National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Appendix F Illustrative Examples of Business Practices
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop." National Research Council. 2009. Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12773.
×
Page 120

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Appendix G Submissions to the Workshop Prior to the meeting, experts from a variety of organizations were invited to submit comments on the framework. Several submissions were received and they are reproduced here. 1. As You Sow 2. Cadbury 3. Monique Oxender, Global Manager, Supply Chain Sustainability, AIAG Sustainability Loan, Ford Motor Company 4. Chisara Ehiemere, Transfair, USA 5. CREA, Inc. 108

APPENDIX G 109 1. As You Sow

110 APPENDIX G

APPENDIX G 111

112 APPENDIX G

APPENDIX G 113

114 APPENDIX G

APPENDIX G 115 2. Cadbury Version 5 24/06/08 CADBURY COCOA PARTNERSHIP VISION INTO ACTION - GLOBAL Thriving rural communities that support Vision a sustainable cocoa supply chain Governing Cocoa-growing communities empowered to take leadership in: Objective Meeting their long-term goals and delivering sustainable cocoa production Delivery Our approach puts the community first, works through partnerships and builds local capacity, promoting Approach community-centred activities delivered at scale through policy advocacy and reform, innovation and research Household Capacity of Biodiversity Key Productivity Livelihood Indicator Communities in target income in key local and opportunities and Reduced Health empowered target national Deforestation and Basic Scorecard communities for rural communities institutions Rates Education youth Outcomes SUSTAINABLE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY Strategic INSTITUTIONAL LIVELIHOODS FROM LIVELIHOODS FROM CENTRED Themes ENGAGEMENT COCOA OTHER MEANS DEVELOPMENT 1. Farmer organisation 1. Alternative income 1. Community 1. Institutional sources (local and mobilisation leading synergy Key Activities 2. Advocacy with other external markets) (traditional, to community stakeholders to - research into district, national mg’mt and planning support cocoa options and int’l) farming - agro-processing 2. Maintain/enhance natural 2. Identify/work to 3. Farmer training 2. Skills training strengthen environment 4. Access to extension including financial weak and entrepreneurial Access to: institutions services skills 3. Education 5. Improved farming 3. Organization and processing 3. Access to credit and 4. Healthcare and individual techniques rural banking capacity 5. Energy sources building and 6. Improved 4. Youth engagement 6. Potable water clarification of productivity and roles and farm efficiency 7. Community services responsibilities and technology of respective 7. Improved farmer incomes institutions Addressing HIV Cross cutting Addressing Gender, Discrimination and Diversity Issues themes Addressing the worst forms of child labour and trafficking Biodiversity Conservation and Environmental sustainability

116 APPENDIX G 3. Monique Oxender, Global Manager, Supply Chain Sustainability, AIAG Sustainability Loan, Ford Motor Company • Questions around impact and relevance need to take into consideration whether the project began with a root cause analysis including the entire system contributing to the abusive situation. Consequently, did action result in a change to the system contributing to the abuses rather than a band-aid? Reduction of these labor abuses is not easy to measure and should not be a single point in time measurement. Also included should be a rate of recurrence over x amount of time to account for cyclical behaviors. Take the example of forced labor in Brazil. One out of every 10 temporary work opportunities may result in a forced labor situation but due to the need for employment and income, lack of education as well as lack of interest in more permanent employment, laborers are willing to take that chance. And this cycle plays out over a period of months to years. • I am unclear as to how program/practice effectiveness differs from impact. • Sustainability questions should specifically require consideration of funding and stakeholder involvement. Actually, no where do I see stakeholders mentioned and I think this is an essential aspect to understand with projects such as this - both who is involved and how. Hope this helps. Looking forward to the discussion.

APPENDIX G 117 4. Chisara Ehiemere, Transfair, USA Fair Trade Certification includes compliance criteria related to child and forced labor for both small farmers and hired labor situations, an addition to numerous other criteria for social, socioeconomic, and environmental development. As such, any impact, or goals of the program would not be limited to child labor or forced labor elimination, but to a much broader set of goals. That said, this is an important part of the standards, and discovery could lead to suspension or decertification. The standards are written to both recognize that small farmers may have their children perform some tasks on the farm, but these must be limited, and cannot interfere with schooling. For hired labor situations, discovery of child or forced labor cannot simply be “fixed” by ceasing employment, but also trying to ensure that these workers are not forced into worst forms of labor situations. In terms of replicability, the compliance criteria that are used are the same world- wide. Replicability can best be achieved by figuring out what types of labor situations a program wants to work with (small farms, cooperatives, large farms, small factories, large factories etc), and different levels of pervasiveness of these types of labor situations, and working out a compliance criteria for each type. For example, Auditor training materials and audit methodology may vary slightly by country/region based on local practices, and the type of labor set-up being reviewed. For Fair Trade certification, the practices must continue in order to retain the certificate. I would imagine that now that sensitivity and awareness to the issues exists, there may be some that would continue to comply, but in most cases, audit and certification is necessary to ensure that responsible choices continue to be made. Cost effectiveness is difficult to separate out because the audit is a comprehensive review of all compliance criteria, not just criteria related to child/forced labor. I imagine, however, that one might look at verification methods that include, for cooperative structures, internal control systems and scientific sampling techniques. For 100% certainty, you would almost have to have an auditor on the ground 100% of the time, but there are sampling techniques that can give a high level of certainty.

118 APPENDIX G 5. CREA, Inc. C R E CREA Inc. P.O. Box 2507 A Hartford, CT 06146-2507 TEL: 860.527.0455 FAX: 860.216.1072 e-mail: crea-inc@crea-inc.org Web site: www.crea-inc.org CREA Center for Reflection, Education and Action, Inc. May 1, 2009 Draft Criteria – with suggested revisions I. Establishing baseline information 1. How was the baseline information collected? 2. How did you measure reliability of the baseline data? 3. What was the geographic area for the baseline data? a. What is regional? b. National? c. Local? D. How recent was the data collection? E. Did the data collection distinguish between child labor and forced labor? F. Did the data collection distinguish by gender? II. What are the specific program goals? A. How were the goals established B. Are they measurable a. Quantitatively b. Qualitatively C. How often will progress on program goals be measured? D. By whom will the progress be measured? III. What are the specific program components? A. How were the components designed? B. How distinguishable were the separate components in terms of measurability? C. How are/were the effects of each component measured? IV. Relevance – at start of project A. Is there a set of assumptions about how activities will lead to outcomes? B. Do you understand why the program works?

APPENDIX G 119 C. Is there a logical connection between the inputs, activities and expected outcomes? V. Consequences A. How are you distinguishing between impacts and consequences? B. What were the direct consequences of the program? C. What were the indirect consequences of the program? D. How did you measure the consequences? 1. Quantitatively? 2. Qualitatively? E. What were the unintended consequences of the program? F. What were the direct impacts of the program? G. What were the indirect impacts of the program? H. How did you measure the impacts? 1. Quantitatively 2. Qualitatively VI. Impact(s) A. Did the overall program reduce child labor? B. Did the overall program reduce forced labor? C. Did the program benefit child laborers? D. Did the program benefit forced laborers? E. What were these specific benefits? F. How were they documented? G. How were they measured? VII. Did the program achieve its goals? A. How was this determined 1. Qualitatively 2. Qualitatively B. Could the program sustain its goals over time? VIII. Relevance – at completion of project A. Were the starting assumptions about how activities would lead to outcomes met? B. Do you understand why the program worked? C. Is there a logical connection between the inputs, activities and expected outcomes? Can these be documented? IX. Sustainability A. Is the practice likely to continue (as needed)? Why or why not? B. Is the benefit likely to continue effectively? C Does the institutional capacity necessary to sustain the benefits and/or exist? D. Does the will to sustain these practices exist?

120 APPENDIX G E. What is necessary for local ownership of the program or practices to continue? X. Replicability A. Could the practice be implemented with modest adaptation in other settings? B. What factors limit replicability? C. What factors encourage replicability? XI. Cost effectiveness A. How is cost effectiveness measured? B. Were the benefits sufficient to warrant the cost in terms of money and time? C. Were the benefits adequate in relation to likely benefits from comparable investments? D. How was cost effectiveness measured? E. Can the business case be made for the project or work as a means of encouraging others to do the same work?

Next: Appendix H Submissions following the Workshop »
Approaches to Reducing the Use of Forced or Child Labor: Summary of a Workshop on Assessing Practice Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $47.00 Buy Ebook | $37.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Globally, child labor and forced labor are widespread and complex problems. They are conceptually different phenomena, requiring different policy responses, though they may also overlap in practice. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) was designed to reduce the use of child and forced labor in the production of goods consumed in the United States. The Act was reauthorized in 2003, 2005, and 2008.

In response to provisions of TVPA, the the Bureau of International Labor Affairs requested that the National Research Council organize a two-day workshop. The workshop, summarized in this volume, discusses methods for identifying and organizing a standard set of practices that will reduce the likelihood that persons will use forced labor or child labor to produce goods, with a focus on business and governmental practices.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!