Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T09:37:40.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are New Democracies Better Human Rights Compliers?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2015

Sharanbir Grewal  and
Erik Voeten
Get access

Abstract

Recent scholarship finds that new democracies are more likely than established democracies to make binding commitments to international human rights institutions. Are new democracies also better at following through on these commitments? Stated differently, does their greater willingness to join international institutions reflect a genuine commitment to human rights reform or is it just “cheap talk?” We analyze this question using a new data set of more than 1,000 leading European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) cases. Since new democracies face judgments that are more difficult to implement than established democracies, we employ a genetic matching algorithm to balance the data set. After controlling for bureaucratic and judicial capacity, we find that new democracies do implement similar ECtHR judgments initially more quickly than established democracies, but this effect reverses the longer a judgment remains pending. Although new democracies have incentives to implement judgments quickly, they sometimes lack checks and balances that help ensure implementation should an executive resist.

Type
Research Notes
Information
International Organization , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , Spring 2015 , pp. 497 - 518
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beach, Derek. 2005. Why Governments Comply: An Integrative Compliance Model That Bridges the Gap Between Instrumental and Normative Models of Compliance. Journal of European Public Policy 12 (1):113–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Thorsten, Clarke, George, Groff, Alberto, Keefer, Philip, and Walsh, Patrick. 2001. New Tools in Comparative Political Economy: The Database of Political Institutions. World Bank Economic Review 15 (1):165–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börzel, Tanja A., Hofmann, Tobias, and Panke, Diana. 2012. Caving in or Sitting It Out? Longitudinal Patterns of Noncompliance in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 19 (4):454–71.Google Scholar
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., and Zorn, Christopher J.W.. 2001. Duration Models and Proportional Hazards in Political Science. American Journal of Political Science 45 (4):972–88.Google Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia Handler. 1993. On Compliance. International Organization 47 (2):175–205.Google Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia Handler. 1995. The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., Richards, David L., and Clay, K. Chad. 2012. The Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Dataset. Available at <http://humanrightsdata.blogspot.com/p/data-documentation.html>. Accessed 19 November 2013..+Accessed+19+November+2013.>Google Scholar
Cole, Wade M. 2012. Human Rights as Myth and Ceremony? Reevaluating the Effectiveness of Human Rights Treaties, 1981–2007. American Journal of Sociology 117 (4):1131–71.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2010. Committee of Ministers. Supervision of the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. 4th Annual Report. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe, Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs.Google Scholar
Diamond, Alexis, and Sekhon, Jasjeet S.. 2013. Genetic Matching for Estimating Causal Effects: A General Multivariate Matching Method for Achieving Balance in Observational Studies. Review of Economics and Statistics 95 (3):932–45.Google Scholar
Elsig, Manfred, Milewicz, Karolina, and Stürchler, Nikolas. 2011. Who Is in Love with Multilateralism? Treaty Commitment in the Post–Cold War Era. European Union Politics 12 (4):529–50.Google Scholar
Farber, Daniel A. 2002. Rights as Signals. Journal of Legal Studies 31 (1):83–98.Google Scholar
Galbreath, David J. 2006. European Integration Through Democratic Conditionality: Latvia in the Context of Minority Rights. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 14 (1):69–87.Google Scholar
Goodliffe, Jay, and Hawkins, Darren G.. 2006. Explaining Commitment: States and the Convention Against Torture. Journal of Politics 68 (2):358–71.Google Scholar
Guzman, Andrew T. 2008. How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. 2009. Forced To Be Good: Why Trade Agreements Boost Human Rights. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., and Tsutsui, Kiyoteru. 2007. Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law To Matter Where Needed Most. Journal of Peace Research 44 (4):407–25.Google Scholar
Hansson, Ulf. 2002. The Latvian Language Legislation and the Involvement of the OSCE-HCNM: The Developments 2000–2002. Global Review of Ethnopolitics 2 (1):17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haverland, Markus. 2000. National Adaptation to European Integration: The Importance of Institutional Veto Points. Journal of Public Policy 20 (1):83–103.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Darren, and Jacoby, Wade. 2010. Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. Journal of International Law and International Relations 6 (1):35–85.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R., and Voeten, Erik. 2014. International Courts as Agents of Legal Change: Evidence from LGBT Rights in Europe. International Organization 68 (1):77–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henisz, Witold J. 2000. The Institutional Environment for Economic Growth. Economics and Politics 12 (1):1–31.Google Scholar
Hill, Daniel W. Jr. 2010. Estimating the Effects of Human Rights Treaties on State Behavior. Journal of Politics 72 (4):1161–74.Google Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney. 2010. From Paper Tigers to Engines of Change: The Effect of Regional Human Rights Courts on Domestic Practice and Politics. PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney. 2012. Implementing International Human Rights Law at Home: Domestic Politics and the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Review 13 (3):279–301.Google Scholar
Ho, Daniel E., Imai, Kosuke, King, Gary, and Stuart, Elizabeth A.. 2007. Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference. Political Analysis 15 (3):199–236.Google Scholar
Hovi, Jon, and Aakre, Stine. 2010. Emission Trading: Participation Enforcement Determines the Need for Compliance Enforcement. European Union Politics 11 (3):427–45.Google Scholar
Howell, Llewellyn D. 2011. ICRG Methodology. Syracuse, NY: PRS Group. Available at <http://www.prsgroup.com/about-us/our-two-methodologies/icrg>. Accessed 19 November 2013..+Accessed+19+November+2013.>Google Scholar
Iacus, Stefano M., King, Gary, and Porro, Giuseppe. 2011. Multivariate Matching Methods That Are Monotonic Imbalance Bounding. Journal of the American Statistical Association 106 (493):345–61.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2004. International Actors on the Domestic Scene: Membership Conditionality and Socialization by International Institutions. International Organization 58 (3):425–57.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2006. The Dangers of Extreme Counterfactuals. Political Analysis 14 (2):131–59.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2007. When Can History Be Our Guide? The Pitfalls of Counterfactual Inference. International Studies Quarterly 51 (1):183–210.Google Scholar
Landman, Todd. 2005. Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Licht, Amanda A. 2011. Change Comes with Time: Substantive Interpretation of Nonproportional Hazards in Event History Analysis. Political Analysis 19 (2):227–43.Google Scholar
Lupu, Yonatan. 2013. Legislative Veto Players and the Effects of International Human Rights Agreements. Paper presented at the Conference on International Law and Politics, September, Emory University.Google Scholar
Lupu, Yonatan, and Voeten, Erik. 2012. Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights. British Journal of Political Science 42 (2):413–39.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Pevehouse, Jon C.. 2006. Democratization and International Organizations. International Organization 60 (1):137–67.Google Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., , Ted Robert Gurr, and Jaggers, Keith. 2013. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2010. Dataset Users' Manual. Center for Systemic Peace. College Park: University of Maryland. Available at <http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2012.pdf>. Accessed 19 November 2013.. Accessed 19 November 2013.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Marshall,+Monty+G.,+,+Ted+Robert+Gurr,+and+Jaggers,+Keith.+2013.+Polity+IV+Project:+Political+Regime+Characteristics+and+Transitions,+1800–2010.+Dataset+Users'+Manual.+Center+for+Systemic+Peace.+College+Park:+University+of+Maryland.+Available+at+.+Accessed+19+November+2013.>Google Scholar
Mbaye, Heather A.D. 2001. Why National States Comply with Supranational Law: Explaining Implementation Infringements in the European Union, 1972–1993. European Union Politics 2 (3):259–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2000. The Origins of International Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe. International Organization 54 (2):217–52.Google Scholar
Neumayer, Eric. 2005. Do International Human Rights Treaties Improve Respect for Human Rights? Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (6):925–53.Google Scholar
Pevehouse, Jon C. 2002. With a Little Help from My Friends? Regional Organizations and the Consolidation of Democracy. American Journal of Political Science 46 (3):611–26.Google Scholar
Piccone, Ted. 2012. Catalysts for Change: How the UN's Independent Experts Promote Human Rights. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Richards, David L., Gelleny, Ronald D., and Sacko, David H.. 2001. Money with a Mean Streak? Foreign Economic Penetration and Government Respect for Human Rights in Developing Countries. International Studies Quarterly 45 (2):219–39.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas, Ropp, Stephen C., and Sikkink, Kathryn, eds. 1999. The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Carol. 2008. Ethnicity and Language Tensions in Latvia. Language Policy 7 (1):3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekhon, Jasjeet S. 2011. Multivariate and Propensity Score Matching Software with Automated Balance Optimization: The Matching Package for R. Journal of Statistical Software 42 (7):1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A., and Danner, Allison. 2010. Credible Commitments and the International Criminal Court. International Organization 64 (2):225–56.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A., and Hopkins, Daniel J.. 2005. The Constraining Power of International Treaties: Theory and Methods. American Political Science Review 99 (4):623–31.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec, and Keller, Helen, eds. 2008. A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas. 2002. Paths to Compliance: Enforcement, Management, and the European Union. International Organization 56 (3):609–43.Google Scholar
Von Staden, Andreas. 2009. Shaping Human Rights Policy in Liberal Democracies: Assessing and Explaining Compliance with the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. PhD diss., Princeton University.Google Scholar
Von Stein, Jana. 2005. Do Treaties Constrain or Screen? Selection Bias and Treaty Compliance. American Political Science Review 99 (4):611–22.Google Scholar
Vreeland, James. 2008. Political Institutions and Human Rights: Why Dictatorships Enter into the United Nations Convention Against Torture. International Organization 62 (1):65–101.Google Scholar