The conditional effect of autocratization: How regime change shapes international preferences in the Universal Periodic Review

Abstract

Abstract International organizations (IOs) are increasingly affected by autocratization of their membership. However, we still know relatively little how both episodes of democratic backsliding and autocratic consolidation affect international preferences of IO member states towards liberal norms and institutions. We argue that autocratization creates uncertainties that are consequential for how member states position themselves within IOs, but that the direction of this effect differs across regime types because of varying constraints in democracies and autocracies. Democratic backsliders are primarily concerned with domestic constraints and the risk of empowering opposition through international behavior, whereas autocratic consolidators are more focused on international audiences and reputation costs associated with autocratization. We test our argument in the specific field of human rights by employing information on the acceptance behavior of states in the Universal Period Review between 2008 and 2020. In our quantitative analysis, we find support for the proposed conditional effect of autocratization and regime type when controlling for other predictors of acceptance behavior. Autocratizing democracies are less likely to accept critical comments, whereas autocratizing autocracies are more likely. We also find that this dynamic shifts in recent years likely due to changing international attention put on democratic backsliding states. By integrating human rights and international relations scholarship, this study offers a differentiated account of when states will resist or embrace liberal norms under conditions of autocratization.