BASELINE STUDY

find other alternatives for their livelihoods” (Özbek, 2007:40). Seasonal agricultural labourers
migrate, sometimes alone and sometimes as a whole household, to find work. The
duration of the migration generally lasts between the months of February and November,
varying with the crops produced and the type of production. These persons work in the
fields during the period of migration, living in tents which in some cases do not have
electricity or clean water and sewerage, and which are far from being hygienic or healthy
(Özbek, 2007:41). Children migrating with their families also live in these conditions and
are obliged to work (Gülçubuk et al., 2003, p.100). In general, these children are away
from their schools for anything from 3 to 7 months each year. This situation obstructs their
access to education, so that they lose their chance of upward social mobility (Gülçubuk et
al., 2003, p.100). The future lives of these children, struggling in the cycle of poverty, will
not be very different from those of their parents (Yıldırak et al, 2002).
If children working or growing up within the context of seasonal migration are to break out
of the cycle of poverty, education is an important tool. However, the social and economic
situations of these children show variations depending on geography and the crop in question.
For example, according to the detailed assessment of findings of this research, while
children working in the hazelnut harvest in Ordu and in the cotton harvest in Şanlıurfa face
a number of similar issues, they also encounter differing problems. Differences can also be
observed in the ability of children to develop strategies against poverty and deprivation, reflecting
individual differences among the children themselves. For example, different cultural
and social values come to light over and above the child’s gender or ethnicity and the conditions
of poverty and school non-attendance caused by the cycle of seasonal migration. The
economic or social capital of the family also plays an important role in the child’s chances of
continuing to attend school. All such differences contribute to the factors which determine
whether a child works outside the home or undertakes domestic chores, and whether s/
he continues his/her education or not. The development of social policies that attempt to
direct the children of seasonal agricultural migration into education must taks these various
geographical, social and economic differences into account. The situation of these children
must be understood correctly if they are to be given back their childhoods and their right to
education. Only in this way will we be able to create appropriate social policies.
The Ministry of Labour and Social Security has defined child labour in the scope of seasonal
agricultural migration as one of the “worst forms of child labour” (2008, 28). This decision
reflects both the violation of the right to education and the unprotected conditions which
children experience in the process of migration. Article 3 of the ILO Convention No. 182
defines this form of child labour, and on the basis of clause d. of this article, Turkey has
identified new typologies for the worst forms of child labour which take national conditions
and characteristics into account. Although the issue is of such great importance, the situation
of children in seasonal agricultural migration has not sufficiently captured the attention
of policy-makers. Academic studies on the topic are also limited. Yet the investigation of
seasonal agricultural migration is important not only to understand and to reduce child
poverty, but also to understand the social exclusion and discrimination which adults face
due to their gender or ethnicity.
12