farm size increases, the labor input must increase proportionally cam paribus if yields are to be maimained'. How farmers with larger furms mobilize additional labor resources is an important question, particularly as it pertains to the use of child labor.

Sample producers were classified into three roughly equal groups on the basis of the size of roral cocoa holding'. The groups are defined as: Small :s 2.5 ha of cocoa n = 379 2.5 ha < Medium:S 4.86 ha n = 343 Large> 4.86 ha n = 334 /u farm size increases the proportion of households using only family labor andlor reciprocal labor declines significandy from 17% among the small size: class to 4% among the large class (Table 6). Conversely, the employment of casual, salaried labor, and sharecropping arrangements all increase. These labor types appear to be the preferred means of mobilizing the additional labor required on larger farms. A nominal increase in the reported

"There are labor saving innO'Ylltioru that roukl be substituted. such as herbicide: we and use of motorized sluhins and spaying machinc:s, but these innovations almost v.imou[ oa:epdon had nO( been adopred.. s,-ow rocoa holdint includes both productive and nonbe:uint newly mablishc:d hoklinp.

15

Table 6. Variation In producer utilization of labor types by size class. Nigeria. 2000/01.

n Sharecropping arrangements:

Own labor supply Paid casual labor Spouses' labor supply Paid salaried labor Family child labor supply Extended family labor supply Reciprocal labor supply Paid extended family labor Only using family & recip labor

=

Small 379

Size class Medium 343 33

La:r

All 1056

Prob.

64.7 50.7 29.8 26.4 21.1 11.3 8.4 2.4 0.5 17.7

69.4 49.6 26.8 30.6 28.6 15.7 5.2 3.2 1.5 7.3

78.6 47.3 35.6 27.8 29.6 14.7 3.9 2.1 2.1 4.2

70.6 49.2 30.7 28.2 26.2 13.8 6 2.6 1.3 10

<0.001 0.664 0.041 0.445 0.017 0.201 0.030 0.633 0.183 <0.001

use of family child labor occurs as one moves from small to medium and large producers. although the changes were not significant.

Variation in labor types utilized across productivity classes The productivity of the producds cocoa production system. which is closely correlated with gross revenues per ba. can potentially influence the choice oflabor used. Low levels of productivity through their effect on revenues could constrain the producer's labor options and lead to grearer utilization of low COst labor choices.

Sample producers were classified into productivity groups according to the level of their cocoa yield per ha in 2000/01. Yields were calculated by dividing the toral quantity of cocoa produced. by the productive cocoa area. defined as all cocoa land of greater than three years of maturity6.

The productivity groups are defined as follows: ~ 207 kglha n ~ 341 Low 207 kglha < Average ~ 445 kglha n = 349 High > 445 kg/ha n = 342 The labor types used for each productivity class are reporred in Table 7. Family labor. specifically child labor. producer's own labor. and spouse's labor are all more frequently reported among low productivity producers. Overall. the proportion of households using only family andlor reciprocal labor arrangements is nearly double the proportion among high yielding producers and the proportion indicating family child labor use declines by more than half from the low to the high productivity class.

In Nigeria (as well as Ghana and Cameroon) the proportion of households engaging sharecroppers increases with productivity. The most likely explanation for this is a higher labor input on a per ha basis for hums under a sharecropping arrangement and the strong 6Although some improved hybrid cocoa can bepn to bear at 2 to 3 ye:us, tht: majority of rumen: were not utilizing such varieties.

16

Table 7. Frequency variation in producer utilization of labor types by yield class, Nigeria, 2000101.

Yield class N Sharecropping arrangements

Own labor supply Paid casual labor Spouses' labor supply Paid salaried labor Family child labor supply Excended family labor supply Reciprocal labor supply Paid cxcended family labor Only using family & recip labor

=

Low

Average

341

349

57.5 59.9 26.0 38.0

73.9 46.4 31.8 25.2

35.4 20.2

24.6 11.7

4.7 2.3 0.9

3.4 2.3 0.9 8

14.1

High 342 80.9 41.5 34.8 21.1 19.0 8.8 9.6 3.2 2.3 7.6

Mean 1032 70.7 49.3 30.9 28.1 26.3 13.6 5.9 2.6 1.4 9.9

Prob. <0.00 I <0.001 0.041 <0.00 I <0.001 <0.00 1 0.00 1 0.695 0.157 0.006

mo tivation for that labor to maximize output in order co maximize [he size of the workers'

share. We also see a higher reporced use of casual workers among high productivity fums as was the case in Cameroon.

An unexpected finding is the reduction in salaried labor use as the fumer moves up in productivity class.

The use of children for clearing of cocoa fields and pesticide application both declined by over one-half among "high" productivity producers reiative to "low" producers although the declines are statistically significant only for clearing/weeding (Table 8). fu in the case of Cameroon, increasing productivity of the fum may reduce the employmenr of children in hazardous ocrupations.

The use of family children for pod breaking, field transport, fermenration, and dtying all show significant declines as productivity increases.

Variation across household labor endowments

A priori we expect that the larger the household's endowment of family labor, the lower the likelihood of employing hired labor. CPHs with lots of family labor should substitute this labor for hired labor. Specifically, hired casual labor, paid salary, and sharectopping arrangements should be less observed among households with a large endowment off.unily labor and conversely, use of family labor should increase.

Sample producers were grouped into three classes of male adult labor equivalent endowments according to their demographic composition in 2001. Adult male labor equivalents were calculated as: ADEQUIV= MENIB-54 + 0.S'MEN54 + 0.8' WOMENJB-54 + 0.7'WOMEN54 + OoS'CHILD

17

Table 8. Variation in producer utilization offamily child labor by task and productivity class, Nigeria, 2000/01.

Yield class N

Oeartng Pesticide application Harvest pods

Sreak pods Field transport Fermentation

Drying

=

Low 342

Average

High

349

342

Mean 1033

9.4 4.4 6.7 10.2 10.3 7.3 12.6

6.0

4.7 1.8 3.2 3.5 4.4 2.6 4.1

6.7 3.0 4.7 6.4 6.9 4.6 8.2

2.9 4.3 5.4 6.0 4.0 8.0

Prob 0.041 0.129 0.088 0.001 0.007 0.011 <0.001

where: ADEQUIV = the number of adult male labor equivalents in the household MEN 18-54 = the number of men living in the household between the ages of eighteen and 54 MEN54 = the number of men over the age of 54 WOMEN 18-54 = the number of women living in the household between the ages of eighteen and 54 IX/OMEN 54 = rhe number of women over the age of 54 CHILD = rhe number of family members under the age of 18.

The household labor endowment groups are defined as: Scarce :s 5 ADEQUIVs n = 335 ADEQUIVs < Average :s 8.1 ADEQUIVs n = 338 Abundant > 8.1 ADEQUIVs n = 356 The choice of labor types across household labor endowments is reported in Table 9.

The posited substitUtion of family labor for hired labor is nor evident. In fact, as in Cameroon and Ghana, rhe frequency of sharecropping actually increases with the household's endowment of labor. Explanation for rhis apparent anomaly could be due to rhe abiliry of households wirh abundant household labor to use those assets to create physical assets, i.e., cocoa farms, which are then placed under a sharecropping arrangement. There was, however, a slight increase in the employment of family child labor as household labor endowment increases.The increase in fiunily child labor use as rhe labor endowment increases is as a result of increases in the employment of children for fermentation and drying (Figure 4).

The frequencies for the other labor tasks were independent oflabor endowments.

We now proceed to the exami nation of (I) ti me allOOltion and enrolimen t rate of fum ily children employed in the various tasks of producing cocoa, (2) the number of casual workers employed by task and remuneration, and (3) children employed as permanent workers in Nigeria.

18

Table 9. Frequency variation in producer utilization of labor types by household labor endowment class, Nigeria, 2000101.

Household labor endowment Average Abundanc All 338 335 356 1029

Scarce

n= Sharecropping arrangements Own labor supply Paid casual labor Spouses' labor supply Paid salaried labor Family child labor supply Extended family lahor supply Reciprocal labor supply Paid extended family labor Only using family & recip. labor Mean no. oClabor cypes used (#)

64.1 54.9 29.3 33.4 28.4 II 6 2.4 1.2 14.3 2.0

70.6 50.6 29 30.5 23.4 13.3 6.2 3.6 1.5 10.9 2.1

76.7 44.3 35.6 21.8 25.2 16.8 59 2 1.4 5.3 2.1

70.6 49.8 3 1.4 28.4 25.6 13.8 6 2.6 1.4 10.1 2.1

Prob.

0.001 0.018 0.105 0.02 0.326 0.085 0.982 0.402 0.947 <0.001 0.724

Time allocation, school enrollment rates, and numbers of employed family children Further informacion on the rime allocation of child labor from within the household was solicited from producers indicating its use. Information was garhered on the number of children by age and gender employed by task. the amount of time employed. and whether or not they were enrolled in school. One hundred and nineteen producers provided the information summarized in Table 10 and Annex Tables 1 to 3.

On average. for the 14% of producers reporting the employment offumily child labor. the mean amount of labor supplied was 311 days. The mean producer engaged slightly over twO children per task and the mean number of tasks in which children were employed was 2.6. The proportions of this total by age class reveal that the largest part is supplied by the 15-17 year age group and that girls supply almost an equal amount of labor as boys (Figure 4).

One of the concerns raised abOUt working children is the impacr of work on rheir human devdopmenr. including the impacr on school enrollment. Among working f.unily children. school enrollment rates ranged from 43 to 60% across age and sex cohorts and were significantly lower than the enrollment rates of working family children in Cameroon and Ghana (Table 10). These enrollment rates were also considerablr lower than the overall sample ptoportion of 91 %. The underlying reasons for the lower enrollment rates among working children requires further investigation.

It should be noted rhar the question posed (enrolled or nor enrolled) is a relatively coarse indicaror of education. Still unanswered for rhose that are enrolled are questions such as (i) whether or not the child is at an appropriate age for his or her class level. (ii) the correlation between school performance and the amount of work done by the child. or (iii) the question

of qualicy of the educational facilities to which the student has access.

19

< 10yr

"..

~\ 10-14 yrs

"""

Figure 4. Proportion of reported family child labor supplied by age and gender groups.

As noted above one of the major Article 4(a) concerns with child work is the health and safety threat posed by machete use and pesticide application. The employment of family children for field clearing with machetes and the application of pesticides was reported by 6.7% and 3%, respectively, of the sampled producers.

Further information was obtained from nine of the 32 producers who indicated the employment of household children in applying pesticides (Annex Table 2). Extrapolating from these nine, it is estimated that the sampled producers (n â&#x20AC;˘ 1080) were employing 32 childIen under the age of 15 to apply pesticides. Similarly, it is estimated that 125 children undO[ the age of 15 were employed by sample producers to clear cocoa plant.rions. Assuming that the sample findings are repcesencative, the estimate of the number of children employed by their parents in Ondo State in pesticide application is 1335 and 7 5631 in c1earing.

7Th prdl:!rmi c:paN1on factor for extrapolation is NI", where N - population siu:. and n ..sampLe:sUe. However as there ~ no natisticaUy prccist estimates of the producer populac:ioa in Nigeria. we aI'C focccd fO I.ISIC an a1CUlla~ upansion factor. Qlq.meÂŤ Q '" tqMlrted conn.a&e of cocoa oported dwing the sampLe )"tV. and f is the sum of tht tonnage of AllIple. US"" Q. 0.045-170 000. and f - l834 the OIpuWon factor is 412.

20

Table 10. Descriptive statistics on cocoa employment and school enroliment of household children over all reported labor tasks (N â&#x20AC;˘ 187).

c.v.

Median Min Max n

1.857 0.431 7.063 2.182 28

0.63 0.98 0.28 0.89 0.43

1.5 0.417 8

2.2 0.494 6.333 2.6 37.3

M= Boys under 10 employ<d.

I

24

0 3 1 15

5 1 9 6 48

14 14 8 11 9

0.46 0.71 0.34 0.68 0.40

2 0.333 8 2.5 48

1 0 3 1 15

4 1 8 7 52

15 15 9 10 10

1.737 0.519 Hours worked per day by boys 10 (0 14 yrs 5.97 Days work<d. per week by boys 10 (0 14 yrs 2.121 Weeks worked per year by boys 10 (0 14 yrs 33.275

0.44 0.72 0.33 0.76 0.49

2 0.5 6 2 33.5

1 0 2 1 2.25

4 1 8 6 52

38 38 33 33 30

Girls 10 [014 yrs employ<d.

Enrollmem rare (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls 10 to 14 yrs Days worked per week by girls 10 co 14 )TS Weeks worked per year by girls lOco 14 yrs

2 0.598 5.5 2.316 34.25

0.86 0.57 0.35 0.76 0.44

2 0.5 6 2 27

1 0 2 1 8

12 1 8 7 52

44 44 36 38 32

Boys 15 [0 17 yrs employ<d.

2.136 Enrollmem care (proportion in school) 0.547 Hours work<d. per day by boys 15 (0 17 yrs 5.759 Days work<d. per week by boys 15 (0 17 yrs 1.769 Weeks work<d. per year by boys 15 (0 17 yrs 27.138

0.93 0.64 0.32 0.79 0.53

2 0.5 6

a

Girls 15 co 17 yrs employ<d.

Enrollmem care (p[oporrion in school) H ours work<d. per day by girls 15 (0 17 yrs Days work<d. per week by girls 15 co 17 yrs Weeks work<d. per year by girls 15 (0 17 yrs

0.63 0.60 0.30 0.75 0.44

2 0.5 6 1 24

EnroUment rate (proportion in school)

Hours worked per day by boys under 10 Days worked per week by boys under 10 Weeks work<d. per year by boys under 10 Girls under 10 employed Enrollment rate (proportion in school)

Hours worked per day by girls under 10 Days work<d. per week by girls under 10 Weeks worked per year by girls under 10 Boys 10 (0 14 yrs employ<d.

Enrollment rate (proportion in school)

2.013 0.586 6.167 1.773 29.971

21

I

24

20 1 1 10 7 2.25 52

125 125 106 108 67

1

77 77 66 66 35

8

a 1 I 4

10 7 52

Table 11. Summary statistics for casual labor employment.

Variable

Mean

Std dov.

Max

Min

N

Total worker, employed per task (#) Workers < 18 year, (#) Food and drink payment Pay per worker (Naira)

3.92 0.11 0.32 1514 0.756

9.57 1.13 0.47 2306 0.43

200 22 1 16000

1 0 0 30 0

456 456 454 360 451

Migrant worker proportion

Casual workers: their employment and remuneration Ten producers interviewed (0.9%) indicated hiring casual workers under the age of 18 year,.

Three of the 10 indicated rhat they had hired the workers under a share arrangement and that the workers were undertaking all the tasks associated with cocoa production. Of the remaining seven producers, five

had hired casuals to clear cocoa farms;

two to break pods,

one to harvest pods, and one to apply pesticides. The mean pay reported for soven tasks was N579 , which was significantly lower (Student's t = 2.31. P = 0.053) than the mean task pay of N 1555 reported for crews of only adult casual workers (n = 378). The mean work crew consisted of 3.5 persons. Sixry percent of the casual workers under 18 years of age were from local environs while 40% were migrant workers from within Nigeria. Eighry percenr of the migrant workers had their origins in southeast Nigeria. Overall, casual worker, under the age of eighteen accounted for slightly less than 3% of the casual work force reported by ptoducers.

Table 11 gives the summary statistics for casual workers over all age groups based on information provided by 246 producers. Sovenry-six percent of the tasks in which casual hire was employed were reported by producers to be undertaken by migrant workers and 24% by local workers. Forty-five percent of the adult casual workers were from the southeast and 40% were from the middle bdt of Nigeria with the remainder from the southwest with the exception of five producers who indicated using migrant workers from Togo.

Neither the total number of workers nor the payment per worker varied significantly across either producer size class or productivity class.

Given their overall importance in cocoa production, it is recommended that a follow-up investigation with direct interviews of casual workers be conducted to gather more informa-

tion about their livelihood strategies and the role of casual cocoa employment.

Salaried child workers Worker conditions Twelve of the 1080 cocoa producers interviewed (1.1 % of total) reported the use of paid salaried workers under the age of 18. A total ofl8 boys were in their employment. fur.polation from the sample results in an estimate of 1168 children employed as salaried workers.

This is the labor category. which has raised the most concerns about child trafficking and bondage-like conditions in other parts of West Africa as proscribed by Article 4(a) of [LO

22

Convention 182. A series of questions invescigated the payment, living conditions. and mode of recruitment concerning these children.

Producers Cn = 9) indicated the age and work status for 19 of the 28 children. Two producer.; were employing three children between 10 and 14 years of age. All three of these children were reported to normally work eight hour.; a day for six days a week. The remaining 16 children were between 15 and 17 years and worked between two and nine hour.; per day with a mean of 6.44 hour.;. Producers Cn = 5) indicated an average of 47.8 weeks worked per year by six of these children. The producer reported that these workers had been employed from between one and rhree years and classified ren child worker.; as permanent full rime workers. seven as seasonal workers, six as temporary workers, one as a permanent, part-time worker, and one as a casual worker (n = 12). Information was mi.ssing for three children.

One of the commonly given explanations for why producers use child workers is because they can be hired at lower COSt than adults. An annual payment was indicated for 27 of the 28 children employed. These child workers were paid a significantly lower salary (one tail test Student's t = 2.356, prob = 0.01) relative to adult permanent workers (Table 12). At the mean; a child worker received 56% of the adult payment. Three producers provided information on whom they paid for the services of the II children in their employment.

Two of these producers reported that in the case of lOaf the children, the intennediary was paid while the other produoer indicated paying the child's parents.

Eleven of the 12 producers iodicated that their child workers were migrants. The twdfth producer was employing a child ITom his own village. All 18 of the 27 migrant child workers for whom information was obtained were from Nigeria, eight were from the southwest portion of Nigeria, nine were from the southeast, and one was from the middle belt.

The II producers employing migtant child workers used two principal means to engage the child. Four of the producers indicated that a total of 14 child workers were engaged through the sharecropper to whom they had awarded the share rights to their cocoa farm. Five producers had engaged a total of eight children through use oflabor inter mediaries or contracrors. There was one case of a producer engaging a child worker through an acquaintance and one case where rhe child had been engaged through the interventions Table 12. A comparison 01 child and adult worker payment and producer employment demand.

Child workers (n

%

II)

Adulr workers (n = 78)

Annual payment (Naira)

13863 (0.907)

24648 (0.586)

Number of workers employed

2.455 (0.737)

(0.600)

NB. Nwnber in pMdltheses is rodficient of ...maoon.

23

2.115

of his parents. Two producers employing a total of three children indicated that no written contract existed but that conditions ofwork were negotiable. Three producers indicated for eight child workers that a written contract with negotiable conditions existed.

Aneodotal reports by some survey team members indicate that the practice of the sharecropper providing a child worker as part of the share agreement may be fairly common and may have been underreported by producers. To uncover the exact extent of mis practice and given the overall importance of sharecropper labor to cocoa production in Nigeria,

further targeted study of sharecropping arrangements in the southwest Nigeria is highly recommendod. Three producers responded when asked why they employed child workers.

The three responses were: (1) lack of local labor availability, (2) the higher cost of local labor, and (3) because child migrant workers were hard working.

Information on the well-being of the children was also gathered although the response rate was limited. Three producers employing 11 children indicated that the children often returned home with the last visit between six and 12 months in all cases. Throe producers also indicated the provision of rene-free lodging for the five children in [heir employment and one producer indicated that free meals were provided for the one child in her employmene. Three producers indicated the provision of medicines and two paid for visits to medical clinics.

Producer characteristics Certain characteristics of the subgroup of producers who use this class of child labor were compared to those not indicating its employment to sec if there are any significant differences between these twO groups. Several striking differences were noted in the producer's production technology system including markedly lower yields and a larger farm size (Table 13). The average yield of producers using permanenr child labor was only 55% the level of producers who did not indicate its use. Associated with the lower yields among these producers is a significantly low level of fungicide and insecticide use. Cocoa farm size among users of child labor was significantly larger than among nonusers. No significant differences were found in the proportion of farms under sharecropping arrangements, in the mean age of the tree stock, or in the overall share of cocoa revenues.

These findings are congruent with those for family children in suggesting that low productivity, large farms arc more likely to employ child labor. And as a consequence that efforts to increase the productivity particularly of large farms might reduce the incidence of child workers in the cocoa sector of Nigeria.

The demographic characteristics among these two groups of producers were also examined (Table 14). The household size of users of child labor was one-third larger than nonusel'S. While the other variables were not statistically different across these groups, it

is noted that heads of household among users had roughly one year less education, were more likely to be female, and were an average of two years older than heads of household among nonusers.

24

Table 13. Mean comparison of producer characteristics across those Indicating use of salaried child workers and those not Indicating use, Nigeria 2001.

Use of salaried child workers N ot indicated Indicated Two tail prob.

Variabk Yidd per ha (kglha)

Area of cocoa farm (ha)

Value of fungicide (N Iha)

Value of insecticide (N/ha)

478 529 1035 4.69 4.34 1059 3422 3583 1055 1492 2156 1055 24.6 1\.6 969 0.64 0.44 1048 13.5 3.3 1066

Mean Stddev. n Mean Sed deY. n Mean S,d deY n Mean Std deY. n

Mean age of cocoa farm (yr)

Mean S,d deY. n

Proponion of f.ums sharecropped

Mean Sed deY. n

Share of cocoa revenues out of 20

Mean Std deY. n

25

263 243 12 9.32 6.75 12 1834 1434 12 744 672 12 26.4 13.3 12 0.50 0.48 12 12.3 3.7 12

0.011

0.037

0.003

0.003

0.655

0.326

0.295

Table 14. Mean comparison of demographic variables across producers not IndicatIng use of permanent child workers wHh those indicating use, Nigeria 2001.

Use of permanent

child workers Not indicated Indicated Two tail prob.

Variable

Mean 9.8 Std dev. 7.3 n 1071 No. of children in household Mean 3.5 Std dev. 3.0 1036 n Proportion of male-headed households Mean 0.89 Std dev. 0.31 n 1069 3.6 Mean Education of head of household (yr) Std dev. 4.6 n 1070 Mean Age of household head 55 Std dev. 16 n 1067 Size of household (persons)

26

15.0 7.7 12 2.6 2.9 12 0.75 0.45 12 2.3 4.7 12 57 14 12

0.039

0.294

0.3

0.355

0.79

Conclusions and Recommendations A survey of 1080 cocoa producing households in southwest Nigeria was conducred in August 2001. One of the principal objectives of the survey was (0 investigate the incidence and use of child labor in cocoa production systems with the analysis focusing on the types of labor in which children are employed and the factors, which inAuence their employment.

Understanding the underlying facrors associated with child labor use is an important step

in the process of developing effective intervencions for addressing the issue:.

The use of salaried child labor among a small proportion of Nigerian cocoa ptoducers was reported (1.1 % of producers interviewed). A (Otal of28 boys under the age of 18 were emf>loyed (with all but one internal migrant) mainly from southeast Nigeria and the middle belt region. It is estimated that af>proximately 1700 boys are so employed on the cocoa farms of Ondo State. There were indicarions of two chief modes of employment: either through recourse to a labor contractor acting as an intermediary, or as a condition for awarding a

farm to a sharecropper. Under the latter the sharecropper was expected to furnish the boy employed as a provision of the sharecropping agteement.

Investigation of the labor intermediaries supplying migrant child workers ro cocoa producers in southwest Nigeria is recommended.

Sharecropping, the most common labor type, was reported by 70% of the producers interviewed. The practice of providing a child worker as a condition of the sharecrof> agreement was anecdotally reponed by some of the survey tearn members as being fairly common practice and may have been underteported here because this study did not interview sharecroppers. Further investigation of the sharecropping institution in sQuthwe:ยงt

Nigeria and its connection with child labor is strongly recommended.

Producers indicating the employment of salaried child workers had significantly largcr and lower yielding cocoa farms than those not employing salaried child workers. They also had a larger family size: than those not using salaried child wotkers and there was a slight tendency towards female household heads among users. These findings when coupled with the lowet salarics earned by child workers, seem to indicate that producers employing children did so as a cost cutting effon in response to marginally profitable, low yielding cocoa production systems.

Ten f>roducers interviewed indicated hiring casual workers under 18 years. Overall, over 30% ofhouscholds reported using adult casual labor. Given the importance of casual labor as a facror of produCtion, it is recommended that a follow-up investigation with direct interviews of casual workers be conduCted during the harvest season (October to December). The focus of the study sbould be the liveliltood strategies of casual cocoa workers, the place of casual cocoa employment in those strategies, and the incidence of child workers among casual workets.

27

The most commonly reported employment of children in the cocoa plantations of southwest Nigeria was the category offamily children reported by 14% of cocoa producing households sampled. The mean producer using household children employed slightly over two children for a rotal of311 working days on an average of2.6 tasks. The most commonly reported tasks in which children were employed were drying and field transport. The most serious from the hazardous work perspective of Article 3(d) ofILO Convention 182 was employment in pesricide application (3% of producers reporting) and clearing cocoa farms with machetes (7% reporting).

The potential effect of working on the cocoa fitm on schooling is a concern. The school enrollment rate among family children assisting on their parent's farm was significandy lower than the overall mean enrollment rate. The underlying reasons for the lower enrollment rates among working children ceq uires further investigation.

The influence of cocoa farm size. productiviry, and family size on labor use was exam-

ined. Larger farms reported more frequent use of sharecroppers, casuallahorers, and salaried workers. The proportion of households indicating only the use of &mily labor declined as firm size increased while the use of family children marginally increased on larger farms.

It was also found that higher yielding farms more frequently engaged sharecroppers. The recommendations for further investigations ofcasual workers and sharecroppers made above should take these points into consideration in the process of sampling.

Higher yielding farms were also found to use &mily child labor less frequently than low yielding farms. In particular, the use of &mily children employed in pesticide application and clearing was less than half its reported level among low yielding producers. This suggestS that efforts to increase the productivity of cocoa systems may indirectly result in lower employment of family children in potentially hazardous activities.

On the basis of these findings a sensitization campaign is recommended to inform abouc the potential hazards posed by pesticides and clearing cocoa plantations when children are employed. The findings regarding productivity, labor endowment, and cocoa farm size can help in targeting messages on the issues of child employment in hazardous tasks.

Sensitization materials should be distributed through channels that are already interacting with farmers and can identify the larger, lower productivity firmers with large &milies, who were found to be more likely to employ children. These channels should include extension agents. farmer organizations, and exporters and thdr market intermediaries.

28

Annex. Descriptive statistical tables on family child labor employment in the cocoa sector of southwest Nigeria.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics on cocoa employment and school enrollment of household children employed In clearing cocoa farms (N = 47).

Mean

C.V.

Median Min

Max N 2 2

15

2 0.5 6 1 15 3 0.5 8 3 48

3 3 3 3 3

I

4 1 8 6 48

8 8 7 7 7

3 0.5 8 3 48

3 3 2 3 2

5

38 38

8 7 48

33 35 19

8 1 10 7 52

77 77 66 66 35

Boys under 10 employed Scholarization rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys under 10 Days worked per week by boys under 10 Weeks worked per year by boys under 10

1.5 0.25 6 1 15

0.471 1.414 0 0 0

1.5 0.25 6 1 15

Girls under 10 employed Scholarization rue (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls under 10 Days worked per week by girls under 10 Weeks worked per year by girls under 10

2.667 0.389 7.333 2 37

0.217 0.247 0.157 0.5 0.515

3 0.333 2 48

2 0.333 6 1 15

Bo)~ 10 ro 14 yrs employed 2.125 Scholarizauon rate (proportion in school) 0.465 Hours worked per day by boys IO to 14 yrs 7.286 Days worked per week by boys 10 to 14 yrs 2.429 Weeks worked per year by boys 10 to 14 yrs 30.714

0.466 0.789 0.172 0.708 0.644

2 0.375 8 2 43

0 5 1 3

Girls 10 to 14 yrs employed Scholarization race (ptoportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls \0 to 14 yrs Days worked per week by girls 10 to 14 yes Weeks worked per year by girls 10 to 14 yrs

2.333 0.278 6.5 2 47

0.247 0.917 0.326 0.5 0.03

2 0.333 6.5 2 47

Boys 15 ro 17 yrs employed Scholarizarion rate (proponion in school)

2.026 0.493 0.57 0.545

8

0 6

2 0 5 I

46

2 0.5

0

Hours worked per day by boys 15 to 17 yes 5.879 0.254 Days worked per week by boys 15 to 17 yrs 1.486 0.718 Weeks worked per year by boys 15 to 17 yrs 27.632 0.39

6

2

24

10

Girl. 15 to 17 yrs employed 2.013 Scholarizarion rate (proponion in school) 0.586 Hours worked per day by girls 15 ro 17 yr.

6.167 Days worked per week by girls 15 to 17 yes 1.773 Weeks worked per year by girls 15 to 17 yr. 29.971

2 0.5 6 1 24

1 0

29

0.63 0.60 0.30 0.75 0.44

I

1

4

1

Table 2. Descriptive statistics on employment and school enrollment of household children employed In applying pesticides (N = 9).

Boys under 10 employed Scholarization rate (proponion in school) Hours worked per day by boys under 10 Days worked per week by boys under 10 Weeks worked per year by boys under 10 Girls under 10 employed Scholarizarion race (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls under 10 Days worked per week by girls under 10 Weeks worked per year by girls under 10 Boys 10 to 14 yes employed Scholarizacion rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys 10 to i4 yrs Days worked per week by boys 10 to 14 yrs Weeks worked per year by boys 10 to 14 yes

Mean

c.v.

Median Min

Max

2 0.5 3 2

0 0 0 0

2 0.5 3 2

2 0.5 3 2

2 0.5 3 2

N

0

1 3 2

0 0 0 0

1 3 2

22

Girls 10 to 14 yrs employed Scholarizadon race (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls 10 to 14 yrs Days worked per week by girls 10 ro 14 yrs Weeks worked per year by girls 10 to 14 yrs

1.333 0.833 6.333 1.667 22

0.433 0.346 0.456 0.346 0

8 2 22

Boys 15 to 17 yes employed Scholuizacion ra.[e (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys 15 to 17 yr.

Days worked per week by boys 15 to 17 yrs Weeks worked per year by boys 15 ro 17 yes

2.167 0.639 6.6 1.6 24

0.739 0.668 0.332 0.342 0

1.5 0.75 8 2 24

Girls 15 to 17 yrs employed Scholarization rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls 15 to 17 yes Days worked per week by girls 15 to 17 yrs Weeks worked per year by girls 15 to 17 yrs

1.6 0.7 7.25 1.25 23

0.559 0.639 0.132 0.4 0.061

I

30

1 1 3 2

2 2 1 0

1

0 0 0 0 0

1 8

1 1 3 2

8

1 8

22

22

1 0.5 3

2

I

8 1 22

I

3 3

8 2 22

3

6 6 5 5

24

5 1 8 2 24

I

I

3

1 7.5 1 23

0 6

5 5 4

22

0 3 1

22

8 2 24

3

4 2

Table 3. Descriptive statistics on employment and school enrollment of household children employed In pod breaking (N" 211.

Mean C.V.

Median Min

Boys under 10 employed Schoiariza.ion rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys under 10 Days worked per we<:k by boys under 10 Weeks worked per year by boys under I 0

0 3 0.333 0

3 0.333

30

I 30

Girls under 10 employed Scholari",.ion rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls under 10 Days worked per we<:k by girls under 10 We<:ks wo rked per year by girls under 10

2.667 0.528 6 2 34

0.573 0.779 0.471 0.707 0.582

3 0.333 6 2 34

Boys to to 14 yrsemployed Scholariza[ion rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys 10 to 14 yrs Days worked per week by boys 10 14 yrs Weeks worked per year by boys to [0 14 yrs

1.667 0.583 7 2.333 47

0.346 0.655 0.247 0.247 0.03

2 0.5 8 2 47

5

Girls 10.0 14 yrs employed Scholariza.ion rate (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by girls 10 [0 14 yrs Days worked per week by girls JO to 14 yrs Weeks worked per year by girls 10 '0 14 yrs

1.8 0.667 7 2 39

0.465 0.468 0.202 0.354 0.333

Boys 15 to 17 yrs employed Scholariza.;on ra.e (proportion in school) Hours worked per day by boys 15 ro 17 yrs Days worked per week by boys 15 [0 17 yrs Weeks worked per year by boys 15 to 17 yrs

1.615 0.615 6.333 1.727 20

Girls 15 [0 17 yrs employed Scholarization race (propottion in school) Hours worked per day by girls 15 to 17 yrs Days worked per week by girls 15 to 17 yrs We<:ks worked per year by girls 15 [0 17 yrs

2.25 0.5 5.625 2.571 46

'0

31

N

3 3 0.333 0.333 1 0 I 1 30 30

0 0

I

Max

I 0.25 4

4 8 3 48

3 3 2 2 2

2 1 8 3 48

3 3 3 3 2

2 0.5 8 2 46

I 3 0.333 1 8 5 3 24 47

5 5 5 5 3

0.313 0.487 0.311 0.27 0.949

2 0.5 7 2 15

I

2

0 2 1 4

8 2 46

13 13 12 11 4

0.314 0.436 0.455 0.773 0

2 0.5 6 2 46

0.333 2 1 46

20 I

0.25 2 46

I

3 I 8 7 46

8 8 8 7

About IITA THE IntemationallnstibJte ofTropical Agriculture (IITA) was founded in 1967 as an international agriculbJral research institute with a mandate for improving food production in the humid tropics and to develop sustainable production systems. It be(ame the first African link in the worldwide network of agricultural research centers known as the Consultative Group on International Agriculttr.ll Research (CGIARl, fonned in 1971.

IITA's mission is to enhance the food security, income, and weI-being of resource-poor people primarily in the humid and subhumid zones of sub-Saharan Africa, by conducting research and related activities to increase agricultural production, improve food systems, and sustainably manage natural resources, in partnership with national and international stakeholders.To this end, IITA conducts research, gennplasm conservation, training, and infonnation exchange activities in partnership with regional bodies and national programs induding universities, NGOs, and the private sector. The research agenda addresses crop improvement,. plant health, and resource and crop management within a food systems framework and targetted at the identified needs of three rnajor agl'OeCological zones: the savannas, the hlmid forests, and the midaltibJdes. Research focuses on smallholder cropping and postharvest systems and on the following food crops: cassava, cowpea, maize, plantain and banana, soybean, and yam.

ISBN 97B 131 2157

Printed by UTA