This paper relies upon the 'what's the problem represented to be?' approach to policy analysis to interrogate key representations of human trafficking implicit in the UK government's anti-trafficking policy. It identifies six policy vectors, or representations, of human trafficking embedded within the policy, including organized crime, 'illegal' immigration, and victim assistance as three primary vectors; sexual exploitation/prostitution, poverty in countries of victims' origin, and isolated instances of labour law infringements as three secondary vectors. In addition, a series of assumptions, which underlie the current interpretation of trafficking, are also identified. By exploring what the problem of human trafficking is represented to be, the paper also provides an insight into what remains obscured within the context of the dominant policy frameworks. In doing so, it highlights the role of state-capital entanglements in normalizing exploitation of trafficked, smuggled and 'offshored' labour, and critiques the UK's anti-trafficking policy for manufacturing doubt as to the structural causes of human trafficking within the context of neoliberalism. ; full text from https://www.napier.ac.uk/~/media/worktribe/output-833907/traffickers-and-their-victims-anti-trafficking-policy-in-the-united-kingdom-1.pdf
This article provides a summary of research undertaken to investigate public awareness and understanding of human trafficking in Great Britain, Hungary and Ukraine. Responding to the lack of reliable empirical data on this issue, the research relies on representative national opinion surveys to assess the extent of public awareness of what constitutes human trafficking, the sources of knowledge underpinning this awareness, and respondents' attitudes towards key dimensions of human trafficking as embedded in international and respective national legal and policy frameworks and discourses. Conceptually, this article reinforces recent calls for policy and media paradigm shifts from understanding human trafficking as a phenomenon of crime and victimhood, to, above all, a human rights concern linked to the broader issues of sustainable development and social justice. Methodologically, the study highlights the role of opinion surveys as a measure of effectiveness and impact of anti-trafficking awareness campaigns. In practical terms, the article presents a set of data which can be useful for policy-makers, anti-trafficking activists, and national media in designing impactful awareness-raising campaigns and interventions.
This article provides a summary of research undertaken to investigate public awareness and understanding of human trafficking in Great Britain, Ukraine, and Hungary. Responding to the lack of reliable empirical data on this issue, the research relies on representative national opinion surveys to assess the extent of public awareness of what human trafficking is, the sources of knowledge underpinning this awareness, and respondents' attitudes towards key dimensions of human trafficking as embedded in international and respective national legal and policy frameworks and discourses. Conceptually, this article reinforces recent calls for policy and media paradigm shifts from understanding human trafficking as a phenomenon of crime and victimhood, to, above all, as a human rights concern linked to the broader issues of sustainable development and social justice. Methodologically, the study highlights the role of opinion surveys as a measure of effectiveness and impact of anti-trafficking awareness campaigns. In practical terms, the article presents a set of data which can be useful for policy-makers, anti-trafficking activists, and national media in designing impactful awareness-raising campaigns and interventions.
This paper relies upon the 'what's the problem represented to be?' approach to policy analysis to interrogate key representations of human trafficking implicit in the UK government's anti-trafficking policy. It identifies six policy vectors, or representations, of human trafficking embedded within the policy, including organized crime, 'illegal' immigration, and victim assistance as three primary vectors; sexual exploitation/prostitution, poverty in countries of victims' origin, and isolated instances of labour law infringements as three secondary vectors. In addition, a series of assumptions, which underlie the current interpretation of trafficking, are also identified. By exploring what the problem of human trafficking is represented to be, the paper also provides an insight into what remains obscured within the context of the dominant policy frameworks. In doing so, it highlights the role of state-capital entanglements in normalizing exploitation of trafficked, smuggled and 'offshored' labour, and critiques the UK's anti-trafficking policy for manufacturing doubt as to the structural causes of human trafficking within the context of neoliberalism.
This paper relies upon the 'what's the problem represented to be?' approach to policy analysis to interrogate key representations of human trafficking implicit in the UK government's anti-trafficking policy. It identifies six policy vectors, or representations, of human trafficking embedded within the policy, including organized crime, 'illegal' immigration, and victim assistance as three primary vectors; sexual exploitation/prostitution, poverty in countries of victims' origin, and isolated instances of labour law infringements as three secondary vectors. In addition, a series of assumptions, which underlie the current interpretation of trafficking, are also identified. By exploring what the problem of human trafficking is represented to be, the paper also provides an insight into what remains obscured within the context of the dominant policy frameworks. In doing so, it highlights the role of state-capital entanglements in normalizing exploitation of trafficked, smuggled and 'offshored' labour, and critiques the UK's anti-trafficking policy for manufacturing doubt as to the structural causes of human trafficking within the context of neoliberalism.
This paper relies upon the 'what's the problem represented to be?' approach to policy analysis to interrogate key representations of human trafficking implicit in the UK government's anti-trafficking policy. It identifies six policy vectors, or representations, of human trafficking embedded within the policy, including organized crime, 'illegal' immigration, and victim assistance as three primary vectors; sexual exploitation/prostitution, poverty in countries of victims' origin, and isolated instances of labour law infringements as three secondary vectors. In addition, a series of assumptions, which underlie the current interpretation of trafficking, are also identified. By exploring what the problem of human trafficking is represented to be, the paper also provides an insight into what remains obscured within the context of the dominant policy frameworks. In doing so, it highlights the role of state-capital entanglements in normalizing exploitation of trafficked, smuggled and 'offshored' labour, and critiques the UK's anti-trafficking policy for manufacturing doubt as to the structural causes of human trafficking within the context of neoliberalism.
The focus of this paper is on government anti-trafficking policies and funding allocations in two case-study countries, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (UK). The paper discusses specific ways, or 'vectors', in which human trafficking has been discursively constructed by national policies and the solutions that have been offered to counteract it. It relies on publicly available information and information obtained via Freedom of Information requests from public authorities in these countries to explore the extent to which anti-trafficking funding allocated by national governments supports or unsettles such representations. A broader definition of human trafficking has been encoded into anti-trafficking policies in Ukraine, implicating migratory pressures and violation of irregular migrants' human rights as the root causes of trafficking. However, the ability of the government to act upon this definition is limited by the ongoing socio-economic and political crises in Ukraine. This is in comparison to the politicised construction of trafficking by the UK government as a threat from international organised crime and 'illegal' immigration. The paper concludes that governments in both countries put their anti-trafficking money where 'their mouths are': crime, immigration and victim care in the UK, and awareness raising, victim care and training of 'frontline professionals' in Ukraine.Dándonos el "Mayor Rendimiento al Menor Coste" (o No): Financiación nacional contra la Trata en Ucrania y Reino UnidoResumenEste artículo se centra en la políticas gubernamentales contra la trata y la asignación financiera en dos países a modo de estudio de caso, Ucrania y Reino Unido. En concreto se discuten las vías específicas, o "vectores", que en el ámbito de las políticas nacionales se han ido formulando para afrontar el problema de la trata de seres humanos, así como las soluciones que se han ido proponiendo para neutralizarlo. Para ello se toma la información pública disponible y aquella obtenida a través de solicitudes a los Servicios de Información Pública en estos países, para determinar si el alcance de las líneas de financiación de los gobiernos contribuyen a apoyar o perjudicar sus propias conceptualizaciones del problema. Una definición más amplia de la trata de personas se ha introducido en Ucrania, que identifica como las causas fundamentales de la trata las presiones migratorias y las violaciones de los derechos humanos de migrantes irregulares. Sin embargo, la capacidad de actuación del gobierno en esta línea se ve limitada por la continua crisis socio-económica y política que afronta el país. Por su parte, el gobierno de Reino Unido realiza una construcción política de la trata de personas como una amenaza al crimen organizado y a la inmigración "ilegal". El artículo concluye que los gobiernos de ambos países sustentan económicamente las acciones que más les interesan: crimen, inmigración y apoyo a las víctimas en Reino Unido, y campañas de sensibilización, apoyo a las víctimas y entrenamiento de los "profesionales en primera línea" en Ucrania.
The focus of this paper is on government anti-trafficking policies and funding allocations in two case-study countries, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (UK). The paper discusses specific ways, or 'vectors', in which human trafficking has been discursively constructed by national policies and the solutions that have been offered to counteract it. It relies on publicly available information and information obtained via Freedom of Information requests from public authorities in these countries to explore the extent to which anti-trafficking funding allocated by national governments supports or unsettles such representations. A broader definition of human trafficking has been encoded into anti-trafficking policies in Ukraine, implicating migratory pressures and violation of irregular migrants' human rights as the root causes of trafficking. However, the ability of the government to act upon this definition is limited by the ongoing socio-economic and political crises in Ukraine. This is in comparison to the politicised construction of trafficking by the UK government as a threat from international organised crime and 'illegal' immigration. The paper concludes that governments in both countries put their anti-trafficking money where 'their mouths are': crime, immigration and victim care in the UK, and awareness raising, victim care and training of 'frontline professionals' in Ukraine
The focus of this paper is on government anti-trafficking policies and funding allocations in two case-study countries, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (UK). The paper discusses specific ways, or 'vectors', in which human trafficking has been discursively constructed by national policies and the solutions that have been offered to counteract it. It relies on publicly available information and information obtained via Freedom of Information requests from public authorities in these countries to explore the extent to which anti-trafficking funding allocated by national governments supports or unsettles such representations. A broader definition of human trafficking has been encoded into anti-trafficking policies in Ukraine, implicating migratory pressures and violation of irregular migrants' human rights as the root causes of trafficking. However, the ability of the government to act upon this definition is limited by the ongoing socio-economic and political crises in Ukraine. This is in comparison to the politicised construction of trafficking by the UK government as a threat from international organised crime and 'illegal' immigration. The paper concludes that governments in both countries put their anti-trafficking money where 'their mouths are': crime, immigration and victim care in the UK, and awareness raising, victim care and training of 'frontline professionals' in Ukraine.Dándonos el "Mayor Rendimiento al Menor Coste" (o No): Financiación nacional contra la Trata en Ucrania y Reino UnidoResumenEste artículo se centra en la políticas gubernamentales contra la trata y la asignación financiera en dos países a modo de estudio de caso, Ucrania y Reino Unido. En concreto se discuten las vías específicas, o "vectores", que en el ámbito de las políticas nacionales se han ido formulando para afrontar el problema de la trata de seres humanos, así como las soluciones que se han ido proponiendo para neutralizarlo. Para ello se toma la información pública disponible y aquella obtenida a través de solicitudes a los Servicios de Información Pública en estos países, para determinar si el alcance de las líneas de financiación de los gobiernos contribuyen a apoyar o perjudicar sus propias conceptualizaciones del problema. Una definición más amplia de la trata de personas se ha introducido en Ucrania, que identifica como las causas fundamentales de la trata las presiones migratorias y las violaciones de los derechos humanos de migrantes irregulares. Sin embargo, la capacidad de actuación del gobierno en esta línea se ve limitada por la continua crisis socio-económica y política que afronta el país. Por su parte, el gobierno de Reino Unido realiza una construcción política de la trata de personas como una amenaza al crimen organizado y a la inmigración "ilegal". El artículo concluye que los gobiernos de ambos países sustentan económicamente las acciones que más les interesan: crimen, inmigración y apoyo a las víctimas en Reino Unido, y campañas de sensibilización, apoyo a las víctimas y entrenamiento de los "profesionales en primera línea" en Ucrania.
The focus of this paper is on government anti-trafficking policies and funding allocations in two case-study countries, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (UK). The paper discusses specific ways, or 'vectors', in which human trafficking has been discursively constructed by national policies and the solutions that have been offered to counteract it. It relies on publicly available information and information obtained via Freedom of Information requests from public authorities in these countries to explore the extent to which anti-trafficking funding allocated by national governments supports or unsettles such representations. A broader definition of human trafficking has been encoded into anti-trafficking policies in Ukraine, implicating migratory pressures and violation of irregular migrants' human rights as the root causes of trafficking. However, the ability of the government to act upon this definition is limited by the ongoing socio-economic and political crises in Ukraine. This is in comparison to the politicised construction of trafficking by the UK government as a threat from international organised crime and 'illegal' immigration. The paper concludes that governments in both countries put their anti-trafficking money where 'their mouths are': crime, immigration and victim care in the UK, and awareness raising, victim care and training of 'frontline professionals' in Ukraine.
Drawing on multi-method research, this article demonstrates that the risks of large-scale trafficking due to the war in Ukraine were mitigated by granting Ukrainians more extensive rights than typically afforded to refugees. This shows the advantages of rights-based approaches to migration and labour exploitation. We draw on Bakhtin's and Žižek's work on the carnivalesque to argue that mainstream anti-trafficking initiatives—which are depoliticised and able to win support and funding from across the political spectrum—often serve merely as theatrical and distracting sideshows diverting attention from more impactful activities and the normalised exploitation within capitalism. However, avoiding trafficking is insufficient if Ukrainian citizens and residents still endure exploitative conditions. A weakened legal framework for workers' rights within Ukraine alongside inadequate labour protections across Europe have facilitated such exploitation. In contrast to the depoliticised stance of the anti-trafficking industry, this article concludes that more explicitly political actions supporting migrants' rights, workers' rights, and access to welfare and public services will not only more effectively challenge trafficking but also prevent other exploitation of migrants.
This article responds to Gozdziak's (2015: 30) call to explore how the knowledge that informs public debates about human trafficking is generated. Media imagery and narratives play a significant role in constructing both knowledge and ignorance. This article reflects on the construction of such knowledge by analysing how anti-trafficking docufiction videos from the Unchosen competition dramatize trafficking. We draw on Goffman's (1974) work on frames to analyse how these videos present a simplified interpretation of reality, where certain constructed aspects of trafficking and exploitation are represented by video-makers as illustrating the general. In doing so, we highlight how anti-trafficking docufictions help efface everyday exploitation. The article contributes both to the empirical research on the construction of knowledge about trafficking, and to critical conceptual work on (anti)trafficking, exploitation and ignorance. It is part of a broader project to challenge exceptionalizing and individualizing representations of human trafficking – aiming to engage better with everyday exploitation.
Dominant anti-trafficking policy discourses represent trafficking as an issue of crime, "illegal" migration, victimhood and humanitarianism. Such a narrow focus is not an adequate response to the interplay between technology, trafficking and anti-trafficking. This article explores different levels of analysis and the interplay between human trafficking and technology. We argue for a shift from policy discourses with a very limited focus on crime and victimisation to more systemic understandings of trafficking and more robust micro-analyses of trafficking and everyday life. The article calls for an agnotological understanding of policy responses to trafficking and technology: these depend upon the production of ignorance. We critique limitations in policy understandings of trafficking-related aspects of online spaces, and argue for better engagement with online networks. We conclude that there is a need to move beyond a focus on "new" technology and exceptionalist claims about "modern slavery" towards greater attention to everyday exploitation within neoliberalism. ; The People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013/ REA grant agreement PIEF-GA-2011-29840
