IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v48y2018i02p513-533_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deliberative Capacity Building through International Organizations: The Case of the Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights

Author

Listed:
  • Milewicz, Karolina M.
  • Goodin, Robert E.

Abstract

Theories of deliberation, developed largely in the context of domestic politics, are becoming increasingly relevant for international politics. The recently established Universal Periodic Review (UPR) operating under the auspices of the UN’s Human Rights Council is an excellent illustration. Our analysis of responses to its reports and recommendations suggests that the deliberative processes surrounding the UPR do indeed evoke co-operative responses even from countries with poor human rights records. Its highly inclusive, deliberative, repeated-play and peer-to-peer nature can serve as a model for how international organizations more generally can enhance deliberative capacity across the international system.

Suggested Citation

  • Milewicz, Karolina M. & Goodin, Robert E., 2018. "Deliberative Capacity Building through International Organizations: The Case of the Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 513-533, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:48:y:2018:i:02:p:513-533_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123415000708/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Konstantina Skritsovali & Sally Randles & Claire Hannibal, 2023. "Missing Attention to Power Dynamics in Collaborative Multi-Actor Business Models for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Daniel Berliner & Alex Ingrams & Suzanne J. Piotrowski, 2022. "Process effects of multistakeholder institutions: Theory and evidence from the Open Government Partnership," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1343-1361, October.
    3. Mintao Nie, 2023. "IOs’ selective adoption of NGO information: Evidence from the Universal Periodic Review," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 27-59, January.
    4. Berliner, Daniel & Ingrams, Alex & Piotrowski, Suzanne, 2022. "Process effects of multistakeholder institutions: theory and evidence from the Open Government Partnership," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111060, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:48:y:2018:i:02:p:513-533_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.