IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

Research article
erd

Disparity in Quality of Life and Education Attainment ofChildren within the Tea Sector: Case Study in Low-Countryin Sri Lanka
YUKO FUKUDA*
Organization for the Strategic Coordination of Research and Intellectual Properties,
Meiji University, Ikuta, Japan
E-mail: yukotsu70@yahoo.co.jp

EIJI YAMAJI
Graduate School of Frontier Science, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan
Received 2 February 2022

Accepted 25 July 2022(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract In Sri Lanka, household income and living standards in the estate sector are lower
than those in other sectors. The tea sector is an important industry in the estate sector, where
the structure has changed over time, with an increase in smallholders and improvements inliving conditions. This change has made the living environment and educational
opportunities within the tea sector no longer uniform. This paper aims to identify thedisparity in quality of life and education attainment of children and attempts to describe thestructure of the differences behind these disparities by focusing on the three management
types. Quantitative and qualitative methods were applied to this analysis. Primary data for
302 households were collected between 2013 and 2015. Six indicators of the environment
surrounding children and two indices of education attainment were used. Four indicatorsshow statistically significant disparities among management types. A comparison between
the six indicators and management types indicates that people on the PEs are more likely tolive under the low quality of life and face the difficulties, which are related to the social
structure of the management type to which the households belong.
Keywords children, disparity, quality of life, education, tea sector

INTRODUCTION
This study focuses on the environment surrounding children and the education attainment ofchildren between management types in the tea sector. Sri Lanka has been a transit point for tradefor centuries, and was colonized by Western countries in the early 16th century. Tea was developed
as a colonial plantation crop by the British Empire. After independence in the 1970s, large-scale
estates were nationalized, and later, their management was privatized. Concurrently, private estates
could expand the cultivation area, and smallholders have been encouraged to join the tea
cultivation, so that the management types of tea cultivation have been no longer uniform. The
transition to a market-based economy in1990s and the end of the civil war in 2009 led to social
development and diversification of people's values, which also have expanded the employment
opportunities outside the estates. Today, people need to have more than a basic education to workand live outside the estates.
Many studies have reported on the living environment and education attainment of children
living on estates as well as on the recent improvements in estates, while there have been few
comparative studies focusing on the management type. This study attempts to delineate thedifferences in quality of life and education attainment of children based on management type. The
context and structure behind these differences have also been described.
MATERIALS AND METHODSⒸ ISERD

119

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

A descriptive design was applied to this analysis. The results presented in this paper are based on
the quantitative and qualitative methods of primary data collection. Questionnaires and interviews
were collected between 2013 and 2015 in Kotapola Division, located in the northern part of the
Matara district, where the tea sector is economically important. Tea cultivation in this area iscarried out by Regional Plantation Company-RPC, Private Estate-PE, and Individual Farmer-IF.1
The sample size is 302 housing units, comprising 103 households in 2 RPCs, 100 on 19 PEs, and in
99 IFs in a total of 11 villages. Table 1 shows an overview of children aged 5-17, target children are
196 in RPCs, 205 on PEs, and 133 in IFs.
Table 1 Number of households, people andchildren
RPC

PE

IFs

Household:People:

103
491

100
480

99
424

Children:106 (Boy)
90 (Girl)

117 (Boy)
88 (Girl)

72 (Boy)
61 (Girl)

Fig. 1 Location of Morowaka and Deniyaya
The questionnaire is based on the Child Activity Survey 2008/09 (CAS 08/09),2 which was
jointly conducted by the Sri Lankan government and the International Labour Organization (ILO).
This study used the same variables as in the CAS 08/09. The quantitative analysis used theenvironment and education attainment as the dependent variables and the management type as theindependent variable, and conducted a χ-square test3 to find the differences in the environment andeducation attainment among management types. The environment surrounding children consists of
six indicators: a. household income, b. head of household education level, c. housing condition, d.
environmental safety, e. economic activities and f. housework activities of children. The education
attainment consists of two indices: attendance and repeated years/dropouts.
FINDINGS
1. Environment Surrounding Children
Quality of life is an important aspect of individual well-being. Indicators a and b focus on thehousehold condition, selecting the economic status of the household and the educational
achievement of the head of the household. Indicators c and d focus on living conditions, selecting
the variables of privacy and settlement status, and safe and sanitary environment. Indicators e and fboth focus on the activity status of children at home, selecting economic activities to earn income
and housework activities for family.

1 The RPCs were composed of 12-29 estates and managed 15,000-25,000ac of cultivated land, but they had not enoughassets, which prevented funding for new investments, causing difficulties in management (Nihal 2011). In order toimprove the RPCs' management, privatization was carried out in 1995 through the sale of 51% of the controlling interestin each, initially 20 RPCs were privatized and later 3 RPCs were added (ADB 2004). Their tea land is currently leased
from the government for 99 years, and 286 plantations are managed by 23 RPCs (MPI 2012). Between 1951 and 2005,
the number of small farmers increased by 368%, while estates with 100ac or more declined by 57% (Herath andWeersink 2007). The present management type is State-owned estates, RPC, PE, and IF.
2 The CAS data covers the demographic characteristics of children, their school attendance, economic activities, healthand safety, housing, and household characteristics. It also presents information on perception of parents/guardians on
their children working and other characteristics pertaining to the children aged 5-17 years. Data in this paper extracted
3,683 households from 9 districts where mainly tea estates were located.
3 In this paper, p-value less than 0.05 is considered statistically significant.
Ⓒ ISERD

120

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

Household conditions: The impact of family situation on children has been studied in various
fields. Table 2 shows the household income by management type. The average monthly income of
302 households is Rs. 26,970, while it is Rs. 25,151 in the RPCs, Rs. 26,534 on the PEs, and Rs.
29,303 in the IFs. Though IFs have a higher average income, more IF households are below thepoverty line.4 This is because of the different income structures of each management type. The
main source of income for IFs comes from the sale of tea leaves and side jobs, whereas for estatehouseholds, it is the salary from the estate.
Table 2 Household income
RPC
Average Income
Poverty Line
No of Household below
Poverty Line
<20K:
Household
20K<30K:
Income>30K:
Rs.130 =1USD in 2014

Rs. 25,151

Table 3 Head of household education levelPE
Rs. 26,970
Rs.26,534
5,511 Rs

IFs
Rs.29,303

9

6

16

58 (29.6%)
73 (37.2%)
65 (33.2%)

56 (27.3%)
72 (35.1%)
77 (37.6%)

45 (33.8%)
38 (28.6%)
50 (37.6%)

RPC
PE
IFs
57
102
6
None
(29.1%)(49.8%)(04.5%)
111
89
63
Low*
(56.6%)(43.4%)(47.4%)
28
14
64
High**(14.3%)(06.8%)(48.1%)* Low: Grade 9 (compulsory education) or less** High: above compulsory education

IFs’ income comes from harvest yield, which is highly dependent on the cultivation area, as
well as from other crops or jobs. The greater the cultivation area or more side jobs they have, thehigher the income they receive. At the time of the survey, tea leaf disease was prevalent, reducing
tea leaf yield and their income. Though social security is available, they generally do not receive it
because they do not enroll in it. The main source of income for people on estates comes from theestate itself. The salary for RPC employees is uniform whereas for PE employees, it varies fromestate to estate. For RPCs, the salary is decided every other year through wage board discussions
held by RPCs and trade unions and government. This was Rs. 620 (Rs. 450 + benefits) per day in2014.5 The salary is not reduced if employees appear, even if they do not meet quotas. They also
receive Employees Provident Fund (EPF), Employment Trust Fund (ETF)6, gratuity, attendancebonus, profit bonus, and other benefits. For PEs, the daily salary is generally lower than that of
RPCs in the range of Rs. 350-500.7 Salary is not paid if an employee is unable to work for any
reason. Benefits, such as EPF and ETF, are guaranteed on larger estates, but are not always
guaranteed on the medium-sized and not guaranteed on the small estates.
The cross-sectional analysis of household income among children shows that it is notstatistically significant between management types, but it is statistically significant for the head ofhousehold education level. This indicates that there is no large difference in household income
among children by management type (Table 2), but there is a difference in the head of householdeducation level between IFs and the two estate types (Table 3). The difference in the head ofhousehold education level may be attributed to the social conditions of the time in which they wereborn. Their average age was 52 years old, indicating that they were born in the 1960s and the 1970s.
The nation was growing economically, but due to regional disparities and internal conflicts,
compulsory education could not be implemented nationwide and equal educational opportunities
were not available.8
Living conditions: The living space in which children live has a significant impact on theirdevelopment. In many countries, owning a home is a status symbol, but it also protects privacy andkeeps people from moving from place to place. It also helps to create an environment in which
4 Poverty Line: taken as half the median household income of the total population
5 According to Manager, if employees were registered as full-time workers, 25 working days per month were guaranteedwith 17 days paid holidays per year, with nominal quota of 20-22kg of leaf plucked per day. Salary is guaranteed
regardless of weather or insufficient yield.
6 EPF is a social security scheme of employees and EPF is to help employees to save a fraction of salary every month.
7 Work schedule was around 22 days per month and quantity of leaf plucking was determined to be around 25kg per day,8 This survey also found that the higher their education level, the more they perceived education as important and viceversa.
Ⓒ ISERD

121

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

children can settle down. Living conditions were divided into two indicators. One focuses on the
housing itself, whereas the other focuses on the environmental safety of the living space. Housing
condition is generated from three variables: i. ownership (not owing single house=0, and owing asingle house=1), ii. type of housing (line house=0, single house=1); and iii. the number of rooms
for each person (less than one room=0, more than one room=1). It is classified as high if all three
are satisfied, medium-high if two are satisfied, medium-low if one is satisfied, and low if none aresatisfied. Environmental safety is generated from four variables: i. safe drinking water (unsafe=0,
safe=1), ii. exclusive toilet facilities (shared or none=0, owned=1), iii. safe lighting source (nolighting or non-electricity=0, electricity=1); and iv. safe energy sources for cooking (nongas/electricity=0, gas/electricity=1). It is classified as high if all four are satisfied, medium-high if
three are satisfied, medium if two are satisfied, medium-low if one is satisfied, and low if none aresatisfied. Table 4 shows the housing condition and environmental safety of children bymanagement type.
The cross-sectional analysis of housing condition and environmental safety among children
between management types is statistically significant. Table 4 shows that housing condition isdifferent between management types and that children on PEs are more likely to live in lower
housing condition. This is because IFs own a single house, whereas most children living on theestates live in the provided line-house, which has 1-2 rooms9 or a single room with a veranda. Thus,
most of the IFs’ children belong to the medium category or above, but most of the children of thetwo estate types belong to the low category. Line-houses originally were built for temporary
workers during the coffee plantation era, when the plantation economy was introduced, and estate
owners have provided them to workers who do not have access to housing. Line-houses haveremained in the traditional manner and are often regarded negatively, as a relic of the colonial
period. A notable difference between RPCs and PEs is their right to residency. People in RPCs canstay in line-houses after retirement, even if their family members are not working,10 but people on
PEs cannot stay unless they are working, and are required to move out after leaving their jobs.
Table 4 Housing condition and environmental safety
Housing
Low
Medium-low
Medium-high
High

RPCs
140 (74.5%)
41 (21.8%)
7 (03.7%)
N/A

PEs
140 (71.8%)
19 (09.7%)
28 (14.4%)
8 (04.1%)

IFs
N/A
N/A
104 (78.2%)
29 (21.8%)

Low=0, Medium-low=1, Medium-high=3, High=4

Safety
RPCs
PEs
IFs
Low
3 (01.5%)
N/A
1 (00.8%)
Medium-low
13 (06.7%)
28 (13.7%)
2 (01.5%)
Medium120 (61.5%) 135 (66.2%)
81 (61.0%)
Medium-High
58 (29.8%)
41 (20.1%)
49 (36.7%)High
1 (00.5%)
N/A
N/A
Low=0, Medium-low=1, Medium=3, Medium-high=4, High=5

Environmental safety in the survey villages was recognized as the second from the bottom of650 divisions in Matara (DCS 2013) and the CAS 08/09 indicated that it on estates was worse thanon non-estates. This survey observes a similar distribution between the estates and IFs; whencomparing RPCs with PEs, PEs are in a lower category. Overall, this survey found that children
living on PEs tend to live under more unstable and less secure living conditions than IFs and RPCs.
Children’s activities: Doing some work for the family is a social and cultural norm in Sri Lanka.
Long hours of these activities not only take children away from school, but also deprive them of theopportunities they need to experience as children, which adversely affects their health anddevelopment. This study categorizes children's activities into two indicators: one focusing on
economic activities and the other on housework activities for the family. Our survey found that the
average number of hours spent by children on daily activities (sleeping, eating, leisure, school, andhousework) was around 20.5 hours, suggesting that economic activities11 that exceed 3.5 hours may
affect other activities. Table 5 shows the definition of child labour used in this study and Table 6
shows the average activities’ hours and activities status.
9 Space of a room is approximately 10 feet×12 feet. People owing a house was 15% in RPC and 28% on PEs.
10 Ownership belongs to the RPCs.
11 Economic activities are mainly engagement in tea cultivation or working for the family business, regardless of having

income or not.
Ⓒ ISERD

122

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

Table 5 Definition of child labour

Table 5 Definition of Child LabourAge
5-12 years
12 year and overEconomic Activities
More than 5 hours a week
More than 15 hours a week

Housework Activities
More than 15 hours a week
More than 25 hours a week

Table 6 Children’s activities
Economic Activities
Average hours

RPCs

PEs

IFs

1 hour and 14 min

Housework Activities
Average hours

RPCs

PEs

IFs

1 hour and 20 min

None

173 (95.6%)

169 (87.6%) 99 (76.2%)

None

046 (25.4%)048 (24.8%)

34 (26.2%)

Work008 (04.4%)

12 (06.2%) 25 (19.2%)

Housework

108 (59.7%)

109 (56.5%)

74 (56.9%)

12 (06.2%)

Child labour027 (14.9%)036 (18.7%)

22 (16.9%)

Child labour－

6 (04.6%)

The cross-sectional analysis of children’s economic activities is statistically significant
between management types, but that of housework activities is not statistically significant. This
indicates that differences among children exist in economic activities, but not in housework
between management types. The average daily activity time of the children engaged in economic
activities was 1 hour and 14 minutes. Children in RPCs were not engaged in child labor, whereas
6.2% of children on PEs and 4.0% of those in IFs were engaged. As for housework, many children
in all management types worked for their families, with average daily activity time of 1 hour and
20 minutes. Child labor engagement is 14.9% for RPC, 18.7% for PEs and 16.9% for IFs. Children
on PEs are more likely to engage in child labour.
2. Education Attainment and Educational Environment
This survey found that 86.1% of households stated the importance of education for their children,
and wished for them to have a better future through high-quality education and professional
knowledge. Figure.2 represents the children's school attendance by management type, and Figure.3
represents the repeated years/drop-out experiences. In terms of management types, the crosssectional analysis of both education attainment is statistically significant.

Fig. 2 School attendanceFig. 3 Repeated years / dropout

All IFs children attended, whereas 6.9% and 22.4% in RPCs and PEs did not attend, indicatingthat attendance of children living on the PEs was poor (Fig.2). For repeated years/dropout
experiences, the same trend can be observed; 33.2% in RPCs and 47.4% on PEs were not in theappropriate grade for their age (Fig.3).12
The cost of education can be noted as a factor in giving up children's education. This includes
stationery, reference books, transportation, private tutoring fees, and school repairs. Transportation
to and from school increases the burden of educational expenses, and has a bearing on commute
12 Secondary analysis of the CAS 08/09 data showed that the ratio of school non-attendance was around 10.3% in the

non-estate sectors, while around 15.5% on estates.
Ⓒ ISERD

123

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

safety (Wal, 2008). 13 The average expenditure per child is Rs.1,324 overall; Rs.960 for RPCs,
Rs.855 for PEs, and Rs.2,583 is for IFs. The percentage of households not spending is 2.6% for
RPCs, 14.6% for PEs, and 1.5% for IFs, indicating that IFs spend more on their children's
education than RPCs and PEs.
Behind this education expenditure is the attribution that each management type has. Children
in IFs could go to relatively large schools, better equipped, and with better-quality teachers locatedin the central town, but it requires for school facilities and the distance from their home requires
more time and money to commute. Children in RPCs go to schools on estates or locally, and schoolbuses are arranged for those whose residential areas are far from schools. Children on PEs usually
go to schools close to their home so that they do not require long-distance walking or transportation(Table 7). However, if children wish continue with senior secondary education (≥12 grades), there
is likely to be no school on the estate or near home.14 Thus, they must take a bus for commuting,which costs the household.
This survey found that the educational environment of both estates’ households is morefavorable in terms of distance, time, and modes than IFs, but less favorable in terms of quality ofeducation and educational opportunity.
Table 7 Distance from home to school and mode of travel
RPC

PE

IFs

58 (34.5%)

44 (28.2%)

13 (10.2%)

3≦5km

48 (28.6%)
43 (25.6%)

82 (52.6%)
23 (14.7%)

25 (19.7%)
14 (11.0%)>5km

19 (11.3%)

07 (04.5%)

75 (59.1%)

<1km
1≦3km

RPC

PE

IFs

Walking

87 (50.6%)

89 (56.7%)

23 (18.0%)

Car/ Motor bicycle

16 (09.3%)

2 (.1.3%)

13 (10.2%)

Bus/School bus

69 (40.1%)

66 (42.0%)

92 (71.8%)

DISCUSSION
This study attempts to delineate the disparity in quality of life and educational environment andexamine how these are related to the social structure of the management type to which thehouseholds belong.
Table 8 Quality of life and education attainment between management types
Household Condition

Living Condition

Children Activity
Education Attainment

H-income

Head Ed

Housing

SafetyEconomicHousework

No different

Different

Different

Different

Different

No different

Differentχ-square test (p=0.05): Significant = Different, No significant =No different

Table 8 shows the result of χ-square test on the quality of life and education attainment ofchildren. This survey found that four indicators show statistically significant disparities among
management types. The results of the comparison between the six indicators and management types
indicate that people on the PEs are more likely to live under the low quality of life and face thedifficulties, which are related to the social structure of PEs.
Table 9 presents an overview of the social structure of each type of management. IFs are selfemployed and their income depends on the amount of tea leaves harvested and their side jobs.
While both estate types’ workers are salaried, employment conditions for RPCs are more secure
13 Tea cultivation areas are generally located on the slope in the mountain. In the survey area, buses are available on themain roads, but not on the side roads or narrow streets, in which covered with trees and grass, and few road lamps andfew pedestrians. Therefore, family who arranges a travel mode such as bike, car or three-wheeler drives their children
to school for safety.
14 Schools below university are in Sinhala or Tamil medium. Most the children living on the estate go to Tamil medium
schools, but are limited. Only one school of Grades 12 and above is available. (5 schools in Tamil medium in Matara, 4schools are located in the survey areas)Ⓒ ISERD

124

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

than for PEs. Low-income households are unable to make ends meet, which is a factor in childlabor and leads to non-spending on child education. As shown in Table 2 and Figure 2 and 3,
despite the fact that a larger number of low-income IF households are below the poverty line, theirchildren’s education attainment is better than that of either estate type. This indicates that children's
education attainment is not only related to household income, but also to a combination of factors
such as the stability of one's livelihood, living environments, the educational environment, andparental awareness.
Table 9 Social structure of each management type of tea sector
EstatesRP
Cultivationarea≧50 acLiving Zone
HouseholdCondition

LivingCondition

EducationPE
Large (L) ≧50ac
Medium (M) 50－10ac
Small (S) ≦10acIFs

around 0.5－5ac

EstateVillage & Town

Village & Town

・Salary: Same for all RPCs
decided based on negotiation
with RPC & Trade Union
・EPF, ETF, Other benefits
・Residence: Generally provided by theestate, long-term workers have residencyrights after retirement.
・ Managed by PRCs, but residents canmodify.
・Pre-school: provided by estate
・1-11G: on estate or nearby home
・12-13G: Generally outside Town

・Salary: Depend on the estate
・L : EPF, ETF, Other benefits
M: depend on estate
S : generally, no-benefits
・Residence: Generally provided by estate,
but residency rights depend on the estate.
・Managed by PE. Residents can modify ifowner allows.

・Productivity & Side business・ Generally not join in Social
security

・Pre-school: in village
・1-11G: generally nearby home
・12-13G: Generally outside Town

・Owing land & house

・Maintain by themselves
・Pre-school: in village
・1-13G:nearby home/town/city

This survey found that estate workers and families usually live in residences provided by theestate where they work, and their children go to schools nearby or on the estate. However, while
the right of residence is recognized in RPCs, it is often not granted on PEs. PE workers who quit
their jobs often move with their families to new estates that offer better salaries and benefits. It
seems that they have more freedom of choice in their living conditions than those living in RPCs or
IFs do. If the new residence is in the same living area, children can commute to the same school as
before, but the change in commuting condition may exacerbate their financial burden. Moreover,relocation between estates can affect the stability of children's livelihoods, put their safety at risk
and increase child labor. Children's development can be influenced by the environmental safety of
their living space. However, neither PE owners nor their residents tend to invest in facilities fortheir homes because they do not stay there for long periods of time. Owing to inadequate energy
infrastructure, children are exposed to the risk of accidents caused by kerosene and firewood.
Furthermore, collecting firewood and fetching water increases children’s working hours at home,which indirectly affects their learning.
CONCLUSION
This study found that children's quality of life varies between management types, and a disparity in
education is also observed. Investigating into estate management types, we found that children
living on PEs generally suffer from poorer living conditions and education due to the discrepancy
in the social structure of each estate management type to which the children belong.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to all the interviewees who spent valuable time in this study. I
also express my sincere appreciation for the people who kindly provided me with their support,Ⓒ ISERD

125

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2022) 13-2

assistance, and advice. I would also like to thank my academic advisors for their considerable
guidance and encouragement.
REFERENCES
Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2004. Project completion report on the plantation reform project in Sri
Lanka. Asian Development Bank, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Retrieved from https://www.adb.org/sites/
default/files/project-document/69596/pcr-sri-26238.pdf
Department of Census and Statistics Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka (DCS). 2011. Child activity
survey 2008/09. Department of Census and Statistics Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka,
Retrieved from https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ILAB/research_file_attachment/Child_Activity_
Survey_2008-09_Final_Report_SriLanka.pdf
Department of Census and Statistics Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka (DCS). 2013. Classificationof administrative divisions by quality of housing. Department of Census and Statistics Ministry of
Finance and Planning Sri Lanka, ISBN 978-955-577-823-7
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
Ministry of Plantation Industries (MPI). 2013. Statistical information on plantation crops 2012. MPI,
Government of Sri Lanka, Retrieved from https://plantation.gov.lk/web/images/pdf/publications/plantation_sector_statistical_pocket_book_2012.pdf
Nihal, S.A. 2011. IMF, World Bank and ADB agenda on privatization, Pillage of plantations in Sri Lanka.
Authorhouse, ISBN 1452062609, Bloomingthon, USA.
Sen, A. 1992. Inequality reexamined. Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-19-828334-2, USA.
United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (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 fromhttps://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000226221
Wal, S.V.D. 2008. Sustainability issues in the tea sector, A comparative analysis of six leading producing
countries. Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO), Retrieved from https://www.
somo.nl/sustainability-issues-in-the-tea-sector/Ⓒ ISERD

126