IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Research article

Key Factors Influencing Education Disparity in the LowGrown Tea Cultivation Community of Sri Lanka
YUKO FUKUDA*
Organization for the Strategic Coordination of Research and Intellectual Properties,
Meiji University, Ikuta, Japan
Email: yukotsu70@yahoo.co.jp
Received 12 July 2023

Accepted 20 September 2023(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Education indicators in Sri Lanka compare well with other South Asian countries
relative to economic standards. However, educational disparities between living sectors(urban, rural, individual farming, and estate) remain, and children in the estate sector face thegreatest challenges in improving educational attainment. Tea is a prominent industry in theestate sector, with several common types of tea cultivation management, and the educational
attainments of children whose parents work in this sector have been previously found to varydepending on the cultivation management type in which their parents are involved. This study
aimed to investigate the factors that contribute to children's educational disparities,
specifically by focusing on the different management types within the low-grown tea
cultivation community. This study adopted a two-step mixed-method analysis. The first step
examined children’s educational disparity among four living sectors across 9 tea-growing
districts, using data from the Child Activity Survey 2008/09. The second step investigatededucational disparities within three management types (plantation companies, private estates,
and individual farming) of the tea cultivation community. Quantitative analysis employedcross-tabulation, while qualitative analysis relied on questionnaires and interviews. Six
indicators of the children's environment were considered key factors influencing educational
disparities, with school enrollment status as an indicator of educational attainment. The
quantitative analysis revealed that children in the estate sector had the lowest school
enrollment rates, particularly those belonging to private estate communities. Contrary to thewidely-held belief that household income is a significant factor in educational disparities, it
was not found to be statistically significant within either the estate sector or the tea cultivation
community. The qualitative analysis indicated that relocation is one of the factors contributing
to the low enrollment status of private estate children. It also suggested that other indicators,
such as household income, are interconnected factors contributing to educational disparities.
Keywords Sri Lanka, children, educational disparity, tea cultivation community

INTRODUCTION
Tea cultivation was introduced as an alternative to coffee during the colonial period in the 19th
century. The laborer houses, known as "line houses," were originally built for seasonal workers
migrating from South India for coffee harvesting. However, these houses continue to be used evenafter transitioning to tea cultivation, lacking adequate facilities and sanitation. This has raised
concerns regarding children's development (SOMO 2006). In the 1970s, significant changes in the
management structure of the tea cultivation community (referred to as “tea community”) occurred
due to land reforms, leading to a diversification of management types. Furthermore, economic
reforms during the same period brought about overall economic and social development, which
impacted the living conditions of those involved in tea cultivation1.
Previous studies have focused on examining the impact of living environments on educational
1 In the 1970s, the existing large-scale estates were nationalized and later bundled into 22 Regional Plantation Companies(RPC). In 1995, management was handed over to the private sector. Concurrently, Private Estates (PE) expanded the tea
cultivation area and the number of Individual Farmers (IF) increased.

Ⓒ ISERD

27

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

attainment in various fields, with household income considered a crucial factor influencing
educational disparities. However, an interesting finding has been reported: despite a higher
prevalence of low-income households among tea farmers, all children achieve good educational
attainment within the tea community (Fukuda, 2023). This suggests that there may be additional
factors beyond household income that are associated with educational disparities. Thus, based on the
management types in the tea community, this study attempted to identify factors that affect education
disparities among children and explored relations between “the living environments surrounding
children” and “their educational attainment” by using quantitative and qualitative methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Methods
This study employed a two-step mixed-method analysis to investigate factors contributing to
educational disparities. In the first step, disparities among children in four living sectors across 9 teagrowing districts2 were examined. The second step focused on disparities among three management
types within the tea community. Quantitative and qualitative methods were employed. The
quantitative analysis examined educational attainment differences among the living sectors and thetea community. The qualitative analysis was conducted to identify key factors contributing to
education disparities and explore the relations between these factors, based on the different
management types of tea cultivation in the low-grown tea areas. Six indicators of the living
environment are “household income, house-head’s education level, housing condition, the safety ofliving space, and child economic and housework”, with “school enrollment” as an indicator of
educational attainment.
Data Collection
In the first step, descriptive analysis was conducted using data from the Child Activity Survey
2008/09 (CAS 08/09), which represented all of Sri Lanka except the Northern Districts. For thisstudy, 3,683 households and 6,119 children were extracted from the 9 districts where tea estates areconcentrated. Three living sectors were originally defined: urban, rural, and estate. However, due tothe significant increase in individual farming, the classification scheme was expanded to include
urban, rural, individual farming, and estate. In the second step, questionnaires based on CAS 08/09
were distributed, and interviews were conducted between 2013 and 2015 in the Kotapola division of
the Matara district. This area is known for tea cultivation conducted by regional plantation companies(referred to as "plantation companies" or "RPC"), private estates (referred to as "PE"), and individual
farming (referred to as "farming" or "IF"). The sample included 302 housing units, with 103 from
RPCs, 100 from PEs, and 99 from IFs across 11 villages. Additionally, interviews were conductedwith school teachers, estate owners and managers, and local government officers.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Educational Disparity Among Living Sectors in Tea-Growing Districts
Despite Sri Lanka’s focus on social policies, the estate sector in the country struggles with low
educational attainment and quality of education (UNICEF 2014). Sri Lanka, formerly Ceylon, is ageographically diverse and naturally abundant island. Within the nine targeted districts of the CAS
08/09, the sample distribution was as follows: 473 children (7.9%) in urban areas, 3,352 children(54.8%) in rural areas,1,289 children (21.1%) in farming communities, and 1,005 children (16.4%)
in the estate sector.
Table 1 presents the enrollment status and grade repetition/dropout experience of children. Out
2 9 districts include Kalutara, Kandy, Matale, Nuwara eliya, Galle, Matara, Badulla, Ratnapula and Kegalle.

Ⓒ ISERD

28

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

of 6,119 children, 5,147 were attending school, 633 were not attending, and the status of 339 children
was unknown. Notably, the estate sector had the highest percentage (15.5%) of children not attending
school, compared to approximately 10% in other residential sectors.
Upon completing primary education, some students face challenges in continuing theireducation. When examining enrollment status based on the level of education, there were 4,562
children belonging to the compulsory education age group, 97% of whom attended school overall,while only 93% were in the estate sector. For children aged 15-17, 66% overall progressed to seniorsecondary education, but the rate dropped significantly to 27% in the estate sector.
Table 1 Enrollment status and grade repetition/dropout experience
Livingsectors
Urban
Rural
Farming
EstateTotal

Enrollment status

Grade repetition / Dropout experience

AttendNon-Attend

Total

401 (89.3%)
2,855 (90.0%)788 (89.9%)
1,103 (84.5%)
5,147 (89.0%)

48 (10.7%)317 (10.0%)
144 (10.1%)
124 (15.5%)633 (11.0%)

499
3,172
932
1,227
5,780

Nonexperience
408 (88.9%)
2,823 (87.4%)
692 (89.9%)113 (71.3%)
5,056 (85.4%)

ExperienceTotal

51 (11.1%)
407 (12.6%)
692 (10.2%)
1,133 (28.7%)
866 (14.6%)

459
3,230
971
1,262
5,922

Furthermore, 5,056 children had no experience of grade repetition or dropping out, while 866
children had such experiences. The proportion of children with these experiences varied acrosssectors, with 11% in urban, 13% in rural, 10% in farming, and a significantly higher 29% in the estate
sector. These findings highlight significant differences in the educational attainments of children
between the estate sector and other sectors.
Impact of Household Income on Educational Attainment
Past studies have often mentioned that out-of-school attendance is deeply rooted in structuralinequalities and disparities. Extensive research has been conducted in various fields to investigate
the impact of the family environment on educational attainment, with household income identified
as one of the key factors affecting educational disparity (Harsh and Paul 2007).
The average monthly income for all 3,682 households is approximately Rs. 16,000, with urban
Rs. 25,595, rural Rs. 17,075, farming Rs. 20,765, and estate Rs. 10,585. In terms of income groups,
approximately 50% of households in urban areas belonged to the high-income group, while in ruraland farming areas, it ranged from 30% to 40%. However, in the estate, only 4% of households
belonged to the high-income group, and a significant 59% lived under 10K, indicating that estatechildren are much more likely to face poverty than those who live in other sectors.

Fig. 1 Educational attainment within living sectors by income group
Figure 1 shows the relationship between household income and educational attainment. In nonestate sectors, higher household income is associated with improved enrollment and reduced grade
repetition/dropout rates. However, this pattern is not observed in the estate sector. Further analysisⒸ ISERD

29

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

reveals that while enrollment status and grade repetition/dropout status are statistically significant
overall, they are not significant within the estate sector. This suggests that factors other than income
are related to the educational disparities within estates.
Educational Disparity within Tea Cultivation Communities
Sri Lanka is divided into 25 districts and 9 provinces, with 331 divisions and 14,021 GN divisions.
The study focuses on the Kotapola division in the Matara District, which consists of 37 GN divisions.
Data collection and interviews were conducted in four selected divisions characterized by low living
conditions. This area is known for its low-grown tea, with diverse management types due to historicalbackgrounds. In contrast to the upcountry, where large tea plantations were established on hillsides
during the colonial era, tea cultivation in the low-grown tea areas has evolved on land adjacent to thevillages (Wenzlhuemer, 2008).
Table 2 provides an overview of households and children categorized by management types,
including the enrollment status of children. The cross-tabulation analysis revealed a statisticallysignificant difference among the three types of management communities. It is noteworthy thatchildren living on private estates had lower enrollment rates compared to the other management types,
with 22.4% of children in the private estate community not attending school. In contrast, only 6.9%of children in the RPC community and none in the IF community were not attending. (Fukuda, 2023)
Table 2 Family overview and enrollment status by management types
Management
types
Plantationcompany (RPC)
Private estate(PE)
Individual
farming (IF)
Total

Enrollment
status

Boy

Girl

Total

Enrollment status
AttendNon-attend

103

106

90

196

175 (93.1%)

13 (6.9%)

100

117

88

205

149 (77.6%)

43 (22.4%)

99

72

61

133

131 (100.0%)

302

295

239

534

455 (89.0%)

56 (11.0%)

Living Environments and Their Impact on Educational Attainment
Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between six living environment indicators and children's
educational attainment. The data indicates an overall trend where lower attendance is linked to factors
such as low household income, lower education levels of the household head, lack of ownership orresiding in a line-house, reduced security of living space, and extended hours of activities.

Fig. 2 Impact of living environments on educational attainmentⒸ ISERD

30

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Table 3 presents the statistical results of the cross-tabulation analysis, investigating therelationship between the living environments and children's enrollment status within the tea
community. The findings indicate that within tea communities, household income alone does not
significantly impact educational disparities. Instead, factors such as the education level of thehousehold head, housing condition, safety of the living space, and children's economic activities
show a significant association with educational disparities. These findings suggest that some of thesefactors may play more influential roles in shaping educational disparities.
Table 3 Relationship between living environments and enrollment status
Family environments
Household
Head Education
IncomeNon-significant
Significant

Living conditions
Housing

SafetySignificant

Significant

Child activities
EconomicHousework
work
Non-significant

χ-square test (p=0.05): Significant = Different, No significant =No different*Economic work: Due to the sample size, statical analysis could not be conducted.

Factors Behind Educational Disparity
Table 4 provides the comparisons of the six environmental factors. It indicates that children living in
the IF community engaged in economic and housework to some extent, but they had favorable
housing conditions and living conditions. Children living in the RPC community had a lower
household income and housing conditions, but they fared relatively better in the other four
environmental factors. Children living in the PE community had moderate household income andhousing conditions, but they experienced poorer levels in the remaining four environmental factors.
This discrepancy within the tea community can be attributed to the social structure of eachmanagement type.
Table 4 Quality of living environments within tea cultivation communities
Management type
Plantationcompany (RPC)
Private estate(PE)
Individual
farming (IF)Family environments
HouseholdHeadincomeeducation

Living conditions
Housing

SafetyChild activities
EconomicHousework
work

Low

MiddleLow

MiddleNo

Low

MiddleLow

Middle

Low

High

High

High

High

High

High

MiddleMiddleThe social structure varies according to management type. Individual farmers (IFs) are selfemployed and rely on income from tea harvesting and side jobs. They have higher average incomes,
but a significant number of them fall below the poverty line. In contrast, wages for workers in RPCs
are determined through wage board discussions involving the RPCs, trade unions, and thegovernment. In contrast, PE workers' salaries are decided individually by each estate, potentiallyresulting in lower wages and fewer benefits, particularly in medium and small PEs. The higher
average household income on PEs compared to RPCs can be attributed to multiple-income earners
Housing types also differ. IF households typically own their housing, while most children in theestate community live in line houses provided by the estate. A notable difference between the RPC
and PE households is their right to residency. Those in the RPCs can stay in line houses after
retirement, even if their family members are not working. In contrast, PE residents can only stay ifthey or their family members are employed, except for some large estates. The better housing
arrangement in PEs compared to RPCs can be partly attributed to some PE workers commuting fromoutside the estate and owning their own homes. Additionally, the education environments also vary.
Children from the IF community have more opportunities to access education and attend relatively
large schools in town. Conversely, children in the RPC and PE communities have fewer opportunitiesⒸ ISERD

31

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

to access education. Children in the RPC community primarily attend estate schools (with schoolbuses for distant homes). Similarly, children in the PE community typically attend schools locatednearby (Fukuda, 2023).
Reasons for School Non-attendance
As shown in Table 2, all of the IF children were attending school, while 13 RPC and 43 PE children
were not attending. Table 5 provides the main reasons explained by the families of 39 non-attending
children. The most common reasons were 'financial difficulty' (10 children), 'relocation between
estates' (9), and 'child dislikes school/study' (7). Other reasons included 'child labor' (5), 'inadequate
documents and procedures' (4), and 'disability' (4).
Table 5 Reasons for school non-attendance
Financialdifficulty

Relocation

Adjustment
to school

Economic
activities

Inadequate
paperwork

DisableOthersNo answer

3
7

2
7

3
4

2
3

4

3
1

4

1
16

No
relocation

RPC
90(100.0%)1(1.1%)
89(98.9%)
9(100.0%)2(22.2%)
7(77.8%)

PE
84(100.0%)42(50.0%)
42(50.0%)
24(100.0%)18(75.0%)
6(25.0%)

Total
174(100.0%)43(24.7%)
158(75.3%)
33(100.0%)20(60.0%)
13(39.4%)

Total

99

108

207

RPC
PE

Table 6 Enrollment status: impact of housing ownership and relocation
AttendDoesn’t own house
Owns house
Non-Attend
Doesn’t own house
Owns house
Total

RPC
174
(100.0%)154(85.5%)
20(11.5%)
13(100.0%)9(69.2%)
4(30.8%)

PE
148(100.0%)110(74.3%)
38(25.7%)
43(100.0%)40(93.0%)
3(7.0%)

Total
453(100.0%)264(58.3%)
189(41.7%)
56(100.0%)49(87.5%)
7(12.5%)

187

191

509

AttendRelocatedNo
relocation
NonAttend
Relocated

Furthermore, six estates managers, five school teachers, and five GN officers described thechallenges faced by the children. They mentioned that children growing up on the estates faceeconomic disadvantages, as their families have limited awareness of education due to their educationlevel. Consequently, workers, particularly those employed in PEs, often move from one estate toanother in search of a better salary, which is an obstacle to children's education. In some cases,
children stop attending school due to various factors, such as incomplete procedures by parents,
financial constraints within their families, or difficulties in adapting to new schools. These findings
suggest that the family's economic status and migration between estates impact children's enrollment
status. As shown in Table 2, there was no significant difference between household income andschool attendance status, but there was a significant relationship between housing conditions andschool attendance status. Table 6 presents the relationship between housing ownership andenrollment status, as well as the relationship between relocation and enrollment status. The crosstabulation analysis revealed statistically significant findings within the tea community overall. It isnoteworthy that there is an observed educational gap based on residence rights and relocation
experiences. Specifically, 58.3% of the school-attending children lived in line houses, while 87.5%of the non-attending children did. Among non-attending children on PEs, only 7.0% belonged tofamilies who owned their housing, while 93.0% lived in line houses. As for relocation, overall, 24.7%
of school-attending children had experienced relocation, while 60.6% among non-attending children.
Among non-attending children in PEs, 25.0% had not experienced relocation, but 75.0% had.

Ⓒ ISERD

32

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

Exploring the Process of Educational Disparity by Interrelated Living Environments
The cross-tabulation analysis conducted in this study revealed that household income was not directly
associated with educational disparity in the estate sector or the tea community. However, insightsfrom interviews highlighted the link between household income and residential mobility.
Figure 3 illustrates the process of educational disparities by the living environments surrounding
children, with a focus on residency rights, which were found to be statistically significant andemphasized in the interviews. Families without residency right tend to move from one estate toanother, influenced by their lower income. That is families with lower incomes frequently relocate
between estates in search of better employment conditions. These relocations may require children
to change schools, which negatively impacts their educational attainments because of inadequate
paperwork, additional cost, or difficulty adjusting to a new school environment.
No Right of Residency

Low Income Level
Relocation

Safety of Living SpaceChild Activities
・Paperwork
・Additional Costs
・Adequate school

Perception ofHouse Head

School AttendanceFig. 3 Process of educational disparities in private estate communities
Furthermore, families without a residential right may be less willing to invest in housing andnecessary facilities, which is potentially leading to unsafe living spaces and an increase in the time
the children spend helping with housework, in turn negatively affecting their education attainment.
Moreover, children often play an important role in low-income families, not only as income providers
but also as chore providers. Long hours of engagement in these activities can affect their learning
time and is one of the factors that widen the educational gap. families with low educational
backgrounds often lack a concrete understanding of the importance of education or a knowledge ofproper sanitation or are unaware of the adverse consequences of child labor, which give a negative
impact on children’s education attainment. By exploring the influence of these interrelated living
environments on educational disparity, we gain valuable insights into the challenges that hinder
equitable access to education.
CONCLUSION
This study employed a mixed-method analysis, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches,
to examine the factors contributing to educational disparities. The quantitative analysis revealed thatchildren in the estate sector, particularly those on private estates, had the lowest school enrollment
rates.
Contrary to the prevailing belief that household income is a significant factor in educational
disparities, the findings indicated no statistically significant relationship between household income
and educational disparities within the estate sector or the tea community. However, the qualitative
analysis suggested that relocation is one of the factors influencing the low enrollment status amongchildren in private estates. Furthermore, it revealed the presence of other interrelated factors,
including household income, which collectively contribute to the differences in enrollment statusⒸ ISERD

33

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2023) 14-2

among the three management types.
One limitation of this study was the absence of questions about relocation in the initialquestionnaires. Further research could focus on comparing the factors that contribute to education
disparities between the high-grown and low-grown tea areas of Sri Lanka.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to all the interviewees who generously dedicated theirvaluable time to participate in this study. I am deeply grateful for the support, assistance, and valuableadvice provided by the individuals who contributed to this research.
REFERENCES
Aturupane, H., Glewwe, P. and Wisniewski, S. 2007. The impact of school quality, socio-economic factors
and child health on students’ academic performance, Evidence from Sri Lankan primary schools. World
Bank, D.C, USA, Retrieved from URL https://openknowledge.worldbank.org
Department of Census and Statistics, Government of Sri Lanka (DCS). 2011. The child activity survey 2008/09.
DCS, ISBN 978-955-577-748-3, Sri Lanka, Retrieved from URL https://www.ilo.org/ipecinfo/product/
download.do?type=document&id=18735
Department of Census and Statistics, Government of Sri Lanka (DCS). 2013. Classification of administrative
divisions by quality of housing. DCS, ISBN 978-955-577-823-7, Sri Lanka.
Fukuda, Y. 2023. Disparity in quality of life and education attainment of children within the tea sector, Casestudy in low-country in Sri Lanka. IJERD, 13 (2), 119-126, Retrieved from URL https://iserd.net/
ijerd81/Volume8-1-27.pdf
Herath, D. and Weersink, A. 2009. From plantations to smallholder production, The role of policy in the
reorganization of the Sri Lankan tea sector. World Development, 37 (11), 1759-1772, Retrieved from DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.028
SOMO. 2006. Sustainabilitea, The Dutch tea market and Corporate Social Responsibility. SOMO, ProFound& India Committee of the Netherlands, Retrieved from URL https://www.somo.nl/sustainabilitea/
UNICEF. 2014. All children in school by 2015, Global initiative on out-of-school children, South Asia regional
study covering Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia,
Kathmandu, Nepal, Retrieved from URL https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000226221
Wenzlhuemer, R. 2008. From coffee to tea cultivation in Ceylon, 1880-1900, An economic and social history.
Brill’s Indological Library, BRILL, The Netherlands.

Ⓒ ISERD

34