Output Legitimacy

2022 ◽  
pp. 281-464
Keyword(s):  
Output Legitimacy

Epilogue

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
The Past ◽  
Output Legitimacy ◽  
The Eu

Can the judicial creation of the EU internal market be justified? A famous—positive—answer has, in the past, been suggested by Miguel Maduro’s We the Court; and the first section explores the credentials of his ‘majoritarian activism’ thesis. The second section surveys alternative forms of legitimacy, such as ‘output legitimacy’ and ‘messianic legitimacy’, but it also offers a new Kantian approach to the legitimacy question.

Red Tape, Rule Legitimacy, and Public Service Motivation: Experimental Evidence From Korean Citizens

2022 ◽  
pp. 009539972110690
Author(s):  
Yongjin Ahn ◽  
Jesse W. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Public Service ◽  
Public Service Motivation ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Input And Output ◽  
Relief Fund ◽  
Red Tape ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
Output Legitimacy

While legitimacy plays a key role in determining if a public sector rule or process objectively qualifies as red tape, it is unclear if legitimacy shapes subjective red tape judgments. We use a sample of South Korean citizens and a vignette-based survey experiment describing applying for a small business COVID-19 relief fund to test the relevance of rule legitimacy for perceived red tape. We find that obtaining a favorable outcome (receiving the fund) reduces perceived red tape, but that neither input nor output legitimacy plays a consistent role. Second, we find that public service motivation moderates the role of both input and output legitimacy on perceived red tape, though in different directions. For those with high levels of public service motivation, output legitimacy reduces perceived red tape. However, for the same group, input legitimacy increases it. We provide a detailed discussion of the contributions of our study.

Saving Democracy from Ourselves

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Archon Fung
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Governance ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Media Professionals ◽  
Social Coherence ◽  
Output Legitimacy ◽  
Three Components

Though we all depend upon democracy, each of us in our public and civic roles is motivated to act in ways that deplete its sustaining conditions. In this chapter, Archon Fung proposes that one part of the solution to this problem is a thicker professional and civic ethics. The argument has three components. The first is a basic account of democratic governance that advances procedural and output legitimacy. In order to produce legitimacy, however, democracy has five sociopolitical “underwriting” conditions: commitment to process over outcome, social coherence, a spirit of compromise, responsive government, and epistemic integrity. Finally, different kinds of actors—politicians, media professionals, and citizens—have powerful self-interested motives to pollute “the commons” of democracy. Each of these role-specific discussions develops a set of ethical commitments that actors should adopt to sustain democracy instead of undermining it.

1. Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Barnard ◽  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
Output Legitimacy ◽  
The Eu

This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of the development of EU law. It then sets out the text’s overarching themes.These can be introduced in the form of two questions: ‘What should the EU be doing?’ and ‘How should the EU go about doing it?’ The first question is linked to the concept of ‘output legitimacy’, that is, the EU proving its value to the public by showing that it is effective in contributing to the achievement of objectives which have wide public support (e.g. economic growth and job creation). The second question is linked to the concept of ‘input legitimacy’, that is, how fair and democratic is the process by which the EU takes decisions.

scholarly journals Authorising humanitarian intervention: a five-point defence of existing multilateral procedures

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Recchia
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Moral Hazard ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Just Cause ◽  
Regional Organisations ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Armed Intervention ◽  
Output Legitimacy

AbstractEven scholars who support multilateralism in principle frequently question the value of securing approval from existing multilateral bodies for humanitarian intervention. The United Nations (UN) and regional organisations such as NATO, the argument goes, are far from democratic; furthermore, multilateralism is often a recipe for doing nothing; therefore, unauthorised intervention should be permissible in circumstances of ‘humanitarian necessity’. This article maintains that although today’s multilateral organisations and related procedures for authorising armed intervention may be suboptimal, they have significant output legitimacy. First, existing authorisation procedures reduce the risk of destabilising conflict spirals among powerful states. Second, they diminish the likelihood that humanitarianism will be used as a pretext. Third, they reduce epistemic problems concerning the identification of a just cause for intervention and thus the risk of accidental abuse. Fourth, they minimise the ‘moral hazard’ of humanitarian intervention. Finally, compliance with multilateral procedures is increasingly required for successful peacebuilding. This leads me to conclude that humanitarian warfare should always be authorised by the UN or regional multilateral organisations.

Legitimacy and eu Biofuel Governance: In Search of Greater Coherence

Climate Law ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 239-266
Author(s):  
Seita Romppanen
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Sustainability Criteria ◽  
European Climate ◽  
Input And Output ◽  
Energy Governance ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
Output Legitimacy

The eu regulatory framework for sustainable biofuels is an example of today’s dynamic European climate and energy governance. The article demonstrates that there are, however, particular internal controversies that continue to undermine the overall credibility of the eu biofuel regime, as well as the effectiveness and legitimacy of the scheme. In connection with the debate on new governance, the article explores the concepts of input and output legitimacy as regards the verification of compliance with biofuel sustainability criteria. The article shows that if the procedural requirements to satisfy input legitimacy are not met, there is a risk that output legitimacy—the credibility of the substantive outcome—will also be diminished. By paying attention to the process and harmonizing the itemized process-related elements we can improve both the appropriate achievement of the substantive outcome as well as the legitimacy of eu biofuel governance.

scholarly journals Socialisation and legitimacy intermediation in the Council of the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-221
Author(s):  
Kamil Ł. Ławniczak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
State Governments ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Qualified Majority ◽  
Depth Interviews ◽  
Supranational Level ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
Output Legitimacy ◽  
Made In

Abstract The Council is a crucial intergovernmental institution of the European Union. However, the complex, opaque and consensual character of the decision-making process in the Council puts its legitimacy into question. Intergovernmentalist theory posits that it is sufficiently legitimised, indirectly, by the member state governments. Constructivist research, on the other hand, suggests that socialisation might disturb the relaying of positions from the national to the supranational level, as the former approach implies. This paper aims to explore these issues, in particular related to representation and consensus. It contains an analysis of material generated in in-depth interviews and concludes that more effort is invested into reaching a more inclusive compromise in the Council than one would expect if it were to decide by qualified majority. Socialisation is weakening the input legitimacy of decisions made in the Council, while at the same time enhancing their output legitimacy by favouring genuine consensus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document