A focus on trafficking, forced and child labor in the agricultural and informal sector is needed. With limited number of inspectors, these sectors are often disregarded. While labor inspectors and other government and police agents are well positioned to identify trafficking, with many inspections being complaint driven, victims without access to call or submit any form of complaint means their situations will largely be overlooked or ignored. However, there are specific techniques that can be applied to identify high risk practices used by business owners (even the smallest and in agriculture) that can zero in on risk areas involving recruitment, remuneration, health and safety, and social dialogue. Without applying a specialized inspection process, the inspector will be more challenged to find violations during a typical site visit, especially if it is an agricultural or other small or informal business operations. Further, any form of advance notice that an inspection or review will occur further erodes the potential for identification of trafficking, forced and child labor violations especially if the reliance is on visual evidence. Without a focus on economic units of business that are small and informal in their operations, it will be impossible to achieve strides in child and forced labor and trafficking reduction, especially in agriculture.
Many agricultural and small and informal economic units of business do not have formal HR systems, so common practices mean there will be little documentation even though the processes of hiring, payroll, work task assignments, supervision, etc., are performed. Using an approach to identify internal risks can help to clarify for the business/operator where certain processes being used increases their risk of violations and enable a better understanding of how to change those practices while still being able to operate their business cost effectively. This is especially true when migrant or temporary / seasonal workers are involved. The internal risks are within the business owner's control. These should be addressed separately from the external risks that are largely outside the business owners control but requires engaging the business owner to be involved in helping to support actions to address the external risks for the geographic area in which the business operates. If development interventions are focused in the receiving areas, this can have the unintended effect of actually contributing to incidences of trafficking, forced and child labor.
If a review uncovers internal and/or external risks of trafficking and forced labor, to adequately explore the incidence of trafficking, forced and child labor and understand and address the risk, we recommend that additional off-site investigations not only in the receiving areas but in the sending areas be performed. If prevention projects are being implemented, it should include interventions that address the push factors in sending areas while simultaneously implementing actions that address the pull factors in receiving areas. In the sending areas, the approach should be to curtail the movement of persons outside their homebase and make their homebase more attractive for them to remain. This would include development interventions that promote education, economic development, job skills training, health, housing, etc., all of the push factors that encourage migration for employment and high risk of trafficking. In the receiving areas, a focus that includes repatriation and education and technical assistance with employers to use alternative practices that reduce their internal risks for trafficking and other worker and human rights violations within the business processes they use is likewise needed. This would include a focus on the businesses practices related to recruitment, remuneration, health and safety, and social dialogue.