International Labour Review, Vol. 136 (1997), No. 2 (Summer) Social labelling to combat child labour: Some considerations Janet HILOWITZ * ‘ince the 1980s there has been a growing public awareness in both developed and developing countries about the use of child labour, especially but not only in the developing countries. Many private agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and some governments and international organizations, including the ILO, have sought and continue to seek ways to reduce the use of such labour. Within the past five years, one of the means applied by some NGOs has been the labelling of products and services, with the intention of providing an assurance to consumers that what they purchase has not been produced by children. Sometimes, where this blanket assurance cannot be given for various reasons, the label provides a different assurance: that the labelling organizations, producers and traders are engaging in activities to benefit the child workers employed in a given industry, thus alleviating some of the ill effects of work for the children concerned and sometimes their families as well. Labelling initiatives relating to child labour are still few — currently no more than six, although others are under consideration in various quarters. Once they began to attract the attention of press and public and to register some successes, it became clear that a closer investigation was called for. This article provides some background to the subject, describing existing labelling programmes and reviewing available assessments of their effects on working children and on industry and consumer behaviour in the industrialized and developing countries. A number of issues are raised concerning the role of labels in a strategy to reduce child labour. One conclusion is that labelling may reduce the number of employed children and improve conditions for some still at work. However, since it can be applied only to a few products and services, and to date mostly exported products, the potential effect is limited. To have a significant impact on child labour a broad range of actions * Professor of Sociology, University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. This article is based on a preliminary study prepared for the ILO's Working Conditions and Environment Department. Copyright © International Labour Organization 1997216 International Labour Review and policies is required, including appropriate labour market legislation and oversight. the availability of educational and other alternatives for working children, and awareness-raising about both the legislation and the problem of child labour among parents, employers, trade unions and the public in the country or region concerned. Background The focus of this article is on labelling initiatives concerned specifically with child labour, although some initiatives also aim to bring about other positive changes as well. First, a brief description of the broader context will be useful. Labels in general A label is information that the manufacturer or marketer of a product provides to the consumer at the point of sale. It usually contains certain basic information, such as the size and composition of a product, the name or trademark of the manufacturer or retailer and the country of origin. Sometimes it takes the form of a notice posted in the retail area and relates to all the products displayed, stating, for example, that only natural ingredients are used. A label usually contains words and numbers, but it may show no more than a logo and the name of an organization, in which case its meaning for the consumer must depend on information provided elsewhere. Social labels The labels relating to child labour form part of a broader category, social labels, which inform consumers about the social conditions of production in order to assure them that the item or service they are purchasing is produced under equitable working conditions. When consumers prefer such items or services, producers feel the pressure to introduce or maintain such conditions. In some countries such labelling has a long history. The White Label, which was introduced by the National Consumers League of the United States in 1899 and spread to 13 American States, assured consumers that women’s and children’s stitched cotton underwear was manufactured under decent working conditions and with no child labour; it read “Made under clean and healthful conditions ... Use of label authorized after investigation”, a claim backed up by the monitoring of production sites by the League. It was discontinued in 1918, when labels sponsored by trade unions and guaranteeing manufacturer compliance with labour standards came into widespread use. Union labels were found on virtually all garments sold in the United States until garments began to be imported in volume from overseas. One version of the union label, that of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, read: “Look for the Union Label When You Shop For Women’s and Children’s Apparel ... Symbol ofSocial labelling to combat child labour: Some considerations 217 Decency, Fair Labor Standards and the American Way of Life”. An attempt to create a new label for garments sold in the United States, the “No sweat” label, is now being considered by various parties, with the support of some members of the United States Congress. Other labels that have appeared sporadically in various countries urge consumers to “Buy American”, “Buy French” and so forth. These labels might also be considered social labels, but they have marked political overtones. Yet another class of labels, now fairly widely accepted in many developed countries, consists of “green” or “eco-labels”. They inform consumers about the environmentally safe mode of production of, or the ecological benefits of using, specific products. These labels may perhaps not appear to be “social” in any conventional sense, but in that they aim to restore a healthier relation between the human community and the environment they can be considered social labels. Finally, another important kind of social labelling of certain imports has made an appearance in both Europe and the United States in recent years. Private voluntary associations purchase certain commodities — coffee, tea, cocoa, bananas, sugar and honey to date — directly from small farmers at prices that are generous and comparatively stable relative to world market prices. They then repackage and market them in the wealthier consumer countries under specific trademarks or labels (Max Havelaar, Cooperation, Fairtrade, to name but a few). Disadvantaged small producers in developing countries thus enjoy a relatively reliable income, and middlemen are bypassed. These “fair trade” products, as they are collectively called, have made notable inroads, representing up to 4 per cent of the total national market for the product in some European countries; a new umbrella association, Fair Trade Labelling Organization International (FLO), now Promotes seven distinct labels sold in thirteen countries. The non-profit- making associations that sponsor fair trade labels also work for social improvement, such as better housing and schools in the producer communities. Such labelling initiatives greatly benefit children, who often work as part of the family agricultural enterprise; but in these cases improving the lives of working children is merely a by-product of broader economic and social goals and not in itself a principal focus of the programmes. The nature of current social labels Features shared by most social labelling initiatives Much of the social labelling in existence today has been advocated and advanced principally by groups and organizations with a concern for poor working and living conditions, mainly in the developing countries from which most of the labelled products are exported. Such labelling is usually considered voluntary, because the producer, wholesaler or retailer who places a social label on a product or service does so by choice, rather than to