English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The focus of this paper is on government anti-trafficking policies and funding allocations in two case-study countries, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (UK). The paper discusses specific ways, or ‘vectors’, in which human trafficking has been discursively constructed by national policies and the solutions that have been offered to counteract it. It relies on publicly available information and information obtained via Freedom of Information requests from public authorities in these countries to explore the extent to which anti-trafficking funding allocated by national governments supports or unsettles such representations. A broader definition of human trafficking has been encoded into anti-trafficking policies in Ukraine, implicating migratory pressures and violation of irregular migrants’ human rights as the root causes of trafficking. However, the ability of the government to act upon this definition is limited by the ongoing socio-economic and political crises in Ukraine. This is in comparison to the politicised construction of trafficking by the UK government as a threat from international organised crime and ‘illegal’ immigration. The paper concludes that governments in both countries put their anti-trafficking money where ‘their mouths are’: crime, immigration and victim care in the UK, and awareness raising, victim care and training of ‘frontline professionals’ in Ukraine. Dandonos el "Mayor Rendimiento al Menor Coste" (o No): Financiacion nacional contra la Trata en Ucrania y Reino Unido Resumen Este articulo se centra en la politicas gubernamentales contra la trata y la asignacion financiera en dos paises a modo de estudio de caso, Ucrania y Reino Unido. En concreto se discuten las vias especificas, o "vectores", que en el ambito de las politicas nacionales se han ido formulando para afrontar el problema de la trata de seres humanos, asi como las soluciones que se han ido proponiendo para neutralizarlo. Para ello se toma la informacion publica disponible y aquella obtenida a traves de solicitudes a los Servicios de Informacion Publica en estos paises, para determinar si el alcance de las lineas de financiacion de los gobiernos contribuyen a apoyar o perjudicar sus propias conceptualizaciones del problema. Una definicion mas amplia de la trata de personas se ha introducido en Ucrania, que identifica como las causas fundamentales de la trata las presiones migratorias y las violaciones de los derechos humanos de migrantes irregulares. Sin embargo, la capacidad de actuacion del gobierno en esta linea se ve limitada por la continua crisis socio-economica y politica que afronta el pais. Por su parte, el gobierno de Reino Unido realiza una construccion politica de la trata de personas como una amenaza al crimen organizado y a la inmigracion "ilegal". El articulo concluye que los gobiernos de ambos paises sustentan economicamente las acciones que mas les interesan: crimen, inmigracion y apoyo a las victimas en Reino Unido, y campanas de sensibilizacion, apoyo a las victimas y entrenamiento de los "profesionales en primera linea" en Ucrania.

Giving us the ‘Biggest Bang for the Buck’ (or Not): Anti-trafficking government funding in Ukraine and the United Kingdom