IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper

Compliance for big brothers: An empirical analysis on the impact of the anti-trafficking protocol

  • Cho, Seo-young
  • Vadlamannati, Krishna Chaitanya

The Anti-trafficking Protocol reflects the interests of the major powers. Due to the high costs of compliance, countries will strategically select certain obligations to comply, which can satisfy the major powers with smaller costs. Among the three main obligations of the Protocol - prevention, protection and prosecution, we predict that ratification leads to compliance with the prevention policy first because prevention is less costly for member states to comply with. Therefore it is the most efficient form of compliance. We empirically test this hypothesis by employing panel data from 147 countries during the period of 2001-2009. As the theory predicts, the ratification of the Protocol has the strongest effect on the prevention policy of a member state compared to protection and prosecution. Our findings are robust to the method of estimation and the choice of variables.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/70206/1/653770790.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Goettingen, Department of Economics in its series Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers with number 118.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:cegedp:118
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Platz der Göttinger Sieben 3, 37073 Göttingen

Web page: http://www.cege.wiso.uni-goettingen.de/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Jinyong Hahn & Jerry Hausman, 2002. "A New Specification Test for the Validity of Instrumental Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 163-189, January.
  2. Christian Bjørnskov & Axel Dreher & Justina Fischer, 2008. "Cross-country determinants of life satisfaction: exploring different determinants across groups in society," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 119-173, January.
  3. Jinyong Hahn & Jerry Hausman, 2003. "Weak Instruments: Diagnosis and Cures in Empirical Econometrics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 118-125, May.
  4. Martin Gassebner & Michael J. Lamla & James Raymond Vreeland, 2009. "Extreme Bounds of Democracy," KOF Working papers 09-224, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
  5. Edward E. Leamer, 1982. "Let's Take the Con Out of Econometrics," UCLA Economics Working Papers 239, UCLA Department of Economics.
  6. Cragg, John G. & Donald, Stephen G., 1993. "Testing Identifiability and Specification in Instrumental Variable Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 222-240, April.
  7. Barry Eichengreen & David Leblang, 2008. "Democracy And Globalization," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 289-334, November.
  8. Esther Duflo & Raghabendra Chattopadhyay, 2004. "Women as policy makers: Evidence from a randomized policy experiment in india," Framed Field Experiments 00224, The Field Experiments Website.
  9. Ronald Davies & Helen Naughton, 2014. "Cooperation in environmental policy: a spatial approach," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 923-954, October.
  10. Fölster, Stefan & Henrekson, Magnus, 2000. "Growth Effects of Government Expenditure and Taxation in Rich Countries," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 391, Stockholm School of Economics.
  11. Hans Pitlik, 2007. "A race to liberalization? Diffusion of economic policy reform among OECD-economies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 159-178, July.
  12. Hoffmann, Stanley, 1956. "The Role of International Organization: Limits and Possibilities," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 357-372, August.
  13. Belser, Patrick, 2005. "Forced labour and human trafficking : estimating the profits," ILO Working Papers 376750, International Labour Organization.
  14. Cho, Seo-Young & Dreher, Axel & Neumayer, Eric, 2011. "The Spread of Anti-Trafficking Policies - Evidence from a New Index," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2011 20, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
  15. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
  16. Dreher, Axel & Gassebner, Martin & Siemers, Lars-H. R., 2010. "Globalization, economic freedom and human rights," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 115, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  17. McAleer, Michael & Pagan, Adrian, 1985. "What Will Take the Con Out of Econometrics?," CEPR Discussion Papers 39, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  18. Lancaster, Tony, 2000. "The incidental parameter problem since 1948," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 391-413, April.
  19. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
  20. Neumayer, Eric & Plümper, Thomas, 2010. "Spatial Effects in Dyadic Data," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(01), pages 145-166, January.
  21. Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 1997. "I just ran four million regressions," Economics Working Papers 201, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  22. Bruce A. Blonigen & Ronald B. Davies & Glen R. Waddell & Helen T. Naughton, 2004. "FDI in Space: Spatial Autoregressive Relationships in Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Working Papers 10939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Nickell, Stephen J, 1981. "Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1417-26, November.
  24. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Paul Frijters, 2002. "How important is Methodology for the Estimates of the Determinants of Happiness?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-024/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  25. Mark McGillivray & Howard White, 1993. "Measuring development? The UNDP's human development index," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(2), pages 183-192, 03.
  26. Martin Gassebner & Noel Gaston & Michael Lamla, 2008. "The Inverse Domino Effect: Are Economic Reforms Contagious?," KOF Working papers 08-187, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
  27. Vreeland, James Raymond, 2008. "Political Institutions and Human Rights: Why Dictatorships Enter into the United Nations Convention Against Torture," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(01), pages 65-101, January.
  28. Frank Windmeijer, 2000. "A finite sample correction for the variance of linear two-step GMM estimators," IFS Working Papers W00/19, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  29. Cho, Seo-Young, 2010. "International human rights treaty to change social patterns: The convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 93, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  30. Axel Dreher & Jan-Egbert Sturm, 2006. "Do IMF and World Bank Influence Voting in the UN General Assembly?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1724, CESifo Group Munich.
  31. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-29, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:cegedp:118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.