The Role of Transnational Advocacy Networks in United Nations Human Rights Council Resolutions†

This study examines how civil society participation in target and voting states shapes voting behavior in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Drawing on Transnational Advocacy Network theory, it argues that civil society organizations (CSOs) in target states transmit information on human rights abuses to the interna-tional level, while CSOs in voting states translate this information into domestic political pressure. Using data on target-state CSO complaints submitted to the UN Special Procedures (UNSP) and measures of voter-state civil society participation from V-Dem (2025), the study analyzes UNHRC voting outcomes from 2009 to 2022 using a binary logistic regression. The results show that a higher number of CSO complaints against a target state increases the likelihood of affirmative votes, and this effect is significantly stronger when voting states have more active civil societies. These findings provide empirical evidence that transnational advocacy networks operate within the UNHRC, showing that civil society influence originating in target states is trans-mitted into international decision-making processes and becomes more effective when supported by active civil society in voting states.