IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb597/24.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mapping legitimacy discourses in democratic nation states: Great Britain, Switzerland, and the Unites States compared

Author

Listed:
  • Hurrelmann, Achim
  • Krell-Laluhová, Zuzana
  • Schneider, Steffen

Abstract

This working paper first outlines the contours of a discourse analytical approach to the study of legitimation processes and then presents findings from a quantitative analysis of legitimacy-related communication in selected print media of the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States in 2004. Our data suggest considerable differences between the three countries with regard to levels of (de)legitimation, privileged legitimation resources, and legitimation styles. The micro dynamics of legitimation processes in 2004 were characterised by nationally specific legitimation attention cycles. References to internationalisation and deparliamentarisation - two trends that are often held responsible for a severe legitimacy crisis of the nation state and representative democracy - play no more than a marginal role in legitimacy discourses. We conclude that evidence for a pervasive and full-fledged erosion of the nation state's legitimacy - or a uniform shift from input to output legitimation - is scant.

Suggested Citation

  • Hurrelmann, Achim & Krell-Laluhová, Zuzana & Schneider, Steffen, 2005. "Mapping legitimacy discourses in democratic nation states: Great Britain, Switzerland, and the Unites States compared," TranState Working Papers 24, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb597:24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/28274/1/497823187.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weatherford, M. Stephen, 1992. "Measuring Political Legitimacy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(1), pages 149-166, March.
    2. Anderson, Christopher J. & Guillory, Christine A., 1997. "Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 66-81, March.
    3. Dryzek, John S. & Berejikian, Jeffrey, 1993. "Reconstructive Democratic Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(1), pages 48-60, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nagel, Alexander-Kenneth, 2007. "Analysing change in transnational policy networks: legitimacy-transfers in the Bologna Process," TranState Working Papers 57, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.

    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. Newton, Kenneth, 2005. "Support for democracy: Social capital, civil society and political performance," Discussion Papers, Research Group Civil Society, Citizenship and Political Mobilization in Europe SP IV 2005-402, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Rafael Treibich & Martin Van der linden, 2017. "Trump trumps Bush," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 17-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    3. Cusack, Thomas R., 1997. "On the road to Weimar? The political economy of popular satisfaction with government and regime performance in Germany," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 97-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Kenneth Newton, 2006. "Political Support: Social Capital, Civil Society and Political and Economic Performance," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(4), pages 846-864, December.
    5. Haikun Zhu, 2018. "Social Stability and Resource Allocation within Business Groups," Working Papers Series 79, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    6. Robert MacCulloch & Silvia Pezzini, 2010. "The Roles of Freedom, Growth, and Religion in the Taste for Revolution," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 329-358, May.
    7. Ali Abdelzadeh, 2014. "The Impact of Political Conviction on the Relation Between Winning or Losing and Political Dissatisfaction," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(2), pages 21582440145, May.
    8. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Vringer, Kees & Carabain, Christine L., 2020. "Measuring the legitimacy of energy transition policy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    10. Delhey, Jan & Newton, Kenneth, 2004. "Social trust: Global pattern or nordic exceptionalism?," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Inequality and Social Integration SP I 2004-202, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Matthias Flückiger & Markus Ludwig & Ali Sina Önder, 2019. "Ebola and State Legitimacy," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(621), pages 2064-2089.
    12. Gilbert Silvius & Aydan Ismayilova & Vicente Sales-Vivó & Micol Costi, 2021. "Exploring Barriers for Circularity in the EU Furniture Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-25, October.
    13. Dominik Schraff & Frank Schimmelfennig, 2019. "Eurozone bailouts and national democracy: Detachment or resilience?," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 361-383, September.
    14. Stephen, Matthew D., 2015. "‘Can you pass the salt?’ The legitimacy of international institutions and indirect speech," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 21(4), pages 768-792.
    15. Fenja Søndergaard Møller, 2019. "Blue blood or true blood: Why are levels of intrastate armed conflict so low in Middle Eastern monarchies?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(5), pages 517-544, September.
    16. Khemani,Stuti, 2020. "An Opportunity to Build Legitimacy and Trust in Public Institutions in the Time of COVID-19," Research and Policy Briefs 148256, The World Bank.
    17. Martin Halla & Friedrich Schneider & Alexander Wagner, 2013. "Satisfaction with democracy and collective action problems: the case of the environment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 109-137, April.
    18. Dan Durning, 1999. "The transition from traditional to postpositivist policy analysis: A role for Q-methodology," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 389-410.
    19. Bouma, Jetske A. & Joy, K.J. & Paranjape, Suhas & Ansink, Erik, 2014. "The Influence of Legitimacy Perceptions on Cooperation – A Framed Field Experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 127-137.
    20. André Blais & Eric Guntermann & Vincent Arel-Bundock & Ruth Dassonneville & Jean-François Laslier & Gabrielle Péloquin-Skulski, 2020. "Party Preference Representation," Working Papers halshs-02946659, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:sfb597:24. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zesbrde.html .

    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.