AGDI a environ 300 publications actuellement.
2016 |
|
| 1. | Koomson, Simplice Asongu Isaac A African Development Review, 28 (1), pp. 104–115, 2016. Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Altruistic, Child labour, Farm income, Non-Altruistic, Non-Farm income @article{Asongu_579, author = {Simplice Asongu A Isaac Koomson}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8268.12170/full}, doi = {10.1111/1467-8268.12170}, year = {2016}, date = {2016-03-16}, journal = {African Development Review}, volume = {28}, number = {1}, pages = {104–115}, abstract = {Child labourers play an integral role in households' income diversification process by contributing to farm and non-farm incomes but policies, including that of ILO, have focused largely on eliminating child labour from the agricultural sector through education. This study sought to ascertain the relative contribution of child labourers to farm and non-farm incomes using the GLSS6 data and employed a SUR estimation that simulated, empirically, with the child's number of hours spent in school. Findings confirmed the trade-off between school hours and household farm and non-farm incomes but simulating and deriving the net effect after including child education revealed that as child labourers spend an extra hour in school, every Ghafdr12170-gra-00011.00 contributed to farm income is accompanied by a Ghafdr12170-gra-00012.12 contribution towards non-farm income. By implication, child education policy can remove child labourers from the farm but may likely result in a paradoxical effect of pushing these children into non-farm activities as they engage in them after school and during weekends. We suggest that government provides adequate remuneration for workers and lobby/bargain for comprehensive prices for agricultural products (internationally) so that households do not use children as instruments to diversify their income portfolios, since child labour acts as a push factor.}, keywords = {Altruistic, Child labour, Farm income, Non-Altruistic, Non-Farm income}, pubstate = {published}, tppubtype = {article} } Child labourers play an integral role in households' income diversification process by contributing to farm and non-farm incomes but policies, including that of ILO, have focused largely on eliminating child labour from the agricultural sector through education. This study sought to ascertain the relative contribution of child labourers to farm and non-farm incomes using the GLSS6 data and employed a SUR estimation that simulated, empirically, with the child's number of hours spent in school. Findings confirmed the trade-off between school hours and household farm and non-farm incomes but simulating and deriving the net effect after including child education revealed that as child labourers spend an extra hour in school, every Ghafdr12170-gra-00011.00 contributed to farm income is accompanied by a Ghafdr12170-gra-00012.12 contribution towards non-farm income. By implication, child education policy can remove child labourers from the farm but may likely result in a paradoxical effect of pushing these children into non-farm activities as they engage in them after school and during weekends. We suggest that government provides adequate remuneration for workers and lobby/bargain for comprehensive prices for agricultural products (internationally) so that households do not use children as instruments to diversify their income portfolios, since child labour acts as a push factor. |
2015 |
|
| 2. | Koomson, Simplice Asongu Isaac A 2015. Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Altruistic, Child labour, Farm income, Non-Altruistic, Non-Farm income @workingpaper{Koomson2015, title = {Relative Contribution of Child Labour to Household Farm and Non-Farm Income in Ghana: Simulation with Child's Education}, author = {Simplice Asongu A Isaac Koomson}, editor = {African 2015 Governance and Development Institute WP/15/032}, url = {http://www.afridev.org/RePEc/agd/agd-wpaper/Relative-Contribution-of-Child-Labour-to-Household-Farm-and-Non-Farm.pdf}, year = {2015}, date = {2015-09-01}, abstract = {Child labourers play an integral role in households’ income diversification process by contributing to farm and non-farm incomes but policies, including that of the ILO have focused largely on eliminating child labour from the agricultural sector through education. This study sought to ascertain the relative contribution of child labourers to farm and non-farm income using the GLSS6 data and employed a SUR estimation that simulated, empirically, with child’s education. Findings showed that as a child labourer spends more time in school, every Gh₵1.00 contributed to farm income is accompanied by a Gh₵2.12 contribution towards non-farm income. By implication, child education policy removes child labourers from the farm but are likely to have a paradoxical effect of pushing these children into non-farm activities as they engage in them after school and during weekends. The suggestion is that governments must provide adequate remuneration for workers and pay a good price for agricultural products so that households do not use children as instruments to diversity their income portfolios, since child labour acts as a push factor in the diversification process.}, keywords = {Altruistic, Child labour, Farm income, Non-Altruistic, Non-Farm income}, pubstate = {published}, tppubtype = {workingpaper} } Child labourers play an integral role in households’ income diversification process by contributing to farm and non-farm incomes but policies, including that of the ILO have focused largely on eliminating child labour from the agricultural sector through education. This study sought to ascertain the relative contribution of child labourers to farm and non-farm income using the GLSS6 data and employed a SUR estimation that simulated, empirically, with child’s education. Findings showed that as a child labourer spends more time in school, every Gh₵1.00 contributed to farm income is accompanied by a Gh₵2.12 contribution towards non-farm income. By implication, child education policy removes child labourers from the farm but are likely to have a paradoxical effect of pushing these children into non-farm activities as they engage in them after school and during weekends. The suggestion is that governments must provide adequate remuneration for workers and pay a good price for agricultural products so that households do not use children as instruments to diversity their income portfolios, since child labour acts as a push factor in the diversification process. |
