Legitimacy in an Age of Global Politics

Hurrelmann, Achim; Schneider, Steffen; Steffek, Jens

doi:10.1057/9780230598393

Cited by 65 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No single and universally acceptable definition of legitimacy exists (Ansell 2001). Thus, legitimacy has been depicted as an essentially contested concept: it is difficult to reach a final consensus on the definition and meaning of legitimacy among scholars, practitioners, and laypeople alike (Hurrelmann et al 2007a;Connolly 1992; see also Gallie 1956;Solum 2020aSolum , 2020bSolum , 2020c. For these reasons, it is possible and useful to provide a discussion of its various meanings and the consequences of adopting one of them.…”

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the most general level, the idea of legitimacy refers to the rightfulness and acceptability of political authority (Hurrelmann et al 2007b). The concept of legitimacy is closely intertwined with a network of other normative and empirical concepts in philosophy and political science -power, authority, rights, obligations, sovereignty, consent, institutions, and the state.…”

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most major studies on legitimacy declare that legitimacy is based on social values that are more or less accepted by the population. Both philosophers and empirical political scientists, as well as sociologists and social psychologists, agree that the most fundamental divergence over the meaning of legitimacy is between a normative and an empirical approach to the concept (Ansell 2001;Zelditch 2001;Berg 2008;Hurrelmann et al 2007b;Fabienne 2017;Blatter 2018;Vallier 2018). The normative approach is sometimes called prescriptive, and in some contexts it is referred to as theoretical or political theorization (which may be a potential source of misunderstanding, as political theorization is practiced in the empirical side as well).…”

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While most of the studies on political legitimacy focus on the national or international institutions of regimes and the political community (e.g. Schneider et al 2007), this study focuses on the forest sector. Political legitimacy means here that the forest and nature conservation regimes are perceived as rightful, and that the related political institutions (such as regulations and public incentives, as well as decision-making processes, forest programs, and administrative procedures) are perceived as rightful among the people.…”

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empirical political scientists are interested in measuring the degree of popular acceptance of existing regimes and developing explanations for low or high degrees of legitimacy (Easton 1965;Berg 1988;Wiberg 1988;Beetham 1991;Sadeniemi 1995, Scharpf 1997Norris 1999;Pardo 2000;Barnard 2001;Hurrelmann et al 2007;Schneider et al 2007;Blatter 2018). Empirical approaches have also been developed in sociology (e.g.…”

Section: Alternatives For Empirical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Legitimacy of forest policy – concept analysis and empirical applications in Finland

Rantala¹

2020

Diss. For.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyzes the political legitimacy of forest and forest-related nature conservation policies in Finland. Legitimacy is defined here that the forest and nature conservation regimes and related political institutions are perceived as rightful among the people. The major contribution of this study is the comprehensive conceptual framework of legitimacy based on several theories, mainly from political science. The framework analyzes the objects of support, patterns of legitimacy, performance evaluations, and how these relate to one another. In this study, the objects of support refer to forest-related political institutions; these include regulations and public incentives, as well as decisionmaking processes, political programs, and administrative procedures. The framework is intended to be especially useful in the empirical analyses of pluralistic public political discussion and uses a methodology developed for this purpose. The study also analyses the social values of organized political actors. The empirical part of this study explores a data set from Finnish print media discourse, based on letters to editors in three newspapers and in one journal, along with comments given during the preparation of Finland's National Forest Programme 2010. Another empirical data set consists of qualitative semi-structured interviews and the writings of the organized interest groups. Many different groups of citizens were found to participate in public discussion on forests. Quite a large number of individuals shared the overall publicity, despite the fact that there were some very active writers. Nature conservation organizations, researchers, and politicians were well represented. However, the participation of governmental officials from both the forest and environmental sectors can be characterized as insufficient, considering their importance in the implementation of policies. The study of letters to editors found that groups of common social values served as patterns of legitimacy in the performance evaluations of forest policies. These include welfare and wellbeing derived from forests; values related to nature conservation; democratic values; distributive justice; good governance; core regime principles; and fair markets. Of all performance evaluations, 52% were negative while 26% were positive and 22 % were mixed. The welfare of citizens and the nation, export incomes and employment were the most common justifications used in the legitimacy evaluations while economic growth was a topic that divided opinions. Principles related to values of nature and sustainable development were almost as common in the data. A common argument related to the wellbeing of future generations combined the ideas of benefits and nature values with the idea of distributive justice. Democratic values, especially the public participation of the involved groups of people and public deliberation were common sources of legitimacy. Most political actors supported the ideal of conciliatory decision-making, while smaller group preferred strictn...

show abstract

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definitions and Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%