![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper presents the descriptive results and qualitative analysis of an innovative survey sent to ministries, national rapporteurs, GRETA officials, police officials, NGOs, and ombudsmen across the EU on their anti-trafficking policy preferences and opinions. In demonstrating the diverse array of occupational and regional predilections for different prostitution policies, European Commission and Anti-Trafficking Coordinator involvement in anti-trafficking efforts, and suggested policy area solutions and reforms, the study provides a first and powerful look into elite opinion formation on anti-trafficking public policy. This paper also provides an original academic assessment of national rapporteur functions and effectiveness in the EU based on the survey responses and attitudes. The cumulative inferences of the needs and desires of different European policymakers in future anti-trafficking policy and EU cooperation provide a blueprint for good governance in the design and implementation of policies and legal frameworks that seek to eradicate modern slavery.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 Originally submitted as part of the policy incubator requirement for LSE’s MSc in European and International Public Policy. MSc (class of 2021) in European and International Public Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science’s (LSE) European Institute.
2 The Council of Europe’s (which is an entity separate from EU institutions) Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.
3 The survey received LSE Research Ethics Board approval on May 5, 2021, under reference #24323.
4 In analyzing the survey data, each observation (i.e. respondent) was assigned to a region based off of their identified member state. Using UCF’s categorization, Northern Europe includes Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Sweden; Southern Europe includes Croatia, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain; Western Europe includes Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands; and Eastern Europe includes Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia (UCF Libraries, Citation2021). There was a fairly uniform quantity of respondents from each region, with 18 from Eastern Europe, seventeen from Northern Europe, nineteen from Southern Europe, and nineteen from Western Europe completing the survey (two respondents failed to disclose their member state affiliation).
5 Survey participants were able to select all descriptions/categories that applied to their occupation and THB country type (destination, transit, or source), so some respondents are represented in multiple occupation or THB country type classifications.
6 In an effort to remain unbiased, I refer to those involved in regulated sex markets as sex workers, use the term “prostitute” to refer to individuals that sell sex more generally, and employ the term “THB victim” where trafficking victimization would be recognized by national referral mechanisms.
7 The observations of the Eastern and Southern European respondents should be ignored in , as there are no EU member states in these regions that have currently adopted the Swedish model.
8 To clarify, survey participants had to select which type of prostitution model their member state complied with before answering questions about their level of agreement or disagreement with only that policy. Thus, the respondents whose answers are reflected in self-identified with living in or representing a member stated with legalized prostitution, while the respondents whose answers were utilized in self-identified with living in or
representing a member state with the Swedish model.
9 Letters of formal notice were filed against Germany, France, Austria, Portugal, Italy, Luxembourg, Greece, Slovakia, Spain, Malta, the Netherlands, Ireland, and Cyprus in 2013. Additionally, reasoned opinions were later issued to Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, and Cyprus before these cases were closed over Directive 2011/36/EU.
10 The criterion of gathering data was split into two separate criteria in this survey: that of gathering data on THB crimes and investigations and of gathering data on THB victims.
11 NGO staff members’ mean scores ranged from 50.4 on “measure results” to 59.7 on “gather crime data.”
12 The p-value is 0.087 (and therefore greater than the 0.05 level of significance) when the p-value is simulated with 2,000 replicates to account for the fact that some member state data is unavailable and some member states had low survey representation.
13 It should be noted that Diane Schmitt was appointed in July 2021, so after the survey had been concluded.