Abstract:

Gender equality is considered important for development and good governance, yet the causes of cross-national variation in gender equality are still not well understood. This paper claims that the distinct types of rule pursued by the French versus the British imperial powers selected for postcolonial institutions that are systematically correlated with gender equality. The paper evaluates this conjecture using three tests: a cross-country test of former British and French colonies, a historical comparison of Syria and Iraq, and a regression discontinuity across the former colonial border within modern-day Cameroon (see Lee and Schultz 2012). Results indicate that, despite our understanding of British colonialism as beneficial for a variety of economic institutions (Acemoglu and Johnson 2004, La Porta et al. 2008, Lipset 1994) French institutions often better promoted gender equality. This paper contributes to the discussion on the relative importance of colonial institutions versus natural resource endowments or religion (Nunn 2013, Sokoloff and Engerman 2000, Ross 2008, Fish 2002, Inglehart and Norris 2003).

Speaker Bio:

Adi Greif is a Ph.D. candidate in Political Science at Yale University and a pre-doc at CDDRL for the academic year 2013-2014. Her dissertation, "The Long-Term Impact of Colonization on Gender", investigates why gender equality varies by former colonizer (French or British) in the Middle East and globally. It uses cross-national statistics, a regression discontinuity across the former colonial border in Cameroon, and interviews from Egypt and Jordan. Her research abroad was supported by a Macmillan Dissertation Fellowship.

Adi's research interests are colonialism, international alliances, state formation and comparative gender policies with focus on the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa. She has lived in Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco, and visited Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey. Adi holds an M.A. in Political Science from (Yale University) and a B.A with honors in Political Science and a minor in Math (Stanford University). Before coming to Yale, she worked at the United States Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C. through the Tom Ford Fellowship in Philanthropy.

Abstract: 

Do human rights institutions work? To answer this question we examine the effect of these institutions on two kinds of outcomes: physical integrity rights (freedom from torture, government-sponsored killing, political imprisonment, and the like) and civil and political rights (freedoms of speech, assembly, movement, and religion, as well as voting and workers' rights). Our analysis covers up to 143 countries, including some of the world's worst abusers, over the period 1981 to 2004. We arrive at two main conclusions. First, national human rights institutions improve physical integrity outcomes but not civil and political rights practices. This finding reflects a greater worldwide focus on extreme violations such as torture, but also points to widespread resistance among non-Western governments to "Western" civil and political rights standards. Second, we find that time matters: the establishment of a human rights institution contributed initially to greater reports of physical integrity abuses, but practices improved significantly after only four or five years. These institutions shine a bright spotlight on countries negative practices, making it more likely that abuses are detected and cataloged. Over time, however, they help to curb egregious human rights violations. Our findings suggest that human rights institutions are not just futile exercises in governmental hypocrisy; rather, they work to improve human rights practices regardless of the intent of governments.

Speaker bios: 

Francisco Ramirez is Professor of Education and (by courtesy) Sociology at Stanford University where he is also the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs in the Graduate School of Education. His current research interests focus on the rise and institutionalization of human rights and human rights education, on the worldwide rationalization of university structures and processes, on terms of inclusion issues as regards gender and education, and on the scope and intensity of the authority of science in society. His comparative studies contribute to sociology of education, political sociology, sociology of gender, and sociology of development. His work has contributed to the development of the world society perspective in the social sciences. Ramirez received his BA in social sciences from De La Salle University in the Philippines and his MA and PhD in sociology from Stanford University. 

His recent publications include “Conditional Decoupling: Assessing the Impact of National Human Rights Institutions” (with W. Cole) American Sociological Review 702-25 2013; “National Incorporation of Global Human Rights: Worldwide Expansion of National Human Rights Organizations, 1966-2004” (with Jeong-Woo Koo).  Social Forces. 87:1321-1354. 2009; “Human Rights in Social Science Textbooks: Cross-national Analyses, 1975-2008” (with J. Meyer and P. Bromley). Sociology of Education 83: 111-134.  2010; “The Worldwide Spread of Environmental Discourse in Social Science Textbooks, 1970-2010 (with P. Bromley and J. Meyer) Comparative Education Review 55, 4; 517-545. 2011; ‘The Formalization of the University: Rules, Roots, and Routes” (With T. Christensen) Higher Education 65: 695-708 2013; and “The World Society Perspective: Concepts, Assumptions, and Strategies” Comparative Education 423-39 2012.

 

Wade Cole is Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Utah. His current work focuses on (1) the impact of global human rights norms, treaties, and institutions on a range of country-level practices including bodily integrity rights, civil and political rights, labor rights, women’s rights, racial discrimination, measures of wellbeing, and governmental redistributive efforts; and (2) the rise and possible demise of minority-serving and women’s colleges in the United States, with an interest in how the varied and often contradictory ways that African Americans, American Indians, Hispanics, and women were incorporated into the American polity shaped the emergence, development, and purposes of postsecondary institutions catering to these groups. Cole holds a BA in political science from Western Washington University and a PhD in sociology from Stanford University. 

Recent publications include “Conditional Decoupling: Assessing the Impact of National Human Rights Institutions, 1981 to 2004,” American Sociological Review 78(4):702–725 (with Francisco Ramirez); “Strong Walk and Cheap Talk: The Effect of the International Covenant of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights on Policies and Practices,” Social Forces 92(1):165–194; “Government Respect for Gendered Rights: The Effect of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on Women’s Rights Outcomes, 1981–2004,” International Studies Quarterly 57(2):233–249; and “Human Rights as Myth and Ceremony? Reevaluating the Effectiveness of Human Rights Treaties, 1981–2007,” American Journal of Sociology 117(4):1131–1171. He is also author of Uncommon Schools: The Global Rise of Postsecondary Institutions for Indigenous Peoples (Stanford University Press, 2011).

Abstract:

Prior to the rise of public protests in Russia in December 2011, experts largely viewed Russian nationalism as the strongest ideological trend in the country. This perception significantly influences both the role that some nationalists came to play in the contemporary protest movement and the way other opposition activists relate to them. At the same time, in its efforts to counteract the protest movement, the Kremlin has adopted a rather controversial policy in respect of nationalists and nationalist ideology. This policy essentially combines suppression of ultra-right radicalism in all forms with the use of nationalist ideology to mobilize support for the government.

Speaker Bio:

Alexander Verkhovsky is the founder and director of the SOVA Center for Information and Analysis, a Moscow-based NGO that monitors and analyzes political extremism, ultra-nationalism, xenophobia, freedom of religion, and the use and misuse of counter-extremism measures in Russia.

Verkhovsky has authored numerous publications on these issues. SOVA Center is conducting monitoring on them (see http://sova-center.ru).

 

Co-sponsored with Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies (CREEES)

Abstract:

Zainah Anwar will speak on the necessity and possibility of reform in the way Islam is understood and used as a source of law and public policy in Muslim contexts. From Sisters in Islam in Malaysia and its ground-breaking work at the national level to Musawah, the global movement for equality and justice, Muslim women activists today are at the forefront in challenging the use of Islam to justify continued discrimination against women and violations of fundamental liberties. They are producing new feminist knowledge, combining Islamic principles, human rights, constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination, and women's lived realities to break the constructed binary between Islam and human rights, and the disconnect between law and reality. They are publicly challenging traditional religious authorities with alternative understandings of Islam in ways that take into consideration changing times and context. Anwar will share the experience of Sisters in Islam and the global movement it initiated, their work and challenges, and the resulting public contestations and  hope for change. 

About the Speaker: 

Zainah Anwar is currently a visiting Social Entrepreneur in Residence at Stanford for fall 2012 through CDDRL’s Program on Social Entrepreneurship. Anwar is a founding member of Sisters in Islam (SIS) and currently the director of Musawah based in Malaysia, the global movement for equality and justice in the Muslim family. She is at the forefront of the women’s movement pushing for an end to the use of Islam to justify discrimination against women. The pioneering work of SIS in understanding Islam from a rights perspective and creating an alternative public voice of Muslim women demanding equality and justice led it to initiate Musawah in 2009. This knowledge-building movement brings together activists and scholars to create new feminist knowledge in Islam to break the binary between Islam and human rights and the disconnect between law and reality.  

Anwar also writes a monthly newspaper column on politics, religion and women’s rights, called Sharing the Nation. She is a former member of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia. Her book, Islamic Revivalism in Malaysia: Dakwah Among the Students, has become a standard reference in the study of Islam in Malaysia.

Abstract:

The hegemony of the democratic ideal may be waning. Until recently, even the custodians of dictatorships claimed democratic status for their regimes. Many still do. But other rulers now drop the pretense of democracy and claim that their nondemocratic regimes provide the people with conditions that are superior to those found in democracies. They portray themselves as demophiles rather than democrats, and claim that their concern for their people provides a superior alternative to popular control over the state. What is more, some actually do pursue policies that differ meaningfully from the predation that characterizes the behavior of elites in many nondemocratic regimes. How may we understand contemporary demophily, and how does it challenge democracy?

Speaker Bio:

M. Steven Fish is a comparative political scientist who studies democracy and regime change in developing and postcommunist countries, religion and politics, and constitutional systems and national legislatures. He is the author of Are Muslims Distinctive? A Look at the Evidence (Oxford, 2011). He is also author of Democracy Derailed in Russia: The Failure of Open Politics (Cambridge, 2005), which was the recipient of the Best Book Award of 2006, presented by the Comparative Democratization Section of the American Political Science Association, and Democracy from Scratch: Opposition and Regime in the New Russian Revolution (Princeton, 1995). He is coauthor of The Handbook of National Legislatures: A Global Survey (Cambridge, 2009) and Postcommunism and the Theory of Democracy (Princeton, 2001). He served as a Senior Fulbright Fellow and Visiting Professor at the Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia, in 2007 and at the European University at St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Russia, in 2000-2001. In 2005, he was the recipient of the Distinguished Social Sciences Teaching Award of the Colleges of Letters and Science, University of California-Berkeley.

The Program on Liberation Technology at Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law is building a ‘Constitution Explorer’ website that will host a structured database of constitutions to enable people to compare and contrast other countries' constitutions as they undergo their own national projects for constitutional change. For example, this interactive platform will allow users to learn how other emerging democracies have incorporated complex legal, political, and human rights clauses in their constitutions. Currently, most constitutions can be found online, but in order to understand how different constitutions have tackled a challenging issue (e.g. appointment of judges, role of religion, ect), one has to go through each constitution manually. Constitution Explorer will have a database where each article of each constitution is tagged by subject, allowing quick and meaningful searches.

When possible, Constitution Explorer will strive to provide translations of all text to lift the barrier of language and provide a discussion platform for our users to debate these important issues. The website will also host articles by legal and political experts on specific themes like empowerment of women or tackling corruption, helping to contextualize and unpack complex constitutional clauses and terminology for all to benefit from. All constitutional data from Constitution Explorer will be available in an open format for the wider community to contribute to this process.

How you can help: Participate in Constitution Day!

Saturday, November 12, 201

The Program on Liberation Technology is calling all legal enthusiasts, political scientists, and constitutional experts interested in contributing to a project that will aid activists, legal scholars, and the general public with the constitution writing process! Your participation in Constitution Day will help impact post-revolutionary states in the Arab world and beyond to have powerful information available to them as they undergo this historic process and begin to build the foundations of a democratic state.

Constitution Explorer is already a reality with a running prototype. However, it is still missing many constitutions, translations, and most of all categorization. In order for the search experience to be meaningful for our global users, we will "categorize" each article of a constitution by subject, allowing the user to browse not only by country but also by concept. We also want to provide notes that will clarify each article and the issues that it relates to. Many constitutions also require translations to be understandable by the largest number of people possible. And for all this, we need you!

The Program on Liberation Technology is organizing an international Constitution Day on Saturday November 12, 2011 when volunteers will gather in local groups - with computer in hand - to help categorize, translate and annotate. The team has already developed a tagging taxonomy and guidelines to facilitate the categorization process, but needs a little bit of your time to begin tagging articles of select constitutions.

Constitution Day will feature online sessions during the day, so you will be able to connect and talk to other participants internationally. There are no specific requirements, except a basic knowledge and interest in law (especially constitutional law), and an enthusiasm towards this endeavor. There are no specific computer skills required, the team just asks that you participate in a mock training session, follow the taxonomy, and most of all have fun!

The Program on Liberation Technology will be convening a group at Stanford University and there will be similar gatherings with international partners worldwide. This is also something that you can participate in virtually but the team encourages you to have a partner to work with as this is a deliberative process and it helps to work with a small team.

For more information on Constitution Day and how you can participate, please contact estelle.comment@gmail.com for more information. To participate, please fill out the form here.