Are Human Rights Practices Improving?

Abstract

Has government protection of human rights improved? The answer to this and many other research questions is strongly affected by the assumptions we make and the modeling strategy we choose as the basis for creating human rights country scores. Fariss (2014) introduced a statistical model that produced latent scores showing an improving trend in human rights. Consistent with his stringent assumptions, his statistical model heavily weighted rare incidents of mass killings such as genocide, while discounting indicators of lesser and more common violations such as torture and political imprisonment. We replicated his analysis, replacing the actual values of all indicators of lesser human rights violations with randomly generated data, and obtained an identical improving trend. However, when we replicated the analysis, relaxing his assumptions by allowing all indicators to potentially have a similar effect on the latent scores, we find no human rights improvement.

The effect of copartisan justice ministers on human rights in presidential democracies

“…In response, Haschke and Gibney ([ 56 ]: 89–90) note that Clark and Sikkink [ 60 ] and Fariss [ 61 ] “repeatedly assert that the [US State Department and Amnesty International] annual reports are now longer and more detailed—and presumably more accurate—than they had been in the past,” yet “the evidence that they marshal in this regard is selective and does not constitute compelling proof.” In their analysis, Haschke and Gibney ([ 56 ]: 99) show that “any measurable bias is actually in the opposite direction of” what Clark and Sikkink and Fariss claim. In another response, Cingraneli and Filippov ([ 62 ]: 1088) note that they “have identified serious problems” with the alleged ‘unbiased estimates’ created by Fariss. Using Fariss’ own computer code they find that the upward trend identified by Fariss “depended almost entirely on the inclusion of the mass killing indicators” ([ 62 ]: 1086).…”

“…In another response, Cingraneli and Filippov ([ 62 ]: 1088) note that they “have identified serious problems” with the alleged ‘unbiased estimates’ created by Fariss. Using Fariss’ own computer code they find that the upward trend identified by Fariss “depended almost entirely on the inclusion of the mass killing indicators” ([ 62 ]: 1086). They caution that “[t]hose who use Fariss’s scores should be aware that there is a strong built-in correlation between mass killings and those scores,” and as such, “evaluators should remember that the trends in Fariss’s scores for capable and democratic countries are affected by frequencies of mass killing events in failed and authoritarian states” ([ 62 ]: 1088).…”

“…Using Fariss’ own computer code they find that the upward trend identified by Fariss “depended almost entirely on the inclusion of the mass killing indicators” ([ 62 ]: 1086). They caution that “[t]hose who use Fariss’s scores should be aware that there is a strong built-in correlation between mass killings and those scores,” and as such, “evaluators should remember that the trends in Fariss’s scores for capable and democratic countries are affected by frequencies of mass killing events in failed and authoritarian states” ([ 62 ]: 1088). For this reason alone, it would be inappropriate for me to use Fariss’ scores as my sample is limited to democracies.…”

“…In their analysis, Haschke and Gibney ([56]: 99) show that "any measurable bias is actually in the opposite direction of" what Clark and Sikkink and Fariss claim. In another response, Cingraneli and Filippov ( [62]: 1088) note that they "have identified serious problems" with the alleged 'unbiased estimates' created by Fariss. Using Fariss' own computer code they find that the upward trend identified by Fariss "depended almost entirely on the inclusion of the mass killing indicators" ([62]: 1086).…”

Backlash against human rights shaming: emotions in groups

“…Sikkink (2017, 179, 212), expresses misgivings about the term 'shaming' and says she prefers 'shining a light'. More generally on the debate over the effectiveness of human rights advocacy, see Fariss (2014Fariss ( , 2019 and Cingranelli and Filippov (2018).…”