Abstract.  This article presents a quantitative measurement of the political legitimacy of states in the late 1990s and early 2000s for 72 states containing 5.1 billion people, or 83 per cent of the world's population. First, the concept of state legitimacy is defined and justified. The definition includes the subjects, objects and sub‐types of legitimacy. A strategy to achieve replicable cross‐national measurements of legitimacy is then outlined and implemented, including a discussion of data sources and three alternative aggregation methods. The results are briefly examined and tested, and the uncertainties of quantitative measures discussed. Finally, the role of supplementary qualitative measurement is considered.

No abstract

This article examines a range of potential causal variables of state legitimacy using a globally representative set of 72 countries accounting for 83 percent of the world's population. Major theories of legitimacy determinants are advanced and tested using survey and expert data. Three variables (which measure good governance, democratic rights, and welfare gains) are then chosen from among all strongly correlated variables as being the most plausible basis for a causal theory.The theory is then further tested using 31 pairs of countries with similar income levels and in similar regions, which shows a significant positive correlation between performance and legitimacy. The article concludes with suggestions for further research.

The contemporary politics of China reflect an ongoing effort by the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to reclaim the right to rule in light of the consequences of economic development, international pressures, and historical change. China's regime stands out within the Asian region for its success in the effort of adapting to change and ensuring its continuity. Focusing on changes in China's elite discourse during the reform period and particularly during the last decade, the aim of this article is to elaborate the relative importance of various sources of legitimacy as they are shifting over time, as well as inherent dilemmas and limitations. There is evidence of an agile, responsive, and creative party effort to relegitimate the postrevolutionary regime through economic performance, nationalism, ideology, culture, governance, and democracy. At the same time, the study finds a clear shift in emphasis from an earlier economic‐nationalistic approach to a more ideological‐institutional approach. La política contemporánea China refleja un esfuerzo sostenido del Partido Comunista Chino por continuar ejerciendo el derecho de gobernar a la luz de las consecuencias del desarrollo económico, las presiones internacionales, y el cambio histórico. El régimen Chino se destaca dentro de la región de Asia por su éxito en el esfuerzo de adaptarse al cambio y asegurar su continuidad. Centrándonos en los cambios en el discurso de la elite China durante el periodo de reforma y particularmente durante la última década, el objetivo de este artículo es el de detallar la relativa importancia de las diferentes fuentes de legitimidad y sus variaciones en el tiempo, así como los dilemas y limitaciones inherentes. Existe evidencia de un esfuerzo ágil, sensible y creativo para relegitimar el régimen post‐revolucionario a partir del desempeño económico, el nacionalismo, la ideología, la cultura, un buen gobierno, y la democracia. De la misma forma, este estudio encuentra un cambio claro en el énfasis del régimen de un enfoque económico‐nacionalista a uno ideológico‐institucional.

What explains the nature of institutional change in post-1989 China? Dominant theories of institutional change focus on economic-rationalist, sociopolitical, or historical causes. Yet they have trouble explaining the pattern of institutional change in China. An alternative legitimacy-based perspective is proposed here that provides a more parsimonious and general theory of institutional change for China and potentially for other cases as well.