Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) involved in the contemporary anti-human trafficking (AHT) movement seek to inform AHT public policies in ways that reflect their frames of human trafficking. They also play a central role in executing the U.S. AHT approach. Little is known about how different NGOs frame human trafficking broadly, the process by which they influence policy, and their general insights on the AHT movement and the U.S. AHT approach. Comparing successful and negative cases, and the viewpoints of movement elites and nonelites provides the best assessment of a social movement, its framing dynamics and outcomes, and the process by which it meets its objectives.
This research examines: 1) how a diversity of NGOs frame human trafficking and the factors informing their frame construction; 2) the process by which NGOs achieved success, measured by access to institutionalized channels of policymaking and the reflection of their frames in AHT policies; and 3) NGOs’ views on the U.S. AHT approach and the successes of and obstacles faced by the AHT movement. I employ an instrumental, collective case study approach and utilize primary data collected through in-depth interviews with sixty-one NGO representatives located in ten U.S. metropolitan areas. This sample includes movement elites and nonelites that experienced varying levels of success in different policy settings throughout the U.S. Supplementary data was collected through in-depth interviews with eleven governmental representatives and participant observation at six AHT events.
Results demonstrate that numerous multifaceted frames are relevant to this movement and ideologies on gender, available resources, and political context largely influence NGOs’ frame construction. The process by which NGOs influenced AHT policies in ways that reflected their frames supports an integrative theoretical approach to social movements. Successful NGOs' ability to take advantage of available resources political opportunities enabled them to communicate their frames to important governmental actors. While governmental representatives report that successful NGOs conveyed compelling frames, the intersection of resources and political context fashioned the vehicle by which NGOs could accomplish this. NGO representatives also offer common perspectives on the successes of the AHT movement, including increased public awareness of human trafficking, greater collaboration between representatives of NGOs and government, government funding for AHT work, and services and benefits for victims of human trafficking. However, certain obstacles exist. Awareness is imperfect, collaborative work can be unproductive, funding for AHT work is restrictive, and victims face barriers to accessing services and benefits. Results further suggest that the U.S. AHT approach is primarily guided by a “law and order” frame in which prosecuting human traffickers is a key strategy for ending human trafficking. I conclude by discussing the policy implications of these results and avenues for future scholarship.