Research on labor trafficking faces many methodological challenges, which make it difficult to provide reliable estimates of the problem. In this research, we applied respondent-driven sampling and unique access to migrant communities in San Diego County, California, to estimate the extent of trafficking violations in one of America’s largest Spanish-speaking immigrant destinations. We found that 30 percent of undocumented migrant laborers were victims of labor trafficking, 55 percent were victims of other labor abuses, and about half of these victimization experiences occurred within the past 12 months. The rate of trafficking violations varied markedly across business sectors that typically hire unauthorized migrant workers. Construction and janitorial services had the most reported trafficking violations and labor abuses. Findings in this study also suggest that the illegal status in the country is likely the most significant factor contributing to vulnerability to trafficking violations.
ArcuryThomas A.WeirMariaChenHaiyingSummersPhillipPelletierLori E.GalvánLeonardoBischoffWerner E.MirabelliMaria C.QuandtSara A.2012. Migrant farmworker housing regulation violations in North Carolina. American Journal of Industrial Medicine55:191–204.
2.
BernhardtAnnetteSpillerMichael W.TheodoreNik. 2013. Employers gone rogue: Explaining industry variation in violations of workplace laws. Industrial and Labor Relations Review66 (4): 808–32.
3.
ClawsonHeather J.LayneMarySmallKevonne. 2006. Estimating human trafficking into the United States: Development of a methodology. Fairfax, VA: Caliber.
4.
CurtisRicTerryKarenDankMeredithDombrowskiKirkKhanBilal. 2008. The commercial sexual exploitation of children in New York City (Vol. I)—The CSEC population in New York City: Size, characteristics, and needs. New York, NY: John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
5.
DaniulaityteRamintaFalckRusselLiLinnaNahhasRamzi W.CarlsonRobert G.2012. Respondent-driven sampling to recruit young adult non-medical users of pharmaceutical opioids: Problems and solutions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence121(1–2): 23–29.
6.
De CockMichaëlle. 2007. Directions for national and international data collection on forced labour. International Labour Organization Working Paper 30, Geneva, Switzerland.
7.
FarrellAmyMcDevittJackFahyStephanie. 2008. Understanding and improving law enforcement responses to human trafficking. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
8.
FarrellAmyMcDevittJackPerryNoamFahyStephanieChamberlainKateAdamsWilliamOwensColleenDankMeredithShivelyMichaelKlingRyanWheelerKristin. 2009. Review of existing estimates of victims of human trafficking in the United States and recommendations for improving research and measurement of human trafficking. Washington, DC: Humanity United.
9.
FortunyKarinaCappsRandyPasselJeffrey S.2007. The characteristics of unauthorized immigrants in California, Los Angeles County, and the United States. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
10.
FrostSimon D. W.BrouwerKimberly C.Firestone CruzMichelle A.RamosRebecaRamosMaria ElenaLozadaRemedios M.Magis-RodriguezCarlosStrathdeeSteffanie A.2006. Respondent-driven sampling of injection drug users in two U.S.-Mexico border cities: Recruitment dynamics and impact on estimates of HIV and syphilis prevalence. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine83 (7): i83–i97.
11.
GileKrista J.HandcockMark S.2010. Respondent-driven sampling: An assessment of current methodology. Sociological Methodology40 (1): 285–327.
12.
GoelSharadSalganikMatthew J.2009. Respondent-driven sampling as Markov chain Monte Carlo. Statistics in Medicine28:2202–29.
13.
GoździakElz.bieta M.BumpMicah N.2008. Data and research on human trafficking: Bibliography of research-based literature. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University.
14.
GoździakElz.bieta M.CollettElizabeth A.2005. Research on human trafficking in North America: A review of literature. International Migration43 (1/2): 99–128.
15.
HeckathornDouglas D.1997. Respondent-driven sampling: A new approach to the study of hidden populations. Social Problems44 (2): 174–99.
16.
HeckathornDouglas D.2002. Respondent-driven sampling II: Deriving valid population estimates from chain-referral sample of hidden populations. Social Problems49 (1): 11–34.
17.
HeckathornDouglas D.2007. Extensions of respondent-driven sampling: Analyzing continuous variables and controlling for differential recruitment. Sociological Methodology37 (1): 151–207.
18.
HeimerRobert. 2005. Critical issues and further questions about respondent-driven sampling: Comment on Ramirez-Valles, et al. (2005). AIDS & Behavior9 (4): 403–8.
19.
HillLauren E.JohnsonHans P.2011. Unauthorized immigrants in California estimates for counties. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
20.
HoeferMichaelRytinaNancyBakerBryan. 2012. Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States: January 2011. Washington, DC: Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security. Available from www.dhs.gov/ (accessed 25 June 2013).
21.
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center (HSTC). 2006. Fact sheet: Distinctions between human smuggling and human trafficking. Available from www.state.gov/m/ds/hstcenter/90434.htm (accessed 25 June 2013).
22.
International Labour Organization (ILO). 2005. A global alliance against forced labour. Geneva, Switzerland: ILO.
23.
International Labour Organization (ILO). 2006. Technical consultation on forced labour indicators, data collection and national estimates. Geneva: ILO.
24.
International Labour Organization (ILO). 2011. Hard to see, harder to count: Survey guidelines to estimate forced labour of adults and children. Geneva: ILO.
25.
International Organization for Migration (IOM). 2000. Migrant trafficking and human smuggling in Europe. Geneva: IOM.
26.
JohnstonLisa G.PrybylskiDimitriRaymondH. FisherMirzazadehAliManopaiboonChomnadMcFarlandWilli. 2013. Incorporating the service multiplier method in respondent-driven sampling surveys to estimate the size of hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Case studies from around the world. Sexually Transmitted Diseases40 (4): 304–10.
27.
KerwinDonald M.McCabeKristen. 2011. Labor standards enforcement and low-wage immigrants: Creating an effective enforcement system. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. Available from www.migrationpolicy.org/ (accessed 25 June 2013).
28.
LaczkoFrank. 2005. Introduction: Data and research on human trafficking. International Migration43 (1/2): 5–16.
29.
LaczkoFrankGoździakElz.bieta. 2005. Data and research on human trafficking: A global surbal survey. Geneva: IOM.
30.
LaczkoFrankGramegnaMarco A.2003. Developing better indicators of human trafficking. Brown Journal of World Affairs10 (1): 179–94.
31.
LanskyAmyAbdul-QuaderAbu S.CribbinMelissaHallTriciaFinlaysonTeresa J.GarfeinRichard S.LinLilian S.SullivanPatrick S.2007. Developing an HIV behavioral surveillance system for injecting drug users: The National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System. Public Health Reports122 (Suppl 1): 48–55.
32.
MalekinejadMohsenJohnstonLisa GrazinaKendallCarlReginaLigiaKerrFranco SansigoloRifkinMarina RavenRutherfordGeorge W.2008. Using respondent-driven sampling methodology for HIV biological and behavioral surveillance in international settings: A systematic review. AIDS and Behavior12:S105–S130.
33.
MarcusAnthonyHorningAmberCurtisRicThompsonEfram. 2014. Conflict and agency in pimps’ relations with underage trafficking victims. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, this volume.
PasselJeffrey S.CohnD’Vera. 2011. Unauthorized immigrant population: National and state trends, 2010. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Available from www.pewhispanic.org/ (access 25 June 2013).
36.
RobinsonWilliam T.RisserJan M. H.McGoyShanellBeckerAdam B.RehmanHafeezJeffersonMaryGriffinVivianWolvertonMarciaTortuStephanie. 2006. Recruiting injection drug users: A three-site comparison of results and experiences with respondent-driven and targeted sampling procedures. Journal of Urban Health83 (7): 29–38.
37.
SarmaMarla. 1981. Bonded labor in India: National survey on the incidence of bonded labor: Final report. New Delhi: Biblia Impex.
38.
SteinfattThomas M.BakerSimon. 2011. Measuring the extent of sex trafficking in Cambodia—2008. Bangkok, Thailand: United Nations Interagency Project on Human Trafficking.
39.
TyldumGuriBrunovskisAnette. 2005. Describing the unobserved: Methodological challenges in empirical studies on human trafficking. International Migration43 (1/2): 17–34.
40.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). 2009. Global report on trafficking in persons. Vienna, Austria: Policy Analysis and Research Branch, UNODC.
41.
United States Department of Justice (USDOJ). 2006. Assessment of U.S. government efforts to combat trafficking in persons in fiscal year 2005. Washington, DC: USDOJ. Available from www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports.html (accessed 25 June 2013).
42.
United States Department of Justice (USDOJ). 2007. Assessment of U.S. government efforts to combat trafficking in persons in fiscal year 2006. Washington, DC: USDOJ.
43.
United States Department of Labor (USDOL). 2001. 1999–2000 Report on low-wage initiatives. Washington, DC: Employment Standards Administration Wage and Hour Division, USDOL.
44.
United States Government Accountability Office. 2006. Human trafficking: Better data, strategy, and reporting needed to enhance U.S. antitrafficking efforts abroad. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.
45.
VolzErikHeckathornDouglas D.2008. Probability based estimation theory for respondent driven sampling. Journal of Official Statistics24 (1): 79–97.
46.
WeitzerRonald. 2005. Flawed theory and method in studies of prostitution. Violence Against Women11 (7): 934–49.
47.
WeitzerRonald. 2007. The social construction of sex trafficking: Ideology and institutionalization of a moral crusade. Politics & Society35 (3): 447–75.
48.
ZhangSheldon X.2012. Trafficking of migrant laborers in San Diego County: Looking for a hidden population. San Diego, CA: San Diego State University. Final Report submitted to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice for Grant No.: 2009-IJ-CX-0011. Available from www.ncjrs.gov.
