More controversially, the wages of sex workers have been described as ‘high’ for a ‘low skill’ occupation and explained by the loss of position in the marriage market (Arunachalam and Shah, 2008; Edlund and Korn, 2002).
But this is not just some random paper.
“The evidence we bring indicates that the increased stigmatization of prostitution that has taken place in the UK over the period 2000-2012, during which prostitution was progressively criminalized, does not support the expectations of a significant reduction in demand as the policy intended and corresponds to a change in the type of clients that are observed through successive waves of the British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (NATSAL henceforth). We conclude that this provides further support for the idea that demand for sexual services might be inelastic to both the market price and the implicit price of stigma, whereby criminalization is not likely to be conducive to decreases in demand as is hoped for. Rather, it might jeopardize the working conditions and safety of existing prostitutes thus raising the welfare cost of abolitionism.
Well, alright then, it is just some random paper. But that bold there is the part that Al Roth chose to highlight. And Al Roth did gain the Nobel for his work on market design and the like.
The Swedish approach is counterproductive that is, it’s the German, legalised, method that should be followed.