Search

The papers making up this Special Section reveal important findings and begin to fill gaps in existing literature about children's and young people's understanding and developing beliefs about socio-economic inequality and poverty. We draw on our research experience with children growing up in poverty in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam (Young Lives) from the perspective of sociology of childhood and social anthropology. The commentary discusses the papers in the Special Section and calls for policies and practices that argue for social justice for children and young people in political and economic terms and emphasizes the importance of including children's views and descriptions of their experiences in research about poverty and inequality.

Due to the rarity of longitudinal data, evidence on the benefits of education across the life-course is relatively sparse in developing countries. Young Lives is the only comparative dual-cohort study to combine data collection using mixed-methods at child, household, school and community levels, following 12,000 children in two cohorts across four countries since 2002. This article outlines the conceptual and analytical framework and the key methodological features of the Young Lives study, and the unique potential of the data for analysis of educational trajectories, and of the influences that shape them. It discusses the challenges associated with a cross-country interdisciplinary study of children, their families and schools and examines how these were addressed. These include the logistical, epistemological and ethical challenges of ensuring the integrity of the panel data and cohort, maintaining an appropriate degree of consistency across countries in terms of design and measurement, without compromising policy relevance at the national level, and balancing the sometimes competing demands for cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence.

This article examines the association between formal education, social mobility and independent child migration in Ethiopia, India (Andhra Pradesh), Peru and Vietnam and draws on data from Young Lives, a longitudinal study of childhood poverty and schooling. It argues that among resource-poor populations, child migration sustains kin relations across generations and households and also facilitates children's progression through the life-course, thus it is fundamental to social reproduction. It reasons that formal education has greatly amplified this trend. Schooling has acquired symbolic value as the prime means of escaping household poverty and realising ambitions for social mobility. As such, elevated educational aspirations combine with systems shortcomings to stimulate school selection, school transfer and school-related child migration. The article concludes by examining the implications for children, for social reproduction and for policy.

The papers making up this Special Section reveal important findings and begin to fill gaps in existing literature about children's and young people's understanding and developing beliefs about socioeconomic inequality and poverty. We draw on our research experience with children growing up in poverty in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam (Young Lives) from the perspective of sociology of childhood and social anthropology. The commentary discusses the papers in the Special Section and calls for policies and practices that argue for social justice for children and young people in political and economic terms and emphasizes the importance of including children's views and descriptions of their experiences in research about poverty and inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on data from Peru, this article explores how poverty mediates diverse risks in rural children's lives. It offers four main arguments. First, risk is not simply a feature of 'extraordinary' childhoods, but integral to everyday, 'ordinary' lives. Second, children's responses to adversity are crucially shaped by sociomoral considerations. Third, children participate actively in household risk mitigation, their engagement structured by individual (biographical) and collective factors. Fourth, changing circumstances present new opportunities and challenges for children living with adversity. Current approaches focusing on so-called 'objective' risks neglect children's own priorities and subjective experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]