How is the establishment of the international human rights regime possible in the first place? Bringing together theories from international law, political science, and sociology, I revisit the argument that global efforts to institutionalize human rights into international law are mainly driven by states undergoing democratization. Political democratization is crucial to the creation of the international human rights regime, because it generates “commitment” and “concession” mechanisms that motivate states to support human rights treaties. Analyzed by Cox event history models, the data on state ratification of the core United Nations human rights treaties from 1966 through 2006 are consistent with this argument. Improvement in human rights and increased political competition do significantly increase the rate of state ratification of human rights treaties. The ratification-promoting effect of democratization also operates in an immediate fashion. Overall, this study provides empirical support for the dynamic state-oriented explanation for global legalization of human rights and suggests a close connection between global democratization waves and the establishment of the human rights regime.
ClarkAM (2001) Diplomacy of conscience: Amnesty international and changing human rights norms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
ClarkRBeckfieldJ (2009) A new trichotomous measure of world-system position using the international trade network. International Journal of Comparative Sociology50: 5–38.
10.
ColeWM (2005) Sovereignty relinquished? Explaining commitment to the international human rights covenants, 1966–1999. American Sociological Review70: 472–495.
11.
DonnellyJ (1986) International human rights: a regime analysis. International Organization40(3): 599–642.
12.
DonnellyJ (2003) Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. 2nd ed.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
13.
ElliottMA (2007) Human rights and the triumph of the individual in world culture. Cultural Sociology1: 343–363.
14.
ElsterJ (1979) Ulysses and the Sirens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
FarberDA (2002) Rights as signals. Journal of Legal Studies31(1): 83–98.
16.
FearonJD (1997) Signaling foreign policy interests: tying hands versus sinking costs. Journal of Conflict Resolution41(1): 68–90.
17.
FinnemoreMSikkinkK (1998) International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization52(4): 887–917.
18.
ForsytheDP (1991) The Internationalization of Human Rights. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
19.
ForsytheDP (2006) Human Rights in International Relations. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
GoodliffeJHawkinsDG (2006) Explaining commitment: states and the Convention against Torture. Journal of Politics68(2): 358–371.
21.
GoodmanRJinksD (2003) Measuring the effects of human rights treaties. European Journal of International Law14(1): 171–183.
22.
Hafner-BurtonEM (2012) International regimes for human rights. Annual Review of Political Science15: 265–286.
23.
Hafner-BurtonEMTsutsuiK (2005) Human rights in a globalization world: the paradox of empty promises. American Journal of Sociology110(5): 1373–1411.
24.
Hafner-BurtonEMTsutsuiK (2007) Justice lost! The failure of international human rights law to matter where needed most. Journal of Peace Research44(4): 407–425.
25.
Hafner-BurtonEMTsutsuiKMeyerJW (2008) International human rights law and the politics of legitimation: repressive states and human rights treaties. International Sociology23: 115–141.
26.
HathawayOA (2003) The cost of commitment. Stanford Law Review55(5): 1821–1862.
27.
HathawayOA (2007) Why do countries commit to human rights treaties?Journal of Conflict Resolution51: 588–621.
28.
HathawayOA (2002) Do human rights treaties make a difference?Yale Law Journal111(8): 1935–2042.
29.
HawkinsDG (2002) International Human Rights and Authoritarian Rule in Chile. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
30.
HendersonEA (2004) Mistaken identity: testing the clash of civilizations thesis in light of democratic peace claims. British Journal of Political Science34: 539–563.
HochstetlerKClarkAMFriedmanEJ (2000) Sovereignty in the balance: claims and bargains at the UN conferences on the environment, human rights, and women. International Studies Quarterly44(4): 591–614.
33.
HollyerJRRosendorffBP (2011) Why do authoritarian regimes sign the Convention against Torture? Signaling, domestic politics and non-compliance. Quarterly Journal of Political Science6(3–4): 275–327.
34.
HuntingtonSP (1991) The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
35.
HuntingtonSP (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
36.
JacksonRH (ed.) (1999) Sovereignty at the Millennium. Oxford: Blackwell.
37.
KatzensteinPJKeohaneROKrasnerSD (1998) International organization and the study of world politics. International Organization52(4): 645–685.
38.
KeithLC (1999) The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: does it make a difference in human rights behavior?Journal of Peace Research36(1): 95–118.
39.
KrasnerSD (1982) Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. International Organization36(2): 185–205.
40.
KrasnerSD (1999) Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
LandmanT (2004) Measuring human rights: principle, practice, and policy. Human Rights Quarterly26(4): 906–931.
42.
LandmanT (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
43.
MarshallMGJaggersK (2009) Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2007. Vienna, VA: Center for Systemic Peace.
44.
MeyerJWBoliJThomasGM. (1997) World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology103(1): 144–181.
45.
MoeT (1990) The politics of structural choice: toward a theory of public bureaucracy. In: WilliamsonOE (ed.) Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 116–153.
46.
MoravcsikA (2000) The origin of human rights regimes: democratic delegation in postwar Europe. International Organization54(2): 217–252.
47.
NeumayerE (2003) The Pattern of Aid Giving: The Impact of Good Governance on Development Assistance. New York: Routledge.
48.
NielsenRASimmonsBA (2009) Rewards for rights ratification? Testing for tangible and intangible benefits of human rights treaty ratification. Presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, ON, Canada, 3–6September.
49.
NorthDC (1993) Institutions and credible commitment. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics149: 11–23.
50.
PevehouseJCNordstromTWarnkeK (2004) The COW-2 international organizations dataset version 2.0. Conflict Management and Peace Science21(2): 101–119.
51.
RatnerSR (2004) Overcoming temptations to violate human dignity in times of crisis: on the possibilities for meaningful self-restraint. Theoretical Inquiries in Law5(1): 81–109.
52.
RussettB (1993) Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53.
RussettBOnealJR (2001) Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations. New York: Norton.
54.
SchellingTC (1966) Arms and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
55.
ShepsleKA (1991) Discretion, institutions, and the problem of government commitment. In: BourdieuPColemanJ (eds) Social Theory for a Changing Society. Boulder, CO: Westview, pp. 245–263.
56.
SimmonsBA (2009) Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57.
SimmonsBADannerA (2010) Credible commitments and the international criminal court. International Organization64(2): 225–256.
58.
SmithDAWhiteDR (1992) Structure and dynamics of the global economy: network analysis of international trade 1965–1980. Social Forces70: 857–893.
59.
SmithJWiestD (2005) The uneven geography of global civil society: national and global influences on transitional association. Social Forces84: 621–652.
60.
StataCorp (2007) Stata Statistical Software: Release 10. College Station, TX: StataCorp.
61.
TherneauTMGrambschPM (2000) Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York: Springer.
62.
TumaNBHannanMT (1984) Social Dynamics: Models and Methods. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Van RossemR (1996) The world system paradigm as general theory of development: a cross-national test. American Sociological Review61: 508–527.
65.
VreelandJR (2008) Political institutions and human rights: why dictatorships enter into the United Nations Convention against Torture. International Organization62: 65–101.
66.
WotipkaCMRamirezFO (2008) World society and human rights: an event history analysis of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. In: SimmonsBADobbinFGarrettG (eds) The Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 303–343.
67.
WotipkaCMTsutsuiK (2008) Global human rights and state sovereignty: state ratification of international human rights treaties, 1965–2001. Sociological Forum23(4): 724–754.
