measuring human rights purpose of measurement levels of measurement categories and dimensions...
TRANSCRIPT
Measuring human rights
Purpose of measurementLevels of measurementCategories and dimensionsObjects of measurementProblems of measurement
Purposes of measurement
Contextual description Monitoring Documentation
Classification Types of regime Types of governance Types of rights violations
Mapping (time and space) Global trends Regional Local
Secondary analysis Academic research Policy research Political dialogue
Levels of social scientific measurement
L e v e l 4S c o re s fo r U n its
T h e sc o res fo r u n its o f o b se rva tio n (e .g. in d iv id ua ls , c o u n trie s , re g ion s) g e n e ra te d b y a p a rtic u la r in d ic a to r.Q u a n titativ e a n d q u a litativ e d a ta .
L e v e l 3In d ic a to rs
A lso re ferre d to as 'm e a su re s ', 'o p e ra tio n a lisa tio n s ', an d c la ssific a tio nsE v e n ts -b a se d, s ta n d a rd s-b a se d (o rd ina l, in te rv a l, no m in a l), su rv e y -b a se d (ord in a l, in te rv a l, n o m in a l)
L e v e l 2S y stem a tiz e d C o nc e pt
A sp e c ific fo rm u la tio n o f a c o nc e p t u se d b y sch o la r, IG O , N G OD im e n sio n s an d c o m p o n e nts o f c o n c e pt
L e v e l 1B a c k g ro u nd C o n c e pt
T h e b roa d c o n ste lla tion o f m ea n in g s a n d u n de rs ta n din g s a sso c ia ted w ith a g iv e n c o n c e ptN o rm a tiv e a n d e m p ir ic al th e o ry
Adapted from: Zeller and Carmines 1980; Munck and Verkuilen 2000; Adcock and Collier 2001; Ball and Spirer 2000
Measuring Example
L e v e l 4S c o re s fo r U n itsB R A Z IL 1 9 8 5
L O W E X E C U T IV E C O N S T R A IN T ; H IG H C IV IL R IG H T S V IO L A T IO N S
L e v e l 3In d ic a to rs
E X E C U T IV E C O N S T R A IN T ; C IV IL R IG H T S V IO L A T IO N S
L e v e l 2S y s tem a tiz e d C o nc e pt
L IB E R A L D E M O C R A C YIN S T IT U T IO N A L D IM E N S IO N ; R IG H T S D IM E N S IO N
L e v e l 1B a c k g ro u nd C o n c e pt
D E M O C R A C Y
Categories and dimensions of human rights
Categories Civil rights Political rights Economic rights Social rights Cultural rights Solidarity rights
Dimensions Protect Respect Fulfil
Categories
Dimensions
I
Respect (no interference in the exercise of the
right)
II Protect
(prevent violations from third parties)
III Fulfil
(provision of resources and the
outcomes of policies)
Civil and political
Torture, extra-judicial
killings, disappearance,
arbitrary detention, unfair trials, electoral
intimidation, disenfranchisement
Measures to
prevent non-state actors from committing
violations, such as
Investment in
judiciaries, prisons, police forces, and
elections, and resource allocations
to ability
Cat
egor
ies
of h
uma
n rig
hts
Economic, social, and cultural
Ethnic, racial, gender,
or linguistic discrimination in
health, education, and welfare and
resource allocations below ability.
Measures to
prevent non-state actors from engaging in
discriminatory behaviour the limits
access
Progressive realisation
Investment in health, education, and
welfare, and resource allocations to ability
Objects of measurementPrinciple (de jure)
International legal National legal
Practice (de facto) Events-based Standards-based
Dichotomous categories Polychotomous scales
Survey-based Hybrid measures
Policy Input Process Output Outcome
Principle (de jure) measurement
Code treaty participation (scale) No signature (0) Signature (1) Ratification (2) Ratification with reservations (weighting)
Code national constitutions (n or scale) Articles on civil rights Articles on political rights Articles on economic rights Articles on social rights Articles on cultural rights
International de jure human rights
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year
Num
ber
of C
ount
ries
Rat
ifyi
ng I
nstr
umen
ts
ICESCR ICCPR OPT1 OPT2 CERD CEDAW CAT CRC
Landman (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press
International de jure rights: coding reservations
Rewarding the absence of reservations Countries with no reservations with regard to said treaty that do not
modify obligations, or non-substantial declarations (score = 4) Countries whose reservations could have some but not major impact on
their obligations (score = 3) Countries whose reservations have noticeable effect on the obligations
(score = 2) Countries whose reservations can have significant and severe effects on
treaty obligations (score = 1)
The ratification score No signature (0) Signature (1) Ratification (2)
Weighting the ratification score Weighted Ratification = [Ratification score (0,1,2) * Reservations score
(1,2,3,4)] High score = ratification with fewer substantial reservations Low score = ratification with more substantial reservations
International de jure rights: ICCPR with and without reservations
Year
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
Me
an
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
ICCPR (1966)
CCPRRESW
Landman (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press
International de jure rights: ICCPR with reservations
Regional groupingsM
iddl
e E
ast
Pos
t-C
omm
unis
t Eur
op
Com
mun
ist E
urop
e
Eur
ope
Pac
ific
Asi
a
Am
eric
as
Afr
ica
Me
an
CC
PR
RE
SW
8
6
4
2
0
Landman (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press
Domestic de jure civil and political rights
Civil and Political Rights
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Lif
e
Sla
very
/ser
vitu
de
Tor
ture
/cru
eltr
eatm
ent
Equ
alit
y be
fore
the
law
Arb
itra
ry d
eten
tion
Pri
vate
lif
e
Fre
edom
of
mov
emen
t
Asy
lum
Tho
ught
/opi
nion
Exp
ress
ion
Ass
embl
y/as
soci
atio
n
Vot
e
Par
tici
pati
on
Types of Rights
Per
cena
tge
of N
atio
nal
Con
stit
utio
ns
1788-1948 1949-1957 1958-1966 1967-1975
Source: van Maarseveen and Tang (1978)
Domestic de jure economic and social rights
Economic and Social Rights
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Soc
ial
secu
rity
Wor
k
Fre
e ch
oice
of
job
Fai
r/eq
ual
pay
Tra
de u
nion
s
Res
t/le
isur
e
Sta
ndar
d of
liv
ing
Edu
cati
on
Types of Rights
Per
cent
age
of N
atio
nal
Con
stit
utio
ns
1788-1948 1949-1957 1958-1966 1967-1975
Source: van Maarseveen and Tang (1978)
Practice (de facto) measurement
Events-basedStandards-basedSurvey-basedHybrid
De facto measurement: events-based methodology for human rights
Disaggregated events (‘who did what to whom’) Act Violation(s) Perpetrator Victim Context
When Where
Controlled vocabulariesAggregated event countsMultiple sources of information
De facto measurement: events-based data model
Source: http://shr.aaas.org/hrdag/idea/datamodel/index.html
Measuring de facto rights: events-based example in Kosovo
Source: Patrick Ball and Jana Asher
Estimated total refugee migration and killings over time, in Kosovo
Source: http://shr.aaas.org/hrdag/project-38.php
Measuring de facto rights: events-based example in Peru, 1980-2000
Measuring de facto rights: events-based example for abuse against Human Rights Defenders, 1997-2000
Source: Landman (2006)’Holding the Line: Human Rights Defenders in the Age of Terror’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 8..
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Alg
eria
Arg
enti
naA
rmen
iaA
zerb
aija
nB
angl
ades
hB
elar
usB
oliv
iaB
osni
a H
erze
gove
nia
Bot
swan
aB
urki
na F
aso
Bur
undi
Cam
bodi
aC
amer
oon
Cha
dC
hile
Chi
naC
olom
bia
Con
go,
Dem
ocra
tic
Con
go,
Rep
ubli
c of
the
Cos
ta R
ica
Cot
e d'
Ivoi
reC
roat
iaC
uba
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Dji
bout
iE
ast T
imor
Les
teE
cuad
orE
gypt
El
Sal
vado
rE
thio
pia
Gam
bia
Geo
rgia
Gre
ece
Gua
tem
ala
Gui
nea-
Bis
sau
Hai
tiH
ondu
ras
Indi
aIn
done
sia
Iran
Isra
elIt
aly
Jord
anK
azak
hsta
nK
enya
Kor
ea,
Rep
ubli
c of
Kyr
gyzs
tan
Lao
sL
eban
onL
iber
iaM
aced
onia
Mal
aysi
aM
auri
tani
aM
auri
tius
Mex
ico
Mor
occo
Nam
ibia
Nep
alN
icar
agua
Nig
eria
Pak
ista
nP
anam
aP
eru
Phi
lipp
ines
Rus
sia
Rw
anda
Sen
egal
Spa
inS
ri L
anka
Sud
anS
yria
Tan
zani
aT
hail
and
Tog
oT
unis
iaT
urke
yT
urkm
enis
tan
Ukr
aine
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Uzb
ekis
tan
Ven
ezue
laV
ietn
amY
emen
Yug
osla
via
post
Zam
bia
Zim
babw
e
Country
HR
D a
buse
(N
act
s)
De facto measurement: standards-based methodology
Ideal standards Legal instruments Conceptual definition
Democracy Good governance Human rights
Empirical information Monitoring bodies
Human rights treaty bodies NGOs (e.g. Amnesty International/Human Rights Watch) Governments (e.g. US State Department)
Newspapers Historical accounts/narratives
Coding Dichotomous categories
ACLP Doorenspleet
Polychotomous scales Freedom House Political Terror Scale Torture Scale
De facto measurement: standards-based scales of rights
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Year
Rig
hts
Sca
le
FH Political Rights
FH Civil Rights
Torture Scale (Hathaway)
Amnesty PIR
State Department PIR
Landman (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press
De facto rights:Standards-based measures across space
REGION
Eas
t A
sia
Pac
ific
So
uth
Asi
a
ME
NA
Su
b S
ah A
fric
a
Lat
in A
mer
ica
No
rth
Am
eric
a
Po
st-C
om
m E
uro
pe
Co
mm
Eu
rop
e
Eu
rop
e
Mea
n Sc
ore
(Hig
h =
wor
se)
5
4
3
2
1
0
PTS (AI)
PTS (SD)
Torture Scale
Freedom House CR
Freedom House PR
Landman (2005) Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press
De facto measurement: standards-based scales of political and civil rightsCingranelli and Richards (CIRI) data set
YEAR
2003
2001
1999
1997
1995
1993
1991
1989
1987
1985
1983
1981
Mea
n1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
POLPAR
SPEECH
ASSN
KILL
MOVE
TORT
POLPRIS
www.humanrightsdata.com
De facto measurement: standards-based scales of women’s and workers’ rightsCingranelli and Richards (CIRI) data set
YEAR
2003
2001
1999
1997
1995
1993
1991
1989
1987
1985
1983
1981
Mea
n2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
WECON
WOPOL
WORKER
WOSOC
www.humanrightsdata.com
De facto measurement: survey-based methodology
Sample of the population ‘VIPs’ Quota sample Random
Standardised questionsReponses
Open Closed
De facto measurement: survey-based measure of human rights
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
France UK Germany Netherlands USA Mexico Brazil Chile
Country
Per
cent
age
of r
espo
nden
ts
World Values Survey (1994) question on support for the idea of human rights in 1990 across eight countries (1002 N 2095).
De facto measurement: survey-based measure of human rights
Physicians for Human Rights (2002); N = 991 IDPs in Sierra Leone
Policy indicators
InputProcessPerformanceOutputOutcomePerception
Policy indicators: input
Provision of resources Spending in education Spending on health service Spending on housing
Policy indicators: process
Health Number of patients seen per day Waiting lists Average journey time to hospital
Water Time it takes to access clean water Number of trips to water source
needed per day
Policy indicators: performance
Health Time it takes to build new hospitals Time it takes to deliver new beds Time it takes to train and recruit new
doctors
Water Time it takes to provide a water
connection Time it takes to build a sewerage system
Policy indicators: output
Health Number of doctors per 100,000 Number of hospital beds per 100,000 Number of hospitals per geographical
area
Water Households with access to water
within 200m of dwelling Increase in quality of water
Policy indicators: outcome
Health Infant mortality rates Longevity rates New HIV/AIDs cases
Water Level of water born diseases Infant mortality rate
Policy indicators: perception
Attitudinal dataSurveysFeedback questionnairesCan evaluate inputs, process, and outputs
Problems of measurement
ValidityReliabilityMeasurement biasLack of transparencyVariance truncationInformation biasAggregation problems