Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Protecting Democracy in Europe and the Americas

  • Darren Hawkins (a1)

Especially since the end of the Cold War, the Council of Europe (CE) and the Organization of American States (OAS) have acted to protect democracy in their member states from erosion or reversals, with CE policies more robust than those in the Americas. What explains this variation? I develop an argument focusing on institutional permeability, or the extent to which those organizations are accessible to nonstate actors. Permeability consists of three dimensions: range of third parties allowed access, level of decision making at which access is granted, and transparency of IO information to those third parties. Higher levels of permeability are likely to produce higher levels of constraint on state behavior through increasing levels of precision and obligation in international rules and practices. Alternative explanations, summarized as regional democracy norms, domestic democratic lock-in interests, and the power of stable democracies cannot explain the variation in multilateral democracy protection. More broadly, this article suggests that “democratizing” IOs by allowing ever-greater access to nonstate actors is likely to result in stronger, more constraining international rules, even in areas where states most jealously guard their sovereignty, such as the nature of their domestic political institutions.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Antoaneta Dimitrova , and Geoffrey Pridham . 2004. International Actors and Democracy Promotion in Central and Eastern Europe: The Integration Model and Its Limits. Democratization 11 (5):91112.

Emilie Hafner-Burton , and Mark A. Pollack . 2002. Mainstreaming Gender in Global Governance. European Journal of International Relations 8 (3):339–73.

Jutta Joachim . 2003. Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities: The UN, NGOs, and Women's Rights. International Studies Quarterly 47 (2):247–74.

Hal Klepak . 2003. Power Multiplied or Power Restrained? The United States and Multilateral Institutions in the Americas. In U.S. Hegemony and International Organizations, edited by Rosemary Foot , S. Neil MacFarlane , and Michael Mastanduno , 239–63. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Barry S. Levitt 2006. A Desultory Defense of Democracy: OAS Resolution 1080 and the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Latin American Politics and Society 48 (3):93123.

John J. Mearsheimer 1994–95. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security 19 (3):549.

David S. Meyer , and Debra C. Minkoff . 2004. Conceptualizing Political Opportunity. Social Forces 82 (4):1457–92.

Heraldo Muñoz . 1998. The Right to Democracy in the Americas. Translated by Mary D'Leon. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 40 (1):118.

Effie G. H. Pedaliu 2007. Human Rights and Foreign Policy: Wilson and the Greek Dictators, 1967–1970. Diplomacy and Statecraft 18 (1):185214.

Kal Raustiala . 1997. States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions. International Studies Quarterly 41 (4):719–40.

Kim D. Reimann 2006. A View from the Top: International Politics, Norms and the Worldwide Growth of NGOs. International Studies Quarterly 50 (1):4567.

Milada Anna Vachudová . 2005. Europe Undivided: Democracy, Leverage and Integration after Communism. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Arturo Valenzuela . 1997. Paraguay: The Coup That Didn't Happen. Journal of Democracy 8 (1):4355.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Organization
  • ISSN: 0020-8183
  • EISSN: 1531-5088
  • URL: /core/journals/international-organization
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 2
Total number of PDF views: 42 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 154 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 26th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.