| 1. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Audiences of (De)Legitimation in Global Governance: A Comparative Overview
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance. Practices, Justifications, and Audiences. - : Oxford University PressOxford. - 9780191946417 ; , s. 187-214
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter explores the composition of targeted and self-appointed audiences of legitimation and delegitimation related to global governance institutions (GGIs). The study of targeted audiences is important because it reveals whose legitimacy beliefs matter in the eyes of elites. At the same time, there are channels through which self-appointed audiences can make their voices heard, not least in influential social media. An elite survey shows that non-constituent audiences are more commonly targeted than constituent audiences. This is true across GGIs of different policy fields and geographical scope. Targeting the legitimacy beliefs of member state representatives or the general public does not seem to be a main priority for elites. It is much more common for elite respondents to target civil society organizations than to target citizens in member states. In contrast, across GGIs, citizens are more prominent among self-appointed audiences as compared to their relative importance as targeted audiences. Citizens are the dominant self-appointed audience group in legitimacy debates on all GGIs, particularly in legitimacy debates on economic/financial and peace/security-related GGIs and less in the case of sustainable development GGIs.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Conclusions and Directions
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance. - 9780230239067 ; , s. 213-226
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 3. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
(De)Legitimation and the Composition of Audiences. Comparing Intergovernmental and Nongovernmental Global Governance Institutions
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance. Practices, Justifications, and Audiences. - : Oxford University PressOxford. - 9780192856111 - 9780191946417 ; , s. 215-215
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter explores how and why the composition of audiences of (de)legitimation varies across two key types of global governance institutions (GGIs), namely intergovernmental and nongovernmental institutions. It does so through a comparative study of the United Nations Framework Conventions for Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), holding the policy field of sustainable development constant. Theoretical expectations on variation across these two types of GGIs relate to institutional set-up, democratic normative structures, and politicization. Factors related to institutional set-up and governance mandates as expected contribute significantly to explaining the composition of audiences of both GGIs, albeit in different ways. Explanations related to global and domestic democratic normative structures have become more central over time for the composition of audiences of the UNFCCC compared to the FSC. Politicization stands out as an important factor for explaining the activation of self-appointed audiences in the case of the UNFCCC. Yet, politicization does not appear to be decisive for who was targeted by the UNFCCC. In comparison, politicization is an important explanation for who is targeted by the FSC, as manifested in its attempts at countering critique.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Introduction: Partnerships, Democracy, and Governance
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance. - Houndmills : Palgrave Macmillan. - 9780230239067 ; , s. 3-23
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Audiences of De(Legitimation) in Global Governance
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Legitimacy in Global Governance. : Sources, Processes, and Consequences - Sources, Processes, and Consequences. - : Oxford University Press. - 9780198826873 ; , s. 119-133
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter identifies types of audiences at which legitimation and delegitimation practices are directed in global governance. The concept of “audience” steers attention to processes of communication between those who seek to shape legitimacy perceptions and those whose perceptions would be shaped. (De)legitimation practices may have different implications for different audiences, and the chapter suggests that audiences play an active part in the performance of (de)legitimation in global governance. Two distinctions are introduced for classifying relationships between global governance institutions and the multitude of actors that may hold legitimacy beliefs about them, namely between constituencies and observers and between targeted and self-appointed audiences. Such categories can be used for the purpose of studying patterns and variation in legitimacy beliefs across actors.
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Country Reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals—The Politics of Performance Review at the Global-National Nexus
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Human Development and Capabilities. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1945-2829 .- 1945-2837. ; 20:4, s. 403-417
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- With the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), debates on governance through goal-setting and performance review have gained momentum. In this article, we explore how the politics of performance review played out in public sustainable development reporting at the global-national nexus. By examining the case of Swedish reporting to the United Nations High Level Political Forum in 2017, we find policy translation, accountability preparation and identity formation to be key functions of SDG reporting. We draw attention to the performative and political features of these functions in the sustainable development realm. With a fast approaching deadline, policy translation of global indicators to the national context glossed over politically contentious issues. Reporting served to enable peer review among governments rather than hierarchical accountability of domestic politics. Moreover, the identity formation function of SDG reporting was strong on the international stage while domestically it was challenged by broader political struggles. In conclusion, our study bears witness of the formative power of public reporting for SDG governance. We call for comparative research to allow for further theory-building on the politics of public reporting on sustainable development.
|
|
| 14. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Democracy in Global Governance : The Promises and Pitfalls of Transnational Actors
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Global Governance. - 1075-2846 .- 1942-6720. ; 16:1, s. 81-101
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The participation of transnational actors in global policymaking is increasingly seen as a means to democratize global governance. Drawing on alternative theories of democracy and existing empirical evidence, we assess the promises and pitfalls of this vision. We explore how the structuring and operation of international institutions, public-private partnerships, and transnational actors themselves may facilitate expanded participation and enhanced accountability in global governance. We find considerable support for an optimistic verdict on the democratizing potential of transnational actor involvement, but also identify hurdles in democratic theory and the practice of global governance that motivate a more cautious outlook. In conclusion, we call for research that explores the conditions for democracy in global governance through a combination of normative political theory and positive empirical research.
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Bexell, Magdalena
(författare)
-
Exploring Responsibility : Public and Private in Human Rights Protection
- 2005
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The theory and practice of international relations are replete with dilemmas related to the distribution of responsibility for human rights protection. Institutionalized notions of public and private empower and shape knowledge of what the spheres of responsibility signify for different kinds of actors. This study examines how the public-private distinction is manifested in controversy concerning the character of corporate social responsibility. The study develops a conceptual framework centered on the public-private distinction and the concept of responsibility, drawing attention to the ambiguous and political character of the distinction. Through the analytical prism of the framework, debates concerning responsibility in the case of transnational oil corporations operating in zones where human rights violations are committed by governments are studied. A closer examination is undertaken of the controversy surrounding a Canadian headquartered oil company that operated in Sudan between 1998 and 2002. A range of political, legal and moral tensions arise from boundary-drawing processes between public and private in debates on the distribution of responsibility for human rights protection. The boundary between public and private responsibility is found to be a site of struggle, leading to charges of complicity in human rights abuse. Reconfigurations of authority and power relations question the state-centric focus of the international human rights regime. In the study is discerned an emerging global public domain of action where nonstate actors such as transnational corporations and advocacy NGOs interact and set agendas and standards. The pluralization of authority relations in webs of global governance and the expansion of private sector self-regulation challenge the association of authority with public actors that are accountable through political institutions. This diversification of authority relations is scrutinized in light of the principle of democratic accountability and legitimacy. Efforts at self-regulation, as well as the development of mechanisms for holding transnational corporations accountable for their impact on social conditions, expand the terrain of accountability in zones of human rights violations where transnational corporations are present. This indicates that the territorial boundaries of accountability systems related to human rights are becoming recast into a less territorially defined transnational sphere of action, influence, contestation and answerability. The analysis demonstrates that the study of responsibility, accountability and authority in the field of international relations is confronted with new challenges through the examination of corporate social responsibility in a global governance setting.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Företags samhällsansvar och mänskliga rättigheter
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Mänskliga rättigheter - ett ofullbordat uppdrag. - : Liber. - 9789147089574 ; , s. 287-304, s. 287-304
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
- Bexell, Magdalena
(författare)
-
Global Governance, Gains and Gender
- 2012
-
Ingår i: International feminist journal of politics. - : Routledge. - 1461-6742 .- 1468-4470. ; 14:3, s. 389-407
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- United Nations bodies and large private companies have recently entered into partnerships for women’s empowerment in developing countries. Such public–private partnerships have not previously been the subject of feminist scrutiny. In this article I examine three partnerships, feeding into research exploring business influence on global governance gender policies. The article demonstrates how partnerships assert their legitimacy through a proposed mutually supporting relationship between women’s empowerment and companies’ economic gains, in contrast to a human rights-based approach to development. I show how UN–business partnerships for women’s empowerment mobilize discourses, policies and governmental techniques to create alignments between business objectives and individual women’s empowerment. Each woman is constituted as an ally of economic success by pursuing her education, increasing productivity and entrepreneurship. I argue that public–private partnerships for women’s empowerment do not challenge the gendered structures of the global economy, though they may improve individual women’s economic situation in the short term. The critical and emancipatory potential of empowerment is weakened by the imposed boundaries of neoliberal market criteria and their demands for economic effectiveness.
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
- Bexell, Magdalena
(författare)
-
Globalt folkstyre? Kommentar till Johan P. Olsen
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift. - 0039-0747. ; 117:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Kommentarer till Johan P. Olsens artikel “Lorenzettis utfordring og demokratiets århundre”. Redaktionen har bett några svenska statsvetare att fritt kommentera den text av Johan P. Olsen som publiceras i detta nummer av Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift.
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
- Bexell, Magdalena
(författare)
-
Indicator accountability or policy shrinking? Multistakeholder partnerships in reviews of the sustainable development goals
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Global Policy. - 1758-5899. ; 15:2, s. 276-287
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with their 169 targets and 231 indicators epitomise the trend of global governance by numbers. This article suggests the notion of a global “indicator reporting trajectory” that is shaped by three main elements: the politics of indicators, a reporting infrastructure and indicator advocacy. I propose that indicator reporting trajectories may result either in policy shrinking or in indicator accountability. The idea of an indicatory reporting trajectory is empirically illustrated with the case of indicators on multistakeholder partnerships of SDG 17. High expectations are put on such partnerships to accelerate SDG realization, but they face several accountability challenges. The analysis shows how indicators that capture globally agreed (but contested) goals can silently disappear due to a lack of data and measurability during long follow-up processes. I argue that there is a great risk for policy shrinking with regard to multistakeholder partnerships under SDG 17 and that this has implications for accountability and, in the end, for the realization of the 2030 Agenda.
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
| 31. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Power and Legitimacy
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Handbook of Global Sustainability Governance.
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 32. |
|
|
| 33. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Realizing the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development–engaging national parliaments?
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Policy Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0144-2872 .- 1470-1006. ; 43:4, s. 621-639
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article examines the role of national parliaments in policy processes related to the realization of the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development, adopted in the UN General Assembly in 2015. We outline three main roles of parliaments in the case of national policy-making based on intergovernmental agreements: legislative and policy approval, citizen representation, and accountability. The cases of Sweden and Ghana are examined with regard to those roles, looking for factors that impact the degree of parliamentary involvement with the 2030 Agenda. The cases show that while formal features of political systems impact how parliaments exercise those roles, political choice among policy-making elites and voters is an equally important factor shaping how those roles play out. Yet, political choice can in turn be circumscribed by competing domains, issues and actors in national 2030 Agenda processes. Even if the two countries chosen for comparison are dissimilar with regard to substantive challenges faced in realizing the 2030 Agenda, they are alike with regard to weak involvement of their parliament in policy-making related to the 2030 Agenda thus far. The conclusion puts forward possible implications of a lack of parliamentary involvement for the domestic democratic legitimacy and realization of the 2030 Agenda.
|
|
| 34. |
|
|
| 35. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Responsibility and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Forum for Development Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0803-9410 .- 1891-1765. ; 44:1, s. 13-29
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article asks what key concerns emerge from the way responsibility is framed in United Nations summit documents on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015. Our conceptual framework serves to make the study of SDG responsibility more systematic by distinguishing three main senses of responsibility: cause, obligation, and accountability. The framework structures our analysis of two SDG summit documents, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. The article shows, first, that the causal sense of responsibility is hidden between the lines in paragraphs on poverty, debt and environmental issues. As a consequence, root causes of problems might not be appropriately addressed. Second, SDG summit documents deal predominantly with responsibility in the sense of obligation. We raise concerns with repeated consideration for national circumstances and with vague obligations for non-governmental actors. Third, with regard to accountability, we stress that quantitative indicators have unintended steering effects both before and beyond the review phase. The focus on indicators risks shadowing broader obligations, such as international human rights. In all its three senses, responsibility in key SDG documents remains state-centric with great room for state sovereignty, self-regulation and respect for national circumstances. Our framework is useful also in showing that the three senses of responsibility build on each other and that engagement with responsibility provides fruitful ground for further research.
|
|
| 36. |
|
|
| 37. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
Strengthening the Sustainable Development Goals through integration with human rights
- 2023
-
Ingår i: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. - 1567-9764. ; 23:2, s. 133-139
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper discusses the relationship between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the long-standing human rights system of the United Nations. Thematically, these two modes of global governance strongly overlap. Several SDGs are in line with human rights obligations. At the same time, the SDGs and human rights are based on divergent logics and constructed very differently. After capturing the key characteristics of the two governance modes, this paper highlights the differences between the SDGs and human rights and introduces a novel conceptualisation to enhance our understanding of the relationship between rights-based and goal-based approaches. Against this backdrop, we assess this relationship and argue that human rights have the potential to strengthen and reinforce the SDGs. In particular, we sketch some future pathways to better integrate the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with existing human rights instruments to enhance accountability, review, and participation in decision-making in relation to the SDGs.
|
|
| 38. |
|
|
| 39. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
The Politics of Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: A Theoretical Framework
- 2022
-
Ingår i: M Bexell, K Jönsson, and A Uhlin (eds.) Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Practices, Justifications, and Audiences. - Oxford : Oxford University Press. - 9780192856111 ; , s. 25-48
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter advances a theoretical framework for studying how, why, and with what impact on audiences, global governance institutions (GGIs) are legitimated and delegitimated. The first component of the framework concerns the distinction between agents and objects. An agent enacts practices of (de)legitimation, whereas an object of (de)legitimation is what is being (de)legitimated, namely the GGI or specific policies. The second component is an agent-structure approach enabling the study of (de)legitimation processes within broader institutional and structural contexts. In this regard, the chapter identifies institutional set-up, policy field, and social structure as particularly relevant factors to account for variation in (de)legitimation across GGIs. The third component of the framework consists of practices, justifications, and audiences of (de)legitimation. Legitimation practices are what different agents engage in when they legitimate or delegitimate GGIs. Justifications are the substantive normative content these agents draw on when engaging in such practices. Audiences are the actors on the receiving end of these processes. The chapter develops overall theoretical expectations related to variation in practices, justifications, and audiences of (de)legitimation across GGIs.
|
|
| 40. |
|
|
| 41. |
- Bexell, Magdalena, et al.
(författare)
-
The Post-2015 Consultations: Fig Leaf Policy or Test Bed for Innovation?
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Global Trends. Prospects for World Society. - Bonn and Duisburg : Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag - Forum Wissenschaft Hochschule. - 9783596032877 ; , s. 131-147
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The United Nations (UN)-led global consultations on new development goals, which will replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), started in 2012. In comparison with the creation of the MDGs, the road towards the post-2015 goals is much more inclusive and participatory. The consultations are part of a longer trend, in which intergovernmental organizations seek to strengthen their legitimacy in the eyes of those affected by their decisions. The post-2015 consultations have turned the spotlight on the vibrant and disparate stakeholder landscape of global development governance. Yet, actual decision-making on the new set of goals remains state-centred. The main challenge for UN member states, as they negotiate the new goals, is to do justice to the diverse input obtained through the consultations. Civil society views on their degree of impact through policy dialogues with UN bodies are quite sceptical. However, prospects for the implementation of new goals are higher if they gain broad legitimacy.
|
|
| 42. |
|
|
| 43. |
|
|
| 44. |
|
|
| 45. |
-
Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance
- 2010
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (refereegranskat)abstract
- There has been a rapid proliferation of public–private partnerships in the areas of human rights, environmental protection and global governance. Consequently, private actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and transnational companies have gained increasing authority in both public policy and regulation. Research into the democratic legitimacy of how these arrangements span the public–private divide is still in its infancy. However, this book furthers our understanding of how different forms of legitimacy and accountability interact, and highlights trade-offs between democratic values in partnership operations. It places the partnership trend in the context of broader theoretical discussion and explores a variety of tensions between, for instance, hierarchies and markets, the common good and private profit, and government and governance. In addition, the book presents research into global and national partnerships, particularly with regard to their democratic credentials.
|
|
| 46. |
-
Global Governance, Legitimacy and Legitimation
- 2015
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Rules set by global governance organizations affect communities across the world. Such organizations increasingly seek to obtain legitimacy in the eyes of groups beyond their member state elites. This book advances scholarly debate on the politics of legitimacy and legitimation in global governance. It brings together researchers from different subfields of International Relations in order to highlight trends and contradictions in the contemporary politics of legitimacy across areas of sustainable development, humanitarian relief, responsible investment, sustainable fisheries and labour standards. The chapters explore legitimation efforts by various forms of global governance bodies, such as intergovernmental organizations, public–private partnerships and fully private bodies. The book demonstrates that different governance forms beyond the nation state share deep legitimacy challenges and engage in continuous legitimation attempts. Questions on the audiences of such legitimation attempts are particularly pivotal in understanding the politics of legitimacy. Audiences are not predetermined but constituted through interaction between legitimation efforts and the reactions to those of targeted and other groups, mirroring broader global power relations.
|
|
| 47. |
|
|
| 48. |
|
|
| 49. |
- Hickmann, Thomas, et al.
(författare)
-
Scoping article : research frontiers on the governance of the Sustainable Development Goals
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Global Sustainability. - 2059-4798. ; 7
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Non-Technical SummaryThis article takes stock of the 2030 Agenda and focuses on five governance areas. In a nutshell, we see a quite patchy and often primarily symbolic uptake of the global goals. Although some studies highlight individual success stories of actors and institutions to implement the goals, it remains unclear how such cases can be upscaled and develop a broader political impact to accelerate the global endeavor to achieve sustainable development. We hence raise concerns about the overall effectiveness of governance by goal-setting and raise the question of how we can make this mode of governance more effective.Technical SummaryA recent meta-analysis on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has shown that these global goals are moving political processes forward only incrementally, with much variation across countries, sectors, and governance levels. Consequently, the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development remains uncertain. Against this backdrop, this article explores where and how incremental political changes are taking place due to the SDGs, and under what conditions these developments can bolster sustainability transformations up to 2030 and beyond. Our scoping review builds upon an online expert survey directed at the scholarly community of the 'Earth System Governance Project' and structured dialogues within the 'Taskforce on the SDGs' under this project. We identified five governance areas where some effects of the SDGs have been observable: (1) global governance, (2) national policy integration, (3) subnational initiatives, (4) private governance, and (5) education and learning for sustainable development. This article delves deeper into these governance areas and draws lessons to guide empirical research on the promises and pitfalls of accelerating SDG implementation.Social Media SummaryAs SDG implementation lags behind, this article explores 5 governance areas asking how to strengthen the global goals.
|
|
| 50. |
- Jönsson, Christer, et al.
(författare)
-
Coordinating Actors in the Fight against HIV/AIDS: From "Lead Agency" to Public-Private Partnerships
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance. - 9780230239067
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The chapter traces the development of the international response to the pandemic of HIV/AIDS from the designation of the World Health Organization (WHO) as “lead agency” in the late 1980s to the emergence of a variety of public-private partnerships from the 1990s onwards. This trajectory is related to general trends in global public health governance. Existing partnerships in the field of HIV/AIDS are described and typified. Finally, the legitimacy and democratic qualities of today’s global governance arrangements in the fight against AIDS are discussed in terms of coordination, representation and accountability.
|
|
