Streetcareers : an ethnographic study on the lives of children in street situations in Tondo, the Philippines

(1)

(2)

ii

Graduate School of Social Sciences

Research Master International Development Studies

(3)

iii

MSc (Res) Thesis

A Child-Centered Ethnographic Study

on the Street Careers of Children in

Tondo, Manila

Charlotte Prenen

Msc (Res) International Development Studies

June 30

th

, 2017

(4)

iv

Thesis Supervision and Evaluation

Supervisor:

Dr. Jacobijn Olthoff

Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences University of Amsterdam

Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, Amsterdam J.Olthoff@uva.nl

Second Reader:

Dr. Yatun Sastramidjaja

Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences University of Amsterdam

Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, Amsterdam Y.Sastramidjaja@uva.nl

(5)

v

Abstract

Starting from a ‘street careers’ framework, this thesis studies the lives of children in street situations in Tondo, the Philippines. Although academic research on the lives of children in street situations is increasing, a gap persists between researcher’s interpretations and representations of children’s realities, and the heterogeneous ways that children understand their realities. Representations based on researchers’ interpretations often result in portraying children in street situations as one homogeneous group of children, posing the risk of the stigmatization and marginalization of all poor children on the street. To do justice to the heterogeneities in children’s lives, this thesis presents a ‘street careers’ framework with three pillars as building blocks: livelihoods, social identity, and life trajectories. Building on the three pillars, the empirical findings from the child-centered ethnographic research conducted in Tondo reveal substantial differences in how children experience livelihood activities and opportunities, and demonstrates how public opinion influences children’s social identity constructions differently. Furthermore, it became clear that in contrast to what the literature suggests, variations in children’s street careers are not persistently influenced through public’s opinion on children in street situations. In Tondo, it is often the lack of space in housing that ‘pushes’ children to the street, which explains the high number of children visible on the streets of Tondo today. This thesis emphasizes that children are unique, with individual needs, and experiences, which should be studied and taken into account when designing policy aiming to improve their well-being.

Keywords: Children in street situations; Street careers; Livelihoods; Social

Identities; Life Trajectories; Tondo, Manila

(6)

vi

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Visualization of Social Identity as the First Pillar in the ‘Street Careers’ Framework

(Source: Author) ... 13

Figure 2: Livelihoods as the second pillar in the ‘Street Careers’ Framework ... 15

Figure 3: The ‘Street Careers’ Framework, with Life Trajectories as the third pillar ... 18

Figure 4: Barangay 105, ‘Happy Land’ (Source: Author) ... 26

Figure 5: Research Location Tondo, Manila (Source: Google Maps, TripAdvisor) ... 27

Figure 6:Ethnographic Research Methods (Source: Author) ... 31

Figure 7: An example of a Life Trajectory drawing ... 33

Figure 8: JM and Chito looking for recyclable garbage in the garbage bags ... 42

Figure 9 The garbage the boys collected that night……… ... 42

Figure 10: Treb cleaning bottles outside on the street ... 44

Figure 11: Jezra cleaning bottles in front of her house ... 44

Figure 12: Jane cooking rice for her and her family……… ... Figure 13: Manilyn making the bed………. ... 47

Figure 14: Life Trajectory Drawing Annalyn, 12... 61

Figure 15: Elyo sleeping on a wooden table to take a break from his long work night. Figure 16: Treb sleeping on the street, holding and safeguarding his garbage. ... 63

Figure 17: ‘Building’ two. The wall is the ‘entrance’ of the building. (Source: NGO Project Pearls) ... 66

(7)

vii

Foreword

Before entering one of the most underdeveloped and poorest areas of the Philippines, I tried to imagine how I could ever get close to children who are supposedly using drugs, stealing, in need of help, or trying to take advantage of me. The moment I stepped foot in Tondo, these stereotypes were shattered. None of the stereotypes fit the children I met in Tondo, and none of these representations even came close to capturing their experiences. I was able to get close to the children in Tondo because what these children wanted was someone who listened to them, someone who was interested in their experiences and realities, someone who listened to them completely. With the inhumane and unhealthy living conditions in Tondo, the garbage that was everywhere I looked, and the lack of basic facilities for almost all people who live there, I was surprised by the positive feeling I got from the place. There is one sentence written on many walls in Tondo, Tondo Man May Langit Din. The positive energy of the children is what, for me, symbolizes this sentence, which translates into - Even in Tondo there is a Heaven. I first and foremost want to thank all children who participated in this research, the children from whom I have learned so much.

Secondly, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to ‘Mommy Cell’ and ‘Mother Risa’, my interpreter who became my great friend throughout my months in Tondo, and my Filipino ‘mother’ who offered me a place to stay in Tondo and cooked food for me every day. Without their help and friendship of both laughter and crying, I would not have been able to conduct my research in Tondo as such.

I would thirdly like to thank my supervisor, Jacobijn Olthoff. Throughout this entire process, her constructive feedback and dedication to helping me motivated me to work as hard as I did. Her detailed feedback and words of advice were incredibly valuable to the development of my thesis, and I am grateful for the opportunity to have worked with her.

Finally, I want to thank my friends, my boyfriend, and my family who supported me throughout the writing process and, most importantly, during my time in the field. I am grateful for their unconditional love and support, and for always believing in me.

(10)

2

Introduction

While there is no international agreement on the definition of the term ‘street children’, it is estimated that tens of millions of children around the world are living and working on the street (UNICEF, 2012). The phenomenon of ‘street children’ continues to grow due to population growth, intensifying urbanization, increasing migration, and an inadequacy of policy and social action to prevent this phenomenon (KidsRights, 2012; Conticini, 2005). This growing issue makes it hardly surprising that scholars have studied the lives of children on the street extensively.

Publications in academic literature have emphasized the scale of the problem around the world, have outlined the identifying characteristics of children in street situations, have sought to explain root causes of the phenomenon, and have documented the consequences of a street lifestyle for children’s health and development (Panter-Brick, 2002). From such publications, it became clear that children are pushed into living and working on the streets due to many factors such as poverty, family dysfunction, domestic abuse, or the idea that freedom can be found on the streets (Hulme & Conticini, 2006; Butler, 2009). Once on the street, children are exposed to many threats and challenges. Some of the most pressing challenges include difficulties in accessing health services and in maintaining basic health, exposure to violence and abuse, exploitation, no access to shelter, and dangerous working conditions (KidsRights, 2012).

From studies on the lives of children in street situations, it became clear that there is a gap between children’s heterogeneous understandings of their experiences and realities, and the ways adults and researchers interpret, describe, and represent children’s experiences and realities (de Benítez, 2011; Conticini, 2008; Whitehead et al, 2008). Researchers create a category of children in street situations with certain characteristics and experiences based on their interpretations and give insufficient attentiveness to children’s voices about their realities (de Benítez, 2011). This has three important consequences. First, according to de Moura (2002), a ‘street children’ category draws heavily on moral values and the conception of an isolated street society. Labeling children as ‘street children’ presents the risk of stigmatization of all poor children living and working on the street, and the risk of perpetuating their social exclusion (de Moura, 2002). Second, in addition to the risk of stigmatization and social exclusion, most studies focusing on the lives of children in street situations refer to them, erroneously, as one homogeneous group of marginalized children (de Benítez, 2007). Such portrayals are in danger of ignoring children’s agency because, in

(11)

3

reality, children on the street are not a clearly defined, homogenous population. The use of the street by the children is ‘fluid, depending on his or her age, gender and experience’ (Ray et al, 2011: 8). Third, the way the concept of ‘street children’ is constructed reflects various social and political agendas (Panter-Brick, 2002). According to de Moura, the social construction of street children does not favor comprehensive practices, but ‘inspires interventions which sustain the status quo of inequalities’ (2002; 362). In order words, the socially constructed, homogeneous and stigmatized representations of children in street situations may be used to support disputable actions that perpetuate life on the street (de Moura, 2002).

To diminish the gap between children’s realities and adults’ interpretations, and to contest the homogenizing stigmas surrounding children in street situations, researchers have emphasized the need to include children’s participation in studies about their lives (Oh, 2012; de Benítez, 2011; Young & Barrett, 2001). Ethnographic and participatory methods in empirical studies are increasingly used to explore meanings of children’s experiences on the streets. Such participatory ethnographic studies cover the varied aspects of life on the street such as survival strategies (Conticini, 2005), reasons to ‘enter’ life on the street (Karabanow, 2006), influence of gender, age and ethnicity (Evans, 2006), and processes of moving between home and street (Ursin, 2013). Although these studies provide some information on the aspects of children’s lives, an approach on how to comprehensively study the heterogeneous experiences and realities of children in different street situations remains absent.

In the context of the Philippines, repeated concern has been expressed by the United Nations about the large number of children living and working on the streets (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2009). A lot of work is currently undertaken by non-government organizations (NGOs) and government organizations to improve the lives of children in street situations in the country. These organizations categorize children in street situations as children under the age of 18 for whom ‘the street’, including unoccupied dwellings and wasteland, has become home and/or their source of livelihood, and who are inadequately protected or supervised (KidsRights, 2012). By categorizing children in street situations as such, there remains little to no recognition of the diversities and individualities in children’s lives. It is here that we see an interesting parallel with how literature tends to conceptualize ‘street children’ as a homogeneous, marginalized group of children who lack agency and a voice in navigating their own futures.

To do justice to the heterogeneities in experiences and realities of children in street situations such as in the Philippines, I developed a ‘street careers’ framework that offers an approach to comprehensively study the lives of children on the street from their own perspectives. The

(12)

4

development of the ‘street careers’ framework enables to move beyond studying solely snapshot descriptions of children’s lives towards gaining more contextual and in-depth information about the lives of children on the street. This thesis demonstrates the theoretical development of the ‘street careers’ framework and its three main pillars as building blocks: social identity, livelihoods, and life trajectories. The pillars of the ‘street careers’ framework together allowed me to empirically study the lives of the children in street situations in Tondo, the Philippines in a comprehensive manner.

With this thesis I aim to make two contributions. On the one hand, it aims to make an empirical contribution in offering policymakers in Tondo a greater understanding of the heterogeneous realities and experiences of children in street situations. On the other hand, by developing the ‘street careers’ framework, this thesis aims to make a theoretical contribution to scholarly understanding by presenting a comprehensive approach to study the lives of children in street situations that is applicable in other, comparable contexts.

(13)

5

Chapter 1: Theoretical Framework

Introduction

As was described in the introduction, this thesis has two main objectives. First, it aims to gain and present a greater understanding of the lives of the children on the streets of Tondo, and second, it aims to develop a framework how to study lives of children in street situations in different, but comparable contexts. To achieve these two objectives, this thesis starts with a theoretical chapter that develops the ‘street careers’ framework, a framework which gives justice to the heterogeneous experiences and realities of children in street situations. Prior to the development of the ‘street careers’ framework, this chapter starts with a section that critically analyzes the marginal position of children in street situations in current development discourses. In this section, influential studies on ‘street children’ will be discussed in light of the social exclusion paradigm, demonstrating how most current discourses refer to these children, erroneously, as one homogeneous group of marginalized children. Furthermore, implications of the term ‘street children’ will be discussed, followed by an argumentation on why there is a need to refer to them as ‘children in street situations’. The following sections develop the ‘street careers’ framework. These sections present the three main pillars as building blocks of the framework: social identities, livelihoods, and life trajectories. The chapter concludes with the presentation of the research questions and an outline of the coming chapters.

1.1 The Social Exclusion of Children on the Street

Over the last few decades, social scientists shifted the approach in studying the lives of children. Where children were predominantly seen as ‘incomplete adults’ that socialize into adult society, sociologists like James, Jenks, and Prout (2001; 1998; 1997) convincingly argued for studying children as active agents who are capable of making their own decisions, as social ‘beings’ rather than ‘becomings’. Children became recognized as worth studying through themselves and for themselves, “regardless of the adults’ viewpoints and preoccupations” (Prout and James, 1997, p.8). This new childhood studies, in short, views childhood as a social construction, understood in different ways in different cultures and societies and at different times.

The idea of childhood as a social construction in itself is not new. In 1962, Ariès already brought this to the attention in his influential work Centuries of Childhood where he argued that in pre-modernity the concept of childhood was non-existent. According to Ariès, childhood only emerged as a valued phenomenon afterward. Ariès’ statement led many

(14)

6

historians to object his visions, as critics argue that the Middle Ages did have a concept of childhood, not perhaps the same as in later centuries, but a concept nonetheless (Cunningham, 2005). Despite such objections, more recently, scholars argued that Ariès’ observations do have a core of truth, and are fruitful as an interesting idea (Qvortrup, 2005; Jenks, 2004). For example, the often cited scholar Qvortrup (2005) builds the ideas of Ariès and states that in modern society children belong to the private family, retreated from the openness of public society. He argues that by losing legitimate visibility in public, children are socially excluded from the dominant sectors of the social world like business and labor, urban areas, and political sectors, which all became characteristics for adults (Qvortrup. 2005). Children’s exclusion from urban areas, labor and other dominant sectors of the social world is particularly relevant when discussing the lives of children who spend most of their time working and living on the street in urban areas.

A strand of research that is relevant for studying the lives of children in street situations is research that links the phenomenon of ‘street children’ to the contexts of marginalization and social exclusion (see for example Stodulka, 2017; Ursin, 2016; de Benítez, 2011; Ataov & Haider, 2006; Beazley, 2003; Evans, 2006; Nieuwenhuys, 2001; Panter-Brick, 2002; Stephenson, 2001). In his recent book, Stodulka (2017) presents the results of his five-year ethnographic study on marginality and stigma of children on the streets of Java and accurately illustrates how stigmatization and marginalization of persons are closely related to each other. According to Stodulka (2017; 24), a stigma can be identified when particular ‘others’ are distinguished and labeled as ‘different’, which is often associated with negative attributes, as ‘they’ are separated from ‘us’ and ‘they’ are finally stigmatized. He argues that discourses influence the ways that street-related children deal with these marginal social conditions, making the positioning of ‘street children’ deeply political.

In 2001, Nieuwenhuys already observed the influence of discourse on the marginalization of children on the street. She argued that the term ‘street children’ was forged as ‘a category of discourse construed around the children of the poor’ (551). The underlying presuppositions of the term accommodate the idea of curing societies of ‘street children’ who are displaying socially unacceptable behavior, thereby portraying these children as a problem outside of ‘mainstream society’ (Nieuwenhuys, 2001). More recent studies from Benoit et al. (2008) and Ursin (2016) build further on the idea of discursive marginalization of children on the street. According to Benoit et al. (2008) literature on ‘street children’ runs the risk of homogenizing these groups of children in an attempt to demonstrate their marginal position within society. Correspondingly, Ursin (2016) argues how discourses on ‘street children’ create an understanding of the ‘other’ as homogeneous social groupings who are excluded from

(15)

7

mainstream society. This exclusion greatly influences the ways that these (groups of) children are encountered, defined and debated, and how this impacts their everyday lives, experiences, and livelihoods (Ursin, 2016). In short, discourses on childhood, and in this case on ‘street children’, have the ability to naturalize the stigmatization, marginalization, and homogenization this group of children based on their lacking opportunities, skills, and access to resources (Nieuwenhuys, 2001; de Moura, 2002; Glauser, 2015; Stodulka, 2017).

1.2 Implications of the Term ‘Street Children’

In the previous section, a start was made with critically analyzing literature on the social exclusion of children, particularly of children on the street. In this section, I will zoom in on the specific label often used for these children, i.e. ‘street children’, and show why this label does not accurately capture most of these children’s social realities. The phenomenon ‘street children’ has been the focus of academic interest and welfare concern for over two decades. Since its inception, the term ‘street children’ has been used to refer to different children in a variety of circumstances, showing no consensus on definitions of this group of children (de Benítez, 2011; Aptekar & Heinonen, 2003; Ennew, 2003). The definition of ‘street children’ is contested, above all in its implicit claim to capture in one blow the reality of millions of children throughout the world. UNICEF made several attempts to broadly define this group of children, and refers to ‘street children’ ‘as boys and girls aged under 18 for whom 'the street' (including unoccupied dwellings and wastelands) has become home and/or their source of livelihood, and who are inadequately protected or supervised by responsible adults’ (UNICEF, 2007). This definition by UNICEF illustrates an attempt to capture the diverse social realities of children in various street situations, and many practitioners and policymakers refer to this definition when categorizing and defining children on the street. Yet, by categorizing children on the street as such, there remains little to no recognition of the diversities and individualities in children’s lives.

Social researchers Glauser (2015), de Moura (2002), de Benítez (2011), and Panter-Brick (2002), powerfully criticize the term ‘street children’. Drawing on their insights, I illustrate three crucial implications of the term ‘street children’. First, as was briefly mentioned in the introduction, referring to children as ‘street children’ tends to homogenize the lives of all children on the street (Panter-Brick, 2002). Consequently, the representation of ‘street children’ obscures the heterogeneity in children’s experiences and the diversities in children’s lives on the street, which vary from context to context, from group to group and from individual to individual. Homogenizing the lives of children on the streets furthermore easily contributes to the stigmatization and social exclusion of all poor families and children on the street (de Moura, 2002). Children on the streets are often stigmatized and ‘presumed to be

(16)

8

offenders, even when there is no offense; drug addicts, even if they never used drugs; and “vagrants”, even if they work hard’ (Rosenblatt, 2014; 21).

Second, where the label ‘street children’ was originally adopted by international agencies to avoid negative overtones for children who had been known as vagrants, rag-pickers, and glue-sniffers, scholars later suggested that the term ‘street children’ does still have powerful negative emotional overtones (de Benítez, 2011; Panter-Brick, 2002; Aptekar, 1988). In a study on children on the streets of Colombia, Aptekar (1988) argues that the term ‘street children’ evokes conflicting emotions of disapproval, disgust, and pity among the public. Although Aptekar’s study was conducted almost three decades ago, recent scholars still build on his insights. In recent literature, ‘street children’ are continuously portrayed as a socially undesirable group of children. There are two, somewhat contradictory, stereotypes of ‘street children’. On the one hand, a ‘street child’ is seen as a victim and is thus more likely to be treated as a passive object of welfare, rather than a person with his or her rights. On the other hand, there is a picture of a young male, engaged in substance abuse and delinquency. Both these assumptions place ‘street children’ outside of normal life courses of children and assume that children should not work or live on the street (Ursin, 2016; de Benítez, 2011; Benoit et al., 2008; Evans, 2006; Glauser, 2015).

Third, ‘street children’ are easily represented as the symbol of poverty and social exclusion (Panter-Brick, 2002). According to de Moura (2002), presenting children as ‘street children’, alienated from mainstream society, inspires interventions aimed at improving the conditions of an ‘outsider’, rather than the development of long-term and comprehensive support for ‘excluded’ insiders. Some interventions sustain the status quo of social inequalities and possibly ‘perpetuate life on the street’ (de Moura, 2002; 362).

Based on the implications of the appellation ‘street children’, the search for a definition or term that adequately represents children on the street as children who have heterogeneous realities and experiences, who are not stigmatized, and who are perceived as ‘included’ in mainstream society, continues. ‘Children in situations of risk’ and ‘Children in Need of Special Protection’ are emerging terms, which conceptualize ‘street children’ as one of a number of groups most at risk and requiring urgent attention (UNICEF, 2010; Butler, 2009). Such terms do not demarcate ‘street children’ radically from other poor children. Yet, for children for whom the street is a reference point, I believe this is not a good suggestion. For them, it is important to adopt a more inclusive operational understanding of children on the street. Therefore, throughout this thesis, ‘street children’ are referred to as ‘children in street situations’, an appellation which is agreed upon by the Children’s Rights Council in Brazil

(17)

9

(Rizzini, 2011). Referring to children as such emphasizes that the issue here is not the ‘street child’ or the group of ‘street children’, but the situation causing the child to be in the street. It opens up an approach that recognizes that children’s realities on the street vary greatly. Furthermore, it is built on the idea that these realities should be characterized by and with the involvement of the children who experience them, rather than by other people doing this on their behalf (Terre des Hommes, 2014). In this respect, identifying diverse situations and experiences on the street seems more relevant than identifying what one would call ‘street children’ (Aptekar & Stoecklin, 2014). Hence, this thesis refers to ‘street children’ as ‘children in street situations’.

1.3 From Changing the Term to Changing the Approach in Studying the

Lives of Children in Street Situations

So far it has become clear why there is a need to refer to children on the street generally as ‘children in street situations’. Referring to children in this manner moves beyond portraying this group of children as a homogeneous group by emphasizing diversities in experiences of different children in different situations. Yet, changing the way of referring to children on the street is only a first step. It raises further questions as to which theoretical concepts and insights are useful for adequately studying the lives of such children and it asks for an exploration of the methodological building blocks useful for doing so. This is where the concept of the ‘street career’ comes in, and as a following step, a comprehensive ‘street careers’ framework with which the heterogeneous realities and experiences of children on the street can be adequately analyzed.

When developing a ‘street careers’ framework for studying the lives of children in street situations, it is first of relevance to investigate where the basic concepts were originated. The concept of a ‘street career’ emerged when the notion of a ‘career’, as originally espoused by Goffman’s (1961) in his study on social deviance, was applied to children on the street. Essentially, Goffman’s (1961) concept of a ‘career’ refers to the progression of related experiences and identity changes in particular settings over time. The concept of a ‘career’ then, ‘allows one to move back and forth between the personal and the public, between agency and social structures, and between the self and its significant society’ (Goffman, 1961; 127). In other words, a ‘career’ is bound up with social identities and social roles as well as with wider societal definitions of how these deviants should behave (Goffman, 1961). It is a progression from one set of social identities and social roles to another and has ‘implications for a person’s subjective sense of self as well as for their objective behavior’ (O’Brien & Yar, 2008; 38).

(18)

10

In applying Goffman’s concept of a ‘career’ to children in street situations and studying their lives as ‘street careers’, this thesis is not unique. In fact, Visano (1990; 142), among others, has illustrated how applying the concept of a ‘street career’ offers a useful tool for exploring children’s ‘activities and relationships attendant with street socialization, and the various stages of assimilation to street life’ (ibid). The ‘street career’ concept was later linked to time and age (Evans, 2006; Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2003; Beazley, 2003); to movements between home and street (Aptekar & Heinonen, 2003), to social skills, subcultural norms and values (Stephenson, 2001) and to temporality (Stodulka, 2017). What becomes clear from studies on children’s ‘street careers’ is that appraising children’s lives as a career prevents solely studying aspects of children’s lives. It requires one to move beyond snapshot descriptions of children and calls for data giving both time-depth and contextual information (Panter-Brick, 2002). Furthermore, studying children’s lives as careers does justice to children’s individual agency, and recognizes that children are active in shaping their own destinies (Karabanow, 2004). Despite the shared understandings about the value of ‘street careers’ concept in general, scholars have not yet completely agreed upon a definition of the concept of a ‘street career’, and a comprehensive approach how to study lives as ‘street careers’ is still lacking.

This thesis takes a step further by using the ambiguous but valuable ‘street careers’ concept to develop a ‘street careers’ framework. In this way, justice is done to the value of the ‘street careers’ concept and a unique and new comprehensive approach in studying the lives and experiences of children on the street is offered. Building on the basic concepts of a ‘career’ and a ‘street career’, I have found three pillars that uphold the ‘street careers’ framework: social identity, livelihoods, and life trajectories. Throughout the following sections, I will elaborate further on each of the three pillars individually, and will illustrate how together they allow gaining in-depth knowledge on children’s heterogeneous lives and realities.

Social Identity Constructions of Children in Street Situations

The first pillar that upholds the framework is the concept of social identity. In his study on children’s street careers, Visano (1990) introduced ‘street career’ concept as a concept which can help appraise for children the long-term outcomes of social experiences and negotiated social identities on the street. Other, more recent scholars, used social identity as a central aspect when studying children’s ‘street careers’ (Evans, 2006; Panter-Brick, 2002; Stodulka, 2017). Children create certain identities on the streets as a response to their stigmatization and as a solution to the problems they face in a world that is generally hostile to their existence (Beazley, 2003). Studying the social identities of children on the streets makes it possible to analyze processes by which children construct their identities over time on the street, and how wider society influences these constructions (Evans, 2006).

(19)

11

An important strand of research for the development of the first pillar is research that links the concept of a street career to children’s social identity constructions (Karabanow, 2006; Evans, 2006; Beazley, 2003). In the simplest terms, peoples’ complex and fluid identities can be understood as the characteristics that make an individual distinct from others as well as those that make an individual a recognizable member of a social group (Beazley, 2003). When linking the concept of social identity to street careers, the children’s multiple and fluid identities of in street situations change depending on different circumstances and on the various relationships they possess (Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2002).

More scholars have highlighted the link between relationships of children in street situations on the one hand and their identity constructions and negotiations on the other. For instance, renowned researcher Maclure in his article with Sotelo (2014) on children on the streets of Nicaragua demonstrated how identities of children are shaped by their personal relationships with peers and families, and by their socialization within permanent social groupings such as family and school. Social relationships are mentioned as relevant because where children have supportive relations, they are usually able to benefit from the social capital generated from these relationships (Barker, 2012; Holland et al., 2007). From the numerous definitions and understandings social capital, current study primarily builds on Bourdieu’s (1985) definition and analysis. Bourdieu describes social capital as a way of looking at individuals as agents in various social positions who are able to sustain their place in the system of social inequality, through the way they use social networks and connections. His analysis examines the advantages derived from participation in groups and the mobilization of social ties as a resource (Bourdieu, 1985).

According to Maclure and Sotelo (2014), for children who live in circumstances of poverty, there is limited availability of social capital, and sparse opportunities for social capital formation. A lack of social capital leaves marginalized children, such as children in street situations, susceptible to risks which could undermine their development. To overcome these risks, children are looking for trustworthy and reliable social ties that will help to yield structural and social capital and will play a significant role in contributing to life chances and well-being of children in street situations (Maclure & Sotelo, 2014). The authors identified two types of social capital that are particularly relevant in a child’s identity development on the street: affective assets and structural assets. The former are intrinsic and include perceptions and feelings such as self-esteem, friendships that are built up through social relationships and trust, and the latter consists of tangible resources such as skills, material goods, knowledge and additional social connections. Both types of assets are socially

(20)

12

generated and connect relationships of children in street situations with the opportunities that are available to them (Maclure & Sotelo, 2014).

An accurate example of the importance of social capital to identity development in children’s street careers is evident in Beazley’s (2003) study on the construction of identities on the streets of Indonesia. In her study, Beazley illustrates the importance of street boys’ socialization into a ‘street identity’. She uses Visano’s (1990) concept of a street career and argues that socializing into a series of norms, ideals, group processes and codes of ethics on the street are necessary in order to follow a successful career (Beazley, 2003). With this identification of a social ‘street identity’, children are expected to adopt particular attitudes, perspectives, and values. According to Beazley, these values include principles of solidarity, individual survival, independence and freedom, work hierarchies, unique attitudes to life on the street and the understanding of street codes. Adopting these attitudes and values, supportive networks, coping strategies and relationships in the absence of parents contribute in developing a social identity, a collective identity from which to define an individual identity that helps to redefine negative self-concepts (Beazley, 2003).

When establishing the concept of social identity as the first pillar in the ‘street careers’ framework, it is important to recognize that constructions of identity are not only related to the forms and assets of social capital that children generated from their relationships. According to Karabanow (2006), especially in constructing identity, children in street situations are highly aware of how others perceive them. Through public discourse an assumption on ‘street children’ is created, built on the idea that children on the street are ‘out of place’ (Ursin, 2016; 4). This assumption results in the stereotypical representations of on the one hand children on the street as ‘victims’ in need of help and on the other hand as ‘delinquents’ and a threat to society (Butler, 2009; de Benítez, 2011). As a result of such unrealistic stereotypes, children on the street are often discriminated against and treated with prejudice (Ursin, 2013). This context of prejudice and discrimination, and here we come back to the main issue of current study i.e. children’s street careers, in turn, has an influence on how children behave and construct their identities on the street (de Benítez, 2011; Karabanow, 2006).

In short, this section established social identity as the first pillar of the ‘street careers’ framework. Building on the insights of Maclure and Sotelo (2014), this section illustrated the importance of ties and relationships to children in street situations. It demonstrated the relevance if studying how these relationships constitute relevant assets that have the opportunity to play a significant role in the identity construction in children’s street careers.

(21)

13

Furthermore, it raised the question how identity constructions of children on the street are impacted by the public’s opinion on ‘street children’. Studying children’s social identity constructions in this way offers the first step in exploring the heterogeneities in the careers of children in street situations. Figure one visualizes the first pillar of the ‘street careers’ framework.

Figure 1: Visualization of Social Identity as the First Pillar in the ‘Street Careers’ Framework

Livelihood and Survival Strategies on the Streets

In the ‘street careers’ framework, the second pillar is livelihoods. For children in street situations, livelihood strategies and opportunities have been explicitly associated with a child’s social identity (Beazley, 2003). As a response to the (often negative) public’s opinion about ‘street children’, children in street situations need to be highly sophisticated in creating complex ways to promote, protect and secure their livelihoods (Conticini, 2005). How children use available resources to make a living and how this is related to public’s opinion is critical when studying children’s lives as a street career, as this contributes to the understanding how these children survive in different complex situations on the street (Trent & Kotze, 2009). The concept of livelihoods constitutes the second pillar in the ‘street careers’ framework, and offers the next step towards providing a coherent understanding of children’s lives and experiences on the street.

In academic research, studies emphasized children’s increasing age as an important factor in influencing the livelihood activities and opportunities of children in street situations (Evans, 2006; de Benítez, 2011; Beazley, 2003; Aptekar, 1988; Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2003). Scholars found that children transition into various livelihood forms and activities, in response to both personal development that is related to a child’s increasing age, and in response to a transformation in public perceptions on ‘street children’ (de Benítez, 2011; Beazley, 2003; Aptekar, 1989; Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2003). To illustrate, according to

STREET CAREERS

Social Identity

(22)

14

Aptekar, street children in Colombia were considered cute and economically viable before they reached puberty. Once these street children reached puberty, public perception of their presence shifted towards perceiving children as thugs and a threat to society, and children had to change the ways they earned their livelihoods on the street (Aptekar, 1988). The conclusion of Aptekar’s (1988) study, together with those of other scholars (see, for example, Evans; 2006; Rizzini & Butler, 2003; Beazley, 2003; de Benítez, 2011; Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2003), suggest that livelihood opportunities and strategies of children in street situations are related to getting and visibly looking older in both age and size, together with a decrease in public tolerance of children’s presence on the streets.

In addition to age, it is argued that gender is also an important characteristic which is related to children’s livelihood activities and opportunities on the street (Evans, 2006; Ray et al., 2011; Beazley, 2002; van Blerk, 2005). According to Beazley (2002), girls earn their money in a different way than boys do. Traditionally, girls are kept close to home in most of the world’s cultures due to family responsibilities, their own protection and because of child-care. On the contrary, men and boys are generally encouraged to go be independent and to go outside to earn a living (Coren et al., 2013; Evans, 2006; Beazley, 2002; van Blerk, 2006; Rafaelli et al., 2000). This separation of places for boys and girls leads to the belief that girls in street situations are more ‘out of place’ than boys, resulting in a doubly marginal position compared to boys in livelihood opportunities on the street (Beazley, 2002).

According to van Blerk (2006), it is important to study the significance of age and gender, not to generalize experiences to other boys and girls, but as a different lens through which we can continue to more fully understand the lives and experiences of children in street situations. Children are individuals with their own agency. It is important to investigate children's livelihood activities related to their age and gender, as this are, although socially constructed, characteristics of children. Studying children’s livelihoods as such allows highlighting individual personalities and preferences in the ways children survive on the street (van Blerk, 2006).

In short, this section illustrated the second pillar that I have found to uphold the ‘street careers’ framework: livelihoods. Livelihood opportunities and strategies of children in street situations are related to a child’s age and gender, and the changing public opinion. Once a child ages into youth, thereby visibly looking older in age and size, his or her livelihood activities and opportunities change. As regard to gender, girls are doubly marginalized as they are frequently perceived as ‘being the “wrong” gender in the “wrong” place’ (Skelton, 2000; 80). How children use available resources to survive on the street and how this is influenced

(23)

15

by the public’s opinion and a child’s age and gender is critical when studying children’s lives as street careers, as this contributes to the understanding how children survive in different complex situations on the street (Trent & Kotze, 2009) It offers the next step in exploring the heterogeneous lives of children in street situations more comprehensively. Figure two illustrates livelihoods as the second pillar in the ‘street careers’ framework.

Figure 2: Livelihoods as the second pillar in the ‘Street Careers’ Framework

Life Trajectories of Children in Street Situations

So far, social identity and livelihood are the first two pillars that uphold the ‘street careers’ framework. In addition to these two pillars as building blocks in the framework, several authors suggest that also the concept of life trajectories is particularly useful in research on children’s lives on the street as this draws attention to theorizations of age and brings in processes of temporality (Evans, 2006; Hockey & James, 2003; James, Jenks & Prout, 1998). The idea of including life trajectories as the third pillar in the framework is to divide the life course of children in street situations into complementary parts, which are not necessary linear or standardized (Hockey & James, 2003). By doing so, justice is done to temporality, fluidity and diversity of children’s experiences in different trajectories in their street careers.

Studying life trajectories of children in street situations is important because it allows studying the movement of children over time and through temporal phases of life in street careers pathways (Evans, 2006). This is important because, according to Stodulka (2017), the temporality and fluidity of children’s street careers of children in street situations have not been systematically addressed in anthropological studies. This is remarkable, considering that the fluidity of experiences on the street has been acknowledged repeatedly (Ray et al., 2011; Aptekar & Heinonen, 2003; de Benítez, 2007). By establishing life trajectories as the third

Liveli-hoods

STREET CAREERS

Social Identity

(24)

16

pillar in the ‘street careers’ framework, the framework offers an approach to address the fluidity and temporality in children’s experiences.

To examine the different complementary parts of children’s temporal life on the street, Rizzini and Butler (2003) roughly divide children’s life course into three main trajectories: socializing onto the street, daily life on the street, and leaving or ‘exiting’ the street. Although these are relevant for children in different situations, I believe their study inadequately accounts for differences within the trajectories. Rizzini and Butler (2003) tend to homogenize trajectories of children in different street situations and are doing insufficient justice to their agency. Karabanow (2006) provides a complementary view on children’s life trajectories in his study on children’s street careers in Toronto. He shed light on children’s attitudes and experiences as they move through the different stages of street life. He puts great emphasis on children’s agency and approaches their lives in a non-deterministic way that translates negative turning points in life into a deviant ‘street-world’ (Karabanow, 2006; 51). Far from being passive and dependent, Karabanow (2006) sees children as active agents in their own street careers and accurately studies how children move towards and away from street life.

The theoretical perspectives of Karabanow’s (2006) and Rizzini and Butler’s (2003) are two central views in the life trajectories pillar of the ‘street careers’ framework. To explore experiences surrounding the trajectory of moving towards street life, one could start by studying the context of the family and the reasons for leaving home to the street environment. As already studied extensively, the street offers for some a sense of amusement, escape from violence or an opportunity for independence when this does not exist within the context of the family (Karabanow, 2014; de Benítez, 2011; Butler, 2009). Children who move to the street could be rejecting kinship relations and household structures (Evans, 2006). ‘Choosing the street’ should be understood within the context of poverty and social structures, as well as individual circumstances (Karabanow, 2006).

According to Karabanow (2006), in the early trajectories of street life, the majority of time is spent trying to meet basic survival needs such as food, shelter, and interactions. The ways children try to meet these needs differ for children with different gender and ages, in diverse situations on the street. The process of going to the street is a gradual process where the early part of the child’s street career is when a child starts to spend frequent time on the streets during the day but returns home at night. In this way, the child is able to assimilate to new surroundings, to make new friendships and to become habituated to street life (Karabanow, 2006).

(25)

17

According to Karabanow (2006) and Rizzini and Butler (2003), themes such as security, drugs, leisure, and mobility all influence children’s life trajectories. For example, the places children go to for work, to play, or to rest influence the places where they spend their time, and the places they avoid. A child’s livelihood activity may influence the use of space, their income, and their reason for following or stopping a certain trajectory. Furthermore,

interventions from the government or the police could force children to move into a different life trajectory, and relates to the ways children experience feelings of insecurity or security on the street. Children constantly flux between home and street, from street to institutions or shelters, or to different parts of the city. The processes of temporality and shifts between home, street, NGOs, and institutions have rarely been systematically addressed in

ethnographic research. This is interesting since these movements recur for as long as children are on the street (Rizzini & Butler, 2003).

To study the trajectory of leaving life on the street, Rizzini and Butler refer to a study conducted by Lucchini in 1998. Findings from Lucchini’s study suggest that there are three ways of leaving street life: an active exit, and exit due to a depletion of resources, or a forced exit because of removal. In this distinction, the first exit indicates that children have complete agency in leaving the street, the second implicates some acts of agency while the third completely does not. Although his study is conducted over 15 years ago, the three exits still seem to correspond to the realities of children in present day (Karabanow, 2008; 2014).

When children successfully leave the street, they make a conscious, active choice to follow an alternative trajectory. This could occur when children disassociate themselves from the streets when they experience negative, stigmatizing or abusive reactions from mainstream society, or when they have a sense of being in control and able to take care of themselves. When an exit stems from a depletion of resources, life on the street was ended due to a lack of resources for survival, mobility, and sociability (Lucchini, 1998). These two types of exits differ due to the lack of alternative trajectories to the street in the second exit. A common strategy for children is to temporarily distance themselves from the street, because of a depletion of resources or to take a break from the harsh street environments (Rizzini & Butler, 2003). Commonly, such temporary exits are with organizations that offer a shelter or drop-ins where children can go to eat, sleep, and rest, after which they return to their lives on the street.

According to Lucchini (1998), the third possible exit of street life is an exit due to institutionalization or imprisonment, an exit without any form of agency. In general, the street is subject to extensive regulation and control by a number of players such as the police, community leaders and other influential people (Ursin, 2016; Conticini, 2005). In societies

(26)

18

where people see children in street situations as a threat or a potential threat to society, the juvenile justice system is often used as a way to clear the streets and to punish offenders against the common good (de Benítez, 2003). Children in particular countries can get arrested solely for living on the street, or for committing offenses connected with their homeless status, as in the Philippines (Consortium for Street Children, 2002; 1). Governments defend such a repressive system of operating by stating that removing the children from the street is the only way to protect children from exposing abuse and exploitation (de Benítez, 2003).

In short, this section discussed the third and final pillar of the ‘street careers’ framework: life trajectories. The section described how studying the life trajectories of children contribute to the understanding of the heterogeneous movements and fluidities in their street careers. It provided examples of reasons for moving towards and away from life on the street, and how government organizations and NGOs could influence these movements between the different, non-linear trajectories in children’s street careers. Reasons for following certain trajectories in moving towards or away from street life differ due to circumstances, needs, and aspirations of individual children.

In summary, in this thesis, the ‘street careers’ framework consists of three pillars: social identity, livelihoods, and life trajectories. Studying lives as street careers on the basis of these three pillars gives the opportunity to gain comprehensive information on children’s heterogeneous social experiences in daily life on the street, children’s livelihood activities and opportunities, their social identity constructions, and the movements towards and away from life on the street. The ‘street careers’ framework furthermore takes into account notions of age, gender, and temporality, it investigates the influence of public’s opinion on children’s experiences, and does justice to children’s agency. The visualization of the ‘street careers’ framework and its three pillars as building blocks is presented on the next page in Figure three.

Figure 3: The ‘Street Careers’ Framework (Source: Author) Public Perception – Age – Gender - Temporality

Liveli-hoods

STREET CAREERS

Social Identity Life Trajec-tories

(27)

19

1.4 Research Questions

To gain a greater understanding of the lives of the children on the streets of Tondo, and to develop a framework on how to study lives of children in street situations in different, but comparable contexts, this thesis is centered on the following main research question:

‘How do children in street situations experience variations in their street careers, based on the three pillars of the ‘street careers’ framework: livelihoods, social identity, and life

trajectories?

This question is disaggregated into the following, interrelated sub-questions:

- What are different livelihood opportunities and activities of children in street situations in Tondo, and how does the public’s opinion impact activities and experiences of children differently?

- How do children capitalize on social relationships when constructing their social identities?

- How do children in street situations in Tondo perceive themselves and how does public’s opinion influence these self-perceptions differently?

- How do different children experience variations in their life trajectories of moving toward and away from street life?

- How do NGOs and government organizations define the heterogeneous group of children in street situations, and how do children engage with and experience interventions of these organizations?

- How does the ‘street careers’ framework contribute in understanding the heterogeneous and diverse realities and experiences of children on the street?

By developing the ‘street careers’ framework, this chapter made a start in answering the final sub-question and meeting the first objective of this thesis. The ‘street careers’ framework offers an approach how to comprehensively study the lives of children in street situations from their perspectives.

To meet the second, empirical objective, I applied the ‘street careers’ framework to the children in street situations in Tondo, Manila. In the following chapters, the empirical study with the children of Tondo is discussed. Chapter two describes the context in which the empirical study for this thesis was conducted. It discusses the socio-economic and political situation of the Philippines and discusses the challenging circumstances of children in street

(28)

20

situations in the country. The chapter gives an overview of the research location in Tondo, Manila and concludes with a short introduction to the NGO where I did my internship: Bahay Tuluyan. Chapter three discusses the research methodology. In this chapter, the child-centered ethnographic research methods are discussed, methods that are critical in studying lives as ‘street careers’. Furthermore, the ontological position that underpins the framework is discussed in Chapter three, followed by an explanation of the sampling method, the ethical considerations, and the limitations.

Applying the ‘street careers’ framework, as visualized in Figure three, to the context of Tondo, the results of the empirical study with children in street situations are presented in the Chapters four, five and six. Chapter four introduces the children of Tondo based on their diverse livelihood strategies, activities, and opportunities for children to survive on the street. Also, the influence of gender and age are discussed as intersecting elements that contribute to children’s experiences on the street. Chapter five examines the children’s constructions of social identity through an investigation of their social relationships with peers and family, and the ways they are able to capitalize on these relationships. Chapter six illustrates diversities in the children’s life trajectories and the varying experiences with government and non-government interventions aimed at improving the well-being of children in street situations in Tondo. The final chapter, Chapter seven presents the conclusions of the thesis and the answers to the research questions. This chapter also offers a discussion on the empirical contributions, followed by recommendations for NGO policymakers in Tondo, who aim to enhance the well-being of the children in street situations. The chapter ends with the theoretical contributions of this thesis and recommendations for scholars aiming to understand the lives of children in street situations.

(29)

21

Chapter 2: Research Context

Introduction

This chapter introduces the world around children in street situations in Tondo, Manila. The chapter starts by placing the empirical study within a larger context by describing the socio-economic and political situation in the Philippines. The following section illustrates the situation of children in street situations in the country and investigates whether this situation changed under the new political administration. After this, current policies and practices aimed at improving the lives of children in street situations will be discussed, followed by a description of the neighborhood where the empirical study is conducted. The chapter ends with a short description of the NGO Bahay Tuluyan, the organization where I did a voluntary internship and through whom I was introduced to the situations in Tondo.

2.1 Socio-Economic Context of the Philippines

The Republic of the Philippines is an island country with a population of around 101 million people. After World War II, the Philippines were the second wealthiest country in East Asia after Japan. However, the country suffered from slow economic growth and economic recession under the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, as his regime created a mismanagement of the economy and political volatility. This economic recession only started to recover after the fall of Marcos’ dictatorship in 1986. Revolutions, economic liberalization, and reforms aided the country towards robust economic growth (US Department of State, 2009). Recently, the World Bank called the Philippines a “rising tiger” in East Asia by stating that the country has strong economic fundamentals, good governance and a high number of educated and motivated workers (World Bank, 2011). According to the World Economic Outlook Database (2016), the Philippine economy is the 36th largest in the world.

The wealth in the country is not shared equally among all Filipinos. Under the administration of the former President Aquino, a ten-point economic agenda was supposed to reduce the Philippines’ income inequality and unbalanced concentrations of wealth (Philippine Development Plan, 2011). Yet, according to the Asian Development Bank in 2016, the country is getting richer, but the poor still remain poor. It is estimated that 25,2 percent of the national population is living under the poverty line, and only 60 percent of the population aged 15 and above is employed (ADB, 2016). The gap between the rich and poor is widest in the Philippines when compared with other Southeast Asian nations. The highest concentrations of poor income units are among the youngest people in the country, those aged 30 and under (ADB, 2016). In a country where 33,7 percent is aged younger than 15 years, these concentrations of poor income among the youngest people of the country are alarming.

(30)

22

Under the new political administration of Rodrico Duterte1, who entered office last year, inequalities between rich and poor persist. Before Duterte became president, he was a long-serving mayor in the city of Davao in the south of the Philippines. According to Human Rights Watch, during the time Duterte was mayor of Davao, elements of the local police and local government operated in a death squad that killed about 1,000 people, including criminals, drug dealers, and leftists (Human Rights Watch, 2014). While Duterte was mayor, he began gathering names of suspects from local police offenders and elected officials for a new national ‘War on Drugs’. This list took many shapes and contained anywhere from 600.000 to more than a million suspects (New York Times, 2017). How people end up on or get off the list is mysterious. In total, the war on drugs left over 8,000 people dead, and overwhelmingly hit the urban poor. President Duterte was elected on promises to be a champion of the poor and to reduce the persistent inequality that marked the Philippines. Instead, an industry of murder is growing, at the expense of the urban poor. Street children are listed among the victims of the killings, and Duterte referred to their deaths as ‘collateral damage’ (Amnesty International, 2017).

2.2 Challenges of Children in Street Situations in the Philippines

In the context of the unequal and poor socio-economic situations of the Philippines which was presented in the previous section, there are many children living their lives or earning their livelihoods on the streets. The term ‘street children’ in the Philippines has been used to describe boys and girls under the age of 18 who consider the streets to be their home or source of livelihood. For these children, the streets are both their workspace and their playgrounds. They may or may not be supervised by adults, and they may or may not return to some sort of home or family (Ruiz, 2006).

A recent UNICEF report on child poverty in the Philippines shows that in this society, where poverty is a day-to-day struggle, this directly impacts children’s physical and intellectual growth (UNICEF, 2015). In this same report, UNICEF (2015) concludes that combating child poverty in the country continues to be a challenging task. Due to the persistently high population growth in recent years and the lack of inclusive growth, the 36 percent of the children aged below 18 who were considered poor in 2009 are still poor now. Poverty in the Philippines is evident in the number of children and youth who wander in the urban streets, who scavenge in dumpsites and landfills, and those who drop out of school to support their family income (UNICEF, 2015).

1_{As president Duterte only entered office on 30 June 2016, information in this chapter is primarily} derived from newspapers and non-scientific articles on his policies and practices.

(31)

23

In 2009, The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child raised serious concern about the high number of children living in the streets. While it is difficult to present exact statistics on the number of children in street situations, it was estimated that there were 246,000 street children in the Philippines in 2011 (UNICEF, 2011), with over 150,000 in the capital city Manila (KidsRights, 2012).The UN Committee discussed four main issues posed particular risks for children in street situations in the Philippines: health and hygienic lifestyle, children’s working conditions, a danger of violence and a low standard of living. In regards to health and hygienic lifestyle, the Committee raised major concerns about children’s lack of access to adequate nutrition, clothing, housing, social and health services. For example, children’s lack of shoes sometimes leads to wounds and injuries which are not treated appropriately or not treated at all, and this could easily lead to infections that could have been prevented (Baldo, 2009). The children who live and work on the dumpsites of the Philippines are the ones in the worst conditions. The wooden houses illegally built on the dumpsite are prone to collapse in inclement weather because they are unstable. Rubbish is often burned on these dumpsites, which puts children at risk of inhaling toxic chemicals and of getting infectious diseases. Children in street situations are particularly vulnerable to peer violence, police violence, sexual abuse and exploitation and organized violence. Finally, like other children in street situations around the world, children in street situations in the Philippines often lack adequate shelter or housing (KidsRights, 2012).

2.3 Policies on ‘Street Children’ in the Philippines

“I don't care about human rights.” (President Rodrico Duterte, August 2016)

During his short time as president of the Philippines, Duterte plans to include stronger sanctions against criminals, endorsement for vigilante killings, curfew for minors, and trying parents whose children are caught on the streets (Saigian, 2016). Under his administration, there are two dominant policies on ‘street children’: public order and child protection. In principle, these two are contradictory but so far have led to similar drives of action. Laws concerning children in the Philippines show a tendency to depict ‘street children’ as vulnerable children in need of protection by the state, or as a threat to society simply by being on the streets (Siagian, 2016). Two pieces of legislation support these dominant discourses on street children in the Philippines. The view that children in street situations are a threat to society stems from the Justice Juvenile Act of 2006. In this act, children are characterized as ‘children at risk’ and as children who are likely to commit a crime. A child at risk is one who

Streetcareers : an ethnographic study on the lives of children in street situations in Tondo, the Philippines

Graduate School of Social Sciences

Research Master International Development Studies

MSc (Res) Thesis

A Child-Centered Ethnographic Study

on the Street Careers of Children in

Tondo, Manila

Charlotte Prenen

Msc (Res) International Development Studies

June 30

, 2017

Thesis Supervision and Evaluation

Abstract

Table of Figures

Table of Contents

Foreword

Introduction

Chapter 1: Theoretical Framework

Introduction

1.1 The Social Exclusion of Children on the Street

1.2 Implications of the Term ‘Street Children’

1.3 From Changing the Term to Changing the Approach in Studying the

Lives of Children in Street Situations

Social Identity Constructions of Children in Street Situations

Livelihood and Survival Strategies on the Streets

STREET CAREERS

Life Trajectories of Children in Street Situations

STREET CAREERS

STREET CAREERS

1.4 Research Questions

Chapter 2: Research Context

Introduction

2.1 Socio-Economic Context of the Philippines

2.2 Challenges of Children in Street Situations in the Philippines

2.3 Policies on ‘Street Children’ in the Philippines