Implementing ILO child labour convention 182: lessons from the gold-mining sector in Burkina Faso

Abstract

This article explores the implementation of Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labour in the mining sector in Burkina Faso. It highlights key lessons from a project funded by DFID and Save the Children UK and implemented by COBUFADE, a Burkinabe NGO. Children were found to be important and capable actors in the fight against child labour, notably in research and lobbying, and the article explores the role that civil society can play in taking local voices to national policy makers and in linking the different actors implicated in Convention 182.

Leslie Groves is a social anthropologist and works as an independent social development consultant. She has worked with child workers in Brazil, Tanzania, and Vietnam, and has reviewed the Convention 182 process in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, and Honduras. An article of hers on the experience in Honduras, titled ‘Implementing ILO Child Labour Convention 182: Lessons from Honduras’, appeared in Development in Practice 14(1&2) (February 2004).

Notes

Leslie Groves is a social anthropologist and works as an independent social development consultant. She has worked with child workers in Brazil, Tanzania, and Vietnam, and has reviewed the Convention 182 process in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, and Honduras. An article of hers on the experience in Honduras, titled ‘Implementing ILO Child Labour Convention 182: Lessons from Honduras’, appeared in Development in Practice 14(1&2) (February 2004).

The projects took place in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, and Sahel between March 2001 and July 2003 and were funded by DFID. As part of its commitment to effective implementation of the Convention, SC-UK undertook an external evaluation of project activities in Burkina Faso, with the aim of drawing lessons that could be shared with others with similar concerns (Groves 2002). This article is based on interviews conducted during the ten-day evaluation visit. I would like to thank Emily Delap for her valuable comments on earlier drafts.

It is not clear what these economic activities are and this figure seems to be an underestimate given that only 40 per cent of children between 7 and 12 years of age attend school.

According to the officials, no action had been taken due to ‘lack of resources’, but it could also be argued that this inaction was due to a lack of prioritisation.

This method of selection obviously meant that there was an element of bias in who was chosen by the local authorities and parents, but this was perhaps unavoidable as their permission was necessary and they provided the only possible access to the children. Selection criteria were on the basis of sex, age, and occupation, with a balance required in each. The child researchers chose their own informants both through interviewing friends as well as more casually by talking with other children working on the sites. In this way there was a random element to the selection of informants.

Although the president of the Association of Child and Youth Workers of Burkina Faso was involved in the design and implementation of the project, he was no longer a child when he participated. He did play an important role, however, in increasing the level of child representation, as he is an elected representative of the Association of Child and Youth Workers.

One weakness in the project was the lack of formal engagement between the ILO and IPEC, due to confusion within the project team as to the role of IPEC. The team did not realise that IPEC was separate from the Ministry of Labour and therefore assumed that only the latter need be involved, and that the Ministry would communicate with IPEC. This communication did not happen, however.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Leslie Groves *