Vol 14, No.1 (2004)
ISSN 1546-2250
Children and Adolescents Growing Up in Poverty: Comparative Perspectives from India and Brazil-
A Report from the World Social Forum 2004, India
Tamo Chattopadhay
Teachers College
Columbia University
Citation: Chattopadhay, Tamo. (2004). “Children and Adolescents Growing Up in Poverty: Comparative Perspectives from India and Brazil- A Report from the World Social Forum 2004, India.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 172-189.
Keywords: Brazil, India, NGOs, children in poverty, empowerment of children, role of civil society, international collaboration
Introduction
This paper reports on the outcomes of an international seminar titled, “Children and Adolescents growing up in Poverty and Marginalization: Comparative Perspectives from India and Brazil,” held at the World Social Forum 2004 in Mumbai, India. The goal of this paper is to inform the international community of economic development scholars and practitioners about some of the key issues that emerged from the discussions during the seminar. While primarily a “report back,” this paper is also a reflection on practice and an invitation for action.Scope of the Event
The primary organizers of the seminar were Childwatch International, a global network of institutions involved in research on childhood, and two of its affiliated organizations: CIESPI- International Center of Research on Childhood at Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; and TISS- Tata Institute for Social Sciences, in Mumbai, India. The event aimed to facilitate a dialogue between researchers, practitioners and advocates working with socially and economically marginalized children and adolescents in India and Brazil.Why India and Brazil?
While comparative seminars in development are not new, the choice of participating countries is typically dominated by the “regionalism” rationale, creating comparative discourses between countries located in South Asia or Latin America, for example. Understandably, countries within a region are to a great extent affected by similar cultural, linguistic and economic forces and often share deep-rooted histories and legacies. At the same time, countries in different regional groupings sometimes share more aspects of social situations and physical environments than they do with countries in their own regions. While the methodology of comparative studies does allow for temporal, spatial and thematic comparisons between countries, very often thematic comparisons are bounded within spatial clusters. Thus, for example, when child labor is analyzed, a typical point of comparison is the situation in India and Bangladesh. When school-based approaches for preventing child labor are studied, the subjects are often Brazil’s Bolsa Escola and Mexico’s Progressa. Organizers of the current seminar made a deliberate exception to this norm.There has also been a growing appreciation of the potential of Indo-Brazilian collaboration among policymakers in the two countries. On a number of international issues, collaboration between Brazil and India has been gaining momentum. However, almost all of the official exchange between the two countries in the field of development has remained primarily among leaders in higher education management, biotechnology, informatics, trade agreements and other areas- in other words, among the elites who dominate the mainstream economy.
While Brazil and India both have striking similarities in terms of social inequalities and civil society capacities, there have been relatively few collaborative efforts between the two countries in the area of human rights of socially and economically marginalized children and adolescents. The current event aimed to initiate such a dialogue, marking an important milestone within the larger context of the World Social Forum.
The Participants
The event brought together representatives from research institutions, as well as from NGOs based in India and Brazil that work directly with marginalized children on service delivery and advocacy from a human rights perspective.1 While some of the panelists were familiar with the others’ work, most of the panelists met for the first time at the event. The panel was moderated by Tamo Chattopadhay, a doctoral candidate from Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, and a guest researcher at CIESPI, Brazil.Overview of Discussions
The first panel presentation by Dr. Usha Nayar gave a broad overview of the social and physical environment of marginalized childhood in the urban context in India, with specific reference to the situation of Mumbai, the largest metropolis on the Indian subcontinent. It was followed by a similar overview presentation by Professor Irene Rizzini, who described the environment of marginalized children in urban areas of Brazil, with a particular focus on Rio de Janeiro. These were followed by thematic presentations by the other panelists. Following the presentations, the panelists and the audience engaged in a discussion and question-and-answer session. Udi Butler provided some rich ethnographic perspectives from his research on life trajectories of vulnerable children and adolescents in Brazil. Lucia Nader of Conectas talked about her organization’s efforts in Brazil to educate young children about their basic human rights and to train and mobilize young people to become advocates for their cause. John Menacheri of Childline discussed in detail the challenges of providing the first line of protection for children in an environment lacking basic services or strong political will for disadvantaged children in India. Fareeda Lambay’s presentation highlighted the power of innovative approaches in responding to the educational needs of the hardest-to-reach children in India.Approximately 30 participants with backgrounds in research, programming and advocacy work for and with marginalized children contributed to the open discussions that followed the panel presentations. Participants came from diverse parts of India and Brazil, as well as from various international NGOs and multilateral organizations (such as UNICEF). The medium size of the group allowed for an informal and informative exchange. Particularly noteworthy was the participation of a child, himself a laborer, who represented an organized movement of working children in New Delhi, India. The movement, called Barhte Kadam in Hindi, means March Forward.
The panelists and the members of the audience shared concepts, methodologies, policies and information about effective programs for holistic development of opportunities for disadvantaged children in the contexts of India and Brazil. As pragmatic programming and policy issues were discussed in detail, most of the discussions were grounded in a human rights framework. Thus, challenges facing marginalized children were problematized in terms of violation of children’s rights, while interventions were conceptualized as approaches to fulfillment of children’s fundamental human rights.
The Social Environment of Marginalized Children
What follows in this section is a comparative analysis of the parameters of the social environment of marginalized children in India and Brazil, based upon the discussions at the seminar. While a comprehensive analysis remains beyond the scope of this paper, the synthesis below attempts to highlight some of the key issues.Impacts of Changing Family Environments
For millions of economically disadvantaged children and adolescents, one of the most profound challenges in their living environment is the unreliability of their families’ stability and support. The seminar discussions confirmed that this issue of family instability transcends regional and national boundaries.In India, family structures are changing as more and more impoverished individuals are leaving rural areas and migrating to cities. These demographic changes are impacting the fabric of the nuclear family and are exacting a particularly heavy toll on children in urban areas. For example, the infant mortality rate is much higher in the urban areas of India than in the rural parts of the country. This is particularly alarming given the fact that Indian cities are typically better equipped with health facilities than the villages. Dr. Nayar attributed this paradox mainly to the breakdown of the family support system in urban poverty. Often, rural children are migrating to the cities on their own, and when in need of public assistance, they do not have adults to call upon who could negotiate on their behalf with the authorities in an unfamiliar urban environment.
While similar in scope, the situation in Brazil includes a distinct gender dimension. Increasingly, for families living in poverty in Brazil, the role and value of women as caregivers and family heads in the Brazilian society is changing. Dr. Rizzini reminded the seminar participants that the implications of these changes on gender socialization, resilience and life trajectories of children should be explored fully in order to inform public policy and the social development agenda.
Another major correlate of the fragile family environment in both countries is the issue of children’s safety. In the megacities of the world, whether São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Mumbai or Calcutta, children are regularly confronted with danger in the streets. This is particularly true in the Brazilian context, where violence against children is rampant and has been highlighted in the international media. As the business of survival prevents adults from being available for the protection of their children, and as children migrate alone to cities, violence and abuse proliferate among police, gang members and other youth in drug-affected neighborhoods.
The child participant in the seminar described these issues from his own experience of living and working on the streets of the Indian capital.2 He spoke about the brutality of the police, and the physical abuse and violence against children at the hands of adults involved in law enforcement and organized crime. Children are often seriously injured in these disputes.
During discussions at the seminar, it became clear that police brutality towards impoverished children and adolescents caught in the crossfire of drugs and crime is a common urban experience in India and Brazil, and juvenile justice systems in both countries are inadequate to deal with the problem. However, the scope and degree of violence against street youth remains much higher in the Brazilian context.
Lack of Basic Services
As in most parts of the developing world, those living in the impoverished urban communities of India and Brazil face a chronic lack of basic services, such as education, health services, clean water, and sanitation services. In India, while free municipal schools do exist, the mismatch between supply and demand is a chronic problem. In some rural areas that lack adequate transport and road systems, students often cannot access the schools, so the schools function under capacity. The reverse is the case in urban areas, where overcrowding of classrooms and undersupply of qualified teachers, textbooks, and learning materials are rampant. With health care, the issue is similar: the services do not reach the majority of children, and government-funded protective services are essentially not equipped to respond to the needs of children and poor people living in slums.A critical component often overlooked by policymakers in the context of service delivery for children, is recreation. Being able to play is integral to the notion of childhood. The right of the child to play is also enshrined in the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC), Article 31. Seminar participants testified that poor urban children in India do not even have places to play where they can enjoy leisure, engage in age-appropriate recreational activities, or just be children.
The higher level of national income in Brazil generally affords a higher level of public services compared to India, but Brazilian children growing up in poverty experience a relative level of deprivation and social exclusion comparable to that of their peers in India. While public primary education is also free in Brazil, the quality of public education in both countries compares poorly with the private school systems where middle class and wealthy families send their children. This embedded inequality in the social system leads to gang violence in impoverished communities which carries over into the schools, and remains a key challenge in the public education system catering to students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Gaps in the social welfare system for children are compounded by poverty and their families’ lack of sustainable income.
These observations from the Indian and Brazilian contexts reinforce a key concept with important policy implications for child well-being: family capacity and social services must strategically complement each other. Without adequate social support systems, families cannot provide the level of protection that their children need; for children without stable families, gaining protection and exercising their rights is difficult, even if services are available. This also means that for children without a stable family environment, such as children on the street or working children living away from family and home, absence of basic social services becomes doubly damaging.
The Diversity in Contexts of Marginalized Children’s Environments
The panelists reminded the seminar participants of the importance of moving away from a generic, homogeneous notion of appropriate family and social environments to the reality for people in poverty, marked by complexity and relative power differentials. Both India and Brazil are characterized by large territories and dense populations; India alone is the second most populous country in the world with one billion inhabitants. When studying either country, one must consider the tremendous diversity of economic and class structures (including a religious caste system in India), as well as significant regional differences in economic development and livelihood opportunities. Given these circumstances, clinging to the notion of an “average” poor family limits researchers’ capacity to study the environments of children and adolescents.The Political Economy of Children’s Marginalization
The comparative perspective on marginalized children in India and Brazil also demonstrates that a country’s economic growth alone is not a guarantee of children’s well-being. During the panel discussion, Dr. Rizzini drew attention to a stark reality: despite the fact that Brazil is almost ten times wealthier than India (as measured in per capita Gross Domestic Product), disadvantaged children there suffer as much as their peers in India. This illustrates the limitations of the economic “trickle-down” theory. It also affirms that deliberate and focused public policy, informed by research and guided by civil society, is required, along with economic development, to fulfill and protect the rights of every child as they are declared in the CRC.The comparable level of marginalization in India and Brazil, in spite of significantly different levels of national wealth, also reflects the phenomenon of social inequalities. Dr. Rizzini noted that the increasing gap between social strata continues to create a situation of despair even in wealthier countries where many children growing up in poverty will not “make it.”
Dr. Nayar pointed out that in the big cities of India that have populations of more than one million, as many as 60 percent of the inhabitants live in poverty. Deep, historically rooted social inequalities are also characteristic of the Brazilian society. Of the 70 million children in Brazil, 30 to 40 million live in poor areas. The Brazilian constitution has one of the most progressive laws regarding children: its Statute of Children and Adolescents declares that children are an “absolute priority” of Brazilian society. In spite of the powerful constitutional foundation, however, children growing up in poverty in Brazil lack the opportunity to fulfill their basic rights, including the right to be alive and to fully develop their capacities and personal potential. Dr. Rizzini, though, noted that with the new labor government of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in power, Brazil stands at an historic crossroads, with the opportunity to create a society based on equity and human rights.
The Distance between Policy and Practice
In outlining the socio-political context in which Childline India operates, Dr. John Menacheri reiterated an issue raised by many participants: the distance between policy and practice, and the gap between legislation and real-life circumstances. Dr. Menacheri drew attention to the government’s traditional approach of isolated interventions, such as modification of elements of the Juvenile Justice Act. Dr. Menacheri argued that such one-off efforts do not address the fundamental need for crafting comprehensive legislation for children and adolescents in India. The lack of responsiveness on behalf of the legislators to the urgent needs of children was attributed by the speaker to the fact that children do not vote. The same disconnect between declared policy and practice is also the case in Brazil. Dr. Rizzini noted that while the language of human rights is worded strongly in Brazilian policy documents, most of the mandates remain political rhetoric and are not reflected in implementation on the ground.Strategies for Action
Seminar participants brought to the event their diverse perspectives on strategies for fulfilling the rights of marginalized children in India and Brazil. While the summary below does not capture the richness of the discussions at the seminar, it still highlights some of the recurring themes that deserve the attention of the international development research and practice community.Framing of Children’s Issues and the Need for Children’s Participation
Dr. Rizzini laid out three guiding principles for framing the discourse about children growing up in marginalization and disadvantage:1. children have special needs;
2. children are young citizens;
3. parents, the state, and society at large are responsible for providing children with opportunities and resources so that each one can start “equally” and fulfill their potential throughout life.
In thinking about strategies to implement these guiding principles, Dr. Rizzini drew attention to the importance of children’s participation. Besides addressing the issues of inadequate basic services and pervasive violence, strategies for action must empower marginalized children with a feeling that they belong: to a family, to society, to the nation. Echoing the concerns that children are not part of the “vote bank,” and hence their voices are often neglected, Dr. Rizzini argued that increased presence and inclusion of children on a range of panels and decision-making bodies should be a key strategy in social activism. Such strategies should give children the opportunities to become their own advocates and overcome their alienation through active engagement for social change. This means that children must participate as young citizens in efforts that directly affect their present and future.
Strengthening the Existing Bases of Support for Children
While children born into poverty are deprived of a fair start to succeed in life, there are still important resources in their communities and environments that can play a crucial role in their survival and growth. This was the core idea behind the “Bases of Support” project in which Dr. Rizzini’s research team from CIESPI has been engaged for the past four years in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The research mapped the existing bases of support for children in impoverished communities. Dr. Rizzini identified some of the key findings of this research, some of which were remarkably similar to the environment of marginalized children in India, as described by Dr. Nayar. The CIESPI team’s research concluded the following:1. A number of formal services do exist in Rio’s favela communities, yet such services do not respond to the needs of the families. Indeed, the policymakers have never consulted with the families or the children to learn about their needs.
2. The public support structure reaches only a very small percentage of the target population– formal services have a low participation rate.
3. Informal support reaches many more children than does formal, government- or NGO-funded support. An example is an explicadora or explicator– a woman who lives in the community and is known for her practical knowledge in areas of child care and parenting needs. An explicadora, when approached by families and other community members, advises families informally on various aspects of their childcare needs, and hence remains a critical resource for the community. However, these women do not receive any support form the government.
4. Existing supports and resources, both formal and informal, do not collaborate or coordinate well with each other, even in small communities.
These findings point to the need for coordinated social strategies that build upon existing systems and resources.
The idea of building upon existing resources is also at the heart of Childline India’s modus operandi. The presentation by John Menacheri of Childline explained the organization’s service delivery model. Childline operates a 24-hour, seven-day-a- week toll-free number for children and concerned adults to call in for help and emergency assistance. The organization operates in 55 cities all over India. Every call by a child or a concerned adult is carefully addressed by trained Childline operators. In all cases, the callers are linked or referred to relevant services and resources to address their needs.
A key aspect of Childline’s work is that it does not duplicate existing services. Rather, it links the existing services in a network so that the diverse needs and vulnerabilities of marginalized children can be addressed in a comprehensive and efficient way. Thus, partnership with existing support systems, both formal and informal, government- and NGO-driven, is central to Childline’s operating strategy. Childline also remains cost-effective by training staff members of partnering NGOs to provide support for its operations. It also actively recruits and trains young people from the street and other exploitative circumstances, employing them in Childline’s partnership network operations.
In short, while there is a tremendous need to campaign for formal support and resources in the impoverished communities and for marginalized children, such campaigns should always consult with families and communities on the ground, connect the formal services, strengthen the existing informal support structures, and build upon these existing bases of support a stronger foundation for social development that reaches all children, particularly the most vulnerable ones.
Harnessing Children’s Intrinsic Assets
Children continue to demonstrate amazing resilience in the face of adversity. Dr. Nayar, from India, and a number of participants from Brazil noted that while children remain more vulnerable than adults to the harsh realities and traumas of poverty and social exclusion, they nevertheless display a remarkable capacity to challenge these obstacles with the kind of humor and hope of which only children are capable. Hence, harnessing the psycho-social assets of children should be integral to any intervention aimed at protecting and fulfilling the rights of marginalized children and adolescents.Importance of Listening to Children
Closely related to the issue of children’s participation is the need to listen to children’s voices in order to understand their lives and help develop policies that ensure their well-being. This message came across strongly in the presentation by CIESPI Guest Researcher Udi Butler. His research on children’s life trajectories demonstrated how social forces operate in the life of an individual child.The story of Sandra, a child who escaped family violence and abuse by her stepfather and became a street child at the age of nine, elaborated in rich detail some of Dr. Rizzini’s general observations regarding marginalized childhood in Brazil.
Sandra’s life trajectory is a testimony to the failure of the state to support and protect the rights of children and adolescents. It also tragically displays the lack of willingness on behalf of adults to listen to the plight and needs of a vulnerable child. Sandra used to dress up as a boy in order to avoid the added risk of being a girl on the street, where she struggled to survive. She continually encountered the police, by whom she was charged for petty crimes, including theft when she stole food to escape hunger. As she moved through various social work agencies and NGOs, Sandra always returned to the street where she found a sense of “freedom,” belonging and bonding with other children– something that was missing in the impersonal and mostly faith-based shelters for children where she sometimes stayed.
It was noted by a number of Brazilian participants that increasingly, NGOs working with children like Sandra are learning to listen to the voices of those they serve. They are working to empower children with critical awareness of their reality, following the model of Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy.
Ensuring Human Rights and Social Harmony in a Multisectoral Framework
Speakers repeatedly reiterated the need for multisectoral strategies to address the needs of vulnerable children holistically. It was emphasized time and again that the needs of children, especially vulnerable children, are interlinked and cannot be addressed if only approached through traditionally distinct sectoral line-ministries such as health, education, environment or the like. The problems of the “whole child” can only be addressed when various service sectors work together in a coordinated and cross-functional synergy. The speakers also emphasized, however, the need to devise context-specific strategies, based on context-specific parameters. In the Indian context, noted Dr. Nayar, the issue of deeply entrenched religious divisions must be taken into account. In Brazil, racial divisions and the associated stigma are major issues.Thus, while a human rights approach should focus on individual rights, a multisectoral policy framework for enhancing the living environment and opportunity structures of marginalized children should strengthen communal and societal harmony at large.
Rethinking the Role of Civil Society
Given the range of government and non-governmental organizations present at the seminar, the issue of civil society’s role in fulfilling children’s rights remained a central theme of the discussions. The discussions on civil society were particularly relevant given the fact that the seminar took place under the auspices of the World Social Forum, the largest annual gathering of global governmental agencies. While the participants raised a range of important issues, they all emphasized the critical need to rethink the role of civil society and NGOs in fulfilling children’s rights and making progress towards social justice.Reaching the Hardest to Reach
The human rights-based approach to development demands that those who are hardest to reach and are most vulnerable to violation of their human rights should be given special priority in outreach agendas. The examples of Childline and Pratham make this clear. Their experiences support a recurring argument that NGOs typically have more resources than government agencies, and hence have a unique obligation to effectively reach out to the most disadvantaged populations.Pratham, an Indian NGO founded ten years ago, has been providing innovative educational and developmental enrichment and psycho-social support to children growing up in the poorest shantytowns across India. In retracing the steps back to the origin of Pratham, Dr. Lambay underscored how powerful ideas and innovative approaches developed by NGOs like Pratham have enabled breakthroughs in the seemingly insurmountable obstacles of reaching the hardest to reach. Pratham’s approach embodies the idea of self-empowerment: empowering the community to support their own children, and providing not just educational but also emotional support. By reaching out to and protecting the rights of those who are most vulnerable, Pratham has employed a human rights-based approach in programming from its inception.
Being Catalysts for Change
In vast and populous countries such as India and Brazil, it is unrealistic to expect any single NGO to be able to take the place of government as the public service provider. Nor should this be desirable. India and Brazil are democratic countries and signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; in such countries, it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that the basic needs and fundamental human rights of citizens are fulfilled. Hence, many speakers observed that NGOs should be catalysts for change, and not principal service providers for the poor. It was argued that the primary responsibility for providing social services must lie with the government; NGOs can complement certain aspects of the public social support system in order to ensure that the most vulnerable children are reached and served.This was well demonstrated in the cases of the NGOs represented in the panel. For example, Pratham is acting as a catalyst for change in India through its innovative programs, its well-coordinated partnership with the government education services, its complementary education programs, and its ongoing efforts in research and evaluation. In emphasizing the importance of ongoing monitoring and evaluation, Pratham has also initiated a national dialogue on the importance of moving away from input indicators (such as school enrollment) to process and outcome indicators (such as retention and actual learning). It has put emphasis on skills that have multiplier potential, such as reading. Being able to read unlocks other avenues for children to pursue further education on their own. Pratham administers a highly effective 45-day reading module.
Along with goals and outcomes, Pratham has also made accountability an integral aspect of its program implementation. Building upon its own practices, Pratham has started advocating for an accountability indicator in the public school system that would use the number of school days a teacher has actually been present in the classroom as a measure.
Pratham’s innovative approaches are rooted in the conviction that there is an urgent need to provide viable models that can fulfill the promises of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and that children cannot wait and lose their life opportunities while policymakers debate optimal policy. Indeed, Pratham’s low cost (US$175 per child per year in a unit of 20 children) has proven to be effective in reaching large numbers of in- and out-of-school children in partnership with the government and has proven to be a catalyst for change.
Reconceptualizing the Relationship with Government
The role of NGOs as catalysts for change and complementary resources for existing public services requires a redefined framework of partnership and collaboration with the government. The speakers from India acknowledged and emphasized that such an approach would require a fundamental shift in the mindset of NGO practitioners, who have typically derived their purpose from protesting against existing state policies and social order. This implies that NGOs should be required to balance their roles both as a critic and as a partner of the government. That the role of NGOs should be one of cooperating with the government, complementing the government, and bridging the communities of disadvantage with the mainstream public services was the emergent consensus among the panelists from India. Indeed, the work of both Pratham and Childline India were illustrative of such a government-NGO partnership paradigm.Childline is a prominent example in this regard because of the organization’s national reach and strategic partnership with government in filling a service gap for vulnerable children. Indeed, the majority of Childline’s funding comes from government sources. Childline functions as a complementary service provider that works in partnership with the government to reach the most vulnerable children whom the existing infrastructure of government services cannot reach effectively.
Childline’s partnership with government also entails informing government officials about the true extent of the breadth and adequacy of social services and social support for children and youth growing up in economic disadvantage and social marginalization. The need for partnership with government was also a strategic choice for Childline. It has been Childline’s experience that identifying one concerned government official, one “champion” within the bureaucracy, can sometimes be the most powerful mechanism in bringing about institutional and policy change.
Working in partnership with the government is also a cornerstone of Pratham’s approach. The Pratham partnership model envisioned that instead of replicating what the government was already providing through its primary schools, Pratham would supplement and enrich those offerings with child-friendly learning and developmental activities. In this sense, Pratham complements the government efforts and does not aim to substitute them.
The Brazilian perspective in this regard was somewhat different at the seminar. While government was acknowledged as the primary entity responsible to uphold the human rights of all its citizens, particularly the more vulnerable young ones, the role of NGOs was seen more as one of mobilization for social change. The NGOs would still provide vital services to marginalized children and adolescents; however, the entire issue would be framed in the context of transforming existing public policies with NGOs acting as the advocates and lifelines for strengthening the voices of the poor. In her comments, Lucia Nader (Conectas São Paulo) emphasized that it is critical for NGOs to work in cooperation with the government while simultaneously maintaining distance and independence.
Seminar participants observed that perhaps the perspective of NGOs as institutions of social mobilization was rooted in the history of civil society activism during the period of dictatorship in Brazil. Brazil has historically been a country of deep-rooted social inequalities that struggled for social justice throughout the era of dictatorship to finally usher in a democratic state. Through tireless struggle, networks of civil organizations were able to influence policy and affect fundamental change in society. Arguably, such a political legacy could be responsible for the institutional dynamics of government-civil society relationship in Brazil.
Using Advocacy and Research for Social Change
Participants in “Children and Adolescents growing up in Poverty and Marginalization: Comparative Perspectives from India and Brazil” pointed out throughout the seminar that a core function of NGOs should be to work on being heard in all avenues of power and public policy. The advocacy goal should be to make sure that government policies enacted are pro-children, that equal opportunity is given to all children and that rights are applicable and upheld for all children and not just a select few.These approaches are increasingly important given the broad decentralization of authority that has been taking place both in India and Brazil (indeed throughout the developing world). In particular, primary education oversight remains largely a local responsibility, in the form of municipal-level committees in Brazil and village education committees in rural India. Hence, it is imperative that civil society organizations try to become part of these structures in order to influence public policy and affect change.
Typically, in work with civil society agencies, NGOs are either service providers or focused on policy analysis and advocacy. The model of combined service delivery and policy advocacy is quite often encountered in Brazil, but is not a common practice among those working in development. However, as the panel presentations indicated, both of the Indian NGOs, Childline and Pratham, are combining some aspects of advocacy with their core operations in service delivery.
A critical awareness of the larger political economy of education and social welfare for the impoverished children of India motivates Childline to combine extensive service delivery for vulnerable children in immediate need of support with sustained advocacy and lobbying efforts with the government for long-term legislative change. Keeping the government properly informed through on-going campaigning and advocacy is also a priority for Childline, since most of its funding comes from the government. Pratham has also been an important player in promoting policy advocacy. For example, one of its important initiatives has been to advocate for a policy of having social workers become part of the educational system reaching the poor population, and legislating that all government schools should have a social worker in-house.
Addressing the participants of the seminar who represented the academic world, Dr. Rizzini emphasized a critical disconnect in the development discourse: the gap between research and policy. While not every NGO could be expected to have adequate research capacity, the need for service delivery NGOs to collaborate with research institutions for developing empirical evidence is significant. Dr. Rizzini emphasized that research should not only be translated and linked to policy, but it should also be used as a tool for social change.
Pratham has also used field-based research to inform policies and dispel the myths that often influence middle-class notions about poverty and poor people. Some of the myths that Pratham has helped destroy are that poor people do not value their children’s education, or that children choose work over school only because they are poor. In fact, Pratham has demonstrated through its research that it is the inadequate quality and insignificant utility of the public education system that affects the decision of many poor families and children to stay away from school and choose other, more productive alternatives such as work. A similar endeavor was also undertaken by Childline.
Besides connecting callers to appropriate services and available resources, Childline uses the saved-call data to identify potential gaps in the service delivery and social protection for disadvantaged children. An extensive database of calls received and follow-up steps made enables Childline to analyze and identify trends of child vulnerability and the critical environmental parameters of marginalized childhood and adolescence in India. Such research and analysis efforts allow Childline to build public awareness of the critical gaps that deserve public policy attention.
Big Picture and Next Steps
One of the distinctive features of the seminar was that it brought together a group of people working on children’s rights from a diverse set of institutions: academic and research, service delivery and advocacy. Further, these organizations varied widely in the scope and scale of their relationship with the government.The comparative perspectives on India and Brazil were also highly symbolic given the venue of the seminar. The World Social Forum started in Brazil, and this year was the first time the forum was being held outside of Brazil. Incidentally, at the same time as this seminar was taking place at the World Social Forum in India, Brazilian President Lula was visiting India. The Brazilian Minister of Culture, renowned musician Gilberto Gil, was the key artist at the closing ceremony of the Forum.
The seminar was significant for a number of other reasons, as well:
1. By bringing Indian and Brazilian scholars and practitioners from the field into a direct dialogue, it set an important example of South-South cooperation in international social development.
2. The seminar created a unique learning community by bringing together a diverse mix of scholars, researchers, practitioners, and activists, including adolescent activists, both on the panel and in the audience.
3. The seminar was truly a collaborative effort among all the organizations represented in the panel. A direct outcome of the pre-forum preparatory work was creation of a larger network of organizations working in the area of children’s rights, Children’s Rights at the World Social Forum, of which CIESPI and Childline India are both members.
4. The seminar’s broad thematic scope of “childhood and adolescence in poverty and marginalization” allowed for a range of issues from education, to health, to income opportunities to be discussed with the “whole child” in mind. This holistic approach helped avoid narrow categorization of children with labels of vulnerability.
5. The comparative focus on India and Brazil provided contextual specificity to the discussions, thereby balancing the thematic breadth.
World Social Forum is not just an annual conference– it is a movement, a discourse, a vision of “another world” that is built upon the paradigm of human rights and human dignity. The CWI-CIESPI-TISS seminar framed the issues of marginalized childhood and deprivation through the Human Rights paradigm, affirming human rights as the tool for social transformation. In this sense, besides being an important learning and professional opportunity for its participants, the seminar was an expression and embodiment of the vision of World Social Forum itself.
In spite of the increasing appreciation of the value of such South-South dialogue, very often the only mechanism for such exchange available to the NGOs of the South is a synthesis of global “best practices” mediated by a multilateral organization or an NGO of the North. While scholars in international educational development have a rich tradition of collaborative work, rarely does a front-line NGO from the South get the opportunity to share its experiences, knowledge and challenges directly with its counterparts in comparable socio-economic contexts in other countries. By directly engaging researchers and practitioners from two leading countries of the South, Brazil and India, on issues of children’s rights, the seminar created a unique opportunity for learning and within the political space of World Social Forum.
Going one step further, the idea of enriching South-South dialogue with participation of marginalized children and adolescents was proposed by this author at the conclusion of the seminar. Often, the scope of child participation and exchange at the international level, orchestrated by multilateral organizations for their special gatherings, is non-representative at best and tokenism at worst. Very often at the venues of the North, it is the sons and daughters of the elites and diplomats who are called upon to “represent” the poor children’s voice of their countries. This is truly an opportunity lost, since young people have a unique way of seeing, listening, and communicating that could be tremendously enriched through a direct dialogue between marginalized children and adolescents themselves.
By inviting marginalized children to take part in important policy discussions, organizers can help capture children’s aspirations and creative ideas for formulating strategies to address their social exclusion. Such a forum, jointly facilitated by adults and children, could empower children by enabling them to relate to diverse contexts of human rights violation, and bring a new sense of purpose and hope in their everyday lives.
Acknowledgement:
The author is grateful to Dr. Irene Rizzini (Childwatch and CIESPI, Brazil), Dr. Usha Nayar (Childwatch and TISS, India), Dr. Fareeda Lambay (Pratham, India), and Ms. Inu Stephens (Childline India) for valuable discussions. All the views reflected in this paper are those of the author, and the author alone is responsible for all the shortcomings.Endnotes
a) CIESPI in Brazil and TISS in India, both with significant experience in applied research and international collaborative work with service-providing NGOs
b) Pratham, a leading Indian NGO whose educational model for disadvantaged urban children has been adopted by the government of India for providing universal primary education in income-poor communities
c) Childline India Foundation, a unique NGO of national scope whose model of combined counseling, intervention, and advocacy is being adopted in other countries. Childline enables children in need of help to call a toll-free number, whereupon Childline staff connects the children to appropriate support networks.
d) Conectas Human Rights, an International Human Rights NGO based in São Paulo, Brazil, with a strong focus on the Human Rights of children in conflict with law.
The panelists were:
1. Irene Rizzini, Director, CIESPI Brazil, and President of Childwatch
2. Usha Nayar, Deputy Director, TISS India, and Vice-President of Childwatch
3. Udi Butler, Researcher, CIESPI Brazil, and Goldsmith College, University of London, UK
4. John Menacheri, Deputy Director, Childline India Foundation
5. Fareeda Lambay, Principal, Bombay School of Social Work, and Founding Director, Pratham
6. Lucia Nader, Coordinator of Human Rights Dialogue Network, Conectas Human Rights in São Paulo, Brazil
2. Issue numbers 1 and 2 of Volume 13 of Children, Youth and Environments each contain various articles, field reports, and book reviews concerning street children.
Tamo Chattopadhay is engaged in applied policy research and program evaluation in international education. He consults internationally with multilateral organizations and community based NGOs. His research focus is on comparative education policy towards economically disadvantaged children and adolescents. Currently a Doctoral Candidate at Columbia University’s Teachers College, Mr. Chattopadhay is researching supplementary education programs for marginalized adolescents in Brazil and United States. Originally from India, Mr. Chattopadhay studied Physics in Russia, and received an MBA in Finance in New York. Prior to international education, he was a Vice President at J. P. Morgan, a global investment bank in New York.