Human trafficking: an examination of available services and support in Prince George, B.C.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human trafficking is an abhorrent crime that exists throughout the world, affecting communities of all sizes. Men, women, and children are treated as slaves and are forced into exploitive situations for both labour and sexual services. While the body of research on global human trafficking is growing, there are fewer studies that look at community-level care and support of victims, and even fewer that look at conditions in smaller urban centres where human trafficking is less prominent. The purpose of this interdisciplinary research is to address both these gaps by examining service provision for victims of trafficking in Prince George, British Columbia. I employ the conceptual lenses of intersectionality and heteronormativity to understand human trafficking victimization and the theory of social care to account for systems of care and support organized in response to this victimization. Using a case study approach, I conducted key-informant interviews with service providers in Prince George and Vancouver in order to understand the nature of service coordination and how service delivery differs in a small urban centre compared to a gateway metropolitan centre where human trafficking is more prevalent. My findings indicate that service providers' understandings of human trafficking differ, and that resource access and institutional conditions create barriers for victim identification and service coordination. Finally, I offer recommendations for policy and practice intended to enhance the capacity of local care and support networks to identify and offer help to victims. --Leaf ii.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".