Slavery in The 21st Century

Controversy and Criticism
Much of the criticism of the Global Slavery Index relates to the methodology employed
to produce prevalence estimates presented in the 2016 Global Slavery Index and earlier
editions. The 2016 Global Slavery Index prevalence estimates were based on results of
surveys in 25 countries through the Gallup World Poll, the results of which were
extrapolated to countries with an equivalent risk profile. Measurements of forced sexual
exploitation and children in modern slavery were identified as critical data gaps to
address in future estimations. The 2018 Global Slavery Index saw substantial
methodological improvements, including a significant increase in the number of survey
data points, and substantial changes to the approach to estimating prevalence of
modern slavery in countries without survey data.
According to researchers Andrew Guth, Robyn Anderson, Kasey Kinnard and Hang
Tran, they find the 2014 Global Slavery Index's methods reveal weaknesses and they
raise questions about its replicability and validity. They have stated that the publicity
given to the Index is leading to the use of its data can lead to inaccurate policy
formulation and methods used in the Index are inadequate.
In the 2014 Global Slavery Index, some countries, for which no data were available,
were given the same rate as countries that were judged to be similar. For example,
prevalence rates for Britain were applied to Ireland and Iceland, and those for America
to several western European nations, including Germany. This form of extrapolation has
attracted some criticism.
Scholar Anne Gallagher said the 2014 Global Slavery Index is based on flawed data.
Gallagher writes "the basic unit of measurement of “modern slavery” is flawed: the
definition is self-created and, bizarrely, changes from one year to the next."
Alexis A. Aronowitz called the Index to be "terribly flawed" and points out that:
"The index is based on mix of sources: population surveys in a few countries; fuzzy
estimates by governmental agencies or NGOs; stories in the media; and local experts.
For nations lacking any such source, the index creators engage in an "extrapolation"
exercise -- they simply apply an estimate from one nation to "similar" nations lacking
such estimates."
Global Slavery Index 2014
Rank Country Region Slaver
y
policy
1
Sub-
Mauritania Saharan
Africa
Global Slavery Index 2014 Table
Huma
n
rights
Vulnerability Data
Developmen
t
State
stabilit
y
Discriminatio
n
Mea
n
Pop. in
slavery
%
Prevalence Data
Pop. in
slavery n
Population
92.9 75.3 76.8 62.7 67.6 72.2 4.0000 155,600 3,889,880
Page 117 of 161