Topic
Legitimacy
About: Legitimacy is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 26153 publications have been published within this topic receiving 565921 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Book•
07 Apr 2005
TL;DR: The Winner-Loser gap: Contours and Boundaries as discussed by the authors is defined as the gap between winners' and losers' consent in the winner-loser gap, defined by the difference in the two sides' consent.
Abstract: Preface 1. Winning isn't Everything: Losers' Consent and Democratic Legitimacy PART 1: THE WINNER-LOSER GAP 2. Political Legitimacy and the Winner-Loser Gap 3. The Winner-Loser Gap: Contours and Boundaries 4. The Dynamics of Losers' Consent: Persistance and Change in the Winner-Loser Gap PART 2: UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENCES IN LOSERS' CONSENT 5. Individual Differences in Losers' Consent 6. Winning and Losing in Old and New Democracies 7. How Political Institutions Shape Losers' Consent 8. Comparing Losers' Assessments of Electoral Democracy 9. Losing and Support for Institutional Change 10. Conclusion: Graceful Losers and the Democratic Bargain Appendix References
491 citations
Book•
18 Aug 2003TL;DR: In this article, the state as ultimate evaluator and guarantor for meeting needs has been argued in South Africa and the case of South Africa Bibliography Index, which is based on the concept of true interest.
Abstract: Preface Introduction 1. Liberalism's rights-preferences couple 2. Beyond the rights-preferences couple 3. The form and outline of the argument Part I. The Nature of Needs: 4. Need categories 5. Vital needs 6. Particular social needs 7. Agency needs 8. The natures of needs: historical, normative, political Part II. The Formation and Interpretation of Needs: 9. Generation and legitimation 10. Normative power and the institution of private property 11. Perception and interpretation 12. Oppression and need 13. True interests 14. The concepts of true interest Part III. The Political Evaluation of Needs: 15. Freedom and rights: a critique of the concept of 'civil society' 16. Practices, institutions, and the evaluation of institutions 17. Roles: reclaiming the census 18. Practical reason and practical imperatives Part IV. The State of Needs: 19. The state 20. The modern state, coercion and power 21. The state as ultimate evaluator and guarantor for meeting needs 22. Need priority: practical not theoretical 23. Political participation: procedural and institutional proposals 24. Legitimacy and paternalism 25. States of needs Conclusion: What needs to be done? The case of South Africa Bibliography Index.
490 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the role that transnational corporations (TNCs) should play in developing global governance, creating a framework of rules and regulations for the global economy.
Abstract: We discuss the role that transnational corporations (TNCs) should play in developing global governance, creating a framework of rules and regulations for the global economy. The central issue is whether TNCs should provide global rules and guarantee individual citizenship rights, or instead focus on maximizing profits. First, we describe the problems arising from the globalization process that affect the relationship between public rules and private firms. Next we consider the position of economic and management theories in relation to the social responsibility of the firm. We argue that instrumental stakeholder theory and business and society research can only partially solve the global governance issue, and that more recent concepts of corporate citizenship and republican business ethics deliver theoretically and practically helpful, fresh insights. However, even these need further development, especially with regard to the legitimacy of corporate political activity.
486 citations
TL;DR: Cohen and Sabel as mentioned in this paper argue that the many efforts to establish new equilibria between well-functioning markets and well-ordered political institutions are doomed to fail, and opts instead for fundamental change: conservative in their strict defence of fundamental democratic ideals, such ideas are radical in their search for new institutional arrangements which bring democratic values directly to bear.
Abstract: This essay by Joshua Cohen and Charles Sabel promotes visions of democracy, constitutionalism and institutional innovations which may help to open up new dimensions in the search for legitimate European governance structures and their constitutionalisation. Faced with Europe's legitimacy problems, proponents of the European project often react by pointing to the many institutional failings in the (national) constitutional state. These reactions, however, seem simplistic, offering no normatively convincing alternatives to the once undisputed legitimacy of a now eroding nation state. The essay by Cohen and Sabel forecloses such strategies. Summarising and endorsing critiques of both the unfettered market system and the manner of its regulatory and political correction, it concludes that the many efforts to establish new equilibria between well‐functioning markets and well‐ordered political institutions are doomed to fail, and opts instead for fundamental change: conservative in their strict defence of fundamental democratic ideals, such ideas are radical in their search for new institutional arrangements which bring democratic values directly to bear. How is the concept of directly‐deliberative polyarchy complementary to and reconcilable with our notions of democratic constiutionalism? To this question the readers of the essay will find many fascinating answers. Equally, however, how might the debate on the normative and practical dilemmas of the European system of governance profit from these deliberations? Which European problem might be resolved with the aid of the emerging and new direct forms of democracy identified in this essay? How might direct democracy interact with the intergovernmentalist and the functionalist elements of the EU system? Although this essay contains no certain answers to these European questions, its challenging messages will be understood in European debates.
471 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore how effective boundary work involves creating salient, credible, and legitimate information simultaneously for multiple audiences, and the thresholds, complementarities and tradeoffs between salience, credibility, and legitimacy when crossing boundaries.
Abstract: The boundary between science and policy is only one of several boundaries that hinder the linking of scientific and technical information to decision making. Managing boundaries between disciplines, across scales of geography and jurisdiction, and between different forms of knowledge is also often critical to transferring information. The research presented in this paper finds that information requires three (not mutually exclusive) attributes - salience, credibility, and legitimacy - and that what makes boundary crossing difficult is that actors on different sides of a boundary perceive and value salience, credibility, and legitimacy differently. Presenting research on water management regimes in the United States, international agricultural research systems, El Nino forecasting systems in the Pacific and southern Africa, and fisheries in the North Atlantic, this paper explores: 1) how effective boundary work involves creating salient, credible, and legitimate information simultaneously for multiple audiences; 2) the thresholds, complementarities and tradeoffs between salience, credibility, and legitimacy when crossing boundaries; and 3) propositions for institutional mechanisms in boundary organizations which effectively balance tradeoffs, take advantage on complementarities, and reach thresholds of salience, credibility, and legitimacy.
462 citations