Labour in Global Value Chains: Work Conditions in
Football Manufacturing in China, India and Pakistan
Peter Lund-Thomsen, Khalid Nadvi, Anita Chan,
Navjote Khara and Hong Xue
ABSTRACT
A critical challenge facing developing country producers is to meet international labour standards and codes of conduct in order to engage in global
value chains. Evidence of gains for workers from compliance with such standards and codes remains limited and patchy. This article focuses on the global
football industry, a sector dominated by leading global brands that manage
dispersed global value chains. It assesses the working conditions for football
stitchers engaged in different forms of work organization, factories, stitching
centres and home-based settings in Pakistan, India and China. It draws on detailed qualitative primary field research with football-stitching workers and
producers in these three countries. The article explains how and why work
conditions of football stitchers differ across these locations through an analytical framework that interweaves both global and local production contexts
that influence work conditions. In doing so, it argues that current debates on
the role of labour in global value chains have to go beyond a narrow focus
on labour standards and corporate social responsibility compliance and engage with economic, technological and social upgrading as factors that could
generate sustained improvements in real wages and workers’ conditions.
INTRODUCTION
Football is considered the most popular sport on the planet. It is a major
global industry with its star players, leading international clubs and major
tournaments idolized, followed and watched across the farthest corners of
the globe. Little attention is paid by fans, however, to how the ball itself,
the very heart of the game, is produced. This article focuses on workers engaged in football production in the main centres of global football
The authors thank the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) for funding
an initial comparative study on football production in the Sialkot (Pakistan) and Jalandhar (India)
clusters, and the Danish Social Sciences Research Council for financing the subsequent study of
workers in football manufacturing in China, India and Pakistan. Of course, neither funding body
is responsible for the findings and views presented here. The authors acknowledge inputs from
participants at various workshops where drafts of this paper were presented and are grateful for
the helpful comments provided by the reviewers. The authors are collectively responsible for
any errors.
Development and Change 43(6): 1211–1237. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01798.x
2012 International Institute of Social Studies.
Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and
350 Main St., Malden, MA 02148, USA
C
1212
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
manufacture — China, Pakistan and, to a lesser extent, India. While iconic
international football players can easily command salaries in excess of
US$ 1 million a month, workers engaged in football manufacturing are
among the lowest paid and least skilled in their respective countries. Drawing on extensive primary evidence, the article assesses work conditions for
those who stitch footballs in China, Pakistan and India, analyses what may
account for the differences in these conditions, and seeks to explain the
systemic position of workers at the very bottom of the global value chain
(GVC) in football production.1
In line with the growing popularity of the sport, international trade in
inflatable balls has grown systematically over the past decade, peaking at
US$ 1.26 billion in 2010 (UN Comtrade, 2011).2 A small number of leading global brands dominate the organization of global football manufacturing. These include Adidas, Asics, Mitre, Mizuno, Nike, Puma, Reebok and
Umbro (Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2010). These brands sponsor leading
football teams such as Barcelona and Chelsea and sell high-quality ‘match’
balls used in professional football leagues and tournaments across Europe
and North America. For example, in the 2010 World Cup tournament, the
official Adidas match ball, produced with the use of mechanized, thermomoulded technology, retailed at approximately US$ 185 a ball whereas a
hand-stitched match ball could be purchased for approximately US$ 85–135
per ball in outlet stores in Northern Europe. The global brands also market
medium-quality hand-stitched or machine-stitched training balls that tend
to be used in lower league matches or club practice, often retailing in the
range of US$ 15–35 per ball. In addition, there is a substantial market for
promotional hand-stitched or machine-stitched footballs that are used as part
of broader marketing campaigns of non-sports brands. For instance, in the
run-up to World Cup or European Cup Championships, many global brands
offer their customers a free football with their purchase as part of their brand
marketing campaigns.
In recent years, there has been greater consolidation among the brands,
with Adidas acquiring Reebok in 2005 and Nike taking over Umbro in
2007. By 2009, Adidas — in its own estimate — accounted for 34 per
cent of the global football business and reported sales of US$ 1.57 billion from football-related merchandizing, whereas Nike generated US$ 1.7
billion from sales of footballs and football-related products (Nadvi et al.,
2011). Brands source footballs from independent suppliers in four distinct
Asian production locations — China, Pakistan, Thailand and India. China
1. GVCs are here defined as inter-firm networks through which products and services are
designed, manufactured, distributed, marketed and recycled across multiple geographical
locations in different regions of the world.
2. Inflatable balls include volleyballs, rugby balls and basketballs as well as footballs. Footballs, or what in the United States are referred to as soccer balls, are considered the largest
single category and are the focus of this study.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1213
dominates the manufacture of low- to medium-quality machine-stitched
balls, while Pakistan is the leading producer for high-quality hand-stitched
match balls. Thailand’s niche was premium thermo-moulded balls, but these
are now also produced in China. India’s production is primarily of low- to
medium-quality hand-stitched footballs.
There have been two key developments in football manufacturing in recent
years. First, given the global cultural prominence of the sport, and the high
profile of the leading brands, a range of labour standard concerns have
affected GVCs in football manufacturing. This led to the implementation
of multi-stakeholder initiatives to monitor against, and address the causes
of, child labour in Pakistan and India (Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2010).
In China, pressures on overtime, working conditions and concerns with
the potential use of prison labour has led to stricter enforcement of codes
of conduct by brands in the Chinese value chains (Nadvi et al., 2011).
Second, there has been systematic technological upgrading in product and
process activities, with more advanced footballs and more mechanized forms
of production. However, technological upgrading has been geographically
uneven with China taking the lead and South Asia attempting to catch up
(Nadvi, 2011).
This article contributes to the literature on labour in GVCs through empirical evidence. We assess the similarities and the differences in the work conditions of football stitchers engaged in factory, stitching-centre and homebased work in Pakistan, India and China and try to explain why we observe
these similarities and differences. We draw on detailed comparative research
undertaken in the three countries from 2008 to 2010, including interviews
with suppliers, contractors and workers as well as the leading global brands.
Finally, we argue that it is important to explore how the sourcing and corporate social responsibility (CSR)3 policies of internationally branded companies affect work conditions at supplier factories in developing countries.
However, it is just as important to recognize that a broader set of local and
global causal factors are likely to influence workers’ conditions in exportoriented industries. We suggest this might be achieved by drawing on insights
gained from a range of interrelated literatures including work on GVCs, on
industrial upgrading in these chains, and on local production organization.
The article is structured as follows. The first two sections briefly describe
the core features and trends in the global football manufacturing industry,
and give details of our methodology. The paper then presents an analytical
framework to explain how similarities and differences in work conditions
in the labour-intensive, export-oriented football manufacturing industry can
be understood, and charts the main findings on work conditions and outcomes for factory-based, centre-based and home-based football stitchers in
Pakistan, India and China. The penultimate section provides an analytical
3. CSR is here defined as firms integrating economic, social and environmental considerations
within their core business practices and their interaction with their stakeholders.
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
1214
Figure 1. Exports of Inflatable Balls for China, Pakistan, Thailand and India,
2003–2011
700
600
(US $ milion)
500
India
400
Thailand
300
Pakistan
200
China
100
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Source: UN Comtrade 2011 data for HS950662 (India data missing for 2007).
explanation behind the differences in wages and work conditions across the
three locations and their relationship to industrial upgrading/downgrading,
GVC governance, and production organization in national institutional contexts. Finally, the conclusion considers the implications of this study for
further policy and research on labour in GVCs.
THE GLOBAL FOOTBALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY: A BRIEF
OVERVIEW
As Figure 1 shows, China’s dominance in global exports of inflatable balls
has been growing since 2003, whereas Thailand and India have been largely
stagnant during the same period. Pakistan saw growth in exports between
2003 and 2006. From 2006 to 2009 export volumes declined. In 2010, the
year of the World Cup in South Africa, export volumes improved for all
four countries, but most dramatically for China. As a consequence, the gap
between China and the world’s second biggest manufacturer, Pakistan, is
widening.
The Pakistani football industry consists of around 390 producers located in
and around the city of Sialkot in Punjab. This used to be the world’s leading
centre for football manufacturing until the late 1990s. Sialkot’s producers
traditionally prided themselves on their knowledge of high-quality handstitching with the Sialkot cluster producing the entire range of high-quality
match balls, medium-quality training balls and lower-quality promotional
balls. The Chinese football manufacturing sector consists of approximately
Labour in Global Value Chains
1215
200 suppliers (Global Sources, 2006). Chinese factories predominantly use
machine-stitching technology. Football manufacturing is concentrated in
Guangdong and Jiangsu provinces. Some of the largest manufacturers are
also located in Fujian and Jiangxi provinces and in Shanghai. Investments
from Hong Kong and Taiwan played a key role in the development of the Chinese football industry. The Indian football manufacturing industry is mainly
located in the city of Jalandhar. The Jalandhar cluster is relatively small
with only 150 exporting enterprises and a daily output of 45,000 inflatable
balls. By contrast, the largest machine-stitching factory in China can produce
70,000 footballs a day. Jalandhar specializes in the hand-stitching of footballs although a few manufacturers have now also started machine-stitching.
In Thailand, football production is dominated by a few large producers engaged in machine-stitching of footballs. The profile of Thailand’s football
manufacturing industry was raised in 2004 when the Japanese-owned firm,
Molten, produced the first mechanized thermo-moulded ball for Adidas.
This was used for the European Cup tournament. However, in 2010 Adidas
shifted its sourcing of thermo-moulded balls from Thailand to a supplier in
Guangdong, China.
A common feature of the football manufacturing industry in Pakistan,
India and, to a lesser extent, China is the extensive use of subcontracting.
In Pakistan and India, the process of stitching the balls is outsourced from
the factory to keep overhead costs down, circumvent local labour laws and
retain flexibility in relation to seasonal changes in football demand. Outsourcing is done through subcontractors of whom there are approximately
2,450 in Sialkot and 1000 in Jalandhar (Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2009).
They serve as a link between suppliers and stitchers in both Sialkot and
Jalandhar. Only one or two firms in each cluster directly employ their own
stitchers. In both clusters, stitchers are generally either employed by the
subcontractors or are self-employed, and are paid on a piece-rated basis,
with rates varying according to the type and quality of ball being stitched.
In Sialkot, stitching takes place in 2,600 registered stitching centres and
in Jalandhar approximately 3,000 registered centres have been identified.
Stitching centres are designated sites — such as a rented building or an open
courtyard — where the stitching of footballs takes place. Centres are usually
managed by subcontractors, and each centre is linked to, and undertakes
work for, a specific manufacturer. Registration implies that these centres are
monitored by the child labour monitoring programmes that operate in each
cluster (Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2010).
Stitching centres vary in size. Sialkot’s large centres accommodate between 100 and 500 stitchers, medium-sized centres have 50–100 stitchers, smaller centres have 10–50 stitchers, and home-based stitching centres have less than 10 stitchers. In addition, there are some non-registered
home-based stitching locations, although it is difficult to estimate their number. Home-based stitching is often a full-time occupation in Sialkot and
Jalandhar, although some female stitchers in Sialkot mainly stitch on a
1216
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
part-time basis to supplement their family’s income. In Jalandhar, approximately thirty stitching centres are small to medium-sized whereas the remainder are home-based units. There are numerous unregistered stitching
locations in Jalandhar (Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2009).
In China, the process of subcontracting takes place from larger machinebased first-tier suppliers in Guangdong to smaller second-tier suppliers in
Guangdong or other provinces such as Jiangsu where stitching sometimes
takes place in townships or rural areas. Subcontracting has been extensively
used in relation to the hand-stitching of footballs by some of the larger
manufacturers based in Shanghai, which subcontracted to Jiangsu province
where stitching was carried out in designated centres, informal workshops
or the homes of village-based stitchers. In China, home-based stitching is
mostly a part-time activity that helps rural women generate some additional
income. Anecdotal evidence obtained through our research suggests that
some suppliers, especially smaller producers and subcontractors based in
Jiangsu, may be outsourcing some hand- and machine-stitching of footballs
to local prisons.
METHODOLOGY
As an entry point to investigating work conditions among factory, stitchingcentre and home-based stitchers, we undertook a full mapping of the value
chains and work forms found in the football manufacturing industries in
Pakistan, India and China. This was done through interviews with key informants and academics, as well as with international buyers, local suppliers,
contractors/subcontractors and football stitchers in each country. In Pakistan
we found home-based, centre-based and factory-based stitching. In India,
the dominant work forms were centre- and home-based stitching.4 In contrast, factory-based stitching was the only work form observed in the leading
football manufacturing region in Guangdong province in South China. In
Jiangsu province in East China, the second largest manufacturing region
in the country, factory-based and home-based stitching were the dominant
work forms although home-based stitching was rapidly disappearing at the
time of our fieldwork due to the low wages earned, young people not entering
the industry, and the availability of better-paid job alternatives.
Our initial hypothesis was that work conditions in the football manufacturing industries of Pakistan, India and China vary according to the type
of work form and value chain that football stitchers are inserted into (see
also Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2010). We expected that conditions would
4. Factory-based machine-stitching was introduced in two factories in Jalandhar in 2008/9.
However, the total number of these workers — around fifty — could not be considered
a dominant work form when compared to the total number of stitchers in the Jalandhar
football cluster.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1217
be better in the more regulated, formal factory work environments where
stitchers would be covered by local labour law protection, and worsen as
we moved to the semi-formal stitching centres and the informal settings of
home-based stitching locations operating outside the remit of labour laws.
Similarly, we expected that stitchers were likely to experience the best work
conditions if they were engaged in value chains of CSR-sensitive megabrands, such as Nike and Adidas. At the same time, we felt that football
stitchers may experience the worst conditions when inserted into chains that
supplied non-CSR sensitive buyers.
Based on these considerations we interviewed workers across the range
of dominant work forms in each location.5 Although our sample sizes of
firms and workers are small, and cannot claim to be representative, they
were purposively selected to give an indicative picture of dominant work
practices in each location. We also interviewed senior sourcing and CSR
personnel of leading global and regional brands, including Nike, Adidas,
the UK brand Pentland-Mitre, the Danish brand Select Sports and smaller
specialized brands such as Fairdeal Trading. Interviews with the brands were
carried out in Europe, the United States and with brand’s representatives and
sourcing offices in Pakistan and China.
In all three countries we interviewed a limited number of chief executive officers and CSR compliance staff from suppliers that fed into the
different value chains. In Pakistan we interviewed four large enterprises,
three medium-sized enterprises and four small enterprises.6 Similarly, we
undertook interviews with five medium-sized enterprises and four small enterprises in India. In Guangdong province we undertook six firm interviews,
two with large factories, two with small factories and two with trading
houses. In Jiangsu province we carried out eleven interviews with small and
medium-sized manufacturers. Going further down the value chain we interviewed six subcontractors in Pakistan and seven in India. Our interviews
with brands, local suppliers and subcontractors were qualitative in nature
and we focused on trying to understand intra-chain relationships, the ways
in which concerns about labour standards and CSR factored into these ties,
and the implications for the distinct category of actors within the chain.
Finally, we conducted a total of 127 individual open-ended questionnaire
interviews with football stitchers in Pakistan, India and China. As shown
below (Table 1) these were distributed according to the different work forms
prevalent in each location. We used a qualitative purposive sampling methodology ensuring that we interviewed a comparable number of male and female workers belonging to different work forms, supply chains and major
5. Worker interviews were carried out in 2009–10 following earlier rounds of fieldwork with
suppliers in each of the three countries.
6. Large enterprises are here defined as firms with 250 or more employees, medium-sized
enterprises as having 50–250 employees, and small enterprises as employing fifty workers
or less.
1218
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
Table 1. Stitching Workers Interviewed by Work Form in Pakistan, India and
China
Work Form
Factory-based work
Centre-based work
Home-based work
Total
Pakistan
India
China
Total
14
19
17
50
0
14
15
29
41
0
7
48
55
33
39
127
stitching areas in Pakistan, India and China. No interviews were carried
out in work premises as this could compromise workers and impact on the
quality of information we obtained. Hence, in Pakistan and India all worker
interviews were undertaken in workers’ homes, and we used a range of local
key informants and snowballing techniques to identify stitchers engaged in
different types of work forms. In China, we conducted interviews with workers outside the factories in Guangdong province, usually meeting workers
either during their lunch breaks or in the evening when they were not being
observed by supervisors and managers. In Jiangsu province, we could only
conduct a very limited number of interviews with home-based stitchers due
to difficulties in accessing these stitchers. In each location we endeavoured
to follow proper ethical protocols, in particular ensuring confidentiality to
all respondents.
Our worker-level interviews sought to explore worker backgrounds, working conditions, income levels, skill acquisition, understanding of CSR and
labour standard concerns, as well as labour activism and broader worker
perceptions of their experience of work. We triangulated the information
obtained through these interviews with reviews of international and national
newspaper articles in Pakistan, India and China, previous writings on the
football industry (e.g. A. Khan, 2007; F.R. Khan, 2007), and through policy
documents and reports produced by international aid agencies, local industry
organizations and market research companies. We also reviewed the websites — in particular the ethical guidelines — of internationally branded
companies and studied national labour laws in each country. We carried
out participatory observation during several factory tours, visits to stitching
centres, and rural and urban areas where home-based stitching took place.
During these visits we took extensive fieldwork notes and produced village
and factory profiles of the localities where stitchers lived and worked. In
addition, we carried out a wide range of interviews with other stakeholders
who had an involvement in the football manufacturing industry. These included interviews with representatives of international agencies in Europe
and Asia — most notably the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO), as
well as repeated discussions with local industry associations in Sialkot and
Jalandhar, national government officials, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) and trade unions working to support stitchers, as well as ethical and
fair trade consultants working in the industry.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1219
GLOBAL VALUE CHAINS, INDUSTRIAL UPGRADING AND LOCAL
PRODUCTION CONTEXTS
How do we explain the similarities and differences in work conditions of
football stitchers in Pakistan, India and China who participate in different
work forms and value chains? Two distinct but related bodies of literature
have addressed the role of labour in global production. First, scholars working on the inter-related concepts of GVCs and global production networks
(GPNs) have argued that global lead firms play a critical role in the organization of GVCs (Gereffi et al., 2005; Kaplinsky, 2005), and that inter-firm
relationships within GPNs are both socially embedded and influenced by
a range of multi-scalar factors — from government regulations and international trade agreements to local norms and practices (Coe et al., 2008;
Henderson et al., 2002). Central to the organization of GVCs and GPNs
have been international standards relating to health and safety, quality assurance, environmental impacts and working conditions (Nadvi, 2008; Ponte
and Gibbon, 2005). Meeting such standards, it is argued, can be necessary
for developing country producers to engage in GVCs (Nadvi and Wältring,
2004). Second, the literature on CSR has sought to understand how firms
integrate social and environmental concerns into core business practices in
ways that raise value as well as address the interests of distinct stakeholders
(Blowfeld and Frynas, 2005; Jenkins et al., 2002). In this area there has been
concern with how ‘voluntary’ CSR codes are implemented by suppliers, the
extent to which this permeates down the value chain, and the implications
that arise for brands and workers (Barrientos and Smith, 2007; Locke et al.,
2009).
The GVC and CSR literatures are beginning to converge as it becomes apparent that the structural dynamics of global competition and global sourcing,
which result in higher returns for companies and shareholders and demand
lower costs and shorter lead times for workers and suppliers, can accentuate non-compliance with labour standards and codes of conduct. Squaring
these two, apparently disarticulated, challenges can be a major struggle for
developing country suppliers, leading to calls for more ‘just’ value chains
(Locke et al., 2009). However, a critical gap in both bodies of literature is
their limited understanding of the role of labour, in particular the potential gains to, and consequences for, workers arising from their participation
in GVCs. In part, this reflects the focus within the GVC and CSR literatures, with firms (or global corporations) viewed as the primary unit of
analysis.
Recently, a number of scholars have begun to recognize this disjuncture
(Rainnie et al., 2011; Selwyn, 2012). Coe and Jordhus-Lier (2010) have
linked the rich literature on labour geography to GPN analysis, and argued
for a more critical understanding of labour agency (see also Lund-Thomsen,
forthcoming; Riisgaard and Hammer, 2011). Barrientos et al. (2011) and
Milberg and Winkler (2011) have explored the inter-relationship between
economic and social upgrading within GVCs, and the consequences for
1220
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
worker livelihoods and working conditions from engagement with such
GVCs. Empirically, there have been attempts to assess the impact of codes
of conduct on workers (Barrientos and Smith, 2007; Chan and Siu, 2010;
Locke et al., 2007; Sum and Pun, 2005).7 Some studies conclude that codes
act as ‘window dressing’ by failing to address core labour rights (Pun,
2005; Xue, 2011). Given this experience, some practitioners and academics
have advocated a ‘cooperation paradigm’ to improve workers’ conditions in
supplier factories (Locke et al., 2009; Oxfam, 2010).8
In seeking to understand outcomes for workers from participation in GVCs
we argue that a combination of possible vertical (GVC) and horizontal (national and local institutional context) factors, and their dynamic interaction,
is required. The challenge is not to use either vertical analysis or horizontal
analysis to understand the conditions of workers in developing countries
that produce for global markets. Instead, the challenge is to understand
how global and local factors mutually condition, reinforce or contradict one
another in different and shifting constellations, thus creating similar and differential outcomes for workers at particular moments in time (Neilson and
Pritchard, 2009, 2010). A critical factor, at the level of both vertical (global)
and horizontal (local) ties or contexts, is upgrading and its consequences
for workers. From this starting point, we develop an analytical framework
for understanding the interplay between vertical and horizontal forms of
analysis with reference to the international football manufacturing industry.
This is inspired by particular bodies of theoretical literature — on industrial
upgrading, on GVCs, as well as local forms of production organization in
developing countries.
7. Evidence of actual outcomes for workers from such initiatives suggests, however, that gains
are at best patchy. Improvements can be identified on tangible issues such as occupational
health and safety (OHS) and limits on excessive overtime, but implementation of codes
of conduct have had little direct impact on issues of labour rights, such as freedom of
association and collective bargaining (Barrientos and Smith, 2007; Chan and Ross, 2003;
ETI, 2006). It is also apparent that codes of conduct do not cover more vulnerable segments
of the workforce in developing countries, such as home-based, temporary workers or
casual workers, many of whom are women (Nelson et al., 2007). Studies have further
highlighted the lack of coordination between the purchasing and CSR departments of
international brands, and the distinct and competing pressures that they place on global
suppliers (Barrientos and Smith, 2007).
8. The main features of this are the need for: (i) better coordination between the purchasing and compliance departments of international brands; (ii) greater cooperation between
brands and suppliers to help suppliers upgrade their products and production processes; (iii)
greater interaction between brands and local NGOs and trade unions in training workers
in their legal rights and the brands’ codes of conduct; (iv) adopting a system of ‘mature
industrial relations’ to improve work conditions and secure enabling rights such as freedom
of association and the right to collective bargaining; and (v) continued and better engagement by private sector companies, NGOs, trade unions, and/or government representatives
within multi-stakeholder initiatives that facilitate cross-sector learning and foster innovative solutions to complex challenges such as child labour or home-based work (Locke et al.,
2009; Miller et al., 2010; Usher and Newitt, 2009).
Labour in Global Value Chains
1221
Industrial Upgrading vs. Downgrading
We might be able to explain similarities and differences in work conditions
at the bottom of GVCs with reference to the literature on industrial upgrading. As more and more low-cost producers enter the global economy, local
suppliers in developing countries face a dilemma in terms of how they can
survive in the face of increasing competition from other low-cost regions.
Hence, developing country suppliers face a choice between engaging in
the so-called ‘high road’ or ‘low road’ to competitiveness. The aim of the
high road is to increase financial returns to local enterprises by engaging
in product, process, functional or intersectoral upgrading strategies — that
is, producing better products more efficiently, by moving into higher valueadded activities such as design and branding of products, or by employing
skills gained in one industry to become competitive in a related industry
(Humphrey and Schmitz, 2002; Schmitz, 2004). Suppliers may also adopt
a low road to competitiveness that is based upon a downgrading strategy.
Downgrading involves moving into lower value-added activities, squeezing
labour by providing lower wages, and failing to abide by social and environmental laws that regulate production in export-oriented industries (Gibbon
and Ponte, 2005; Kaplinsky, 2005). Thus, we might be able to explain similarities and differences in work conditions within the same export-oriented
industry across different producer countries by observing whether local suppliers follow the high or the low road to competitiveness.
Global Value Chain Governance
In GVCs, lead firms have the potential to exercise considerable influence over
their suppliers through their governance of the chain, by deciding what is to
be produced, where, under what conditions, and for what price (Gereffi et al.,
2005). In the case of football manufacturing, international buyers may play
a key role in demanding continuous price reductions from their suppliers or
by compelling their suppliers in different regions to compete on the basis of
price by informing them of what prices their competitors can offer. Naturally,
this severely constrains the financial returns that local suppliers and stitchers
can generate from participating in the global football manufacturing value
chain. International buyers also play a key role in determining what kinds
of footballs are to be produced. By favouring particular types of football,
e.g. thermo-moulded or machine-stitched balls over hand-stitched balls, they
can influence the amount of work available to local suppliers and stitchers in
Pakistan, India and China. Global brands play a key role in coordinating and
organizing the GVC for football production by influencing how footballs are
to be produced. For example, international buyers often determine how balls
are produced by specifying particular technical, social and environmental
requirements that local suppliers must abide by.
1222
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
This can have either positive or negative implications for workers. On
the one hand, the CSR aspirations of global buyers may favour the hiring of
full-time, formally registered workers, working in factory-based settings and
covered by national labour and environmental legislation. On the other hand,
the enforcement of codes of conduct could exclude smaller-scale manufacturers and stitchers employed in the informal economy, e.g. home-based
stitchers, from participating in the higher value-added parts of the global
football manufacturing chain. Buyers can also influence when footballs are
to be produced. International demand for footballs peaks each year between
September and March in line with the football season in Europe and the
Americas while also following a two-year cycle that coincides with the run
up to either the European or World Cup Tournaments. International buyers
of footballs mediate this demand by placing their production orders in preparation for these events. The implications for workers of these changing production cycles could either be excessive work — in the form of overtime —
or too little work, in terms of job and income insecurity.
Local Forms of Production Organization
Similarly, various forms of local production organization in particular regions may play important roles in determining how and under what conditions footballs are to be stitched. As Neilson and Pritchard (2009, 2010) have
argued, local forms of production organization are embedded within wider
institutional contexts of work and employment. On the one hand, these institutional contexts consist of more formal regulatory regimes and agencies
that are entrusted with the promotion of economic and social development
priorities. On the other hand, local institutional contexts also embody the
informal values and norms held by state officials, private entrepreneurs,
NGOs, workers and communities that impact upon production organization
and the conditions under which goods and services are produced.
Within this broader institutional context, some localities may, at one extreme, seek to use mass production techniques involving very large firms
whose workers have to perform strictly demarcated, often repetitive tasks in
producing large volumes of standardized goods. Mass production involves
the mechanization of production to achieve economies of scale and forms
of work organization that serve to increase productivity, thus lowering unit
labour costs (Kiely, 1998). At the other extreme, some localities may seek to
be competitive by forming small-firm industrial clusters that are co-located
within a defined geographical space. In such clusters, information flows
quickly between firms in the cluster; each firm tends to specialize in a given
part of the production process; and the use of subcontracting (also known
as ‘job working’) is extensive to meet changing demands of international
buyers. In this model of local economic organization, an available pool of
skilled workers is found in cluster settings and local support institutions
Labour in Global Value Chains
1223
develop forward and backward linkages; small firms tend to specialize in
small batch production, and to split up individual parts of the value chain
into a large number of production units that are closely co-located within the
boundaries of the cluster (Kiely, 1998).
Mass production within factories potentially creates the opportunity for
workers to engage in collective action through representative trade bodies.
Where effective, such forms of labour agency and mobilization can lead
to higher wages and better job security. However, being involved in mass
production may also result in increased management control and supervision
of workers. As a result, workers may adopt a hostile stance towards their
employers and use demarcation strategies, only performing what is stated in
their employment contract while refusing to share their knowledge of what
works and what does not work at the production line with their employers
(Bradley et al., 2000). In industrial cluster settings, the use of subcontracting
and flexible production might also have advantages for those workers who
do not feel that full-time employment serves their particular needs. For some,
it may provide better possibilities for combining work and family life.
However, the use of subcontracting in clusters may also have a downside
for workers. The kind of reorganization of value chains is often seen as weakening the demands of labour for better work conditions. First, outsourcing is
often accompanied by deregulation and decentralized bargaining, as suppliers are unlikely to be covered by collective industry agreements. Second, as
witnessed through outsourcing of production to locations in the developing
world, the core workforce in the developed world is often under pressure
to make concessions on their employment conditions in order to be able to
keep their jobs. Third, outsourcing leaves peripheral workers to cope with
the disadvantages and risks of cost-cutting and flexibility (Flecket, 2009:
253), resulting in income and employment insecurity.
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN WORK CONDITIONS
Having outlined an analytical framework to help explain similarities and
differences in the work conditions of football stitchers, which focused on the
role of industrial upgrading/downgrading, GVC governance, and production
organization in national institutional contexts, we now present the main
findings gleaned from our worker-level interviews of work conditions of
factory, centre-based and home-based football stitchers in Pakistan, India and
China. An overview of the similarities and differences in work conditions are
listed in Table 2. This evidence needs to be treated with some caution given
that our sample size in each location and distinct work form was small. Thus,
we make no claim that these data are representative. Nevertheless, the data
provide indicative insights into differences across the three country locations
and work forms. Wages are presented in two ways: first, in purchasing power
parity adjusted figures (for monthly wages) in order to obtain a sense of the
1224
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
Table 2. An Overview of Work Conditions for Stitchers in Pakistan, India and
China by Work Form
Sialkot
Work Form
Median monthly wage
(in PPP $)a,b
Median hourly wage
(in nominal US$)
Weekly work days
Daily work hoursc
Child labour
Unionization and
collective bargaining
Social insurance
Jalandhar
Guangdong
Factory
Centre
Home
Centre
Home
Factory
262
190
78
182
177
439
0.38
0.32
0.28
0.24
0.15
0.89
6.0
9.1
Absent
No
6.0
7.8
Absent
No
Wide coverage
No
6.2
6.0
6.4
7.5
7.2
8.1
Unknown Limited Limited
No
No
No
No
No
No
6.0
10.3
Absent
No
Limited coverage
Notes:
a) Wages were calculated in the following ways. For China, the monthly wages were entered as
per the responses of the stitchers interviewed. For Pakistan and India, wages were calculated by
multiplying the average rate received per football by the stitcher interviewed and then multiplying this by
the average number of balls stitched by the stitcher per day. Finally, this number was multiplied by the
number of working days for each stitcher month. This method was adopted for India and Pakistan given
the low literacy rates amongst football stitchers who were often not in a position to calculate their exact
monthly wages. This was then converted into purchasing power parity $ using the World Bank’s PPP
conversion rates.
b) In national currencies, the median monthly incomes were as follows in nominal terms: Pakistan –
factory PKR 7540; centre PKR 5460; home PKR 2275. In India, centre INR 3000; home INR 2925. In
China (Guangdong): factory RMB 1625.
c) For factory-based football stitchers work hours were entered on the basis of actual hours spent inside
the factory/the stitching centre for work purposes. For home-based stitchers, we asked about their daily
routines, when they began, took breaks, resumed football stitching, and finished at the end of the day. This
was necessary as stitchers themselves did not always have a clear idea of how many hours they actually
spent on football stitching.
Source: Authors’ survey.
relative purchasing power of football stitchers in Pakistan, India and China;
and second, using the going market exchange rate adjusted wage figures
(for nominal hourly wages) in order to assess the relative competitiveness
of wages in the production of goods across the three locations.
What is apparent from our data is that, as expected, factory-based football
stitchers earn the highest monthly incomes. This is true across the three
country locations as well as within Pakistan (the only location where all
three forms of work organization were observed). We present wage data
first in terms of purchasing power parity dollars. At the top are Chinese
factory-based football stitchers in Guangdong who earned the equivalent of
PPP$ 439 a month.9 This was 40 per cent more than their Pakistani factorybased counterparts who earned PPP$ 262 per month. In terms of centre- and
home-based stitchers, we find that Pakistani centre-based football stitchers
9. In contrast, anecdotal evidence suggests that home-based football stitchers in Jiangsu
province earn about PPP$ 65–92 a month.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1225
and Indian centre- and home-based football stitchers in our sample earn
almost identical monthly incomes at PPP$ 190, 182 and 177 respectively.
When we review the nominal wages (that is to say, converted according
to market exchange rates) we see that the wage differences between China
and the South Asian locations are even more sharply defined. The hourly
nominal wages in Chinese factories (US$ 0.89) are more than double the
hourly wage in Pakistani factories (US$ 0.38) and more than three times
as high as nominal wages in Indian stitching centres (US$ 0.24). While the
PPP wage levels provide an indication of real wages, the nominal hourly
wages provide a better sense of how comparative wage rates may affect the
sourcing decisions of global buyers.
Football stitching can be seasonal in line with international demand for
footballs, and some stitchers especially in India and Pakistan reported that
they often did not obtain stitching work for months at a time. However,
when there were enough orders, stitchers in Pakistan, India and China generally worked six days a week.10 In terms of daily work hours there was an
important difference between Chinese and South Asian football stitchers.
Chinese factory-based football stitchers in our sample worked longer hours
on average (10.3 hours a day) than their South Asian counterparts. Overtime payments did not apply to Pakistani and Indian home- and centre-based
stitchers given that they did not have any contract defining their work relationship and working hours with the suppliers whose balls they stitched.
In the case of China, however, factory-based stitchers generally indicated
that they do work overtime, sometimes receiving payment for this, while
home-based stitchers in Jiangsu did not receive any overtime payment.11
On occupational health and safety (OHS) our findings reveal that the
majority of football stitchers in China using machine-stitching report that
they suffer from OHS problems related to football stitching. This is similar
to Indian and Pakistani football stitchers using hand stitching, where OHS
problems related to deformed fingertips, shoulder and elbow inflammations,
arm and back pain were common. In India, 100 per cent of the home-based
and centre-based stitchers reported suffering from health-related problems
as a result of their stitching work. In Pakistan, some factory-based stitchers
indicated that they suffered OHS problem while most centre-based stitchers
(70.6 per cent) and home-based stitchers (93.3 per cent) stated that they had
faced OHS problems.
Contrary to earlier research in Sialkot and Jalandhar12 we found little
evidence to suggest that football stitching was still undertaken with the
help of child labour in either Pakistan (Sialkot), India (Jalandhar) or China
10. The average for India is somewhat higher, but not significant given the small number of
home-based stitchers in our Indian sample where a few outliers responded that they also
worked on Sundays.
11. The number of valid responses in our sample of Pakistani factory-based stitchers was too
low to make any firm conclusions regarding overtime in that particular setting.
12. See, for example, Goyal (2004, 2005); Husselbee (2000).
1226
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
(Guangdong).13 Our own field-level observations in Sialkot and Jalandhar
suggest that child labour has been substantially diminished if not virtually
eliminated from the export-oriented manufacturing of footballs.14 In Jiangsu
province, we found anecdotal evidence to suggest that prison labour was
involved in the stitching of footballs. While we were unable to ascertain
how widespread this practice is, a subcontractor in Jiangsu province claimed
that he could get us 3,000 balls stitched in a prison while a factory told us that
they had set up a production facility for machine-stitching inside a prison.
During an internet search we also came across a prison that — in Chinese —
publicly advertised its ability to supply footballs.
Our research shows that unionization is generally absent in football stitching in Pakistan, India and China. In the one case of factory-based work in
Pakistan some attempt has been made to set up workers’ committees. However, these have been largely unsuccessful in terms of protecting workers’
rights. In India, an official trade union does exist for football stitchers.
However, it is largely ineffective, with a limited membership, and receives
money from local entrepreneurs to curb its demands. In terms of industrial
action, however, we found evidence of factory-based stitchers in Pakistan
and China spontaneously organizing to defend their rights. In Pakistan, a
strike was spontaneously undertaken with the aim of pressurizing factory
management in the main Nike supplier in Sialkot. The strike happened during
the financial crisis in mid-2009 when the factory was forced to temporarily
lay off a large number of workers. It appeared as if factory management intentionally miscalculated the factory-based stitchers’ monthly wages. Once
stitchers became aware of this, they stopped work and only resumed once
they had obtained a promise from the factory owner that due wages would
be paid in full. Similarly, on 7 May 2009, 2,000 workers went on strike
in a large export-oriented factory in Guangdong because of the relocation
of the factory and the dismissal of workers without full compensation for
wages due.15 On 7 June 2010, more than 1,000 workers went on strike at the
new factory site and destroyed part of its administrative office because the
security guards of the factory had beaten workers.16
13. In our field research in India we did come across one stitching family in Batala in which a
female stitcher was assisted by her children in some light tasks once they came back from
school, while a stitcher working in a centre claimed that children were involved in stitching
there but ran away when the child labour monitors come. In Pakistan, the Independent
Monitoring Association for Child Labour reported to us that it usually finds two to three
children a month during its visits to stitching centres in Sialkot, out of a total work force of
approximately 30,000 registered stitchers.
14. A recent NGO report (ILRF/BBVA, 2008) documented the extensive use of child labour in
the football manufacturing cluster of Meerut in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. However,
the football cluster in Meerut is not primarily engaged in export-oriented production whereas
this article focuses on the main export-oriented cluster of India, Jalandhar.
15. See http://epaper.nddaily.com/I/html/2009–05/07/content_783623.htm (accessed 2 April
2010).
16. See http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4999f0bf0100it2k.html (accessed 15 June 2012).
Labour in Global Value Chains
1227
In terms of social insurance, we found that Pakistani and Chinese factorybased football stitchers mostly had some form of social insurance. In
Pakistan, this included health, pension and unemployment benefits whereas
in China it related to pension benefits only. However, centre- and homebased stitchers in Pakistan and India were generally not covered by any social insurance. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a similar situation prevails
amongst home-based stitchers in Jiangsu province. In Pakistan, however, we
found two exceptions where centre-based stitchers were provided with some
medical insurance. One was stitchers producing fair trade footballs; the other
was stitchers working for one local factory that provided their stitchers with
medical insurance and basic education for their children.
FACTORS AFFECTING DIFFERENCES IN WORK CONDITIONS FOR
FOOTBALL STITCHERS
In the previous section we outlined what appeared to be the most significant
similarities and differences in the working conditions of Pakistani, Indian
and Chinese football stitchers. We now turn to the question of what explains
these similarities and differences. Our analysis is structured on the basis of
our analytical framework on industrial upgrading/downgrading, GVC governance, and production organization in national institutional contexts. As
suggested earlier, global and local factors may mutually condition, reinforce
or contradict one another in ways that create distinct outcomes for workers.
Here, we set out how some of these factors might affect work conditions.
Industrial Upgrading
Perhaps the most significant difference in the work conditions of Pakistani,
Indian and Chinese football stitchers is that Chinese factory-based workers
earn significantly higher wages than football stitchers in India and Pakistan.
Part of the explanation as to why the Chinese manufacturers are able to pay
their workers higher wages relates to the process upgrading undertaken by
Chinese manufacturers. Chinese football manufacturing became prominent
on the global stage with the invention of machine-stitching technology and
the emergence of mechanized football manufacturing plants in China. This
resulted in a dramatic increase in productivity in comparison with handstitched football production in Pakistan and India. Our firm-level qualitative
data suggests that a Chinese factory-based machine stitcher can stitch on
average 39.8 balls a day whereas the average Pakistani hand stitcher could
stitch 4.5 balls a day and the Indian hand stitcher 3.9 balls. This implies
that the daily productivity of Chinese factory-based stitchers was 8.6 times
higher than their Pakistani counterparts and 10 times higher than their Indian
counterparts. If we adjust for the number of hours worked per day, we find
1228
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
a similar story. The hourly productivity of machine-based Chinese stitchers
in a large export-oriented factory working in teams was approximately 6.9
times higher than Pakistani hand stitchers and 7.8 times higher than that of
Indian hand stitchers.
Sialkot’s manufacturers have traditionally specialized in the nicheproduction of high-quality hand-stitched balls. They have, however, lost
a significant portion of the world market in training and promotional balls
in recent years to Chinese competitors. While Pakistani manufacturers continue to emphasize that hand stitching produces higher quality footballs,
Chinese manufacturers have realized that the quality of footballs is perhaps
not the most crucial factor in the purchasing decisions of end consumers in
the mass market for training, recreational and promotional balls. As globally
branded firms play a key role in the marketing of these footballs, consumers
base their purchasing decisions primarily on the basis of the brand name
(Nike, Adidas, etc.) and the price, rather than whether a ball is hand- or
machine-stitched in these market segments.
As Pakistani and Indian manufacturers had not yet introduced machinestitching technology they were unable to match the productivity levels of
Chinese football manufacturers and were thus forced to squeeze wages
of their football stitchers. As our research in both Sialkot and Jalandhar
indicated, football stitchers experienced only minor nominal wage increases
in the last five to ten years. Consequently, taking account of inflationary
pressures, real wages had declined.
Process upgrading — in the form of the invention of machine stitching
in China — did not appear to have reduced the OHS risks that Chinese
football stitchers face in comparison with their South Asian counterparts. In
Pakistan, India and China the majority of hand and machine stitchers that
we interviewed complained of injuries to their hands and lower parts of their
arms caused by pricking of the needle, as well as back pain arising from
sitting for long hours crouched in the same position on the floor, on low
stools, or even on production lines.
Global Value Chain Governance
It also appears that CSR and sourcing strategies adopted in the interaction
between international buyers and local suppliers may affect work conditions
for football stitchers in each country. This can have both positive and negative effects, creating winners and losers among stitchers participating in
different work forms in the industry. The decline of child labour in football
stitching in Sialkot and Jalandhar over the last fifteen years can largely be
related to a variety of CSR initiatives within the Pakistani and Indian football
manufacturing industries. First, child labour monitoring has been introduced
in both clusters since the end of the 1990s. While the effectiveness of these
monitoring mechanisms has been the subject of both policy and academic
Labour in Global Value Chains
1229
discussion (see, e.g., Lund-Thomsen and Nadvi, 2010), their establishment
has brought about a general impression that the involvement of children in
football stitching is illegal. In Pakistan, in particular, the involvement of
children in centre-based football stitching would have direct livelihood implications as centres are likely to be closed if child stitchers are found within
them. Second, various NGO awareness-raising campaigns in Sialkot and
Jalandhar have changed the perception of child labour within local stitching
communities. Most stitching parents felt that involving children in football
stitching was not helpful to their child’s future. On the one hand, it would
compromise their schooling. On the other hand, involving them in football
stitching from an early age would mean that they could be restricted to an
occupation that provided little prospect for socio-economic advancement.
The factory-based model of football stitching facilitates compliance with
the international CSR requirements of Western buyers. Generally, these
brands prefer that production is in-sourced in factory-based settings where
wages, work hours, overtime payments etc. can be more easily controlled
than in the informal urban and rural settings of Sialkot and Jalandhar. The
factory-based model of production facilitates the access of workers to benefits such as social insurance (health, pension, unemployment etc.) and
overtime payments. This was much more widespread under the factorybased model of football stitching in Guangdong than in the centre-based
and home-based settings in Sialkot and Jalandhar. Similarly, we observed
that the factory-based model of football stitching in Sialkot and Guangdong
allowed workers to collectively organize spontaneous strikes in relation to
the delayed or incorrect payment of monthly wages (in Pakistan) as well as
factory closures and relocations (in China).
Yet the introduction of the factory-based model of football stitching in
Pakistan has also had some negative, and unintended, consequences. Nike is
the only international brand that insists that football stitching must take place
inside the factory premises of its supplier in Sialkot. While this may help
workers obtain the minimum wage, social security and overtime payment
prescribed under Pakistani law, it does not take into account the socioeconomic reality faced by many of the female stitchers living in the villages
surrounding Sialkot who are unable to commute to and from Nike’s supplier
factory due to patriarchal norms imposed by their male family members.
Consequently, there were no female stitchers employed by the Nike supplier
at the time of our field research.
Our findings from China illustrate similar kinds of trade-offs in relation to
the implementation of CSR requirements of international brands and their
effects on workers’ conditions. In some factories supplying either the leading
brands (Nike or Adidas) or non-sports brands (such as Disney) we found
that the implementation of CSR requirements placed limits on the number of
hours that stitchers could work a day. In these cases, the maximum number
of work hours was ten hours a day, six days a week, with Sundays off.
In the non-CSR compliant factories, football stitchers often worked twelve
1230
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
hours a day. As all factories, not only in China but also in Pakistan and
India, operated on the basis of the piece-rate payment system, the monthly
wages of stitchers working in the CSR non-compliant factory were somewhat
higher than those of their counterparts working in the Guangdong factories
where CSR requirements are more strictly enforced. However, the hourly
wage rates of football stitchers in the non-compliant factory tended to be
lower than in the ‘CSR compliant’ factories that supply the mega, smalland medium-sized, and non-sports brands.
Producers in Sialkot, Jalandhar and Guangdong province also face different sourcing pressures through the global value chain. On the one hand,
international demand for footballs fluctuates. It peaks in the run-up to the
European Cup and the World Cup and then drops immediately after these
tournaments end. International demand also changes in relation to the larger
cycles of international capitalism, such as the global financial crisis that
hit the international football industry in early 2009. As all three production locations produce footballs in the promotional segment, they also faced
downwards pressures on price as international buyers can source these products from all three countries. Hence, price competition in this segment of the
market is intense. In sum, local manufacturers have to be able to adjust their
production levels to changing international demand, they tend to face constant downwards pressure on prices, they need to develop new footballs and
football manufacturing methods, and they have to comply with international
CSR standards if they want to sell into the high-end of the international
football market.
Local Forms of Production Organization
In our view, local production organization within Sialkot, Jalandhar and
Guangdong plays an important role in the ability of local manufacturers
to cope with the pressures that emanate from the GVCs into which they
are inserted. At one level, the differences in production organization may
reflect macro-level differences in the industrialization models pursued in
China, India and Pakistan. China’s export-oriented model has been heavily
dependent upon foreign direct investment from Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Producers in Sialkot and Jalandhar have built their international competitiveness on the basis of cluster-based agglomeration economies. In contrast,
manufacturers in Guangdong province have built their export capability on
a mass-production model. These different forms of industrial organization
have implications for the work conditions of football stitchers in all three
settings.
Small-firm industrial clusters may be able to compete in the international
economy by specializing in small batch production for niche markets, and
by splitting up production processes between large numbers of smaller units
that are located within a narrowly defined geographical area. In this form
Labour in Global Value Chains
1231
of industrial organization, subcontracting and the use of job working are
extensive in order to meet the changing demands of international buyers.
This form of industrial organization was well-suited for the kinds of demands that local manufacturers in Sialkot and Jalandhar faced from the early
1970s until the mid-1990s. In the early 1970s, as international demand for
footballs began to surge in both Sialkot and Jalandhar, it soon became obvious to local entrepreneurs that it was no longer viable to keep the most
labour-intensive part of production inside the factories. As labour laws were
strengthened in the early 1970s, and industrial strikes became more frequent
(in Sialkot), local entrepreneurs felt that it was too expensive to retain permanent employees at times when football demand was low. This led to the
subcontracting of stitching from local factories to the homes of the football
stitchers. This added flexibility enabled producers to respond to changing
demands as well as allowing them to avoid social protection provisions
within the labour laws. At the same time, placing a network of contractors in
between the football factories and the stitchers themselves limited the risks
of industrial disputes that could disrupt production and/or lead to increased
demands for better work conditions in the industry. In our interviews with
home- and centre-based football stitchers in Sialkot and Jalandhar we asked
whether they ever engaged in any kind of bargaining over stitching rates. Often the answer was that while football stitchers did complain about the rates
to their contractors, the contractor would reply that rates were fixed by the
factory and could not be changed. The institutionalization of subcontracting
made it very difficult for trade unions to form and collective bargaining to
emerge. In terms of producing outcomes for workers, outsourcing can result
in the risks associated with global capitalism being pushed down to the lowest point of the football stitching chain. The outsourcing of hand-stitching
to centre and home-based locations tends to reduce the incomes of football
stitchers, resulting in income and occupational insecurity.
We believe that part of the explanation for the longer hours put in
by Guangdong’s football stitchers relates to their being migrant workers,
whereas their counterparts in Sialkot and Jalandhar tend to be local residents. Most of the workers labouring in the Chinese factories have left their
home provinces, and their families, to come to Guangdong in order to save
as much as possible in the shortest possible time span. With wages paid
on a piece-rated basis they can earn more by working longer hours. Hence,
notwithstanding the limits on working hours in place in some factories, with
overtime Chinese stitchers work more hours per day than their Pakistani and
Indian counterparts. There are no migrant workers in Sialkot and just a few
in Jalandhar (from the Indian state of Bihar). Since Sialkot’s and Jalandhar’s
football stitchers reside in the same locality, with their families, it may be
more difficult for them to work more than seven to eight hours a day if they
also have to spend time engaged in domestic and other forms of labour. This
is especially true for rural-based stitchers who may have farm and off-farm
activities to undertake alongside their football stitching work. In Sialkot and
1232
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
Jalandhar, both male and female centre- and home-based stitchers explained
that they would not want to work in factory settings as they preferred the
flexibility that centre- and/or home-based work allowed them. This enabled
them to come and go anytime and to attend to domestic issues during regular
work hours.
CONCLUSION
This article has sought to provide empirical insights into labour in GVCs
using the case of the global football manufacturing industry. This industry
is dominated by leading global brands that place labour standards and CSR
compliance as central tenets of their sourcing strategies. The industry is
also heavily concentrated with manufacturing centred on China, Pakistan
and to a lesser extent India. Moreover, there is a clear indication from the
trade data of the growing competitiveness of China as the leading global
location for football manufacturing at the expense in particular of Pakistan,
the world’s number two supplier. These dynamic trends reflect differences in
work practices, productivity and manufacturing technologies, and they have
consequences for ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ at the level of national suppliers as
well as local workers.
We undertook a comparative investigation of work conditions among
football stitchers in Pakistan, India and China and attempted to explain why
these work conditions are similar or different across the three countries. We
argued that the similarities and differences in work conditions of football
stitchers can be explained with reference to the intertwined factors of industrial upgrading/downgrading, GVC governance, and different types of
local production organization. Our analysis thus confirms the findings of
earlier studies in other ‘stitching industries’, such as garments and footwear,
that showed how sourcing and CSR pressures in GVCs have created new
forms of work organization and different outcomes for workers across spatial contexts. However, whereas the global garment and footwear industries
are highly dispersed in geographical terms, the global football manufacturing industry is concentrated in just a few production locations, enabling a
more ‘complete’ comparative analysis of how these pressures play out across
different geographical settings.
In the football manufacturing industry, it appears that Chinese stitchers
(in Guangdong) are better off than their South Asian counterparts in Sialkot
and Jalandhar. Factory-based football stitchers in Guangdong earn significantly higher monthly wages than football stitchers in Sialkot and Jalandhar.
They can save part of their earnings, which only some stitchers in Pakistan
can do, while virtually no football stitchers in Jalandhar are able to put any
money aside from their stitching work. While freedom of association and
collective bargaining are largely absent in all three production locations,
Chinese factory-based stitchers in Guangdong appear better able to organize
Labour in Global Value Chains
1233
protests and strikes that put pressure on their employers than the vast majority of football stitchers in Sialkot and Jalandhar who work across a large
geographical area, mostly without any direct relationship between themselves and the factory whose footballs they stitch. In terms of compliance
with international CSR demands, it also appears that Chinese factory-based
football stitchers tend to have more frequent access to medical insurance,
unemployment insurance and overtime payment than their counterparts in
Sialkot and Jalandhar. The only exception in South Asia is a supplier to Nike
that has in-sourced the process of football stitching in response to pressures
from Nike. Hence, it is only in this factory that football stitchers enjoy similar levels of social protection as their counterparts in China. The only way
in which the work conditions of Chinese football stitchers in Guangdong
may be considered worse than those in Sialkot and Jalandhar is in relation
to work hours: football stitchers in Guangdong put in longer hours than their
South Asian counterparts.
However, if we take a broader view of work conditions through the perspective of football stitchers themselves, we arrive at a more mixed assessment. First, during the period of our study it appeared as if factory closures in
the Chinese football manufacturing industry, in line with the financial downturn of 2009/2010, were more frequent than in Jalandhar or Sialkot, leaving
several thousand workers unemployed. Having said that, football production, as gauged through exports from China, grew rapidly over this period.
Second, as mentioned, football stitchers in Guangdong generally have to put
in longer hours and experience greater work intensity than their counterparts
in Sialkot and Jalandhar; this may result in long-term health effects that we
have not been able to document as part of this study. Third, Chinese football
stitchers working as migrant labourers in Guangdong province are generally
denied the benefits of a family life throughout the year. While this may
be reflected in higher financial earnings for themselves and their families
in the short-term, it is difficult to assess what the long-term emotional and
psychological implications of physical separation are for married stitchers,
their spouses and children.
This highlights a final challenge posed by this study. While it may be that
Chinese football stitchers in Guangdong province are better off in terms of
their monthly earnings, any assessment of ‘better off’ or ‘worse off’ depends
upon the yardstick being used. Working as a football stitcher — whether in
Pakistan, India and China — means receiving relatively low wages. Improvements in work outcomes for labour within the industry require an increase
not only in productivity but also in wage rates. Improving wages requires
the possibility for collective bargaining pressures by workers, which remains
relatively limited, especially in India and Pakistan.
This study suggests that codes of conduct focusing on specific aspects
of labour standards do not in themselves generate improved livelihoods
and working conditions for football stitchers. Moreover, while compliance
pressures from the leading global brands may have some positive gains, these
1234
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
may well be outweighed by the competitive pressures and risks that brands
force onto their suppliers, and the suppliers then push down to the workers.
Some categories of workers may become especially vulnerable. To bring
about real improvements in working conditions the policy debate has to go
beyond labour standards and CSR compliance and engage with the economic,
technological and social upgrading that could potentially generate sustained
improvements in real wages and working conditions for workers. However,
as our article has also illustrated, economic upgrading does not automatically
translate into positive outcomes for all types of workers across different value
chains and geographical contexts. Hence, an important policy challenge lies
in identifying the types of industrial upgrading (or downgrading) that are
likely to create winners and losers amongst different categories of workers
within different types of industries, value chains and geographical contexts.
While industrial upgrading may be an imperative for local firms to survive in
the global economy, social safety networks and retraining opportunities need
to be put in place for those workers that are displaced by the ever-shifting
processes of GVC restructuring.
REFERENCES
Barrientos, S. and S. Smith (2007) ‘Do Workers Benefit from Ethical Trade? Assessing Codes
of Labour Practice in Global Production Systems’, Third World Quarterly 28(4): 713–29.
Barrientos, S., G. Gereffi and A. Rossi (2011) ‘Economic and Social Upgrading in Global
Production Networks: A New Paradigm for a Changing World’, International Labour Review
150(3–4): 319–40.
Blowfield, M. and J.F. Frynas (2005) ‘Setting New Agendas: Critical Perspectives on Corporate
Social Responsibility in the Developing World’, International Affairs 81(3): 499–513.
Bradley, H., M. Erickson, C. Stephenson and S. Williams (2000) Myths at Work. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Chan, A. and R.J.S. Ross (2003) ‘Racing to the Bottom: Industrial Trade without a Social
Clause’, Third World Quarterly 24(6): 1011–28.
Chan, A. and K. Siu (2010) ‘Analysing Exploitation: The Mechanisms Underpinning Low Wages
and Excessive Overtime in Chinese Factories’, Critical Asian Studies 42(2): 167–90.
Coe, N.M. and D.C. Jordhus-Lier (2010) ‘Constrained Agency? Re-evaluating the Geographies
of Labour’, Progress in Human Geography 35(2): 211–33.
Coe, N.M., P. Dicken and M. Hess (2008) ‘Global Production Networks: Realizing the Potential’,
Journal of Economic Geography 8(3): 271–95.
Ethical Trading Initiative (2006) ‘The ETI Code of Labour Practice: Do Workers Really Benefit?’. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Flecket, J. (2009) ‘Outsourcing, Spatial Relocation and the Fragmentation of Employment’,
Competition and Change 13(3): 251–66.
Gereffi, G., J. Humphrey and T. Sturgeon (2005) ‘The Governance of Global Value Chains’,
Review of International Political Economy 12(1): 78–104.
Gibbon, P. and S. Ponte (2005) Trading Down: Africa, Value Chains and the Global Economy,
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Global Sources (2006) ‘China Sourcing Report: Sports Balls. Essential Sourcing Intelligence for
Buyers’. Hong Kong: Trade Media Limited.
Goyal, P. (2004) ‘Child Labour in the Sports Goods Industry: Findings from a Survey in Selected
Bastis of Jalandhar’, Social Change 34(1): 66–74.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1235
Goyal, P. (2005) Little Hands That Work: Child Labour in Punjab. Ludhiana: PBG Publications.
Henderson, J., P. Dicken, M. Hess, N. Coe and H.W.C. Yeung (2002) ‘Global Production
Networks and the Analysis of Economic Development’, Review of International Political
Economy 9(3): 436–64.
Humphrey, J. and H. Schmitz (2002) ‘How Does Insertion in Global Value Chains Affect
Upgrading in Industrial Clusters’, Regional Studies 36(9): 1017–27.
Husselbee, D. (2000) ‘NGOs as Development Partners to the Corporates: Child Football Stitchers
in Pakistan’, Development in Practice 10(3–4): 377–89.
International Labor Rights Forum/Bachpan Bochao Andolan (ILRF/BBVA) (2008) ‘Child Labor
in Football Stitching Activity in India: A Case Study of Meerut District Uttar Pradesh’.
Washington, DC and New Delhi: ILRF/BBVA.
Jenkins, R., R. Pearson and G. Seyfang (2002) ‘Introduction’, in R. Jenkins, R. Pearson and G.
Seyfang (eds) Corporate Responsibility and Labour Rights: Codes of Conduct in the Global
Economy, pp. 1–12. London: Earthscan.
Kaplinsky, R. (2005) Globalisation, Poverty and Inequality: Between a Rock and a Hard Place.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Khan, A. (2007) Power, Policy and the Discourse on Child Labour in the Football Manufacturing
Industry of Sialkot. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Khan, F.R. (2007) ‘Representational Approaches Matter’, Journal of Business Ethics 73(1):
77–89.
Kiely, R. (1998) ‘Globalization, Post-Fordism and the Contemporary Context of Development’,
International Sociology 13(1): 95–115.
Locke, R.M. and M. Romis (2007) ‘Improving Work Conditions in Global Supply Chains’,
MIT-Sloan Management Review 48(2): 54–62.
Locke, R.M., M. Amanguel and A. Mangla (2009) ‘Virtue Out of Necessity: Compliance,
Commitment, and the Improvement of Labor Standards’, Politics & Society 37(3): 319–51.
Locke R.M., F. Qin, L. Brause et al. (2007) ‘Does Monitoring Improve Labor Standards? Lessons
from Nike’, Industrial and Labor Relations Review 61(1): 3–31.
Lund-Thomsen, P. (forthcoming) ‘Labor Agency in the Football Manufacturing Industry of
Sialkot, Pakistan’, Geoforum.
Lund-Thomsen, P. and K. Nadvi (2009) ‘Global Value Chains, Local Clusters, and Corporate
Social Responsibility: A Comparative Assessment of the Sports Goods Clusters in Sialkot,
Pakistan and Jalandhar, India’. Technical Paper 17, Industrial Policy and Private Sector
Development Branch. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
Lund-Thomsen, P. and K. Nadvi (2010) ‘Clusters, Chains and Compliance: Corporate Social
Responsibility and Governance in Football Manufacturing in South Asia’, Journal of Business
Ethics 93(2): 201–22.
Milberg, W. and D. Winkler (2011) ‘Economic and Social Upgrading in Global Production
Networks: Problems of Theory and Measurement’, International Labour Review 150(3–4):
341–65.
Miller, D., S. Turner and T. Grinter (2010) ‘Back to the Future? Mature Systems of Industrial
Relations Approaches and Social Upgrading in Outsourced Apparel Supply Chains’. Working
Paper 2010/02. Manchester: University of Manchester.
Nadvi, K. (2008) ‘Global Standards, Global Governance and the Organisation of Global Value
Chains’, Journal of Economic Geography 8(3): 323–43.
Nadvi, K. (2011) ‘Labour Standards and Technological Upgrading: Competitive Challenges in
the Global Football Industry’, International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation
and Development 4(1–3): 235–57.
Nadvi, K. and F. Wältring (2004) ‘Making Sense of Global Standards’, in H. Schmitz (ed.) Local
Enterprises in the Global Economy, pp. 53–94. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Nadvi, K. with P. Lund-Thomsen and H. Xue (2011) ‘Playing against China: Global Value
Chains and Labour Standards in the International Sports Goods Industry’, Global Networks
11(3): 334–54.
1236
P. Lund-Thomsen, K. Nadvi, A. Chan, N. Khara and H. Xue
Neilson, J. and B. Pritchard (2009) Value Chain Struggles: Institutions and Governance in the
Plantations of South India. Gloucester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Neilson, J. and B. Pritchard (2010) ‘Fairness and Ethicality in their Place: The Regional Dynamics
of Fair Trade and Ethical Sourcing Agendas in the Plantation Districts of South India’,
Environment and Planning A 42: 1833–51.
Nelson, V., A. Martin and J. Ewert (2007) ‘The Impacts of Codes of Practice on Worker
Livelihoods’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 28: 61–78.
Oxfam (2010) ‘Better Jobs in Better Supply Chains’. Briefings for Business No. 5. Oxford:
Oxfam International.
Ponte, S. and P. Gibbon (2005) ‘Quality Standards Conventions, and the Governance of Global
Value Chains’, Economy and Society 34(1): 1–31.
Pun, N. (2005) ‘Global Production and Corporate Business Ethics: Company Codes of Conduct
Implementation and its Implication on Labour Rights in China’, China Journal July: 101–13.
Rainnie, A., A. Herod and S. McGrath-Champ (2011) ‘Review and Positions: Global Production
Networks and Labour’, Competition and Change 15(2): 155–69.
Riisgaard, L. and N. Hammer (2011) ‘Prospects for Labour in Global Value Chains: Labour
Standards in the Cut Flower and Banana Industries’, British Journal of Industrial Relations
49(1): 168–90.
Schmitz, H. (ed.) (2004) Local Enterprises in the Global Economy: Issues of Governance and
Upgrading. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Selwyn, B. (2012) ‘Beyond Firm Centrism: Re-integrating Labour and Capitalism into Global
Commodity Chain Analysis’, Journal of Economic Geography 12(1): 247–71.
Sum, N.L. and N. Pun (2005) ‘Paradoxes of Ethical Transnational Production: Codes of Conduct
in a Chinese Workplace’, Competition and Change 9(2): 181–200.
UN Comtrade (2011) ‘United Nations Commodity Trade Statistics Database’. New York: United
Nations, Statistic Division.
Usher, A. and K. Newitt (2009) ‘Beyond Auditing: Tapping the Full Potential of Labour Standards Promotion’. Utrecht: IDH Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative.
Xue, H. (2011) ‘Outsourcing in China: Wal-Mart and Chinese Manufacturers’, in A. Chan (ed.)
Walmart in China, pp. 34–53. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Peter Lund-Thomsen is associated with the Center for Corporate Social
Responsibility and Center for Business and Development Studies, and associate professor in the Department of Intercultural Communication and
Management, Copenhagen Business School, Porcelaenshaven 18A, 2000
Frederiksberg, Denmark (e-mail: plt.ikl@cbs.dk). His research interests focus on corporate social responsibility in developing countries, global value
chains, and industrial clusters. His work has appeared in journals such as
Competition and Change, Geoforum and the Journal of Business Ethics.
Khalid Nadvi is senior lecturer at the School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester, Arthur Lewis Building, Oxford
Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK (e-mail: khalid.nadvi@manchester.ac.uk).
His widely published research on globalization focuses on the interface between local clusters and global production, global regulation and local outcomes. He leads an ESRC funded research network
on Rising Powers and Global Standards and his current research project
is on the rising powers, labour standards and the governance of global production networks.
Labour in Global Value Chains
1237
Anita Chan is a research professor at the China Research Centre, University
of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, NSW 2007, Sydney, Australia (e-mail:
anita.chan@uts.edu.au). She has published widely on Chinese labour issues,
rural China, Chinese youth and comparative labour. She is the editor of
Walmart in China (Cornell University Press, 2011) and Labour in Vietnam
(ISEAS Publishing, 2011). Her current research focuses on the industrial
relations of China’s automobile industry and comparative labour standards
for China and Vietnam’s foreign-invested industries.
Navjote Khara is a professor at the Centre for Business, George Brown
College, 200 King Street East, Toronto, ON, M5A 3W8, Canada (e-mail:
nkhara@georgebrown.ca). Her research interests focus on global value
chains, industrial clusters and corporate social responsibility in the developing countries. She has worked on projects with UNIDO, the Copenhagen Business School and the Institute of Industrial Policy Studies, South
Korea. Her work has been published in Global Networks, European Journal
of International Management and Indian Journal of Marketing.
Hong Xue is a lecturer at the Department of Sociology, School of Social Development, East China Normal University, 500 Dongchuan Road, Minhang,
Shanghai, 200241, China (e-mail: xuehong005@gmail.com). Her research
interests include labour, civil society and global production networks. Her
research has been published in International Labour and Working Class
History, Global Networks and several academic journals in Chinese. Her
chapter on the relationship between Chinese suppliers and their global buyers appeared in Wal-Mart in China edited by Anita Chan (Cornell University
Press, 2011).
Copyright of Development & Change is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment