International Commissions of Inquiry: What Difference Do They Make? Taking an Empirical Approach
International Commissions of Inquiry: What Difference Do They Make? Taking an Empirical Approach
复制标题
国际调查委员会：它们有何不同？
DOI：
10.1093/ejil/chz043
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
Becker M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Becker M
本文介绍了一场关于国际调查委员会 (COI) 有何不同这一问题的研讨会，并从方法论和理论上构建了这场辩论。 COI已成为应对国际关注问题的共同特征。虽然他们的工作的某些方面受到了学术界的广泛关注，但人们对过去 COI 的具体、具体案例的影响知之甚少。因此，本次研讨会鼓励对利益冲突的后果进行实证研究，无论其是否存在、有意或无意。在讨论了所需实证研究的一些常见挑战之后，这篇框架文章提出了 COI 最终产生影响的方式的非详尽类型，例如激发进一步的行动或替代此类行动；事前事后证明决策的合理性；促进共同的叙述或强化相互竞争的叙述；使某些群体合法化，同时使其他群体失去合法性；加强政治对话或加剧分裂；刺激改革或鼓励更多改革；促进（国际）法律或暴露其局限性。这种类型学不仅为本次研讨会提供了假设资源，也为未来对 COI 造成（或不造成）差异的实证研究提供了依据。
Introducing a symposium on the question of what difference international commissions of inquiry (COIs) make, this article frames the debate methodologically and theoretically. COIs have become a common feature of responses to issues of international concern. While aspects of their work have received substantial scholarly attention, less is known about the concrete, case-specific effects of past COIs. This symposium therefore encourages empirical research into the consequences of COIs, absent or present, intended or not. After discussing some of the common challenges to the empirical research required, this framework article sets forth a non-exhaustive typology of ways in which COIs could end up making a difference, such as inspiring further action or substituting for such action; justifying decision-making,ex anteorex post; fostering a shared narrative or hardening competing narratives; legitimizing some groups while delegitimizing others; enhancing political dialogue or intensifying division; spurring reform or encouraging more of the same; promoting (international) law or exposing its limitations. This typology is presented as a resource for hypotheses not only for this symposium but also for future empirical research into the differences made (or not) by COIs.