‘No Human Entry’ on Paper: Outsourcing Labour, Implementation Gaps, and Everyday Illegality of Manual Scavenging in India

Nihal Raj & Manish Tiwari

Journal of Labor and Society2026https://doi.org/10.1163/24714607-bja10200article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Abstract Manual scavenging, the manual removal of human excreta without protective equipment, remains deeply rooted in India’s caste-based occupational hierarchy despite legal bans under the 1993 and 2013 Acts. Independent research reveals its persistence due to weak enforcement and the limited impact of these laws. This reflects systemic institutional neglect that perpetuates caste oppression and the deprivation of Dalit sanitation workers. Using Braverman’s labour process theory and Michael Burawoy’s concept of manufacturing consent, the paper shows how manual scavenging is reproduced through informal contracts, deskilling, and bureaucratic outsourcing. It further explains how cultural narratives and state-led initiatives, such as the Swachh Bharat campaign and the rebranding of workers as Safai Mitras, legitimise exploitation of manual scavengers in India and conceal structural violence. Based on secondary sources, including legislation, court rulings, surveys, reports, and media accounts, the study highlights the need for structural reforms beyond legal prohibition.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1163/24714607-bja10200

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{nihal2026,
  title        = {{‘No Human Entry’ on Paper: Outsourcing Labour, Implementation Gaps, and Everyday Illegality of Manual Scavenging in India}},
  author       = {Nihal Raj & Manish Tiwari},
  journal      = {Journal of Labor and Society},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1163/24714607-bja10200},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

‘No Human Entry’ on Paper: Outsourcing Labour, Implementation Gaps, and Everyday Illegality of Manual Scavenging in India

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.