Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Death penalty: the political foundations of the global trend toward abolition

By Eric Neumayer

Abstract

The death penalty is like no other punishment. Its continued existence in many countries of the world creates political tensions within these countries and between governments of retentionist and abolitionist countries. After the Second World War, more and more countries have abolished the death penalty. This article argues that the major determinants of this global trend toward abolition are political, a claim which receives support in a quantitative cross-national analysis from 1950 to 2002. Democracy, democratization, international political pressure on retentionist countries and peer group effects in relatively abolitionist regions all raise the likelihood of abolition. There is also a partisan effect as abolition becomes more likely if the chief executive’s party is left-wing oriented. Cultural, social and economic determinants receive only limited support. The global trend toward abolition will go on if democracy continues to spread around the world and abolitionist countries stand by their commitment to press for abolition all over the world.

Topics: HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Year: 2008
DOI identifier: 10.1007/s12142-007-0044-0
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.lse.ac.uk:6200
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2006). (0.65) Democratic transition 1.682 1.661 1.542 1.861 (3.45)*** (3.06)*** (2.40)** (2.07)** Left-wing executive 7.415 (4.24)*** Peace years 0.991 0.995 0.994 0.994 (0.86) (0.45) (0.56) (0.38)
  2. (1995). [1764]. On Crimes and Punishments, and other Writings. Cambridge: doi
  3. (1947). [1893]. The Division of Labor in Society. doi
  4. (2002). A ‘Commonsense’ Theory of Deterrence and the ‘Ideology’ of Science: The New York State Death Penalty Debate. doi
  5. (1986). A History of English Criminal Law and its Administration from 1750. doi
  6. (2000). American Exceptionalism and the Death Penalty.
  7. (2001). An Examination of Cross-National Variation in Punitiveness. doi
  8. (2006). and Hood doi
  9. (2002). Armed Conflict 1946–2001: A New Dataset. doi
  10. (1900). Cape Verde Azerbaijan Cote d'Ivoire Uruguay Vatican State Luxembourg France Belgium Cyprus Nicaragua Germany Bolivia Liberia Norway (East) Bulgaria Malta Portugal Haiti Canada Mexico Solomon
  11. (2004). Capital Punishment and American Exceptionalism. Oregon Law Review 81:97-130.
  12. (1977). Capital Punishment and Deterrence: Some Further Thoughts and Additional Evidence. doi
  13. (2001). Capital Punishment and Implementation of Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty. E/CN.15/2001/10. New York: United Nations Economic and Social Council.
  14. (1986). Capital Punishment and the American Agenda. Cambridge: doi
  15. (2000). Capital Punishment at the United Nations: Recent Developments.
  16. (1998). Capital Punishment. doi
  17. (2003). Correlates of War Project. doi
  18. (1997). Cross-National Crime – A Research Review and Sourcebook.
  19. (2002). Database of Political Institutions. doi
  20. (2000). Death in Venice. The New Republic,
  21. (2001). Death Penalty as Democratization: Is the Council of Europe Hanging Itself?. doi
  22. (2004). Democracy and the Violation of Human Rights: A Statistical Analysis from 1976-1996. doi
  23. (1998). Deterrence, Brutalization, and the Death Penalty: Another Examination of Oklahoma’s Return to Capital Punishment. doi
  24. (2002). Dignity, Citizenship, and Capital Punishment: The Right of Life Reformulated.
  25. (1999). Domestic Ethnic Conflict and Ethnic Nepotism: A Comparative Analysis. doi
  26. (2001). Duration Models and Proportional Hazards in Political Science. doi
  27. (2003). Estimating the Inequality of Household Incomes: Filling Gaps and Fixing Problems
  28. (2003). Ethnic and Cultural Diversity by Country. doi
  29. (1991). Felony Murder and Capital Punishment: An Examination of the Deterrence Question. doi
  30. (1999). Global Report on Crime and Justice.
  31. (2002). Guidelines on Human Rights and the Fight Against Terrorism. Brussels: Directorate General of Human Rights.
  32. (1998). Guidelines to EU Policy Towards Third Countries on the Death Penalty.
  33. (2003). Harsh Justice. doi
  34. (2004). Ideology, Social Threat, and the Death Sentence: Capital Sentences across Time and Space. doi
  35. (2000). Imprisonment and Social Classification in Five Common-Law Democracies, doi
  36. (1990). International Use of the Death Penalty. doi
  37. (1971). Law, Order and Power. doi
  38. (2004). Minority Threat and Punishment: a Cross-Naitonal Analysis. doi
  39. (1999). Modelling Survival Data doi
  40. (1996). Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don’t. Chicago: doi
  41. (2002). Penn World Tables Version 6.1.
  42. (1986). Power Concentration, Legitimation Crisis and Penal Severity: A Comparative Perspective.
  43. (1999). Power, Politics, and Crime. doi
  44. (1990). Punishment and Modern Society. doi
  45. (1999). Punishment and Political Theory. doi
  46. (1939). Punishment and Social Structure. doi
  47. (1989). Race, Homicide Severity, and Application of the Death Penalty: A Consideration of the Barnett Scale. doi
  48. (2003). Regression Models and Life Tables (with Discussion).
  49. (2004). Repression of the Human Right to Personal Integrity Revisited: A Global Cross-National Study Covering the Years 1976-1993. doi
  50. (2003). Siting the Death Penalty Internationally. doi
  51. (1997). State-Sponsored Mass Murder: The Onset and Severity of Genocides and Politicides. doi
  52. (1998). Status of the International Covenants on Human Rights. Question of the Death Penalty.
  53. (1997). Testing Coercive Explanations for Order: The Determinants of Law Enforcement Strength over Time. doi
  54. (2001). The Abolition of the Death Penalty in Central and Eastern Europe. Tilburg Foreign Law Review 9:62-83. doi
  55. (1997). The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law. Second Edition. Cambridge: doi
  56. (1999). The Abolition of the Death Penalty: Does ‘Abolition’ Really Mean What You Think it Means?.
  57. (1982). The Civilizing Process. doi
  58. (2003). The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 42 TABLE 1. doi
  59. (2005). The Cultural Lives of Capital Punishment: Comparative Perspectives. Stanford: doi
  60. (2001). The Culture of Control. Chicago:
  61. (1996). The Death Penalty – A World-wide Perspective. Second Edition.
  62. (2002). The Death Penalty – A World-wide Perspective. Third Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Interpol. various years. International Crime Statistics. Saint-Cloud: International Criminal Police Organization.
  63. (2006). The Death Penalty and War. doi
  64. (2000). The Death Penalty in British History. doi
  65. (1996). The Death Penalty in Wartime: Arguments for Abolition.
  66. (2006). The Death Penalty Website. http://web.amnesty.org
  67. (1998). The Economics of Cruel and Unusual Punishment.
  68. (2004). The Globalization of Liberalization: Policy Diffusion in the International Political Economy. doi
  69. (1999). The Political Economy of Capital Punishment. doi
  70. (2001). The Politics of Punishment across Time and Space: A Pooled Time-Series Analysis of Imprisonment Rates. doi
  71. (1999). The Power of Human Rights – International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge: doi
  72. (1999). The Quality of Government. doi
  73. (1986). The Ultimate Coercive Sanction: A Cross-Cultural Study of Capital Punishment. New Haven: Human Relations Area Files. doi
  74. (1997). Time is of the Essence: Event History Models in Political Science. doi
  75. (2001). When the State Kills: Capital Punishment and the American Condition. doi
  76. (2003). World Development Indicators on CD-Rom. doi
  77. (2000). World Income Inequality Database.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.