IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jopoec/v37y2024i4d10.1007_s00148-024-01054-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the prevalence of child labour in the cocoa industry via indirect elicitation methods: a mixed-methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Aurelia Lepine

    (University College London)

  • Yah Ariane Bernadette N’Djore

    (Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny)

  • Carole Treibich

    (Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, INRAE, Grenoble INP, GAEL)

  • Henry Cust

    (University College London)

  • Laurent Foubert

    (International Cocoa Initiative)

  • Megan Passey

    (International Cocoa Initiative)

  • Selina Binder

    (Barry Callebaut)

Abstract

Data from children suggest that the prevalence of child labour in the cocoa industry in Côte d’Ivoire is a worrying 38%. However, while surveying children has the potential to reduce sensitivity biases such as social desirability bias, it presents significant ethical dilemmas and may also be associated with other reporting biases, making accurate estimates of child labour difficult. To address this, we collected data from 1741 cocoa producers to assess whether parents could provide more accurate estimates using indirect survey methods. We compared direct questioning with a list experiment and a novel non-verbal method (‘colorbox’). We found higher prevalence rates of child labour using indirect elicitation methods, but lower than those obtained from children’s surveys. Qualitative in-depth interviews revealed motivations for underreporting, including fear of legal consequences and mistrust of stakeholders. Indirect methods alone are not sufficient to correct for underreporting when child labour is collected from parents. Future research should prioritise direct data collection from children and address ethical concerns to obtain more accurate estimates of child labour.

Suggested Citation

  • Aurelia Lepine & Yah Ariane Bernadette N’Djore & Carole Treibich & Henry Cust & Laurent Foubert & Megan Passey & Selina Binder, 2024. "Estimating the prevalence of child labour in the cocoa industry via indirect elicitation methods: a mixed-methods study," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(4), pages 1-29, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jopoec:v:37:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s00148-024-01054-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s00148-024-01054-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00148-024-01054-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00148-024-01054-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Dillon, 2010. "Measuring child labor: comparisons between hours data and subjective measures," Research in Labor Economics, in: Child Labor and the Transition between School and Work, pages 135-159, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    2. McKenzie D. & Siegel M., 2013. "Eliciting illegal migration rates through list randomization," MERIT Working Papers 2013-023, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. M. Niaz Asadullah & Elisabetta De Cao & Fathema Zhura Khatoon & Zahra Siddique, 2021. "Measuring gender attitudes using list experiments," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 367-400, April.
    4. Ezequiel Gonzalez‐Ocantos & Chad Kiewiet de Jonge & Carlos Meléndez & Javier Osorio & David W. Nickerson, 2012. "Vote Buying and Social Desirability Bias: Experimental Evidence from Nicaragua," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 202-217, January.
    5. L. Guarcello & I. Kovrova & S. Lyon & M. Manacorda & F. C. Rosati, 2010. "Towards consistency in child labour measurement: Assessing the comparability of estimates generated by different survey instruments," UCW Working Paper 54, Understanding Children's Work (UCW Programme).
    6. Jorge M. Agüero & Veronica Frisancho, 2022. "Measuring Violence against Women with Experimental Methods," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(4), pages 1565-1590.
    7. Karlan, Dean S. & Zinman, Jonathan, 2012. "List randomization for sensitive behavior: An application for measuring use of loan proceeds," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 71-75.
    8. repec:eme:rlec11:s0147-9121(2010)0000031008 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Chuang, Erica & Dupas, Pascaline & Huillery, Elise & Seban, Juliette, 2021. "Sex, lies, and measurement: Consistency tests for indirect response survey methods," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    10. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, June.
    11. Imai, Kosuke, 2011. "Multivariate Regression Analysis for the Item Count Technique," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(494), pages 407-416.
    12. Carolina Castilla & David M. A. Murphy, 2023. "Bidirectional intimate partner violence: Evidence from a list experiment in Kenya," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 175-193, January.
    13. Lépine, Aurélia & Treibich, Carole & D’Exelle, Ben, 2020. "Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henry Cust & Aurélia Lépine & Carole Treibich & Timothy Powell‐Jackson & Rosalba Radice & Cheikh Tidiane Ndour, 2024. "Trading HIV for sheep: Risky sexual behavior and the response of female sex workers to Tabaski in Senegal," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 153-193, January.
    2. Lépine, Aurélia & Treibich, Carole & D’Exelle, Ben, 2020. "Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    3. Olivia Bertelli & Thomas Calvo & Massa Coulibaly & Moussa Coulibaly & Emmanuelle Lavallée & Marion Mercier & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps & O. Z. Traoré, 2023. "Collecter des données sur des expériences et attitudes sensibles : le cas du Mali," Post-Print hal-04442342, HAL.
    4. Marine JOUVIN, 2021. "Addressing social desirability bias in child labor measurement : an application to cocoa farms in Côte d’Ivoire," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2021-08, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    5. Carole Treibich & Aurélia Lépine, 2019. "Estimating misreporting in condom use and its determinants among sex workers: Evidence from the list randomisation method," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 144-160, January.
    6. Bertelli, Olivia & Calvo, Thomas & Lavallée, Emmanuelle & Mercier, Marion & Mesplé-Somps, Sandrine, 2024. "What one thinks, what one says and what one does: male justifications and practices of gender-based violence in Mali," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2406, CEPREMAP.
    7. Olivia Bertelli & Thomas Calvo & Emmanuelle Lavallée & Marion Mercier & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps, 2023. "Measuring insecurity-related experiences and preferences in a fragile State. A list experiment in Mali," Working Papers DT/2023/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    8. De Cao, Elisabetta & Lutz, Clemens, 2014. "Sensitive survey questions," Research Report 14017-EEF, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    9. Assefa, Thomas W. & Kadam, Aditi & Magnan, Nicholas & McCullough, Ellen & McGavock, Tamara, 2022. "Who is asking and how? The effects of enumerator gender and survey method in measuring intimate partner violence," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322543, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. repec:dgr:rugsom:14017-eef is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Carolina Castilla & David M. A. Murphy, 2023. "Bidirectional intimate partner violence: Evidence from a list experiment in Kenya," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 175-193, January.
    12. Olivia Bertelli & Thomas Calvo & Massa Coulibaly & Moussa Coulibaly & Emmanuelle Lavallée & Marion Mercier & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps & Ousmane Z Traoré, 2023. "Collecting data on sensitive experiences and attitudes: a Malian case study [Collecter des données sur des expériences et attitudes sensibles : le cas du Mali]," Post-Print hal-04366322, HAL.
    13. Gutierrez, Emilio & Rubli, Adrian, 2024. "LGBT+ persons and homophobia prevalence across job sectors: Survey evidence from Mexico," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    14. Claire Cullen, 2023. "Method Matters: The Underreporting of Intimate Partner Violence," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 37(1), pages 49-73.
    15. Elisabetta de Cao & Clemens Lutz, 2015. "Measuring attitudes regarding female genital mutilation through a list experiment," CSAE Working Paper Series 2015-20, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    16. Billur Aksoy & Christopher S. Carpenter & Dario Sansone, 2022. "Understanding Labor Market Discrimination Against Transgender People: Evidence from a Double List Experiment and a Survey," NBER Working Papers 30483, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Lucia Corno & Áureo de Paula, 2019. "Risky Sexual Behaviours: Biological Markers and Self‐reported Data," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 86(342), pages 229-261, April.
    18. Jorge M. Agüero & Veronica Frisancho, 2022. "Measuring Violence against Women with Experimental Methods," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(4), pages 1565-1590.
    19. Rebecca Walcott & Isabelle Cohen & Denise Ferris, 2024. "When Who Matters: Interviewer Effects and Survey Modality," Evaluation Review, , vol. 48(6), pages 1024-1049, December.
    20. Dammert, Ana C. & Galdo, Jose, 2013. "Child Labor Variation by Type of Respondent: Evidence from a Large-Scale Study," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 207-220.
    21. Jiayuan Li & Wim Van den Noortgate, 2022. "A Meta-analysis of the Relative Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique Compared to Direct Questioning," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 760-799, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Child labour; Sensitive bias; Measurement error; Cocoa; Sustainable development goals;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J80 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - General
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • O15 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Economic Development: Human Resources; Human Development; Income Distribution; Migration
    • I25 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Economic Development

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jopoec:v:37:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s00148-024-01054-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.