Universal Rights, Uneven Impacts: The Domestic Politics of Treaty Incorporation
Book Manuscript
When a state joins a human rights treaty, it must incorporate its international treaty obligations into domestic law by creating domestic regulations and legislation that match the international standards. Why do some treaty members change their domestic laws to align them with treaty standards, while other members do not? I theorize that incorporation—the adoption of specific treaty provisions containing human rights standards into domestic laws—results from political battles between competing domestic interest groups. Most political science research emphasizes how civil society advocates use human rights treaties to hold governments accountable for rights violations. In contrast, I argue that many human rights treaties activate social conflict over distribution or competing moral values. These conflicts spur interest groups to pressure governments both in favor of and against treaty incorporation. Consequently, governments that face competing pressures from international and domestic interest groups often fail to incorporate international treaties. I test this argument by examining legislation adopted in Latin America to incorporate treaties against child labor and marriage. I analyze two original datasets of the national legislation adopted in the region to prohibit these practices, including the loopholes that provide exceptions to the human rights standards. I complement these analyses with qualitative evidence from over 60 in-depth interviews with policymakers, civil society leaders, and representatives of international organizations in six Latin American countries.
Book Manuscript
When a state joins a human rights treaty, it must incorporate its international treaty obligations into domestic law by creating domestic regulations and legislation that match the international standards. Why do some treaty members change their domestic laws to align them with treaty standards, while other members do not? I theorize that incorporation—the adoption of specific treaty provisions containing human rights standards into domestic laws—results from political battles between competing domestic interest groups. Most political science research emphasizes how civil society advocates use human rights treaties to hold governments accountable for rights violations. In contrast, I argue that many human rights treaties activate social conflict over distribution or competing moral values. These conflicts spur interest groups to pressure governments both in favor of and against treaty incorporation. Consequently, governments that face competing pressures from international and domestic interest groups often fail to incorporate international treaties. I test this argument by examining legislation adopted in Latin America to incorporate treaties against child labor and marriage. I analyze two original datasets of the national legislation adopted in the region to prohibit these practices, including the loopholes that provide exceptions to the human rights standards. I complement these analyses with qualitative evidence from over 60 in-depth interviews with policymakers, civil society leaders, and representatives of international organizations in six Latin American countries.
Publications
"Looking beyond Ratification: Autocrats' International Engagement with Women's Rights." 2023. Politics & Gender (with Audrey L. Comstock). doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000472
Although authoritarian regimes often repress the rights of women, many autocrats have committed to international treaties protecting women’s human rights. Scholars have typically overlooked this engagement, focusing instead on autocrats’ commitment (and violation) of treaties protecting civil, political, and physical integrity rights. Yet existing explanations for autocrats’ ratification of these treaties—such as appeasing domestic opposition groups—do not necessarily apply to women’s rights (von Stein 2013). As authoritarian international law is increasingly viewed as an important area of study (Ginsburg 2020), scholars should explore how authoritarian regimes navigate participation regarding women’s rights issues, including their engagement with the main women’s rights treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). After taking a closer look at how autocracies shape, commit, and challenge women’s rights internationally, we suggest several research directions to build this area of study.
"The Evolution of the Global Movement to End Child Marriage." 2022. Journal of Human Rights, 21(2): 227-244. doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2022.2030208
Although international and domestic laws prohibit child marriage, millions of girls are married every year worldwide, a trend only aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the turn of the century, the global advocacy movement to end child marriage has gained momentum by standardizing its framing, using testimonies and symbols to generate empathy and mobilize solidarity, and engaging with policymakers to end the practice. In this article, I draw on newspaper articles, advocacy reports, and interviews with activists in the United States and Latin America to identify the reasons behind its success. I also discuss several challenges activists are grappling with as the movement evolves, including intra-network dynamics regarding the centrality of sexuality and the forms child marriage adopts around the world.
Under Review
"When Treaty Beneficiaries Resist: Working Children and Opposition to Human Rights Norms"
While recent work in international relations has explored social sources of opposition to international human rights norms, little attention has been paid to the resistance from individuals and groups the treaties seek to protect. Why are human rights treaties opposed by their intended beneficiaries, and what are the consequences? I argue that treaty beneficiaries resist the implementation of human rights treaties because of their distributive effects. As opposition from treaty beneficiaries is inherently legitimate, it is harder for policymakers to ignore and can fracture transnational advocacy networks. I illustrate the theory by using legislative records, newspaper articles, and in-depth interviews to trace how an organization of working children, mobilizing with support from transnational advocacy networks, pressured the Bolivian government to adopt a law contravening international treaties against child labor. The case of Bolivia’s child workers highlights normative contestation that can result from the mobilization of treaty beneficiaries, thereby challenging the generalizability of seminal models of transnational activism.
"Rival Networks and Treaty Incorporation: The Domestic Politics of Treaty Incorporation"
Previous scholarship has addressed how activists use international treaties to compel governments to respect human rights. But less attention has been paid to how activists must overcome resistance by other civil society organizations that oppose human rights standards. Therefore, I explore how treaty ratification generates domestic political contestation over competing values even in an area of high normative consensus like children's rights. I argue that governments facing pressure from constituents who oppose treaty standards are less likely to incorporate them into domestic laws. By leveraging an original dataset on Latin American legislation regulating the minimum age of marriage, I show that groups who defend religious prerogatives over marriage policy mitigate the positive effect that non-governmental organizations have on treaty incorporation. The paper suggests that governments’ response to domestic political pressure is an unexplored driver of non-compliance with human rights treaties.
Working Papers
"Labor, Distributive Politics, and the Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties: Evidence from Latin America"
Work in Progress
"Monitoring Treaty Implementation" (data analysis, APSA Centennial Grant)
"Opposing Reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child" (data analysis)
"Looking beyond Ratification: Autocrats' International Engagement with Women's Rights." 2023. Politics & Gender (with Audrey L. Comstock). doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000472
Although authoritarian regimes often repress the rights of women, many autocrats have committed to international treaties protecting women’s human rights. Scholars have typically overlooked this engagement, focusing instead on autocrats’ commitment (and violation) of treaties protecting civil, political, and physical integrity rights. Yet existing explanations for autocrats’ ratification of these treaties—such as appeasing domestic opposition groups—do not necessarily apply to women’s rights (von Stein 2013). As authoritarian international law is increasingly viewed as an important area of study (Ginsburg 2020), scholars should explore how authoritarian regimes navigate participation regarding women’s rights issues, including their engagement with the main women’s rights treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). After taking a closer look at how autocracies shape, commit, and challenge women’s rights internationally, we suggest several research directions to build this area of study.
"The Evolution of the Global Movement to End Child Marriage." 2022. Journal of Human Rights, 21(2): 227-244. doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2022.2030208
Although international and domestic laws prohibit child marriage, millions of girls are married every year worldwide, a trend only aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the turn of the century, the global advocacy movement to end child marriage has gained momentum by standardizing its framing, using testimonies and symbols to generate empathy and mobilize solidarity, and engaging with policymakers to end the practice. In this article, I draw on newspaper articles, advocacy reports, and interviews with activists in the United States and Latin America to identify the reasons behind its success. I also discuss several challenges activists are grappling with as the movement evolves, including intra-network dynamics regarding the centrality of sexuality and the forms child marriage adopts around the world.
Under Review
"When Treaty Beneficiaries Resist: Working Children and Opposition to Human Rights Norms"
While recent work in international relations has explored social sources of opposition to international human rights norms, little attention has been paid to the resistance from individuals and groups the treaties seek to protect. Why are human rights treaties opposed by their intended beneficiaries, and what are the consequences? I argue that treaty beneficiaries resist the implementation of human rights treaties because of their distributive effects. As opposition from treaty beneficiaries is inherently legitimate, it is harder for policymakers to ignore and can fracture transnational advocacy networks. I illustrate the theory by using legislative records, newspaper articles, and in-depth interviews to trace how an organization of working children, mobilizing with support from transnational advocacy networks, pressured the Bolivian government to adopt a law contravening international treaties against child labor. The case of Bolivia’s child workers highlights normative contestation that can result from the mobilization of treaty beneficiaries, thereby challenging the generalizability of seminal models of transnational activism.
"Rival Networks and Treaty Incorporation: The Domestic Politics of Treaty Incorporation"
Previous scholarship has addressed how activists use international treaties to compel governments to respect human rights. But less attention has been paid to how activists must overcome resistance by other civil society organizations that oppose human rights standards. Therefore, I explore how treaty ratification generates domestic political contestation over competing values even in an area of high normative consensus like children's rights. I argue that governments facing pressure from constituents who oppose treaty standards are less likely to incorporate them into domestic laws. By leveraging an original dataset on Latin American legislation regulating the minimum age of marriage, I show that groups who defend religious prerogatives over marriage policy mitigate the positive effect that non-governmental organizations have on treaty incorporation. The paper suggests that governments’ response to domestic political pressure is an unexplored driver of non-compliance with human rights treaties.
Working Papers
"Labor, Distributive Politics, and the Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties: Evidence from Latin America"
Work in Progress
"Monitoring Treaty Implementation" (data analysis, APSA Centennial Grant)
"Opposing Reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child" (data analysis)