Truth commissions are widely seen as important peacebuilding tools partially because they issue recommendations that seek to prompt further justice initiatives to address past abuses and promote institutional reforms that encourage non-repetition. Yet, despite growing interest in truth commissions among academics, policymakers, and activists, little attention has been paid to the recommendations that they outline in their final reports. In this article, we examine the factors that shape whether and when truth commission recommendations are enacted. Thus, we seek to explain not only whether recommendations are implemented, but also how quickly they are implemented. We use survival analysis to test the effects of a range of political and economic country-level variables, commission-specific qualities, and recommendation characteristics on the implementation record of nearly 700 recommendations formulated by ten Latin American truth commissions that operated between 1984 and 2014. The analysis yields interesting results, including that implementation proceeds more quickly in wealthier countries and when recommendations are issued by commissions created immediately after transitions, when the transitions occurred in which one side was victorious, and when commissions are created by an executive order. Moreover, recommendations that are directed towards the past are implemented more slowly than future-oriented measures.

真相委员会被广泛视为重要的建设和平工具，部分原因是它们提出的建议旨在推动进一步的司法举措，以解决过去的侵权行为并促进鼓励不重复的体制改革。然而，尽管学者、政策制定者和活动家对真相委员会越来越感兴趣，但他们在最终报告中概述的建议却很少受到关注。在本文中，我们研究了影响真相委员会建议是否以及何时制定的因素。因此，我们不仅要解释建议是否得到实施，还要解释执行速度有多快它们被实施。我们使用生存分析来测试一系列政治和经济国家级变量、委员会特定质量和建议特征对 1984 年至 2014 年间运作的 10 个拉丁美洲真相委员会制定的近 700 项建议的实施记录的影响。分析产生了有趣的结果，包括在较富裕的国家实施的速度更快，以及何时由过渡后立即设立的委员会发布建议、何时发生一方获胜的过渡以及何时通过行政命令设立委员会。此外，与面向未来的措施相比，针对过去的建议实施得更慢。