Democratic legitimacy of transnational actors: Mapping out the conceptual terrain

Legitimacy Beyond the State?: Re-Examining the Democratic Credentials of Transnational Actors

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 16-37

  Uhlin, Anders ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992561527     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1057/9780230283251     Document Type: Chapter

References (50)

1. Agné, H. (2006) ‘A dogma of democratic theory and globalization: Why politics need not include everyone it affects,’ European Journal of International Relations, 12: 433-58.
2. Anheier, H. and A. Hawkes (2008) ‘Accountability in a globalising world: International non-governmental organizations and foundations,’ in M. Albrow et al. (eds) Global Civil Society 2007/8 (London: Sage).
3. Bexell, M. (2005) Exploring Responsibility: Public and Private in Human Rights Protection (Lund: Department of Political Science, Lund University).
4. Brown, L. D. (2008) Creating Credibility: Legitimacy and Accountability for Transnational Civil Society (Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press).
5. Brown, L. D. and M. H. Moore (2001) ‘Accountability, strategy, and international nongovernmental organizations,’ Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30: 569-87.
6. Brubaker, R. (2005) ‘The "Diaspora" Diaspora,’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28: 1-19.
7. Carlarne, C. and J. Carlarne (2006) ‘In-credible government: Legitimacy, democracy, and non-governmental organizations,’ Public Organization Review, 6: 347-71.
8. Chambers, S. (2003) ‘Deliberative Democratic Theory,’ Annual Review of Political Science, 6: 307-26.
9. Charnovitz, S. (2006) ‘Accountability of non-governmental organizations in global governance,’ in L. Jordan and P. van Tuijl (eds) NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles and Innovations (London: Earthscan).
10. Clark, I. (2007) Legitimacy in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
11. Collingwood, V. (2006) ‘Non-governmental organizations, power and legitimacy in international society,’ Review of International Studies, 32: 439-54.
12. della Porta, D. (2005) ‘Deliberation in movement: Why and how to study deliberative democracy and social movements,’ Acta Politica, 40: 336-50.
13. DeMars, W. E. (2005) NGOs and Transnational Networks: Wild Cards in World Politics (London and Ann Arbor: Pluto Press).
14. Dingwerth, K. (2007) The New Transnationalism: Transnational Governance and Democratic Legitimacy (Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
15. Dryzek, J. S. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
16. Dryzek, J. S. and S. Niemeyer (2008) ‘Discursive representation,’ American Political Science Review, 102: 481-93.
17. Ebrahim, A. (2003) ‘Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs,’ World Development, 31: 813-29.
18. Ebrahim, A. and E. Weisband (eds) (2007) Global Accountabilities: Participation, Pluralism, and Public Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
19. Fuchs, D. (2005) ‘Commanding heights? The strength and fragility of business power in global politics,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 33: 771-801.
20. Grant, R. W. and R. O. Keohane (2005) ‘Accountability and abuses of power in world politics,’ American Political Science Review, 99: 29-43.
21. Haas, P. M. (1992) ‘Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination,’ International Organization, 46: 1-35.
22. Heinrich, V. F., J. M. Mati and L. D. Brown (2008) ‘The varying contexts for civil society accountability: Insights from a global analysis of country-level assessments,’ in V. F. Heinrich and L. Fioramonti (eds) CIVICUS Global Survey of the State of Civil Society, Volume 2: Comparative Perspectives (Bloomfield: Kumarian Press).
23. Held, D. and M. Koenig-Archibugi (2005) ‘Introduction,’ in D. Held and M. Koenig-Archibugi (eds) Global Governance and Public Accountability (London: Blackwell).
24. Jordan, L. and P. van Tuijl (2000) ‘Political responsibility in transnational NGO advocacy,’ World Development, 28: 2051-65.
25. Jordan, L. and P. van Tuijl (2006) ‘Rights and responsibilities in the political landscape of NGO accountability: Introduction and overview,’ in L. Jordan and P. van Tuijl (eds) NGO Accountability. Politics, Principles and Innovations (London: Earthscan).
26. Keck, M. E. (2004) ‘Governance regimes and the politics of discursive representation,’ in N. Piper and A. Uhlin (eds) Transnational Activism in Asia: Problems of Power and Democracy (London: Routledge).
27. Koppell, J. G. S. (2005) ‘Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of "Multiple Accountabilities Disorder",’ Public Administration Review, 65: 94-108.
28. Kovach, H. (2006) ‘Addressing accountability at the global level: The challenges facing international NGOs,’ in L. Jordan and P. van Tuijl (eds) NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles and Innovations (London: Earthscan).
29. Lee, J. (2004) NGO Accountability: Rights and Responsibilities (Geneva: Centre for Applied Studies in International Negotiations).
30. Lister, S. (2003) ‘NGO legitimacy: Technical issue or social construct?’ Critique of Anthropology, 23: 175-92.
31. Macdonald, T. (2008) Global Stakeholder Democracy: Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
32. Mason, M. (2008) ‘The governance of transnational environmental harm: Addressing new modes of accountability/responsibility,’ Global Environmental Politics, 8: 8-24.
33. Mulgan, R. (2000) ' "Accountability": An ever-expanding concept?,' Public Administration, 78: 555-73.
34. Mutz, D. C. (2006) Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
35. Nanz, P. and J. Steffek (2005) ‘Assessing the democratic quality of deliberation in international governance: Criteria and research strategies,’ Acta Politica, 40: 368-83.
36. Nelson, P. J. (2001) ‘Transparency mechanisms at the multilateral development banks,’ World Development, 29: 1835-47.
37. Näsström, S. (2010) ‘The challenge of the all-affected principle,’ Political Studies, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00845.x.
38. Peruzzotti, E. (2006) ‘Civil society, representation and accountability: Restating current debates on the representativeness and accountability of civic associations,’ in L. Jordan and P. van Tuijl (eds) NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles and Innovations (London: Earthscan).
39. Piper, N. and A. Uhlin (2004) ‘New perspectives on transnational activism,’ in N. Piper and A. Uhlin (eds) Transnational Activism in Asia: Problems of Power and Democracy (London: Routledge).
40. Risse, T. (2002) ‘Transnational actors and world politics,’ in W. Carlsnaess, T. Risse and B. A. Simmons (eds) Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage).
41. Scharpf, F. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
42. Scholte, J. A. (2005) ‘Civil society and democratically accountable global governance,’ in D. Held and M. Koenig-Archibugi (eds) Global Governance and Public Accountability (London: Blackwell).
43. Scholte, J. A. (2008) ‘Civil ociety and IMF accountability,’ CSGR Working Paper 244/08.
44. Smith, J. (2008) Social Movements for Global Democracy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).
45. Steffek, J. and M. P. Ferretti (2009) ‘Accountability or "Good Decisions"? The competing goals of civil society participation in international governance,’ Global Society, 23: 37-57.
46. Steffek, J., C. Kissling and P. Nanz (eds) (2008) Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? (Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
47. Unerman, J. and B. O’Dwyer (2006) ‘On James Bond and the importance of NGO accountability,’ Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19: 305-18.
48. Van Rooy, A. (2004) The Global Legitimacy Game: Civil Society, Globalization, and Protest (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).
49. Young, I. M. (2001) ‘Activist challenges to deliberative democracy,’ Political Theory, 29: 670-90.
50. Zürn, M. (1998) Regieren jenseits des Nationalstaates: Globalisierung und Denationalisierung als Chance (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp).