Social Legitimacy and Political Authority: The Case of International Organisations (original) (raw)
Related papers
Responsibility, transparency and legitimacy of socially- oriented NGOs in Kyrgyzstan
Responsibility, transparency and legitimacy of socially oriented NGOs in Kyrgyzstan. International NGO training and research center. Briefing paper # 34. © INTRAC 2013, 2013
This study analysed the NGO sectors’ existing comprehension of accountability and its mechanisms, and the degree to which NGOs understand the implications of, and are willing to address, issues of legitimacy and social responsibility. The study produced recommendations to NGOs on how to improve their accountability to target groups and the community at large. The broad conclusion is that, if NGOs intend to continue to position themselves as democratic institutions of civil society and as checks and counterbalances to the state, they must appreciate the need to provide an example of good governance, transparency, legitimacy and responsibility to target groups and society in general.
Legitimacy and the Role of UK Third Sector Organizations In the Policy Process
Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and …, 2003
This paper explores the legitimacy of third sector organizations in the policy process in the United Kingdom. It draws on empirical research to examine how legitimacy is defined, both by third sector organizations and by those they target within government. The paper argues that while many third sector organizations give high priority to political forms of legitimacy-in the sense of participatory structures and accountability to members and beneficiaries-government is generally more likely to give priority to technical forms of legitimacy, e.g., the quality of research and the ability to implement policy. Nonetheless, political legitimacy is still important, first because this is the form of legitimacy that third sector organizations claim for themselves and second because, as government gives way to governance with an increase in partnerships and collaboration, the dilemmas faced by third sector organizations in achieving political legitimacy are being faced on a broader canvas.
Governance and accountability of environmental NGOs
Environmental Science & Policy, 2005
The issue of the governance and accountability of environmental non-government organisations (ENGOs) is gaining in prominence in academic and public discourse. Ideally each sector of society should be characterised by a distinct accountability regime, but faced with calls for greater accountability there is a risk that ENGOs might apply accountability regimes uncritically from the business or private sector. This could undermine the independent change-agent role of ENGOs and therefore weaken aspects of the democratic system. The present paper argues that ENGOs, and the NGO sector in general, need to develop and debate a distinct and credible accountability regime that strengthens and defines their role in society. In support of this goal a framework for conceptualising a legitimacy-based approach to accountability is described. This is based on the observation that NGO capacity for impact is founded on different types of legitimacy that together establish and maintain public trust. One role of governance is to maintain and strengthen these legitimacy assets by establishing and over-seeing accountability streams that recognise that public trust is built on the cumulative evidence of legitimacy. #
Global Environmental Change
Transnational climate change initiatives have increased in number and relevance within the global climate change regime. Despite being largely welcomed, there are concerns about their ability to deliver ambitious climate action and about their democratic legitimacy. This paper disentangles the nature of both authority and legitimacy of a specific form of transnational networks, transgovernmental networks of subnational governments. It then investigates how a major transgovernmental initiative focusing on tropical forests, the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force, attempts to command authority and to build and maintain its legitimacy. The paper illustrates the particular challenges faced by initiatives formed primarily by jurisdictions from the Global South. Three major trade-offs related to authority and legitimacy dimensions are identified: first, the difficulty of balancing the need for increased representation with performance on ambitious climate goals; second, the need to deliver effectiveness while ensuring transparency of governance processes; and third, the limited ability to leverage formal authority of members to deliver climate action in local jurisdictions, while depending on external funds from the Global North.
Why people become authoritarian and how to tackle authority? A power-based analysis
Aranzadi. Thomson Reuters, 2021
In many fields, from psychology to political science, the ontological aspects of power are still debatable. At first glance, power is a relationship between two or more actors in order to achieve concrete results. An actor “A” can influence another actor “B” to obtain results through implicit or coercive means. Power is not only violence, indeed the no-decision or the lack of decision (ignoring the actor “B”) can be considered a manifestation of power. Yet, in this text, I will focus on the latter aspects of power, those related to coercive means, understanding authoritarianism as deviation or abuse of power. I also will focus on the reasons (personal and collective) behind authoritarianism and the forms to restrain it from a social perspective. In the first part, I discuss some relevant dimensions of power and its connection to authority and legitimacy. The second part consists of an analysis of authoritarianism from psychological to social aspects. The third part discusses accountability as a relationship to restrain authority and improve legitimacy. The fourth part analyzes accountability efficiency and its relation to power asymmetries between two or more actors. The fifth part closes the texts bringing up some limits and problems of accountability. This part is important in order to avoid inefficient outcomes and delusions when it comes to restraining authority.
Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes
Regulation & Governance, 2008
The legitimacy and accountability of polycentric regulatory regimes, particularly at the transnational level, has been severely criticised, and the search is on to find ways in which they can be enhanced. This paper argues that before developing even more proposals, we need to pay far greater attention to the dynamics of accountability and legitimacy relationships, and to how regulators respond to them. The article thus seeks to develop first, a closer analysis of the significance of the institutional environment in the construction of legitimacy, the dialectical nature of accountability relationships, and the communicative structures through which accountability occurs and legitimacy is constructed. Secondly, it explores how regulators respond, or are likely to respond, to multiple legitimacy and accountability claims, and of how they themselves seek to build legitimacy in complex and dynamic situations. This analysis, as well as being of intrinsic interest, could be of use to those trying to design accountability relationships or seeking to build them on the ground. For until we understand the implications of the pressures for accountability and legitimacy, the 'how to' proposals which are proliferating risk being simply pipe dreams: diverting, but in the end making little difference. for their observations and comments. The usual responsibilities remain my own. A revised version of this paper will be published in (2008) 2 Regulation and Governance, forthcoming.
Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework
Ecological Economics, 2011
Along with concerns over the effectiveness of earth system governance, ways of enhancing its accountability and legitimacy are increasingly coming to the fore in both scholarly debate and political practice. Concerns over accountability and legitimacy pertain to all levels of governance, from the local to the global, and cover the spectrum of public and private governance arrangements. This conceptual article elaborates on the sources, mechanisms and reform options relating to more accountable, legitimate and democratic earth system governance. We proceed in four steps. First, we conceptualize accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance. Second, we place questions of accountability and legitimacy within the larger context of earth system transformation, which, we argue, poses special challenges to the pursuit of accountability and legitimacy. Third, drawing on the contributions to this special section, we analyze different sources and mechanisms of accountability and legitimacy and their effects on the democratic potential and effectiveness of governance. Fourth, in concluding, we outline reform options that may help alleviate persisting deficits in the democratic potential of earth system governance.
Accountability in the Internet Era: A Lesson from Local Governments in Indonesia
Hasanuddin Economics and Business Review, 2017
Nowadays, Indonesia is one of the countries with the highest internet user growth. In line with it, the local governments in Indonesia use their official website to report the government's activities as an accountability form to the society. Thus, this study conducted for knowing the accountability characteristics and the factors that affect the level of internet accountability reports in the local government websites. Using content analysis based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) index in government agencies and OLS statistical approach on the 34 provinces' official websites, this study finds, in general, the provinces' websites have reported 63% of the total numbers that suggested by GRI. Furthermore, there are two main factors, i.e. the number of population and districts/cities, which positively affect the level of accountability reports in provinces' website. However, no empirical evidence shows the press pressure affects the broad of website reporting in the Indonesia provinces context. Overall, this research indicates that the Indonesia local governments, in this case, provincial governments have focused on delivering their accountability to the society. Moreover, this is a good sign for the democracy growth in Indonesia. Furthermore, the Indonesia local governments may have to give more portions on their official website for answering the headline news from the mass media, specifically for the environmental and social themes. Therefore, it will further strengthen the governancesustainability and democracy in Indonesia local government environment.