| dc.description.abstract | In many countries transitioning from conflict to peace or autocracy to democracy, transitional justice (TJ) plays a crucial role. These mechanisms—ranging from trials to truth commissions, from reparations to purges—are often seen as vital steps towards reconciliation. However, we still lack a clear general understanding of the impacts of TJ on different outcomes including governance and institutions. The policy relevant motivation of this thesis is that since these mechanisms were implemented in many different settings, it is important to know what consequences they have.
This thesis dives into this gap, exploring the intricate links between TJ and good governance broadly defined. It asks: How does TJ influence the establishment of more equal, inclusive, and less corrupt institutions in post-conflict settings? Moreover, how do international actors perceive these mechanisms' impact on governance?
Through rigorous testing of existing theories and a comprehensive analysis of TJ's effects on outcomes like group inequality, corruption, and investment, this research provides insights. When scrutinizing a cross-national dataset encompassing all post-conflict countries from 1946 to 2007, no statistically significant associations between TJ and social group equality or corruption were found. However, closer examination reveals that truth commissions are negatively associated with group inequality in the long term; purges are negatively associated with political corruption, while amnesties are positively associated with regime corruption. Additionally, TJ, specifically restorative mechanisms such as truth commissions and reparations, attracts foreign investment particularly after 5 years.
This thesis pioneers a comprehensive exploration of TJ’s impacts on outcomes like horizontal inequalities and corruption. These insights are crucial for informing donors and policymakers advocating for TJ implementation, revealing general potential impacts of TJ on governance applicable to post-conflict countries. It underscores that TJ may not always yield discernible positive governance effects, urging policymakers to tailor interventions to specific contexts, including the conflict, country, time, and TJ mechanisms. This research contributes to macro-level TJ literature, which often lacks insight into how specific TJ mechanisms work and change people’s lives. Future studies should delve deeper into neglected outcomes and conduct micro or meso-level analyses to understand TJ's nuanced impacts on good governance. | en_US |
