The United Nations; supporting the fight against child labor through conventions on the rights of the child; In 1989, he began working at universities in 190 countries, which were accepted and ratified. The regulation of labor issues was entrusted to the International Labor Organization (ILO), which promoted the elimination of child labor by establishing a minimum age for employment. However, child labor has been frequent since the Victorian era, but the industrial revolution has become apparent since take-off. In the eighth century, the developing nation saw a wave of immigrants in America. Europeans are obviously looking for new areas for the distribution of shops and goods, and targeting North and South America (the new world), the Caribbean, India and Asia. The great migration is also due to the political upheavals across Europe. The economic situation was generally staggering.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, the child was in factories, mines, quarries, fishing, agriculture, etc. Developed. Dangerous working conditions have caused many health and physical problems. The proportion of children as workers was as high as sixty percent. Many laws were made at the time to monitor child labor, unfortunately none of them succeeded. Over the past decade, many NGOs working in Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia, Latin America and other Eastern European and Pacific developing countries have triggered a number of non-governmental organizations.
A common, reasonably aware citizen of any country would not neglect these facts. However, some change in attitude explains paradoxical concepts. The main goals of child labor claims are developing countries. The dangerous conditions in which children work in these countries have become clear again and again in the world economy stalwarts who teach a major pediatric campaign. It is a little wonder that these developing or developed countries are also the ones that multinationals in developed countries are looking for cheap and unskilled labor; obvious cost-cutting strategy after globalization.
For example, in 2004, GAP, a US retailer of clothing and accessories, launched a thorough social control system. old worked as knitting workers. This is certainly a tragic consequence of global demand. This clearly surpassed the socially ethical image that the GAP had worked on and to avoid further confusion, of course, were Indian subcontractors. The product to be manufactured is intended to be exported to consumer markets as compensation for socially wrongful behavior. Consider the gems and the jewels. It is a major revenue collector for importers in Europe, Britain and America. Diamonds from African and Asian mines would be forbidden on the international market of India, Antwerp, Amsterdam, London or New York for engaging in child labor? West Africa alone produces sixty percent of cocoa for large timers such as Cadbury and Nestle. However, it cannot be assured that a sufficiently complex supply chain of cocoa does not involve child labor from its source to the multinational giants; the high proportion of child trafficking in West Africa is indisputable.
The question here is whether developing / backward nations can afford to ban child labor? One of the main points to consider is per capita GDP (purchasing power parity). When the United States amended the Massachusetts Act (1842) and the Pennsylvania Act (1848), per capita GDP was $ 1,955 and $ 2,095. When the 1938 Fair Labor Standard Act was sanctioned, US per capita GDP was $ 7,229. In Britain, GDP per capita was $ 4,791 at the time of ratification of the 1891 Act. When Japan completed its first factory in 1916, GDP per capita was $ 1,848. Similarly, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Italy and France, when implementing their first labor laws against child labor, had a per capita GDP of less than $ 1,500. GDP per capita cannot be directly proportional to the Human Development Index (HDI), but it certainly turns out that financial deficits are less or less. As a result, people's living standards can improve, unemployment can drop and a country can maintain its economic structure and grow.
The Human Development Report, 1997, UNDP, presents the GDP of Latin American nations in 1997, where Mexico ($ 8,370) was the highest and Haiti ($ 1270) the lowest. The same in 2007: Mexico ($ 14140), India ($ 2753), Botswana ($ 13604), etc., Niger ($ 627) is the lowest. The 1997 data show that the GDP per capita of these developing countries (except Haiti) was much higher than that of the developed nations. Data for 2007 shows even higher figures.
If the developed countries' imports have been reviewed, their main exporters are those dealing with child labor. History is sufficient evidence that in the 19th and 20th centuries, countries in America, Britain, Germany and Italy, on the political front, create a stable economic base. At that time, they were not able to eliminate child labor. And yet, this fact is not taken into account when developing countries are in the same position. Imports from these nations are banned, condemning them as the only foreign source of income that gradually builds up its economic structure.
A simple ban on child labor from such countries would only be disadvantaged on the international market. It would only slow down their development and extend the monopoly of the developed nations who are already enjoying the benefits. Developed countries in this globalized age are in a better position to regulate child labor in compliance with the necessary laws, as developing countries ultimately respond to developing countries by providing cheap labor. Rather than eliminating the source of income for poor nations, a more viable solution would be to transform the labor market and increase the wages of adult workers. This can be explained by the simple theory of supply and demand. If the supply of child labor is reduced, the adult workforce will adapt. This was a seemingly successful solution in the past. If you have not yet noticed and disregarded human rights stakeholders, you will certainly leave the conscious universal citizen and fear the analogous conspiracy of the world's leaders against the browbeat.