Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T18:48:07.325Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Yes, Human Rights Practices Are Improving Over Time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2019

CHRISTOPHER J. FARISS Open the ORCID record for CHRISTOPHER J. FARISS [Opens in a new window]
CHRISTOPHER J. FARISS*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
*
*Christopher J. Fariss, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Michigan, cjfariss@umich.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To document human rights, monitoring organizations establish a standard of accountability, or a baseline set of expectations that states ought to meet in order to be considered respectful of human rights. If the standard of accountability has meaningfully changed, then the categorized variables from human rights documents will mask real improvements. Cingranelli and Filippov question whether the standard of accountability is changing and whether data on mass killings are part of the same underlying conceptual process of repression as other abuses. These claims are used to justify alternative models, showing no improvement in human rights. However, by focusing on the coding process, the authors misunderstand that the standard of accountability is about how monitoring organizations produce documents in the first place and not how academics use published documents to create data. Simulations and latent variables that model time in a substantively meaningful way validate the conclusion that human rights are improving.

Type
Letter
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 113 , Issue 3 , August 2019 , pp. 868 - 881
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Special thanks to Michael Kenwick and Kevin Reuning, who have provided an immeasurable amount of assistance and support as I prepared this response. Much of the work builds on several joint measurement projects that are currently underway (Reuning, Kenwick, and Fariss Forthcoming). I also acknowledge research support from the SSK (SocialScience Korea) Human Rights Forum, the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea, and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2925085). Replication files are available at the American Political Science Review Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EB8DD8.

References

REFERENCES

Brysk, Alison. 1994. “The Politics of Measurement: The Contested Count of the Disappeared in Argentina.” Human Rights Quarterly 16 (4): 676–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., and Richards, David L.. 1999. “Measuring the Level, Pattern, and Sequence of Government Respect for Physical Integrity Rights.” International Studies Quarterly 43 (2): 407–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David L., and Filippov, Mikhail. 2018. “Are Human Rights Practices Improving?” American Political Science Review 112 (4): 1083–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Ann Marie. 2001. Diplomacy of Conscience. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Ann Marie, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 2013. “Information Effects and Human Rights Data: Is the Good News about Increased Human Rights Information Bad News for Human Rights Measures?” Human Rights Quarterly 35 (3): 539–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, Michael, Gerring, John, Lindberg, Stafan I., Teorell, Jan, Pemstein, Daniel, Tzelgov, Eitan, Wang, Yi ting, Glynn, Adam, Altman, David, Bernhard, Michael, Fish, M. Steven, Hicken, Allen, McMann, Kelly, Paxton, Pamela, Reif, Megan, Skaaning, Svend-Erik, and Staton, Jeffrey. 2014. “V-Dem: A New Way to Measure Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 25 (3): 159–69.Google Scholar
Dancy, Geoff, and Fariss, Christopher J.. 2017. “Rescuing Human Rights Law from International Legalism and its Critics.” Human Rights Quarterly 39 (1): 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eck, Kristine, and Fariss, Christopher J.. 2018. “Ill Treatment and Torture in Sweden: A Critique of Cross-Case Comparisons.” Human Rights Quarterly 40 (3): 591–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eck, Kristine, and Hultman, Lisa. 2007. “Violence against Civilians in War.” Journal of Peace Research 44 (2): 233–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J. 2014. “Respect for Human Rights Has Improved Over Time: Modeling the Changing Standard of Accountability in Human Rights Documents.” American Political Science Review 108 (2): 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J. 2018a. “Are Things Really Getting Better? How to Validate Latent Variable Models of Human Rights.” British Journal of Political Science 48 (1): 275–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J. 2018b. “Human Rights Treaty Compliance and the Changing Standard of Accountability.” British Journal of Political Science 48 (1): 239–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J. 2019. “Yes, Human Rights Practices Are Improving Over Time.” Harvard Dataverse V1. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EB8DD8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J., and Dancy, Geoff. 2017. “Measuring the Impact of Human Rights: Conceptual and Methodological Debates.” Annual of Law and Social Science 13: 273–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, Christopher J., and Schnakenberg, Keith. 2014. “Measuring Mutual Dependence between State Repressive Actions.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 58 (6): 1003–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibney, Mark, Cornett, Linda, Wood, Reed, Haschke, Peter, Arnon, Daniel, and Pisanò, Attilio. 2017. “The Political Terror Scale 1976–2016.” Political Terror Scale. http://www.politicalterrorscale.org/.Google Scholar
Guitiérrez-Sanín, Francisco, and Wood, Elisabeth Jean. 2017. “What Should We Mean by ‘Pattern of Political Violence’? Repertoire, Targeting, Frequency, and Technique.” Perspectives on Politics 15 (1): 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., and Tsutsui, Kiyoteru. 2005. “Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Paradox of Empty Promises.” American Journal of Sociology 110 (5): 1373–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harff, Barabara. 2003. “No Lessons Learned from the Holocaust? Assessing Risks of Genocide and Political Mass Murder since 1955.” American Political Science Review 97 (1): 57–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harff, Barbara, and Gurr, Ted R.. 1988. “Toward Empirical Theory of Genocides and Politicides: Identification and Measurement of Cases since 1945.” International Studies Quarterly 32 (3): 359–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, Oona A. 2002. “Do human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?” The Yale Law Journal 111 (8): 1935–2042.10.2307/797642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopgood, Stephen. 2013. The Endtimes of Human Rights. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
McCormick, James M., and Mitchell, Neil J.. 1997. “Human Rights Violations, Umbrella Concepts, and Empirical Analysis.” World Politics 49 (4): 510–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mokken, Rob J. 1971. A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Eric A. 2014. The Twilight of Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reuning, Kevin, Kenwick, Michael R., and Fariss, Christopher J.. Forthcoming. “Exploring the Dynamics of Latent Variable Models.” Political Analysis. Accepted.Google Scholar
Rummel, Rudolph J. 1994. Death by Government: Genocide and Mass Murder in the Twentieth Century. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Schnakenberg, Keith E., and Fariss, Christopher J.. 2014. “Dynamic Patterns of Human Rights Practices.” Political Science Research and Methods 2 (1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn. 2017. Evidence of Hope. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles Lewis, and Jodice, David A.. 1983. World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators. Vol. 2, 3rd edition. Political Protest and Government Change. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Fariss Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EB8DD8
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Fariss supplementary material

Fariss supplementary material 1

Download Fariss supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 23.4 MB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.