G20+ Modern Slavery Prevention Index Overview

We are very pleased to launch the Modern Slavery Prevention Index (MSPI).

This platform contains information, data and analyses of national plans/strategies, activities and resourcing undertaken by G20 and other governments to prevent exploitation. The information and data will be increased and updated on an ongoing basis.

Introduction

Vulnerable populations can only improve the quality of their lives if they can rely on a safe environment. One that is free from the risk of exploitation and where they can retain the fruits of their labour. It is essential to reduce structural precarity, such as arises from poverty, hunger, discrimination and conflict, and the specific idiosyncratic risks, such as arise from the complexity of national trade and supply chains, reliance on the local informal economy and the extent and nature of criminal activity.

With these risks in mind, we have developed this platform to provide a better perspective of the challenges identified by governments in their work to address exploitation, the formulation of their dedicated plans and strategies, their commitments and objectives, the impacts sought and the resources allocated.

We are very happy to discuss and receive updates and new disclosure from official government representatives to improve the platform. The platform will be updated on an ongoing basis. If you want to receive updates on a periodic basis, please sign up for updates here.

Some of Our Observations

  • Across the various national plans of the 16 countries which have national plans of any sort, there are nearly 2360 objectives. The average yearly dedicated funds available, that are publicly disclosed, across these 16 countries is US$1.6 billion. 60% of this available annual funding is from India and the United States which account for only 15% of the objectives identified.

  • Much of the funding we have not been able to identify is for activities that are a part of a ministry, department or office with larger responsibilities. The most common example is anti-trafficking activities conducted as part of migration responsibilities. For example, in Turkiye the responsibility for anti-trafficking action rests with the Presidency of Migration Management. The budget for anti-trafficking is not publicly disclosed but in 2023 there were 223 victims of human trafficking recorded, 254,027 irregular migrants and 47,699,715 people entering and exiting. The total annual budget for 2024 for the Presidency of Migration Management was US$411,372,315, it is likely the portion of this budget spent on trafficking is relatively small considering the magnitude of their overall responsibility.

  • Some countries do not yet have a central agency or office that has been deliberately designed with the requisite capacity to be responsible for combating exploitation. In some cases, government activities, such as in the United States, have developed extensively across government institutions to a point where a central agency or office is determined to be very useful. In other cases, such as the United Kingdom, where there are well developed intragovernmental arrangements, but there is no central agency or office. Finally, there are countries which do not have the resources available to develop sophisticated intragovernmental arrangements but have yet to create a central agency or office that is resourced and managed to a level of capacity that an annual report containing basic data points regarding victims, perpetrators, illicit proceeds can be produced. The inconsistency of reporting, transparent disclosure and underlying data shows a weak and impermanent infrastructure.

  • The 3P framework was a guide and a measure for planning. With Goodhart’s law in mind, the 3Ps now seem to be targets to be achieved rather than a measure to be used. Prevention has a very heavy focus on awareness campaigns, interagency training, meetings and cooperation. Enforcement is limited to prosecution, with currently extremely low success, only the United States is pursuing a diverse range of enforcement approaches. Protection primarily concerns victim care and services, and yet at the same time many countries are still unable to provide details of the total number of victims per year.

  • Comparatively, important issues such as wage theft, document fraud, exploitation in supply chains, proceeds from exploitation (money laundering), collective bargaining, and perpetrator recidivism are infrequently mentioned. Online exploitation has been incorporated by some governments. We have provided a thematic assessment of the objectives and commitments set out in each government’s national plans and strategies.

  • Our primary objective is to draw attention to the activities and resourcing necessary to be sufficient to support a level of prevention that creates safe communities for vulnerable people to live and work free from exploitation. We will be adding analysis of additional countries and updates to those existing on an ongoing basis but a picture is already emerging of under-resourcing, insufficient capacity to implement effectively and a need for more adaptive plans and strategies. In many countries, there is also a need for the establishment of at least a basic permanent infrastructure that can collect data and actionable information, produce reports regularly, design responses, and coordinate effectively – essentially a center that will hold.

Platform Contents

The contents of the platform focus on each government’s (i) planning and strategy formulation; (ii) the nature of the objectives and impact desired; (iii) the courses of action selected; and (iv) the estimated and actual resources allocation for implementation. There is an analysis for G20 governments collectively, which will be completed by year end, and then separate distinct analyses for each government in the G20 and other countries.

Each analysis consists of:

  • contextual information and data around domestic vulnerability (e.g. domestic poverty, inequality, reliance on informal economy, internet access etc) and risk to those internationally (e.g. via supply chains and money laundering);

  • national plans and strategies formulated, data gathered, reports generated, victims and perpetrators;

  • analysis of plan and strategic objectives showing the thematic focus and emphasis;

  • publicly disclosed dedicated funding made available; and

  • a brief summary of our conclusions.

    • In considering the activities that constitute exploitation, we have included human trafficking, modern slavery, sex exploitation, gender-based violence, child exploitation, forced labor, forced criminality, forced marriage and online exploitation. This list is not exhaustive;

    • Context is important and so key information and data is provided describing specific challenges faced by each government and its vulnerable communities;

    • The three primary areas of data gathering and analysis are (i) the nature of dedicated plans and strategies and the objectives and commitments proposed; (ii) the measures and mechanisms initiated from objectives and commitments; and (iii) the availability of dedicated resources;

    • Only publicly-available disclosure and reporting issued by the government have been used. Restricting our research to publicly-available disclosure also provides a clearer understanding of a government’s administrative structure and capacity, and their resourcing for this issue;

    • There are instances where it is clear that activities addressing exploitation form only part of a ministry’s, department’s or agency’s other work. If a government has identified and disclosed distinct cost allocations for a relevant portion of shared resources then this has been included in our calculations. But where there is no disclosure of budgetary allocations, specific activities or outcomes/impact then we have not included any allocation but have noted this. For example, a number of governments have a trafficking in persons office or centre positioned within their ministry or department responsible for migration or for the interior but do not provide any disclosure on the dedicated budgets. We would be grateful to discuss updates to our data and information from officers of the relevant governments on dedicated resources and budget allocations;

    • The focus of this first stage of the platform’s development is of planning and strategy formulation at the national/federal level, however where state/provincial/county activities are expressly highlighted then these have been included in the data collection and analysis;

    • The data and information provided has been designed to encourage a better understanding of each government’s objectives, commitments, resourcing and implementation to prevent the exploitation of both those in their jurisdiction and those outside. For example, a government may contemplate measures to protect those working within its borders but also its citizens working abroad, who are remitting monies back home, from exploitation. Contemporaneously, the same government may seek to prevent its international trade and supply chains from exploiting workers in other countries;

    • Where no disclosure has been identified then users will find a conspicuous blank. Any updates or clarifications on the location of disclosure/reports and updated data from relevant government officers are very welcome, please contact us here;

    • Supply chains and organized crime are deliberately structured to be transnational, designed to successfully move resources and execute complicated plans regionally and globally. They can be very quick to adapt. Governments however cannot act unilaterally within another’s borders and must coordinate and cooperate with each other on issues like exploitation. The necessary intra and inter-governmental cooperation and activity often increases organizational and administrative processes and costs, restricting the capacity to adapt, which then culminate in a reduced likelihood of short or long term positive impact;

    • Units of measurement used by each government are not consistent. For example, some governments publish the number of victims assisted, some use potential victims and others have a structured national referral mechanism. At the same time, some governments publish the number of trafficking crimes, some use perpetrators arrested and others perpetrators convicted;

    • We have not created a ranking or rating system of countries but we have provided our analyses, observations and conclusions. We will be publishing more in due course; and

    • The platform has been designed with a normative framework regarding prevention of exploitation. There is no political or ideological alignment.

Global Comparisons

G20 analysis

G20 Members

African Union Members

APAC