PROTOCOL: Cross-border trafficking in human beings: prevention and intervention strategies for reducing sexual exploitation

1. BACKGROUND FOR THE REVIEW

Over the years, growing attention has been given to the phenomenon of trafficking in human beings (THB). Human trafficking generally involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to enslave people in situations that are exploitative and in many cases illegal and dangerous (GAO, 2007). The use of fraud, force, or coercion typically distinguishes THB from smuggling people. Victims of trafficking may be forced to work in prostitution, strip club dancing, sweatshops, agricultural businesses, and people's homes (GAO, 2007, Gervais, 2005; Kelly, 2005). Underage victims are forced to beg for money in cities, work in carpet shops and participate in pornography and sexual acts with adults. Furthermore, trafficking in children in the sports business, especially in soccer, is not uncommon (de Boer, 2002; David, 2005). Not all governments recognize trafficking as a problem. They may treat foreign trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and deport them back to their home countries, rather than protect them (GAO, 2007). However, in most countries, trafficking has been recognized as a national and international problem, and there is a widespread agreement for the need of a multilateral response on both levels (Laczko, 2005). The United Nations (UN) Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, supplementing the UN convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000), stimulates anti-THB legislation and interventions in many countries all over the world. Furthermore, there have been a growing number of international conventions on human trafficking in the last decade as well as a vast increase in the number of publications on THB and on ways to prevent and suppress it (Kelly, 2005; Laczko, 2005).

Sexual exploitation is by far the most commonly identified form of THB, accounting for 79% of all cases, followed by forced labour with 18% (Chawla, Me & Pichon, 2009). A working paper of the International Labour Organization (ILO) supports this finding: 75% of the reported cases regard sexual exploitation (Belser, 2005). Still, caution must be given to these results due to the possible statistical bias, as will be mentioned below. Moreover, the fact that sexual exploitation is the most documented type of THB does not mean that there is an overall consistency in recognizing sexual exploitation. Organizations continue to face obstacles as they work on global and regional initiatives to combat trafficking (Barnitz, 2001). For example, governments disagree on whether there is a difference between ‘forced’ and ‘voluntary’ prostitution (GAO, 2007). Under-reported forms of exploitation are forced or bonded labour, domestic servitude and forced marriage, trafficking for the purpose of organ removal, and the exploitation of children in begging.

Much research has focused on the prevalence of THB, but no consensus has been reached on its incidence. In 2006, the United States Government estimated 600,000 to 800,000 persons being trafficked across international borders annually ¹ . However, according to UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the ILO the number is much higher with approximately 2 million people being trafficked every year worldwide (Boonpala & Kane, 2002). With regard to registered victims, the numbers vary greatly as well. Italy, for example, accounts for a high number of reported victims in Europe ² . In 2006, Italy reported 2143 victims of trafficking. The high number may possibly be the result of the extensive care for victims ³ . This can lead to a higher motivation for victims to denounce. These estimates are questionable due to methodological weaknesses, gaps in data, the interpretations made and the numerous discrepancies found in studies (Cwikel & Hoban, 2005; GAO, 2006; Tyldum & Brunovskis, 2005; World Congress against CSEC, 2001). In the absence of reliable numbers, stereotypes are often seen as being true. In addition, pressure groups, such as social services, can influence the image of trafficking. The issue has been sensationalized and politicized (Brennan, 2005), resulting in policies that are built on rhetoric and ideology rather than on evidence (Vermeulen, 2007). In reaction, organizations have intensified the collection of statistics and policy data. Nevertheless, in all probability only a small percentage of human trafficking is registered leaving a high dark number in its prevalence (BNRM, 2007).

Research on THB has not only focused on its prevalence but also on trends and developments, and on facts about traffickers ⁴ in order to understand the phenomenon. This understanding of the depth, the breadth and the scope of the problem is needed before any initiatives towards prevention and suppression can be developed (Chawla et al., 2009; Surtees, 2008). Research on conviction has also been done, where statistics have shown an increase in the number of convictions. However, most convictions still take place in only a few countries. According to Chawla et al. (2009), who studied THB in Europe, Asia, Africa and America two out of every five countries (41%) do not report any convictions of THB and 14% of all countries have no data available at all. Possible explanations for the lack of registration are that some countries pay little or no attention towards the phenomenon or are poorly prepared and equipped for dealing with THB (Chawla et al., 2009). The level of attention given to THB seems to lead to higher statistics. As more is known on THB, more awareness to the phenomenon is given by the criminal justice system. Consequently, more cases of THB are registered which in turn leads to higher statistics. A rise in prevalence is, therefore, not necessarily only the result of an increase in THB cases.

Many activities to combat trafficking have been initiated by numerous supranational ⁵ , international as well as national organizations. In general, these organizations assess the phenomenon and develop initiatives based on their findings. These activities can be distinguished in preventive, suppressive and victim support interventions. The specific goals of these interventions can be raising awareness, providing education and employment, changing the legislation, prosecution of perpetrators and empowerment of victims. These interventions aim directly at the at-risk population, victims or perpetrators, while others are more indirect, trying to create more awareness among social workers and policy makers. Furthermore, initiatives can combine several goals and activities. For example, in 2007 Terre des Hommes started, together with partner NGOs, a project ⁶ in 12 countries to ‘contribute to the development of effective policies and practices against trafficking in especially children, safeguarding and promoting the rights of boys and girls in Southeast Asia, Southeast Europe and Latin America’(Dottridge, 2010). This project uses a very extensive approach in preventing trafficking, involving four different components: a) capacity building of NGOs and media; b) awareness-raising and empowerment at local level; c) advocacy at national and regional level; and d) networking.

Much is written about these initiatives, but some areas have been neglected. Knowledge on ‘what works’ is in particular limited. Most publications are primarily descriptive, for example describing the hardship of or social assistance to victims. Others mainly aim at collecting trustworthy numbers to define the scale of the phenomenon (Kelly, 2005).

There has been relatively little independent ⁷ research that evaluates and assesses the effectiveness of counter trafficking policies, programmes, and various interventions (Chase & Statham, 2005; Laczko, 2005). This can be problematic since organizations evaluating their own initiative may have explicit or implicit political or practical agendas that could influence their conclusions - for instance by selecting or disposing of certain information (Vandekerckhove, 2003). It is possible that more or less weight is given to certain data due to the authority of certain key actors (Tyldum & Brunovskis, 2005). The individuals involved in human trafficking, whether they are the perpetrators or victims, are considered hidden populations where the size and boundaries remain unidentified (Laczko, 2005; Tyldum & Brunovskis, 2005). As human trafficking is illegal and mainly underground (BNRM, 2007; Boak, Boldosser & Biu, 2003) trustworthy data is difficult to collect resulting in conclusions that may be far from the truth. Deficient data tracking systems and methodologies for estimation and evaluation could increase the risk that programmes targeting this specific population will be inaccurate (Clawson, Williamson & Garrett, 2008; Kelly, 2002). Evaluation is important as evaluative knowledge on trafficking can be used to develop prevention techniques or policies (Dottridge, 2007a; Kelly, 2005). The United States Government Accountability Office reviewed documents of 23 U.S. Government funded anti-trafficking projects in Indonesia, Thailand and Mexico. It revealed that 21 of the 23 projects included one or more monitoring elements but only ten state how performance is measured. The majority lack a logic framework of monitoring that links activities to goals, indicators and targets (GAO, 2007). And even though the number of monitoring and evaluation studies is rising, it is believed that more scientific evaluation research is needed to ensure the effectiveness of the interventions developed, to help agencies achieve the results desired, and to enable more effective oversight and accountability (GAO, 2006).

Another frequently encountered restriction in the research on THB is the availability of only small samples. Often, this is due to the limited access to victims and perpetrators (Ennew, 2008; Laczko, 2005). Intrinsically, there is nothing wrong with small samples. If done sensitively a variety of methods can produce illuminating results. Nevertheless, often preference is given to a single method such as interviews or questionnaires, which are not considered appropriate in researching topics that are controversial or difficult to talk about. Furthermore, small amounts of data are sometimes pushed through numerical hoops that produce misleading results (Ennew, 2008) ⁸ . As a result, little (reliable) knowledge on effectiveness of interventions in this area is available (BNRM, 2007).

While evaluations of anti-trafficking interventions are scarce, such interventions seem to cause collateral damage (Boermans, 2009; Dottridge, 2007b; Limanowska, 2003). Anti-trafficking programmes can cause damage by putting restrictions (often unlawful) on young women's decisions to migrate or even to travel. For instance, refusal to issue a visa or to allow a young woman to enter the country is presented as an anti-trafficking measure (Limanowska, 2003). ⁹ In 2002, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a series of recommended Principles and Guidelines ¹⁰ . The third principle states that anti-trafficking measures “shall not adversely affect the human rights and dignity of persons, in particular the rights of those who have been trafficked…” (p. 3) thereby aiming to protect victims of trafficking against (more) damage by interventions. Guideline 3 provides more detail on this point and urges governments, intergovernmental organizations and NGOs to monitor and evaluate “the relationship between the intention of anti-trafficking laws, policies and interventions, and their real impact” and to distinguish “between measures which actually reduce trafficking and measures which may have the effect of transferring the problem from one place or group to another” (p. 7). According to Dottridge (2007c), the High Commissioner's Guidelines do not appear to have been heeded by many government agencies and NGO's involved in anti-trafficking activities. Nine years have passed since the endorsement of the UN Trafficking Protocol but little is known about which interventions have been the most effective in preventing human trafficking, protecting victims and prosecuting traffickers (GAO, 2007).

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE REVIEW

The background information yields a number of justifications for a Campbell Systematic Review on this topic. The growing attention to THB entails a demand for more information. The number of interventions to counter THB is rising, and many initiatives have been described. At the same time, the effectiveness of these programmes remains unknown. ¹¹ However, the severity of the crime and the impact on its victims makes it of utmost importance to gain more insight into the working and effectiveness of anti-trafficking strategies ¹² and interventions. Hence, the objectives of this systematic review are twofold. Firstly, this review will bring together and assess the available evidence on the effects of anti-THB strategies and interventions. This will contribute to the knowledge on anti-THB interventions and their effectiveness and will therefore provide information to policy makers. Secondly, this review will increase the knowledge about the strengths and weaknesses of research concerning anti-trafficking strategies and interventions that can stimulate future research and improve evaluations. Awareness will be raised on the need for more rigorous research designs that also shed light on possible collateral damage of interventions that otherwise may remain unknown due to insufficient and inadequate information (Dottridge, 2007c). This systematic review can fill the gap between what has been done and what has been learnt, in line with the views of Dottridge (2007a). He mentions that processes such as ‘institutional learning’, ‘sharing lessons learned’ and identifying ‘good practices’ are necessary. He states, “In the case of every substantial initiative to prevent trafficking, therefore, it is important that it should be evaluated. Whenever possible, the lessons from the evaluation should be published or made available to others conducting similar work. The fastest way of circulating information of this sort at the moment is to put it on a website, ensuring the title mentions ‘evaluation’ or ‘impact assessment’ (of efforts to prevent child trafficking), so that this is picked up by Internet search engines” (Dottridge, 2007a, p.66). Consequentially, this review aims at contributing to a more evidence-based approach in the prevention and suppression of cross border THB for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

The questions to be answered are the following:

What types of anti-THB strategies and interventions that have been accompanied by some form of empirical analysis can be distinguished?

3. METHODS

Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies in the review

Studies will be included in this review based on the following criteria:

Types of studies: studies focusing on cross-border trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation will be collated. The focus will be on cross-border trafficking, because internal trafficking is not (yet) or just recently recognized in many countries. Cross-border trafficking is operationalized by following the definition of the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000), which has been signed and ratified by more than 100 countries, making it the most widespread definition used. Article 3 (a) of this UN Protocol states that “Trafficking in persons shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs”.

This review will be limited to trafficking for prostitution or sexual exploitation, in any form there is. Trafficking for forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs will be kept out of consideration for several reasons. Firstly, the line between trafficking for labour exploitation and terrible working conditions is thin (de Jonge van Ellemeet, 2007) making it difficult to define situations as one or the other. Secondly, there are few - if any - studies in the area of trafficking for the removal of organs. These practices were either not recognized, or not recognized as a form of trafficking until included in the UN protocol. Finally, these areas in human trafficking take place in different parts of society and have their own dynamics. Therefore, they should be studied as distinct topics.

In this review studies on anti-trafficking measures will be included that involve evaluations of strategies - (policies) and interventions - to prevent or suppress cross border trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation, targeting both individual perpetrators and criminal groups, as well as (possible) victims, for example by informing and educating. Policies or initiatives exclusively regarding victim assistance, the reintegration of victims and arrangements for legal status, will not be included.

An inclusion criterion that will be applied in the second stage of the review is that studies must report the effectiveness of initiatives, supported with numerical data. Studies considering best practices or evidence-based practices on how to counteract THB will be included in this review.

Descriptions of good practices based on field experiences but lacking any numerical data will be excluded.

Participants: there are no exclusion criteria regarding participants (i.e. evaluation research dealing with initiatives targeting perpetrators and criminal groups as well as vulnerable individuals and professionals in the field of anti-THB will be included).

Publication: eligible studies are either published - electronically or in print - or unpublished. Studies from the year 2000 and onwards are incorporated in the review. This year was chosen since it marks the UN Trafficking Protocol.

Country of origin: In principle, studies from any country all over the world will be included. However, due to limited resources and knowledge of a limited number of foreign languages within the research team, only those studies that have been written in Danish, Dutch, English, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Spanish and Swedish will be reviewed.

Methodological quality: All empirical (numerical) evaluation studies with respect to anti-trafficking interventions and strategies will be included. They will be categorized according to the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale (SMS) (Sherman et al., 1998) in order to identify and assess the strength of the evidence (Sherman, Farrington, Welsh & MacKenzie, 2002). The five categories of studies distinguished in this scale are:

Post-test measure with no control or comparison groups

According to Rossi, Lipsey and Freeman (2004), research on effectiveness of interventions should aim at least at a quasi-experimental design, corresponding with level 3 of the Scientific Methods Scale. This review strives to uphold this aim. However, we expect only a few studies - if any - with a design at this level.

4 TIME FRAME

5 PLANS FOR UPDATING THE REVIEW

This review will be updated every five years to include new evaluation studies on anti-THB initiatives in any country. A couple of years will be needed for researchers to take note of this review and allow them to evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the Campbell Collaboration (C2) in Norway for their financial support. We are also grateful for the support given by the BNRM and WODC by allowing us to search through the library, to make use of their personal contacts and help in any way possible to make available the information needed for this systematic review. Furthermore, we would like to thank Peter van der Voort from the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR) for his expertise in searching relevant studies.

7. STATEMENT CONCERNING CONFLICT OF INTEREST

There is no conflict of interest present. The Bureau of the (Dutch) National Rapporteur on Trafficking in Human Beings (BNRM) and the Research and Documentation Centre (WODC) are not directly involved in policy development on human trafficking.