Introduction

Also referred to as neo or contemporary slavery, modern slavery in general is institutional oppression that endures in present-day society. Often out of sight or obscured like a normal job, modern or neo-slavery entails exploitation of others that is severe for purposes of personal or profitable gain (Sogani, 2019; Antislavery, n.d.). As such, in present-day society, it is estimated that 40.3 persons, which includes both adults and children are trapped in slavery as they are controlled through violence or threats of violence (Walk Free, 2018). Most of the victims have fallen into this trap in their attempt to flee insecurity or poverty to either improve their life circumstances and/or support their families.

What is more, from the 40.3 victims of modern slavery, 71 percent of them were women and children and 9.2 million were from Africa making it the continent with the highest prevalence for modern slavery (Rozpedowski, 2020). In addition, it is key to point out that exploitation is manifested in multiple forms, namely, adult and child trafficking, involuntary labor, bondage through debt, descent-based slavery, and forced and premature marriages.

However, all victims are vulnerable to be exploited and trapped in slavery due to being predisposed to poverty, exclusion, and conflict, which are significantly prevalent in Africa compared to other continents (Antislavery, n.d.).

A similar trend is evidenced in Africa’s relations with other continents. This can be evidenced by the mineral mining industry. That is, while Africa has an inordinate amount of minerals, gold, cobalt, palladium, and platinum, these minerals among other natural resources and metallic deposits have contributed to Africa becoming the contemporary epicenter of slavery (Rozpedowski, 2020). Specifically, Africa’s vulnerability due to poor regulation and state corruption coupled up with enticing foreign interests fueled by the need to support and advance society digitization has contributed a rise of conflict minerals, which is a key contributing factor to modern slavery. That is, conflict minerals also referred to as 3TGs (Tin, Tungsten, Tantalum, Gold) are commonly extracted from conflict zones, and being under the control of outside actors, rebel groups or armies contributes to the proliferation of violence and exploitation in these regions with the main one being eastern Congo (European Commission, 2021). These minerals are important as they are important in the manufacture of numerous devices which include computers, medical devices, tablets, and smartphones.

This has led to the rise of the sentiment that Africa is faced with a resource curse which alludes to the fact that these resources have an innate potential to enhance the economies of the countries and the continent at large. However, they only benefit the groups involved in armed conflict whereby, slave labor is used to fuel the fighting and in mining operations which further hinders community members from building better lives. On the other hand, since poor institutions and regulations play a compounding role, Africa can also be termed to be institution- cursed as its local and regional institutions do not effectively safeguard residents and the region from exploitation and the descent into anarchy that collectively create or enable an environment that condones modern slavery.

Conflict minerals are a key contributor to modern slavery vulnerability for both the inhabitants of a conflict zone and those who attempt to leave to enhance their life circumstances. However, the conflict situation is a product of institutional failure both in the African countries/region and the developed nations which points to regulatory and legislative gaps, multinational tech companies’ global supply chain for these minerals, and the capitalist system of production. Hence, all of these will be discussed to outline the relationship between conflict minerals and modern slavery as well as probable solutions to ensure the countries with these mineral deposits can use them to ensure prosperity for their people, the country, and the continent at large.

Artisanal mines and conflict

Conflict minerals are mainly synonymous with the mid- African region, particularly in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). However, there are several other countries in Africa with mineral and metal deposits, for instance, emeralds in Zambia, rubies in Mozambique, diamonds in Sierra Leone, and Liberia, among others (Rozpedowski, 2020). Nevertheless, as aforementioned, while these minerals have an innate capacity to enhance the prosperity of a country and its people, this is mostly not the case as they are mainly sold to finance the activity of insurgent groups who rely on slave labor to extract them. For instance, armed groups in conjunction with some individuals from the Congolese national army have capitalized on the 3TGs to finance the widespread war on eastern Congo for several decades (Global Witness, 2015; Free the Slaves, 2011). Consequently, Verpoorten et al. (2019) detail that how these minerals are extracted is what makes difference on whether they promote or deter conflict.

Specifically, artisanal mines promote conflict while industrial mines deter conflict. This difference is due to the mode of extraction and who controls the mine whereby, for artisanal mines, the extraction of minerals is done manually compared to in industrial mines whereby the extraction process is mechanized. On the one hand, industrial mines are owned and run by large, multinational, or transnational companies. On the other hand, artisanal mines are owned and controlled by local elites.

Concerning the employed labor, artisanal mines will usually attract approximately 20 million low-skilled positions compared to industrial mines that have very few jobs. The price of minerals is also a key conflict trigger whereby, when the prices increase, the battle between rival armed groups over the mines for artisanal mines when compared to industrial mines. This is also outlined to have a ripple effect on society such as increased attacks against civilians and looting around areas near the artisanal mines (Vircoulon, 2011). Focusing on eastern Congo which embodies the problem due to the prevalent high rebel activity and conflict, as well as having mineral deposits for Gold and the 3Ts, it is estimated to have approximately 382,000 artisanal miners spread across 2700 artisanal mines (Verpoorten et al., 2019). The result is that the central government is unable to oversee these mines and their activities. Also, while it is proposed that artisanal mining should be done in explicitly demarcated zones, only 1 percent of them operate this way with 61 percent of them operating on industrial concessions. What is more, these minerals are easily smuggled out of the country with proceeds only going to the armed groups who run these mines (Verpoorten, Stoop & Windt, 2019).

However, as outlined by Gibb (2016), while Eastern Congo is synonymous with conflict minerals because of its 3TGs deposits, it is not the only country. For instance, the Central African Republic eastern rivers have diamonds and gold, which has attracted independent artisanal miners, but they have to pay for a license to the violent armed sets who have taken charge of these areas who are also the main beneficiaries of the mining activities. A similar trend is evidenced in diamond mines in Zimbabwe whereby, the existence of armed groups has been furthered by the police as well as the security forces who loot diamond grounds to acquire extra income. Also, this accords the mines and the groups that run them freedom from government oversight. The undiscerning and ready market for these minerals makes it easy to mix them into genuine supply chains because of the inherent weaknesses wrought by the culture of secrecy that defines the supply chains (Gibb, 2016).

At this point, it is evident that Africa is not necessarily resource-cursed. Instead, it is the institutional curse that serves as an antecedent for the prevalent resource curse. That is, a state of conflict is fueled by ongoing competition over the lucrative mines with income from them serving as a key incentive for warring parties (Andersson, 2016). Also, some elements of these nations’ security forces such as the police and the army taking partisan sides fuel the conflict further by granting it some degree of legitimacy whilst protecting the activities of these armed groups from government oversight. In line with this, artisanal mines are particularly vulnerable to being run over by armed groups resulting in persistent conflict as different groups attempt to take control of the mine due to its lucrativeness. On the other hand, those who control the mine will attack nearby residents forcing most of them into some form of servitude or exploitation, and displacing others. Hence, artisanal mines as structured do have some degree of a vicious cycle with conflict since they share a self-reinforcing relationship. That is, artisanal mines thrive on conflict since it is the only way that armed groups can retain control of the mine and smuggle the minerals and metals overseas. On the other hand, since these armed groups have little to no human capital to carry out mining activities, they will resort to systems of structural servitude to lock nearby residents in forced labor, including children. This is achieved through threats of violence or perpetrating attacks on civilians. Hence, the existence of artisanal mines predicates and perpetuates a state of violence.

Role of global supply chains

Generating approximately US$150 billion in illegal profits yearly, slavery exists hidden in the international value chains run by powerful transnational firms. That is, in addition to these global value chains linking suppliers, labor contractors, and global retailers across numerous industries, countries, and institutions, the bottom-line justifiability of the utilization of slave labor and conditions in addition to the difficulty of organizing and governing these value chains causes the thriving of modern slavery (Landman & Silverman, 2019; Stringer & Michailova, 2018; Skelton, 2020; Gold et al., 2015; Griffin et al., 2014). What is more, the extensive subcontracting that characterizes the activities of multinational corporations contributes to their failure in effectively monitoring their supply chains.

When this is considered against the role of the global value chains in the relationship between conflict minerals and modern slavery, Elgg (2017) asserts that while the global electronics industry is among the largest industrial sectors globally, it is the largest revenue- generating in the goods-producing sector. However, this impressive performance is at the expense of people who are essential in the electronics supply chains. That is, with labor-intensive sectors, low-skilled and low-wage jobs being considered disproportionately at risk of forced labor, manufacturing and extraction of raw materials tasks in the global electronics industry fit this risk profile since exploiters will seek to profit from vulnerabilities (Elgg, 2017; Christ et al., 2020). Specifically, DRC and Malaysia are uniquely positioned due to the raw material abundance and of electronics manufacturing factories of these countries respectively. What is more, Hermes (2017) asserts that while modern slavery concerns have been prevalent since the global electronics industry have continually relied on slave labor in the extraction of raw materials especially in DRC, the world’s largest consumer brands have continued to buy cobalt in these circumstances because of the lack of traceability throughout the value chain as well as the involvement of dodgy players in the supply chain (Hermes, 2017). That is, the use and reliance of subcontractors throughout the supply chain exacerbate the traceability concern while opening up the supply chain to unscrupulous third parties. Hence, it is difficult for multinational companies to determine whether the minerals sourced are legitimate or are sourced from conflict zones and artisanal mines.

However, it is important to note that forced labor is not the only form of exploitation that the global supply chains support. That is, according to the International Labor Organization, it is estimated that more than a million young children illegally work in quarries. For instance, in Burkina Fason and Niger, children under the age of 15 make up approximately 30 to 50 percent of the labor found in the gold mines. Similarly, a study conducted in 2015 estimated that more than 20 percent of the workers in gold mines were children. Moreover, children were also exploited in gold mines located in the Western, Central, and Ashanti Ghanaian regions[ CITATION Int \l 1033 ]. What is more, Cobalt and Coltan mining sites in DRC have also been increasingly using child labor especially with the increased demand for batteries due to the increased uptake of portable electronic devices, and the increased move towards electric cars (Sovacool, 2021; International Labor Organization; Ayres, 2012). Moreover, these children are normally subjected to violence, intimidation, extortion, and harsh working conditions.

Therefore, focusing on the impact of global value chains, it is key to note that their inherent weaknesses create an enabling environment for the exploitation of vulnerable populations. When this is coupled with the business case of slave labor, this further ingrains the culture of exploitation which proliferates because of the indifference by multinational companies controlling these supply chains to monitor and deter forms of modern slavery. Hence, the increased demand for the 3TGs contributes to the conflict environment because the trade not only finances the armed groups but it also triggers a series of violence between warring factions[ CITATION Chr12 \l 1033 ]. This opens a door to different forms of exploitation both to meet the needs of the multinational companies but to also provide cheap raw materials which appeal to these companies due to the impact they have on profitability resulting in the condoning of forced and child labor.

Case in point, in December of 2019, Advocates of Human Rights filed a case representing 14 parents and their children accusing Apple, Google, Microsoft, Tesla, and Dell of aiding in the death and injuries of children illegally employed in cobalt mines that serve their business (Lavietes, 2019). According to the families, the children had been employed illegally by mines that were under a company named Glencore, based in the United Kingdom. The cobalt produced from the activity in the mining camps were then sold to Umicore, a trader, and ultimately to the tech giants (Kelly, 2019). Also, although Glencore and the tech companies denied the charges, Glencore had been accused previously of using child labor (Lavietes, 2019). A core aspect of the complaint detailed that these companies were complicit since they were well aware of the existence of child labor in their supply chain, and they had the resources and authority to monitor and regulate the supply chains but they did not. Also, in their responses, most of the mentioned companies claimed they do not knowingly engage in business with players who engage in fraudulent recruitment or labor practices which is indicative of the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ culture they promote in the global value chains (Lavietes, 2019; Kelly, 2019).

The existing regulatory and legislative gaps

As aforementioned, Africa is significantly institution cursed which has significantly contributed to the rise of a seeming resource curse. Specifically, this is due to poor institutions and regulations that succumb to enticing foreign interests failing to safeguards residents in the region from exploitation. What is more, practices such as corruption within state institutions, and partisan politics have resulted in the creation or enablement of an environment that condones modern slavery because of the inherent legislative gaps which are furthered by regulatory gaps (Homewood, 2018; Silva & Schaltegger, 2019). Case in point, while it has been evidenced that security forces in most of the affected areas are partisan because of the extra income they obtain from conflict minerals, Hermes (2017) details that conflict minerals and modern slavery are a result of lacking regulation that directly addresses the vulnerabilities of the global supply chain. For instance, the United States does not classify Cobalt as a conflict mineral, which exempts its sourcing from falling under conflict mineral rules. Thereby, without laws that implore companies to check and publicly disclose the origin of raw materials as well as its suppliers there is lacking transparency in the supply chain that creates a breeding ground for modern forms of slavery (New, 2015; LeBaron & R€uhmkorf, 2017).

As Banerjee (2020) notes, there are more slaves today than when slavery was legal with the majority of them being exploited by the private sector for business gain. Hence, while it is a crime, the present-day organization of the political-economic system largely supports the practice, specifically, the global neoliberal capitalism that creates a large market for forced and child labor both supply- and demand- wise. This is indicative of the failure of voluntary initiatives of self-regulation such as codes of conduct, multi-stakeholder initiatives, and corporate social responsibility which mainly play the role of strategic reputation management and transparency while doing little to curtail modern slavery practices in the supply chain (New, 2015; Silva & Schaltegger, 2019; Sankara et al., 2019).

Nevertheless, the international community has responded with legislative instruments to combat the issue of neo-slavery existing in the international value chains for these minerals.

While it is a commendable first step, these have not been particularly effective. Some of the notable legislative measures are the UK’s Modern Slavery Act, the US’ Dodd-Frank Act (2010),

However, in Australia, operational disclosure is not the only requirement as firms have to ensure that both their operations and their supply chain do not condone the practice. As such, the country has gone ahead to criminalize modern slavery practices under its criminal code, including those committed in foreign countries. This grants reprieve to victims who can seek legal remediation for injustices committed or condoned by Australian-based companies an example that should be emulated by other countries, especially, Western economies whose insatiable demand fuels modern slavery practices (Kolieb & Wynn-Pope, 2020; LeBaron & R€uhmkorf, 2017). What is more, while multinationals can be held accountable for acts of modern slavery and armed conflict under international criminal law under either ‘crimes against humanity’ or ‘war crimes’, the skewed distribution of power and finances between multinational companies and the victims results in a situation where the victims are unable to seek justice since these companies can circumvent legal responsibility using both overt and covert approach such as bribing officials or threats of violence (Kolieb & Wynn-Pope, 2020). As a result, most victims can only seek representation and legal remediation through non-governmental organizations and human rights groups which further reduces their probability of obtaining justice (Silva & Schaltegger, 2019). For instance, in the aforementioned 2019 case, International Rights Advocates, a human rights NGO based in the US, filed the case on behalf of the 14 families.

Therefore, the lax regulatory and legislative regime both locally and internally fosters the exploitation of conflict minerals and the productive role of slave labor. That is, in African countries, the high rates of corruption and instability make them vulnerable to exploitation by international corporations due to the fragmented state of the supply chain and the widespread mineral deposits across the continent. On the other hand, in developed nations where these multinationals are based, there is a need for governments to take a more active role as opposed to the traditional reliance on self-regulation by these multinational companies. Specifically, opening channels where legal recourse can be sought across jurisdictions is a key step towards making multinationals accountable for monitoring and identifying modern forms of slavery in their supply chain and putting up measures to alleviate these practices.

Summary of existing regulations and legislations addressing modern slavery

• UK’s Modern Slavery Act (2015) – consolidating human trafficking and slavery offences, the Act necessitates companies whose sales are more than £36 million to public annual statements detailing the steps taken to ensure human trafficking and slavery does not thrive in operations and supply chain or declare if no steps have been taken. The Act also establishes trafficking reparation orders and new criminal offences as well as the powers of enforcements and measures to safeguard victims.

• Australia’s Modern Slavery Act (2018) – it necessitates organizations that operate and that are based in Australia with a gross revenue of more than $100 million to report the issue of neo-slavery and its risks in their supply chains and operations on an annual basis as well as taking active actions to address the risks.
• California’s Transparency in Supply Chains Act (2010) – this Act necessitates all manufacturers, retailers, and sellers, in California that do business and exceeds $100 million in gross revenue to disclose the actions it takes to do away with slavery and human trafficking in its supply chain.
• United Nations Guiding Principles on Business Human Rights – a three-chapter document, it sets out the UN’s framework to protect, respect and remedy that governments and companies should adhere to. Hence, it defines the concrete and actionable steps to be taken to meet the duties and responsibilities of preventing human rights abuses in company operations while also providing remedies for such abuses.
• The EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive (2014) – under this directive, businesses with 500 employees and more should include non-financial statement in their annual reports that should detail the procedures, risks, and program outcomes on anticorruption and bribery, diversity, environment protection, good treatment of employees, corporate social responsibility, and the respect for human rights.

• The Canadian Modern Slavery Act – introduced in the Senate on 29^th October 2020, this Act will necessitate companies to annually publish a modern slavery report whilst also amending the customs tariff to prohibit the entry of good produced by child labor in Canada.
• The EU Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence Legislation – proposed by the Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament in its 11^th September 2022 report, this legislation would require due diligence on environmental, governance and human rights risks to remediate impacts and make the relevant disclosures while also holding liable subjects liable for adverse impacts.
• The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act – while it is yet to be enacted, the Act was passed by the US house of representatives on 22^nd September 2020. It establishes a presumption that goods produced by persons recruited by the XUAR government as part of its poverty alleviation program or the pairing assistance program, or those produced in Xinjiang are produced using forced labor and hence, their importation into the US is prohibited pursuant to the necessary amendment to Section 307 of the Tariff Act. Also, the Act will necessitate additional reporting obligations for some US public companies.

• The Tasmania Modern Slavery Act – presented to the Tasmanian House of Assembly on 30^th April 2020, this Act would require modern slavery disclosures for commercial organizations stipulated in the Commonwealth Modern Slavery Act and New South Wales Modern Slavery Act. What is more, the Act would also introduce a post of an Independent Supply Chain (Anti-slavery) commissioner as well as a Supply Chain (Modern Slavery) Committee of Parliament.
• The Washington State Transparency in Supply Chains Act – proposed on 13^th January 2020, this Act would require some retail seller of agricultural products with business operations in Washington to not only prepare and annual human trafficking statement but to also monitor their suppliers.

In addition, while countries are taking active steps to enhance supply chain transparency and the traceability of raw materials, US States are also introducing separate anti-slavery acts as part of a multi-stakeholder approach to address the contemporary issue. The pioneers as evidenced are Washington and California.

Discussion and Conclusion

Sabo-Walsh (2017) outlines that with the demand for cobalt and lithium on the rise because of the increased demand for technologies and the reduction of carbon emission by increasing the use of batteries to decrease energy use, this poses a significant urgency to address the relationship between conflict minerals and modern slavery. Specifically, multinationals should enhance the traceability of key minerals especially the 3TGs (Vircoulon, 2011; Sancha et al., 2019). Laws and partnerships with key stakeholders and initiatives should also be enhanced and enforced to improve visibility throughout the supply chain (Gold et al., 2015). Therefore, as noted by Church & Crawford (2018), the mining sector is core to the international shift to a decline in carbon in the future. This is because the technologies needed all require mineral and metal inputs that are supplied by the mining sector. Hence, there is a risk that if the relationship between conflict minerals and modern slavery is not addressed, it will be exacerbated by the low- carbon transition which will make the mineral-producing countries more fragile and conflict- averse (Sovacool, 2021).

Hence, to remedy the violence and conflict dynamics of mineral-rich resources, there is a need to address local tensions and weak governance which should then be supported by monitoring supply chains to rid them of modern forms of slavery. However, to ensure accountability and transparency, regulatory and legislative frameworks also have to evolve by necessitating supply chain disclosures as standard practice as well as holding multinational companies accountable for contemporary slavery forms orchestrated in their chains of supply.

Finally, there is a need for states to assume full ownership of all mining sites to ensure modern forms of slavery do not fester and to also rid supply chains of artisanal mines. Therefore, by bringing together ethical sourcing and enforcing labor protections, it is possible to sever the relationship between conflict minerals and modern slavery by focusing on the global supply chains of key minerals and metals.

References

Andersson, J. M. (2016). Conflict, Resources and the Responsibility of Corporations. Uppsala Universitet.

Antislavery. (n.d.). What is modern slavery? Retrieved from Antislavery: https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/modern-slavery/

Ayres, C. J. (2012). The international trade in conflict minerals: coltan. Critical Perspectives on International, 178-193.

Bales, K. (2002). The Social Psychology of Modern Slavery. Scientific American, 80-89. Banerjee, B. (2020). Modern Slavery Is an Enabling Condition of Global Neoliberal Capitalism:

Commentary on Modern Slavery in Business. Business & Society, 415-419. doi:10.1177/0007650319898478

Buss, D. (2018). Conflict Minerals and Sexual Violence in Central Africa: Troubling Research.

Social Politics, 545-567.

Christ, K. L., Burritt, R. L., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). Accounting for work conditions from modern slavery to decent work. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 1481- 1504.

Church, C., & Crawford, A. (2018). Green Conflict Minerals. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Elgg, J. W. (2017). Ethical Sourcing and Everyday Electronics. Lexis Nexis. European Commission. (2021). The regulation explained. Retrieved from European

Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/conflict-minerals- regulation/regulation-explained/#:~:text=On%201%20January%202021%20a,are

%20mined%20using%20forced%20labour.

Free The Slaves. (n.d.). Slavery in The Congo. Retrieved from Free The Slaves: https://www.freetheslaves.net/where-we-work/congo/

Gibb, M. (2016, February 29). Whether it's Mexico's gold or Zimbabwe's diamonds, mining is riven with violence and business is complicit. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/29/mexico-gold-zimbabwe- diamond-mining-conflict-business-complicit

Global Witness. (2015, March 2). Conflict Minerals in Eastern Congo. Retrieved from Global Witness: https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/conflict-minerals/conflict- minerals-eastern-congo/

Gold, S., Trautrims, A., & Trodd, Z. (2015). Modern slavery challenges to supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 485-494.

Griffin, P. A., Lont, D. H., & Sun, Y. (2014). Supply chain sustainability: evidence on conflict minerals. Pacific Accounting Review, 28-53.

Hermes. (2017). Modern Slavery: The True Cost of Cobalt Mining. Outcomes Beyond Perfomance.

Homewood, J. (2018, May 2). Conflict-Minerals Legislation Fails To Prevent Human Rights Abuses. Retrieved from The Organization for World Peace: https://theowp.org/reports/conflict-minerals-legislation-fails-to-prevent-human-rights- abuses/

International Labor Organization. (n.d.). Child Labour in Mining and Global Supply Chains. Child Labour Platform. Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/--- asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-manila/documents/publication/wcms_720743.pdf

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/dec/16/apple-and-google-named- in-us-lawsuit-over-congolese-child-cobalt-mining-deaths

Kolieb, J., & Wynn-Pope, P. (2020, June 15). An unexpected opportunity for corporate peacebuilding. Retrieved from Corrs Chambers Westgarth: https://corrs.com.au/insights/an-unexpected-opportunity-for-corporate-peacebuilding? utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=LinkedIn-integration

Landman, T., & Silverman, B. W. (2019). Globalization and Modern Slavery. Politics and Governance, 275-290.

Lavietes, M. (2019, December 17). Tesla, Apple among firms accused of aiding child labor in Congo. Retrieved from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-mining-children- trfn-idUSKBN1YK24F

LeBaron, G., & R€uhmkorf, A. (2017). Steering CSR Through Home State Regulation: A Comparison of the Impact of the UK Bribery Act and Modern Slavery Act on Global Supply Chain Governance. Global Policy, 15-28.

New, S. (2015). Modern Slavery and the Supply Chain: The limits of corporate social responsibility? Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 697-707.

Rozpedowski, J. (2020, September 14). Africa’s (Modern) Slavery Problem. Retrieved from Global Security Review: https://globalsecurityreview.com/africas-modern-slavery- problem/

Sabo-Walsh, S. (2017, March 29). The Hidden Risks of Batteries: Child Labor, Modern Slavery, and Weakened Land and Water Rights. Retrieved from Green Tech Media:

Sancha, C., Maria, J. F., & Gimenez, C. (2019). Managing sustainability in lower-tier suppliers: how to deal with the invisible zone. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 458-474.

Sankara, J., Patten, D. M., & Lindberg, D. L. (2019). Mandated social disclosure. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 208-228.

Silva, S., & Schaltegger, S. (2019). Social assessment and management of conflict minerals: a systematic literature review. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 157-182.

Skelton, S. K. (2020, June 9). Major technology companies ‘negligent’ on forced labour practices. Retrieved from Computer Weekly: https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252484362/Major-technology-companies- negligent-on-forced-labour-practices

Sogani, A. (2019, February 2). Capitalism and the Rise of New Slavery: From Slave Trade to Slave in Trade. Retrieved from E-International Relations: https://www.e- ir.info/2019/02/02/capitalism-and-the-rise-of-new-slavery-from-slave-trade-to-slave-in- trade/

Sovacool, B. K. (2021). When subterranean slavery supports sustainability transitions? power, patriarchy, and child labor in artisanal Congolese cobalt mining. The Extractive Industries and Society, 271-293.

Steiner-Dicks, K. (2019, August 6). Katherine Steiner-Dicks reports on growing calls for major reforms to the UK’s Modern Slavery Act. Retrieved from Reuters Events: