Autonomy or Accountability? How Meritocracy, Patronage and Gender Balance Affect Perceptions of Legitimacy

Abstract

While research suggests that bureaucratic performance is critically contingent on employee selection procedures, few studies examine the perceived legitimacy of different recruitment regimes in the eyes of citizens. This study investigates how perceived bureaucratic legitimacy is shaped by the principles guiding the selection process (merit-based vs. political recruitment) and by its outcome in terms of descriptive representation. We suggest that both meritocratic recruitment and descriptive representation significantly enhance bureaucratic legitimacy, yet that the legitimizing effect of meritocratic recruitment is particularly important in contexts with low quality of government. Citizens in contexts permeated by favoritism, corruption, and low political trust are more vigilant against political recruitment and place less importance on gender balance. Using a unique survey experiment fielded across 27 European countries, we find support for these propositions. Our findings have implications for understanding perceived trade-offs between bureaucratic autonomy and accountability, and perceptions of bureaucratic legitimacy.