Towards a multifaceted measure of perceived legitimacy of participatory governance

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Tessa Haesevoets, Arne Roets, Kristof Steyvers, Bram Verschuere, Bram Wauters
{"title":"Towards a multifaceted measure of perceived legitimacy of participatory governance","authors":"Tessa Haesevoets,&nbsp;Arne Roets,&nbsp;Kristof Steyvers,&nbsp;Bram Verschuere,&nbsp;Bram Wauters","doi":"10.1111/gove.12800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Policy decision-making modes in governance contexts have become increasingly participatory. This raises questions about legitimacy, and how to measure this concept. The current article advances a multifaceted measurement of perceived legitimacy of policy decision-making modes in participatory governance, capturing the three components of legitimacy (input, throughput, and output) with two items each. This six-item measure was tested in a vignette survey (total <i>N</i> = 4583), which was administered among four types of democratic stakeholders: politicians, civil servants, civil society, and citizens. Respondents completed the scale for four different policy decision-making modes (representative, consultative, co-decisive, and decisive). Our six-item scale shows excellent internal consistency as an encompassing measure, while at the same time also allowing for fine-grained analyses on difference patterns in the input, throughput, and output components of legitimacy. As such, it provides a relevant and parsimonious tool for future research that requires a multifaceted measurement of the perceived legitimacy of participatory governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":48056,"journal":{"name":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","volume":"37 3","pages":"711-728"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gove.12800","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Policy decision-making modes in governance contexts have become increasingly participatory. This raises questions about legitimacy, and how to measure this concept. The current article advances a multifaceted measurement of perceived legitimacy of policy decision-making modes in participatory governance, capturing the three components of legitimacy (input, throughput, and output) with two items each. This six-item measure was tested in a vignette survey (total N = 4583), which was administered among four types of democratic stakeholders: politicians, civil servants, civil society, and citizens. Respondents completed the scale for four different policy decision-making modes (representative, consultative, co-decisive, and decisive). Our six-item scale shows excellent internal consistency as an encompassing measure, while at the same time also allowing for fine-grained analyses on difference patterns in the input, throughput, and output components of legitimacy. As such, it provides a relevant and parsimonious tool for future research that requires a multifaceted measurement of the perceived legitimacy of participatory governance.

对参与式治理的合法性认知进行多方面衡量
治理背景下的政策决策模式越来越具有参与性。这就提出了关于合法性以及如何衡量这一概念的问题。本文对参与式治理中政策决策模式的合法性感知进行了多方面的测量,分别用两个项目来捕捉合法性的三个组成部分(投入、产出和输出)。这项由六个项目组成的量表在一项小故事调查(总人数 = 4583)中进行了测试,调查对象包括四类民主利益相关者:政治家、公务员、公民社会和公民。受访者针对四种不同的政策决策模式(代表制、协商制、共同决定制和决定制)填写了量表。我们的六项目量表作为一种涵盖性的测量方法,显示出极好的内部一致性,同时还允许对合法性的投入、产出和输出部分的差异模式进行精细分析。因此,该量表为今后需要对参与式治理的感知合法性进行多方面测量的研究提供了一个相关且简洁的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
10.30%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Governance provides a forum for the theoretical and practical discussion of executive politics, public policy, administration, and the organization of the state. Published in association with International Political Science Association''s Research Committee on the Structure & Organization of Government (SOG), it emphasizes peer-reviewed articles that take an international or comparative approach to public policy and administration. All papers, regardless of empirical focus, should have wider theoretical, comparative, or practical significance.
×
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