Citizens' perceptions of the legitimacy of independent agencies: The effects of expertise-based and reputation-sourced authority

IF 6.1 1区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Dovilė Rimkutė, Honorata Mazepus
{"title":"Citizens' perceptions of the legitimacy of independent agencies: The effects of expertise-based and reputation-sourced authority","authors":"Dovilė Rimkutė, Honorata Mazepus","doi":"10.1111/puar.13916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legitimacy is a central concern for independent agencies tasked with shaping policies. While expertise-based and reputation-sourced authority bases are assumed to be relevant for agency legitimacy, their individual and joint effects on citizens' perceptions lack comprehensive examination. To address this gap, the study integrates insights from bureaucratic politics, bureaucratic reputation, and cognitive psychology. Our survey experiment with Dutch citizens, focusing on the European Food Safety Authority, suggests that expertise-based authority positively affects perceived agency legitimacy, while a negative reputation has detrimental effects. Furthermore, expertise-based authority moderates the impact of reputation, amplifying positive effects and mitigating negative ones. This implies that agencies are more susceptible to reputational threats when they lack expertise-based authority. The study advances the theoretical tenets of bureaucratic reputation theory and offers effective strategies for agencies to strengthen their legitimacy among the most critical audience in democratic political systems—citizens.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13916","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Legitimacy is a central concern for independent agencies tasked with shaping policies. While expertise-based and reputation-sourced authority bases are assumed to be relevant for agency legitimacy, their individual and joint effects on citizens' perceptions lack comprehensive examination. To address this gap, the study integrates insights from bureaucratic politics, bureaucratic reputation, and cognitive psychology. Our survey experiment with Dutch citizens, focusing on the European Food Safety Authority, suggests that expertise-based authority positively affects perceived agency legitimacy, while a negative reputation has detrimental effects. Furthermore, expertise-based authority moderates the impact of reputation, amplifying positive effects and mitigating negative ones. This implies that agencies are more susceptible to reputational threats when they lack expertise-based authority. The study advances the theoretical tenets of bureaucratic reputation theory and offers effective strategies for agencies to strengthen their legitimacy among the most critical audience in democratic political systems—citizens.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Administration Review
Public Administration Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
10.80%
发文量
130
期刊介绍: Public Administration Review (PAR), a bi-monthly professional journal, has held its position as the premier outlet for public administration research, theory, and practice for 75 years. Published for the American Society for Public Administration,TM/SM, it uniquely serves both academics and practitioners in the public sector. PAR features articles that identify and analyze current trends, offer a factual basis for decision-making, stimulate discussion, and present leading literature in an easily accessible format. Covering a diverse range of topics and featuring expert book reviews, PAR is both exciting to read and an indispensable resource in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信