Abstract
ObjectivesOur objectives were (1) to systematically map the contours of the European evidence base on labour trafficking, identifying its key characteristics, coverage, gaps, strengths and weaknesses and (2) to synthesise key scientific research.MethodsWe took a two-phase approach: a systematic map followed by a detailed synthesis of key scientific research evidence. Our search strategy included 15 databases, hand searches of additional journals, backwards searches, snowball searches and expert recommendations. We identified and screened 6106 records, mapped 152 and synthesised eight.ResultsOverall, the literature was limited and fragmented. Reports produced by official agencies dominated; academic authorship and peer-reviewed outputs were comparatively rare. Few publications met minimum scientific standards. Qualitative designs outweighed quantitative ones. Publications typically described trafficking’s problem profile and/or discussed interventions; they rarely assessed trafficking’s impacts or evaluated interventions. Even among the key scientific research, the quality of evidence was variable and often low. Particular weaknesses included poor methods reporting, unclear or imprecise results and conclusions not properly grounded in the data. The synthesised studies were all exploratory, also sharing other design features. Common themes identified included: poor treatment of victims; diversity of sectors affected and commonalities among victims; inadequacies of current responses; and barriers to interventions.ConclusionsThere is a lack of high-quality studies into European labour trafficking. Methodological opacity, insufficient rigour and publication in non-indexed locations impede the identification, assessment and synthesis of evidence. Adherence to higher reporting standards would further the field’s development and particular research gaps should be addressed.
Highlights
There is a lack of high-quality studies into European labour trafficking
In order to be of value to our synthesis, it was vital that we could extract from the publications empirical evidence specific to our research focus (European labour trafficking) rather than aggregate data combining this issue with other forms of trafficking and/or other geographies
We present results from the systematic map and synthesis in turn
Summary
Ethical approval was not required for this project. We registered our review prospectively in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Cockbain et al 2014), our eventual review was far more comprehensive than what we had initially planned and registered. We conducted manual searches of six journals, a selection chosen because we knew them to contain trafficking research but they were not (fully) indexed in the above databases. They were: Brown Journal of World Affairs; Criminology and Public Policy; Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice; Health and Human Rights; International Health; and Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. We designed our search terms to include, as an alternative to the generic category ‘labour’, some specific industries commonly associated with labour trafficking in the academic and grey literature (Andrees and Linden 2005; Home Office 2007, 2012; National Crime Agency 2014), policy discourse and media debate. The first criterion was built into the searches and the second was applicable to full text screening only, whereas all the rest were used for both title and abstract and full text screening
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
