Human Trafficking in South Eastern Europe

1. 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 writtenwith Elizabeth Gomart Research assistance: Ivana Aleksic and Natalia Otel

2. Structure • Key figures……. • A. Objectives & framework • B. Extent and dynamics in SEE • C. Root-causes: Demand and supply • D. Responses/ Policy challenges • E. Why should a development institution like the Bank be concerned? • F. What can we do?

3. 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? Key figures to start with

4. 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)

5. 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

6. 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.

9. 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 B. Major Trends and Dynamics in SEE

10. Human Trafficking Routes

11. Age Range of Victims of Trafficking –IOM data based on 826 assisted victims in SEE countries between May 2001 and December 2002

12. · How does it happen? • Means of ‘recruitment’ vary falsepromises 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 victims slave-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.

13. 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…

14. …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)

15. 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

16. 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)

17. 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

18. 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.

19. Minors (0-14) • Share these risk factors, esp. regional, ethnic and at-risk households • BUT 2 specific risk factors apply consistently: • Households they come from= very poor • With low levels of education • => Major implications for child welfare policies

20. Before 2000: isolated and uncoordinated efforts of mainly local/international NGOs • Since 2000: • Institutional & legal framework: Palermo Protocol, Special Task Force in the Stability Pact, Core Labor Standards, National action plans adopted by all SEE countries • More partners =mobilizing; and • The EU included HT in pre-accession strategy • The US links assistance to anti-trafficking efforts • 3. Shift from criminalization to human rights issue D. Responses: Steps forward…

21. …and emerging gaps /challenges • Despite progress, limited ownership of SEE governments, esp. victims’ assistance & protection • Too much is demanded from civil society sector • Insufficient monitoring and evaluation of existing targeted projects • 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

22. Examples of specific operational gaps

24. Emerging policy recommendations for our clients 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.

25. E. Why WB should be concerned ? What we can’t do Be 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, weshould 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

26. 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

27. 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 advantage Our 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

28. 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 8. WHAT CAN WE DO?

29. 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

30. 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/