Public Support for International Human Rights Institutions: A Cross‐National and Multilevel Analysis

Abstract

The expansion of international human rights institutions has drawn much attention. Bringing together theories from sociology, political science, and international law, this article examines what factors promote public support for international human rights institutions, using the recent wave of the World Values Survey data (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008). The level of public support displays both cross-national and crossindividual variations, so I conceptualize it as a two-level process and employ the multilevel modeling. At the individual level, it is found that men, younger people, and individuals with more education and income show a higher level of support. At the country level, national affluence, political change (de-democratization), and linkage to the world society are associated with more support. I further integrate individuallevel characteristics and country-level social contexts, and pay special attention to education. Education is the institutional link between macro-level social influences and micro-level individual attitudes. I find that the support-promoting effect of education is contingent on social contexts. It is more salient in wealthy countries and countries with strong ties to the world society.

Cultures of Denial: Avoiding Knowledge of State Violations of Human Rights in Argentina and the United States

“…In addition, this project interrogates common assumptions about how information on human rights abuses circulates in society. It is often assumed that if information were truly available to the public (through the mass media, word of mouth, or other channels), it would lead to greater public outcry and action for social change (see, e.g., Zhou ). Yet our work indicates that this process is more complicated.…”

The contextual effect of trust on perceived support: Evidence from Roma and non‐Roma in East‐Central Europe

“…In order to account for country‐level targets of perceived support, we controlled for 2011 GDP per capita and Gini coefficient (with data from the World Bank). We also include a measure of repression from Freedom House (see Zhou, 2013). This measure ranges from 2 to 14 in our sample, with higher values representing more repression.…”

Putting Sociological Knowledge to Good Use

“…Sociologists, I propose, have a great deal to contribute to research and theory on human rights, especially owing to the many ways we approach the study of the many aspects of society. Sociological Forum has devoted many pages to such issue (see, e.g., Cole ; Sutton and Norgaard ; Zhou ). The Council of the American Sociological Association adopted a statement on August 12, 2009.…”