The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers
Tóm tắt
When do members of civil society view international election observers as legitimate? Motivated by recent work on the legitimacy of international organizations, we evaluate what type of information affects non-governmental organizations’ (NGOs) beliefs about international election observer groups, which include both intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) that seek to exercise authority, often regarding the same elections. Specifically, we examine the effects of two different types of information: information about the observers’ objective substantive features versus information that serves as heuristic shortcuts. Three survey-based experiments – one in Kenya and the others global – prime NGO respondents with information about both real and hypothetical election observer groups in ways intended to affect their votes for which organizations should be invited to observe the next election in their countries. In general, the primes about the objective substantive sources of legitimacy beliefs failed to produce consistent, measurable changes in responses among NGOs across both the hypothetical and real-world observer groups. That is, telling NGOs about the qualities of the organizations work failed to change perceptions. What mattered instead, however, was an organizations’ prominence or type, features that likely served as heuristic shortcuts. The findings, however, varied depending on whether we used hypothetical or real organizations. With hypothetical organizations, NGO respondents preferred other NGOs, suggesting an isomorphism heuristic. Conversely, with real organizations NGO respondents preferred more prominent and well-known intergovernmental organizations. This suggests that the isomorphism and prominence of observer organizations can drive legitimacy beliefs. Given the differences between using real versus hypothetical organizations, however, it also cautions against using hypothetical actors in survey experiments.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Anderson, B., Bernauer, T., & Kachi, A. (2018). Does international pooling of authority affect the perceived legitimacy of global governance? The Review of International Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-018-9341-4.
Armingeon, K., & Ceka, B. (2014). The loss of trust in the European Union during the great recession since 2007: The role of heuristics from the national political system. European Union Politics, 15(1), 82–107.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.
Beetham, D. (1991). The legitimation of power. Macmillan.
Benstead, L. J., Kao, K., & Lust, E. (n.d.). Does it matter what observers say? The impact of international election monitoring on legitimacy. http://www.academia.edu/30532200/Does_it_Matter_What_Observers_Say_The_Impact_of_International_Election_Monitoring_on_Legitimacy. Accessed 26 Apr 2018.
Berger, J., Sorensen, A. T., & Rasmussen, S. J. (2010). Positive effects of negative publicity: When negative reviews increase sales. Marketing Science, 29(5), 815–827.
Bjornlund, E. (2004). Beyond free and fair: Monitoring elections and building democracy. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
Bland, G. (2015). Measuring the quality of Kenya’s march 2013 election. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics and Policy, 14(2), 136–147.
Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265–289.
Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 307–324.
Brown, S. (2001). Authoritarian leaders and multiparty elections in Africa: How foreign donors help to keep Kenya’s Daniel Arap Moi in power. Third World Quarterly, 22(5), 725–739.
Bush, S. S., & Prather, L. (2017). The promise and limits of election observers in building election credibility. The Journal of Politics, 79(3), 921–935.
Bush, S. S., & Prather, L. (2018). Who’s there? Election observer identity and the local credibility of elections. International Organiztion, 72(3).
Caldeira, G. A., & Gibson, J. L. (1992). The etiology of public support for the supreme court. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 635–664.
Chaudoin, S. (2014). Promises or policies? An experimental analysis of international agreements and audience reactions. International Organization, 68(01), 235–256.
Cole, R. J. (2013). Africa’s relationship with the international criminal court: More political than legal. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 14(2), 353–382.
Dafoe, A., Zhang, B., & Caughey, D. (forthcoming). Information equivalence in survey experiments. Political Analysis https://www.dropbox.com/s/j9b5xow6yscfigi/17-07-31-2143_confounding-sa.pdf?dl=0. Accessed 26 April 2018.
Davies, G. A. M., & Johns, R. (2013). Audience costs among the British public: The impact of escalation, crisis type, and prime ministerial rhetoric. International Studies Quarterly, 57(4), 725–737.
Dellmuth, L. M., & Tallberg, J. (2015). The social legitimacy of international organisations: Interest representation, institutional performance, and confidence extrapolation in the United Nations. Review of International Studies, 41(3), 451–475. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210514000230.
Dellmuth, L. M., & Tallberg, J. (2018). Elite communication and the legitimacy of international organizations. Unpublished paper.
Desposato, S., & Garztke, E. (2013). How “democratic” is the democratic peace? A survey experiment of foreign policy preferences in Brazil and China. Working Paper, Univ. Calif. San Diego and Univ. Essex.
Desposato, S., Gartzke, E., & Suong, C. (2013). How popular is the democratic peace? A survey experiment of political preferences in Brazil and China. Working Paper. http://www.scpi.politicaldata.org/SCPIV/scpi6_Desposato.pdf. Accessed 26 April 2018.
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65(2), 135–150.
Edelman. (2018). 2018 Edelman TRUST BAROMETER. https://www.edelman.com/trust-barometer. Accessed 15 May 2018.
Findley, M. G., Laney, B., Nielson, D. L., & Sharman, J. C. (2017). External validity in parallel global field and survey experiments on anonymous incorporation. The Journal of Politics, 79(3), 856–872. https://doi.org/10.1086/690615.
Follesdal, A., & Hix, S. (2006). Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(3), 533–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00650.x.
Franck, T. M. (1990). The power of legitimacy among nations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gelpi, C. (2010). Performing on cue? The formation of public opinion toward war. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 54(1), 88–116.
Gourevitch, P. A., Lake, D. A., & Stein, J. G. (2012). The credibility of transnational NGOs: When virtue is not enough. Cambridge University Press.
Grant, R. W., & Keohane, R. O. (2005). Accountability and abuses of power in world politics. American Political Science Review, 99(1), 29–43.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
Harteveld, E., van der Meer, T., & Vries, C. E. D. (2013). In Europe we trust? Exploring three logics of trust in the European Union. European Union Politics, 14(4), 542–565.
Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the global order: From the modern state to cosmopolitan governance. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
Hetherington, M. J., & Nugent, J. D. (2001). Explaining public support for devolution: The role of political trust. In What is it about government that Americans dislike (pp. 134–151).
Horowitz, M. C., & Levendusky, M. S. (2011). Drafting support for war: Conscription and mass support for warfare. Journal of Politics, 73(02), 524–534.
Hurd, I. (1999). Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics. International Organization, 53(2), 379–408.
Hurd, I. (2002). Legitimacy, power, and the symbolic life of the UN security council. Global Governance, 8(1), 35–51.
Hyde, S. D. (2011a). The Pseudo-democrat’s dilemma, why election observation became an international norm. Ithaca: Cornell University Press Accessed 26 April 2018.
Hyde, S. D. (2011b). Catch us if you can: Election monitoring and international norm diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 356–369.
Hyde, S. D. (2012). Why believe international election monitors? In P. A. Gourevitch, D. A. Lake, & J. G. Stein (Eds.), The credibility of transnational NGOs: When virtue is not enough. Cambridge University Press.
Hyde, S. D. (2015). Experiments in international relations: Lab, survey, and field. Annual Review of Political Science, 18(1), 403–424.
Jennings, M. K. (1998). Political trust and the roots of devolution. In V. Braithwaite & M. Levi (Eds.), Trust and governance (pp. 218–44). Russell Sage Foundation.
Johns, R., & Davies, G. A. M. (2012). Democratic peace or clash of civilizations? Target states and support for war in Britain and the United States. The Journal of Politics, 74(04), 1038–1052.
Keating, V. C., & Thrandardottir, E. (2017). NGOs, trust, and the accountability agenda. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(1), 134–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148116682655.
Kelley, J. G. (2008). Assessing the complex evolution of norms: The rise of international election monitoring. International Organization, 62(02), 221–255.
Kelley, J. G. (2009a). The more the merrier? The effects of having multiple international election monitoring organizations. Perspectives on Politics, 7(01), 59–64.
Kelley, J. G. (2009b). D-minus elections: The politics and norms of international election observation. International Organization., 63, 765.
Kelley, J. G. (2012). Monitoring democracy: When international election observation works, and why it often fails. Princeton University Press.
Kelley, J. G. (2013). Watching the watchmen: the role of election observers in Africa. Think Africa Press. https://thinkafricapress.com/watching-watchmen-role-election-observers-africa-kenya-drc-zimbabwe/. Accessed 19 Dec 2018.
Levendusky, M. S., & Horowitz, M. C. (2012). When backing down is the right decision: Partisanship, new information, and audience costs. Journal of Politics, 74(02), 323–338.
Levy, J. S., McKoy, M. K., Poast, P., & Wallace, G. P. R. (2015). Backing out or backing in? Commitment and consistency in audience costs theory. American Journal of Political Science, 59(4), 988–1001.
Lister, S. (2003). NGO legitimacy: Technical issue or social construct? Critique of Anthropology, 23(2), 175–192.
Logister, L. (2007). Global governance and civil society. Some reflections on NGO legitimacy. Journal of Global Ethics, 3(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449620701437988.
Majone, G. (1998). Europe’s ‘democratic deficit’: The question of standards. European Law Journal, 4(1), 5–28.
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. (1992). NDI mission to the Republic of Kenya (International Delegation Report).
Newton, K., & Norris, P. (2000). Confidence in political institutions: Faith, culture, or performance? In S. J. Pharr & R. D. Putnam (Eds.), Disaffected democracies: What’s troubling the trilateral countries? (pp. 52–73). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Nye, J. S. (1997). Introduction: The decline of confidence in government. In J. S. Nye, P. Zelikow, & D. C. King (Eds.), Why people don’t trust government (pp. 1–18). Harvard University Press.
Owuor, M., Nguyen, D., Kuria, A., & Salinas, A. O. (2008). The electoral process in Kenya: A review of past experience and recommendations for reform. International Foundation for Electoral Systems.
Pearl, J. (1984). Heuristics: Intelligent search strategies for computer problem solving. Addison-Wesley.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Rocabert, J., Schimmelfennig, F., Crasnic, L., & Winzen, T. (2018). The Rise of international parliamentary institutions: purpose and legitimation. The Review of International Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-018-9326-3.
Rubenstein, J. C. (2014). The misuse of power, not bad representation: Why it is beside the point that no one elected Oxfam. Journal of Political Philosophy, 22(2), 204–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopp.12020.
Rubenstein, J. C. (2016). Between Samaritans and States: The Political Ethics of Humanitarian INGOs (reprint edition.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sanchez, R. (2014, October 19). WHO to review Ebola response amid criticism. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/world/who-ebola-response/index.html. Accessed 16 May 2018.
Scharpf, F. W. (1970). Demokratietheorie Zwischen Utopie Und Anpassung. Vol. 25. Konstanzer Universitätsreden. Konstanz: Druckerei u. Verlagsanst. Universitätsverl.
Schmidtke, H. (2018). Elite legitimation and delegitimation of international organizations in the media: Patterns and explanations. The Review of International Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-018-9320-9.
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118.
Stroup, S. S., & Wong, W. H. (2017). The authority trap: Strategic choices of international NGOs. Ithac: Cornell University Press.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
Tallberg, J., & Zürn, M. (2019). The legitimacy and legitimation of international organizations: introduction and framework. The Review of International Organizations. (this issue).
Tomz, M. (2007). Domestic audience costs in international relations: An experimental approach. International Organization, 61(4), 821–840.
Tomz, M., & Weeks, J. L. P. (2013). Public opinion and the democratic peace. American Political Science Review, 107(04), 849–865.
Trager, R. F., & Vavreck, L. (2011). The political costs of crisis bargaining: Presidential rhetoric and the role of party. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 526–545.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232.
Wallace, G. P. R. (2013a). International law and public attitudes toward torture: An experimental study. International Organization, 67(01), 105–140.
Wallace, G. P. R. (2013b). Martial law? Military experience, international law, and support for torture. International Studies Quarterly.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2p2), 1–27.
Zaum, D. (Ed.). (2013). Legitimating International Organization. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press.