New evidence that naming and shaming influences state human rights practices
New evidence that naming and shaming influences state human rights practices
复制标题
新证据表明点名和羞辱影响国家人权实践
DOI：
10.1080/14754835.2022.2122785
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Crabtree Charles
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zhou Yuan;Kiyani Ghashia;Crabtree Charles
点名和羞辱在多大程度上影响了国家对人权的尊重？尽管许多国家和国际人权组织在战略上点名羞辱国家，希望以此阻止侵犯人权的行为，但此前关于这些战略的实证研究对其有效性存在分歧。在这篇文章中，我们重新研究这个理论上重要的问题。我们采取一种新的方法来研究如何命名和羞辱影响国家人权的做法。首先，我们将自动文本分析应用于一系列人权报告，并开发了两种新的跨国人权命名和羞辱措施。一项措施侧重于大赦国际（AI）的命名和羞辱工作，另一项措施则侧重于美国政府。其次，我们评估这些措施的结构效度，发现证据表明，他们捕捉相关的潜在维度。第三，我们研究这些措施与人权做法相关的程度。我们的研究结果表明，虽然人工智能的命名和羞辱活动似乎不会影响政权的做法，但美国国务院的行为与改善的权利表现有关。我们的措施和成果有助于人权，国际组织和外交政策的文献不断增加。
To what extent does naming and shaming influence state respect for human rights? Although many countries and international human rights organizations strategically name and shame states with the hope of deterring human rights abuses, prior empirical work on these strategies has disagreed about their effectiveness. In this article, we reinvestigate this theoretically important question. We take a new approach to examining how naming and shaming influences state human rights practices. First, we apply automatic text analysis to acorpusof human rights reports and develop two new cross-national human rights naming and shaming measures. One measure focuses on Amnesty International’s (AI’s) naming and shaming efforts, and the other focuses on the US government. Second, we assess the construct validity of these measures, finding evidence that they capture the relevant latent dimension. Third, we examine the extent to which these measures are correlated with human rights practices. Our results show that whereas AI’s naming and shaming activities do not seem to influence regime practices, the US State Department’s are associated with improved rights performance. Our measures and results contribute to the growing literature on human rights, international organizations, and foreign policy.