Search for: All records

Researchers in the social sciences are interested in the consequences of institutions, increasingly on a global scale. Institutions that may be negotiated between states can have consequences at a microlevel, as local populations adjust their expectations and ultimately even their behavior to take institutional rules into account. However, large-scale fine-grained analyses that test for the complex evidence of such institutions locally are rare. This article focuses on a key institution: International borders. Using computer vision techniques, we show that it is possible to produce a geographically specific, validated, and replicable way to characterizeborder legibility, by which we mean the ability to visually detect the presence of an international border in physical space. We develop and compare computer vision techniques to automatically estimate legibility scores for 627,656 imagery tiles from virtually every border in the world. We evaluate statistical and data-driven computer vision methods, finding that fine-tuning pretrained visual recognition models on a small set of human judgments allows us to produce local legibility scores globally that align well with human notions of legibility. Finally, we interpret these scores as useful approximations of states’ border orientations, a concept that prior literature has used to capture the visible investments states make in border areas to maintain jurisdictional authority territorially. We validate our measurement strategy using both human judgments and five nomological validation indicators. 

Abstract Pandemics are imbued with the politics of bordering. For centuries, border closures and restrictions on foreign travelers have been the most persistent and pervasive means by which states have responded to global health crises. The ubiquity of these policies is not driven by any clear scientific consensus about their utility in the face of myriad pandemic threats. Instead, we show they are influenced by public opinion and preexisting commitments to invest in the symbols and structures of state efforts to control their borders, a concept we call border orientation . Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, border orientation was already generally on the rise worldwide. This trend has made it convenient for governments to “contain” the virus by externalizing it, rather than taking costly but ultimately more effective domestic mitigation measures. We argue that the pervasive use of external border controls in the face of the coronavirus reflects growing anxieties about border security in the modern international system. To a great extent, fears relating to border security have become a resource in domestic politics—a finding that does not bode well for designing and implementing effective public health policy.