Abstract
Objectives: Why do states create a truth commission after political transition? This article answers this question by testing three key theories after surveying the existing literature: transnational advocacy networks, the balance of power between old and new elites, and diffusion theory. Methods: Cox proportional hazards models were used to explain the adoption of a truth commission. I used the Transitional Justice Database Project database on truth commissions in 71 countries that became democracies between 1980 and 2006. Result: Strong evidence supports transnational advocacy networks and diffusion explanations. First, active domestic and international advocacy is a key factor. Second, diffusion theory is supported, as establishing a truth commission in neighboring countries is a relevant factor. Transitional countries are most sensitive to truth commissions adopted in culturally similar countries. Conclusion: I found empirical evidence supporting the relevance of diffusion, domestic advocacy groups, and international actors.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1485-1502 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Social Science Quarterly |
| Volume | 100 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2019 Aug |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Direct correspondence to Hun Joon Kim, Department of Political Science, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136–701, Korea 〈[email protected]〉. This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2925085); and a Korea University Grant (K1706371). Hun Joon Kim shall share all data and coding for replication purposes.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 by the Southwestern Social Science Association
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Social Sciences