What factors influence levels of repression targeting refugee populations? In this paper, we explore the efficacy of top-down and bottom-up approaches to mitigating host-state repression, specifically highlighting the role of human rights organizations (HROs) and institutionalized equal opportunity in influencing states’ decision to violently repress refugees. In so doing, we argue that repression levels can be moderated through proper accommodation and integration of refugee populations via the activities of HROs in addition to increased institutionalized equal opportunities for displaced persons. Using a new dataset that captures state repression of refugee populations together with a zero-inflated ordered probit model and an estimation technique that addresses endogeneity, we find mixed support for our hypotheses.
AidData (2016) AidDataCore_ResearchRelease_Level1_V3.0 Research Releases dataset. Williamsburg, VA: AidData. Available at: http://aiddata.org/aiddata-research-datasets (accessed 10 September 2019).
2.
BagozziBEHillDWJr.MooreWH, et al. (2015) Modeling two types of peace: The zero-inflated ordered probit (ZiOP) model in conflict research. Journal of Conflict Resolution59(4): 728–752.
BlundellRBondS (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics87(1): 115–143.
7.
BracicA (2016) Reaching the individual: EU accession, NGOs, and human rights. The American Political Science Review110(3): 530–546.
8.
ChenowethEStephanMJ (2011) Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York: Columbia University Press.
9.
ChenowethEPerkoskiEKangS (2017) State repression and nonviolent resistance. Journal of Conflict Resolution61: 1950–1969.
10.
CingranelliDLRichardsDLClayKC (2014) The CIRI human rights dataset. CIRI Human Rights Data Project 6. Available at: http://www.humanrightsdata.com/
11.
ÇirakoğluOCDemirutkuKKarakayaO (2021) Mediating role of perceived threat in the relationship between casual contact and attitudes towards Syrian refugees in Turkey. Journal of Refugee Studies34(3): 2984–2999.
12.
CoppedgeMGerringJKnutsenCH, et al. (2019) V-Dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v9. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://v-dem.net/
13.
DavenportC (2007) State repression and political order. Annual Review of Political Science10: 1–23.
14.
DavenportCArmstrongDA (2004) Democracy and the violation of human rights: A statistical analysis from 1976 to 1996. American Journal of Political Science48(3): 538–554.
15.
De MesquitaBBCherifFMDownsGW, et al. (2005a) Thinking inside the box: A closer look at democracy and human rights. International Studies Quarterly49(3): 439–458.
16.
De MesquitaBBSmithAMorrowJD, et al. (2005b) The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
FiskK (2016) One-sided violence in refugee-hosting areas. Journal of Conflict Resolution62: 529–556.
20.
FranklinJC (2008) Shame on you: The impact of human rights criticism on political repression in Latin America. International Studies Quarterly52(1): 187–211.
MostBAStarrH (2015) Inquiry, Logic, and International Politics. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
31.
MurdieAMDavisDR (2012) Shaming and blaming: Using events data to assess the impact of human rights INGOs. International Studies Quarterly56(1): 1–16.
32.
PemsteinDMarquardtKLTzelgovE, et al. (2019) The V-Dem measurement model: Latent variable analysis for cross-national and cross-temporal expert-coded data. 4th ed. V-Dem working paper no. 21, January. Gothenburg: Varieties of Democracy Institute, University of Gothenburg.
33.
PoeSC (2004) The decision to repress. In: CareySCPoeSC (eds) Understanding Human Rights Violations: New Systematic Studies. Farnham: Ashgate, pp.16–42.
34.
PoeSCTateCN (1994) Repression of human rights to personal integrity in the 1980s: A global analysis. American Political Science Review88(4): 853–872.
35.
PoeSCTateCNKeithLC (1999) Repression of the human right to personal integrity revisited: A global cross-national study covering the years 1976–1993. International Studies Quarterly43(2): 291–313.
36.
ReganPMHendersonEA (2002) Democracy, threats and political repression in developing countries: Are democracies internally less violent?Third World Quarterly23(1): 119–136.
37.
RoodmanD (2009) How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal9(1): 86–136.
SavunBGinesteC (2019) From protection to persecution: Threat environment and refugee scapegoating. Journal of Peace Research56(1): 88–102.
40.
SmithJWiestD (2005) The uneven geography of Global Civil Society: National and global influences on transnational association. Social Forces84(2): 621–652.
41.
StephanMJChenowethE (2008) Why civil resistance works: The strategic logic of nonviolent conflict. International Security33(1): 7–44.
42.
TeorellJDahlbergSHolmbergS, et al. (2019) The quality of government standard dataset, version Jan19. Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, University of Gothenburg.
UllahSAkhtarPZaefarianG (2018) Dealing with endogeneity bias: The generalized method of moments (GMM) for panel data. Industrial Marketing Management71: 69–78.
WrightTMMoorthyS (2018) Refugees, economic capacity, and host state repression. International Interactions44(1): 132–155.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
