2020 III Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2(1) CONCLUSIONS: THE VALUE OF MAPPING DOMESTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS Mapping domestic implementation of states’ international antislavery commitments reveals a significant implementation gap between international and domestic law in this area. By identifying this misalignment between principle and practice, highlighting where shortcomings exist and how other states have gone about addressing the issue, it provides impetus and evidence for advocacy. It suggests that something more is needed to effect necessary change within states than international commitment, without concluding that the frameworks of international law are irrelevant or unnecessary. Rather, they provide a crucial authoritative yardstick for assessing state practice, as well as a lever for change. In developing a new global dataset of states’ domestic legislation, and making this publicly available, this mapping exercise also provides meaningful evidence for a wide range of stakeholders, allowing them to access, analyse and compare global legislative data. Beyond consideration of extreme forms of exploitation, the Antislavery in Domestic Legislation database provides a window into global and regional trends, as well as national practice, in implementing fundamental international commitments for the protection of individuals at the domestic level. It supports identification of the factors that contribute to, and inhibit, the translation of some of the most fundamental human rights commitments made by states. These lessons extend beyond the domain of antislavery, with relevance for the range of international commitments made by states to protect individuals — including the critical threshold consideration of individuals’ right to a nationality that provides access to a plethora of other rights. By enriching the evidence available on why states do, and do not, fulfil their international commitments through national legislation, this research provides insights for those seeking to understand states’ approach to international commitments to protect individuals — including the basic protections of nationality and citizenship. The research and analysis of the database further provides methodological insights for the interrogation of domestic implementation of international commitments, and global mapping of the translation of principle in practice. 28 States make a multitude of international commitments, many of which are fundamental to improving the lives of the world’s most vulnerable people. Yet, mechanisms of enforcement and compliance in international law can be imperfect. Knowledge gaps and misinformation exacerbate these difficulties, preventing effective, evidence-based advocacy. By mapping states’ domestic implementation of these commitments, we not only reveal whether states have lived up to their commitments, but also provide useful evidence for advocacy and accountability. This data goes beyond answering the question of whether states have implemented their international commitments, to help address the (perhaps more critical) questions of what influences implementation, and how it can be improved. 28 The authors welcome communication from others considering undertaking such a task, with queries to be directed to Katarina.Schwarz@nottingham.ac.uk. 166