The concept of exploitation sits at the heart of efforts to define and deliver decent work. It is foundational to what institutions like the International Labour Organization do. And it occupies a central position within the global legal architecture around extreme forms of abuse like ‘trafficking’, ‘forced labour’ and ‘modern slavery’. Nearly all of the campaigns, interventions, laws, and policies which have been introduced to address these crimes in recent decades have exploitation at their core.
Yet exploitation is nowhere defined in international law. Even the Palermo Protocol, which establishes the internationally agreed upon definition of trafficking, deliberately avoids offering anything concrete. Some say this doesn’t matter, believing that ‘we’ll always know it when we see it’. Others regard this omission as positive. If we leave the content of exploitation open, they say, then legislators and activists can fill it with ever more examples of ‘unacceptable’ work – thereby advancing the cause of improving working conditions for us all.
These arguments have some merit. But a wealth of contemporary research and years of frontline engagement with vulnerable workers in the Global North and South suggest that this lack of definitional clarity contributes to all kinds of problems.
