Legitimacy and evasion: exploring organisational subversions of modern slavery principles through a neo-institutional lens

这项研究的理由随着对劳工滥用问题的日益重视，特别是立法和监管机构以及民间社会的日益重视，已经形成了一个可接受的公司行为框架。除了站在纯粹的伦理立场上，人们几乎不理解人们对英国《现代奴隶法》等新立法的坚定反应，或者为什么一些组织继续违抗规范。这最终使被剥削者面临更大的风险，因为寻求限制滥用的法律和其他结构受到缺乏经验发现的限制。对导致劳动力剥削的管理和组织因素缺乏了解，意味着公司本身更难确保子公司、合作伙伴和供应商遵守标准，从而给利益相关者带来风险。这项研究试图建立在对这些因素的认识的基础上，这些因素可以赋予决策者权力。这三个国家正处于不同的制度崛起阶段。英国主导了有关现代奴隶制的立法。近年来，阿联酋对这一问题的关注越来越多；俄罗斯是这三个国家中最不成熟的，尽管中国移民和朝鲜强迫劳动的事件以及该国国家媒体对非政府组织报道的报道最近增加了这个问题的知名度。关键研究问题英国、俄罗斯和阿拉伯联合酋长国(阿联酋)是如何解决围绕现代奴隶制的制度压力的？这项研究旨在对与劳工剥削有关的组织行为有新的理解，并比较各国的制度环境和对这些压力的坚定反应。为此，这项研究将回答以下问题：1)与英国和发表现代奴隶制声明的公司的发源国相关的制度因素是什么？2)这些因素如何影响企业对现代奴隶制压力的反应？3)各国的企业行为与制度因素之间可以进行什么比较，这些因素是如何变化的？假设目前还没有发展，尽管Soundarajan，Spence和Rees(2018)关于制度“规避”的紧急工作提供了一个有用的研究参考点。研究方法将采用混合方法。对英国迄今公布的大约10,000份现代奴隶制声明进行量化分析，将寻求揭示遵守制度规范的程度，并探索不同遵守程度对原籍国的影响。然后，对分别在三个国家(英国、阿联酋和俄罗斯)注册的公司的约20名企业经理进行定性阶段的访谈，以更广泛地了解特定背景下不同形式的逃税。

Rationale for the researchThe increasing attention being paid to issues of labour abuse, particularly from legislative and regulatory bodies and civil society, has developed a framework of acceptable corporate behaviours. Beyond taking a purely ethical standpoint, there is little understanding of firm reactions to, for example, new legislation such as the UK Modern Slavery Act, or why some organisations continue to defy norms. This ultimately puts the exploited in greater risk, since legal and other structures which seek to limit abuses are constrained by lack of empirical findings. A lack of understanding of management and organisational factors leading to labour exploitation means that firms themselves are less able to ensure that subsidiaries, partners, and suppliers are upholding standards, creating risks to stakeholders. This research seeks to build on the emerging recognition of these factors which can empower decision makers.The three countries are at varying stages of institutional emergence. The UK has led legislation and on modern slavery. UAE has seen growing attention paid to the issue in recent years; Russia is the least mature of the three countries, although incidences of Chinese migrant and North Korean forced labour and coverage of NGO reports in the country's national media have recently increased the issue's profile.Key research questionsHow are institutional pressures around modern slavery addressed in the UK, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)?The research aims to develop new understanding of organisational behaviours with regard to labour exploitation, and to compare both the institutional environments and firm reactions to them across the countries. To that end, the research will answer the following questions:1) What are the institutional factors relevant to the UK and the origin country of companies producing modern slavery statements?2) How do these factors influence firm responses to modern slavery pressures?3) What comparisons can be drawn between firm behaviours to institutional factors across countries, and how are these changing?HypothesesNone developed as yet, though the emergent work on institutional "evasion" by Soundararajan, Spence, and Rees (2018) provides a useful study point of reference.Research methods to be usedThe research will adopt a mixed methods approach. A quantitative analysis of approximately 10,000 modern slavery statements published to date in the UK will seek to reveal the degree of compliance with institutional norms and explore the country of origin effects of different levels of compliance. A qualitative phase of interviews with approximately 20 business managers from companies domiciled in each of three countries (UK, UAE and Russia) will then obtain a broader understanding of differing forms of evasion in particular contexts.