Micro-Foundations of Naming and Shaming: Proposed Annexation of the West Bank

• In Event: Public Opinion About International Events and Organizations

Abstract

'Naming and shaming’, a strategy in which a particular actor is singled out and publicly criticized for a negative behavior, is commonly used in international relations. Evidence from large-N and case studies are inconclusive regarding the impact of shaming on compliance with international norms. While some suggest that social pressure leads to change, others find a backlash effect. In addition, although works from both strands of work conjecture that shaming can impact policies through domestic publics, little work has been done to evaluate whether shaming impacts public opinion. There are even fewer studies that investigate potential mechanisms that may mobilize domestic support or opposition. To address these issues, I conducted a unique survey-experiment on a nationally representative sample of Jews in Israel, a country frequently shamed on international platforms. I leveraged the ambiguity regarding Israel's plans to annex territories from the West Bank in order to shape respondents' perceptions of global criticism. I find that shaming had a backlash effect, individuals treated with condemnation were more supportive of annexation and less obligated to international norms and laws in general. This result is likely driven by respondents' need to maintain a positive image of their in-group.

Author

• Lotem Bassan-Nygate, University of Wisconsin - Madison