Human Trafficking in South Eastern Europe

Beyond Crime Control, an Agenda for Social Inclusion and Development

Workshop on the Development Implications of Gender-based Violence, November 9th 2004 By Carine Clert, Senior Social Development Specialist, ECSSD

Based on a World Bank internal scoping paper written with Elizabeth GomartResearch assistance: Ivana Aleksic and Natalia Otel

Structure

Key figures…….A. Objectives & frameworkB. Extent and dynamics in SEEC. Root-causes: Demand and supplyD. Responses/ Policy challengesE. Why should a development institution like the Bank be concerned?F. What can we do?

Key figures to start with

• Industrial countries experienced a rise in the stock of migrants of 28 % over the 1990s

• Migration is likely to accelerate: Income disparities demographic profile in source countries i.e.

relatively large supply of young workers • more women (proportion of women migrating

in Europe=51.2%- World estimates 2003)What we know less about := who becomes subject to coercion and

exploitation in the migration process and why?= type of developmental implications?

Examples of Available estimates:1 to 2 million people are trafficked each

year worldwide (U.S. State Department) In 1997, trafficking involved 175,000

women and girls from Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (IOM,2000)

At least 1,200 Albanian minors identified as trafficked to Italy and Greece for begging and forced labor between 2000 and 2003

Only a few victims are identified and assisted: E.g. number of victims who transited/were temporarily trafficked in Serbia = approx. 10 times higher than for identified/assisted victims in Serbia

(Belgrade, SEE Regional Clearing point,2003)

A. Objectives & framework

• The first WB paper on this complex issue• A scoping exercise, not a study• Takes stock of facts, causes, identifies

gaps in responses and highlights implications for the Bank- with a focus on SEE

• Main source: Reliable data now available through Belgrade’s Regional Clearing Point (RCP)-1st report circulated Oct.2003

• Key argument: beyond crime control and human rights protection, need for a 3rd perspective:

a social inclusion perspective

Framework Human Trafficking is about adults and

children being trafficked within their own countries and across international borders against their will for purposes of exploitation

Major Reference= The Palermo Trafficking Protocol (signed in 2000 as part of the UN Convention on Trans-border Crime) which emphasizes coercion + exploitation

Trafficking is not smuggling.

Phases of the process

Key issues

1. Pre-Movement vulnerability to human trafficking (individual/household/regional factors etc..)

2. Movement Cross-border movement

3. Post-Movement/Exploitation

 Trafficked migrant at his/her ‘workplace’

4. Post-Exploitation Constraints and opportunities of reinsertion

Phases of the process

Policy tools/approaches

1. Pre-Movement Prevention- short-term/ long term

2. Movement Seizure of trafficked migrants

3. Post- Movement /Exploitation

 Identification + rescue

4. Post-Exploitation Repatriation to country of originReintegration

B. Major Trends and Dynamics in SEE

Young women and minors (0-14) = main categories of victims (but big data gaps for minors)

Major sending countries/entity: Moldova, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria &Kosovo

Non-SEE receiving countries: Western European countries, US, Canada, Israel, Turkey and Middle East

SEE countries that used to be mainly transit countries = also becoming origin and destination (Albania, FYugoslavia, Kosovo & Bosnia)

Trends: no decrease but + underground operations

Internal trafficking (within country) on the rise but under-reported

Human Trafficking Routes

Age Range of Victims of Trafficking – IOM data based on 826 assisted victims in SEE countries

between May 2001 and December 2002

N/Aless 14

14 - 1718 - 24

25 - 30Over 30

S1

74

7

94

446

162

400

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

N/A less 14 14 - 17 18 - 24 25 - 30 Over 30

· How does it happen?Means of ‘recruitment’ vary

false promises of employment abroad recruitment for the sex industry under false terms, false promises of marriage, and kidnapping

HT is not only about organized criminal networks but is also a community issue

60% of assisted victims in SEE in 2002/2003 =recruited by acquaintance or a friend (IOM)After ‘recruitment:

owners withhold the documents of victimsslave-like terms of employment imposed(victims of HT do not send remittances…!) Threats on victims and families back home. Victims subjected to beatings, rape, and even

death.

C. Root-causes: Demand and Supply

DEMAND…• SEE= a fertile environment for

traffickers: poor governance, weakened rule of law, increase power of criminal elements

• HT = easy and low risk business (poor prosecution), with maximized profits

• Enabling environment also in non-SEE receiving countries:

• Growth of the sex market, Loopholes in migration policies; demand of Western entrepreneurs for semi-legal and illegal activities at cheap cost…

…and Supply: Push and risk factors

• Poverty and labor -based analyses (high youth unemployment/ Sending countries= among the poorest) explain initial willingness to migrate

• But are insufficient: HT can’t be equated with illegal migration; HT involves the coercion and the exploitation of the vulnerable

• Exposure to HT = linked to multiple vulnerability and rooted in economic, social,and geographic exclusion processes, as well as to gender-based discrimination

• ESW key source: sample surveyed by RCP:4825 victims from, identified and assisted in SEE countries/entity)

Hopes and Multiple isolation: Profile of identified and assisted victims (RCP,2003)

For young women and girls ( 15-30)Individual risk factors• Age and gender come first• Being a member of a minority group (e.g

Roma –Romania, Bulgaria & Albania)• Low level of education esp. for Albania &

Kosovar victims but many victims completed high school and most attended formal schooling

• Victims not always unemployed=> need for preventive strategies to look at job quality

Household and non-economic risk factors

• Poverty= important yet not only factor• Alcoholism, violence, parental precarious

situation • Emotional and social isolation of young

girls/women (alienation/not belonging..etc)• Most victims resided with families prior to

recruitment but graduates of orphanages =at risk

• Spatial variables also matter- Victims= geographically isolated (rural

areas/small towns) and come from poor regions (combines with border position)

Moldova: southern region of Cahul, along the border with Romania; Transdniestria (post-conflict region)

Romania: Moldovan region to the north (poorest)

Bulgaria: northeast (Dobrich, Varna, Rousse), and southwest (Blagoevgrad, Kyustendil, Kurdjali, Petrich- border area

Albania: cities and South before mid-90s/ today the north

 => suggests potential benefits of better geographically targeted poverty alleviation and Community-Driven operations as preventive strategies

Connections between h.t.and gender inequality

• flows from regions/countries where women’s political and socio-economic position has declined

• where patriarchal traditions remain entrenched (e.g. rural Albania)

• lack of informal/formal support networks for mothers restricts women’s choices (e.g. Moldova)

• Working conditions in home countries: sexualization, with endemic sexual harassment

• Domestic violence is the 2d reason to migrate

• Growing acceptability of sexual exploitation of women and ‘commodification’ of women for the profit of the community.

Minors (0-14)Share these risk factors, esp. regional, ethnic

and at-risk households

BUT 2 specific risk factors apply consistently:

1. Households they come from= very poor2. With low levels of education

=> Major implications for child welfare policies

D. Responses: Steps forward…

Before 2000: isolated and uncoordinated efforts of mainly local/international NGOs

Since 2000:1. Institutional & legal framework:

Palermo Protocol, Special Task Force in the Stability Pact, Core Labor Standards, National action plans adopted by all SEE countries

2. More partners =mobilizing; andThe EU included HT in pre-accession

strategyThe US links assistance to anti-trafficking

efforts3. Shift from criminalization to human

rights issue

…and emerging gaps /challenges

1. Despite progress, limited ownership of SEE governments, esp. victims’ assistance & protection

2. Too much is demanded from civil society sector

3. Insufficient monitoring and evaluation of existing targeted projects

4. Review of specific gaps in services suggests

Persisting assumption that HT= mainly a problem of illegal migration =>focus of services on repatriation and skeletal support services

=>Many returned women= re-trafficked

PREVENTION REINTEGRATION

1. Short-term prevention: awareness-raising campaigns- focused on women’s exposure to sexual exploitation, but too little on child trafficking and other labor exploitation- focused on the capital and schools but little on rural, out-of-school and at-risk youth, communities

1. Repatriation- victims’ willingness to

return as condition for service provision but fear, shame, and lack of opportunities

- shelters offer ad-hoc services, only short-term stay, and limited space

Examples of specific operational gaps

PREVENTION REINTEGRATION

2. Medium/Long-term prevention - few long-term prevention programs targeted at inclusion/empowerment of young women- no targeted approach to regional/community development in areas vulnerable to h.t.

2. comprehensive reintegration - few long-term reintegration programs for young women (Bulgaria, Moldova) and mainly focused on economic aspects- little on empowerment and social inclusion- gaps for minors) (exception: Albania

Extend beyond anti-trafficking approaches focused on crime control and legal protection of human rights,

Consider a broader policy agenda focused on equitable development and social inclusion,

if preventive strategies are to address supply factors effectively (i.e. improve the social circumstances of potential victims)

and if repatriation responses are to foster adequate and durable reinsertion of victims into the country of origin.

HT = emblematic of vulnerable situation of young women & children at home, work and in communities in poorest SEE countries/regions.

Emerging policy recommendations for our clients

E. Why WB should be concerned ?

What we can’t doBe involved in the policing and legal

aspects of human trafficking (incl. rescue of victims & crime control), which escape our mandate and where we have no comparative advantage.

But as development institution, we should be concerned about human trafficking because both its supply-related causes (poverty, social inclusion, lack of gender equity) and its consequences have strong implications for development, esp. for major sending countries

Three specific reasons to be concerned

1. HT creates negative externalities and serious costs for primary sending countries

• Families: e.g. breakdown, neglect of small children (half of trafficked Moldovan young women =mothers)

• Communities: values, insecurity, crime.• Countries’ sustainable development:

depletion of human K, lack of remittances• Public health implications - STIs

2. Potential for WB interventions to have a positive impact on reducing human trafficking / esp. interventions targeted at poverty reduction and social inclusion

At present, this impact= ad-hoc + small scale

3. WB comparative advantageOur privileged access to governments =>

strong position to increase government ownership of long term prevention of HT and reinsertion strategies.

Clear focus for WB= primary sending countries

8. WHAT CAN WE DO?

1. Make our staff aware/Learning agenda

• Need to extend beyond SEE, esp. Caucasus and Central Asia

• Country team & cross-sectoral regional events

2. Mainstreaming HT in our advisory work

• Poverty assessments/ support to PRSPs• Gender assessments + analysis• Youth assessments • Labor market and migration (upcoming

ECA Migration study on social dimensions)• More gender and age analysis of

livelihoods in rural areas and small towns

3. Operations. Focus on tools/actions that are coherent with corporate priorities and supportive of improving and mainstreaming anti-trafficking objectives

Specific sectors deserve obvious attention

• Education• Public health –+ framework for medical

assistance to victims• Social protection/ e.g. better targeted

assistance to vulnerable households/ lessons from de-institutionalization work on child welfare

But also cross-sectoral rural and social investments

• Rural + small towns = geographic focus + target to areas identified as vulnerable to traffickers=> implications for our poverty targeted Community Driven projects + better gender and demographic targets

• Gender-sensitive investments for youth inclusion

• Specific challenges on rural finance/