In this article, I challenge prevailing assumptions in modern slavery research by addressing an uncomfortable question: Under what conditions do systems of exploitation become self-reinforcing through the constrained choices available to those subjected to them? I extend the concept of unfree agency to show how survival-driven actions can unintentionally stabilise exploitative arrangements. Drawing on vulnerability theory, Sen’s account of unfreedoms, and debates on labour agency and moral complicity, I develop a framework linking structural vulnerability, constrained choices, normalisation, unwitting reproduction, and the persistence of exploitation. The article contributes to modern slavery scholarship by connecting micro-level coping practices to the macro-level reproduction of exploitation, and to business ethics debates by refining how consent and responsibility should be understood under coercion. I call for a liberation ethics perspective that evaluates business and policy responses according to whether they expand the substantive freedoms and capabilities of those with the least agency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Md Nazmul Hasan (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: