Literature Review



The literature review is the process of analyzing the existing information of related subject where includes of history and we het new ides of respective field. It is based on the various books, research papers, seminar papers, report of national and international organizations, journal and articles etc.

In the Global context, child labour has emerged as a major social problem in much of the third world countries where there are rapid increases in population. The international labour organization (ILO) has estimated that 205 million children between five to fourteen work fulltime while tens of millions of them work under exploitative and vulnerable condition.(ILO, 2006). Peterson (1670) described that child labour is not only the problem of individual or a family but also the problem of the society. Child labour may be regarded broadly as any work of children under condition that interferes with opportunities for physical development, education which children require. It is the working of children at unfit ages for unreasonable hours or unhealthy condition.

In the context of Nepal, Pant (1967) states that child labour is a source of cheap labour. It is the poverty that compels parents to make children work for wage and employment. Employment of children increases the earning of family by depriving them of educational opportunities, minimizes their chances for vocational training, their physical growths, limpers their intellectual development as they are facing any kind of unskilled labours.

The carpet industry is one of the hard currency generating industry in Nepal. Its contribution in the total overseas export of the country in 1991/92 was around 58 percent and the earning from the carpet export alone was rs. 7.73 billion (Lamichhane,1992). The large numbers of child labourers are involving in carpet factories. In the esrly nineties, thcsrpetsector was believed to have employed about 250,000 to 300,000 labourers especially migrantlabourers. However, by the mid-nineties, this sector was employing a substantial number of child labourers in exploitative arrangements. There was a rumor that child labourers in carpet sector employed as much as 40 to 50 percent of the total labour force in this sector (k.c. et al., ILO, 2002).

Majority of the children who are working in carpet industry, household socio-economic status is very poor. About 63.6 percent of children working in carpet factories are found to be squatters (ILO, 2006). The position of the working children of a family may be as important as the contributions of the head of household (ILO,2006). The literacy status of the child labourers of carpet industries is very low. About half of the child labourers in carpet sector are illiterate(ILO, 2006). Mainly, due to the lack of awareness and education of parents of child labourers, they do not get educational opportunity. In the carpet sector, child labourers are working from various caste/ethnic groups. However, majority are from indigenous group and very few of them are from non- indigenous, Madhesi. The CWIN study (1992) shows that more than 80 percent child labourers in carpet factories are Tamang whereas accrording to ILO(2006), the children who are working in carpet sector Tamang (58.5%) are in majority followed by Magar (11.4%) and several castes of Terai (9.7%).

The ILO report indicates that the high incidence of muculo skeletal disorders among the carpet weaving children, which are caused by awkward postures, traumas and stresses on the muscles, poor lighting conditions, long working hours and cramped work spaces. Wool dust can also cause allergies and diseases of respiratory system, and long term exposure may esult in obstructive lung diseases (ILO, 2006). Similarly, most of the child labourers are suffering from psychological or physical abuse by employers or middlemen. They are unable to raise their voices in front of employers due to fear of getting punishment. Some child labourers who are working in carpet industries with their parents are also punished by their parents, if they do not work. But comparatively, they seem to be safe than others (K.C. et al.,ILO,2002).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *