Abstract
When we talk about NGOs and their legitimacy, it is common to distinguish between advocacy NGOs on the one hand, and service provision NGOs on the other (see Franz and Martens, 2006). While the former are often evaluated in terms of the authenticity of their claim to represent others (Hahn, 2008; Mallaby, 2004), the standard currency for judging the latter are the relative efficiency and effectiveness with which an organisation provides its services and the contribution of its services to the common good (Frantz and Martens, 2006). However — and this volume provides a number of examples — the discussion about NGOs and their legitimacy more and more tends to include an evaluation of NGOs in much broader terms, such as inclusiveness, transparency, or accountability. In a move that some have interpreted as a ‘backlash against civil society’ (Clark, 2003, pp. 169–85), the legitimacy of NGOs is publicly challenged and NGOs that demand democracy or accountability are increasingly asked ‘How democratic are you?’, ‘To whom are you accountable?’ and ‘Who do you speak for and what is your claim to speak for others based on?’.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
K. Bäckstrand (2006) ‘Democratizing Global Environmental Governance? Stakeholder Democracy after the World Summit on Sustainable Development’, European Journal of International Relations, 12, 4, pp. 467–98.
M. Beisheim (1997) ‘Nichtregierungsorganisationen und ihre Legitimität’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B 43/1997, pp. 21–9.
S. Benhabib (1996) ‘Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy’, in S. Benhabib (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), pp. 67–94.
S. Bernstein (2004) The Elusive Basis of Legitimacy in Global Governance: Three Conceptions, Working Paper No. GHC 04/2 of the Institute for Globalization and the Human Condition (Hamilton, ON: McMaster University).
S. Bernstein and B. Cashore (2004) ‘Non-State Global Governance: Is Forest Certification a Legitimate Alternative to a Global Forest Convention?’, in J. Kirton and M. Trebilcock (eds) Hard Choices, Soft Law: Combining Trade, Environment and Social Cohesion in Global Governance (Aldershot: Ashgate), pp. 33–63.
T. A. Börzel and T. Risse (2005) ‘Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of International Governance?’ in E. Grande and L. W. Pauly (eds) Complex Sovereignty: Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-First Century (Toronto: University of Toronto Press), pp. 195–216.
A. Buchanan and R. Keohane (2006) ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’, Ethics and International Affairs, 20, 4, pp. 405–37.
J. L. Campbell (2005) ‘Where Do We Stand? Common Mechanisms in Organizations and Social Movements Research’, in G. F. Davis, D. McAdan, W. R. Scott and M. N. Zald (eds) Social Movements and Organization Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 41–68.
S. Chambers (2003) ‘Deliberative Democratic Theory’, Annual Review of Political Science, 6, pp. 307–26.
A. Chayes and A. Handler Chayes (1995) The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
J. T. Checkel (2006) ‘Tracing Causal Mechanisms’, International Studies Review, 8, 2, pp. 362–70.
J. Clark (2003) Worlds Apart: Civil Society and the Battle for Ethical Globalization (London: Earthscan).
Corporate Europe Observer (2002) ‘Rio+10 and the Privatisation of “Sustainable Development”’, Corporate Europe Observer, 11, May 2002.
G. F. Davis and C. Marquis (2005) ‘Prospects for Organization Theory in the Early Twenty-First Century: Institutional Fields and Mechanisms’, Organization Science, 16, 4, pp. 332–43.
D. Dickinson (2006) ‘Guidelines by Stakeholders for Stakeholder: Is it Worth the Effort?’ SDI Issues — CSR & Accountability No. 18 (Amsterdam: SDI), available at http://www.globalreporting.org/NR/rdonlyres/B2E70533–6026-4260-AF2D-06C814E860C8/0/DickinsonByStakeholdersForStakeholders.pdf, date accessed 16 January 2009.
P. J. DiMaggio and W. W. Powell (1983) ‘The Iron Cage Revisited. Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields’, American Sociological Review, 48, 2, pp. 147–60.
K. Dingwerth (2007) The New Transnationalism: Transnational Governance and Democratic Legitimacy (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
K. Dingwerth and P. Pattberg (2009) ‘World Politics and Organizational Fields: The Case of Transnational Sustainability Governance’, European Journal of International Relations, 15, 4, pp. 707–43.
H. Eckstein (1975) ‘Case Study and Theory in Political Science’, in F. I. Greenstein and N. W. Polsby (eds) Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 7 (Reading: Addison-Wesley), pp. 79–138.
P. Fowler and S. Heap (2000) ‘Bridging Troubled Waters: The Marine Stewardship Council’, in J. Bendell (ed.) Terms of Endearment: Business, NGOs and Sustainable Development (Sheffield: Greenleaf), pp. 135–48.
T. M. Franck (1990) The Power of Legitimacy among Nations (New York: Oxford University Press).
C. Frantz and K. Martens (2006) Nichtregierungsorganisationen (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag).
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2001) GRI Update: January 2001 [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002a) Dialogue on Current and Future Directions: Some Key Issues and Perspectives for and from Our Stakeholders (GRI web archive document) [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002b) GRI Secretariat Memorandum: Summary of the Revisions Working Group and Related Board (20 March–September 2002) [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002c) GRI Update: August 2002 [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002d) GRI Update: June 2002 [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002e) GRI Update: May 2002 [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002f) A Historic Collaborative Achievement: Inauguration of the Global Reporting Initiative (4 April 2002) [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2002g) Incorporation of Stitching Global Reporting Initiative (Amsterdam: GRI).
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2003a) Business Plan 2003–2005 (Amsterdam: GRI).
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2003b) News Update October 2003 [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2004a) News: ‘GRI Rules the Roost’: Benchmarking Report Shows 94% of Best Reporters are Using GRI, available at http://www.globalreporting.org/news/updates/article.asp?ArticleID=366, date accessed 27 December 2004.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2004b) Structured Feedback Process, available at http://www.globalreporting.org/feedback/SFP.asp, date accessed 21 June 2004.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2007a) Latest News: New OS this month, available at http://www.globalreporting.org/NewsEventsPress/LatestNews/2007/NewsJan07NewOS.htm, date accessed 1 February 2007.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2007b) available at http://www.corporateregister.com/gri/ (homepage), date accessed 17.01.2007.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2009) What We Do, available at http://www.globalreporting.org/AboutGRI/WhatWeDo/, date accessed 15 January 2009.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (undated-a) Stakeholder Council: Terms of Reference [on file with author].
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (undated-b) Stakeholder Council, http://www.globalreporting.org/governance/stakeholdercounc.asp, date accessed 23 March 2004.
T. Göbel (2007) Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth? Some Thoughts on the Role of Inclusiveness in (Private) Transnational Governance (Mimeo, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen) (Tübingen: Eberhard-Karls-Universität).
L. H. Gulbrandsen (2004) ‘Overlapping Public and Private Governance: Can Forest Certification Fill the Gaps in the Global Forest Regime?’, Global Environmental Politics, 4, 2, pp. 75–99.
K. Hahn (2008) NGOs’ Power of Definition: Identity Productions in Counter-Human Trafficking Discourse and the Debates on the UN Protocol, Ph.D. Dissertation (Bremen: University of Bremen).
A. Hasenclever, P. Mayer, and V. Rittberger (1997) Theories of International Regimes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
C. Huckel (2005) Legitimacy and Global Governance in Managing Global Public Health, Paper presented at the conference ‘Organizing the World: Rules and Rule-Making among Organizations’, Stockholm, 13–15 October.
I. Hurd (1999) ‘Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics’, International Organization, 53, 2, pp. 379–408.
M. Jachtenfuchs (2003) ‘Regieren jenseits der Staatlichkeit’, in G. Hellmann, K. D. Wolf and M. Zürn (eds) Die Neuen Internationalen Beziehungen: Forschungsstand und Perspektiven in Deutschland (Baden-Baden: Nomos), pp. 495–518.
R. O. Keohane (2003) ‘Global Governance and Democratic Accountability’, in D. Held and M. Koenig-Archibugi (eds) Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance (Cambridge: Polity), pp. 130–59.
G. Klosko (2000) Democratic Procedures and Liberal Consensus (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
A. Liese and M. Beisheim (forthcoming) ‘Transnational Public-Private Partnerships and the Provision of Collective Goods in Developing Countries’, in T. Risse and U. Lehmkuhl (eds) Governance without a State? Policies and Politics in Areas of Limited Statehood.
S. Mallaby (2004) ‘NGOs: Fighting Poverty, Hurting the Poor’, Foreign Policy, September/October, pp. 50–8.
R. B. Mitchell (1998) ‘Sources of Transparency: Information Systems in International Regimes’, International Studies Quarterly, 42, 1, pp. 109–30.
M. Palenberg, W. Reinicke, and J. M. Witte (2006) Trends in Non-Financial Reporting, GPPi Research Paper Series No. 6. (Berlin: GPPI).
P. Pattberg (2004) ‘“Private-Private Partnerships” als innovative Modelle zur Regel(durch)setzung? Möglichkeiten und Grenzen eines neuen Konzeptes am Beispiel des Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)’, in T. Brühl, H. Feldt, B. Hamm, H. Hummel and J. Martens (eds) Unternehmen in der Weltpolitik: Politiknetzwerke, Unternehmensregeln und die Zukunft des Multilateralismus, (Frankfurt a. M.: Dietz), pp. 143–62.
T. Risse (2006) ‘Transnational Governance and Legitimacy’, in A. Benz and I. Papadopoulos (eds) Governance and Democracy: Comparing National, European and International Experiences (London: Routledge), pp. 179–99.
J. Steets (forthcoming) Partnership Accountability. Defining Accountability Standards for Public Policy Partnerships, unpublished manuscript, Berlin/Erfurt.
M. C. Suchman (1995) ‘Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches’, Academy of Management Review, 20, 3, pp. 571–610.
S. Tarrow (2005) The New Transnational Activism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
M. van de Kerkhof (2006) ‘Making a Difference: On the Constraints of Consensus Building and the Relevance of Deliberation in Stakeholder Dialogues’, Policy Sciences 39, 3, pp. 279–99.
S. Waddell (2002) The Global Reporting Initiative: Building a Corporate Reporting Strategy Globally (Boston, MA: The Global Action Network Net).
P. Wapner (1996) Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (Albany, NY: SUNY Press).
P. Willetts (ed.) (1996) The Conscience of the World: The Influence of Non-Governmental Organisations in the UN System (London: C. Hurst & Co).
K. D. Wolf (2006) ‘Private Actors and the Legitimacy of Governance beyond the State. Conceptional Outlines and Empirical Explorations’, in A. Benz and I. Papadopoulos (eds) Governance and Democracy: Comparing National, European and International Experiences (London: Routledge), pp. 200–27.
O. R. Young (1999) Governance in World Affairs (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press).
M. Zürn (1992) Interessen und Institutionen in der internationalen Politik: Grundlegung und Anwendung des situationsstrukturellen Ansatzes (Opladen: Leske + Budrich).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Marianne Beisheim and Klaus Dingwerth
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Beisheim, M., Dingwerth, K. (2010). The Link between Standard-Setting NGO’s Legitimacy and Effectiveness: An Exploration of Social Mechanisms. In: Steffek, J., Hahn, K. (eds) Evaluating Transnational NGOs. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230277984_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230277984_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-31022-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-27798-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)