Interests convergence in global human rights politics

Abstract

Abstract What explains the convergence and divergence of states’ interests related to global human rights? This study examines the dyadic similarity of the language used in the multilateral dialogue focusing on the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). The joint activities of NGOs influence states, and human rights norms are transmitted through IGOs. Using text analysis methods, the similarity between state recommendations during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is systematically quantified. Analyses suggest that a pair of states are more likely to use similar language in UPR recommendations as the number of joint activities of NGOs, shared memberships in IGOs, and shared experience in the UNHRC increases. The effects are robust even after controlling for different types of political relationships between states.