The Economics of Slavery
Peter Edman
One thing that strikes me as I consider the statistics of modern-day slavery that Jody Hassett Sanchez and others report—upwards of 27 million people and an economic impact of $12 billion (presumably yearly)—is that, even bracketing the horrendous moral issues for a moment, the economic return is so appalling.
Consider by comparison the case of ExxonMobil, the world’s largest corporation: It has around 106,000 employees worldwide and made a profit of $39.5 billion just in 2006. Considering their $340 billion in revenue, some analysts argue that their return on investment is actually low. I’m no analyst, but it looks to me like a person in slavery generates $444. Compare this with the $373,000 profit and $3.2 million revenue per Exxon employee. It boggles the mind.
Or look at the rest of Fortune’s Global 500 list. The fifty largest employers of the Global 500 companies employ 19.7 million people combined, but even the company at Number 500, with the “lowest” revenues on the list—Nike—has revenues of $13.7 billion—in their case generated from just 26,000 employees. The world’s single largest employer, Wal-Mart, has 1.8 million employees but in 2006 generated revenue of $348.6 billion and profit of $11.2 billion. Whatever legitimate criticism can be raised about the pay and treatment of Nike or Wal-Mart employees around the world, they can only be considered fortunate compared with the stories of slaves in Togo, India, Pakistan, Dubai, and elsewhere.
As I was typing this, my wife—working on a project for our toddler—informed me in passing that one can make modeling clay out of dryer lint. The creativity behind such a project also boggles the mind—who would possibly think of a use for dryer lint? (On second thought, don’t ask.) But it sparked a connection in my brain.
I’ve been reading recently about George Washington Carver (1864–1943), the biochemist and educator who was himself born into slavery. What I’ve found, when all the myths are stripped away, is a man of high creativity, undeniably inspired by faith, who looked carefully and respectfully at the creation around him and recognized an underlying unity. He thus tried to uncover and create value where others saw none—even in weeds and agricultural waste. His respect extended to people too, and he used this knowledge—and his fame and talent for publicity—for the benefit of the poorest people in the American South. In one of the better biographies of him, Linda McMurry suggests that a major part of his contribution (in addition to his mentoring and work in racial reconciliation) was in promoting sustainable agriculture by interpreting scientific discoveries so everyday people could use them.
What potential Carvers are there among the millions enslaved today? Who will be creative enough to make their slavery more obviously uneconomical?
Freeing individual people and fostering the rule of law and the universal demands of human rights are certainly critical to an appropriate response to modern slavery. Nor am I an advocate for unthinking industrialization. But business is a calling, and there is a role here too for corporate creativity—whether microfinance or multinational—which perhaps uniquely has the ability to change the conditions behind slavery.
Peter L. Edman is director of research for The Trinity Forum.
Provocations, Business, Good and Evil, Meaning and Calling, Tue 27 Feb 2007
