The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
PROPERTY AND THE DEFINITION OF SLAVERY
Abstract
Currently there is no clear understanding of the meaning of ‘slavery’ in modern international law. While generally it is accepted that the authoritative definition of slavery is provided by Article 1 of the Slavery Convention 1926, in recent times slavery has been understood in such a wide variety of ways that effectively it is a meaningless term. This paper reflects on this interpretation problem and aims to redress this balance by reclaiming the core meaning of the legal definition. It applies property law perspectives to explain the conception of ownership invoked by Article 1, to argue that it remains relevant and to explore how it might be applied in identifying modern cases of slavery.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Enslavement infuses human history, from Ancient Greece, Rome, and the Near East, to the Sassanian, Abyssinian, and Akkadian Empires, from the first ' global economies ' in the Indian Ocean and Asian worlds, to early Islamic law, Hindu Rajyas, medieval Korea, and early Christianity.”
From Collapsing the Boundaries Between De Jure and De Facto Slavery: The Foundations of Slavery Beyond the Transatlantic Frame (2020) · cites this paper as [5]
In the citing paper
“This reflects a global orthodoxy in which property frameworks -those legal institutions that regulated slavery for centuries -are the lens through which the practical and theoretical boundaries of the phenomenon of (chattel) slavery are to be viewed (Allain and Hickey 2012).”
From Collapsing the Boundaries Between De Jure and De Facto Slavery: The Foundations of Slavery Beyond the Transatlantic Frame (2020) · cites this paper as Allain and Hickey 2012
Citations
Cites
Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning
Hohfeld, W. N. (1913) · The Yale Law Journal · doi:10.2307/785533 · Cited by 1,859
Waldron, J. (1990) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198239376.001.0001 · Cited by 1,147
Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning
Hohfeld (1913) · The Yale Law Journal · Cited by 705
Holmes, O. W. (1881) · Cited by 637
Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy
Seidman, G. W., & Bales, K. (2000) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2654399 · Cited by 625
Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy
Friman, H. R., & Bales, K. (2002) · Labour / Le Travail · doi:10.2307/25149258 · Cited by 623
Munzer, S. R. (1990) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609138 · Cited by 427
Nicholas, B., & Metzger, E. (1962) · ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · Cited by 389
Property Rights : Philosophic Foundations
Becker, L. C. (1977) · Hollins Digital Commons (Hollins University) · Cited by 230
EXCLUSION AND EXCLUSIVITY IN PROPERTY LAW
Katz, L. M. (2008) · University of Toronto Law Journal · doi:10.3138/utlj.58.3.275 · Cited by 209
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Kim, 2012, Taking Rape Seriously: Rape as Slavery, Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 35, 294
Cited by
Sorted by citations
“I bought you. You are my wife”: “Modern Slavery” and Forced Marriage
McCabe, H., & Eglen, L. (2022) · Journal of Human Trafficking · doi:10.1080/23322705.2022.2096366 · Cited by 42
Strauss, K. (2016) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1177/0309132516629002 · Cited by 31
Moral Economies and Child Labour in Artisanal Gold Mining in Ghana
Okyere, S. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90623-2_9 · Cited by 26
At the Junction: Two Models of Business Responsibility for Modern Slavery
Mende, J., & Drubel, J. (2020) · Human Rights Review · doi:10.1007/s12142-020-00596-9 · Cited by 17
Stoyanova, V. (2014) · Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law · doi:10.7574/cjicl.03.02.191 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Allain, J., & Hickey, R.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Durham University (GB)
- Venue
- International and Comparative Law Quarterly
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 915-938
- ISSN
- 0020-5893 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-6895
- OpenAlex
- W1973898601
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 6.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International and Comparative Law Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Law and Human Rights
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Colonialism, slavery, and trade
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal Rights and Human Rights
- Keywords
- slavery, property law, ownership, modern slavery, international law
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review