The most detailed typology o f small-scale industries is contained in the early book by E. Staley and R. Morse. For them the most important distinction among small enterprises is between factory and non-factory production. They contrast factory work with artisan establishments as follows: “The factory, whether small or large, is distinguished from artisan industry by greater division of labour in production...Artisan industry we may define as manufacturing carried on by craftsmen working singly or with a few helpers or apprentices and without extensive division o f labour” (Staley & Morse 1965, p.6). A second approach was followed by D.Anderson, who separates small enterprises into two categories: household activities, and small workshops and factories (Anderson 1982). Household enterprises are never defined analytically, they are defined in terms of the data as the residual that remains when information taken from “establishment surveys” (which cover only workshops and factories above a certain size) are subtracted from information from “labour force surveys” (which cover all types and scales of activities).
Throughout this study in general and in the discussion o f the relevant theoretical background in particular, these abstractly imposed divisions o f artisan/ factory, traditional/ modem and formal/ informal have been rejected. The only categorization used, and with caution, is that o f scale and the extent to which economic activity is statistically recorded. This study investigates small-scale garment manufacturing establishments, ranging in size from those employing four workers to those employing more than forty. These have been divided into two groups, the first including those establishments that are statistically unrecorded small workshops, the second group including those establishments that are statistically recorded factories. The division is by definition simplistic since it is based simply on the question o f whether an establishment is registered and tax paying or not. In fact most establishments are involved in at least some aspects o f unrecorded, unregistered and therefore unregulated economic activities including employment practices and market transactions. However, in this study of garment manufacturers in Shubra El Kheima, I have deliberately not included home workers. The reason for this is that the question o f homework with its complexities of
self employment and unpaid family labour and all the related questions of gender would have distracted from the main tasks o f the study.
The research project was faced with a number o f difficulties that have led to a series o f alterations and adjustments from the original plan. The first difficulty had to do with statistics. In the first plan for this project one of the aims was to attempt to measure the size o f production in the unrecorded garment sector through a comparison of the total production in the statistically recorded sector with the total local consumption plus exports. The task turned out to be impossible for two reasons. The first was the inaccuracy o f the statistical records, with different statistical compilations providing wildly varying estimations. The second reason was that one of the main sources of garments in the local market was that o f illegally imported, and therefore statistically invisible, ready made garments from a variety o f sources. A second source o f difficulties was in the access to large-scale public and private sector factories. Again it was intended that a number o f these factories would be included in the study. This also proved to be impossible. It required a research permit from the state security police, which was nearly impossible. It would take six months o f paper work and police screening and in 99 percent of cases was refused. It did not matter what type o f information the researcher was looking for, the whole concept o f social research is treated with unlimited suspicion. Because of these difficulties, a group o f 80 establishments was chosen. 60 unrecorded workshops in El Wehda neighborhood and 20 recorded factories in the old textile district in Shubra El Kheima. Still the choice o f both the workshops and the factories was limited by different factors outside the control o f the researcher as well as some research criteria.
The group o f 20 factories was limited by several factors. Many owners would refuse to meet because I did not have any recommendations. The thought o f wasting time with a researcher doing some obscure academic study and without any benefits in return was not particularly appealing. Others demanded a research permit, which, as explained above, was out of the question. The 20 factory cases I was able to get were obtained mainly through family contacts. This led to several advantages. The owners trusted the researcher and were therefore prepared to talk candidly. They were also prepared to give me some of their time and allowed me to interview their workers.
The group o f unrecorded workshops was chosen according to a set o f criteria were agreed upon between the researcher and a contact in Shubra. These included that the establishments had to be garment producers, using cotton cloth, not registered as an industrial or commercial activity. On this basis I set out through friends and relatives of who has lived in the area all their lives and has an extended family network, to create a list of 100 addresses o f workshops in the neighbourhood. O f these we were able to visit only 60. The rest either refused to participate or had closed down for one reason or the other. From these 60 workshops a sub-sample of 20 workshops was chosen, in order to conduct more in-depth research. The basis o f the choice was if the owners would allow further intensive research involving more detailed interviews with their workers.