Content area
Nigeria is said to be one of the largest source countries for victims of modern slavery in the UK (Throughout this paper, I use the terms ‘modern slavery’, ‘slavery’ and ‘human trafficking’ loosely and interchangeably to refer to extreme exploitation as often described in many international documents as well as in the UK’s MSA which is the focus of this paper). Thus, the UK government has often lauded its partnership with the Nigerian government in tackling the problem of modern slavery, often presented as a problem of irregular migration. At the same time, legal migration channels into the UK are increasingly being tightened, and Nigerians are among those who suffer the consequences of such. This paper reviews the UK government policies, partnerships and activities in Nigeria in the light of the Modern Slavery Act. It argues that the emphasis on deterring migration and sex trafficking has meant that the UK government agenda is being promoted to the detriment of key structural factors contributing to other dimensions of vulnerability and exploitation in Nigeria.
Introduction: The UK’s ‘World leading’ MSA
The UK Modern Slavery Act (herewith referred to as MSA) 2015, described as ‘world leading1’ by politicians, represents the first national legal document to define and promote the use of ‘modern slavery’ or ‘slavery’ instead of ‘human trafficking’, ‘forced labour’, or other terms that were widely accepted in describing extreme exploitation before then (Broad and Turnbull, 2019). The Act was introduced ‘to tackle modern slavery in this country and set an example for other countries seeking to do the same’.2 While the socio-economic and political factors as well as personal agendas that led to its emergence have been questioned (see for example, O’Connell Davidson, 2015; Gadd & Broad, 2018; Craig et al., 2019), the UK government’s strategy has had significant influence in the private sector, civil societies, international NGOs and governments (Balch, 2019). For example, there has been a proliferation of NGOs working on addressing exploitation in the UK following the implementation of the MSA (Gadd & Broad, 2018). Beyond the UK, the MSA was influential in the launch of a Modern Slavery Act in Australia (Parliament of Australia, 2017).
Given the above, the literature examining different aspects, practices and effects of the MSA are not hard to come by. Scholars like Balch (2015) and O’Connell Davidson (2015) have questioned the reactionary and political usage of the language of slavery. Balch et al (2019) and New (2021) also examined Sect. 54 (the transparency requirement) of the Act and concluded that its pursuit may worsen the exploitation of vulnerable workers in source countries and less regulated markets. Gadd and Broad (2024)’s study of Sect. 45 of the Act, which creates separate statutory defences for victims of modern slavery, shows that it ‘offers only the slimmest protections’ for intended beneficiaries (p312); Van Dyke (2019) discussed the limitations of implementing the MSA in specific sectors; and Hodkinson et al. (2021) considered the MSA alongside the Immigration Acts of 2014 and 2016 to show how a narrow focus on victimisation and offending ignores how the state contributes to extreme exploitation of migrants.
These and other critics have argued in different ways that the MSA is more about the Conservative agenda of tightening borders and clamping down on criminal networks and less about human rights, workers’ rights or migrant rights (Kenway, 2021). Indeed, with an ever-changing political landscape, the UK’s position in relation to the MSA has shifted with modern slavery being conflated with illegal migration and the dangerous journeys made by many to travel to the country (Balch, 2023).
Beyond the UK, the MSA is influential in the government’s work with other countries to combat modern slavery. Specifically, through the Modern Slavery Fund (MSF), the UK’s anti-slavery work abroad aims to ‘apprehend offenders, support victims and prevent people falling into slavery’ (Home Office, 2021: 38). The MSF is also used to promote awareness and strengthen partnerships with foreign governments to tackle the problem of slavery (Ibid) and deter irregular migration (ICAI, 2020). This is certainly the case in Nigeria where funds provided by the UK government (and other Western donors) have been used for awareness campaigns, supporting victims of modern slavery, providing infrastructures for government agencies and other anti-trafficking measures in many urban centres (see for example, Vermeulen et al., 2019; Creta, 2020; ICAI, 2020).
Examples of these include the ‘I am Priceless’ campaign spearheaded by the UNODC, EU and other Nigerian agencies that focused on sensitising ‘communities and families who are often betrayed and deceived by people who make false promises of a better future for their children and relatives, within or outside of Nigeria’ (UNODC, 2012; UNODC, n.d). The Not for Sale campaign (which will be examined in detail later on in the paper) ran between 2018 and 2020 with an estimated cost of £500,000 (ICAI, 2020:20). According to one estimate, the UK’s anti-slavery and anti-trafficking spending in Nigeria was about £42 million (€51million) between 2015 and 2019 (Vermeulen et al., 2019).
However, there is little or no knowledge of the impact of the MSA or other UK government led anti-trafficking and anti-slavery initiatives in Nigeria. This article is a contribution towards addressing this knowledge gap. Given the paucity of reliable data, the complexity of the Nigerian legal system and the challenges with direct inferences or comparative analysis across different geographical and political contexts, the paper does not seek to measure the direct effects of the MSA on anti-trafficking and anti-slavery legislation in Nigeria. Instead, it focuses on how the British foreign policy and strategy on modern slavery—guided by the MSA—is pursued in Nigeria and its impact on Nigerians.
Against this backdrop, I draw briefly from the policy transfer literature to explain how the pursuit of the Modern Slavery agenda as led by UK politicians and ‘experts’ in Nigeria is problematic. Policy transfer refers to ‘a process by which knowledge of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in one political system (past or present)’ is used in the development of similar features in another (Dolowitz, 2000:3). Policy transfer may be voluntary or coercive, but there can be an overlap between the two types (Benson & Jordan, 2011; Dolowitz & Marsh, 1996). Coercive transfer policies may be direct (i.e. one government or institution pushing or forcing another to adopt a policy’) or indirect (i.e. ‘externalities and functional interdependence’ may force a nation to adopt a policy that may not reflect domestic socio-economic context and culture’) (Ibid:346–348). Examples would include the influence of organisations like the IMF and World Bank in the spread of Western economic policies through loans and/or other development aid (Dolowitz & Marsh, 1996). In relation to the focus of this paper, it could be argued that many anti-slavery and anti-trafficking policies and programmes in non-Western countries are related to pressures from the international community and especially Western countries rather than local priorities (Dupuy et al., 2012).
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: after this introduction, the paper gives an overview of Nigeria and the human trafficking situation in the country followed by a discussion of the methodology. Next, it discusses the influence of the MSA in Nigeria through a focus on the UK government’s anti-trafficking initiatives in the country before drawing its conclusions.
Nigeria as a Case Study
With increasing population, underperforming economy, growing poverty and income inequality, regional conflicts and unstable political landscape, Nigeria represents a unique case in the study of vulnerability and exploitation. The country has huge oil and natural gas reserves, but about three-quarter of the population are estimated to live in absolute poverty (World Bank, 2019). Oil revenues, Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) and other neoliberal policies have fuelled large-scale corruption and uneven development over the years (Falola and Heaton, 2008; TiP Report, 2024). Many Nigerians lack access to basic infrastructures like good roads, clean water, electricity among others. High-level inflation, mass unemployment, underemployment and job losses, security challenges are some of the other factors that contribute to large-scale migration of Nigerians (Falola and Heaton, 2008). Despite repeated political promises and international collaborations, there is no functioning comprehensive social protection programme in the country, and as such many Nigerians rely on informal support systems – including extended family ties, generosity of friends and the community – for sustenance and solutions in times of crises (Mberu et al., 2013; World Bank, 2019). Such support systems are also significant in understanding migration as well as trafficking within and beyond the shores of the country as will be shown later (Castle & Diarra, 2003; Alber, 2011; Olayiwola, P. (2021)).
Against this backdrop, the country is understandably often characterised as a source, transit and destination for human trafficking and/or modern slavery (see for example, Adesina, 2014; UNODC, 2022; TiP Report 2024). Several academic literature, government and policy documents as well as NGO publications have focused on sex trafficking – involving Nigerian women and girls in many European countries – as a classic example of human trafficking (see TiP Report, 2024 for example). But the rate of incidence of internal trafficking – for labour and other forms of exploitation – in the country is believed to be almost three times higher than the rate of international sex trafficking (UNODC, 2022). Other forms of human trafficking that have been identified in the country include exploitation in domestic work, agriculture, street hawking, forced marriage, organised begging, baby factories and harvesting, and organ harvesting (Huntley, 2013; Adesina, 2014; Ezeibe et al., 2021; Adannaya, 2023; Vanguard News, 2023).
Several ‘supply’ or ‘push’ factors—including most of the issues earlier highlighted—have featured prominently in explaining internal and external trafficking or modern slavery in the country, and these are often the basis for designing anti-trafficking interventions. For example, the belief that poverty, ignorance and/or ‘desperation’ as well as ‘traditional or cultural practices’ should be blamed for trafficking (see UNESCO, 2006; Adesina, 2014 among others) explains the emphasis on ‘awareness campaigns’ and ‘enlightenment’ or ‘education’ as anti-trafficking measures in the country (see Nwogu, 2014; Olayiwola, P. 2019). Similarly, the claim that traffickers are mafias, or ‘members of criminal gangs’ or ‘closely knitted networks’ justifies a criminal justice approach as a response to human trafficking in the country (see for example Ariyo, 2021; NAPTIP, 2022c; EUROPOL, 2024; TiP Report, 2024). As will be shown later in the paper, such assumptions and ‘mythologies’ (Sanghera, 2005) undergird the UK’s anti-slavery efforts in the country.
The above implies that other factors beyond the sending households – such as the demand for cheap labour, absence of state welfare support for the majority in the country and the impacts of external governments and institutions – are hardly addressed in anti-trafficking and anti-slavery measures in the country and beyond (Howard, 2017; Olayiwola, P., 2021). Thus, despite huge investments spanning more than two decades and an ever-expanding ‘rescue industry’ (Agustin, 2007), it does not seem as if the ‘war’ against human trafficking or modern slavery in the country is closer to being won than when it first started. This paper examines the UK’s contributions to this war. Before delving into the UK’s anti-slavery work in Nigeria however, it is necessary to briefly examine the anti-trafficking and anti-slavery landscape in the country.
To address the problem of human trafficking and in response to international norm in the aftermath of the Palermo Protocol, the Nigerian government established the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP) in 2003. The NAPTIP Act was amended in 2015 ‘as a result of the new trends in the crime of trafficking in persons and the need to further strengthen the institutional framework’ (NAPTIP, n.d.). NAPTIP is responsible for apprehending traffickers and supporting victims, but the organisation has increasingly focused more on the former than the latter through its emphasis on surveillance operations, raids, ‘going after traffickers’ and collaborating with other security agencies in the country (NAPTIP, 2024a). The agency’s achievements are also often discussed in terms of arrests and convictions of human traffickers (see NAPTIP, 2024b for example).
NAPTIP figures show that more than 60 per cent of human trafficking in the country happens internally with about 39 per cent occurring across international borders (NAPTIP, 2022a). Victims of trafficking are mostly women and children, and they can be found in different parts of the world (TiP Report, 2024). Besides partnerships with security agencies, NAPTIP partners with other government agencies, local and international agencies as well as Western governments to tackle human trafficking in the country (NAPTIP, 2024b). Through such partnerships, NAPTIP have created programmes wholly or partially funded by Western governments or international agencies like the UNODC, IOM, ILO among others. For example, the support and contributions of these organisations were significant in the creation of the ‘guidelines on National Referral Mechanism for Protection and Assistance to Trafficked Persons in Nigeria’ (NAPTIP, 2022a, 2022b, 2022c, 2022d:5). The agency partnered with the IOM (in partnership with other agencies) in 2017 to launch ‘The Missing Steps’ – an anti-trafficking TV series (see UNODC, 2012. and IOM Nigeria, 2017 respectively). In 2019, the Nigerian Port Authority announced a partnership with UK Border Force to facilitate ‘legitimate movement of persons and goods’3 between the two countries; and NAPTIP (2022b)’s report shows that the UK Home Office Modern Slavery Nigeria Program provided shelter for survivors of human trafficking in Edo State – ‘the epicentre of Nigeria’s human trafficking business’ (DfID, 2018: n.p.). As will be shown below, the focus on Edo State is underpinned by the agenda to ‘safeguard’ the UK and control migration or ‘trafficking’ from Nigeria to the UK.
Since the focus of this paper is the topic of government policy, I rely heavily on published and documentary sources – including news and print media, government reports – in the two countries. I analyse these sources to show how UK led anti-trafficking and anti-slavery initiatives in the country are used to promote UK government’s agenda of restricting legal migration at the expense of addressing pressing socio-economic challenges in Nigeria thereby worsening the vulnerabilities of many Nigerians.
Human Trafficking as Problem of Irregular Migration?
Human trafficking is regularly presented as a problem of irregular migration in the UK, hence the government’s collaboration with the Nigeria is more about discouraging migration to the UK than addressing the fundamental issues contributing to the vulnerability of many Nigerians. Nigerians were the fifth largest group of victims referred to the UK’s National Referral Mechanism (NRM)4 in 2017 (DfID, 2018). So, it was not surprising that in 2018, when Theresa May, as the Prime Minister of the UK, visited Nigeria, she promised a series of measures to cut illegal migration and support victims of modern slavery. Among others, she announced a ‘partnership with Nigerian authorities to find traffickers and bring them to justice’ (UK Government, 2018). To achieve this and other aims, a joint Border Taskforce, funded by the UK government, was established at the Lagos airport (ibid).
The task force was instrumental in the prosecution of the first person to be convicted under the MSA – perhaps unsurprisingly in a case involving sex trafficking of Nigerian women (ibid; BBC, 2018). By emphasising trafficking as a trans-border crime (and linking it with drug trafficking and other offences) (UK Government, 2018b), efforts and resources could be justifiably shifted to regulating external movements involving Nigerians despite the fact that majority of trafficking occurs within the country. Relatedly, the focus on sex trafficking takes focus away from other forms of trafficking involving Nigerians (TiP Report, 2024).
It is worth stating here that the same Theresa May championed a ‘hostile environment’ (Travis, 2013) policy that has continued to shape the UK’s Home Office treatment of many migrants –especially of African and Nigerian origins. For example, despite being subject to ever-expanding stringent visa requirements, getting a UK visa is like the proverbial camel passing through the eye of a needle for many Nigerians, and those granted visas are subject to deportations for committing immigration-related offences (The Cable, 2017; Akinwale, 2018; Forbes, 2022; Guardian, 2024). This explains why many Nigerians seek ‘help’ in navigating UK’s visa requirements and become susceptible to exploitation and modern slavery (O’Connell Davidson, 2015). In other words, the pursuit of anti-slavery work by the UK government through increasing surveillance at airports – through the joint task force – in Nigeria combined with extensive scrutiny and security measures – underpinned by assumptions and suspicions of Nigerians – in the UK (Hill, 2018) creates an almost perfect condition for traffickers and people smugglers to exploit. Indeed, evidence in the region suggests that those who end up with human traffickers and people smugglers had previously unsuccessfully explored legal channels of migration to the UK and other Western countries (Okyere and Olayiwola, 2022; see also O’Connell Davidson, 2015; LeBaron & Phillips, 2019).
Another implication of such restrictive migration policies is that many Nigerian victims of modern slavery face significant hurdles in seeking support or getting justice in the UK in the face of political decisions, prejudices and poisonous rhetoric around immigration, asylum and refugee in the UK (Gadd & Broad, 2024). Thus, many victims may prefer to suffer in silence or refuse to cooperate with authorities thereby worsening their vulnerability.
Stamping Out Slavery in Nigeria?
In 2018, the ‘Stamping out Slavery in Nigeria (SoSiN) was announced by the UK government, as well as an increase in the ‘migration and modern slavery funding’ to £40.5 million (DfID, 2018: n.p). Again, the conflation of migration with modern slavery could not be more direct. The government at the time targeted Edo state as ‘a focal point of the human trafficking business’, and ‘a key source location for trafficking into the UK’. The fund was meant to ‘tackle key drivers of modern slavery and unsafe migration attempts’ by ‘changing the aspirations of potential victims and migrants’ and ‘making it worthwhile for people to stay in their home states’ through ‘information campaign’ and other measures.
SOSiN was closed abruptly in 2020 as a result of reduced FCDO budgets, but the plan at the time involved recruiting ‘UK government communication specialist’ to design and lead such campaigns. Such rhetoric reduces human trafficking and exploitation in the country to ignorance and desperation of the people that could be cured through education and/or enlightenment. Tackling the myriads of socio-economic challenges confronting young people in the region was not as important as ‘boosting engagement with them to change their ‘aspirations’.
Stay at Home
Relatedly, a collaborative campaign between UK and Nigerian agencies was initiated in 2019 to promote the benefits of ‘staying at home’ instead of seeking opportunities to migrate to the UK and being ‘tricked’ by traffickers. Campaign materials included TV and radio adverts as well as posters to be placed in public places such as schools, religious centres and marketplaces (The Independent, 2019). The campaign titled ‘I am not for sale’ focused on women ‘being made’ or becoming successful in Nigeria instead of being lured by deceptive promises of traffickers (Fig. 1).
[See PDF for image]
Fig. 1
UK funded anti-slavery and anti-trafficking campaign in Nigeria.
Source: THEICIR https://x.com/search?q=%23THEICIR&src=hashtag_click
This material is encouraging Nigerian women to ‘explore opportunities’ in their areas. There is no mention of huge disparities between rural and urban areas, or between Nigeria and the UK in terms of opportunities, or the survival struggles of many Nigerians at home. It also does not tell of many positive examples of successful migration that Nigerians learn about through families, neighbours, the media etc.
Addressing Vulnerability by Restricting Mobility?
Socio-cultural contexts affect how trafficking is perceived (Agustin, 2007; Mai, 2010), and trafficking is a serious crime principally because it serves the purposes of (mostly Western) governments and institutions (Agustin, 2020). In this light, I present two broad arguments. First, most of what the Nigerian government has been ‘co-opted’ into labelling as ‘modern slavery’ are seen as ‘acceptable’ means of survival or ‘helping’ in a society without a functioning social protection system, high levels of poverty and inequalities (Olayiwola, P., 2022). This is true in many cases of child trafficking in the country and elsewhere in West Africa (Alber, 2011; Howard, 2017; Olayiwola, P., 2021). Reports of government and NGO officials being complicit in the trafficking of people (see Adesina, 2014; TiP Report, 2024) for example could also be explained in this context. In many instances, these officials may face significant socio-cultural pressures to facilitate the movement of potential victims especially within the country or engage children in potentially exploitative practices (ibid). Explaining this in terms of the ‘corruption’ of officials or ‘desperation’ of victims does not do justice to many poor and/or vulnerable Nigerians that are left to survive on their own (Guardian, 2018), or account for the significance of informal support systems in a society with weak institutions and deficient social protection system (Akanle et al., 2019; Olayiwola, P., 2021). This implies that many intermediaries in the country do not fit the image of the ‘traffickers’ or ‘slavers’ that Theresa May wanted the UK funded task force in Nigeria to go after. Instead, increasing criminalisation measures may worsen the vulnerability of many in the country.
In the same vein, while campaigns to change the aspirations of potential migrants to ‘stay at home’ may be politically popular, they are more about the perceived threats of too many migrants ‘flooding’ the UK (Pruitt, 2019), than about the interests or rights of potential migrants. Thus, as much as other forms of abusive and exploitative practices are rife in Nigeria and many Nigerians are seeking opportunities to escape, the UK’s Modern Slavery agenda in the country has been focused primarily on ‘preventive measures’ that advocate being ‘safe at home’ – a narrative that serves the interests of politicians pursuing different (personal) agendas (ICAI, 2020; Gadd & Broad, 2024). It is not clear how preventive such messages are when the structural causes of trafficking in the country are ignored or downplayed. Instead, such messages ‘create doubts and uncertainties’ about the difficulties faced by many households in the country (Olayiwola, P., 2019: 63).
Second, as a major recipient of UK and other Western government funding, Nigeria, like many developing countries, is obliged to abide by the dictates and expectations and/or requirements of donors (Nwogu, 2014). This means that even where government officials and/or agencies do not agree with certain anti-trafficking programmes or messages, they feel pressured to accept and promote such to maintain diplomatic ties with the donor(s). In relation to anti-trafficking messages as above, it can be argued that many Nigerians -including state officials and local NGOs – are not receptive to them (Olayiwola, P., 2022). In fact, there is evidence that while knowledge of human trafficking and modern slavery has improved significantly in the country (as well as in the West African sub-region), the incidence might be increasing as a result of deepening poverty, increasing inequalities and other structural challenges in the country earlier highlighted (Alber, 2011; Nwogu, 2014; Olayiwola, P., 2019).
As much as the rate of poverty in the country is high, the incidence of poverty is not uniform. For example, poverty is more concentrated in the Northern states than in the Southern states, and rural poverty is more than three times the urban poverty (The Economist, 2014; World Bank, 2019). Thus, rural areas – from where many potential victims originate (see TiP Report, 2024)—in Nigeria are synonymous with deep poverty, deprivation and near absence of basic infrastructures. This means that structural factors ‘pushing’ many rural dwellers to the urban centres or leading many to explore opportunities beyond their immediate environment are continually downplayed. As such, despite the campaigns and support services to returnees for example, many are still subject to re-trafficking and/or other forms of exploitation (Creta, 2020; HRW, 2019). In other words, the various operations of the Nigerian government—including ‘partnership with the UK’—to address human trafficking are more about addressing the concerns of UK and aligning with the agenda of politicians and ministers than the fundamental challenges contributing to vulnerability and exploitation.
Conclusion
Human exploitation exists in different forms and settings. The challenges of human trafficking, modern slavery and exploitation in Nigeria are related to individuals’ mode of adaptation and survival in the context of the failure of the Nigerian government to address grinding poverty, worsening standard of living, increasing inequalities and inadequate infrastructures. The UK’s modern slavery agenda in Nigeria however is about policing the borders and encouraging Nigerians to ‘stay at home’ instead of seeking opportunities to migrate to the UK (and other Western countries).
For many potential migrants, ‘home’ is where there is safety and socio-economic stability. The UK’s modern slavery fund, directed towards ‘keeping people at home’ has achieved mixed results at best because it is not channelled towards the fundamental issues contributing to extreme exploitation in Nigeria – increasing poverty, inequalities, political instability, social exclusion, deficiencies in basic infrastructures among others. Instead, the UK’s modern slavery agenda is about downplaying the stark socio-economic realities that many Nigerians are faced with and denying them the right to migrate and/or seek better opportunities. These strategies hinder potential migrants and worsen their vulnerabilities as they seek to navigate the complexities around legal channels of migration.
In this light, extreme exploitation is not just a crime, but also a problem of distribution of power and resources within and between countries. In a nation with the largest number of people living in absolute poverty in the world (World Bank, 2019), high unemployment rates and where majority do not have access to social safety nets, migration (internal and external) remains a viable strategy for survival. There is no doubt that many are subject to abuse and exploitation in pursuing this objective, yet the picture is more nuanced and complex and requires thinking along a continuum of positive and negative experiences. Without acknowledging these, criminalisation of migration or campaigns advocating attitudinal changes remain insufficient in combatting human trafficking and modern slavery.
Funding
No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.
Data availability
All data or statistics quoted are publicly available.
Declarations
Conflict of Interest
The author has no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
See for example, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ce5116e40f0b627de48663d/Independent_review_of_the_Modern_Slavery_Act_-_final_report.pdf; https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld5804/ldselect/ldliaison/12/1204.htm
2https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ce5116e40f0b627de48663d/Independent_review_of_the_Modern_Slavery_Act_-_final_report.pdf; p7.
3https://nigerianports.gov.ng/2021/09/07/npa-partners-u-k-border-force-on-port-security-and-trade-facilitation/
4The UK’s framework for identifying and referring potential victims of modern slavery and ensuring they receive appropriate support.
References
Adannaya, U. (2023). Attribution, Consequences and Pervasiveness of Baby Factory in Nigeria, PhD Thesis, University of Portsmouth.
Adesina, OS. Modern day slavery: Poverty and child trafficking in Nigeria. African Identities; 2014; 12,
Agustín, L. Sex at the margins: Migration, labour markets and the rescue industry; 2007; Zed Books:
Agustín, L. Snake oil. Journal of Human Trafficking; 2020; 6,
Akanle, O; Fayehun, OA; Adejare, GS; Orobome, OA. International migration, kinship networks and social capital in southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Borderlands Studies; 2019; 36,
Akinwale, Y. (2018). ‘’EMBARRASSING: Nigerians as rejects of the world.’’ International Centre for Investigative Reporting, May 19, https://www.icirnigeria.org/embarrassing-nigerians-as-rejects-of-the-world/
Alber, E. (2011) ‘Child Trafficking in West Africa?’. In Anna M.G., Laurie, F.
Ariyo, D. Nigerian Confraternities and the Increase in Human Trafficking Across Europe; 2021; AFRUCA:
Balch, A., Currie, S., Johns, J., Vaughn, L., & Stalford, H. (2019). Clothes, Chocolate and Children: Realising the Transparency Dividend
Balch, A. (2019). Defeating ‘Modern Slavery’, Reducing Exploitation?: the Organisational and Regulatory Challenge, in Craig, G., Balch, A., Lewis, H., and Waite, L. (eds) The Modern Slavery Agenda: Policy, Politics and Practice, Policy Press, pp 75-96
Balch, A. (2023). How the UK’s new immigration law will put more people at risk of modern slavery, The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/how-the-uks-new-immigration-law-will-put-more-people-at-risk-of-modern-slavery-209746
Balch, A. Craig, G; Waite, L; Lewis, H; Skrivankova, K. Understanding and evaluating UK efforts to tackle forced labour. Vulnerability, exploitation and migrants: Insecure work in a globalised economy; 2015; Palgrave Macmillan: pp. 86-98. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137460417_7]
BBC (2018). 'Voodoo' nurse Josephine Iyamu guilty of sex trafficking, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-44645937.
Benson, D; Jordan, A. What have we learned from policy transfer research? Dolowitz and marsh revisited. Political Studies Review; 2011; 9,
Broad, R; Turnbull, N. From human trafficking to modern slavery: The development of anti-trafficking policy in the UK. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research; 2019; 25,
Castle, S. And Diarra, A. (2003). The International Migration of Young Malians: Tradition, Necessity or Rite of Passage?’. Research Report. London: School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Craig, G et al. The modern slavery agenda: Policy, politics and practice in the UK. [Online]; 2019; Policy Press:
Creta, S. (2020). Abused in Libya and forced into prostitution back home: the nightmare of trying to reach Europe, available at: https://www.euronews.com/2020/06/21/abused-in-libya-and-forced-into-prostitution-back-home-the-nightmare-of-trying-to-reach-eu.
D. and Florence O. (Eds.) Frontiers of Globalisation: kinship and family structures in Africa. New Jersey: Africa World Press, pp71–92.
DfID (Department for International Development (2018). UK aid to stop modern slavery in Nigeria, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-aid-to-stop-modern-slavery-in-nigeria#:~:text=UK%20aid%20will%20help%20tackle,of%20Nigeria's%20human%20trafficking%20business.&text=UK%20support%20to%20back%20use,in%20the%20hands%20of%20traffickers.
Dolowitz, DP. Introduction. Governance; 2000; 13,
Dolowitz, D; Marsh, D. Who learns what from whom: A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Studies; 1996; 44,
Dupuy, K. Ron, J., and Prakash, A. (2012) ‘Foreign Aid to Local NGOs: Good intentions, bad policy’,Open Democracy, 15November. Available at: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/foreign-aid-to-local-ngos-good- intentions-bad-policy/ (Accessed 03 March, 2024).
Van Dyke, R. (2019) 'The UK’s response to modern slavery: law, policy and politics', in Gary Craig, and others (eds), The Modern Slavery Agenda: Policy, Politics and Practice in the UK, Bristol: Policy Press,pp. 47–74
EUROPOL (2024) 15 arrested in intercontinental crackdown against Nigerian crime syndicates, https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/15-arrested-in-intercontinental-crackdown-against-nigerian-crime-syndicates
Ezeibe, C; Oguonu, C; Ajaero, CK; Osadebe, N; Agbo, H; Uwaechia, O. From vulnerability to sustainability: Implementation of free education programmes and reversal of child trafficking in Nigeria. Journal of Human Trafficking; 2021; 7,
Farage, N. (2024) I warned about illegal migration when it was a trickle – years of failure have turned it into a flood https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/27/nigel-farage-illegal-migration-channel-flood/
Falola, T; Heaton, M. A History of Nigeria; 2008; Cambridge University: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819711]
Forbes (2022) Deportation Flight Lands In Lagos As U.K. Announces Migration Agreement With Nigeria. https://www.forbes.com/sites/freylindsay/2022/06/30/deportation-flight-lands-in-lagos-as-uk-announces-migration-partnership-with-nigeria/
Gadd, D; Broad, R. Troubling recognitions in British responses to modern slavery. The British Journal of Criminology; 2018; 58,
Gadd, D; Broad, R. When victims of modern slavery became offenders: The unravelling of the UK’s modern slavery agenda. Journal of Human Trafficking; 2024; 10,
Guardian (2018). I’m tired of life’: How Nigeria’s poorest people struggle to survive. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/jul/16/nigeria-poverty-stricken-families-struggle-survive
Guardian (2024). Home Office in threat to deport disabled man to Nigeria after 38 years in UK, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/19/home-office-in-threat-to-deport-disabled-man-to-nigeria-after-38-years-in-uk.
Hill, A. (2018) ‘’Lawyer blames visitor visa refusals on ‘deep underlying racism’.’’ The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/06/lawyer-blames-visitor-visa-refusals-on-deep-underlying-racism.
Hodkinson, SN; Lewis, H; Waite, L; Dwyer, P. Fighting or fuelling forced labour? The Modern Slavery Act 2015, irregular migrants and the vulnerabilising role of the UK’s hostile environment. Critical Social Policy; 2021; 41,
Howard, N. Child Trafficking, Youth Mobility and the Politics of Protection; 2017; Palgrave Macmillan: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47818-4]
HRW (2019) “You Pray for Death” Trafficking of Women and Girls in Nigeria, https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/08/27/you-pray-death/trafficking-women-and-girls-nigeria
Huntley, S. (2013). The Phenomenon Of “Baby Factories” In Nigeria As A New Trend In Human Trafficking, ICD Brief 3, available at: https://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/upload/documents/20140916T170728-ICD%20Brief%203%20-%20Huntley.pdf.
Independent Commission for Aid Impact (2020) The UK’s approach to tackling modern slavery through the aid programme, https://icai.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/ICAI-modern-slavery-review_FINAL.pdf
IOM Nigeria (2017). The Missing Steps Episode 1 (IOM Nigeria & SWISS Confederation), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZO4w_A-Qnk
Kenway, E. The truth about modern slavery; 2021; Pluto Press: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1dm8d41]
LeBaron, G; Phillips, N. States and the political economy of unfree labour. New Political Economy; 2019; 24,
Mai, N. (2010). The Psycho-Social Trajectories of Albanian and Romanian “Traffickers” London Metropolitan University. https://metranet.londonmet.ac.uk/fms/MRSite/Research/iset/Working%20Paper%20Series/WP17%20N%20Mai.pdf
May, T. (2018). UK steps up fight against human trafficking in West Africa, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-steps-up-fight-against-human-trafficking-in-west-africa
Mberu, BU; Ezeh, AC; Langatz-Chepngeno, G; Kimani, J; Oti, S; Beguy, D. Family ties and urban-rural linkages among older migrants in nairobi informal settlements. Population, Space and Place; 2013; 19, pp. 275-293. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/psp.1711]
NAPTIP (n.d). About us https://naptip.gov.ng/about-us/
NAPTIP (2022). NAPTIP, Development Partners and Stakeholders Re-Strategize to Tackle Human Trafficking as Boot Camp for Members of State Task Forces Kicks Off in Abuja, https://naptip.gov.ng/naptip-development-partners-and-stakeholders-re-strategize-to-tackle-human-trafficking-as-boot-camp-for-members-of-state-task-forces-kicks-off-in-abuja/.
NAPTIP (2022). Guidelines on National Referral Mechanism for Protection and Assistance to Trafficked Persons in Nigeria, Abuja: NAPTIP.
UNODC. (2022 September 6). NAPTIP, UNODC, IOM, OHCHR, expertise France, FIIAPP partner with States to combat human trafficking in Nigeria. https://www.unodc.org/conig/en/stories/naptip--unodc--iom--ohchr--expertise-france--fiiapp-partner-with-states-to-combat-human-trafficking-in-nigeria.html
NAPTIP (2022). Federal Government of Nigeria, US, UK, Others Hail NAPTIP Achievements as 2022 World Day Against Human Trafficking Activities Climax,https://naptip.gov.ng/federal-government-of-nigeria-us-uk-others-hail-naptip-achievements-as-2022-world-day-against-human-trafficking-activities-climax/
NAPTIP. (2022). NAPTIP DG orders commanders to go after child traffickers. https://naptip.gov.ng/naptip-dg-orders-commanders-to-go-after-child-traffickers/
NAPTIP (2024) More Trouble for Human Traffickers in Nigeria as the New Director General of NAPTIP, Promises Stringent Enforcement and Implementation of All Counter-trafficking Laws and Policies https://naptip.gov.ng/more-trouble-for-human-traffickers-in-nigeria-as-the-new-director-general-of-naptip-promises-stringent-enforcement-and-implementation-of-all-counter-trafficking-laws-and-policies/
NAPTIP (2024). NAPTIP Celebrates 2024 World Day Against TIP As Partners and Stakeholders Give Thump Up For The Agency’s Achievements, https://naptip.gov.ng/naptip-celebrates-2024-world-day-against-tip-as-partners-and-stakeholders-give-thump-up-for-the-agencys-achievements/
New, S. (2021), 'Modern Slavery and Supply Chain Transparency', in Thomas Y. Choi, and others (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Supply Chain Management (2021; online edn, Oxford Academic, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190066727.013.1.
Nwogu, VI. Anti-trafficking interventions in Nigeria and the principal-agent aid model. Anti-Trafficking Review; 2014; 3, pp. 41-63.
O’Connell Davidson, J. Modern Slavery: The margins of freedom; 2015; Palgrave Macmillan: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137297297]
Office, H. 2021 UK Annual Report on Modern Slavery; 2021; Home Office:
Okyere, S., & Olayiwola, P. (2022). Anti-trafficking and anti-smuggling campaigns in West Africa as new racialised migration deterrence efforts. In White Supremacy, Racism and the Coloniality of Anti-Trafficking (pp. 17–32). Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003162124-3
Olayiwola, AP. ‘Killing the tree by cutting the foliage instead of uprooting it?’Rethinking awareness campaigns as a response to trafficking in South-West Nigeria. Anti-Trafficking Review; 2019; 13, pp. 50-65. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14197/atr.201219134]
Olayiwola, P. Vulnerabilities, support systems and child domestic work in South-West Nigeria. Children’s Geographies; 2021; 19,
Olayiwola, P. 'They just have to adopt these conventions’: Anti-childtrafficking policies and politics in Nigeria. Journal of Human Trafficking; 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23322705.2022.2139587]
Parliament of Australia (2017) Hidden in Plain Sight, https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024102/toc_pdf/HiddeninPlainSight.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf (Accessed 10 September 2024
Pruitt, LJ. Closed due to ‘flooding’? UK media representations of refugees and migrants in 2015–2016 – creating a crisis of borders. British Journal of Politics and International Relations; 2019; 21,
Sanghera, J. (2005) ‘Unpacking the Trafficking Discourse’. In K. Kempadoo, J. Sanghera, & B. Pattanaik, (Eds.), Trafficking and prostitution reconsidered. New perspectives on migration, sex work, and human rights (pp. 46-67). Paradigm Publishers.
The Cable (2017). 35 Nigerians deported from UK, https://www.thecable.ng/35-nigerians-deported-uk/
The Economist (2014) Falling poverty and rising income inequality in Nigeria http://country.eiu.com/article.aspx?articleid=1432272327&Country=Nigeria&topic=Politics.
The Independent (2019). Nigerian women warned not to come to Britain in government campaign, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigeria-uk-modern-slavery-women-human-trafficking-campaign-not-for-sale-a8869736.html
TiP (Trafficking in Persons) Report (2024). 2024 Trafficking in Persons Report, Washington
Travis, A. (2013). ‘’Immigration bill: Theresa May defends plans to create 'hostile environment'.’’ The Guardian, October 10, 2013. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/10/immigration-bill-theresa-may-hostile-environment
UK Government (2018). Immigration Minister strengthens cooperation with Nigeria on modern slavery, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/immigration-minister-strengthens-cooperation-with-nigeria-on-modern-slavery
UNESCO (2006) ‘Human Trafficking in Nigeria:Root Causes and Recommendations’, Policy Paper Poverty Series n° 14.2, Paris: UNESCO.
UNODC (n.d.) UNODC Country Office Nigeria https://www.unodc.org/conig/en/stories/Pricelessgoodwill-ambassadors.html
UNODC (2012) Nigeria launches anti-human trafficking campaign, as two Goodwill Ambassadors are named https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2012/October/nigeria-launches-anti-human-trafficking-campaign-appoints-goodwill-ambassadors.html
Vanguard News (2023). Organ trafficking: Nigeria’s silent crisis https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/09/organ-trafficking-nigerias-silent-crisis/
Vermeulen, M., Tromp, R., Zandonini, G. and Amzat, A. (2019). A breakdown of Europe’s €1.5bn migration spending in Nigeria, The Correspondent. https://thecorrespondent.com/150/a-breakdown-of-europes-eur1-5bn-migration-spending-in-nigeria.
World Bank. Advancing Social Protection in a Dynamic Nigeria; 2019; World Bank Group:
© The Author(s) 2024. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.