1.INTRODUCTION
Cursory observation would prove that child labour has increase in Nigeria since the late 1980s.To this end the increase may be related to the changing socio economic structure of the country. It is in this light that this paper seeks to relate the massive increase in the incident of child labour In Nigeria the mid 1980s.Globalisation should be seen as an encompassing process with implications for different sections of socio life (see Anugwom, 2001). Therefore, globalization significantly affected the child labour in Nigeria.
Nigeria is reported as having 12million child workers, which is one of the highest in the world (see Siddigi and Patrinos,2001). Moreover the IL0 1996 estimate that 250million children are involved in child labour. This figure shows a problem of major proportion and which is concentrated principally in developing nations of the world. A concern with child labour stem largely out of the stark that realization in spite of the numerous national attention given to the issue, it seems to elude meaningful solution in fact rather than abate, child labour has persisted. Child labour has also attracted international attention and concern. Hence, there have been many declaration on the global arena on how to stem the rising tide of child labour. Among these declarations and conventions are the ILO conventions on the Elimination Of Child Labour, the, ILO Declaration on the Fundamental Principles and Rights of Work, the UNICEF. Declaration on the Right of chidren and of course the current ILO international Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (a joint initiative between the ILO and the individual countries). In spite of these concerns, Child Labour has continued almost unabated, showing that a more reliable approach may be identifying the root of the problem in the socio economic structure of the society concerned and tackling it from there. It is in this sense that I exploit the link between child labour and economic globalization in Nigeria.
b. The Child Labour Syndrome
The distinction between work or child work and child labour is often very crucial in understanding phenomenon of child labour. Along this line of thought, child work is considered either neutral or good for the children while child labour is bad (see Boyden, et al., 1998, Anker, 1995, Myres,1999 etc). The difference between these two categories is especially in African countries where some form of work orientation for the children within the ambit of the family considered an important part of the process of socialization. Therefore beyond the idea of one form of child labour being worst than another, this manner of thinking situates child labour within the socio cultural context of the society concerned, and avoid the temptation of even classifying the use of children in house hold chores as child labour even when the parent merely help out their parents.
All the same, it is important to realize as the ILO has demonstrated, some form of child labour are worst than others. In this case, ILO C onvention 182 (ILO,1999a, 1999b)on worst form of child labour identify child slavery, debt bondage, force labour trafficking, child prostitution, pornography and hazardous work as the worst forms of child labour, demanding urgent efforts to eliminate them.
All the same, the definition of child labour should be seen as mired in some cultural questions. This is especially the situation in the African context where the utilization of the child in family farms and domestic chores are accepted as part and parcel of the socialization process. However, the context of the labour should be very fundamental in donating it as child labour. In the same token, the economic rationale behind the activity should be seen as important. Therefore in purely cultural and traditional setting, children were exposed to labour that was not injurious to their psycho mental health and social development under the auspices of the family. This sort of labour involvement was not readily tied to any significant economic considerations, rather the family saw as a process of exposing the child gradually to the demands of work instilling the dignity of labour in him. Thus as Collins (1983) posits, work can help a child in terms of socialization, in building self esteem and for training.
These considerations have being eroded by both the contemporary urban environment and the economic rationale behind the current involvement of children in labour. Equally significant is the fact that a lot of children involved in labour nowadays are those under the care of guardian or foster parent in urban areas. This introduces the element of economic exploitation of children. Actually, it has being shown that the pressure of guardian is a big factor in the involvement of children in labour (see Chuta 1998).
All the above points indicate the child labour, even though apparent is problematic to define. This is the line with Amins (1994) contention that is a complicated term to be generally defined. In spite of the context and the complex nature of the phenomenon, it is largely define from a legal point of view. In this case, the law of society sets a limit to the age of those to be involved in work or paid labour. In the case of Nigeria, the minimum age for involvement in labouris 12, while 18 is the minimum age for involvement in dangerous or risky work (see siddiqi and Patrinos, 2001).
Amin (1994) has drown a broad distinction between two forms of child labour. These according to him, are rural child labour and urban child labour. In rural area child labour takes the form of involvement in agricultural activities and such other activities as house cleaning, cooking, child minding, fetching water and fire wood, etc, while in urban environment, domestic chores, street labour and apprenticeship are the dominant forms of involvement. However my concern in this paper is with urban child labour. Undoubtedly, the urban environment provides the conditions for the generation of child labour. Moreover,the exploitation of children in the labour sector is more of condition of the urban environment than the rural environment. Hence, child labour is predominantly an urban phenomenon.
Child labour should be conceived as the economic exploitation of children below the legally prescribed age in the labour sector for the benefit of a significant other. In this sense ,child labour is the involvement of children in paid labour (including income generating activities and apprenticeship) or other activities that create economic benefit especially for others beside the children so engaged. However, what constitutes child labour is mediated by the cultural reality of the society concerned .But far from being cultural reality or accepted way of life in African societies, child labour, as currently obtains, contradicts the intrinsic value Africans place on children. Thus ,child labour like other forms of child abuse, is purely an aberration of the way of life of Africans. This fact has being captured by the Ike and Twumasi Ankrah (1999:110) thus
The same child whose often celebrated with passion eventually becomes an object of abuse and neglect, exploitation, war and poverty, in the very hands of the same culture that gave birth to it.
This calls the fact that child labour represent an abnormality that demands socio action. Child labour appears to be related to change in the socio economic structure of society. Hence development transition generally experience more incident of child labour than the develope region of the world.
c. Toward a Theoretical Explanation Of Child Labour various attempt have been made by to proffer explanations for the occurrence of child labour. While some of these explanations are couched in terms of theories, a majority of these are simply view point seeking to offer reliable explanations of the phenomenon. Among these viewpoint are the functionalist approach, the neoclassical economic model, the political economy perspective, the psychological model, the socio psychological theory, the socio cultural perspective etc. from my point of view, the combination of the political economy and socio cultural perspective offer the most logical explanation of the incidence of child labour in Nigeria. The political economy view point can be gleaned in the seminal works of Karl Marx and Braverman. In the basic political economy frame of reference, child labour can be meaningfully explained principally in terms of the relationship between ownership and control of capital as well as the powers and perks of power that emanate from them. There child labour shows the cruelty or meanness of capitalism and it self contradiction since the laissez faire and free entry principles that are ideally sign post of capitalism are nullified in the case of child labour. No wonder Braverman argue that child labour aids capitalist accumulation in situation of low technology and helps augment income of the poor, even though marginally, thereby stultifying or dulling their willingness to resist exploitation.
Similar to the political economy approach, the socio cultural orientation emphasizes social structures, norms, value, culture and institutional patterns and interaction in the explanation of child abuse and child labour (see Gelle, 1973). It sees child labour as the product of the socio system. The view point focuses on the socio cultural property of the state or characteristics of the socio pattern and their effects on the adequate socio psychological development of the child. Essentially, it sees child labour as the outcome of the failure of the society to provide for carter for its marginal members.
3. The socio Economic Context of Child Labour In Nigeria There is a difference between the socially accepted gradual exposure of a child to work and the exploitation or gross undermining of the development prospect of the child in the labour process in words, work can be a form of learning and self expression as well as impetus for growth, but becomes dangerous when it turns into labour or becomes a demanding drudgery characterized by repetition, physical exertion, and with adverse impact on the physical and mental welfare of the child. This is in line with the view of the ILO (1988) That child labour is that which interferes with the education with the education of the child and adversely affect the health of the child concerned.
One factor that has perpetuated child labour is low economic cost. Thus children can be hired at little or no cost at all. Moreover, the children work without contracts or any form of security and most times must ensure what is considered appropriate returns to guardians or employers. All things considered, child readily available. Again in the ability of some parent guarantee some reasonable future for their children makes them willing to let such children get involved in labour.
Be that as it may children in purely tradition Nigeria societies were exposed to work within the confines of the family and the process of the child internalizing the norms and the values of his social group. Work in this situation was devoid of harmful affect and exploitation. It was part of the process of learning through imitation. As Okpara (1986) posits, children in the sub culture of the Igbo of south Eastern Nigeria are trained early to rehearse adult roles through involvement in their parent social and economic activities which provides them opportunities to act out behavior required in mature statuses mainly adult statues. He goes futher to argue that the idea of an obnoxious child labour seen, in terms of contemporary reality, is the exploitation of the child for economic benefits of others.
The greatest number of working children is to be found in the hawking and goods peddling businesses in the major township in Nigeria. These child hawkers move from house to house and street to street touting their wares or they are engage in what might be called road traffic hawking. In such big towns as Lagos, Ibadon, Benin, Kano, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Onitsha etc, these children take daily risks selling various wares to occupant of moving vehicles. These children whether sent to the trade by their parent or guardians/employers are gradually cut off from the social ties of family life. This is because they spent abnormally long ways on the road or street. Most of them get home very tied and late in the night. In fact, a night journey by bus through such popular routes as Lagos to Onitsha or Lagos to Kano will review that a lot of these children stay awake all day and night hawking their wares and mostly in very unhealthy social and physical environments.
Also child labour is visibly high in labour activities with a small economic return and in those activities with a small economic return in those activities that require considerable degree of itinerancy. Therefore, child labour is usually a phenomenon in the informal sector in Nigeria where children are used to cut costs and improve the profit margin of the average entrepreneur. In addition child labour is widespread in the hawking business. As a matter of fact hawking by children remains one of the surest indicators of any level of child labour in any African society. In the case of Nigeria, child hawkers are highly visible. Basically the economic consideration behind the use of children in labour is underlined by the fact that child labour invariably lower cost on personnel. In a way also, it contribute to unemployment lower wages for the adult working population of a society (see ILO, 1988, Goode, 1992) impetus to engender economic growth. It is important to point out that economic globalism was given a boost in Africa by the elusiveness of development in many countries in the region. Therefore economic globalism manifested in the adjustment programmes of the 1980s and the contemporary emphasis on the private sector driven economy (privatization) and reduced public sector spending or what is often called the post adjustment economic measures, as being seen as invaluable to economic growth in Africa. The international financial institutions and the very Unpopular World Trade Organization have promoted this orthodoxy.
But far from proving a reliable panacea for the ailing African economies, these measures have further worsened the economies and created enormous hardship for the population. Hence, after more than two decade of tinkering with these largely externally driven economic initiative, Nigeria is still to crawl out of economic doldrums. It is in this regard that some writers questioned the efficacy of these measures in African economies. In this case Ghai (1992), Amin (1987), Arighi (1982) etc, have being argued, mainly from a radical perspective, that economic than globalization further worsen class and national inequalities as well as mirrors the contradiction between labour and capital. To them, economic globalization is nothing short of a ploy widening the hegemonic scope of capitalism. It is on this note that one sees globalization as having adverse implications for general inequality and poverty In the developing world (see also Watkins 1997).
According to Siddiqi and Patinos (2001), Africa and Asia account for the over 90 percent of total child employment in the world. This unsurprisingly coincides with the fact that these two regions have the highest number of developing countries and poverty ridden populations and poverty that has tremendously in the last two decades. As has been observed, child labour is an index of poverty neediness or the general deprivations (see, Okpara, 1986). In this sense, child labour may be expected to increase as the general deprivation of the population expands. Therefore, the era of globalization, which has wrought unsavoury socio economic conditions on most families in Nigeria, can been seen as increasing the incidence of child labour.the most dominant form of economic globalization in Nigeria, the structural adjustment programme (SAP) has been felt more by urban households, especially income earners, than other sections of the population (see Anugwom is seen as responsible for introducing urban poverty with a new dimension in Nigeria i.e urban food poverty (see Adesina, 1994).
The above would serve as useful points in contradicting the tendency of relating child labour to socio cultural, religious or geographical factors (see ILO, 1979). The only cogent fact in this regard is that child labour is related to the level of development in a society. In fact, all over the world, the incidence of child labour is linked to the level of development. It is therefore unsurprising that Africa and Asia have the highest incidence of child labour (see, Table 1 below) and are incidentally amongst the poorest and the least developed regions in the world today.
Table1: Distribution Of Economically Active Children (Percentage Of World Table)
Region 1980 1985 1990
Africa 17.0 18.0 21.3
Americas 4.7 5.6 n.a
Europe 77.8 75.9 72.3
Oceania 0.2 0.2 0.2 Source: ILO, 1993
Siddiqi and Patrinos (2001) have raised points that affect the efforts to abolish or ameliorate child labour. These include the non existence of international agreement defining child labour and the country differences in minimum age work restrictions. However these observation lose sight that child labour can be perceived and the ILO has done quite a lot of in enumerating what constitute child labour as well as what constitute hazardous and harmful child labour. As I have posited, the core problem remains basically with the economic structure/condition of the society that create the conditions of child labour. This argument is especially relevant in view of the fact that child labour can be related to poverty and the sharpening of general economic distinctions is so many societies since the last two decades. This period coincide with the advent of globalization, which can be viewed as creating economic rationality in government social provisioning postures, thus exposing family to poverty of a larger dimension.
Child labour impacts on development, particularly as it distort nthe labour process. Children work the longest hours and are the worst paid of all labourers (see Baquelle and Boyden, 1988). Hence, children are used exploitatively in the labour arena and by this process create wealth or profit for those employing or using them. Child labour raises concern for a number of reasons which range from the condition of the children involved and the implications of this type of labour on other issues in the economy like adult employment and wage levels and thus general employment development.
5. Globalisation and Child Labour in Nigeria: Survival is the Name of the Game
So many reasons have been adduced for the involvement of children in paid employment or labour. The most common reasons is poverty. In addition, such other factors as the social environment of the family, greed, poor educational achievement, parental socio economic status (which is related to poverty), etc,are equally mentioned. In spite of this, poverty, or lack of money has been pinpointed as crucial variable in the explanation of child labour in Nigeria (see,Chute,1998 Okpara, 1986).
Therefore, the main cause of child labour in Nigeria is poverty. In this regard parent let their children go, mainly because of one or a combination of two reasons. In the first case, the parent owing to poverty, may find it difficult to provide for their child. Apart from the provision of food, the parent may lack financial might to provide education, health care and other basic requirements 70% of children involved in different labour activities in the urban centres are from poor or low class families (see, Chute, 1998). In this situation, the children often work together with either parent, who also utilize money earned in the maintenance of the family.
However such children are utilize mainly in street hawking where they peddle such commodities as groundnuts, oranges, vegetables, agricultural product etc. the incidence of the second category of poverty driven child labour has grown tremendously in the last decade in Nigeria. This is precisely as the result of economic crises consequent upon economic globalization, which manifested dominantly in the form of adjustment programme initiated in mid 1986 as well as current emphasis on economic liberalization and free market.
Moreover child labour is more prevalent in the informal sector, which in Nigeria is highly is unmonitored and an all comers sector. Also in this sector children are largely visible in the buying and selling (hawking), artisan vocations (used largely as apprentices but subjected to the hazardous work), transportation (as tout and conductors) and street/market vending. Actually, one can see the prevalence of child labour in these activities that are outside the direct control/monitoring of government and its agencies as the logical outcome of the failure of legislation in most segment of the private sector.
The heightened economic rationality underlying the globalization enterprise has undermined the socio fabric of Nigerian society. In this sense social values and choices are basically dictated by economic factors. As I have argued elsewhere, globalization has undermined the cherished Nigerian social value and money the measure of all things (see, Anugwom, 2001b). economic globalization has led to heightened economic sense and commodification of almost all spheres of life. Thus globalization, in the guise of externally driven macro economic measures, has further worsen the economic position of Nigeria families. It was exactly this scenario that a former Nigeria labour congress (NLC) President, Paschal Bafyau captured when he argued that the adjustment programme, rather than being a palliative measure, has worsen hardship and poverty has become even more widespread (see Newswatch, 1992). Also, tied in with the SAP and even being implemented currently are the so called post adjustment measures such as the privatization programmes in Nigeria.
Privatization has impacted on the poverty of Nigerian families in principally two ways. In the first place, nit has lead to massive dismissals or retrenchment in the firm concerned, thus jeopardizing the abilities of a lot of families to take care of them. Apart from this the emphasis on privatization has, in the second place, led to a declining involvement of the government in Nigeria in social provisioning. In this case social provisioning has being privatized both in the spirit of privatization and in a bid to lessen government’s public sector spending. Therefore the families are confronted with the increasing cost of social services or the non availabilities of social amenities. This, is in spite of privatization in Nigeria has raised more questions than it has provided a panacea to the economic malaise plaguing the country (see, Okolie, 2000 Anugwom 2001c).
Be that as it may, privatization has increased the economic burden of families and as in this sense, negatively impacted on family poverty. Anugwom and Anugwom (2000) have linked the increasing poverty in urban areas in Nigeria to the SAP and its various consequences. The link between family survival or poverty and child has being captured succinctly Anker (2000) who argues that even though child labour is very hard on children, it is necessary for family survival in developing countries. In this sense, the utilization of children in economic activities of diverse nature is a product of reality.
The reality being the inability of the parent in the light of crushing economic scenario of the globalization era to make ends means. In this situation, some children voluntarily opt for paid labour as their contribution to the survival of the family. Such altruism, even in the face of reality, emanates primarily from the African cultural viewpoint survival is group matter. Therefore, the African child has a stalk and gets involved in activities towards this survival. The point therefore is that urban child labour, as it were, has grown out of an increasing scope of family poverty arising from the socio economic fall out of globalization. Hence, the child labour may represent one more coping mechanism by poor urban households in Nigeria.
6 Mortgaging their Future: The Social and Physical Pathology of Child Labour
The argument on the negative effects of child labour simply implies belabouring the point since copious theoretical and practical studies abound to show the disastrous effects of child labour on the children involved (see for instance, Obikeze, 1984: McGee and Wolfe, 1991: Becker, et al., 1995 etc in this regard). However in assessing the impact of child labour, Ike and Twumasi Ankrah (1999: 113) opine: The psychological impact of child labour can never be overestimated…… The physical and emotional stress work combined with the denial of Opportunities to play or interact fully socially with peers and to explore the world could doom a child to personality and behavioural maladjustment. Emotional abuse and neglect, separation from family,monotony, and the burdens of premature responsibility, will most likely have some permanent adverse impact on the working child.

Emphatically, it has been discovered that factors that tend to increase children working hours generally tend to decrease their hours of study (Akabayashi and Psacharopolous, 1999). This then implies some level of trade off between the two activities. Thus, the working child devotes little time to learning and other meaningful growth related activities. All said, the adverse consequences or pathology of child labour cannot be over emphasized. In this sense, increasing incidence of child labour portends grave dangers for the development of any country and more specifically the future of the children. Amin (1994:242)captures this situation thus: children are put under the exploitative situation in the form of low pay, hazardous and dangerous working conditions, excessive long and continuous hours of work, and other types of abusive social and work practices. Under these circumstances, the health, physical, educational and intellectual development of the children as well as their life time opportunities may be seriously hampered.

The involvement of children is risky or dangerous work is particularly detrimental to their health. As has been posited by scholars, children are easily tired and fatigued, they easily lose attention and inaccurate judgments and these make them prone to occupational injuries of different forms, ranging from bruises and cuts to disabilities and even death (see also, Rabin, 1985: Berger, 1984).
It would however appear that child labour is about all about negative outcome. In this sense of those in involved eventually grow into hardworking and honest citizens. In the views of Amin (1994:242).
Some domestic child workers ususlly learn a trade and some are threaten quite well. They are better off than they would have been in the village. Yet some usually become worse off than they started.

Despite the above ambivalence, it is obvious that child labour is potentially injurious to the children involved. As Chute (1998) discovered, children expose to child labour are, on the average, less educated than their other mate. Moreover the chances are that those who become something in spite of being exploited as children might have turned out better or greater without involvement in this kind of labour. The probability of turning out better would be affected by the nature and length of exposure to child labour and more significantly the condition or context of the exposure. Thus, those who were involved for a short time or in figuratively clean/decent activities and under the guardian of conscientious people may eventually become better citizens.
CONCLUSION
From the foregoing, one is tempted to agree with the deduction of Amin (1994) and ILO (1986) that child labour can be meaningfully mitigated by the enhancing the economic status of adult and the case of Nigeria, urban households or families deserve particular attention. More so, the withdrawal of government largely from social provisioning all in a bid to generate a private sector driven economy has impacted negatively on the economic status and well being of Nigerian urban families. Therefore a crucial factor in the campaign against child labour seems to be the role of government in mediating socio economic hardship confronting urban families.
Economic globalization, with its emphasis on economic rationality, instrumentality and a commodiffication of the life in general, has increased the incidence of child labour in urban Nigeria. Just like posited by the political economy perspective, globalization hinged on acute economic rationality has created an abundance of child labour for to the advantage of the privileged members of society and capitalists who benefit from lowered production costs and a bigger profit margin. And as this viewpoint posits, child labour now in Nigeria seems like a survival mechanism by the poor who are marginal to the capitalist project of globalization. Also, the fact remains that child labour is partially a product of the Nigerian social system. The inability of the Nigerian state to provide for the poor and economically fragile or marginal members society has given impetus to the growth of a child labour. so as the socio cultural perspective emphasizes, the failure of the institutions of society to provide for or carter for its members creates the objective conditions for the proliferation of child labour. I strongly believe that a globalization regime that enables government intervention in the area of social provisioning as well as the provision of cushioning measures will go a long way in easing the severe economic hardship on Nigeria families and in this regard curb child labour.

REFERENCE
Adesina, J. (1994). Labour in the Explanation of an African Crisis. Daker: CODESRIA. Akabayashi, H. and G. Pscharopoulos (1999). The Trade off Between Child Labour And Human Capital Formation: a Tanzanian case. Study. Journal of development studies, vol, 35 No. 5: 120_140.
Amin, A. A. (1994). The Economic Impact of Child labour in Cameroon. Labour capital and society, 27: 2:234_248.
Amin, S. (1987). The Crises, Third World, North South and East West, in E. Hansen (ed) Perspective on Peace and Development. London: Zed books.
Anker, R. (1995). Labour Market Policies, Vulnerable Groups and Poverty, in J. Figuero and L. Shaheed (eds) poverty: new approaches to analysis and policy. Geneva: International Institute for Labour studies.
Anker, R. (2000). Conceptual and Research frameworks for the Economics of Child and Labour and its Elimination. ILO/IPEC Working Paper. Geneva: ILO.
Anugwom,E. E. (2001a). Globalization and labour Utilization in Developing Countries the case of Nigeria, seminar Paper, African Studies Centre, Laden (April, 12).
Anugwom, E. E. (2001c). the state, Rentier Economy and the realities of Privatization in Nigeria: ESUT Social Science Journal (Forthcoming).
Anugwom, E. E. and K. N. Anugwom (2000). The Structural Adjustment Programme and Urban poverty in South Eastern Nigeria. Research Report, CODESRIA Daker, Senegal.
Arrighi, G. (1982), Economic Crisis and Crisis of Hegemony. Political international, Vol. ii No.2 (spring)
Becker, J.J. Alpert: D. Bigtoot: B. Bonner:L. Geddie: S. Henggeler: K. Kaufman and C. walker (1995). Empirical Research on Child Abuse and Neglect Treatment Working Group. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 24 (Suppl): 23_46.
Boyden, J. B. Ling and W. Myers (1998). What works for the working for children. Italy UNICEF.
Boyden, J. (1991). Working Children in Lima, Peru, in W. Myers(ed) Protecting Working Children, London: Zed Books.
Bequelle , A. and J. Boyden (1988). Working Children Current and policy Responses. International Labour Review, 127, 2,153_171.
Berger, LR. (1984). Conceptual framework: Child labour and Health. Geneva : WHO.
Brav erman, H. (1974). Labour and monopoly capital . New York : Monthly Review Press.
Chuta, N. (1998). The lncidence of Child labour in Nigeria: a case stuty of Nsukka urban. Unpublished Thesis, Nsukka : University of Nigeria .
Collins, J. (1983) Fertility Determinants in a High Andes. Community . population and Development Review, 9, 1:61_75.
Comaroft, J. and J Comaroft (2000). Millennial Capitalism: first Thoughts on a second coming, Public Culture, 12 (2): 291_343.
Gelles, R.T (1973). Violence Towards Children in the united states. American journal of Orthopsychiatry, 43:611_621.
Ghai, D, (1992). Structural Adjustment , Global integration and Social Democracy. UNRISD Discussion paper.
Gil, D.G (1975) Unravelling Child Abuse . American journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45:518_623.
Goode, J.H. (1992). Egyptian labour market Overview. Egypt: USAID.
Griffin, K. and K. Khan (1992). Globalisation in the Developing World: An essay on the international dimension of development in the post _cold war era, Geneva: UNRISM.
Held, D. (1997). Democracy and Globalisation” Global Governance, 3:251_267.
Hirst, P.and G. Thompson, (1996). Globalisation in Question. Cambridge: Polity press.
Ike, C.A and K, Twumasi_ Ankral, (19999)”Child Abuse and Child labour Across Culture: Implications for Research, Prevention and Policy Implementation journal of social Development in Africa, 14, 2:109_118.
ILO (1999a). Convention No 182 concerning the prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child labour , Geneva: ILO.
ILO (1999b). Recommendation No. 190 Concerning the prohibition and Immediate Action for Eliminatio of the Worst forms of Child labour . Geneva: ILO.
ILO(1986), Asia Regional Triparite Workshop on Practical Measures to Compat Child Labour.” Proceedings and Working Papers, Bangkok (Sept. 22_30).
ILO (1979). Population and Labour . Geneva. ILO.
McGee, R. and D.A Wolfe (1991) “Psychological Maltreatment: Towards an operational Definition. “Development and Psychopathology, 3:3_18.
MitteIman, j (1995). “Rethinking the international Division of Labour in the context of Globalisation, “Third World Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 2.
Myers, W.E (1995), “Considering Child Labour Changing terms, issues and actors at the International level. “Childhood: 13_26, London: Sape.
Newswatch (1992). “What Future for SAP, “Vol. 15, No. 8, Feb. 24:9.
Obikeze, D.S. (1984). “Perspectives on Child Abuse in Nigeria: “International Child Welfare Review: 63.
Okolie , A (2000). “The Political Economy of Privatization in Nigeria: a study of Nigergas company Ltd, Enugu , “ in E Anugwom; V. Okeke; R Asogwa; I Obasi (eds). The social Sciences Issues and Perspective. Nsukka: Fulladu.
Okpara, E. (1986). “Child Labour as a Significant Index of Poverty in Nigeria: Implications for social Policy, “In P.O. Ebigbo; G. IZuora; D, Obikeze; E. Maduewesi; E. Okpara & E. Ekwegbalu (eds). Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Child Abuse in Africa. Enugu: ANCPPAN/UNICEF.
Ralim, S.(1985). Psychological problems of Children at Work. Geneva: WHO.
Siddiq, F .and H. Patrinos (2001). “Child Labour: Issues, and interventions. “World Bank, HCO Working Paper 56. http://www.worldbank.org/html/extdr/hnp/hddflash/workp/wp Watkins, K. (1997). Globalization and Liberation: Implications for poverty,
Distribution and Inequality. UNDP Occasional Paper 32.
World Bank (1996). Global Economic Prospect and Developing Countries. Ashington, D. C. World Bank.