政治受众与亚太废除死刑

S. Bradley
{"title":"政治受众与亚太废除死刑","authors":"S. Bradley","doi":"10.1163/15718158-02001001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates why some states in the Asia Pacific have retained capital punishment, while others have abolished it, either de facto or de jure. In contrast to existing theories, it is theorised that governments conduct cost-benefit calculations considering both domestic support and international pressure for abolition, then formulate their death penalty policy based on the lowest cost scenario. This theory is tested by applying controlled comparison and process tracing analysis to three cases: Cambodia, South Korea, and Indonesia. These case studies demonstrate that pressures from domestic and international political audiences are determinative in states’ decision-making processes regarding capital punishment.","PeriodicalId":35216,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political Audiences and the Abolition of Capital Punishment in the Asia Pacific\",\"authors\":\"S. Bradley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718158-02001001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article investigates why some states in the Asia Pacific have retained capital punishment, while others have abolished it, either de facto or de jure. In contrast to existing theories, it is theorised that governments conduct cost-benefit calculations considering both domestic support and international pressure for abolition, then formulate their death penalty policy based on the lowest cost scenario. This theory is tested by applying controlled comparison and process tracing analysis to three cases: Cambodia, South Korea, and Indonesia. These case studies demonstrate that pressures from domestic and international political audiences are determinative in states’ decision-making processes regarding capital punishment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718158-02001001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718158-02001001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文调查了为什么亚太地区的一些国家保留了死刑,而另一些国家则在事实上或法律上废除了死刑。与现有理论相反,有理论认为,政府在考虑国内支持和国际废除死刑压力的情况下进行成本效益计算,然后根据最低成本情景制定死刑政策。这一理论通过对柬埔寨、韩国和印度尼西亚三个案例的对照比较和过程追踪分析进行了检验。这些案例研究表明,来自国内和国际政治受众的压力对各国关于死刑的决策过程具有决定性作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Political Audiences and the Abolition of Capital Punishment in the Asia Pacific
This article investigates why some states in the Asia Pacific have retained capital punishment, while others have abolished it, either de facto or de jure. In contrast to existing theories, it is theorised that governments conduct cost-benefit calculations considering both domestic support and international pressure for abolition, then formulate their death penalty policy based on the lowest cost scenario. This theory is tested by applying controlled comparison and process tracing analysis to three cases: Cambodia, South Korea, and Indonesia. These case studies demonstrate that pressures from domestic and international political audiences are determinative in states’ decision-making processes regarding capital punishment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law is the world’s only law journal offering scholars a forum in which to present comparative, international and national research dealing specifically with issues of law and human rights in the Asia-Pacific region. Neither a lobby group nor tied to any particular ideology, the Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law is a scientific journal dedicated to responding to the need for a periodical publication dealing with the legal challenges of human rights issues in one of the world’s most diverse and dynamic regions.
期刊最新文献
Religious Exemptions and the Constitutionality of Vaccine Mandates in the Philippines Equal Representation of Women in the Superior Judiciary: A Comparative Analysis between Pakistan and the United Kingdom Decriminalisation of Adultery in Taiwan Empathy, a Hallmark of Equality: Shaping Fearlessness Into Transformative Decision-Making and Teaching Microverse, Mezzoverse, Macroverse: Protection Against Discrimination in an Artificialised World?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1