Perceptions of Safety, Risk Mitigation Strategies, and the Role of Local Policies among Female Unlawfully Working Sex Workers in Rotterdam, the Netherlands

Overview

This qualitative investigation examines safety perceptions, risk mitigation practices, and policy influences among female sex workers operating in Rotterdam's unlawful sector. The study challenges the dichotomous framing of lawful sectors as inherently safe and unlawful sectors as inherently unsafe, drawing on the Crime as Work theoretical perspective to elucidate how regulatory policies may inadvertently channel workers into underground markets and how those workers navigate safety within constrained institutional contexts.

Methods and approach

The research employed qualitative methodology combining semi-structured interviews and observational fieldwork with female sex workers in Rotterdam's unlawful sex industry. The Crime as Work analytical framework structured the examination of workers' safety cognitions, protective strategies, and relationships with local policy environments. Data collection centered on workers' subjective assessments of risks and their autonomous safety practices across lawful and unlawful market segments.

Key Findings

Sex workers demonstrated nuanced, non-binary safety assessments that diverged from official risk categorizations. Participants reported awareness of occupational hazards present in both lawful and unlawful sectors and deployed multiple protective mechanisms including social networks, screening practices, and situational awareness protocols. However, respondents acknowledged the inherent limitations of these strategies and recognized that comprehensive harm mitigation remained unattainable. The research indicates that local policy configurations may push workers into unlawful sectors rather than protecting them through regulation.

Implications

The findings suggest that current regulatory architectures in Rotterdam may produce counterproductive outcomes by concentrating vulnerable workers in less visible, less regulated market segments rather than facilitating safer working conditions. Policy frameworks that treat lawful and unlawful sectors as categorically distinct in terms of safety may obscure workers' actual risk exposures and adaptive capacities. The dichotomous policy approach warrants reconsideration to account for workers' demonstrated ability to assess and manage risks across sectoral boundaries.

Scope and limitations

This summary is based on the study abstract and available metadata. It does not include a full analysis of the complete paper, supplementary materials, or underlying datasets unless explicitly stated. Findings should be interpreted in the context of the original publication.