IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v12y2011i1p107-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The legitimacy of new modes of governance in the EU: Studying national stakeholders’ support

Author

Listed:
  • Susana Borrás

    (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, sb.cbp@cbs.dk)

  • Anders Ejrnæs

    (Roskilde University, Denmark)

Abstract

The literature on new modes of governance suffers from a gap between the normative and the positive approaches to legitimacy. This article addresses this gap by studying the patterns of national stakeholders’ support for the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). The results of our survey demonstrate that the OMC receives greater support than previously assumed and that the support of national stakeholders is largely associated with their involvement in national procedures. These findings corroborate the assumptions of normative theories of participatory democracy about the importance of involvement. Furthermore, the study’s findings underline the pivotal role that national stakeholders play regarding matters of legitimacy in the EU’s multi-level system of governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Susana Borrás & Anders Ejrnæs, 2011. "The legitimacy of new modes of governance in the EU: Studying national stakeholders’ support," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(1), pages 107-126, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:12:y:2011:i:1:p:107-126
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116510380282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116510380282
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116510380282?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:44:y:2006:i::p:533-562 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Lee Miles, 2004. "Editorial: The Paradox of a Popular Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(s1), pages 1-8, September.
    3. Andreas Follesdal & Simon Hix, 2006. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 533-562, September.
    4. Easton, David, 1975. "A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 435-457, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caroline Mcevoy, 2016. "The Role of Political Efficacy on Public Opinion in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(5), pages 1159-1174, September.
    2. Lisanne de Blok & Max Heermann & Julian Schuessler & Dirk Leuffen & Catherine E. de Vries, 2024. "All on board? The role of institutional design for public support for differentiated integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 593-604, September.
    3. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    4. Richard Hyman & Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick, 2020. "(How) can international trade union organisations be democratic?," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 26(3), pages 253-272, August.
    5. Lourdes ROJAS RUBIO, 2022. "Inequality, Corruption and Support for Democracy," THEMA Working Papers 2022-20, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    6. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2007. "Reflections on multilevel legitimacy," MPIfG Working Paper 07/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    7. Soetkin Verhaegen & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2014. "European Identity and Support for European Integration: A Matter of Perceived Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 295-314, May.
    8. Ekkart Zimmermann, 2009. "Formen des politischen Terrorismus: ein Plädoyer für eine Differentialdiagnose," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(4), pages 11-28.
    9. Katjana Gattermann & Claes H De Vreese, 2017. "The role of candidate evaluations in the 2014 European Parliament elections: Towards the personalization of voting behaviour?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 447-468, September.
    10. Arjan H Schakel & A J Brown, 2022. "Dissecting Public Opinion on Regional Authority: Four Types of Regionalists Based on Citizens’ Preferences for Self-Rule and Shared Rule," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 52(2), pages 310-328.
    11. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:1:p:29-64 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    13. Petia Kostadinova, 2015. "Improving the Transparency and Accountability of EU Institutions: The Impact of the Office of the European Ombudsman," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 1077-1093, September.
    14. Delhey, Jan, 2002. "Korruption in Bewerberländern zur Europäischen Union: Institutionenqualität und Korruption in vergleichender Perspektive," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Social Structure and Social Reporting FS III 02-401, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    15. Camille Kelbel & Virginie Van Ingelgom & Soetkin Verhaegen, 2016. "Looking for the European Voter: Split-Ticket Voting in the Belgian Regional and European Elections of 2009 and 2014," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 116-129.
    16. Daniel L. Nielson & Susan D. Hyde & Judith Kelley, 2019. "The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 685-715, December.
    17. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2014. "No exit from the euro-rescuing trap?," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    18. Kyriaki Nanou & Galina Zapryanova & Fanni Toth, 2017. "An ever-closer union? Measuring the expansion and ideological content of European Union policy-making through an expert survey," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(4), pages 678-693, December.
    19. Erik Jones, 2009. "Output Legitimacy and the Global Financial Crisis: Perceptions Matter," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(5), pages 1085-1105, November.
    20. Marianne van de Steeg & Thomas Risse, 2010. "The Emergence of a European Community of Communication - Insights from Empirical Research on the Europeanization of Public Spheres," KFG Working Papers p0015, Free University Berlin.
    21. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:12:y:2011:i:1:p:107-126. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.