This article proposes a human rights sequence theory of atrocity and a human rights-based approach to atrocity prevention. It argues that human rights violations escalate in predictable patterns, sometimes culminating in atrocities and genocide. Drawing on new cross-national, time-series data measuring government respect for 24 human rights and a new operational definition of atrocity, the article employs Mokken Scale Analysis to show that violations such as extensive torture, political imprisonment, and labor rights abuses typically precede the onset of widespread extrajudicial killings and genocide. These findings suggest an early warning system using information about human rights violations to inform upstream prevention strategies.

ABSTRACT: The CIRIGHTS Data Project scores a representative sample of all internationally recognized human rights. In this article, we use CIRIGHTS scores to discover global patterns in government respect for human rights. The findings show that worker rights, including the right to form a trade union and bargain collectively, are among the least protected human rights. The right to be protected from torture is also among the least protected rights, but, on average, other physical integrity rights—protection from extrajudicial killing, political imprisonment, and disappearance—are among the most protected rights. We introduce an Overall Human Rights Protection Index for all countries, which shows that nearly two-thirds of the world's countries score less than 65 on the 100-point scale. A heat map shows that countries tend to have similar index scores if they share an international border. We discuss the implications of these patterns for future research and policymaking.

The CIRIGHTS Data Project is the largest human rights dataset in the world. We score a representative sample of all internationally recognized human rights for all countries of the world covering 40 years.This manual will be your guide for scoring government respect for human rights for the CIRIGHTS Database. In this manual, you will find the information necessary to accurately score the level of government respect for a variety of internationally recognized human rights. Each of the variables includes the following information in this manual:• Name of the right• Variable name in the dataset• Definition • Scoring Scheme • What Does Not Qualify (where applicable) • Where To Find Information About This Variable • Grounding In International Law• Any additional specific information pertinent to the scoring of the variable

We analyze the cross-national and cross-temporal variation in the presence or absence of domestic compliance gaps for three different human rights: the right to a fair trial, children's rights, and the right of workers to form unions. Besides constitutional provisions, which have been the focus of previous research on the de jure-de facto compliance gap, statutes, executive actions, and judicial decisions all can contain promises by domestic politicians to protect human rights. Our indicator of whether legal protection exists and how strong it is reflects the many ways states make human rights legal commitments to their citizens. Our findings show that (a) the probability of promise-keeping and the effects of combinations of accountability and capacity are different for each right; (b) strong laws are a necessary but not sufficient condition for effective protection of rights; (c) treaty participation does not affect the probability of promise-keeping for any right; (d) promise-keeping for one right predicted promise-keeping for other rights. For all rights, the number of countries with gaps grew between 1994 and 2008 and then declined between 2008 and 2019. An important inference from our findings is that international treaties may only be effective when ratifiers are willing to change their domestic laws to be consistent with international norms. One counterintuitive policy implication of our findings is that democratizing low-capacity authoritarian states may lead to more violations of some human rights.

The comparative study of atrocities and atrocity prevention faces several obstacles including a lack of consensus on the universe of cases and too few cases to statistically test alternative theories. The brutality-based (BB) conception is based on the idea that widespread, state-led violations of physical integrity rights constitute an assault on the personhood and human dignity of the members of society— a mass atrocity. Applying this idea to all countries annually systematically identifies a larger number of atrocities and facilitates categorization into three levels of intensity. The BB methodology for generating annual atrocity lists is replicable and transparent. The findings show that, between 1981 and 2019, the frequency of atrocities as defined and identified by other projects has been decreasing, but BB atrocities have been increasing. The sequence of different types of widespread physical integrity violations suggests new avenues for research on atrocity occurrence, escalation, de-escalation, and cessation.

We present new data on labor laws and practices for all countries of the world, recorded annually from 1994 to 2010. The dataset covers seven different labor standards. These are freedom of association, collective bargaining, minimum wage, limitations on working hours, protection from unsafe and unhealthy working conditions, protection from forced and compulsory labor, and protection of children and young people. This list reflects an array of internationally recognized labor rights and closely corresponds with the standards identified in the ILO's 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. A simple analysis demonstrates the utility of the dataset and showcases some of the ways it might be used as a powerful tool in the scientific study of labor rights specifically, and human rights more generally. Presentamos nuevos datos sobre leyes y practicas laborales para todos los paises del mundo. Estos datos se registraron anualmente desde 1994 hasta 2010. El conjunto de datos abarca siete normas laborales diferentes. Se trata de la libertad de asociacion, la negociacion colectiva, el salario minimo, la limitacion de la jornada laboral, la proteccion contra las condiciones de trabajo inseguras e insalubres, la proteccion contra el trabajo forzado y obligatorio, y la proteccion de los ninos y los jovenes. Esta lista incluye una serie de derechos laborales reconocidos internacionalmente y se corresponde estrechamente con las normas identificadas en la Declaracion sobre los Principios y Derechos Fundamentales en el Trabajo de la OIT de 1998. Mediante un sencillo analisis, se demuestra la utilidad del conjunto de datos y se muestran algunas de las formas en que podria utilizarse como una herramienta eficaz en el estudio cientifico de los derechos laborales en particular, y de los derechos humanos en general. Nous presentons de nouvelles donnees sur les lois et pratiques du travail pour tous les pays du monde qui ont ete enregistrees annuellement de 1994 a 2010. Le jeu de donnees couvre sept normes du travail differentes. Elles comprennent la liberte syndicale, les negociations collectives, le salaire minimum, la limitation du temps de travail, la protection contre les conditions de travail dangereuses et insalubres, la protection contre le travail force et obligatoire et la protection des enfants et des jeunes. Cette liste reflete toute une serie de droits du travail internationalement reconnus et correspond etroitement aux normes identifiees dans la Declaration de l'OIT relative aux principes et droits fondamentaux au travail de 1998. Une analyse simple demontre l'utilite de ce jeu de donnees et presente certaines des facons dont il pourrait etre utilise en tant qu'outil puissant dans l'etude scientifique des droits du travail en particulier, et des droits de l'homme de maniere plus generale.

Reviewed by: Drug War Pathologies: Embedded Corporatism and U.S. Drug Enforcement in the Americas by Horace A. Bartilow David Cingranelli (bio) Horace A. Bartilow, Drug War Pathologies: Embedded Corporatism and U.S. Drug Enforcement in the Americas. (University of North Carolina Press, 2019). ISBN 13:9781469652566, 320 pages. Horace Bartilow examines the long running US war on drugs, a campaign to combat the illegal drug trade. To prosecute that war over the past half century, the United States has enacted laws making the use, sale, and distribution of certain mind-altering drugs illegal; provided economic assistance to cooperating governments; and even sent armed troops to other countries. The book is timely, since the wisdom of the drug war is now being questioned more than ever. Many US states have recently even legalized the production and distribution of marijuana. At the time of this writing, the US federal government has not changed its position in favor of prohibition. Bartilow's book integrates huge amounts of information into an argument that challenges mainstream ideas about the connection between the policies of the US military and the preferences of US-based corporations. It is essential reading for scholars interested in the study of the war on drugs, transnational organized crime, the influence of corporations over public policies, and US foreign policy toward Latin America. The author adds his voice to the growing consensus in the literature that the drug war has done great harm. Bartilow argues that the drug war has mostly hurt low income people in the United States.His use of the word, "pathology," in the title appropriately summarizes his view [End Page 610] that the war on drugs is a "disease," a cancer on American society and on other societies where the war is waged. According to his account, in Latin America the war on drugs has fueled the development of organized crime, enabled violent repression of human rights, undermined democracy, exacerbated economic in-equalities, and encouraged government corruption. The book is well organized and, except for a few chapters that focus one econometric tests, is written at a level appropriate for an audience of upper-level undergraduate college students. Most chapters of this book would be good choices to include in syllabi for college courses focusing on issues of social justice and human rights. The methodology the author used to collect his evidence was eclectic. He combined case study analyses of two of the largest US drug initiatives in the developing world, econometric data analysis, and in-depth analysis of recently declassified documents. It is an excellent example of the value of a mixed method approach. Most readers will come to the topic with strong opinions, and they will benefit from the author's expertise and unique perspective. He was born and spent his early years in Jamaica, so he was a firsthand witness to some of the effects of the war on drugs on the domestic politics and policies of his own country. He spent years developing his ideas and gathering the relevant evidence. He has listened to other arguments and takes them seriously throughout the book and has honestly and fairly presented the evidence. I am more convinced than before about the existence and seriousness of the disease Bartilow identifies, but I still have questions about why the drug war began, why it continues, and what should be done. One of the questions I would address with my students is whether we should accept the author's theory of embedded corporatism to explain why the war on drugs started and why it continues. Embedded corporatism refers to the large role that corporations play in US policymaking which results in public policies shaped by US-based corporations for the benefit of US corporations. Do corporations intend to do harm?On this question the author is conflicted. In his dominant narrative, corporations are not evil. They are pursuing profits and are not violating any laws. Corporate leaders are represented by the author as indifferent to the harm they cause at home or abroad. Milton Friedman would have called their behavior ethical. Many mainstream analyses of US public policymaking would describe the creation of drug war policies as the...

In their article "Is Religion Really the Enemy of Human Rights?," Wade Cole and Gaelle Perrier challenge the bottom-up theory of human rights protection and our findings regarding the effects of religiosity and of Muslim governments on human rights protection. Their counterarguments and re-analysis of the data are not convincing. They do not have a coherent alternative theory motivating their empirical re-analysis, and they carelessly use multiple regression to undermine our original findings. Here we present even more evidence supporting the societal religiosity hypothesis and illustrating a large Muslim human rights deficit for nearly all human rights. Poor human rights scores for Muslim countries result from discriminatory policies that are consistent with the tenants of Islam, public opinion in Muslim countries, and descriptions of discriminatory policies contained in human rights reports. To counter the negative effects of religiosity and Muslim governments, we recommend new international and national policy initiatives advancing gender equality.

Though nearly all countries of the world have promised to respect human rights, there are two groups of countries in the world: one where human rights are improving and another where they are not. Countries in the improving human rights group also are improving in many other ways. The logic of institutional "path dependence" explains why only a minority of countries are in the improving group and why it is difficult to switch from a bad trajectory to a good one. It emphasizes that new formal rules including human rights often fail to constrain political and economic actors. Further exploration of these ideas requires a new research agenda focusing less on year-to-year changes and more on long-term trends. It also should concentrate less on assessing the impact of one formal institution at a time and more on identifying the full range of supporting institutional arrangements necessary for improving human rights.

The World Bank, along with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), plays an important role in providing external capital for developing countries. Most of the controversy has been centred upon the fairness of the structural adjustment conditions and the effects of these conditions on economic development and on the human rights practices of loan recipients. The most careful quantitative research on selection criteria has focused on the IMF and has given disproportionate attention to potential economic selection criteria. The World Bank also was less likely to give a loan to a country involved in interstate conflict. Structural adjustment conditions required by the Bank and IMF are intended to encourage recipient governments to adopt what World Bank and IMF staff refer to as 'good governance' policies. Human rights practices affect the probability of loan receipt, while loans affect human rights practices, which, in turn, affect the subsequent probability of loan receipt.

Integrating institutional and implementation issues into policy decisions - an introduction and overview, Derick W. Brinkerhoff. Part 1 Policy analysis and the new institutionalism analyzing policy reform and reforming policy analysis - an institutionalist approach, Ronald J. Oakerson and S. Tjip Walker the institutional analysis and development framework - application to irrigation policy in Nepal, Wai Fung Lam et al an institutional analysis of local-level common pool woodstock governance and management - implications for environmental policy, James T. Thomson analyzing bureaucracy and rural development policy implementation - the limits of hierarchy, Norman K. Nicholson. Part 2 Policy analysis and implementation frameworks: a comparative approach to the assessment of decentralization policy in Developing Countries, Richard Vengroff and Ogwo Jombo Umeh analyzing the role of the public sector in Africa - implications for civil service reform policies, Jerry M. Silverman sustainability assessment for agriculture policies - comparative cases from agricultural extension, Daniel J. Gustafson an analytic framework for policy implementation - assessing progress with Madagascar's national environmental action plan, Derick W. Brinkerhoff exporting policy paradigms - the case of Chinese forestry, Peter deLeon and Vicki L. Spencer. Part 3 Policy analysis and implementation tools: stakeholder analysis and political mapping - tools for successfully implementing policy reforms, Benjamin L. Crosby interactive policy analysis - process methods for policy reform, Louise G. White analytic approaches to reducing the costs of corruption - West African livestock marketing and trade policy, John S. Holtzman and Nicholas P. Kulibaba climbing the objective tree - policy analysis and reform in the Philippines, Alice L. Morton.

Governments supply different levels of protection for different human rights, in part, because the members of their societies demand protection of some rights, but not all rights for all members of society. The authors argue that societal religiosity is an important factor reducing the level of societal demand for many human rights. Using quantitative indicators of societal religiosity and respect for human rights, the findings of this study show that (a) most human rights practices are worse in societies where citizens are more religious and (b) Muslim majority nations provide less respect for almost all human rights.

This research project uses econometric methods and comparative, cross-national data to see whether violations of human rights increase the likelihood of the onset or escalation of violent protest, terrorism and/or civil war. The findings show that these types of violent internal conflict will occur and escalate if governments: (1) torture, politically imprison, kill, or "disappear" people, (2) do not allow women to participate fully in the political system, including allowing them to hold high level national political office, and (3) do not allow women to participate fully in the economic life of the nation by ensuring equal pay for equal work, by encouraging their entry to the highest paid occupations, and by protecting them from sexual harassment at their workplaces. These types of violations of human rights and the existence of large horizontal inequalities in societies independently produce an increased risk of the onset and escalation of many forms of violent internal conflict. The results also provide some evidence for the argument that there is a trade-off between liberty and security.

We contribute to the research stream emphasizing the competition between international organizations and citizens for influence over the domestic policy choices of national politicians. Drawing upon previous theoretical and empirical work on the common agency problem, we contend that the joint influence of a country’s memberships in multiple international governmental organizations (IGOs) generates consistent, unintended, disruptive effects, which reduces domestic accountability and can worsen the quality of a domestic government. Even if we assume that joining any particular IGO is beneficial for member states, the competing demands of multiple IGO memberships could undermine the quality of their governments. Our comparative, cross-national empirical findings support this theoretical expectation. Countries participating in a larger number of IGOs tend to have poorer scores on five widely used indicators of the quality of a domestic government. Future research should identify the types of policies and countries where the negative externalities of international cooperation on domestic accountability are greatest.