New Article Published: “Human Rights Conditions: What We Know and Why it Matters”

By Patrick Finnegan

I am delighted to announce that the current issue of the Minnesota Journal of International Law (Winter 2019) is carrying an article that I co-wrote with David Weissbrodt, Regents Professor of Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Law School.  Professor Weissbrodt is my long-time employer and a mentor, so I am deeply honored to share a byline with him.  Our article explores the causal research on human rights violations and compliance.  The Abstract is reproduced below (footnotes omitted).  The entire article can be accessed here on the Minnesota Journal of International Law website.

*****

Human Rights Conditions: What We Know and Why it Matters

David Weissbrodt and Patrick Finnegan

Abstract

It may be impossible to understand the cause of every human rights violation. Causal research is a useful endeavor, however, as it sheds light on the conditions that produce human rights violations and compliance. Such knowledge can help improve the effectiveness of human rights advocacy strategies to target and influence these conditions. This survey examines four broad themes: (A) Government Behavior and Structure; (B) Armed Conflict; (C) Economic Factors; and (D) Psychological Factors. The findings by scholars and practitioners are myriad and complex, but some general trends are observable. Democratic governments tend to better protect a broad range of human rights, especially when paired with an independent judiciary. Democratization may involve short-term disruption but has long-term payoffs in respect for human rights. Repression in weak states heightens the likelihood of civil wars. Armed conflict, in turns, tends to generate the most grave human rights abuses. Economic factors are deeply intertwined with the full spectrum of human rights in two key ways: (1) the distribution of resources (economic, social, and cultural rights); and (2) economic structures and incentives that may encourage repression. Individual psychological factors, such as the tendency to obey authority, group identity, and exclusionary ideologies can lead people to commit atrocities, especially in the context of armed conflict. 

Following this overview, the article discusses some of the controversies and challenges in human rights research. These issues include: differences in qualitative and quantitative methods; surveillance bias in statistical work; and the difficulty of comparative work. The article then explores theories of how international human rights norms influence state behavior and how this influence affects domestic conditions. The article concludes by reiterating that causal research can improve advocacy, and adds that it may serve a persuasive function as well. Causal research can help human rights advocates make the case for policies that contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights. It can do so by establishing the credibility of policy proposals, demonstrating that advocates understand the problems they seek to address.