Institutional sources of legitimacy in multistakeholder global governance at ICANN

This article provides a novel systematic exploration of ways and extents that institutional characteristics shape legitimacy beliefs toward multistakeholder global governance. Multistakeholderism is often argued to offer institutional advantages over intergovernmental multilateralism in handling glo...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Regulation & governance Ročník 18; číslo 3; s. 1018 - 1039
Hlavní autoři: Jongen, Hortense, Scholte, Jan Aart
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Melbourne John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 01.07.2024
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Témata:
Accords
Andra geografiska studier
global governance
Governance
ICANN
Internet
Internet governance
Legitimacy
Legitimation
Mixed methods research
Multilateralism
multistakeholder
Other Geographic Studies
Political Science
Polls & surveys
Statsvetenskap
World problems
ISSN:1748-5983, 1748-5991
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:This article provides a novel systematic exploration of ways and extents that institutional characteristics shape legitimacy beliefs toward multistakeholder global governance. Multistakeholderism is often argued to offer institutional advantages over intergovernmental multilateralism in handling global problems. This study examines whether, in practice, perceptions of institutional purpose, procedure, and performance affect legitimacy assessments regarding this form of global governance. The analysis focuses on the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), one of the largest and most institutionally developed global multistakeholder arrangements. Evidence comes from a mixed‐methods survey of 467 participants in ICANN. We find that this representative sample accords high importance in principle to many institutional features, and also rates the actual institutional operations of ICANN quite highly on various counts. Moreover, many institutional characteristics associate significantly with participants' legitimacy beliefs toward ICANN. However, not all institutional qualities have this significance, and the relevance of individual‐ and societal‐level circumstances indicates that institutional sources do not provide a full explanation of legitimacy. The article contributes refinements to theory of legitimacy in global governance; demonstrates the value of mixed‐methods survey work in this field; supplies unique original data and analysis; and identifies implications for the politics of (de)legitimation around multistakeholderism.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1748-5983
1748-5991
DOI:10.1111/rego.12565