Mirror of the state or independent image? – Conceptual perspectives on the question of a legitimacy shift to the output dimension in local democracy

Abstract

This contribution discusses the theoretical and conceptual implications of asking about the legitimacy of local democracy and the relevance of discussing ‘performance legitimacy’. The role of local government in generating or undermining democratic legitimacy is ambivalent. It is questionable whether there can be something like a genuine legitimacy of local government at all, considering its subordinate and functionalised role in the modern (welfare) state. In the first part of the article, the complexity and controversial status of political legitimacy in general and local government in particular is exposed. It is argued that the effective interplay of justification (giving acceptable reasons for policies) and demonstration (performing successfully by fulfilling promises), which is at the core of generating legitimacy, cannot be deduced from general concepts and fixed in a general model. Generating a self-reinforcing dynamic of public support and linking different dimensions of legitimacy (input, throughput, output) is a matter of reflexive institutionalisation. Being part of a democratic welfare state has provided local governments in Western democracies with a stabilised focus of legitimacy. At the same time, local governments are particularly under pressure to adapt, to innovate and to modernise. Four broader narratives of changing democratic legitimacy sources with respect to local government are discussed. The shift to ‘performance legitimacy’ has to be seen in a wider context of redefining the meaning of (local) democracy as mapped out by the four narratives.