Fears of Peers? Explaining Peer and Public Shaming in Global Governance

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This article conducts a comparative analysis of peer and public pressure in peer reviews among states. Arguing that such pressure is one increasingly important form of shaming in global politics, we seek to understand the extent to which five different peer reviews exert peer and public pressure and how possible variation among them can be explained. Our findings are based on responses to an original survey and semi-structured interviews among participants in the reviews. We find that peer and public pressure exist to different degrees in the peer reviews under study. Such differences cannot be explained by the policy area under review or the international organization in which peer reviews are organized. Likewise, the expertise of the actors involved in a peer review or perceptions of the legitimacy of peer review as a monitoring instrument do not explain the variation. Instead, we find that institutional factors and the acceptance of peer and public pressure among the participants in a peer review offer the best explanations.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)335-355
Number of pages21
JournalCooperation and Conflict
Volume54
Issue number3
Early online date8 Jan 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2019

Keywords

  • Anti-corruption policy
  • human rights
  • international authority
  • naming and shaming
  • peer review
  • trade and economic policy
  • HUMAN-RIGHTS
  • INTERNATIONAL-ORGANIZATIONS
  • POLITICS

Cite this

@article{aace54ba4904493bb226509e49aa124a,
title = "Fears of Peers? Explaining Peer and Public Shaming in Global Governance",
abstract = "This article conducts a comparative analysis of peer and public pressure in peer reviews among states. Arguing that such pressure is one increasingly important form of shaming in global politics, we seek to understand the extent to which five different peer reviews exert peer and public pressure and how possible variation among them can be explained. Our findings are based on responses to an original survey and semi-structured interviews among participants in the reviews. We find that peer and public pressure exist to different degrees in the peer reviews under study. Such differences cannot be explained by the policy area under review or the international organization in which peer reviews are organized. Likewise, the expertise of the actors involved in a peer review or perceptions of the legitimacy of peer review as a monitoring instrument do not explain the variation. Instead, we find that institutional factors and the acceptance of peer and public pressure among the participants in a peer review offer the best explanations.",
keywords = "Anti-corruption policy, human rights, international authority, naming and shaming, peer review, trade and economic policy, HUMAN-RIGHTS, INTERNATIONAL-ORGANIZATIONS, POLITICS",
author = "Valentina Carraro and Thomas Conzelmann and Hortense Jongen",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1177/0010836718816729",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "335--355",
journal = "Cooperation and Conflict",
issn = "0010-8367",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Fears of Peers? Explaining Peer and Public Shaming in Global Governance. / Carraro, Valentina; Conzelmann, Thomas; Jongen, Hortense.

In: Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 54, No. 3, 09.2019, p. 335-355.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fears of Peers? Explaining Peer and Public Shaming in Global Governance

AU - Carraro, Valentina

AU - Conzelmann, Thomas

AU - Jongen, Hortense

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - This article conducts a comparative analysis of peer and public pressure in peer reviews among states. Arguing that such pressure is one increasingly important form of shaming in global politics, we seek to understand the extent to which five different peer reviews exert peer and public pressure and how possible variation among them can be explained. Our findings are based on responses to an original survey and semi-structured interviews among participants in the reviews. We find that peer and public pressure exist to different degrees in the peer reviews under study. Such differences cannot be explained by the policy area under review or the international organization in which peer reviews are organized. Likewise, the expertise of the actors involved in a peer review or perceptions of the legitimacy of peer review as a monitoring instrument do not explain the variation. Instead, we find that institutional factors and the acceptance of peer and public pressure among the participants in a peer review offer the best explanations.

AB - This article conducts a comparative analysis of peer and public pressure in peer reviews among states. Arguing that such pressure is one increasingly important form of shaming in global politics, we seek to understand the extent to which five different peer reviews exert peer and public pressure and how possible variation among them can be explained. Our findings are based on responses to an original survey and semi-structured interviews among participants in the reviews. We find that peer and public pressure exist to different degrees in the peer reviews under study. Such differences cannot be explained by the policy area under review or the international organization in which peer reviews are organized. Likewise, the expertise of the actors involved in a peer review or perceptions of the legitimacy of peer review as a monitoring instrument do not explain the variation. Instead, we find that institutional factors and the acceptance of peer and public pressure among the participants in a peer review offer the best explanations.

KW - Anti-corruption policy

KW - human rights

KW - international authority

KW - naming and shaming

KW - peer review

KW - trade and economic policy

KW - HUMAN-RIGHTS

KW - INTERNATIONAL-ORGANIZATIONS

KW - POLITICS

U2 - 10.1177/0010836718816729

DO - 10.1177/0010836718816729

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 335

EP - 355

JO - Cooperation and Conflict

JF - Cooperation and Conflict

SN - 0010-8367

IS - 3

ER -