Explaining Variation in Legitimation and Delegitimation Practices

Abstract This chapter explains variation in discursive, behavioral, and institutional legitimation and delegitimation practices with reference to the nature of the policy field and transnational actor access. Theoretical expectations are probed through a comparison of two intergovernmental global governance institutions during a legitimacy crisis: one operating in the policy field of sustainable development (the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC), the other being a multipurpose regional organization (the African Union). The chapter finds that the institutionally complex nature of the policy field of climate change explains the rich diversity of discursive, institutional, and behavioral legitimation and delegitimation practices in the case of the UNFCCC. In contrast, despite operating in several policy fields, legitimation practices in the African Union are predominantly discursive in nature and dominated by state actors. The high degree of access and openness within the UNFCCC explains variation in (de)legitimation practices. Although the African Union seeks to portray itself as a people-oriented union, the involvement of transnational actors is undermined by a range of exclusionary measures, which explains the limited variation in legitimation and delegitimation in this case.