Tag: modern slavery

The Modern Slavery Act: some progress, but huge challenges remain

Dr Daniel Ogunniyi & Dr Zahra Shirgholami

Lecturers in Modern Slavery

Wilberforce Institute and the Law School

d.ogunniyi@hull.ac.uk

z.shirgholami@hull.ac.uk

Following yesterday’s anniversary of the introduction of the Modern Slavery Act in 2015, Drs Daniel Ogunniyi and Zahra Shirgholami reflect on its impact and effectiveness eight years on.

Yesterday marked the eighth anniversary of the Modern Slavery Act (the Act), which gained Royal Assent on 26 March 2015. Adopting the legislation was arguably a watershed moment and a re-enactment of the anti-slavery spirit of the early 1800s, when the UK Parliament adopted the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act (1807), outlawing the British Atlantic slave trade. The abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, however, did not mark the end of slavery. Slavery has since mutated and taken on different complex forms. An estimated 50 million people are trapped in modern slavery today. The Act was, therefore, adopted in response to the growing exploitations in the UK, which were not clearly captured in a comprehensive legislation.

The Act consolidated the existing offences of slavery, servitude, forced or compulsory labour, and trafficking in one piece of legislation. Following its adoption, the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), the national framework through which cases of modern slavery are identified and referred to the support service, was extended to all victims of modern slavery in England and Wales.

Referencing the Act in 2015, Theresa May, then Home Secretary, declared that ‘this landmark legislation sends the strongest possible signal to criminals that if you are involved in this vile trade you will be arrested, you will be prosecuted, and you will be locked up. And it says to victims, you are not alone – we are here to help you’. However, to what extent has the legislation fulfilled its promise? How has it fared in terms of criminal prosecutions and convictions? Have victims obtained justice compared to the pre-Act era?

To implement the Act effectively, the office of the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner (IASC) was established, whose mandate is to encourage good practices in the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of the offences under the Act, along with the identification of victims. However, there is currently no Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner in the UK – no appointment has been made since April 2022, when the previous Commissioner, Dame Sara Thornton, completed her term. By failing to appoint a Commissioner, Ministers have been accused of undermining modern slavery protections.

In terms of the victim support mechanism, NRM data from the third quarter of 2022 alone suggest that some 4,586 potential victims of modern slavery were referred to the Home Office, amounting to a ten percent increase compared to the preceding quarter in 2021. The figures from the third quarter of 2022 represent the highest number of referrals recorded since the NRM began in 2009. This may be evidence of better awareness of modern slavery among first-responder organisations or illustrate that the number of cases has risen within the UK. Considering the broader issue with the dysfunctionality of the NRM system, as noted by Dame Sara Thornton, the latter is likely to be the case.

Some successes have, nonetheless, been recorded, particularly in the criminal justice domain. For instance, in August 2021, some 3,335 trafficking investigations were conducted compared with 1,845 in June 2020. Also, 332 traffickers were convicted in 2021 compared to 197 in 2020. These relate to trafficking offences alone. Again, these may not necessarily suggest the efficacy of the Act in tackling crime, as the NRM data has shown an increase in the number of victims over time.

Since 2015, multiple reviews of the law have also been done, which focused on two overlapping issues of victim protection and enforcement. In 2016, the then Home Secretary commissioned Caroline Haughey’s independent review of the Act, which found pockets of good practices but raised significant concerns regarding the policing and broader enforcement response. For instance, the training of police officers, investigators and prosecutors was patchy and sometimes non-existent. The quality and quantity of intelligence about the nature and scale of modern slavery were inadequate, hindering the operational response. Such shortcomings triggered the government to set up the task force on modern slavery in September 2016 to coordinate policy and operational responses.  Nonetheless, the police service inspection conducted by HMICFRS in 2017 concluded that while legislation against modern slavery has been strengthened, no concerted overall response from the police service has been provoked.

Further, Section 54 of the Act, the transparency clause, requires businesses with over £36 million turnover per year to produce an annual statement for each financial year on what steps (if any) they have taken to address modern slavery within their operation, including their supply chains. The transparency clause, intended to eliminate exploitative work within supply chains, is based on the idea of naming and shaming. It highlights the role of the consumer in pressuring companies to address modern slavery risks in their supply chains. However, the value of this approach is contentious. For example, a recent study has shown that consumers could either be largely apathetic and indifferent to others’ work conditions, unaware of the Act, or do not know how they could play a part in it.

The transparency clause in the Act did move the policy response from being entirely criminal justice-based to one shared between criminal justice and corporate responsibility. Still, a robust compliance mechanism, as noted by Broad and Turnbull (2019), rather than maintaining a light-touch business approach, is needed.

The government’s action to outlaw modern slavery is further questionable, considering the creation of what could be deemed a hostile environment towards migrants in mechanisms such as the Immigration Act 2014 and 2016. Migrant workers are continually marginalised and excluded from support in government strategies. The great concern is whether the government will shift its focus from creating a hostile environment for (undocumented) migrant workers to implementing strategies that can address all forms of labour exploitation. Until this happens, modern slavery will be used as a mask to reinforce an anti-immigration agenda, overlooking broader issues of modern slavery beyond cross-border trafficking and the growth of a hyper-flexible labour market.

Ineffective regulation and minimal political will to enforce the existing laws limit the extent to which labour exploitation and modern slavery can be addressed. As the National Audit Office commented, unless the government establishes effective oversight of modern slavery, it could not tackle modern slavery or demonstrate it is achieving value for the resources being used. It is worth noting that, in May 2022, the government announced plans for a new modern slavery bill to strengthen ‘the protection and support for victims of human trafficking and modern slavery and to increase accountability of companies and other organisations to drive out modern slavery from their supply chains.’ It remains to be seen whether the new bill would consider the numerous academic and non-academic critiques to fit its purpose and accomplish its goal.

‘Migration and Modern Slavery: Voicing the Journeys’ Conference, 27-28 March, 2023

The ‘Migration and Modern Slavery: Voicing the Journeys’ two-day conference aims to bring together leading academics and practitioners to explore issues of modern slavery and migration through the voices of those on migratory journeys. It will pay particular attention to their journeys, their treatment on arrival at their destinations, and how survivors of modern slavery and practitioners can help to improve these aspects of survivors’ experiences.

To practically implement obligations imposed by international and domestic laws, criminological and socio-legal research, along with policymakers and legislators, must be aware of victims’ backgrounds, lived experiences, and needs. Research and practice must be informed by insights from individuals with experience of modern slavery and those who may be vulnerable to exploitation. Each person affected holds crucial qualitative evidence that academics, policymakers, and practitioners must listen to and incorporate into their work.

This conference will therefore explore the following key issues:

• The importance of engaging survivors with precarious immigration status;

• National and international legal obligations and slavery vulnerabilities;

• How to minimise risks of modern slavery within supply chains;

• How to develop multi-agency strategic partnerships to bring together a diverse range of stakeholders including those with lived experience.

Over the course of the two days, attendees will hear from academic and professional experts and will be invited to engage in discussions to help better understand the correlations between migration and modern slavery, and to share best practice in supporting those who are subject to these processes.

Confirmed Speakers:

Day 1: Academic focused day

Day 2: Practitioner focused day

Workshops:

Day 1:

  • Migrant workers’ voice: Minimizing risks of modern slavery within supply chains through inclusive and innovative approaches.
  • Climate Change and Modern Slavery: What Role for Human Rights Law?

Day 2:

  • A panel discussion with audience questions led by Professor Simon Green. What can trauma-informed approaches offer to the victims of modern slavery and migration?
  • Using survivor voices to inform practice. How policy, sharing best practice, and survivor voices can impact the quality of support.

To sign up for this conference please click here.

About the venue

This two-day interactive conference will be held at the Wilberforce Institute located on High Street in the old town of Kingston Upon Hull. The Wilberforce Institute makes up part of a small but unique museum quarter that includes the Wilberforce House Museum, birthplace of William Wilberforce, famous abolitionist and campaigner against the transatlantic slave trade.

There are various large public car parks located a few minutes’ walk from the building. If you travel by train, you can enjoy a 10 to 15-minute walk through the centre of Hull taking in either Queens Gardens and the statue of Wilberforce, or if you prefer, you can make your way past the Marina and through the cobbled streets of the Old Town. The full address is The Wilberforce Institute, Oriel Chambers, 27 High Street Hull, HU1 1NE.

Food and drink

Lunch and refreshments will be provided on both days, and we will be hosting a conference dinner on the evening of 27th March, the cost of which will also be covered. Please let us know in advance if you have any specific dietary requirements, and/or would like to attend the conference dinner by emailing Sophie and Megan (sophie.blanchard@hull.ac.uk; megan.white@hull.ac.uk).

Travel Bursaries

We are able to offer funds to cover national and international travel and accommodation on a first-come first-served basis. If you would like to take advantage of this offer, please contact us to let us know an estimation of your travel costs and if you would like accommodation.

Please email sophie.blanchard@hull.ac.uk for further information.

Event notes

This is a two-day event which is suitable for academics and practitioners. However, Day 1 is more academic focused, and Day 2 more practitioner focused. Please feel free to attend either one or both of the days.

Day 1 will begin at 11:00 with registration, tea or coffee and close around 17:15 for drinks and then dinner for those who wish.

Day 2 will begin at 09:00 for tea or coffee and close around 16:30.

Building Access

The University of Hull has increased accessibility to Oriel Chambers by including a platform lift to gain access to the building’s ground floor area. However, fire safety measures mean that in the event of a fire alarm activation this platform and the main lift cannot be used. At present therefore, the Institute can only be deemed accessible to anyone that is able to use stairs to perform a safe exit. However, we are working with the University of Hull Estates and Health and Safety teams to ensure that, as a listed building, and where reasonably practicable, further improvements will be made within the parameters of the planning regulations for future events.

Modern Slavery Statutory Guidance Updates 30 January 2023

Andrew Smith

Manager of the ACTion to Combat Modern Slavery Hub

Co-ordinator of the Humber Modern Slavery Partnership

A.Smith9@hull.ac.uk

The Modern Slavery Guidance for England and Wales, which has recently been updated to reflect many of the changes introduced through the Nationality and Borders Act, came into effect from 30 January 2023. Here Andrew Smith lays out in detail important information about those changes for anyone who is working in this area.

It is worth saying there are numerous updates of great significance to the Modern Slavery Act. Rightly so there are grave concerns about the changes to the Reasonable Grounds [RG] threshold, time limits on evidence gathering at Conclusive Grounds [CG] stage, and disqualifications. I know colleagues around the country are working hard to disseminate all known information about these policy changes to their partnership areas and networks. These changes will have many expected and undoubtedly even more unknown impacts on how first responders are able to quickly identify and refer potential victims of modern slavery.

The changes to the Reasonable Grounds threshold and the evidence required, along with the inevitable period of adjustment for first responders, could certainly have an impact on how quickly and effectively local authority child National Referral Mechanism [NRM] decision-making pilot areas are able to suitably refer, and then safeguard, young people they suspect are being exploited. Regardless of any future NRM decision-making processes, it is important young people and adults across the county continue to be supported away from exploitation and those that would do them harm.

The changes to time limits on evidence gathering also mean there is now more onus on First Responders to give as much information and specific evidence as possible when submitting a referral. The online NRM referral form has been updated to reflect these changes to ensure first responders include all relevant information when gathering evidence before submitting the referral. 

Clearly, there is also the urgent need for all organisations to reflect these changes in any first responder training across the country. Training is not only an investment in the professionals we trust to identity and refer potential victims but is vital to ensure we are fulfilling our moral and legal duties to all people that have suffered or are suffering trafficking and exploitation.

It is definitely too early to make any firm assertions on what these changes will mean for the wider anti-slavery system in the UK, but what is clear is that implementing blanket changes based on hostile immigration control will have disastrous consequences for many genuine victims who are unable to ‘evidence’ their traumatic and life changing experiences.

Summary of changes extracted from Section 49 Statutory Guidance:

  1. Changes to the Glossary – Added ‘Additional Recovery Period’, ‘Bad Faith’ (p.13), ‘Nationality and Borders Act 2022’, ‘Public Order’ (p.16), ‘Public order disqualification’, ‘Public order disqualification request’ (p.17) and ‘Victim of Human Trafficking or Slavery (VTS)’ (p.18). Updated ‘Reasonable Grounds Decision’ and ‘Recovery Period’ (p.17).
  • Definition of human trafficking – ‘transferring or exchanging control over’ has been added to Action under the definition of human trafficking (p.21). Sec.2.25 is new and sets out that abuse which happens on route and is not connected to the purpose of travel does not necessarily constitute as trafficking (p.24). Sec.2.26 is new and sets out the definition of sexual exploitation in relation to the Slavery and Human Trafficking (Definition of Victim) Regulations (p.24)
  • Indicators of modern slavery – Sec.3.7 is new and sets out that when determining if someone is a victim of modern slavery, regard may be had to the person’s age, family relationships and physical or mental disabilities, which impair a person’s ability to protect themselves.
  • Reasonable Grounds Decision – The Reasonable Grounds Decision threshold is no longer ‘suspects but cannot prove’ and is now ‘based on objective factors but falling short of conclusive proof’. Sec.7.4 and 7.8 are new (p.61).

·         The section on Making a Reasonable Grounds decision has been completely updated (p.129-174) and now means that a victim’s own testimony alone is no longer sufficient for a +RG decision. There needs to be additional information or evidence, such as medical, witness or expert statements or police reports submitted. Country reports or travel records will not be enough in themselves. Types of evidence are listed at the bottom of p.130-1.

·         ‘The relevant competent authority will take reasonable steps to gather all available information before making a decision within the 5-day decision-making timeframe’. Where there is insufficient evidence provided, the competent authority can question if the RG threshold is met.

·         The RG section now includes information on inconsistent and incomplete accounts, including a list of circumstances for why there might be a lack of detail or reasons for delayed disclosure, in order for the competent authority to assess credibility. If the individual had multiple opportunities to raise information ‘and fails to do so until action is brought against them, such as an Immigration Enforcement removal direction, then this should be weighed in the balance with all other evidence and may damage their credibility.’

·         Sec.14.50-14.81 are new. Sec.14.83 has a new line added: ‘It is not necessary to prove that an offence has taken place, or for there to be an ongoing criminal investigation to find that an individual is a victim’.

  • Recovery Period – The recovery period was reduced from 45 days to 30 in the previous iteration of the guidance.

·         Sec.8.20 has been edited to include that the recovery period will not be observed where a public order or bad faith disqualification apply, or it’s been decided not to provide an additional recovery period (p.69) [does not apply to children]. Previously the guidance said a recovery period will not be observed where ‘grounds of public order prevent it’.

·         There is a new sec.14.86-14.127 on Making an Additional Recovery Period, including a table showing the decision-making framework (p.136-147). In most cases, a victim will not get a second recovery period if they have had a +CG and made a new NRM referral for exploitation that took place before the first RG decision was made. This is different to if victims are re-trafficked after the initial NRM referral.

  • Evidence Gathering at Conclusive Grounds stage – When making a CG decision, the competent authority can now ask a victim or their legal representative for information to be provided within (a minimum) of 14 days and send a reminder for this after 7 days.

·         If this deadline can’t be met, the victim or legal representative can request an extension. This should be requested along with evidence for why the information can’t be provided and an updated timeframe for when it can. The competent authority will then use the criteria listed in the guidance when deciding whether to grant the extension. A CG decision will be made on the basis of the information available to the competent authority.

·         Sec.14.138-14.142 and 14.144 (p.150) are new. Consideration minutes and case records: Lines 5-8 of sec.1.174 are new, as is line 5-10 of 14.177 and line 5-9 of 14.178. The public order and bad faith points in the list in 14.207 are new.

  • Public Order Disqualification – Updated section p.166-176. For definition of public order see glossary p.16.

·         Where the public order disqualification applies, the victim will not have access to a recovery period or support, protection from removal, a CG decision, or Temporary Permission to stay as a Victim of Human Trafficking or Slavery.

·         This can apply to victims currently in the NRM who received their RG decision before 30 January 2023 (individuals in Modern Slavery Victim Care Contract [MSVCC] accommodation who receive a disqualification are provided with 9 working days of move-on support).

·         Disqualification requests can be raised by the Competent Authorities and the Foreign National Offender Returns Command where removal or deportation action is being pursued and the victim meets the public order definition. Disqualification requests can be raised by Competent Authorities where a British citizen is in detention or on licence or a British citizen has presented with challenging behaviours in modern slavery support, and it has been identified by the competent authority that the individual meets the public order definition.

·         The disqualification decision should be made within 30 working days of the disqualification referral wherever possible. First Responders must always make an NRM Referral or a Duty to Notify, even where the individual is likely to meet the public order definition.

·         There is a new Public Order Decision-Making framework table on p.172, which includes information on criminal exploitation, child referrals and threatening behaviour in MSVCC support. ‘A second pair of eyes review will take place on all public order disqualification decisions resulting in a disqualification’.

  • Bad Faith Disqualification – New section p.177-183 updating the previous section on improper claims.

·         ‘An individual may be considered to have claimed to be a victim of modern slavery in “bad faith” where they, or someone acting on their behalf, have knowingly made a dishonest statement in relation to being a victim of modern slavery’.

·         Decisions to disqualify individuals on grounds of bad faith may be made for all cases referred into the NRM before, on, or after 30 January 2023, even if a +CG decision has been made. The disqualification may only be applied where an individual has received a +RG decision.

·         Where the bad faith disqualification applies, the victim will not have access to a recovery period or support, protection from removal, a CG decision, or Temporary Permission to stay as a Victim of Human Trafficking or Slavery. Any RG or CG decision will be revoked.

·         Children (those under 18 at the time of the RG decision) are exempt from disqualification on grounds of bad faith.

·         The consideration of whether to apply the bad faith disqualification will be triggered by evidence from the First Responder, or from within the Competent Authority where evidence of bad faith arises during the CG decision-making process. Where First Responders have concerns about an individual’s credibility, they should indicate this on the referral form.

·         Individuals will be given the opportunity to provide explanatory evidence once the decision maker has communicated their intention to apply the disqualification. Credible explanations for gaps in evidence or a lack of credibility are listed on p.180. A second pair of eyes review must take place on all bad faith decisions resulting in disqualification.

  • Temporary Permission to Stay for Victims of Human Trafficking or Slavery (VTS) – p.217 Non-European Economic Area [EEA] and EEA nationals will automatically be considered for a grant of VTS if they do not already have the right to stay.

·         Victims will need a positive CG decision to be considered for VTS

·         Additional guidance is here 

British Nationals – The Hidden Victims of Modern Slavery

Dr Craig Barlow

Independent Forensic Social Work Consultant & Criminologist

Honorary Research Fellow, Wilberforce Institute, University of Hull

cbarlow@craigbarlow.co.uk

September saw the completion, publication and launch of an important scoping study addressing the experiences of British victims of modern slavery and their pathways to safety and recovery.  The research was led by Dr Carole Murphy at The Bakhita Centre, St Mary’s University, Twickenham in partnership with Louise Gleich at Justice and Care. Dr Alicia Heys, modern slavery lecturer at the Wilberforce Institute, and Dr Craig Barlow, Independent Forensic Social Work Consultant & Criminologist and Honorary Research Fellow at the Institute, were co-investigators on the twelve month project. The project was commissioned by the Modern Slavery Policy and Evidence Centre (MSPEC).

The Project

Currently, British nationals represent the highest number of referrals from one nationality into the National Referral Mechanism [NRM] with year-on-year increases rising from 90 in 2013 to 3,952 in 2021. The percentage of referrals that are British nationals has also risen each year from 2016 until 2020. In 2021, although the actual number had risen again, the percentage had dropped slightly: last year, British nationals accounted for nearly a third of all potential victims (31%). The largest proportion of these referrals in 2021 was for criminal exploitation involving children, representing 55% of all referrals of British nationals, with the majority exploited in criminal activities such as ‘county lines’.

Despite this rise no comprehensive study has been conducted on their specific vulnerabilities or to identify their specific recovery needs. That which exists has been largely focused on criminal exploitation and the ‘county lines’ phenomenon or sexual exploitation. The project sought to begin to fill this gap.

Research Objectives

  • Understand the experiences of British nationals who have been trafficked
  • Identify gaps in support needs provided for British survivors
  • Compare with findings from other groups
  • Develop coherent responses to the specific needs of British Nationals
  • Provide an evidence base for improved grass-roots delivery of support for British survivors
  • Provide an evidence base to influence policy on the support needs of British survivors

The project resulted in a series of publications, conferences and events culminating in the final report, launched at the House of Lords, and hosted by Lord McColl, on September 6, 2022.

Publications and Conference Papers

The literature review for this project was adapted for a journal article  and published  at the beginning of September:  A Review of Modern Slavery in Britain: Understanding the Unique Experience of British Victims and Why it Matters – Alicia Heys, Craig Barlow, Carole Murphy, Amy McKee, 2022 (sagepub.com)

As part of the research, Craig undertook a critical review of the current criminal and civil legislation and justice system in the UK and presented some of the findings of this review in a paper at the British Society of Criminology’s annual conference hosted by Surrey University on June 29. His paper ‘British Victims of Modern Slavery: Journeys into Criminal Exploitation and Alternative Interventions’ critiqued the current legal and policy response to the criminal exploitation of children and vulnerable adults, building on his doctoral research and recent work published with Alicia Keys, Simon Green and Beth Derby.

We followed this up with two conference papers in The Netherlands, at the fifth global meeting of the Slavery Past, Present & Future Conference at Webster University, Leiden. We were joined by Professor Simon Green who presented a paper with Craig focusing on child trafficking and criminal exploitation while Alicia and Carole presented early findings from the British Nationals project.

The Final Report

Identifying Pathways to Support British Victims of Modern Slavery towards Safety and Recovery: A Scoping Study  surveyed and interviewed over 50 professionals working with people affected by modern slavery, as well as interviewing seven survivors, to paint a complex picture of systemic barriers creating social and economic vulnerabilities in relation to modern slavery. The lack of awareness amongst services to intervene early and protect British nationals from exploitation was a key feature.

Carole Murphy said, “Our research shows that there’s a huge gap in knowledge about the potential for British nationals to be exploited in modern slavery. This lack of knowledge and understanding results in them not being offered the same support as other people…[British nationals] are commonly failed by the authorities, facing what one respondent in this study referred to as ‘a cycle of closed doors’.

“What sets British citizens affected by modern slavery apart from other potential victims is that they have regularly come into contact with social services, schools and education institutions, mental and physical health professionals even before their exploitation starts. Despite this, agencies that are designed to support them regularly miss opportunities to protect them from being exploited.”

Moving Forward

The report recommends implementing a public health approach to modern slavery to prioritise prevention and early identification of British nationals, including reviewing legislative protections for survivors. At regional and local levels, the report proposes implementing community awareness and resilience programmes and developing multi-agency modern slavery partnerships.

It also advises providing training to frontline professionals likely to encounter potential victims of modern slavery, specifically addressing the experience of modern slavery for British nationals.

Furthermore, it recommends integrating the approach to supporting people who have experienced modern slavery, including improved communication between services provided through the NRM and local authorities, as well as the Crown Prosecution Service in cases of criminal exploitation.

The Impact of the Climate Crisis on Modern Slavery

Megan White

Modern Slavery Partner Administrator,

Wilberforce Institute, University of Hull

Megan.White@hull.ac.uk

Globally, endeavours have been made for the prevention and eradication of modern slavery. Target 8.7 of the UN’s current Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs] aiming to ‘end modern slavery and human trafficking’ and the G7 financial minister’s recent joint statement condemning the exploitation of people in global supply chains highlight this. Nonetheless, the International Labour Organisation has estimated that just under 50 million people are trapped in modern slavery in 2021. It is well established that global supply chains are hubs for the international exploitation of people. The NGO, Anti-Slavery International, for instance has reported that 16 million people are currently exploited in the private sector with links to supply chains. Exploitation is a common feature at all stages in production, from harvesting the initial raw materials to manufacturing and shipping.

The growing challenge of the climate crisis adds an additional layer of complexity to modern slavery and human trafficking globally. Environmental degradation, loss of land, security and livelihoods are set to push millions of people into vulnerable situations that risk exploitation. Moreover, for those already at risk of exploitation, the climate crisis will only add to their vulnerability. Heat waves, earthquakes, extreme flooding and wildfires are just some of the consequences of the ongoing climate crisis. Most often the poorest members of society from low-income countries are impacted disproportionately because of the limited national disaster relief capacity of the State, and the fact that many individuals rely on optimal climate conditions to support their livelihoods. Primarily this is seen in the agricultural sector. As a direct result of this, climate catastrophes will force individuals into situations of desperation, posing an increased risk for them to become vulnerable to exploitation.

This is a universal challenge that the international community needs to address. The joint report produced by the International Institute for Environment and Development and Anti-Slavery International in 2021 cements this, finding that drought in North Ghana has forced migration to cities, and upon reaching these cities, individuals were at higher risk of modern slavery, particularly debt bondage, trafficking and sexual exploitation. Moreover, the 2016 report of the International Organisation for Migration [IOM] revealed that in India, exploiters tend to recruit before the harvest season or in periods of drought as these are often the hardest time periods for agricultural workers, ensuring advantage can be taken of them at the peak of their vulnerability.

These brief examples demonstrate that climate change is already exacerbating modern slavery, acting as a driver for vulnerability. On an international level the IOM has stressed the importance of understanding the ‘hidden’ consequences of the climate crisis, and that it goes far beyond extreme weather conditions. Considering this, responses to modern slavery must include the impact of climate change, particularly in areas with poor governance and insufficient national protections established for potential climate migrants.

However, a lack of corporate social responsibility, the prospect of being involved in a 150 billion dollar economy and a huge consumer demand from the West underscore a lack of willingness by exploiters to amend the appalling human rights violations in modern slavery. This is further compounded by the sophisticated recruitment strategies and desperate situations of vulnerability which foster ideal conditions to help facilitate modern slavery.

International Law prohibits modern slavery, with some forms of slavery even prosecuted as crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court. However, clear gaps remain in protections against those subjected to modern slavery, as demonstrated by the examples and statistics outlined previously. Enforcement of norms is unclear, and because of the various components of modern slavery, UN bodies, human rights regulators and other international systems are fragmented, leading to inefficiencies. This is further exacerbated and complicated by the challenges brought on through climate change. Although modern slavery is a feature of the SDGs for 2030, in part due to the UK government launching an international campaign to raise awareness of this issue, many parties seem uninterested and unwilling to initiate change to prevent the exploitation and commodification of people, particularly when the demand is so high in this multi-billion dollar industry.

On a more local level, the University of Hull’s 2030 agenda is focused on carving out a more equitable and sustainable world, by addressing inequalities and injustices including exploitation. Moreover, the expertise of the Wilberforce Institute has been utilised by organisations to map out the risks associated with labour and human rights violations by large corporations in their supply chains. The Institute also remains at the forefront of delivering knowledge and conducting research on modern slavery within the UK. However, as Vice Chancellor Professor Dave Petley reflected on last week in his blog for Anti-Slavery Day, there is still much to do.

Revisiting seafood supply chains with Waitrose

Cristina Talens

Director of Modern Slavery Risk Assessments

Wilberforce Institute, University of Hull

c.talens@hull.ac.uk

For over 15 years, Waitrose has had a strategy in place for the responsible sourcing of wild-caught and farmed fish. The retailer has placed great emphasis on ensuring they sell only high quality products sourced from known and approved farms (Waitrose’s supply chain information can be found on the Ocean Disclosure Project website). However, these farms (and fisheries) are located across the world and include some high-risk countries with regards to human rights abuses. Some of them have been widely reported in the press, with headlines focussing predominantly on seafood supply chains in south-east Asia and Central and Latin America. Examples include incredibly long working hours which have led to workers allegedly consuming drugs, such as amphetamines, just to keep going.

In March 2019, Waitrose commissioned the Wilberforce Institute to map out the risks associated with labour and human rights in their seafood supply chains for prawns, scallops, mussels, squid, ray, herring milts and clams amongst others.

The Wilberforce Institute conducted a desk review and interviewed HR personnel and managers from 11 seafood companies in Chile, Ecuador, Honduras, Indonesia, Madagascar, Nicaragua, Peru and Vietnam. The aim of this was to understand worker recruitment and management practices and consider the risk that modern slavery and labour exploitation could take place. The 11 sites covered a workforce of 8900 permanent workers and 1100 temporary workers employed on farms, hatcheries and feeding centres.

The interviews provided Waitrose, and their direct UK based suppliers, with an overview of the specific labour and human rights risks affecting the selected seafood supply chains. Below is a summary of the findings which were based entirely on information provided by site managers:

Gender: 95% of the workforce identified on farms and hatcheries and feeding centres were male. It was therefore considered that in the scenarios being assessed, men were at a much higher risk of human rights abuses than women. One of the reasons given for the gender disparity was that farms and hatcheries are remotely located and the tasks performed by workers are more physically demanding. It is notable that at the packhouse, the gender ratio changes with women representing 50% of the workforce. Packhouses are located nearer to local communities and the work is less physical.

Recruitment methods: Most sites appear to use labour agencies for the purpose of recruiting workers, but not for managing them.

2 out of 11 sites (12%) reported that they used labour agencies and/or subcontractors in Indonesia and Vietnam at hatcheries and farms in more remotely located areas.

5 out of 11 sites (45%) reported that labour agencies carried out recruitment, but that they directly employ the workers once they arrive on site.

Hours: It was found that there was often a lack of transparency regarding working hours. This, in turn, often translated into a lack of transparency on worker’s wages as it is unclear what hourly wage is being paid and whether overtime premiums are being paid.

2 out of 11 sites (12%) had no transparency on working hours and therefore there was a high possibility that wages were being incorrectly calculated. 

5 out of 11 sites (45%) reported excessive working hours and working days. On one site, workers undertook four weeks of work without a day off.

Accommodation: Hatcheries and farms often house workers. The sites are remotely located and accommodation is provided at 7 of the 11 sites (64%).  These house hundreds of workers at a time and this is where the risk of forced labour is highest. Processing sites tend to be closer to the towns providing better transport links and communication with the outside world.

Loans: It is recognised by the farms that loans can be of benefit where there is no welfare structure to support the most vulnerable. The loan amount must not be more than can be reasonably paid back, as this would create debt bondage. Loans were offered in 7 out of 11 sites (64%).

Worker voice: The effectiveness of current worker voice/feedback mechanisms at the farm sites is questionable.

6 out of 11 sites (55%) reported that they had trade unions in place: 4 of these were in Vietnam and 1 in Indonesia. To date, in Vietnam, there is only one representative organisation of workers, the Vietnam General Confederation of Labour (VGCL), however in December 2019 the New Labour Code of Vietnam was passed, for enactment in January 2021. In order to observe Vietnam’s commitments under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) and ILO Conventions, the New Labour Code recognises the right of employees to set up their own representative organisations. The 2020 ITUC Global Rights Index rated Indonesia as a 5, which means there is no guarantee of worker rights in the country. There is also evidence that arbitrary arrests of union representatives were made there in 2019.

In South America, there was no trade union representation at any of the farm sites. Ecuador and Honduras were both rated as a 5, which means that there is no guarantee of worker rights, whereas Chile and Peru were only slightly better with a rating of 4, meaning there are systematic violations of rights. Nicaragua did not have a rating.

There has been considerable unrest across South America in recent years, and at one site, workers (who are housed in employer’s accommodation) were not allowed to contact the ‘outside world’, which was considered by the farm management as a safety measure but could also be viewed as a forced labour indicator.

As a result of these risk assessments, Waitrose engaged direct suppliers, sharing the findings of the assessments with them and following up on the individual corrective actions taken at the farm sites. They also issued a call to action for the industry to collaborate on greater transparency within seafood supply chains as the best opportunity to tackle both illegal fishing and human rights abuses within the seafood sector. To this end, Waitrose signed the Environmental Justice Foundation’s 10 point Charter for Transparency in 2019. Waitrose also recognised that there was a clear need for further investigation and research into the human rights risks in seafood supply chains, especially at the hatcheries and farm sites which are often remotely located and appear to be high risk. Industry collaboration is required to conduct and fund risk assessments on sites in the highest risk countries and could be supported by experts on modern slavery such as those at the Wilberforce Institute.

Long Term Support for Survivors of Modern Slavery: The Importance of Modern Slavery Champions Within Organisations

Tuesday 11 October 2022, 08.45am onwards

Aura Innovation Centre,

Meadow Road

Kingston upon Hull

HU13 0GD

The Wilberforce Institute, University of Hull, in collaboration with the Humber Modern Slavery Partnership and national partners invite you to our upcoming free one-day conference ‘Long Term Support for Survivors of Modern Slavery – The Importance of Modern Slavery Champions Within Organisations’.

The Global Slavery Index estimates there are 40.3 million people trapped in some form of slavery around the globe today. In the UK, 12,727 people were officially identified as potential victims of modern slavery in 2021. Slavery and trafficking are crimes punishable by severe penalties, yet the problem remains and is growing. Providing long term support to victims and survivors of slavery and trafficking is vital in helping people make lasting and meaningful recoveries, to avoid further trauma and re-exploitation, and in some cases to support prosecutions against their exploiters. Access to support services for victims of slavery and trafficking in the UK is provided through the National Referral Mechanism [NRM]. People who are referred into the NRM are entitled to a range of support services such as accommodation, financial assistance, counselling, or help accessing legal advice.

However, research shows us that there is a distinct lack of understanding of what support people need once they have exited this provision or indeed why they sometimes choose to decline any offer of support in the first place.

This one-day conference at the Aura Innovation Centre brings together new empirical research findings by leading academics, stories from survivors, and experts working in policing and victim support to explore and discuss the importance of having skilled professionals in key positions within organisations who can work with victims to improve their long-term outcomes.

Over the course of the day, you will hear from our expert academic and professional speakers on their research findings and the real-world strategies they use to engage and safeguard victims with a focus on agency and identity.

You will take part in interactive workshops, working with colleagues to discuss and develop new approaches you can apply in your own organisation. The day will end with a panel session giving you an opportunity to pose questions to our speakers.

Confirmed Speakers

Professor Simon Green and Dr Nicola O’Leary, University of Hull – Reclaiming the Narrative: Victims reframing victimology. Empirical research findings

DC Colin Ward, Modern Slavery Unit, Manchester Police – Safeguarding victims in policing

Richard Eastwood, Justice and Care, embedded in Essex Police – The role of victim navigators

Major Kathy Betteridge, Director Anti Trafficking & Modern Slavery, The Salvation Army – ‘We are not for sale’, the role of the Salvation Army

Jen Nghishitende, University of Hull, PHD research – “Freedom is a constant struggle”: Women’s journeys after modern slavery in the United Kingdom

About the venue

This is a free event hosted by the University of Hull in a unique and state of the art venue. The Aura Innovation Centre is located at the heart of the UK’s Energy Estuary, in one of the greenest business parks in the country – Bridgehead in Hessle, East Yorkshire. On track to receive a BREEAM Excellent rating for its design, construction, and materials sourced through local supply chains, the Innovation Centre is in the top 10% of UK new non-domestic buildings. And, with an A-rated Energy Performance Certificate the AIC outperforms most new, similar buildings.

Registration and Dietary Requirements

Click here to register for this free one-day event.

Lunch and refreshments are provided. Vegan and vegetarian options are available but please let us know in advance if you have any specific dietary requirements by emailing our interns Sophie and Megan.

sophie.blanchard@hull.ac.uk

megan.white@hull.ac.uk

Counting The Cost of Child Exploitation

Sophie Blanchard

MA student, Criminology and Crime Control 

Department of Criminology, University of Hull

sophie.blanchard@hull.ac.uk

This blog takes a look at the recent Office for National Statistics (ONS) publication of statistics for child victims of modern slavery in the UK. This is the first publication of its kind by the ONS and draws on data from the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), Police Recorded Crime (PRC), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Department for Education’s Children in Need Census (CINC), The Modern Slavery and Exploitation Helpline, amongst other organisations. This ONS publication seeks to provide a deeper insight into the incidences of child victims of modern slavery in the UK.

There is no one data source that accurately quantifies the number of child victims in the UK. The NRM currently provides the best measure of potential victims, although it is known to be an undercount. In this blog we will look at the different sources that support the ONS publication, identify strengths and weaknesses of this type of data collection and aim to provide a summary of the data within it.

How many potential victims have been identified?

In 2021, 5,468 potential child victims were referred into the NRM. This shows a 9% increase from the previous year when 5,028 potential child victims were referred. The number of potential child victims of modern slavery in the UK has increased every year since the NRM was established in 2009. However, it can be argued that the increased number of potential victims being referred is not just because there are more victims but because there is increasing awareness and training amongst first responders.

Whilst the numbers went up for the NRM, the number of potential child victims of modern slavery identified by the Modern Slavery and Exploitation Helpline decreased drastically. In 2021, the helpline received information about 194 potential child victims of modern slavery, which came from calls, web forms, and app entries. This shows a 43% decrease from the previous year when there were 340 potential victims, although the reasons for this are as yet unclear.

Figure 1: Comparison of PRC and NRM figures, April 2016 – March 2021

YearPolice Recorded Crime child victims of modern slaveryYearNational Referral Mechanism child victims of modern slavery
Apr 2016 to Mar 2017287Jan 2017 to Dec 20172,114
Apr 2017 to Mar 2018679Jan 2018 to Dec 20183,129
Apr 2018 to Mar 20191,327Jan 2019 to Dec 20194,554
Apr 2019 to Mar 20202,547Jan 2020 to Dec 20205,028
Apr 2020 to Mar 20213,239Jan 2021 to Dec 20215,468

When we compare the PRC statistics on child victims of modern slavery and the NRM figures in each 12-month period we observe there is a significant difference (Figure 1). This difference highlights a worrying gap in the amount of identified cases of potential child exploitation and the policing response to investigating these potential crimes.  

What are the ages of the victims?

Figure 2: Age of child victims, 2017-2021

Figure 2 shows the ages of child victims from PRC in England and Wales. The largest age group throughout years 2017 to 2021 are 13- to 16-year-olds. The statistics from April 2018 to March 2019 and April 2019 to March 2020 show the number of victims who were aged 13 to 16 almost doubled.

According to the NRM data for the year ending December 2021, over four-fifths, (82%) of the children who received a positive reasonable grounds decision from the NRM were aged 15 to 17 years old. This could simply be because more 15- to 17-year-olds are referred into the NRM and can be backed up by the PCR graph above which shows 13 to 17-year-olds being the most reported ages.

What are the genders of the victims?

Figure 3: Gender of potential child victims, 2021

According to the Modern Slavery and Exploitation Helpline statistics, the most common gender of the 194 potential child victims of modern slavery reported to the helpline in 2021 were female (32%), even though the category of unknown genders is higher than both male and female victims (Figure 3). In contrast, the NRM 2021 end of year statistics appear to show that there were 4,314 male and 1,145 female potential child victims, a total of 5,459, leaving 9 potential child victims of unknown gender. These two contrasting data sets make it difficult to produce any useful overview of the gender of children who are both identified and referred into the NRM and of those that fall outside the scope of the NRM statistics. The ONS publication does not make specific reference to an overview of gender in this way because of this challenge. This is an obvious weakness of collecting and sharing data from multiple different data sets.

In the NRM, of those children who received a positive reasonable grounds decision in 2021, 79% were male and 21% were female.

What are the nationalities of the victims?

When looking at the NRM statistics for the nationalities of the potential child victims, UK nationals are the most commonly identified at 2,981. The five most common nationalities of child victims reflect the five most common nationalities of adult victims, if in a slightly different order (Figure 4).

Figure 4: The five most common nationalities of potential child victims, 2021

What types of exploitation were reported?

The main types of exploitation which have been reported through all organisations have been criminal exploitation (county lines are a significant factor here, especially for males) and sexual exploitation. In the NRM data set males were most likely to have experienced criminal exploitation (62%) and for females it is sexual exploitation (42%).

The Independent Child Trafficking Guardians service (ICTGS) showed that there were 27% more referrals in 2020 than in the previous year (555 in 2020 from 437 in 2019). From the data on exploitation types from October 2018 to December 2019, 379 males and 134 females were referred to ICTGS with a higher number of males who have been criminally exploited (216) than females (17).

Conclusion

Overall, the data that are used and reported within this publication from the ONS are not directly comparable due to the different time periods and the variable recording measures used by each organisation. Some data are separated and cannot be combined and compared with other statistics – not all jurisdictions of the UK are covered by some of the data sources, for example. However, despite the weaknesses and limitations that this report shows, it is a step in the right direction and does provide a somewhat better understanding of the extent of modern slavery in the UK.

In addition, this publication could serve as a useful foundation for gathering data from a much broader set of sources that lay outside the NRM statistics in the future. This would help to give us a far more accurate picture of how many children are being identified as being at risk of exploitation and not just those exclusively referred into the NRM.

Award in Memory of Paola Monzini

Cristina Talens

Head of Business Risk Assessment Services

Wilberforce Institute, University of Hull

C.Talens@hull.ac.uk

Paola Monzini ((1965-2017) was an incredibly talented and inspirational woman on many fronts. She was a greatly respected and world acclaimed sociologist who started her working life at the Italian Government’s Anti-Mafia Investigation Directorate (DIA Direzione Investigativa Antimafia).

Her strategic thinking and negotiating skills were recognised at international level and she became one of the leading experts of the Global Programme Against Trafficking in Human Beings at the UN Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) in Italy.She was also one of the main authors of the UN Protocol Against Trafficking and Smuggling of Human Beings, also known as The Palermo Protocol. This regulatory framework was used to develop national legislation across Europe and more recently in the UK through the Modern Slavery Act. During her years at UNICRI, Paola developed and implemented numerous multinational and bilateral intergovernmental projects across Europe, Africa and Asia with the aim of improving cooperation to facilitate police intervention, prosecution of criminals, and especially the protection of victims of trafficking and smuggling. She was a passionate advocate for the human rights of migrants and refugees in Italy. In 2016 she was one of the first researchers to interview Syrian men and women arriving into Italy, trying to identify the mechanics of exploitation for organised criminal networks in an attempt to protect refugees during their journeys to Europe.

As a measure of her intellectual and scientific contribution to the study of organized crime, human trafficking and global migration, an international award has been created in Paola Monzini’s honour by the friends, family and colleagues of this outstanding researcher. The ‘Paola Monzini’s Award’, launched this year in her memory,  will reward the most deserving students and researchers who, over the last 5 years – from 2017 to 2022 – have worked on a Master’s thesis or a PhD thesis on these topics in an Italian university or in a foreign university (languages accepted: Italian and English).

Special appreciation will be given to studies and research in the field of human, historical, political and social sciences that focus on migration, human mobility and citizenship policies, privileging a gender and intersectional perspective primarily via qualitative research methods – such as narrative approach, biographical analysis – with a particular focus on the stories of individuals involved in the subject investigated, including with the support of audio-visual tools. Priority topics will include trafficking in human beings, sex work and other forms of exploitation of migrants in the legal and illegal economy, violence and discrimination against migrant and refugee women, forced migration and migrants’ journeys particularly across the Mediterranean Sea.

Two cash prizes will be awarded as follows: 1.000 Euros for the best Master’s thesis discussed in an Italian or in a foreign university in the last 5 years (starting from the academic year 2017-2018); 2.000 Euros for the best Doctoral thesis (PhD) discussed in an Italian or foreign university in the last 5 years (starting from the academic year 2017-2018). The funds to support the award will be raised through a crowdfunding campaign. Should the funds raised for this award exceed the total amount for the two scholarships, the Scientific Committee reserves the right to either set up a larger number of awards for the current year or to set aside the surplus funds for the awarding of prizes in the following years.

Participants must send their work by 30 July 2022 in PDF format by e-mail to premiopaolamonzini@gmail.com  specifying that the work compete for the ‘Paola Monzini’s Award’. The work, countersigned with the name and surname of the author, must be accompanied by relevant documentation containing the following information:

  • Identification of the author (name and surname, telephone numbers, e-mail) and date;
  • Domicile and number of identity card or passport or other official identification document;
  • Declaration of the original nature of the work submitted, including the specification that the work is not a copy or a total or partial modification of the author’s or other authors’ work;
  • Declaration of the full ownership of the work’s rights;
  • Declaration of acceptance of all the conditions established by the ‘Paola Monzini’s Award’.

The Scientific Committee in charge of assessing the works and awarding the prizes, through its Coordinator, will keep participants informed and will communicate the results of the assessment by e-mail and through updates published on the web page dedicated to Paola Monzini, paolamonzini.tumblr.com, the website and social channels of the association AMM – Archivio delle Memorie Migranti (Archive of Migrants’ Memories) as well as the information channels of the associations and organizations that support this award. The submission of the work in itself guarantees the commitment of the author not to withdraw it from the competition.

The recipients of the award will be decided by the Scientific Committee. The winners will be announced and the prizes awarded at a public ceremony to be held by 30 October 2022.

Scientific Committee:

Monica Massari (University of Milan)

Coordinator, Paula Adam (Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya)

Teresa Albano (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe-OSCE)

Luca Ciabarri (Escapes-University of Milan)

Rino Coluccello (Coventry University)

Nando dalla Chiesa (University of Milan)

Gianluca Gatta (AMM – Archive of Migrants’ Memories)

Ombretta Ingrascì (University of Milan)

Giovanni Melillo (National Anti-Mafia and Counter-terrorism Directorate-DNAA)

Petra Mezzetti (Fondazione Empatia Milano-FEM)

Letizia Paoli (University of Leuven)

Ferruccio Pastore (Forum Internazionale ed Europeo di Ricerche sull’Immigrazione-FIERI. International Forum for International and European Research on Migration-FIERI)

Vincenzo Ruggiero (Middlesex University)

Emilio Santoro (University of Florence)

Giulio Sapelli (University of Milan)

Rocco Sciarrone (University of Turin)

Cristina Talens (University of Hull)

REF 2021: WE GOT A 4*!

After a longer than usual wait, the results of the Research Exercise Framework 2021, otherwise known as REF 2021, have finally been made public, and we at the Wilberforce Institute are very proud of our success. We got a 4* rating, the highest level possible, for our impact case study, ‘The Wilberforce Legacy: Using historical and contemporary research to meet the challenge of Modern Slavery’.

For those of you who don’t know, the purposes of REF 2021 were threefold:

  • To provide accountability for public investment in research and produce evidence of the benefits of this investment.
  • To provide benchmarking information and establish reputational yardsticks, for use within the HE sector and for public information.
  • To inform the selective allocation of funding for research. 

In short, the government uses the REF exercise to determine how much research funding each higher education institution will receive each year: the four UK higher education funding bodies use it to inform the allocation of circa £2 billion in public funding invested in research annually. The key facts about the REF are available here.

As a format the REF was last used to assess the quality of research in higher education institutions in 2014, so it’s been seven years since any assessment of this kind has been undertaken.  The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), a similar exercise which the REF replaced, had from its inception in 1986, taken place approximately once every five years. It had been introduced that year by Margaret Thatcher’s government to determine the amount of funding that was to be allocated to individual UK Universities at a time of tight budgetary restrictions.  A number of changes to the way in which research is assessed have been made over the years. This included the introduction in 2008 of a four-point quality rating scale, rising from 1* for ‘Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour’, to the much sought after 4*: ‘Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour’.

The REF involved a process of expert review, carried out by expert panels for 34 subject-based units of assessment (UOAs), under the guidance of four main panels. These expert panels consisted of senior academics, international members, and research users. 

Assessors had to review research from three distinct perspectives:

  • the quality of the outputs (e.g. publications, performances, and exhibitions)
  • their impact beyond academia, and
  • the quality of the environment that is provided to support research. 

Significantly, the REF was the first exercise to assess the impact of research outside the higher education sector itself. Impact was defined as ‘an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia’. This idea has rightly continued to gain traction: following on from a review of the effectiveness of REF 2014, more emphasis was placed in the 2021 round on the importance of impact. There was also a call for interdisciplinary collaborations to be more widely rewarded.

Both of these metrics play to the strengths of the Wilberforce Institute. First we are by design an interdisciplinary research institute, bringing together history, social science, heritage and law, as we seek to use an understanding of the past to inform our approach to the present. We also employ practitioners who work on issues around social auditing, on raising awareness of modern slavery, and on taking action to prevent it. This means that our interdisciplinary research can have a direct impact.

Despite our small team of people, the 4* rating of our impact case study revealed just how successful our efforts had been in the period covered by the REF exercise, 2014-2020. The study focused on two particular areas of success. The first concerned the quantification of slavery. The Institute had taken a key role in developing the metrics for the Global Slavery Index (GSI), which provided the first comprehensive and accessible measure of the extent of modern slavery in 167 countries around the world.

Aimed at informing practitioners and policymakers, the GSI was disseminated around the world, and has been used by governments, researchers, NGOs and charities to support the liberation of slaves and their reintegration into society. In addition, Professor Kevin Bales, lead author of the 2014 GSI, built on its success to develop (in collaboration with the Chief Scientific Officer at the Home Office) a new methodology for calculating modern slavery in the Britain. The Multiple Systems Estimation (MSE) framework resulted in a radical reassessment by the UK Government of the number of people enslaved in Britain. That number – of between 10,000 and 13,000 men, women and children – was roughly four times the figure produced by the National Crime Agency’s Human Trafficking Centre in 2013. Taken together, the GSI and the MSE transformed our understanding of the prevalence of modern slavery in the UK. In doing so, it provided the impetus for a new British Government Modern Slavery Strategy and Bill, and paved the way for the introduction of the Modern Slavery Act in 2015.

The second area of success concerned anti-slavery opinion building. Professor John Oldfield,  now Associate and Emeritus Professor of the Wilberforce Institute, was instrumental in developing the concept of an antislavery ‘usable past’ that demonstrated a continuous link between the past and the present, through what can be described as an active ‘protest memory’. He used these ideas to develop two Arts and Humanities Research Council funded projects, the web resource Stolen Lives and The Antislavery Usable Past. Together, the Institute’s interdisciplinary team developed new methods of presenting and disseminating information by juxtaposing the experiences of enslaved people from the eighteenth to twenty-first centuries in an easy to access format.  Between 2015 and 2021, the Stolen Lives website had 34,000 pageviews and 8,185 views of the ‘Repairing Broken Lives’ video resources.

Alongside Stolen Lives (2015) and the Antislavery Usable Past project (2019), the Institute designed and delivered a number of public campaigns to raise awareness of historical and modern slavery, using music, film, teaching aids, exhibitions and web resources.  These included the #HiddenInPlainSight campaign (launched in November 2016, which placed ‘human packaging’ at high-footfall locations), and the #BreakTheChain campaign (launched in London in 2018, using a ‘human vending machine’), which drew attention to the 25 million people trapped in forced labour around the world.

These opinion-building initiatives have been adopted by many key stakeholders and have directly informed national public broadcasting campaigns. Stolen Lives, for example, has raised awareness of slavery at over 60 different public events and its educational materials have been used in schools across the UK. This resource has also had international impact, most notably in Sierra Leone, West Africa, where it proved the inspiration for an exhibition on modern slavery at the National Museum of Sierra Leone in 2017, the first of its kind. Subsequently, the British Council in Sierra Leone, working in collaboration with the Institute, arranged for the translation of songs from Stolen Lives into local languages and used them as resources in its ‘Connecting Classrooms’ programme. To date this has reached over 30,000 students and helped to raise awareness of modern slavery in Sierra Leone. Finally, and importantly, the work of the Institute was shared with local schools and communities in the Humber region. Performances from Stolen Lives have also been held at Hull’s Freedom Festival which attracts audiences of over 130,000.

Academic research is always of its time, and the numbers estimated in the GSI and MSE were very soon out of date. Some of these numbers were included in the Stolen Lives project, so that here too, there is information that is no longer current. But other elements of Stolen Lives continue to have relevance. Reflecting recently on the impact of Stolen Lives seven years on, Professor Oldfield noted that although he would do some things differently now, much of the content in the collection remains as impactful as it did at its creation. You can of course judge for yourselves by visiting the website.

Professor Oldfield reflecting on the impact of Stolen Lives during the recent workshop, ‘Strategies for encouraging children and young people to engage with human rights’, held at the Wilberforce Institute on Thursday May 12, 2022.

Receiving a 4* rating for our impact case study ‘The Wilberforce Legacy: Using historical and contemporary research to meet the challenge of Modern Slavery’, is hugely satisfying, not least because it reveals to us that we can make a difference. But it also reminds us that there is always more to understand about the nature of slavery and exploitation, in the past and the present. Our success in REF 2021 will help us to continue that research.