 Contextualizing Donors’ Interests: The United Nations’ Shaming of the United States’ Trade PartnersSara Kahn‐Nisser Global Policy, 2022, vol. 13, issue 1, 48-61 Abstract: Human rights advocates, particularly intergovernmental organizations (IGO), consider donors’ interests when conducting human rights shaming. Allies of donors receive preferential treatment from IGOs. Do IGOs automatically treat allies of donors more leniently or do they consider the donors’ interests in the specific area being reviewed? This article argues that donor interest considerations are policy‐area‐specific. I substantiate this argument by analysing the association between shaming and partnership with the US, using a new dataset which measures shaming under the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). I use several analysis methods and data matching. The results indicate that having a trade agreement with the US is associated with receiving more criticism under the ICESCR. Rather than giving automatic preferential treatment to allies and partners of the UN’s main donor, the ICESCR committee adjusts its shaming to the US’s interest vis‐à‐vis its partners in the policy‐areas affected by the treaty. Date: 2022 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:glopol:v:13:y:2022:i:1:p:48-61 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Global Policy is currently edited by David Held, Patrick Dunleavy and Eva-Maria Nag More articles in Global Policy from London School of Economics and Political Science Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.