Shaming and Blaming: Using Events Data to Assess the Impact of Human Rights INGOs1

TLDR

The study asks whether shaming activities by human rights NGOs directly influence state behavior. The authors test the hypothesis that shaming effects depend on domestic NGO presence and external pressure, using a new dataset of over 400 shaming events toward governments. The analysis shows that shaming improves state human‑rights practices only when combined with domestic NGO presence or external pressure, providing the first global quantitative evidence of this conditional effect.

Abstract

Do the "shaming" activities of HROs (human rights international non-governmental organizations) have a direct influence on state behavior? We argue, consistent with existing scholarship, that states targeted or "shamed" by these organizations do improve their human rights practices. However, mere shaming is not enough. Improvements in human rights practices result from the interaction of shaming by HROs with (i) a domestic presence of HROs within the targeted state and/or (ii) pressure by third-party states, individuals, and organizations. Using a new data set of the shaming events of more than 400 HROs toward governments, we test these propositions quantitatively and find widespread support for the arguments. This research provides the first global quantitative evidence of the conditional importance of HRO shaming in transnational advocacy efforts.