This twelvemonth on 12 June, World Day Against Child Labour focuses on the riddance of child labor in agribusiness. Worldwide, agribusiness is the sector where the largest per centum of working kids is found – about 70 per centum. Patterns in South Asia, particularly in Pakistan, are rather different where rate of urbanisation is markedly greater as comparison to other parts of the Earth. Urbanization is non simply a secular numerical addition in the population sizes of metropoliss but a whole batch of wretchednesss are associated with this population displacement. Economic force per unit areas coupled with blazing illiteracy forces these, largely untrained and unskilled, migrators to take many unwanted determinations, like child labor. Child labor has ever been an affectional issue, the treatment about which is frequently charged with passion, sorrow and embracing.
Child labor is everyplace. Its appellation which once used to use to the pattern of using immature kids in mills at the morning of factory/industrial epoch, but soon used to place the employment of minor, particularly in work that may interfere with their instruction or jeopardize their wellness ( Encarta [ 2004 ] ) . Most frequently, it is non the kids who decide to get down working alternatively of traveling to schools but there are a host of other socio-economic factors chiefly related to their households or families, to be more specific, that escort them to work. Children by and large do non acquire paid for the work they have been put in by their households ( Basu [ 1999 ] ) . In many western states, including North America & A ; some Europeans ‘ , the state of affairs is a small different and childs may compensate for their work and are encouraged by their parents, & A ; society, to work during their school holidaies as a manner toward doing them independent and appreciative of the value of work and clip ( Gailey [ 1999 ] ) . However, there is a great divide between these phenomena and the state of affairs in which kids, in many developing states particularly in Asia, are put to work as a beginning of household income alternatively of go toing school and acquisition ( see Edmonds [ 2004 ] , Myers [ 1999 ] for inside informations ) . It is these viing demands between full-time work and the physical & A ; rational development of kids that are at issue, particularly in developing states of South Asia.
Academic non-rhetoric literature on child labor may easy be deemed as a three prong probe where the research workers are seeking to ( I ) semanticize the phenomenon, ( two ) ascertain numerical magnitude of the threat across a specified limited part or the Earth, and ( three ) develop causes and effects of this type of labor.
The literature on semantics is chiefly a duality, as Bourdillon [ 2006 ] puts it, between child labour & A ; adult labour and between legitimate kid labor & A ; the abhorred kid labor. Who should be called as kid and who should non be? What should be categorized as labor and what should non be? Further, what sum, or type, of labour a kid may prosecute in? The reply of all these inquiries is mostly socio-cultural dependent. Generally, a individual of ages 5 to 14 is categorized as a kid and should be at school and perfectly non engaged in any activity deleterious to his/her mental, physical, and psychological wellness. Beyond 14, the appellation is mostly cultural. In war lacerate Kabul, a 14+ old ages ‘ chap is a full grown up adult male should be to the full active in economic activity for his family while the same chap, in classy countries of metropolitan Lahore, is merely a kid who should concentrate perfectly on his instruction. Peoples starts defining between kid work and child labor and between light work and worst signifiers of labor. However, this differentiation is more academic instead than practical. The literature on numerical strength is available chiefly in the signifier of studies conducted either at the province or at some NGO degree. ILO, and SIMPOC, is really resourceful and vocal in this regard. They have developed study designs, trying strategies and keen preparation plans to carry on such studies. Their web sites are a good beginning of such stuff. Research workers, largely economic experts, use secondary informations sets. Even who attempts with primary informations sets rely on fiddling trying techniques that normally fails to capture such a pocketed phenomenon. Research workers who have rummaged causes and effects of child labor in a society ever negotiations in footings of adjectives like poorness, or family poorness at micro degree, and literacy, or schooling. One may simplify the causes as poverty-child labor link while the effects as child labour-human capital link. In both the instances, family plays a critical function, particularly at micro degree. Household determination devising theoretical accounts, normally called as bargaining theoretical accounts, which tried to at the same time explicate determinations of ingestion and child labor and, at times, besides child schooling and birthrate. Broadly, there are two types of such theoretical accounts exists in literature as described by Brown, Deardorff et Al. [ 2001 ] ; ( I ) those in which kids have no bargaining power and parents are doing all determinations that serve their ain involvements without respect for the impact on the kid, and ( two ) those in which kids have some intrinsic value in the household. Statistically, all these cause-and-effect surveies are arrested development analyses where the kid labour burden is attempted to set on a list of factors ; some are per se endogenous while the others are exogenic in their very nature.
A family features based analysis, every bit far as literature suggests, discusses household poorness, family literacy degree, and family human ecology. All other variables, if they exist at all, are either undistinguished or derived functions of these three. A whole batch of literature exists on the critical presence of these variables in the kineticss of child labors in any society. These variables may be taken in many senses ( Pinker [ 1999 ] ) . Poverty, for cases, may be measured on an absolute graduated table which refers to a set criterions which is consistent over clip and between civilizations, or on a comparative graduated table where income, or wealth, disparities are seen as an index of poorness instead than material want. Literature on the causes and effects of kid labor use the comparative graduated table more in mentioning to poorness. A seminal theoretical work that captures the function of poorness in the kineticss of the kid labor is by Basu and Van [ 1998 ] who use subsistence restraints as an premise for kid labour which culminates in multiple equilibriums in the labor market. A dramatic consequence is the normalcy of kid leisure which goes against the traditional negative income effects on kid labor. Among late published literature, Baland and Robinson [ 2000 ] formalizes the poverty/child labor mechanism that child labour determinations are made to maximise the present discounted value of family ‘s income. Similar enterprises may be found in Parsons and Goldin [ 1989 ] and Andvig [ 2000 ] . Ray [ 2004 ] concludes that kid labor, particularly in Pakistan, is non negatively correlated with income and related variables. Bhalotra [ 2007 ] proposes a trial of poorness irresistible impulses and investigates it for informations on kids in pay work in rural Pakistan. Basu [ 2005 ] establishes that that the same income can take to different family determinations, depending on who the earner is, has led to an attempt to replace the criterion family theoretical account with the ‘collective theoretical account ‘ , which recognizes that a family ‘s determinations depend on the power balance between the hubby and the married woman. The consequences dispose that boys appear to work on history of poorness irresistible impulses while the grounds for misss is equivocal. Despite fecund Hagiographas, the poorness is ever treated as a binomial, at most trinomial, variable go forthing small room to analyze this variable in connexion with other family features to do a bunch analysis to cluster/segment the child labor market for family features.
Household literacy, in a similar manner may be taken either as the literacy among kids, when it is studied as a rival of labor among childs, or literacy degree of the family where it is studied as a dominant moderator in the afore mentioned bargaining theoretical accounts. Literacy, particularly in former sense, is normally listed among unseen features of the family which is ever hard to mensurate. Deb and Rosati [ 2004 ] Attempts are nevertheless made in this way where polynomial theoretical accounts are used to regress child labor on different activities. Ray and Lancaster [ 2003 ] , Deb and Rosati [ 2004 ] Orazem and Gunnarsson [ 2003 ] usage a three phase discrepancy of Ben-Porath [ 1967 ] theoretical account to sketch the exogenic and endogenous variables that enters the clip allotment determination. Ravallion and Wodon [ 2000 ] look into the displacing factor of child labor by positively proving the effects on kids ‘s labor force engagement and school registrations of the pure school monetary value alteration induced by a targeted registration subsidy in rural Bangladesh. Still the literature is losing for the probe of overall literacy degree of the family that may play a critical function in the bargainings in the family. A literate male parent or a literate family caput may alter the destiny of the childs in the family despite all force per unit areas of poorness, particularly in civilizations like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India. This family feature, when studied in connexion with the poverty/income degree of the family may give striking consequences.
Family construction, or slackly referred as family demographics, is one really of import dimension in the kineticss of child labors in any society. Although, a small is written about this aspect, its significance can non be denied. Apart from Basu and Van [ 1998 ] and Baland and Robinson [ 2000 ] who made indirect intensions on the function of household size and construction in the kineticss of kid labor, its function in educational accomplishment has already been established ( Currie [ 1977 ] , Buchmann [ 2000 ] ) . Fuller, Singer et Al. [ 1995 ] look into the consequence of gender differences in educational attainment. Patrinos and Psacharopoulos [ 1997 ] analyze the effects of being autochthonal, figure of siblings, their activities and their age construction on kid schooling advancement and child non-school activity and categorising the household size is an of import variable. They suggest that an effort must be made to take into history the “ life rhythm effects ” of one ‘s childs on their schooling public presentation and labour force activity. Lerman [ 1996 ] discusses the impact of altering household construction on child poorness in United States. He establishes that the tendency off from matrimony accounted for about half the addition in child income inequality and more than the full rise in child poorness rates. Kessler [ 1991 ] look into the function of birth order, household size, and household construction on the pay finding. Consequences shows that neither birth order nor childhood household size significantly influences the degree or growing rate of rewards while household size is statistically and economically important determiner of adult females ‘s employment position.
These family features may besides be used as factors to set them in a statistical factor analysis that may assist us in placing the most of import factor ( s ) among all these and to set them in a decreasing order of importance. A classical arrested development analysis may besides be used to function the same intent as it is copiously present in the literature but the premises in a classical arrested development analysis are excessively hard to follow. All these family features have inter-dependencies and inter-relationships which may impair a classical arrested development analysis by presenting multi-colinearity and auto-correlations. On the other manus, a factor analysis is unmindful of these malignances and serves the intent rather clearly and explicitly. Such an analysis is about non-existent in child labour literature. This may be due the statistical orientation of the analysis while the child labour literature is most abode by economic experts. However, the factor analysis is often used everyplace else where sequence is to be made on certain interval variables. The present survey is showing such a factor analysis conducted in Lahore division in state Punjab. This is the division in Pakistan which is sing the highest urbanisation in recent old ages. The coming paragraphs are elaborating different aspects of this survey. Section 2 is giving inside informations of the methodological analysis of the survey including study design and chief determiners of child labors in any society as the literature ascribes. Section 3 is the application of factor analysis on the informations gathered for Lahore. Section 4 is a commentary on these consequences while the last subdivision, Section 6, is reasoning the survey.
The exclusive aim is to factorise family based determiners to place most of import factors for child labor. As the standard and the graduated table, both, are to be based on family features, this exercising would besides find of import derived functions in the kineticss of the kid labor in any society. It is to the full recognized that there exist different fortunes and state of affairss influenced by an single family ‘s profile that leads a child to the convulsion of labor. For illustration, in the same society one might anticipate different attacks to be pursued by family caputs, and child-labour users, as has already been discussed in the literature reappraisal, a paragraph ago. Focus here, nevertheless, is on the designation of wide types and the generic attacks suited to each.
The method used was a comprehensive study which covered both the types and the attacks used. Although, the study was non conducted entirely for this paper but it is conducted by the same writer and giving all the relevant information required here to carry on this survey ( see Siddiqi [ 2007 ] , Siddiqi and Pervaiz [ 2005 ] for inside informations on study ) . The mark population in the study is province Punjab, Pakistan, while the existent study is conducted merely in one of its divisions, Lahore ( located in the centre-eastern Punjab ) . Definitions for different key footings, like kid, labor, family, literacy, etc. are taken from Pakistan Population Census ( PCO [ 2000 ] ) . Size of the study is determined by utilizing a pilot study and counsel in DeSantis, Pacijico et Al. [ 2004 ] , and Adcock [ 1997 ] . Some 2,460 questionnaires were being filled, for 205 bunchs in Lahore division, utilizing a multi-stage chance relative systematic sampling program.
The administrative construction divides state Punjab into 8 divisions which farther divided into 34 territories which are farther split into 108 tehsils ( sub-districts ) . We have selected Lahore division for this survey. The first measure in the sampling is the choice of territories within Lahore division. Believing a extremely pocketed nature of the phenomenon, particular weights have to be assigned to the territories. These weights are calculated with mention to the educational and economic position of these territories as these are the two most of import determiners of child labors in any society. Such weights would assist us in capturing the true population of the kid labor. Similar would be the strategy in choosing tehsils from these selected territories. Educational and economic position informations is easy available at different statistics book published by authorities of Pakistan. It is planned to choose 1/3rd territories from Lahore ( in line with the Gallup ‘s doctrine as narrated by Newport, Saad et Al. [ 1997 ] ) by maintaining in position of the educational and economic position of these territories. On norm, every territory happened to hold 3 tehsils, and using the already utilizing 1/3rd sampling regulation, a individual tehsil would be selected from the selected territory. So from Lahore division, a individual tehsil is selected. All these choices are probability relative simple random choices where weights are assigned harmonizing to the educational ( available in Integrated Household Survey conducted by FBS [ 2001 ] ) and economic position ( utilizing AC Nielsen confidential informations ) of territories and tehsils utilizing Brewer [ 1963 ] methodological analysis with Sampford [ 1967 ] extensions. Systematic trying strategy is adopted to choose family bunchs from each selected tehsil where each bunch is made up of 12 families. This consequences in 2,460 families, from Lahore merely, which were contacted during the study.
Specially trained interviewers were hired to roll up information on family demographics, literacy, and economic position utilizing an entirely designed, structured 45-question questionnaire ( see Siddiqi [ 2007 ] for the questionnaire ) . Microrepresentativity analysis is conducted to guarantee the sample representativeness. Serious attempts, both at manual and package degree, are made to guarantee the truth and dependability of the information. A few re-do were besides at that place to rectify mistakes at surveyors ‘ degree. SPSS 15 and SAS 9 are chiefly used for all kinds of statistical and graphical analysis of the informations.
Variables & A ; Analysis
Here an effort is made to look into for the most henious families features for the kid labor. Chiefly these features include family human ecology, family literacy and of-course the family poorness. All these features need operational variables for their proper measurings required for a strict statistical analysis. Following is a description of this opeartionalization which may be helpful in doing a comprehension of the consequences given in subsequent subdivisions.
Household human ecology is measured in footings of
Household caput: its gender,
Family construction: its venue ( either industrial or non-industrial ) , its adjustment ( in footings of figure of suites it is lodging )
Family size: figure of individuals populating therein, figure of households abode in
Household composing: figure of males, and females.
Parents: presence of parents ( both or individual ) in family
Household literacy is determined by
Literacy of family caput
Literacy of parents of the childs
School factor is determined in footings of
Cost of schooling
Distance of school from the family
Attitude towards schools and schooling
Household poorness is gauged utilizing
Income: in footings of both sum and beginning of.
Fiscal liability: in footings of both sum and beginning of.
Factor analysis transforms original variables into sets of common and specific factors. The discernible random vector X, with p constituents, holding a average Aµ and covariance matrix a?‘ . The factor theoretical account postulates that X is linearly dependent upon a few unobservable random variables, F1, F2, … , Fm, called common factors and p extra beginnings of fluctuation Iµ1, Iµ2, … , Iµp, called specific factors. In peculiar, the factor analysis theoretical account, as Johnson and Wichern [ 2005 ] put it, is
where L is a ( p x m ) matrix of factor burdens giving simple correlativity between the variables and the factors. The un-observability of common factors is separating a factor analysis from a arrested development analysis. Lawley and Maxwell [ 1971 ] discourse some extra premises for these factors that ( I ) F and Iµ are independent, ( two ) E ( F ) =0, Cov ( F ) =1, ( three ) E ( Iµ ) =0, Cov ( Iµ ) =I? , where I? is a diagonal matrix. The analysis of the factor theoretical account returns by enforcing conditions that allow one to unambiguously gauge L and I? . The burden matrix is so rotated which is determined by some ‘ease-of-interpretation ‘ standard. Once the burden and specific discrepancies are obtained, factors are identified and estimated values for the factors themselves are constructed.
Here in this survey, the factor analysis is conducted on the explanatory variables with the primary end of picking the most of import 1. Appropriateness of the factor modal is judged through Bartlett ‘s trial of sphericalness, which is proving the void hypothesis that the variables are un-correlated in the population, and by Kaiser, Meyer & A ; Olkin ( KMO ) index which measures the magnitudes of the ascertained correlativity coefficients to the magnitudes of the partial correlativity coefficients. A KMO index greater than 0.5 is ever desirable. These trials are given here in Table 1 where both of trials are rendering the factor theoretical account appropriate for the informations.
Table 1: KMO and Bartlett ‘s Trial
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett ‘s Test of Sphericity
The consequences of the factor analysis are given here, in Table 2 along with the communalities ( in the really last column ) demoing the per centum of discrepancy explained by common factors and per centum of discrepancy ( in the header row ) demoing the comparative importance of these factors. We have used the correlativity matrix and chief constituent method for factor extraction with no rotary motion of the axis for easiness in reading. Almost all these communalities are greater than 0.5 while the remainder would non be included in the readings.
The most of import determination is the choice of factors to be taken. Malhotra [ 2007 ] is proposing a twelve of methods and opines to utilize as many of them at the same time. is demoing a scree secret plan for the analysis which may be used for the choice of the factors. The secret plan is proposing a 4 factors analysis which is explicating mere 36 % of the entire fluctuation nowadays in the information. Increasing the figure of factors to 7 additions this per centum up to 54 % which is rather acceptable in societal scientific disciplines.
Table 2: Component Matrix ( a )
Gender of the Household Head
Populating in Industrial Area
Number of Rooms in Household
No. of Persons Living in Household
No. of Families Living in Household
No. of Persons Working
No. of Persons Literate
Number of Males in the Family
No. of Kids Between the Ages 5 to 15
Number of Kids Populating With Parents
Families with Both Literate Parents
Education of the Household Head
Distance of Family from School
Outgo on Schooling
Entire Household Income
How Much Debt
Debt, from where
Extraction Method: Chief Component Analysis.
a 7 constituents extracted.
Figure 1: Scree Plot
The factor lading braces are plotted as points in Figure 2 which is giving all possible braces of the burdens. The figure is an effort to see inter-relationship between different factors, if it exists any. As a affair of fact, the spread matrix is demoing outliers, particularly in factor 4, 5, and 6. Johnson and Wichern [ 2005 ] suggests that if the sets of burdens for a factor tend to hold, outliers will look as points in the vicinity of 45Es line, but far from the beginning and the bunch of staying points. This is precisely the instance here so these outliers are non a affair of great concern.
Figure 2: Scatter Matrix of Factor Loadings
Interpretation is facilitated by placing the variables that have big burdens on the same factor. That factor can so be interpreted in footings of the variables that load high on it.
Factor 1: Factor burdens are highest for the family debt ; for both of its sum and its beginning. The corresponding communality values are besides rather satisfactory and more than 68 % have been explained by the extracted common factors. As a affair of fact, a family has to take loan, particularly in the socio-economic category we are covering with, merely because of poorness ( Basu and Chau [ 2004 ] ) . So, this factor may be called as the poorness goaded factor. Other rivals, for this factor does non hold adequate communality powers to be taken earnestly.
Factor 2: Factor burdens are highest for figure of childs and for figure of individuals in the family. Communality powers for both of the variables are greater than 80 % , rather plenty for profiling. So, this factor may be profiled as the size of the family as both of the highest factor-loading holders are related to the size and volume of the family. No other variable in this whole list should be taken that earnestly.
Factor 3: Factor burdens are the highest for Number of individuals working and the figure of households populating in the family. These features seem to be rather different from each other. As a affair of fact, this is non so. It is a common world that households populating together normally do similar concern, at least their childs does the same ( Kornstad and Thoresen [ 2006 ] , SPARC [ 2005 ] among many ) . Common concern may non be the binding ground but populating together is a strong ground of common concern. So, this factor may be termed as work driven factor.
Factor 4: Entire household income is the variable for which the factor burden is highest after distance of family from school whose communality power is non that strong and explained merely 43 % by the extracted common factors. While, the communality of the entire household income is rather satisfactory and higher than 58 % . Figure 2 is demoing a twosome of outliers in this factor ; nevertheless a re-analysis after taking these outliers have non affected the communality powers a batch. For entire household income, it is increased from 0.588 to 0.62 while for distance of family from school is increased from 0.434 to 0.497. So this factor may be categorized as income factor.
Factor 5: The lone highest factor lading for this factor is for populating in industrial country. The communality for the variable bases at 0.679 but is farther addition to 0.828 after taking two outliers as apparent from Figure 2. This is doing this factor related to residence and be labeled as abode driven factor.
Factor 6: This factor would be called construction of the family driven factor if its communality is sensible. Again, this factor is marred by a few outliers as apparent from the Figure 2 but the state of affairs does non better by purging the information. We would, hence, non mentioning this factor as construction of the family goaded factor but are go forthing this factor in-determinable.
Factor 7: The lone rival for the factor ‘s label is gender of the family caput whose factor burden is the highest and the corresponding communality stands at 0.819 which is moderately good. So, this factor is referred to as the personality of the family caput factor.
This completes the reading of the extracted factors. So, the factor analysis transformed given 18 extremely correlated family features into 7 reciprocally independent, punctually sorted common factors, given in Table 3.
Table 3: Factors ‘ Profile
Factor ‘s Name
Household Size driven
Work ( labour ) driven
Personality of Household Head
It is rather easy to nail the most of import factor in the kineticss of child labour in Lahore. Further, the analysis do giving us other of import factors in diminishing order of importance. Poverty is considered as female parent of all immoralities, so its presence in the concluding list of of import factors is non surprising. Basu [ 1998 ] , Ray [ 1998 ; Baland and Robinson [ 2000 ] all are faulting the poorness as figure one ground for the kid labour in any society and the same is the instance in Lahore. Surprising facts are the other factors, their sequence, and the complete absence of instruction or literacy degree of the family. Literacy is playing a function in the riddance, at least in diminishing, child labour in other societies. Barrett and Ollendick [ 2004 ] , Basu and Tzannatos [ 2003 ] among many who are recommending for a better literacy rate for the riddance of child labour but, unluckily, this is non the instance in Lahore where, the literacy rate has nil to make with the kineticss of child labour. Household size is prove to be a major factor in the kineticss of kid labour across Africa ( see Admassie [ 2002 ] , Ray [ 2002 ] , Andvig, Canagarajah et Al. [ 2001 ] among many others ) . Recent surveies, discoursing the kid labour in India, our following door neighbour, are non adverting this factor as serious or upseting ( Mishra [ 2000 ] , Ashraf [ 2001 ] ) . But this factor is present as the 2nd most intimidating discrepancy in Lahore. One may fault anti household be aftering attitude in our society but this may non be the lone ground. Work related factor comes next in the sequence. The factor is more related to demand of the kid labour in our society. Although, the survey is non dividing the job into demand or supply side, as many economic experts like Basu [ 1998 ] and other did, the 3rd most of import factor in the kineticss of the kid labour happens to be the uninterrupted demand of the kid labour in society. It may be the greed of employers who look for cheap, easy manipulatable, less demanding, comparatively more reliable labour ( see Grootaert [ 1998 ] , Gupta [ 2002 ] for the demand side analysis of the job ) . Increasing spread between the rich persons and poor persons may besides make a demand of child labour in a society. The 4th most serious discrepancy in the kineticss is related to the entire income pouring into a family. As a affair of fact, kid ‘s income is an built-in portion of the household and it is truly a tough to state good passs even after holding fine-looking money at the terminal of month. The parents ‘ are no more selfless one time trapped into child labour. Many writers, like Purkayastha [ 1998 ] , Basu and Ray [ 2002 ] etc. , suspects the selflessness of the parents particularly when the childs are in labour. The development of bargaining theoretical accounts ( Brown, Deardorff et Al. [ 2001 ] ) stems from this intuition. The same is the instance in Lahore with the lone difference that it is non among the first three but at figure four in the list of most serious discrepancies for the kid labour. Local civilization, which may be read as the venue of the family, is the following discrepancy in the list. The presence of this variable in this list is non something amazing but its importance degree is truly astonishing. Gayaythri [ 2002 ] , Ribeiro [ 2005 ] among others do discusses the premier function of venue in the kineticss of child labour but they consider it to be among the most of import discrepancies but here in Lahore, the state of affairs is non precisely the same.
There are no two sentiments about the kid labour. It is been condemned in all societies. Still, it is present, in one form or the other, in all parts of the Earth. The current survey is an probe for the most of import discrepancies in the kineticss of child labour in any society, in general and in Lahore, in peculiar. The survey is a micro degree family based research and non discoursing macro or policy degree jobs but may take to policy degree recommendations. Poverty goaded factors are revealed to be the most of import factors for child labour while family size and labour related factors comes at figure two and three severally. Apart from poorness, which is an constituted omnipresent world, realisation of family size and work related factors as so serious jobs is giving a new border in the probes of child labour.
It was suspected that family poorness, human ecology and the literacy degrees are the three most serious discrepancies in the kineticss of child labour in any society so at that place in Lahore but revealed is rather different. Household poorness is the most serious, human ecology comes 2nd while family literacy does non hold any function to play in this kineticss, at least non in Lahore division. This sequence is helpful in carving out a policy for child labour riddance particularly in Lahore that a policy non turn toing these factors and in the same sequence would non assist at all.