Returning Trafficking Prevalence to the Public Policy Debate: Introduction to the Special Issue

ABSTRACT

The clandestine nature of trafficking for sexual exploitation has prevented the development of reputable prevalence data, resulting in warring factions and battles over data that have hindered efforts to focus on combating trafficking. Articles in this special issue address the problem by discussing data sources and research practices that could help break the log jam. This introduction explains the policy agendas behind the prevalence wars. It also describes the many recent policy battles around legalization/decriminalization of the sex-trade industry that have broken out in the past few years in the European Union, Canada, Scotland, and the United Kingdom, where competing data assertions have been prevalent. Policy proposals made in advance of adequate knowledge about trafficking for sexual exploitation make new and better research a high priority.

KEYWORDS:

• Prostitution public policy
• public policy agendas
• trafficking prevalence data

Introduction

Legalize prostitution? Decriminalize and regulate? Criminalize the buyer and exempt the seller? These are the debates currently raging across Europe and Canada. As this introduction will discuss, the issue of trafficking for sexual exploitation has not been absent from the discussions, but the lack of trafficking prevalence data and competing prevalence data have made it difficult for policy makers to include the issue of trafficking in their deliberations on prostitution policy. The agendas of battling preservationists and abolitionists, buttressed further by their cherry-picked data, have confused the policy debate. The result is that public policy decisions are untethered to human-trafficking considerations. Curiously, although trafficking plays a large role—even an oversized role in the media—the lack of prevalence data has almost caused the issue to disappear from the public policy debate.

This special issue takes no particular policy position. It wants to make certain that all public policy on prostitution adequately takes trafficking into account, and that law makers consider whether particular legal changes will increase human trafficking or affect society’s ability to eliminate exploitation and coercion in the sex-trade industry.

The first part of this introduction to this special issue considers the prevalence wars-use of competing data that either exaggerate the extent of trafficking or minimize it within the sex-trade industry. Next, it examines the underlying agendas that have led to a politicization of research methodology as well as an interpretation of research results. It will then explore the role that trafficking-prevalence research data have played—and often not played—in recent public policy deliberations in Europe and Canada. Lastly, it explores how prevalence research could be improved given the current environment so that prevalence data can take their proper place in public policy deliberations. Articles in this special issue make suggestions for moving forward toward this goal. This introduction sets the framework for the work ahead.

Competing prevalence figures

Leading anti-trafficking activists repeat several prevalence figures. Antislavery advocate Kevin Bales (2012) gives 27 million people living in slavery or forced labor as “my best estimate.” Walk Free’s Global Slavery Index (Walk Free Foundation, 2014), widely popularized by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, ex-President Bill Clinton, and a host of other figures including singer Bono, estimates 35.8 million people enslaved around the world (all human trafficking) and 60,100 in the United States. The Washington, DC, based anti-trafficking organization Polaris (n.d.) uses an estimate from the International Labour Organization of 4.5 million globally trapped in trafficking for sexual exploitation. Shared Hope International (n.d.) has announced that 100,000 children are bought, sold and rented in the United States each year.

A vocal band of activists and academics challenges these data. Julia O’Connell Davidson (2014) writes “only a tiny minority of workers in the UK sex industry fit the criteria recognized by the relevant authorities as constitutive of ‘trafficking’” (p. 1). In a research report, Catherine Hakim (2015) contests the involuntary nature of the activities of women in prostitution: “The majority of women make an active choice to engage in exceptionally lucrative work for a time” (p. 25). Ronald Weitzer (2012) observes, “There is no evidence that ‘most’ or even the majority of prostitutes have been trafficked” (p. 1342).

The fact is that all these claims are unsubstantiated. In a series of articles over the past seven years, Professor Weitzer (2010, 2012, 2014a, 2014b) has effectively demonstrated that the large data figures are not based on any reputable research methodology. For example, although Walk Free conducted representative random surveys about families’ experiences with coercive labor, these were only undertaken in seven countries and supplemented by data from random-sample surveys in 19 others. An extrapolation method was developed for the remaining countries taking into account factors including vulnerability, geography, and country context. Secondary-source estimates (news reports, for example) were also used, producing highly questionable estimates (Gallagher, 2014). As Gallagher rightly concludes:

Even the very well informed reader will struggle to understand how the fragile sample data from 19 countries was so confidently extrapolated across to the remaining 148…At some points application of the extrapolation “protocol” verges on the ludicrous…After noting that almost no reliable information exists on slavery in China, the Index’s authors cheerfully proceed to declare that they are comfortable with China being considered pretty much the same as other East Asian nations like South Korea, Taiwan and Japan. (Gallagher, 2014, p. 3)

Bales (2012) remains silent about any methodology he has used. Weitzer (2012) also convincingly demonstrates that the trafficking figures used by the U.S. Department of State are based on dubious methodology, criticized by the Government Accountability Office (2006), which stated that the estimate for the United States, as best as it could tell, was based on unreliable estimates of others.

The Washington Post traced the figure of 100,000 children in the sex trade in the United States to 2010 Congressional testimony by the president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, whose methodology did not stand up to scrutiny (Kessler, 2015). Another widely cited figure is that approximately 326,000 children are at risk for commercial sexual exploitation (Estes & Weiner, 2001). The Crimes Against Children Research Center has pointed out that this figure is only an estimate of children at risk because they are runaways and could become involved in commercial sexual exploitation and not evidence of what proportion of these youth were actually involved. In addition, the “at risk” categories are crude guesses (Stransky & Finkelhor, 2008).

The figure of 100,000 children in the sex trade in the United States was presented to Congress by Shared Hope International and was cited by news reports (Stanton, 2013). With no substance behind these data, they can easily be challenged, causing the existence of the very issue to come into question. Weitzer (2014b) concludes: “It is impossible to satisfactorily count (or even estimate) the number of persons involved in or the magnitude of profits within an illicit, clandestine, underground economy at the macro level-nationally or internationally” (p. 13).

Having demolished these estimates as unreliable, Weitzer and others go on to take the position that the majority of those in the sex-trade industry are there voluntarily. However, Davidson (2014) and Hakim (2015) cite no research studies for their iteration of this proposition. On the other hand, Weitzer (2014b) details a number of microlevel research reports that he believes support his assertion. Yet, these studies involve small convenience samples that cannot be used to bolster larger assumptions about the entire universe of individuals in the sex trade. Another weakness is that this research focuses on migration of individuals from one country to another, when trafficking for sexual exploitation also occurs within countries involving native-born persons.

For example, Weitzer cites a study of Vietnamese migrants working in Cambodian brothels (Buzra, Castle, & Diarra, 2004) for the proposition that the women’s activities were fueled only by economic motives, a desire for an independent lifestyle, and dissatisfaction with rural life and agricultural labor. However, that research interviewed only a total of 28 women in depth (and 72 in focus groups) and, of these, 6% said they were tricked into the industry. And once they were in the sex trade, many expressed dissatisfaction with their conditions or stated they had not fully appreciated the risks they would face, such as clients who refused to use condoms, coercion from brothel owners, and violence; although initial participation may have been voluntary, for many, the experience became abusive or coercive.

To support the statement that few migrant women in prostitution are coercively trafficked, Weitzer cites Vocks and Nijboer (2000), who interviewed only 12 women from Central and Eastern Europe who came to the Netherlands to work. In yet another study (Jacobsen & Skilbrei, 2010) he uses to support his proposition, researchers interviewed only a total of 15 Russian women identified by local organizations and law enforcement in Oslo, the researchers themselves cautioning that the findings were not intended to be representative.

Time and time again researchers present a complex picture, but advocates using the data for public policy purposes present their own more simplistic interpretations, as will be discussed below in the Canadian debate. Describing research study results, Weitzer (2010) and others argue that the women knew they were going to be working in prostitution and were volunteers when they began. However, voluntary entry does not preclude later trafficking (e.g., could later be held against their will and unable to leave). Furthermore, Weitzer asserts that even when individuals experience unpleasant or exploitative working conditions, many consider these preferable to remaining at home where they experience starvation, exploitation, or violence. Although they do not wish to return home, however, they still should be considered trafficked if they are being coerced by pimps or traffickers to continue in the sex-trade industry; indeed, the shrinking universe of choices plays into the hands of pimps and traffickers. Lastly, Weitzer also seems to believe that family members or friends, who do not fit our stereotypical image of perpetrators, cannot be regarded as sex traffickers; however, because of the family relationship these individuals may exercise more coercive power over women and girls than other types of traffickers.

Conflicting interpretations of research data are a problem that must be solved if trafficking prevalence research is to be useful in public policy debates. Articles in this special issue address issues of uniform definitions of trafficking as well as methodology that can result in larger, more randomized samples.

The agendas behind the prevalence debate

There has been an unfortunate tendency for advocates to cherry pick data, to advance data of dubious methodology, or to twist data to fit a policy agenda. Often policy agendas influence research practices. Merry (2015) reminds us that underlying theory affects definitions and measurement protocols. Differing agendas regarding the sex-trade industry have impacted both research and interpretation of research results. In designing research and presenting results, researchers need to understand these agendas—the context into which their data will be received.

The issue in contention is decriminalization of the sex-trade industry.¹ Dissolving criminal penalties for the buying and selling of sex maximizes freedom for both parties and minimizes state interference with private sexual decisions. On the other hand, dismantling the industry meets concerns about violence and abuse suffered by sellers at the hands of pimps, traffickers, and customers. Although “data” are proffered to bolster these policy agendas, as we have noted, data cannot now resolve the argument because of the lack of generally accepted trafficking prevalence information. Varying agendas, with their data assumptions, are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Agendas of Preservationists and Abolitionists.

Agenda	Argument	Data Implications
Preservationists
1. Human right to sell sex	Individuals have the right to enter an occupation of their own free choice.	There is violence, but shutting down the entire industry is draconian. Don’t eliminate demand for carpets in order to address forced labor in the carpet industry.
2. New view of sex	Prostitution represents a contemporary manifestation of a new and positive recreational sexual ethic-sex without commitment.	The amount of trafficking in the industry is minimal.
3. Decriminalization helps remove exploitation	Decriminalization encourages sellers to make complaints without fear of prosecution.	There is violence in the industry.
4. Imbalance of sexual needs of men and women	The sex trade is necessary because of the imbalance of sexual needs and desires of men and women.	The majority of participants are volunteers.
5. Public-health concerns: condom use	Decriminalization increases the ability of individuals in the sex trade to use condoms and will help keep them free from violence.	There is violence but decriminalization will encourage customers to be less violent.
6. Adverse reaction to anti- trafficking campaigns	Anti-trafficking campaigns require an intensification of policy and surveillance while underlying conditions contributing to trafficking (poverty, racism, etc.) remain.	There is violence and exploitation in the industry.
Abolitionists
1. Dismantlement of the Industry to restore the traditional family	The only way to end trafficking is to eliminate prostitution, rescue girls and women, reinforce the traditional family and promote abstinence.	Trafficking to meet demand is a serious, worldwide problem.
2. Prostitution is violence against women	All prostitution is violence against women, a patriarchal institution for the terrorization and control of women’s bodies.	Violence permeates the industry, but, more importantly, the very concept of prostitution itself embodies violence.
3. Prostitution is violent and harmful	Many individuals suffer harm in the sex-trade industry from customers, pimps and traffickers, and police officers. These harms outweigh the benefits realized by freely choosing individuals.	There are significant physical and mental harms to those in the sex-trade industry, including trafficking, regardless of how they become involved.
4. Customer demand causes trafficking to meet it	The harm of trafficking is the result of customer demand and a lack of volunteers to sell their bodies. Therefore, demand must be reduced or eliminated through dismantlement of the sex-trade industry.	A high prevalence of violence and coercion occurs in the industry.
5. Race is a factor	Poor girls and women of color are overrepresented in the sex-trade industry and prostitution is normalized in their communities and must be dismantled.	A high prevalence of violence, coercion, and exploitation is present in the sex-trade industry and, hence. in poor, black communities.

Agendas of preservationists

In general, preservationists’ positions rest on a benign view of the sex-trade industry, focusing as they do on the rights of the sellers. To sustain this position, they must minimize the amount of abuse and coercion in the industry.

The human rights argument

For some, antiprostitution measures are a violation of individuals’ human rights and civil liberties to enter an occupation of their own free choice. Lim (2007) puts it this way:

Of course, for those who have been trafficked into prostitution, the concern is with the human rights violation in terms of forced labour. But for others, anti-prostitution measures would be a violation of their human right and civil liberty to go into an occupation of their own free choice. It is important to recall that all persons are entitled to all the human rights generally applicable to all human beings. They are entitled to rights of freedom of speech, assembly, non-discrimination, health and free movement, inter alia. This does not depend on the occupation they choose to follow or to which they may be constrained as the case may be. For those adult individuals who freely choose sex work, the policy concerns should focus on improving their working conditions and social protection, and on ensuring that they are entitled to the same labour rights and benefits as other workers. (Lim, 2007, p. 7)

Two assumptions undergird Lim’s assertions—that trafficking for sexual exploitation is not a large part of the sex-trade industry and is not an indispensable practice for the industry—statements that over time research should be able to prove or disprove. For Lim, trafficking for sexual exploitation needs to be addressed, but “the idea that the entire commercial sex market should be eradicated in order to tackle the problem of trafficking for prostitution is as draconian and wrong-headed as the idea that it is necessary to eliminate demand for carpets in order to address the problem of forced and child labour in the carpet industry” (Lim, 2007, p. 7).

A new view of sex

Dramatically altered concepts about sex also fuel arguments for legalization. The sex in prostitution is viewed as a contemporary manifestation of a new and positive recreational sexual ethic-sex without commitment, anonymous, and promiscuous (O’Brien, Hayes, & Carpenter, 2013). Those wishing to shut down the industry are thought to be concerned about the sexuality of prostitution, which lies outside formerly bedrock ideas of marriage and monogamy. Measures to criminalize or regulate prostitution are viewed as the exercise of the state’s powers to control and punish those who do not ascribe to conventional ideas of love, relationships, and family (Davidson, 2014). A long history of state intervention into forms of sexual expression deemed deviant buttresses this opposition to decriminalization of the sale of sex. To sustain this argument, advocates must view the sex-trade industry as benign, minimizing the amount of trafficking that occurs within it (O’Brien et al., 2013), a difficult proposition to sustain at this time due to a lack of data. Others (Doezema, 1999) acknowledge the existence of trafficking (again usually only in the context of international migration) but believe that the women are already in the sex-trade industry or plan to be and are being punished for making the choices they do to support themselves or their families:

Migration for the sex industry is, for some women, a way of expanding life choices and livelihood strategies. Insisting on viewing these women as victims means denying that they can have agency in their own lives. (Doezema, 1999, p. 47)

Decriminalization facilitating removal of exploitation

Admitting abuses within the sex-trade industry, some preservationists argue that decriminalization facilitates regulation to remove exploitation (Law, 2000). For these advocates, eliminating abuse and trafficking requires sellers of sex to be able to make complaints without fear of prosecution. This argument for decriminalization is different in that it sees the remedy as the best way of removing the violence and coercion present in the industry. As will be discussed later, evidence for or against this proposition should be present in evaluation of efforts in those countries that have decriminalized and regulated prostitution, although here too there are disputes and competing research reports.

Imbalance in sexual desire

Hakim (2015) argues that prostitution results from the imbalance of sexual needs and desires of men and women. Because male demand for sex invariably outstrips female interest in sex, she states, demand for commercial sex is inevitable, made easier now with the Internet’s facilitation of access to sellers of sex. Thus, she asserts that the commercial sex industry is impervious to prohibitions and cannot and should not be eliminated. Hakim too has to deal with the issue of coercion. She does so by asserting that the majority of women make a choice to participate in the industry, with “a high proportion as well-educated graduates and postgraduates who expect to move on to professional careers in due course” (Hakim, 2015, p. 25). For this proposition, she relies on an online survey of male and female participants in the industry carried out in the winter of 2014–2015, a convenience sample limited to those with literacy skills and access to a computer.

Public-health concerns: Condom use

Another group of proponents of decriminalization of prostitution are members of the public-health community, who believe that making prostitution legal increases the ability of those in the sex trade to negotiate the use of condoms to prevent disease and helps to keep them free from violence from customers (Shannon et al., 2015). The narrow focus on condom use often means that public-health advocates and researchers ignore the issue of trafficking for sexual exploitation, failing to consider whether trafficking increases with decriminalization. They also neglect to question whether decriminalization increases demand and grows the industry, in the long run increasing the amount of disease and violence overall, because of the larger number of parties involved.

Adverse reaction to anti-trafficking campaigns

Yet, another group of writers focuses attention on the anti-trafficking campaigns themselves, seen as targeting women and girls of color who need “rescue” from the sex-trade industry. Kempadoo (2015) observes that these efforts have generated “more laws and the criminalization of greater areas of human life and an intensification of policing and surveillance, including more prosecutions, detentions, and incarcerations” (Kempadoo, 2015, p. 16). At the same time, the system that “generates such inequality, servitude, and exploitation” remains untouched (Kempadoo, 2015, p. 17). Gallagher (2014) believes the campaigns are predicated on a belief that slavery can be eliminated without fundamentally changing how our societies and economies are organized, including a radical shift in the distribution and exercise of economic and political power.

Unlike other preservationists, these advocates accept that the global economy relies heavily on exploitation of poor people’s labor and that its underlying structures encourage migration that contributes directly to trafficking. Their analysis, however, is heavily dependent upon a view that trafficking involves movement from underdeveloped countries to more developed economies, which ignores considerations of trafficking of the poor and disadvantaged within developed countries to meet market demands. However, the emphasis on the vulnerable directly engages with Hakim’s assertions about a preponderance of well-educated college graduates in the industry.

Summary

Preservationists’ arguments focus on the rights and well-being of individuals in prostitution, but they must perforce minimize the amount of violence and coercion in the sex-trade industry to justify their advocacy of legalizing the sex trade. This causes a certain inconsistency. For example, one advocate (Bass, 2015) argues that violence is not intrinsic to the sex trade. Yet, later in her book, she asserts there is less violence in countries that have legalized and regulated the industry, extolling the value of security cameras and intercom systems in legal brothels. The discerning reader will be whiplashed: So, there is violence in the sex trade after all?

Agendas of abolitionists

For most abolitionists distinctions between voluntary and coerced participation are not as important as they are for the preservationists, if they are dispositive at all, because it is the conditions of the industry itself that are the focus. Most abolitionists are motivated by the mental and physical harms that occur to those who are in the industry by whatever means they get there, voluntarily or by coercion.

Reinforcing the traditional family

Preservationists assert that conservative abolitionists seek to abolish the commercial sex-trade industry because it transforms existing social forms they would like to conserve: traditional heterosexual patriarchal marriage and family (Dempsey, 2010). Some groups, but not by any means a majority, animated by concern about trafficking for sexual exploitation, believe the most effective means to stop trafficking is to end prostitution, to enforce the traditional family, to promote abstinence, and to return women from work outside the home (Berman, 2006). This position has given rise to concern about “moral panic,” which has greatly confused the debate, often drowning out the voices of other abolitionists.

Prostitution is violence against women

Preservationists also complain that abolitionists characterize all prostitution as violence against women, a male-centered, patriarchal institution for the terrorization and control of women’s bodies (Kempadoo, 2015). It is a fact that there are influential radical feminists who take this view, individuals who make no distinctions between trafficking and prostitution or between child and adult prostitution. Jeffreys (2009) epitomizes this approach, viewing prostitution as a harmful cultural practice “carried out through and in the bodies of women and for the benefit of men” (p. 10). Unlike other labor, including domestic labor, she says it is solely based on women’s biology and oppression. Not surprisingly, consent is not an operative concept for Jeffreys as decisions to participate in the sex-trade industry are most often made by the poor and vulnerable who have limited options or often no choices at all as family members, for example, coerce them into the trade to support the family. For radical feminists like Jeffreys, women are reduced to their bodies for the pleasure of men and the profit of others. Although Jeffreys’s arguments do rest on views of the harms to physical and mental health suffered by individuals in prostitution as demonstrated by research and the accounts of women and girls in the sex-trade industry, no data are really necessary to buttress her main argument.

The harms of prostitution

Dempsey (2010) is one example of one advocate who does not feel the need to take Jeffreys’s route to condemning prostitution. Her contentions rest on the harms of prostitution for either voluntary or coerced individuals. She is willing to admit that there are instances of prostitution that do not amount to trafficking for sexual exploitation, that some individuals view selling sex as a genuinely valuable option, and that these people are not mistaken, misguided or deluded in some way. However:

The fact that some people do not experience harm does not, of course diminish the urgency or importance of the fact that many do. In other words, abolitionist arguments need not establish that all instances of prostitution are harmful; rather, it is sufficient to motivate these arguments that often prostituted people are harmed in prostitution, that the harm is substantial, and that the value of prostitution is inadequate to justify the harm. (Dempsey, 2010, p. 1746)

Therefore, if there are many prostituted women who do not freely opt to sell sex, and if buyers are not in a good position to judge which women are freely choosing and which are not, then the risk of harm posed to the nonconsenting prostituted women vastly outweighs the benefits realized by freely choosing prostituted women. Dempsey (2010) concludes:

In other words, the feminist-abolitionist response to the woman who freely chooses to sell sex is not to deny that she exists or to treat her as a child; it is instead to say that her choice to sell sex does not justify the risk of harm posed to other prostituted people who are sold against their will. (p. 1769)

Dempsey’s argument clearly rests upon the proposition that there are significant physical and mental harms to those in the sex-trade industry, whether trafficked or not, again a claim that should ultimately rest on solid research findings.

Larsen (2004) takes the analysis further; she has written that, due to cultural and economic circumstances, individuals can voluntarily sign up for bondage. Such voluntary labor can be so dangerous or so exploitative as to violate the worker’s human rights. She traces involvement in prostitution in U.S. cities historically to the fact that women were unable to live independently due to low wages and men’s control of the means of subsistence. The result was that there was more value in a woman’s sexual labor than any other form of her work. Larsen concludes that if prostitution is exploitative, it

must be resisted and ultimately abolished. Such work for abolition is not based upon a derogation of the agency of the worker, but upon a recognition that, for reasons of economic need and cultural position, any person may find herself consenting to bondage. If people are pressed by need or subordination to violate their own human rights, it does not diminish their dignity for the world to step in. (2004, p. 123)

The task remains, Larsen writes, for scholars, lawyers, and activists to define what employment practices meet the negative standards for “forced” or “exploitative” labor.

Customer demand causes trafficking

Positing the harms inflected on sellers in the sex-trade industry, End Demand advocates declare that the sex-trade industry must be reduced in size. Individuals who purchase sex generate a market demand for sellers of sex, which is often satisfied by trafficking. Therefore, they allege, only by reducing demand can we lessen the amount of trafficking for sexual exploitation (Yen, 2008). Customers cause harm in two ways, they claim. First, they create the demand for the conduct that causes the primary harm (trafficking for sexual exploitation). Second, by buying sex from a coerced individual, they inflict direct harm on the seller by penetrating her private parts against her will (Dempsey, 2010). This fact makes the often-cited analogy to carpet stores inapt, as the buyer of the carpet manufactured with sweat labor commits no direct harm to the laborer.

End Demand proponents further believe that the only way to dismantle the industry is to hold the customer accountable through the criminal-justice system (MacKinnon, 2011). Nothing else, they argue, can prevent trafficking for sexual exploitation because of law enforcement’s inability to locate and prosecute traffickers. Implicit in this approach, too, is the belief that individuals who buy sex are complicit in the harms inflicted by traffickers in view of the demand generated by their purchase of sex and the influence this demand has on the conduct of traffickers (Dempsey, 2010). This is the reasoning behind Sweden’s approach—criminalizing the buying of sex but decriminalizing the sale of sex, viewing the seller as an individual in need of assistance and services (Waltman, 2011). The argument, of course, assumes a high prevalence of violence and coercion in the industry.²

Race as a factor

Collins (2005) raises the issue of race in U.S. communities. She views young black women trapped in their low-income communities like their counterparts in underdeveloped countries; the girls and women discover that their bodies are commodities of value they can exchange. Furthermore, participation in the sex-trade industry has become normalized and acceptable in their communities, in fact celebrated in cultural images in music videos, film, and television. For Collins (2005), the result is that black women’s bodies are tied to structures of profitability for others, most often the African American men working as pimps who see themselves as businessmen:

[T]he men interviewed in the documentary American Pimp all discuss the skills involved in being a successful pimp. One went so far as to claim that only African American men made really good pimps. Thus the controlling image of the black pimp combines all of the elements of the more generic hustler, namely, engaging in illegal activity, using women for economic gain, and refusing work. (p. 162)

Both Collins (2005) and Kempadoo (2015) remind us of the ways in which girls and women of color are exploited in the sex-trade industry, when normalization in their communities, combined with poverty and racism, severely limit their choices and their ability to explore further options. This analysis takes us beyond individual harms of prostitution depicted in research reports to a broader understanding of the relationship of poverty and prostitution and past the heretofore dominant issue of voluntariness versus coercion in the debate. This argument also assumes a high amount of violence and coercion in the sex-trade industry.

Summary

Abolitionists more fully embrace the presence of trafficking within the sex trade, although they often point to violence and coercion from customers as well. They do not believe it possible to eliminate this violence within a legalized industry.

Data disputes within policy initiatives

From all this, it becomes apparent that dueling factual assumptions about the routes into the sex-trade industry and experiences once there buttress competing policy prescriptions. Within the past few years, we have seen major public policy debates around the world, involving Canada’s new prostitution law, a European Parliament Proposal, Amnesty International’s new prostitution policy, a proposal in the Scottish Parliament, and potential law reform in the United Kingdom, all of which will be explored below. Unfortunately, these disputes have occurred before dispositive prevalence data on violence and coercion are available; a better approach would be to let research results determine policy. These policy disputes are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Current Public Policy Disputes.

	Testimony /Evidence
Law/Proposed Policy	Pro	Con	Outcome
2010: Canadian Superior Court lawsuit: Canada’s ban on brothels is unconstitutional.	Dueling expert witnesses testify.	Dueling expert witnesses testify.	Law declared unconstitutional and case upheld on appeal.
2013: European Union Advisory Policy: Proposal: Enact the Swedish model decriminalizing the seller but not the buyer.	75 Academics: Shut down a violent and coercive industry.	91 Signatories: Data on violence inaccurate; trafficking has increased in Sweden since enactment.	Proposal passes.
2014: Canadian Parliament: Proposal: Enact Swedish Model	800 Signatories: Decriminalization leads to increased demand and trafficking to supply.	306 Academics: Criminalization harms women in prostitution; trafficking has increased in Sweden since enactment.	Proposal passes.
2015: Proposed Amnesty International Policy: Total decriminalization of sex-trade industry.	Consensual sexual conduct is entitled to protection from state interference; criminalization harms those in the sex trade.	Adopt Swedish model instead, preventing harm to those in the sex trade. Proposal will drive up demand and hence trafficking.	Proposal passes.
2015: Proposed Scottish Parliament Bill: Legalize prostitution on the streets and in brothels as well as eliminating current provision preventing living off the earnings of prostitution (New Zealand model).	189 Comments. Proposal increases health and safety of those in the sex trade.	48 Comments. New Zealand has experienced growth of the sex trade and increased trafficking to support it.	Proposal to be introduced in next session of Scottish Parliament.
2015–2016: U.K. Select Home Affairs Committee of Parliament General Inquiry about necessary changes to U.K. prostitution laws in light of human trafficking and with specific reference to enacting the Swedish model.	Reducing demand lessens harm to those in the sex trade.	The Swedish model has negative effects on sellers; demand is not reduced but displaced; Swedish models assumes prostitution is morally wrong whereas current U.K. laws make no such assumptions.	Preliminary report declines to support Swedish model as it relates to customers.

Lawmakers and judges are surprised and befuddled by the lack of definitive data on human-trafficking prevalence and violence and advocates arguing among themselves about findings from research reports. These law-reform efforts illustrate how data are often misused and misread by both sides, demonstrating the need for accurate and commonly accepted data. An agenda for research going forward and lessons on presentation of research results emerge from these often painful adversarial contests. Articles in this special issue address some of these needs more specifically.

Canada’s new prostitution law

A recent 4-year effort to reform Canada’s prostitution law involved a court case against the existing law, competing research allegations (all of which were found wanting), a misreading of research studies by the court, and passage of a new law in Parliament. In a suit brought by women in prostitution, a Superior Court justice in 2010 overturned aspects of Canada’s prostitution law as unconstitutional (Bedford v. Canada, 2010). The lawsuit had challenged three criminal code provisions (within a law that legalized prostitution) that limited solicitation, pimping, and operating a brothel. The 131-page opinion took a year to produce (Makin, 2010). In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the ruling of the lower court as well as that of an intermediary Federal Court of Appeal, agreeing that the challenged provisions threatened prostituted individuals’ rights to life, liberty, and security of the person (Canada v. Bedford, 2013). The women had argued that the overturned provisions had limited the places and ways in which prostitution could be practiced that would lower the risk of violence to themselves.

The original hearing in Ontario involved dueling experts. Those supporting the plaintiffs testified that actions taken by sellers on the street to increase their security often conflicted with the law, such as the brothel provisions that prevented them from working in-call, which is the safest way to conduct prostitution. The women were forced to work outdoors and were unable to hire a driver or bodyguard (which violated the law). The government’s experts offered their conclusions that prostitution is inherently violent, regardless of the legal regime in place or how or where prostitution is practiced. Melissa Farley testified that violence is present in indoor locations. Janice Raymond proffered that it is not the work conditions of prostitution that make women vulnerable but the construction of prostitution itself, in which women are treated as sexual commodities and buyers, mostly men, are allowed to purchase women for use as sexual instruments.

The trial judge found this expert testimony was not sufficiently linked to research data and appeared to the court to represent more emotional views than dispassionate evaluations of data for which the court was looking. Judge Himel went so far as to write:

Similarly, I find that Drs. Raymond and Poulin were more like advocates than experts offering independent opinions to the court. At times, they made bold, sweeping statements that were not reflected in their research…As well, during cross-examination, it was revealed that some of Dr. Poulin’s citations for his claim that the average age of recruitment into prostitution is 14 years old were misleading or incorrect. (Bedford v. Canada, 2010, p. 93)

Melissa Farley’s dramatic language was criticized as

inflammatory and detracts from her conclusions. For example, comments such as, “prostitution is to the community what incest is to the family,“ and ”just as pedophiles justify sexual assault of children… .men who use prostitutes develop elaborate cognitive schemes to justify purchase and use of women” make her opinions less persuasive. (Bedford v. Canada, 2010, p. 92)

In striking down Canada’s law, the court relied on research data presented by the plaintiffs, discussing five studies it said were the most relevant to the issue of violence prevention. A detailed analysis of these studies by Waltman (2014) finds that the court misread and misused the data in these research reports. Waltman found that the court cited one U.K. study as if it had systematically compared street prostitution with prostitution indoors, when there was no control group of those in street prostitution and the researchers did not attempt to make such a comparative claim. Another research study persuasive to the court involved a small sample of 24 persons with only 12 indoors. When Waltman read the research, he found that almost half of those working in legal brothels (nine individuals) gave troublesome accounts of violence, abuse, and unsafe sex, leading him to conclude that the study was a slender reed on which to lean. In analyzing other studies about street violence, Waltman discovered that the researchers did not control for the younger age or drug addiction of those on the streets, which might have made them more vulnerable to abusive customers, meaning that the venue per se may not affect violence and abuse. The court’s use of these studies, evidence given great deference on appeal, illustrates the difficulty nonresearchers have in making sense of data and offers pointers for researchers on presentation of data.

By 2014, Canada needed a new prostitution law. Three hundred and six academics, mainly from Canada, encouraged Canadian politicians to support the full decriminalization of prostitution (Abel et al., 2014). A letter in support of adopting the Swedish model, criminalizing prostitution only for the buyer, garnered over 800 signatures from academics all over the world (Murphy et al., 2014). Those in favor of decriminalization maintained they were presenting a proposal scientifically grounded in an evidence-based approach. Their arguments were similar to those in the EU debate: The Swedish model does not eliminate either prostitution or trafficking for sexual exploitation and makes it more difficult to prosecute traffickers. In addition, they contended that criminalization of any aspect of prostitution hinders the ability of those participating to keep themselves safe, including obtaining assistance from law enforcement.

Those supporting the Swedish model for Canada responded that legalized prostitution results in a growth in the size of the sex-trade industry and an increased inflow of trafficked persons to meet demand. The 800 signatories resented the term “evidence-based,” suggesting as it does that they argue from a position of nothing more than anecdote or opinion. Prostitution, they averred, is violence against women, and evidence has been gathered about the harms of prostitution by academic researchers from survivors of prostitution.

In April 2014, Canadian abolitionists offered some new research published in a peer-reviewed journal, said to demonstrate that criminalization of clients caused more violence for street-based prostituted women, who were unable to access critical social, health, and legal protections (Browne, 2014). The study interviewed 31 individuals in prostitution on the streets of Vancouver (Krusi et al., 2014). In 2013, Vancouver adopted new enforcement guidelines shifting away from arresting or pressing charges against sellers of sex while maintaining arrests for buyers. The research did find that interactions with police were more positive for these sellers following enactment of the new procedures. However, the new rules did not deter them from solicitation on the streets, and, because of enforcement against the buyers, they were forced to spend longer hours on the street to earn an income. Due to customer anxiety, they said they were forced to curtail screening of clients, and business was displaced to isolated areas. However, the research has limitations due to its small sample size and the fact that only those selling sex on the streets were interviewed when it is thought they make up only a small percentage of individuals in prostitution.

The curtain on this installment of data wars was soon rung down. As it turned out, protecting sellers from the police was of no concern to lawmakers, who indicated that they, unlike judges, did not want to make life safe for prostituted women but wished to eliminate all prostitution from within Canadian borders (Browne, 2014). Parliament found that the Swedish model presented the best vehicle for achieving this goal, enacting it into law in November 2014 (Wingrove, 2014).

European Parliament

In 2013, Mary Honeyball, London member of the European Parliament and Labour Spokeswoman for Women in Europe, introduced an advisory proposal to the European Union, recommending the Swedish or Nordic model of prostitution—legalizing the selling of sex but criminalizing its purchase (European Parliament, 2014). Honeyball’s report (European Parliament, 2014) made a number of statements backed up by little research. She maintained that 40–42 million people worldwide are involved in prostitution, when it is impossible to provide a census of an illegal and clandestine industry. Other unsupported claims include Honeyball’s assertion that trafficking is closely linked to organized crime and that more and more young people are being forced into prostitution. Furthermore, she asserted that research on buyers of sex demonstrates that men who purchase sex hold a degrading image of women and are more likely to commit sexual coercion and other acts of violence against them. Honeyball also alleged that one third of German prosecutors have noted that legalization of prostitution in their country has made their work in prosecuting trafficking cases more difficult. She further noted that after passage of the Swedish law, Swedish police confirm that the new policy has had a deterrent effect on trafficking for sexual exploitation in the country.

Ninety-one academics (Mai et al., 2014) signed on to a letter and a report in February 2014, critiquing Honeyball’s proposal, stating they were opposed to criminalizing the clients of prostituted women, based on inaccurate and/or misrepresentative data. The sources cited, they said, include either studies that have been discredited, or those selected to relate to specific circumstances that do not reflect the experiences of many people working in the sex trade. Nor does the report consider the extensive evidence from peer-reviewed academic studies demonstrating the problems associated with the model proposal.

The signatories alleged, for example, that between 2008–2011 the number of reported cases of human trafficking increased in Sweden, with the group attributing the growth to the new Swedish law, which therefore has not been successful in decreasing trafficking for sexual exploitation or reducing the amount of prostitution (Mai et al., 2014). Small was the increase trumpeted by the group—a total of 35 cases in 2011 from a low of 15 in 2008; reported cases of course are not prevalence figures. In addition, according to Swedish police, only about 400 reports of customers buying sexual services were investigated by law enforcement in Sweden between 2008 and 2011, with a total of 139 legal proceedings initiated, of which 96 resulted in some kind of punishment in 2011 (Swedish National Police Board, 2012). Given the low number of customers investigated overall, it would be difficult to make any statements about the effects of Sweden’s new law as the small number of buyers interacting with law enforcement may be too low to have any impact on behavior. For all these reasons, few of the statements made for or against the Honeyball proposal on the Swedish experience can be buttressed by research data cited by the dueling experts.

As for Germany, Honeyball’s opponents questioned her statement that one third of prosecutors believe that legalizing prostitution has made prosecuting trafficking cases more difficult. They explain that the prosecutors’ statement is based on the fact that abolition of the crime of promotion of prostitution has made their anti-trafficking work problematic. This now repealed provision enabled a prosecution for finding clients for a prostituted individual. In reviewing the report around which this controversy centers (Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, 2007), it must first be noted that the research involved only 31 questionnaires completed by representatives from 10 Land criminal police offices and 21 police stations. Thus, it is not one third of German prosecutors but one third of those in the smaller subset responding (approximately 10). Indeed, these prosecutors stated that the repealed law had allowed them to charge traffickers with a lesser offense (finding customers) when they lacked the testimony or other evidence to bring in a trafficking conviction, but none wished to see a return of this provision.

Importantly, the Federal Ministry could not find any empirical evidence to make a judgment about the effect of the new Prostitution Act on trafficking for sexual exploitation or prosecutions for trafficking, stating that no conclusions could be vouchsafed:

It is difficult to find statistical evidence to either prove that the Prostitution Act has reduced crime or promoted criminal prosecution or that it has instead promoted crime and hindered criminal prosecution, since no statistical investigations have been carried out which provide evidence of the detailed relationships between prostitution and concomitant crime and which could reliably provide evidence for either of the two developments. (Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, 2007, p. 45)

It summed up, “There are as yet no viable indications that the Prostitution Act has reduced crime. The Prostitution Act has as yet contributed only very little in terms of improving transparency in the world of prostitution” (Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, 2007, p. 79).

Seventy-nine academics responded to the original 91 opponents of the resolution (Coy et al., 2014). In February 2014, the Honeyball advisory resolution passed in the European Parliament, 343–139, with 105 abstentions (Oppenheim, 2014). A year later, seven parliamentarians from four countries launched a call for the abolition of the sex-trade industry, alleging that trafficking in human beings is an integral part of it (Oliver et al., 2015). The last report available on the Internet reveals 212 parliamentarians signing on from 10 different countries (Oliver et al., 2015). In the spring of 2016, France adopted the Swedish or Nordic model, joining Northern Ireland, which criminalized demand in 2015 (Raymond, 2016; Rubin, 2016). Similar proposals are being considered in Italy (The Local, 2016) and the Netherlands (Dutch News, 2016).

Amnesty International

Amnesty International considered, and passed a “Policy on Sex Work” at its International Council Meeting in Dublin, Ireland, in August 2015 (Elgot, 2015). The policy approved the decriminalization of the sex-trade industry, based on the human rights principle that consensual sexual conduct between adults is entitled to protection from state interference. States should, however, take all steps to prevent trafficking into the sex-trade industry and the use of children in the sex trade. In its proposal, the organization emphasized harm reduction, enumerating the abuse that comes to those who engage in selling sex at the hands of police, the criminal-justice system, and to their bodies due to lack of access to health services (Amnesty International, 2015).

This approach was buttressed by its own research, summarized in the draft policy paper, although the full reports of the research projects are unavailable to the public. Between September 2014 and June 2015, four research projects were undertaken in Argentina, Hong Kong, Norway, and Papua New Guinea in which Amnesty International conducted interviews with over 80 individuals in the sex-trade industry and numerous others such as law enforcement and government officials. No further information about the methodology, especially how the interviewees in this small sample were chosen, is available. The research summary’s key findings only focus on the harm to those in the industry from the criminalization of the activity. It is not known if other questions were asked about violence and coercion or other abuses from sources other than law enforcement. Predictably, respondents in the four countries reported various types of violence and coercion from police.

The proposal prompted an aggressive lobbying campaign by international groups opposed to eliminating penalties for buyers and pimps; various celebrities and former President Jimmy Carter entered the fray with statements and letters (Carvajal, 2015). In July 2015, 600 individuals and organizations from around the world signed on to a letter challenging the draft policy (Abel-Hamid et al., 2015). Signatories agreed that criminalization of the seller of sex led to violence and stigmatization but objected to policies that legalized the entire industry, immunizing the buyers of sex from culpability for driving up demand. Furthermore, they pointed out that decriminalization of the sex trade has led to increased trafficking for sexual exploitation in jurisdictions adopting this policy; acutely vulnerable populations have been used as tools for the profit of others:

Consequently, should Amnesty vote to support the decriminalization of pimping, brothel owning and sex buying, it will in effect support a system of gender apartheid, in which one category of women may gain protection from sexual violence and sexual harassment, and offered economic and educational opportunities, while another category of women, whose lives are shaped by absence of choice, are instead set apart for consumption by men and for the profit of their pimps, traffickers and brothel owners. Neither the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, nor international law excepts any human being from enjoying a life free of violence and dignity. (Abel-Hamid et al., 2015, p. 3)

Again, the policy positions taken in the Amnesty International dispute turned on perceptions of the amount of trafficking for sexual exploitation in the industry. Clearly those in support of the policy of decriminalization did not believe that trafficking had taken over the industry to the extent that opponents believed.

In 2016, a similar battle reached its biggest stage yet—The United Nations—when UN Women (2016) announced its intention to develop a position on the sex trade, giving the public until October 16 to answer three questions in 1500 words. Respondents were asked to deal with the issue of human rights, gender equality and empowerment, and protection of women in the trade from harm, violence, stigma, and discrimination.

Scotland

In September 2015, abolitionists and preservationists clashed again, this time in Scotland. Jean Urquhart, a member of the Scottish parliament representing the Highlands and Islands, announced her intention to introduce a prostitution law reform bill for Scotland; the proposed law would decriminalize all prostitution in the country, including pimping. Rejecting the Nordic model as harmful to individuals active in the sex-trade industry, it supported the New Zealand approach as prioritizing the health and safety of those selling sex (Urquhart, 2015). As she must, Urquhart minimizes the amount of trafficking in prostitution, characterizing coercion as present in all life choices:

There is an inherent coercion built into our economic system to provide for ourselves but this is coercion felt by us all and is not unique to sex workers. Various factors, including our gender and socio-economic background, affect our opportunities and life trajectories and few people have the privilege of absolute unfettered choice in their lives. (Urquhart, 2015, p. 8)

A consultation process is part of the procedure that members of the Scottish Parliament must follow to obtain the right to introduce a member’s bill. Between early September and early December 2015, Ms. Urquhart received 207 responses, 70% supporting her proposed law and 23% opposed in principle (Urquhart, 2016). In March 2016, Urquhart published a summary of the consultation response, followed by her own conclusions from the exercise (Urquhart, 2016). Although opponents of the measure cited research from New Zealand about the growth of the sex-trade industry there and trafficking to support it, in her own findings, Urquhart did not engage with research. Taking the sex trade as a given, she focused solely on measures to increase individuals’ safety while in prostitution, without considering how they got there, whether they were trafficked, and how her proposal would impact trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation. As in the Amnesty International policy discussion, the issue of trafficking was not a real factor. Urquhart then stated her intent to introduce her member’s bill in the next session of the Scottish Parliament.

The United Kingdom

Passage of the Modern Slavery Act in the UK (U.K. Home Office, 2015), which strengthened penalties for trafficking and created a statutory defense for victims to ensure they are not inappropriately criminalized, caused the Home Affairs Select Committee of Parliament to take a second look at U.K. prostitution laws and to determine how they impact trafficking for sexual exploitation (U.K. Parliament, 2016). Early in 2016, the committee sought written submissions on whether criminal sanctions should continue to fall more heavily on those who sell sex, rather than those who buy it. The committee’s preliminary report (Home Affairs Committee, 2016) again demonstrates the important role research could play, but often does not, in this policy debate.

Over 250 written submissions were received and hearings were held. In its July 2016 preliminary report, the committee stated that those weighing in were deeply divided, although there was agreement on the need to decriminalize the selling of sex. The committee chose to characterize the disagreements as based on differing “moral values” on the legitimacy of prostitution. It found evidence generally missing and sometimes misinterpreted or applied too broadly across a diverse industry. Throwing up their hands and expressing “dismay,” the committee recommended that the U.K. Home Office commission an in-depth research study “to help develop a better understanding of the current extent and nature of prostitution in England and Wales, and to draw together and put in context any recent relevant research” (U.K. Home Office, 2015, p. 15). Nor did the committee believe that the effects of any new models (i.e., Sweden, New Zealand) had been conclusively established through research. They were inclined to recommend decriminalizing soliciting and brothel keeping as measures to make the industry safer but stated it could not support the Swedish approach at this time.

Much interest was generated in early September 2016 when Keith Vaz, Labor member of Parliament who was serving as chairman of the Select Committee, resigned from the post that gave him influence over policy on prostitution and drug issues. Vaz was secretly recorded making payments to two eastern European male escorts, even offering to buy cocaine for them (although he said he would not partake) and asking them to bring poppers to the assignation (Gore, 2016). If Vaz was a regular buyer of sex, his positon as head of the powerful Select Committee studying prostitution would be troublesome and would ensure that his private actions would be a matter for public consideration. Was the committee’s preliminary rejection of a law penalizing buyers of sex based on Vaz’s own interests and predilections? And how often in public policy debates is this a factor? Members of Parliament, however, later saw no reason to prevent Vaz from filling a vacant seat on the Commons Justice Committee (Syal, 2016).

What do we learn from all this?

Surprisingly, trafficking for sexual exploitation has not played as important a role in countries’ recent policy determinations as one would have anticipated. Certainly, one would expect that legislators would want to consider whether legal changes, while ameliorating one problem, might exacerbate another. Jean Urquhart’s blithe dismissal of coercion in the industry and Amnesty International’s almost total silence on the issue are surprising. Nor did human trafficking appear to arise in the Canadian court case but was on the mind of Canadian legislators. The U.K. Select Committee also did not firmly grasp trafficking, although the topic was the very reason for the inquiry’s coming into being. The example of Keith Vaz indicates how complex prostitution law changes can be, if policy makers in leadership positions have personally been involved in the sex trade themselves. But more fundamentally, to observe legislative debates centering on the well-being of those selling sex without a discussion of how they got into the industry or coercive means that keep them there demonstrates the failure of the anti-trafficking community to bring this issue front and center.

To be sure, lack of research data about trafficking prevalence and the effects of legalization has been a hindrance. But researchers have not educated legislators to understand if that such data they envision may never be available due to the difficulties of researching hidden populations. The result has been a replication of the longstanding, fossilized debate about prostitution between preservationists and abolitionists—all self-styled feminists. For the U.K. Select Committee to characterize the debate as one based on differing views of the morality of selling sex demonstrates just how disconnected the debate has become from research data.

Going forward

Research methodology

Human-trafficking-prevalence data must come front and center, taking its proper place in policy considerations. There are research data, and there will be more. In this special issue, Fedina and DeForge examine research methodologies used in the public-health field, including respondent-drawn sampling, that go as far as possible to approximate a random sample that can be extrapolated to a local area. These hold promise for human trafficking, and we already have results from several localities, discussed in their article, finding the number of trafficking victims to be significant. More studies of this kind are imperative. Use of small convenience samples or interviews at social services sites should be discontinued if the goal is prevalence estimation, as well as a presentation of estimates not backed up by reputable methodology. Journal editors and peer reviewers should make certain that all data conclusions in articles are supported by research designs appropriate for hidden populations.

Law-enforcement data

Data from law enforcement can now play an important role. More and more trafficking cases are reported to the national hotline and more perpetrators are prosecuted in the United States. As Farrell and Reichert report in their article in this special issue, in a 6-year period (2008–2014), federally funded local human-trafficking task forces identified 2,310 confirmed cases of human trafficking, and, in 2015, a total of 1,636 victims of trafficking called into the national hotline. These cases may represent the tip of the proverbial iceberg, but these are solid data indeed. Farrell and Reichert also discuss statistics from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) System, which since 2013 now captures human-trafficking cases reported to law enforcement. Although off to a slow start, ultimately the UCR will produce useful information, even if it not the whole story, representing as it does only cases coming to the attention of law enforcement.

Research definitions

As we have seen, data wars and competing agendas have spilled over into research on the sex trade and in human trafficking. Shifting definitions of trafficking or coercion, often based on one’s own public policy agenda, make a great deal of the research less than useful and definitive. This problem is further compounded by misreading, manipulation, and cherry-picking of data by advocates. In this issue, Dempsey analyzes the failure to use a uniform definition of trafficking, finding that some researchers actually misunderstand trafficking; because trafficking involves fraud, coercion, or abuse of power, she maintains that the often-used standard consent is erroneous. Journal editors and peer reviewers will play an important role in making certain that research that does not employ standard definitions—or any definition—is not published.

Conclusion

Research for trafficking for sexual exploitation is difficult enough, but, when placed within the context described here, the problems are compounded. Researchers should ensure that data on human trafficking prevalence play a larger role in public-policy debates. When they present their data, they also need to understand how minimization and data critiques prevent acceptance of trafficking-prevalence research. In a recent blog advocating legalization of the sex trade, renowned bioethicist Peter Singer (2016) makes no mention of human trafficking, which simply does not exist in his universe. For him, it is a simply a moral issue:

Countries that criminalize the sex industry should consider the harms these laws cause, as Amnesty International has done. It is time to put aside moralistic prejudices, whether based on religion or an idealistic form of feminism, and do what is in the best interests of sex workers and the public as a whole. (para. 12)

The issue of exploitation and coercion has to a large degree become lost in the rush to modernize prostitution laws. The articles in this special issue make concrete suggestions about how trafficking-prevalence data can be developed and restored to the discussions.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jody Raphael

Jody Raphael is Senior Research Fellow, Schiller DuCanto & Fleck Family Law Center at DePaul University College of Law.

Notes

¹ Although we will not deal with this issue here, it is important to note that decriminalization or legalization may not represent the magic solution for the problem of trafficking for sexual exploitation. What we can take away from an unflinching look at available research is that the sex-trade industry seems capable of growing and expanding regardless of legislative choices and that large cultural and economic changes will be necessary to eliminate exploitation that often comes along with it (Kempadoo, 2015). For example, through a legislative blunder in 2003, the state of Rhode Island decriminalized indoor prostitution in the state, with the loophole remedied in 2009. During the 6-year period of decriminalization, advertising for indoor prostitution increased in Rhode Island, but since the recriminalization in 2009 advertising has continued to grow unabated (Cunningham & Shah, 2014).

² Lim (2007) has an interesting take on demand. Agreeing that demand is an important aspect of all markets, and those where exploitation and trafficking occur, she poses a provocative question about the sex-trade industry: “Is it an abundant supply of vulnerable women and girls whose services and labour can be exploited that fuel a level of demand that would not otherwise be there?” (Lim, 2007, p. 3). If supply is playing a part, the very vulnerability of the sellers is a factor often overlooked in the characterization of the buyers and attitudes toward the industry, an issue often missed in research with buyers.