A ‘Place’ for Stateless People? support a new NGO, Survivor Alliance. 8 The Alliance contributed survivor perspectives to local research and practice, and organised local awareness-raising events and training to empower survivors to become leaders in local antislavery work. The developing work surfaced a number of tensions between the UK’s national and local antislavery action, showing how local partnership work in relation to prevention, enforcement and recovery could be constrained by other aspects of national policy and legislation. This was true for a range of policy areas, including austerity policies and homelessness, but particularly the UK’s stated policy of creating a ‘hostile environment’ against irregular migration. 9 For example, research into media campaign impact found that reporting of suspected cases by the public could be negatively impacted by a concern from (otherwise sympathetic) observers not to make the situation for irregular migrants worse by drawing attention to their ineligibility to work in the UK. 10 In addition, community cohesion was an important part of the local context. One local case of exploitation had been allowed to continue in plain sight on a housing estate due to a lack of interaction and understanding between migrants and the local resident population. The ‘hostile environment’ could also impact on victim care and prosecution of cases, which were closely interconnected. Action research with regional antislavery practitioners revealed that the threat of immigration enforcement could be a strong barrier to gaining the trust of witnesses, with good cause. In some cases, victims were deported mid-way through investigations or left without any recourse to public funds, disrupting both their personal wellbeing and their ability to co-operate with police. Research evidence also emerged that refugees and asylum seekers in the Midlands were struggling to access essential health services, even when they possessed an entitlement to do so. 11 Barriers included misapprehensions about entitlements by key gatekeepers such as doctors’ receptionists. The local business regulatory environment was a further important sphere of action, as in this region the majority of businesses were small and medium sized and not covered by the provisions of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 requiring transparency in supply chains. In general, regulation governing small scale enterprises tended to be minimal and poorly resourced. Some industries, such as hand car washes and nail bars, were frequently identified as sources of employment for irregular migrants, and sites of labour and health and safety violations. In this case, researchers were able to work with local and national statutory and faith partners to investigate the extent of problems, present evidence to parliamentary inquiries, and suggest design improvements to a widely-used reporting app. II ADVANTAGES OF PLACE-BASED WORKING The brief sketch above highlights some key advantages to researchers of placebased working that may also be relevant and transferrable to the issue of 8 9 10 11 See Survivor Alliance (Web Page) <https://survivoralliance.org/>. The provisions that constitute this ‘hostile environment policy’ can be found in the Immigration Act 2014 (UK) and the Immigration Act 2016 (UK). Jen Birks and Alison Gardner, ‘Introducing the Slave Next Door’ [2019] Anti-Trafficking Review 66. Coral J Dando et al, ‘Health Inequalities and Health Equity Challenges for Victims of Modern Slavery’ (2018) 41(4) Journal of Public Health 681. 150