Types Of Legitimacy Research Articles

A Defense of Non-Representational Constitutionalism: Why Constitutions Need Not Be Representational

Abstract The standard opinion is that the force of the constitution hinges on the fact that it is willingly endorsed by the people or, at least representative of the people. This Article challenges this view. More specifically, I differentiate between two types of legitimation: representational legitimation and non-representational or reason-based legitimation. While representational legitimation rests on the fact that the constitution is representative of who the people are or what they want, reason-based constitutions are based on the judgement that the constitution is just or, at least grounded in reason. I also show that some of the puzzles in constitutional theory can be resolved by acknowledging the significance of the latter type of legitimation. For instance, I illustrate that constitutions that were not adopted freely by the nations and could not have been characterized as representative of the people such as the German Constitution can still be legitimate. To put it provocatively: the legitimation of a constitution need not rest on the conviction that it represents the people whom it governs; it may simply rest on the belief that it is a good or just constitution. Representational legitimacy is only one form of legitimacy but not the only one.

The Legitimation of Planning Processes as a Challenge to Metropolitan Governance

This study identifies three types of legitimation from the literature that can be applied within metropolitan governance in the contested sphere of spatial planning: input legitimation, throughput legitimation, and output legitimation. The reason for discussing different forms of legitimation within metropolitan governance is that, globally, only a relatively few metropolitan regions are governed directly through a single elected tier of government such as a regional council. Thus, governance mechanisms in most metropolitan regions involve some form of joint working or cross border governance initiatives that have to be legitimized in the absence of a single overarching elected council covering the whole metropolitan area. The main question discussed in this paper is, therefore, whether all three types of legitimation identified are utilized to legitimize governance mechanisms at the metropolitan scale with a specific focus—as a core part of metropolitan governance—on spatial planning processes and projects. In conceptual terms, our typology structures fuzzy lines of legitimation across the three (the “how”, “who” and “what”) suggested aspects of metropolitan governance in the literature. From this point, we draw on cross-case reviews of variables involved in the design, application, and outcome of input, throughput, and output legitimation in Germany and England, chosen because neither has a formal tier of metropolitan-wide government despite their differences in terms of their highly regionalised and highly centralised national government contexts respectively. This relational methodology helps us to learn about the contextual dynamics of how the three types of legitimation might reinforce one another in different international settings, leading to the overall conclusion that they will work best in combination, although output legitimation has a distinctive capacity to work in less formal settings.

Retrospective Consecration Beyond the Mainstream: The Creation of a Progressive Rock Canon

Based on a sample of 28,360 albums identified by an online community devoted to progressive rock, this article examines factors that shape the retrospective consecration of music that operates beyond the mainstream. Drawing on previous work on fields of cultural production, genre trajectories, and creative careers, the article produces findings that both replicate and innovate. As in previous research, critical acclaim greatly enhances the likelihood of consecration; however, it is not mainstream critics but underground critics whose opinions are most influential and most consistent with popular appeal among the progressive rock audience. Likewise, although performers from the “first wave” of progressive rock and from the United Kingdom have an advantage in getting consecrated, a more recent wave of performers in the online era see higher odds of consecration and there is neither a significant advantage for U.S.-based performers nor a significant disadvantage for performers from the margins. Findings suggest that the relationship between different types of legitimation varies across fields and that in progressive rock—a field with a high degree of aesthetic solidarity—some sources of acclaim often thought of as being in competition are actually compatible.

Zwischen Dynastie, Kalifat und Scharia. Eine interdisziplinäre Betrachtung der Herrschaftslegitimation im frühneuzeitlichen Osmanischen Reich und der heutigen Türkei

This paper discusses types of legitimation in the Early Modern Ottoman Empire and their continuity in today’s Turkey under president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Proceeding from a theoretical examination of the concept of legitimation, this paper shows the diversity of legitimation strategies in an interdisciplinary analysis, accentuating those that Erdogan uses to consolidate his power and bring Turkey back “to former greatness”. As will be demonstrated, Erdogan utilizes particular forms, such as religious legitimation or large-scale building projects, in order to achieve legitimacy similar to that of the Ottoman rulers.

La legitimación en el proceso civil peruano

The objective of this article is to define the legitimacy of the process, as well as to understand the different types of legitimation that have been defined in the doctrine and, consequently, adopted in the Peruvian civil process. Also, it seeks to analyze how the control of this budget should be in the process. It does not intend to settle a controversy, but only to expose our ideas, and try to give this procedural budget a practical purpose, from a reading of it from the Constitution and the general theory of the process.

English

Research in discourse analysis has demonstrated that power can be illuminated through analyzing discourses. Centered on the notion that power and legitimation go hand-in-hand, these discourses are distinguished by specific linguistic components. One of the ways to explore how legitimation is tranquilized is to scrutinize its discourses, which some scholars (Wang, 2006; Van Leeuwen, 2007) argue have the precedence to control some of everyday, social, and public spheres. Following this premise, this paper examines how legitimation is jostled in selected decision-making scenes in a popular syndicated three-judge panel TV court show, Hot Bench . Two objectives are set out for this study; firstly to examine how organization and resolution of cases are generally settled and secondly to identify the types of legitimation employed by the judges in their decision-making processes. Premiered in 2014, Hot Bench draws over 2 million viewers in October 2014, jumping to a staggering 2.5 million viewers in November 2014, emerging as one of the most watched syndicated legal reality TV programs in United States of America with its second season renewed through 2017. By analyzing selected conversations by judges who deliberate verdicts, this study which employs Van Leeuwen’s framework of legitimation concludes that the judges typically employ three types of legitimation, namely, authorization, moral evaluation, and rationalization over the course of adjudicating TV’s court proceedings. This study ultimately contributes to the broader field of discourse analysis by tapping onto the belief that language, through discourse analysis, serves as a vehicle within which specific discourse community maintains power. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2016-1602-03

The Uses and Misuses of Max Weber's Types of Legitimation in American Sociology

The Uses and Misuses of Max Weber's Types of Legitimation in American Sociology