Skip to main content
Social Metrics

Modern Slavery and Forced Labor in ESG Investing

Pomegra Learn

How Do Investors Assess Modern Slavery and Forced Labor Risk?

Modern slavery — encompassing forced labor, debt bondage, human trafficking, and forms of servitude — affects an estimated 49.6 million people globally (ILO, Walk Free Foundation, IOM Global Estimates, 2022). Of these, 27.6 million are in forced labor; 22 million in forced marriage. Business-related forced labor — the category most directly relevant to investment portfolios — accounts for approximately 17.3 million victims, concentrated in manufacturing, agriculture, construction, and domestic work.

For investors, modern slavery represents both a fundamental ethical concern and a financial risk. Companies with forced labor in their supply chains face import bans, regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and civil liability under expanding mandatory due diligence laws. Identifying and managing these risks requires systematic assessment of supply chain exposure, corporate policies, and verification quality.

Modern slavery is an umbrella term covering forced labor (work performed under threat or coercion), debt bondage (work to repay inflated or fraudulently imposed debts), human trafficking (recruitment through force or deception), and forms of severe exploitation that deny fundamental freedoms.

Key Takeaways​

  • The ILO identifies 11 indicators of forced labor: abuse of vulnerability, deception, restriction of movement, isolation, physical or sexual violence, intimidation and threats, retention of identity documents, withholding of wages, debt bondage, abusive working and living conditions, and excessive overtime.
  • UK Modern Slavery Act (2015), Australian Modern Slavery Act (2018), and California Transparency in Supply Chains Act (2010) require disclosure; the EU Forced Labour Regulation (in force 2027) will ban products made with forced labor from the EU single market.
  • Recruitment fee payment by workers — rather than employers — is a primary forced labor risk indicator; the ILO Dhaka Principles state that workers should never pay recruitment fees.
  • UFLPA (2022) imposes rebuttable presumption that all goods from Xinjiang are produced with forced labor, banning US import.
  • Investor engagement should focus on: zero-tolerance policies, recruitment fee reimbursement programs, migrant worker protection, and meaningful grievance mechanisms.

The ILO Forced Labor Indicators​

The ILO framework identifies eleven operational indicators that signal forced labor when present in combination. For supply chain auditors and investors assessing supply chain risk, these indicators serve as the diagnostic framework:

  1. Abuse of vulnerability — Targeting workers who are desperate, undocumented, or otherwise vulnerable
  2. Deception — Misrepresenting job type, working conditions, location, or pay
  3. Restriction of movement — Preventing workers from leaving the workplace or accommodations
  4. Isolation — Cutting workers off from their communities and support networks
  5. Physical or sexual violence — Using or threatening violence to enforce compliance
  6. Intimidation and threats — Threats of violence, arrest, or harm to family members
  7. Retention of identity documents — Confiscating passports, visas, or identity cards
  8. Withholding of wages — Failing to pay agreed wages as a form of control
  9. Debt bondage — Inflating recruitment or transportation debts to create financial dependency
  10. Abusive working and living conditions — Excessive hours, unsafe conditions, degrading treatment
  11. Excessive overtime — Mandatory unpaid overtime enforced through coercion

For ESG investors, audit programs that specifically test for these eleven indicators — rather than just minimum wage and working hours compliance — provide meaningfully better coverage of forced labor risk.

Recruitment Fee Debt Bondage: A Primary Risk Channel​

Migrant workers often pay fees to labor recruiters to secure employment in another country. When these fees are excessive — commonly $3,000–$15,000 for Southeast Asian workers employed in Gulf states — and financed through debt, the debt can take years to repay on the wages available. During this repayment period, workers are effectively in debt bondage: unable to leave the job without abandoning wages needed to service the debt, and vulnerable to employer exploitation.

The ILO Dhaka Principles (2012) and the Employer Pays Principle, now adopted by major brands, state clearly that workers should never pay recruitment fees: employers should absorb these costs or reimburse workers who have paid them. The Consumer Goods Forum's Priority Industry Principle #2 commits signatories to the Employer Pays Principle.

For ESG investors assessing companies with significant migrant worker supply chains — electronics manufacturing in Malaysia and Thailand, construction in the Gulf, food processing across Southeast Asia — the presence or absence of recruitment fee policies and reimbursement programs is a primary forced labor risk indicator.

Mandatory Disclosure Frameworks​

UK Modern Slavery Act (2015)​

Commercial organizations with global annual turnover of £36 million or more that supply goods or services in the UK must publish an annual Modern Slavery Act statement covering:

  • Organizational structure and supply chains
  • Policies in relation to slavery and human trafficking
  • Due diligence processes
  • Parts of the business and supply chains where there is risk of slavery or human trafficking
  • Effectiveness in ensuring slavery is not taking place (measured by KPIs)
  • Training available to staff

Statements must be approved by the board and signed by a director. Failure to publish a compliant statement is a breach of the Act. The Home Office maintains a Modern Slavery Statement Registry where statements are submitted.

Statement quality varies enormously: a 2021 review by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre found that fewer than half of statements met all six required topics, and many contained boilerplate language without evidence of genuine due diligence. For investors, statement quality is itself a due diligence quality signal.

Australian Modern Slavery Act (2018)​

Australian entities with $100 million or more in annual consolidated revenue must submit annual Modern Slavery Statements covering the same six areas as the UK Act, submitted to the government portal at modernslaveryregister.gov.au.

EU Forced Labour Regulation​

The EU Forced Labour Regulation, adopted in November 2024 and entering into force in 2027, bans products made with forced labor from the EU single market — regardless of origin. Unlike the UK and Australian Acts, which require disclosure, the EU regulation prohibits trade. Competent authorities can investigate and impose withdrawal and destruction orders on non-compliant products. This will have a significantly larger practical impact than disclosure requirements alone.

US UFLPA: Sector-Specific Impact​

The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act creates a rebuttable presumption that all goods produced in whole or in part in Xinjiang, or by entities on the UFLPA Entity List, are made with forced labor. The presumption is rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence — an extremely high legal standard.

UFLPA has been applied primarily to:

  • Solar panels: Polysilicon from Xinjiang supplies approximately 35–40% of global solar panel production; UFLPA enforcement has disrupted US solar project timelines and increased supply chain diversification pressure.
  • Apparel: Cotton from Xinjiang represents approximately 20% of global cotton supply; fashion companies have faced detentions.
  • Electronics: Some electronics components trace to Xinjiang-based materials or manufacturers.
  • Tomatoes and other agricultural products: Xinjiang produces significant agricultural volumes.

For investors in these sectors, supply chain mapping to confirm the absence of Xinjiang materials is a financial due diligence requirement as well as an ESG one.

ESG Engagement Strategies​

For investors engaging companies on modern slavery risk, high-priority asks include:

  1. Adopt zero-tolerance policy for forced labor throughout the supply chain with credible enforcement mechanisms
  2. Implement the Employer Pays Principle for all recruited workers, including reimbursement programs for workers who paid fees before policy adoption
  3. Publish supplier lists to Tier 2+ for high-risk commodity categories
  4. Implement ILO 11-indicator audit protocols in high-risk geographies
  5. Establish accessible grievance mechanisms for supply chain workers, including anonymous reporting channels in local languages
  6. Report on KPIs — not just policy statements — in Modern Slavery Act statements
  7. Engage with multi-stakeholder initiatives: Responsible Business Alliance (electronics), AIM-Progress (FMCG), Seafood Task Force, Fair Recruitment Initiative

Common Mistakes​

Accepting policy statements without evidence of implementation. Modern slavery policies are near-universal among large listed companies; the differentiator is whether policies are implemented with resources, training, and genuine accountability.

Assuming social audits detect forced labor. Standard SMETA and SA8000 audits focus on legal wage and hours compliance, not on the ILO 11 indicators. Auditors are not trained investigative interviewers; workers in forced labor situations are not freely disclosing to auditors in front of supervisors. Specialized forced labor audit protocols, worker-driven monitoring, and anonymous hotlines are necessary supplements.

Treating UFLPA compliance as a voluntary ESG choice. UFLPA enforcement is mandatory US law with immediate import consequences. For companies with Xinjiang supply chain exposure, UFLPA compliance is a financial and legal obligation, not an optional ESG enhancement.

Frequently Asked Questions​

What is the Responsible Sourcing Tool? The US State Department's Responsible Sourcing Tool (RST) is a free online resource that maps known forced labor risks in global supply chains by commodity and country, provides guidance on mitigation, and links to relevant laws and standards. It covers over 25 commodities and is updated periodically with new forced labor intelligence.

How do investors assess modern slavery risk in financial services supply chains? Financial services companies have relatively lower modern slavery risk in their own operations but face exposure through IT hardware procurement (servers, devices), facilities management (cleaning, security, catering), and marketing supply chains. The Modern Slavery Act requires disclosure for all commercial organizations; the due diligence process should address these indirect supply chains even if they are lower risk than agricultural or manufacturing supply chains.

Summary​

Modern slavery affects over 17 million people in forced labor in business supply chains, concentrated in manufacturing, agriculture, construction, and domestic work. For investors, the primary risk channels are UFLPA import disruption (Xinjiang exposure), CSDDD and EU Forced Labour Regulation civil liability, and reputational damage from documented supply chain violations. The most actionable assessment framework uses the ILO 11 forced labor indicators to evaluate audit program quality, with specific focus on recruitment fee policies (Employer Pays Principle) and migrant worker protection in high-risk geographies. Modern Slavery Act statement quality is a governance signal; the transition from disclosure requirements to trade prohibition under the EU Forced Labour Regulation will significantly intensify supply chain due diligence requirements from 2027.

→ Health and Safety Standards