Abstract
Despite a plethora of research on the lives of street children globally, little is known about how they find employment in competitive, informal economies in developing countries. To understand how children connect to informal jobs through street relationships, 75 street children ranging from 10 to 17 years old were interviewed in three sites in Dhaka city, Bangladesh. Findings show that social networks play a crucial role in finding work. Network ties help children find new jobs, as network members provide job information, recommend friends or acquaintances to employers, and persuade the employers to hire them. Friends often voluntarily train those who are self-employed in the informal service sectors or those who intend to switch to a new job.
About a million street children, who survive on the margins of urban society in Bangladesh, encounter unique challenges to get by on a daily basis. Some of these challenges are immediate, including uncertainties over food, shelter, and healthcare. In addition, some challenges are about their futures, including uncertainties over transitioning off the streets. One way street children in Bangladesh, who are as young as age 6 years, encounter economic uncertainties is finding informal economic niches where they can make a living. Many street children manage their livelihoods either by being employed by informal employers or being self-employed in hazardous, menial jobs (Islam, 2015). A job, regardless of how exploitative and hazardous it could be, is critical to the youth because it is a vital tool against insurmountable odds. Despite the importance of work, how street children find employment in the informal economy is often overlooked within the street children literature.
The Bangladesh informal economy where most street children find work is very competitive. The informal economy is so widespread in Bangladesh that it accommodates over 89% of the employed labor force, accounting for 37.2 million jobs (Asian Development Bank, 2012). A jobseeker seeking employment in certain manual jobs (i.e. rickshaw pulling, porter, vendor) requires either trusting relationships with employers or social connections that will neutralize opposition from existing laborers (Pryer, 2003). The implications are that street children not only compete against adults for a job but also need ties to connect with employers. Street children might build relationships with employers through sharing the space or being connected with others who are already connected to the employers.
In the United States, researchers have investigated the survival strategies of homeless youth, the barriers they face when seeking formal employment, and the adverse consequences of working in the informal economy (Ferguson et al., 2012). A similar effort is evident in developing countries where researchers have studied street children and their livelihood practices and the predicaments they face while trying to make a living on the street (Amoo et al., 2013; Van Blerk, 2008). The role that social networks play in livelihood practices among homeless youth has gained recent attention in the United States (Gwadz et al., 2009). However, a few studies have looked at the role that social networks play in the informal employment of street children in non-US contexts (Stephenson, 2001). These studies only tangentially mention network support in employment. This leaves an important knowledge gap. Understanding how youth find job information, connect to employers, and manage jobs are important issues that may reveal insights into their survival skills, resiliency, and potential intervention for transitions off the streets.
This article seeks to shed light on how street children navigate the informal labor market and manage jobs through social networks. The term employment or job has been used in this article in a non-western and non-traditional manner to explain a range of informal economic activities that result in economic gains (Portes et al., 1989). Exploring street children’s employment fills some of the knowledge gaps on their survival strategies and thus the article seeks to address the following questions: Do social networks help street children find informal jobs? How do social networks help children connect and manage those jobs? These two questions will be addressed by laying out a theoretical framework on social networks and providing empirical evidences derived from interviews with street children.
Theoretical framework
This study was informed by the literature on social networks. An ego-centered network is structured around an individual, with a wide range of connections to that individual, and across individuals, making up the network itself (Lin, 2001). In fact, the individual has connections to all those who are directly part of the social circle as well as those “others” with whom each person in the network is connected (Katz et al., 2004; Lin, 2001). A body of literature from developing countries provides evidence that social group formation is a common practice among street children. These groups might comprise adolescents, older youths, or a combination of both (Aptekar, 1988; Rizzini and Butler, 2003). In case of Bangladesh, relatively open, democratic, and informal friendship groups among street children were reported. These groups comprise 5–10 children and operate on trust, care, and reciprocity (Conticini, 2005). However, their social networks might not be limited only among friends but distant peers, employers, and service providers. So far, we know little about the nature of street networks in Bangladesh.
Social relationships among street children could be developed to gain resources, to meet basic needs as well as to avert everyday adversities (e.g. protecting each other from theft, outside groups). Relationships among peer groups might also support the socialization and companionship needs of children of the street (Mizen and Ofosu-Kusi, 2013). These friendship ties with peers might be characterized as horizontal relationships among equals, in contrast to social relationships between street children and adults, especially those who hold power and authority such as employer, adults, and member of the law-enforcing agencies, which take on a more vertical nature and develop through submission to their authority. In fact, research shows that street youth often do submit themselves to powerful adult authorities and as an outcome a symbiotic relationship can develop between the youth and those adults that help youth gain some instrumental and expressive returns (Apteker and Stoecklin, 2014; Beazley, 2003; Bourdillon, 1994). However, street youth can also find themselves entrapped in relationships with adults, who may use their powerful positions to serve their own interests (Apteker and Stoecklin, 2014; Beazley, 2003).
The different dynamics of relationships can be conceptualized using a common network language. For example, the concept of “social ties” indicates not only a simple connection but also a “combination of the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy (mutual confiding), and the reciprocal services which characterize the tie” (Granovetter, 1973: 1363). This notion of social ties allows for the further distinction between strong and weak ties. The term “strong ties” refers to mutually felt intimate relationships for which individuals like to stay close to each other, interact a lot, and support each other in need (Wellman and Wortley, 1990). A relationship built on a strong tie is likely to develop over an extended period of time with numerous interactions in multiple contexts (Wellman and Wortley, 1990). In the case of street children, a strong tie could develop among the youth who live close to each other and have meaningful interactions through work, play, and socialization. Strong ties–based networks often converge into a close-knit network in which most members stay in close contact and mutually support one another (Stack, 1997). In the lives of street children, strong ties may be important for getting support quickly, preserving scarce resources, and receiving basic survival and emotional needs. Thus, it is plausible that dense networks of strong ties play a critical role in street survival.
Street children might also develop casual relationships with people with their social surroundings. These casual relationships might be described as “weak ties.” The term “weak tie” refers to a type of relationship between two individuals who are less intimate and more tentatively connected to each other, thus lacking the mutuality, reciprocity, and material and emotional exchanges common in strong ties (Granovetter, 1973; Wellman and Wortley, 1990). In contrast to strong ties, research suggests that weak ties can help individuals garner support and resources that are novel and that support further socio-economic gain (Henly et al., 2005). Weak ties are important when these individuals, especially those who are not in the intimate circle, pass on information and play other vital roles in a network (Burt, 1992). Street children might have weak ties in their networks, such as those characterized by their relationships with employers, older youth, or service providers.
Lin (2001) outlined few mechanisms through which individual networks with varied ties could exploit the resources embedded in social networks. First, network members exchange information that might be useful in opening new opportunities for them which might not be available otherwise. If a network comprises dissimilar actors (e.g. weak ties), the flow of information is likely to be more versatile and widespread (Granovetter, 1973). Second, network ties might also influence individuals (e.g. employers) to make positive decisions involving a member. Often this occurs when intermediaries confirm the “social credentials” of the individuals who are not directly related to the decision-maker (Lin, 2001). For street children, this might be receiving job information from a network member through friends’ networks as well as to influence an employer for a friend to hire him. In the informal sector in Bangladesh, job information is passed through the grapevine, and hiring often requires confirmation of the applicant’s social credentials by someone connected to the employer (Pryer, 2003). Finally, network members reinforce group member’s identity and position in the networks. An assurance of one’s worthiness as a group member ascertains the member’s belonging to the group and thus ensures access to certain resources (e.g. emotional) (Lin, 2001). This bears special implication for street children because it affirms their status within the larger community of street children and street society and allows them to share resources (albeit scare resources) of these groups. For instance, an informal, small, roadside vendor is likely to recruit street children instead of an adult employee not only because they are easy to manage but also because of their shared identity as street dwellers.
Previous research confirms that social relationships play important role in employment. Aptekar (1988) argued that economic necessity fostered group formation among street children in Bolivia that ultimately augmented their chances of better income. Beazley (2003) described a symbiotic relationship between newcomer and older children in Indonesia where older youth initiate younger ones into street career. Studies from India (Kombarakaran, 2004), Ethiopia (Eriksen and Mulugeta, 2015), Ghana (Orme and Seipel, 2007), Bangladesh (Conticini, 2005), and South Afirca (Malindi and Theron, 2010) also mentioned children’s use of social relationships in employment. However, many of these studies treated the role of social relationships in employment in a cursory manner often without explaining the support process. Application of social network approach, especially social ties, is likely to unveil the process, especially how the network properties help children navigate through informal urban labor market.
Methods
The data for this article were derived from a larger study that explored street children’s social networks and use of networks to garner survival resources (Reza, 2014). Since the topic of social networks of street children is relatively unstudied in Bangladesh and likely to be complex, a qualitative approach was pursued (Rubin and Babbie, 2014)
Study population
The definition of street children varies considerably among researchers, policy organizations, and service providers. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) promoted two dominant typologies of street youth: (a) “children on the street” who use street as source of economic activities and return to their family home and (b) “children of the street” who use the street as the main source of economic activities so as to facilitate independent living without any, or very minimal, ties with their family (Apteker and Stoecklin, 2014). This definition has been critiqued for stigmatizing children and ignoring their resilience and abilities to deflect numerous odds. In this article, street children were defined as resilient social actors who are between 10 and 18 years old and manage a livelihood by working on the streets, during the day or night. These youth might or might not have relationships with their family but they do not return to their families at night, at least not during the period of this investigation.
Research sites
Research sites are located in the city of Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. Dhaka, being the most populated city, commercial heart, and a major hub for informal economic activities that attract a lot of street children. The researcher initially scouted six locations and selected three sites due to their strategic position for street children (e.g. a site to access informal jobs, availability of the largest number of street children in the city). These locations were the central railway station in Kamalapur, a river port in Sadarghat, and a market place in Karwan Bazar.
Access to research sites
Due to the public nature of the sites, physical access to these sites was not an issue. However, it was anticipated that gaining children’s trust and participation in the project would be a somewhat challenging task as street children tend to be suspicious of strangers. The researcher and the research team (two associates) contacted two service providers who are working in the research sites. The service providers introduced children through their open-air school and shelter program. Once initial contact was made, the research team interacted with street children in and outside the program a few days a week for over a year prior to inviting them for an interview.
Sampling
Purposive sampling was used to select study participants. Two strategies were used to recruit participants. First, program participants from service agencies were verbally invited to participate in the study. The invitation resulted in 40 participants. Many of these participants were between 10 and 14 years old. A second strategy—snowball sampling—was followed to include older children between 15 and 17 years old. A total of 75 children, 59 boys and 16 girls, were recruited altogether.
Data collection
An in-depth interview protocol was used for data collection. Embedded in the interview protocol was a method of network data collection known as hierarchical mapping technique (HMT; Antonucci, 1986). HMT was employed to identify the people in children’s networks and the intensity of the relationships they have with them (Figure 1). The participants and the research team interacted with youths to identify the network members in each circle.
Modified hierarchical mapping technique.
In addition to the HMT, an interview protocol was developed and pre-tested among 10 street children by the researcher. The interview protocol contained primarily open-ended questions. The open-ended questions were divided into different sections, including network composition, social support in employment, reciprocity, and so on. The corresponding questions were developed to explore the detailed information of each subsection. These questions were centered on each member of the children’s network as identified through the HMT. For instance, if a child identified a person in the network, the subsequent questions enquired about the child’s relation with the person as well as the nature, condition, and extent of social support exchanges between them.
Data analysis
NVivo 9, a qualitative data analysis software, was used to organize the data for analysis. Once transcribed by the research team, a PDF file was created for each interview and was uploaded in NVivo. A codebook was developed around a set of key themes defined a priori by the research questions (2002). The researcher started reading each transcript and outlining the parts of the conversation that related to the research questions. Next, the researcher looked for relationships among the codes and grouped them into larger themes or categories. Once initial coding was completed in NVivo, the corresponding texts around a theme or subtheme from the interview were pooled and included in a matrix created in Microsoft Excel. Pooled data were carefully examined to find similarities and differences in stories, and key findings were identified and reported. Quantitative data (i.e. age, income, duration) were analyzed using SPSS version 22.
Considering their merit and relevance, some conversations were selected and used as evidence for this article. Selected portions of the conversations were translated in English verbatim by the researcher. During the translation process, the researcher took utmost care to keep the original meaning of the conversations. Cultural subtleties, meaning of expressions, and contexts of conversations were also considered in the translation process. All the names used in the text for sharing children’s stories are pseudonyms.
Ethical consideration
The research project was approved by the institutional review board of a US university. The research team adhered to ethical guidelines in every step of the research. Participants were given information about the objectives, procedures, risks, and benefits of the study during information sessions. Prior to the interview, a quiet place and time of participant’s choice (e.g. a quiet railway platform, river bank, or non-governmental organization (NGO) shelter) were selected. Each participant was asked to pick a pseudonym of his or her choice during the interview. It was interesting to note that street children use multiple names to identify themselves and were comfortable in using a new one. A verbal consent form was read to each participant during every session of the interview. During the interview, light snacks were served and frequent enquiries were made to learn whether they were comfortable. At the end of the interview process, each participant was paid $1.50 (equivalent to two-thirds of their daily income) for each session. With the exception of three cases, all other youths completed the interview.
Findings
Demographics
In all, 75 participants participated from three locations: Kamalapur Railway Station, the market area of Karwanbazzar, and the Sadarghat river port. Boys represented a little over 75% of the sample. Participants’ age ranged between 10 and 17 years, and the average age of a participant was 12.6 years. The average street life was a little over 34 months. About half (46.6%) of them were living on the street for 2 years or less and one-third (32%) for 2–4 years. The majority of children (84%) reported having an education level lower than third grade. All the participants came from low-income household which was measured by parental income and occupation.
Job hopping and social networks
Detailed information about their past three jobs was collected from the participants. Their job histories showed engagement in multiple jobs. Over half of the participants (65.3%) had at least two jobs, and about one-third (30.7%) had at least three jobs during the time of interview. All the participants shared a common experience of quickly quitting a job and looking for a new one. Job histories also showed that informal jobs were often filled with abuse, exploitation, and uncertainty. Such experiences forced children to hop from job to job and search for new opportunities. Street children availed those opportunities mostly through peer networks.
Street children networks comprised adults, older youths, and peers. Relationships between adults and street children tended to be hierarchical and less supportive (except for service providers). The most supportive networks were of peers and older youth. Three types of relationships emerged among street peers. These were Parichito (acquaintance), Bondhu (friend), and Janer Bondhu (close friends). Parichito (acquaintance) represents a casual relationship, which is formed with any individual that the youth see around and, at the very least, recognize by face if not by name. Bondu, or friend, emerges from the establishment of strong ties. Friends are those “who care for me,” said Monju, a 14-year old participant from Kamalapur, while according to Jamal a true friend is defined by an absolute connection that means the janer bondhu cannot “betray another friend regardless of what happens.” Therefore, close friends or janer bondhu are those who have proven themselves unshakeable in their commitment to their friends. To a varying degree, all types of peer relationships helped children find and manage jobs.
Role of social networks in new employment
Because of the difficulties in securing jobs and staying employed, participants relied heavily on their social networks to find new jobs. Over 90% of the participants reported that they were able to secure at least one job, and 73% reported securing a second job through network members. Those network ties provided job information, made recommendations and vouched for them, trained them for particular jobs, and even shared work. The extent of support varied in accordance with the strength of relationships, where friends and close friends received most support and acquaintances received relatively less. The following findings will highlight, as available, how the degree of relational closeness (i.e. acquaintance vs friends/close friends) differentiates the availability and volume of employment support.
Job information
Job information was reported to flow relatively quickly through the network of connected children, even along the threads of those who were mere acquaintances. All the participants mentioned that they have shared job information in the past and would like to do so in the future if they come across it. Job information is vital for those looking for new jobs or those who wish to change their current jobs. For example, Hashem, a 17-year-old participant at Sadarghat, described that after landing in Sadarghat, he was desperate for a job, and an acquaintance told him that a van driver was searching for an assistant. He pursued the lead, and it was his first job in the city. Hashem recalled, “… We just got introduced, but he gave me the most important news I was desperate to have.”
An acquaintance may receive some job leads, but he or she is unlikely to share all the positive and negative aspects of the job. Such detailed information is passed along to friends even if they do not ask for the details. Friends may also take special initiatives to collect and pass on detailed information about a job. For instance, when Bablu, a 14-year-old at Karwan Bazar, grew disgusted by the treatment of the vegetable vendors and was considering changing his job, he heard from an acquaintance that a newspaper distributor was looking for new recruits. Bablu shared his interest with friends and they enlisted their friends as consultants—Bablu’s friends asked their friends about what it was like to work as a newspaper boy. Bablu said,
… Kashem [friend’s friend] told me that if I want to sell newspapers I need to work at least 8 hours a day to make approximately 70-80 taka. I would have to work in the sun, which is very difficult. He also shared his experiences on how bus conductor and passengers treat [negatively] if one wants to sell newspaper in the bus [public transportation] …
While this information flow is vital for helping children pursue job leads, it also helps them assess the potential employers’ treatment of employees. For example, several participants in Karwan Bazar shared their perceptions of a van driver who allegedly does not pay workers what he promised before hiring. Participants shared their experiences among friends, and their shared experiences spread to other groups that ultimately cast a negative perception on the employer. In the interview, some participants shared that none of their friends work for the van driver, even though he offers a higher wage.
It was found that the diffusion of job information was relatively robust among boys’ networks than girls’. Girls tended to receive a limited amount of job information and such information was limited in certain domains considered to be “girls’ job.” Domestic aid, roadside kitchen helper, tailoring shop aid, and beauty parlor aid are some areas where girls received information. In contrast, boys received ample information in many domains of informal economy including porter, newspaper boy, vendor, construction worker, cleaner, and so on. Explaining this disadvantage, Setu—a 16-year-old girl from Kamalapur—said,
If they [friends and close friends] come across they will pass it to me. But we all live here and stay close to each other. We usually do not get outside information until someone [male friends] share it with us … Sometimes, employers [informal] come looking for girls but I can’t accept it if I don’t know him or don’t know what his intensions are …
Recommendation and advocacy
Recommendation and advocacy is a two-pronged strategy participants adopt to secure a job for network members. Eighty-two percent of the youth in the sample stated that they had recommended a network member (including acquaintances, friends, and close friends) for a job in the past, and all participants said that they would likely recommend a member of their network for a job.
Making recommendations on behalf of another seems particularly important in the context of street-based businesses, including restaurants, grocery shops, and individual vendors. Prior to hiring, the owners want to make sure that the potential recruit is trustworthy. When a recommendation comes from a trustworthy youth, the candidate’s chance of employment is greater. The following is an example of how Muhin, a 16-year-old participant at Karwan Bazar who works in a roadside restaurant, successfully vouched for his friends when his employer needed new, trustworthy workers. Muhin said,
Both of them [owner/manager] said “Muhin, if you have anyone trustworthy you can bring him to me. I am looking for a good boy.” I took each of them with me and told the manager that he would be a good worker. They [owner/manager] asked me in private about them. I assured them that they are trustworthy. They would never steal anything neither harm your business. I also told him that they are hard workers too …
In the example above, Muhin was confident his friends would suit the needs of his boss at the restaurant. However, when youth are in a position to recommend someone who is just an acquaintance, they generally engage in a pre-screening. The process might help the employer get a better worker, but its central purpose is to protect the value of the youth’s words. Sometimes protecting their own reputation or protecting a friend means hedging a recommendation and taking a passive stance in relation to a job opening. In an example of this, Muhin said,
*R: … in some occasion people [few employers] will come to me looking for a boy. I won’t recommend a good friend to work there too. The workload is too heavy. I may recommend those who are desperately looking for a job. Say, I know Shohel. He did not like working in the station. He is unlucky … He got beaten up so many times. I sent him to the employer [a particular employer] and said, “Tell him [the owner] that I send you.” *I: Why didn’t you take him to the employer? R: He is a friend [hesitant], but we are not that close. I don’t know how he works or how sincere he is. If I take him to the employer and recommend him the employer will hire him. But if he quits the job … or … does something bad, he [employer] will get me. [*R = respondent; I** = interviewer]
This conversation shows how youths differentiate between friends and acquaintance while advocating for them. Muhin did not recommend the job for his friend since the job workload was too heavy. He is sympathetic to Shohel and wants him to have the job but is not sure about his work ethic or reliability. So he does not risk his own credibility. He allows Shohel to use his name but withholds a full endorsement.
While advocating for a friend, a youth is likely to highlight a friend’s honesty, sincerity, humbleness, and devotion in addition to job-specific skills. If the employer is still skeptical about the candidate’s skills, the recommender may even say more than the facts about the candidate. This has been explained by Shaon, a 13-year-old at Karwan Bazar. Shaon recommended a friend to his employer, a newspaper distributor, for a paperboy job. The distributor was unsure of the sales skills of the candidate. Shaon courted the employer suggesting, “He is very good … he sold my share of 20 newspapers in an hour.” This was a clear exaggeration; Shaon’s friend helped him by selling only a few newspapers.
Some youths might risk their reputation for a close friend, however. For instance, 12-year-old Delwar at Sadarghat told the story of returning after a prolonged sickness and struggling to work as a porter. Delwar’s friend had a good relationship with a boat-restaurant owner and he asked the owner to employ Delwar, but the owner was hesitant. After few conversations, the youth guaranteed the owner that he would take responsibility of his friend’s actions. This resulted in Delwar’s employment.
Recommendation and advocacy which resulted in many boys’ informal employment reported to be less effective for girls. Only five girls mentioned that they found a job through members of their peer networks. Limited information aside, safety concern for a friend found to be an impediment why many girls were reluctant to engage in negotiation or advocacy for friends and close friends. For instance, two friends—Kalpana and Moyna (14 and 15 years old, respectively)—used to work as kitchen helper in a roadside restaurant. Their assignments required them to work in the morning and evenings. Kalpana found the job through an acquaintance and she later brought Moyna. Soon after Moyna joined, the treatment both received from the owner forced them to quit the job all together. Describing the event, Kalpana said,
I worked for him [the owner] for about a year. He used to treat me fair … He told me to bring someone to help … When Moyna joined us things started to change. Moyna is older than me and attractive … The owner would ask me to leave but ask Moyna to stay in the evening … One day Moyna told me that the owner gave him “indecent proposal” but she didn’t agree. Then the owner asked me to help him to convince Moyna …We both quitted the job … The owner came to pursue us but we didn’t agree … I got my lesson. I tried to help a friend but it brought trouble for both of us …
Informal training and work-sharing
Much of the work done by street children may be “informal,” but it often requires specific skills. To take an example, a newspaper boy needs to learn how to jump onto a public transport and persuade the people there to buy a newspaper. This requires oratory skills and a certain degree of business savvy, which only come with training and experience. These skills are often acquired from training provided by network members. For instance, Kabir, an 11-year-old participant at Kamalapur, received this type of training from his friends, who helped him get over his fear of jumping onto a moving train. They showed him how to climb onto the roof and how to jump from one train car to the next. After their training, he was not afraid anymore and thus could do the job of a porter.
Part of skill-building is learning about the norms, expectations, and dangers of a particular work site, and youth teach each other. Each job requires certain precautions to avoid accident and injury. There is extreme danger, for instance, when those youth wanting to get work as porters rush to board a slow running train. There is a skill to using the train’s door handle for leverage and maneuvering the body just so to get inside the train without falling. Another kind of danger is the officials in the train station. More experienced children teach others how to identify and assess the officials. For instance, Razu, a 16-year-old at Kamalapur, mentioned that his friends have warned him of “the Yellow and Red Flags.” His metaphor relates to the official attire registered porters and security wear in Kamalapur train station. A railway security wears bright gray attire which youths labeled as a “yellow flag” and porters who wear red shirt as “red flag.”
There are also the unwritten rules of the trade, a form of etiquette or code of conduct. In the following conversation, a youth mentions how he learned from another youth what not to do while in the business of scrap collection:
He [a friend] showed me how to work there. He told me to take a big sack and tour different places. He told me if I visit certain places, I could get more than regular stuffs. He also told me what to pick and what not to … He warned me not to enter anyone’s home or private property. He said that Siraj Bhai [the owner] does not like the idea that we steal from anyone. He [Arman] also told me that if I find any valuables on the street [such as wallet or a cell phone] I must not pick up. I must only pick up things like scrap paper, bottle and plastic items.
Another of the more widely used aspects of one’s social network is work-sharing. Sixty-five youth (86%) reported that they helped another in their job for the sake of sharing in the gains or to simply help a friend complete what they needed to do. Newcomers benefit the most from such arrangements. For instance, when Kamal, a 12-year-old at Kamalapur, was a newcomer he shadowed his new friend, Razib, and learned how to carry luggage. Razib would then “bid” to carry a large load of luggage, a load that he would not be able to manage alone. But with Kamal in tow they could carry it together and shared the earnings. In Karwan Bazar, friends often form small groups to gather leftover vegetables. They pile individual collections and sell them. In Sadarghat, friends form a team to collect scrap items that they can then sell to a collector. Even if there is no agreement to band together, many times children will lend a hand to their friends. They will help them complete a work duty, or fill in if their friend cannot do their work that day.
Work support (e.g. work-sharing, volunteering, and couching on how to perform) was also to some extent common among girls. There were some incidents where girls’ work support behavior was evident. For example, the research team observed that groups of young girls in Karwan Bazar tour the vegetable market to collect leftover vegetables (and sometimes steal them), gather their collections into a larger pile, and sell it to the low-income customers to make a larger profit. In another example, Shahana, a 15-year-old girl Kamplapur, who supplies drinking water to a food vendor outside the station often shared her work with a friend. However, work support seemed less prevalent among older girls. It appeared that girls’ economic opportunities become narrower once they grow up. Mitu, a 17-year-old girl from Kamalapur, explained,
I have been on the streets for a while … I used to work as a domestic aid but my employer and his wife treated me badly … I ran away from there … Initially, I begged to people and they would spare changes. But then they became rude and would scold me to find a job … I worked in another house but they treated me bad as well. Shaheb [the gentleman] was good but his wife was a mean woman … I ran from there too. I sold candy in the public transportation. But conductors and sometimes public would touch me inappropriately, propose me [for sex], or would scold me that a girl shouldn’t be working like a boy … I tried to sell newspaper here [in train station], but the distributor won’t give me any. He told me that girls can’t do boys work … My girls friends here also said so … I don’t do anything now …
Discussion
This article is a part of a larger study, and the objective of the larger study, among others, is to understand the role network members played in street children’s economic activities. The findings show that network members help other youths find new informal jobs and help them make quick money through ad hoc assignments. Network ties provide information to the jobseekers and create a bridge between jobseekers and employers. How deeply a youth will engage in a network member’s job search depends on the strength of their relationships. Youth may strongly advocate for a close friend or friend to secure a job but might play a casual role for an acquaintance. The cautionary approach toward an acquaintance seemed to derive from uncertainties over the credentials of the acquaintance. A misplaced recommendation or advocacy might risk the hard-earned trust of the employers. A similar trend—ambiguous role of network members in job mobilization—was part of findings among poor urban black in the United States. Smith (2005) reported that network members were more concerned about work habits of jobseekers and potential impact on members’ own reputations despite the fact that many of these jobseekers were unemployed.
Network members are also active in training a friend or a close friend skills, etiquettes, and ground rules for a particular job. The training is mostly hands-on, where a child or a group of children couch the aspirant skills of the trade. In many instances, friends would tag the jobseeker along with them and demonstrate what and how to be successful in a job. This form of employment support is reported in some other studies with street children in Indonesia and Ethiopia (Beazley, 2003; Eriksen and Mulugeta, 2015).
One salient aspect of network support that this study found was information sharing. All the participants had exchanged job information with network members in the past and showed keen interest in continuing this practice. The variance of sharing was this: both friends and close friends received detailed job information, while acquaintances received a limited amount of information. Friends made extra efforts to collect and share information when a friend showed interest in a particular job. There were not any efforts by the acquaintances to keep the information for his or her advantages. Rather, an effort to pass information to anyone who wanted it was evident across the sample. Despite the wide sharing of job information among network members, there was no evidence that such information helped youth connect to a better job. The probable reason is that street children’s networks mostly comprised similarly disadvantaged youth who possessed similar types of job information or job mobilization resources (Smith, 2005).
Studies that have investigated homeless youths’ informal economic activities in the United States have found the dubious role played by members of a social network in income earning efforts. Gwadz et al. (2009) reported that “predatory adults” and harmful peers recruit homeless youth in an effort to introduce them to the street economy that often promotes illegal activities. Contrary to this, participants in this study did not display such predatory tendencies. Instead, they played mostly positive roles, especially close friends, who often acted as intermediaries with their informal employers and friends and acted as a guarantor to get a friend employed.
Network members’ positive role in employment is likely due to three factors. First, about half of the participants did not have any adult in their networks. With a limited number of adults, participants were less likely to be connected with potentially harmful adults and without having any relationship with predatory adults, street children were unlikely to be involved in illegal activities. Second, the sample was biased toward younger children. Considering slow physical growth due to malnutrition and lack of proper diets, street children appear to be even younger than their age (Greksa et al., 2007). The younger youth surviving on the streets are often perceived with more tolerance from the larger society (Rizzini and Butler, 2003), and their physical appearance might have spared them from recruitment by those who might wish to integrate them in illegal activities. Finally, whenever children faced any serious exploitation by employer or other adults, many of them departed from those relationships. Therefore, their prior experiences might have dissuaded them from becoming involved with suspicious adults or others they sensed might act in a predatory way.
Even though network support is available for both girls and boys, girls have clear disadvantages in gaining job support from their social networks for several reasons. First, the gendered nature of the informal labor market often puts barriers to girls’ access and continuation in certain jobs. Young girls who undertook some of the “boys’ jobs” were assaulted by the employer, public, and customers alike. Some of these experiences were shared among friends and acquaintances which might have prevented others to undertake similar jobs. Second, even though a number of ties were almost equal for both boys and girls, girls had relatively few weak ties compared to boys. Without diverse weak ties, the flow of job information is likely to be less. Finally, older girls reported to have some male benefactors who supported them financially and otherwise. Even though the girls were reluctant to share detailed information about these males, however, they seem to have influence over girls’ employment decision especially choosing a job.
This study contributes conceptually to the social networks’ literature. Research on social networks barely investigates how networks function among a group of extremely disadvantaged youths’ economic survival in non-western contexts. This study sheds light on this issue by looking at employment mobilization efforts through use of street-based social relationships and found that those relationships are very much in action in the lives of street children in Bangladesh. Embeddedness in social networks provides these extremely disadvantaged children with unique job mobilization and helps them navigate through the competitive and often hazardous terrain of informal job markets. Although the degree of support could be different among groups of children, it hardly affects the overall impact of support in finding employment. These findings corroborate some of the theoretical assertions about networks (i.e. positive outcomes of network ties, variability of support across strengths of ties) that have been well-researched under formal economy and thus offer opportunity to expand the application of network theories to other areas of employment or groups (i.e. adults in informal labor market) in developing countries.
Despite the best efforts of the researcher, the study has several limitations. First, interviews with the participants were the source of the study’s data and some of the participants were as young as 10 years old. In some instances, it was difficult to hold an extended conversation with a young child about a complex subject like social networks and social support. Moreover, a noted shortcoming was the under representation of female voices. Despite many efforts to recruit female participants, it was hard to realize a desired number of them from the Sadarghat site. Moreover, most the female participants (81%) were young (between 10 and 14 years of age). It is likely that more older female participants could enrich the data and provide a greater perspective to the study.
Any policy prescription should consider the fact that social relationships are central to lives of street children in Bangladesh and they often use those relationships in creative ways to make a living. Often street children’s perception of well-being is “influenced more by their social relationships than material assets” (Conticini, 2005: 70). This might explain why institutionalization of children, as practiced in Bangladesh, is not a viable program intervention (Chowdhury, 2012). Institutional settings often break children’s street-based relationships at the first place and offer little opportunity to build new ones. Placement in such institutions is not conducive to their welfare or rights. Rather, an intervention should contemplate the centrality of relationships on the street life. For example, friendship ties could be used to develop economic interventions like friendship-based microenterprises and could be an effective tool for economic gains. Once youths achieve economic freedom, this will be a strong impetus for transition off the streets.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Dr Carol Rippey Massat and Dr Larry Bennett for their comments and suggestions on the draft.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was partially supported by Armin Scheitacker of Germany and the Fahs Beck Foundation of New York, USA.