Redress and the Global South: The Changing Landscape of Postcolonial Reparation Claims

This study examines why symbolic remedies for colonial atrocities are on the rise, while material compensation remains rare. It suggests that former colonial powers weigh the transactional costs and benefits of redress along five factors. It tests them using a mixed-methods approach on a novel dataset of 14 dyadic postcolonial cases, 1990–2024. A multinomial logistic regression model ranks respondents’ reactions on a redress scale from rejection through acknowledgement and symbolic remedies to material compensation. The study finds that international competition, the global standing of claimants, and norm diffusion increase the likelihood of redress, while fear of setting a precedent curbs it, most sharply at the material end. Contrary to expectations, a more right-leaning government does not deter it. The qualitative analysis traces how investigative journalism, legal proceedings, and favourable treaty conditions facilitate redress. The study shows that postcolonial redress is driven less by morality than by strategy.