Why Do Countries Commit to Human Rights Treaties?

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Oona A. Hathaway
dc.coverage.spatial United States
dc.date.accessioned 2016-01-07T15:21:41Z
dc.date.available 2016-01-07T15:21:41Z
dc.identifier.uri http://desa1.cejamericas.org:8080/handle/2015/698
dc.description.abstract This article examines states’ decisions to commit to human rights treaties. It argues that the effect of a treaty on a state—and hence the state’s willingness to commit to it—is largely determined by the domestic enforcement of the treaty and the treaty’s collateral consequences. These broad claims give rise to several specific predictions. For example, states with less democratic institutions will be no less likely to commit to human rights treaties if they have poor human rights records, because there is little prospect that the treaties will be enforced. Conversely, states with more democratic institutions will be less likely to commit to human rights treaties if they have poor human rights records—precisely because treaties are likely to lead to changes in beha- vior. These predictions are tested by examining the practices of more than 160 coun- tries over several decades.
dc.language.iso English
dc.title Why Do Countries Commit to Human Rights Treaties?
dc.ceja.source Fuente:  Journal of Conflict Resolution


Files in this item

Thumbnail Files: Hathaway.pdf
Size: 873.4Kb
Format: PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record