Skip to content

Unravelling the 2016 Global Slavery Index. Part two

The Global Slavery Index sets out to determine slavery prevalence in every country and to assess the quality of government responses. What lies behind apparent complicity of silence that surrounds the Index? Part two. Part one.

Published:
Photo 1_slave-ship_joseph mallord william turner.jpg
Photo 1_slave-ship_joseph mallord william turner.jpg

Slave ship, J.M.W.Turner

The Global Slavery Index emerged out of a worldwide social and political movement that seeks to expose and eliminate the exploitation of human beings for private profit. While the Index’s efforts to quantify the problem of modern slavery are laudable, this should not preclude careful scrutiny of the methodology and how that is applied. This article, the second in a two-part series, analyses two of the Index’s key measurements: prevalence (how many slaves are present in each country), and the quality of government responses. It then turns attention to the apparent reluctance to critically engage with the Index on the part of those who are well placed to identify its technical limitations and guide improvements. What is behind this reticence? And does it even matter? Is there perhaps some value to the argument that it is unfair and counterproductive to criticise those who are acting in good faith, who are genuinely seeking to do good and useful work to end human exploitation?

Assessing country-level prevalence