Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-79b67bcb76-5vsr4 Total loading time: 0.397 Render date: 2021-05-16T07:37:48.994Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Sébastien Mena
Affiliation:
University of Lausanne
Guido Palazzo
Affiliation:
University of Lausanne
Corresponding

Abstract:

In a globalizing world, governments are not always able or willing to regulate the social and environmental externalities of global business activities. Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSI), defined as global institutions involving mainly corporations and civil society organizations, are one type of regulatory mechanism that tries to fill this gap by issuing soft law regulation. This conceptual paper examines the conditions of a legitimate transfer of regulatory power from traditional democratic nation-state processes to private regulatory schemes, such as MSIs. Democratic legitimacy is typically concerned with input legitimacy (rule credibility, or the extent to which the regulations are perceived as justified) and output legitimacy (rule effectiveness, or the extent to which the rules effectively solve the issues). In this study, we identify MSI input legitimacy criteria (inclusion, procedural fairness, consensual orientation, and transparency) and those of MSI output legitimacy (rule coverage, efficacy, and enforcement), and discuss their implications for MSI democratic legitimacy.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Abbott, K.W., & Snidal, D. 2000. Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54: 421–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arya, B., & Salk, J.E. 2006. Cross sector alliance learning and effectiveness of voluntary codes of corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16: 211–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bäckstrand, K. 2006. Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: Rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. European Environment, 16: 290306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, B. 1984. Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bartley, T. 2007. Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions. American Journal of Sociology, 113: 297351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartley, T. 2010. Transnational private regulation in practice: The limits of forest and labor standards certification in Indonesia. Business & Politics, 12(3): art. 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bass, S., & Simula, M. 1999. Independent certification/verification of forest management. Washington, D.C.: World Bank/WWF Alliance Workshop.Google Scholar
Beisheim, M., & Dingwerth, K. 2008. Procedural legitimacy and private transnational governance: Are the good ones doing better? Berlin: SFB-Governance Working Paper Series No. 14.Google Scholar
Bellah, R.N., Madsen, R., Sullivanh, W.M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S.M. 1986. Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Washington, D.C.: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. 2007. Can non-state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework. Regulation & Governance, 1: 347–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 2008. Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation & Governance, 2: 137–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börzel, T.A., & Risse, T. 2005. Public-private partnerships: Effective and legitimate tools of international governance? In Grande, E., & Pauly, L.W. (Eds.), Complex sovereignty: Reconstituting political authority in the twenty-first century: 195216. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Bouslah, K., M’Zali, B., Turcotte, M.-F., & Kooli, M. 2010. The impact of forest certification on firm financial performance in Canada and the US. Journal of Business Ethics, 96: 551–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, P.J., & Ghauri, P.N. 2004. Globalisation, economic geography and the strategy of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35: 8198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, B. 2002. Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non-state market-driven governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance, 15(4): 503–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassel, D. 2001. Human rights and business responsibilities in the global marketplace. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11: 261–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerny, P.G. 1999. Globalization and the erosion of democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 36: 126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. 2001. Globalization and the environment: Determinants of firm self-regulation in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 32: 439–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. 2006. Firm self-regulation through international certifiable standards: Determinants of symbolic versus substantive implementation. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 863–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clausen, J., Ankele, K., & Petschow, U. 2005. The role of voluntary initiatives in sustainable corporate governance In Petschow, U., Rosenau, J., & von Weizsäcker, E.-U. (Eds.), Governance and sustainability: New challenges for states, companies and civil society: 176–85. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CSR Europe. 2010. GRI: Sweden and Denmark lead the way in sustainability reporting http://www.csreurope.org/news.php?type=&action=show_news&news_id=3779, first accessed February 2011.Google Scholar
Cubbage, F.W., & Moore, S. 2008. Impacts and costs of forest certification: A survey of SFI and FSC in North America. Paper presented at the 2008 Sustainable Forestry Initiative Meeting, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Dahan, N., Doh, J., & Guay, T. 2006. The role of multinational corporations in transnational institution building: A policy network perspective. Human Relations, 59(11): 15711600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Senarclens, P., & Kazancigil, A. (Eds.). 2007. Regulating globalization: Critical approaches to global governance. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. Google Scholar
Deephouse, D.L. 1996. Does isomorphism legitimate?. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1024–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingwerth, K. 2008. North-South parity in global governance: The affirmative procedures of the Forest Stewardship Council. Global Governance, 14: 5371.Google Scholar
Domask, J. 2003. From boycotts to global partnership: NGOs, the private sector, and the struggle to protect the world forests In Doh, J.P., & Teegen , H. (Eds.), Globalization and NGOs: Transforming business, government, and society: 157–86. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Dupuy, P.-M. 1991. Soft law and the international law of the environment. Michigan Journal of International Law, 12: 420–35.Google Scholar
Easton, D. 1957. An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Politics, 9: 383400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elms, H., & Phillips, R.A. 2009. Private security companies and institutional legitimacy: Corporate and stakeholder responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 403–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. 1986. The market and the forum: Three varieties of political theory In Elster, J., & Hylland, A. (Eds.), Foundations of social choice theory: 103–326. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Florini, A. 1998. The end of secrecy. Foreign Policy, 111: 5063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fransen, L.W., & Kolk, A. 2007. Global rule-setting for business: A critical analysis of multi-stakeholder standards. Organization, 14: 667–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritsch, S. 2008. The UN Global Compact and the global governance of corporate social responsibility: Complex multilateralism for a more human globalization?. Global Society, 22: 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A. 2003. Deliberative democracy and international labor standards. Governance, 16: 5171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A. 2005. Deliberation before the revolution: Toward an ethics of deliberative democracy in an unjust world. Political Theory, 33: 397419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardberg, N.A., & Fombrun, C.J. 2002. The global reputation quotient project: First steps towards a cross-nationally valid measure of corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 4: 303–07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gereffi, G., Garcia-Johnson, R., & Sasser, C.J. 2001. The NGO-industrial complex. Foreign Policy, 125: 5665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D.U., & Rasche, A. 2007. Discourse ethics and social accountability: The ethics of SA 8000. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17: 187216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D.U., & Rasche, A. 2008. Opportunities and problems of standardized ethics initiatives: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 82: 755–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glasbergen, P. 2011. Mechanisms of private meta-governance: An analysis of global private governance for sustainable development. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances, 2: 189206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graz, J.-C., & Nölke, A. (Eds.). 2008. Transnational private governance and its limits. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, F. 1996. Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1990. The new conservatism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1996. Between facts and norms. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1998. The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2001. The postnational constellation: Political essays. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Hale, T.N. 2008. Transparency, accountability and global governance. Global Governance, 14: 7394.Google Scholar
Hassel, A. 2008. The evolution of a global labor governance regime. Governance, 21(2): 231–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haufler, V. 2003a. Globalization and industry self-regulation. In Kahler, M., & Lake, D.A. (Eds.), Governance in a global economy: Political authority in transition: 226–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Haufler, V. 2003b. New forms of governance: Certification regimes as social regulations of the global market. In Meidinger, E., Elliott, C., & Oesten, G. (Eds.), Social and political dimensions of forest certification: 237–17. Remagen-Oberwinter: Forst-buch. Google Scholar
Held, D., & McGrew, A. (Eds.). 2002. Governing globalization. Cambridge: Polity Press. Google Scholar
Henderson, J., Dicken, P., Hess, M., Coe, N., & Yeung, H.W.-C. 2002. Global production networks and the analysis of economic development. Review of International Political Economy, 9: 436–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, D. 2007. Social reporting and new governance regulation: The prospects of achieving corporate accountability through transparency. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17: 453–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiss, S. 2009. From implicit to explicit corporate social responsibility: Institutional change as a fight for myths. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 433–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, N.-H. 2009. Does global business have a responsibility to promote just institutions? Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 251–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husted, B.W., & Allen, D.B. 2006. Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise: Strategic and institutional approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 838–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, I.L., & Fadner, R. 1965. The coefficient of imbalance. In Lasswell, H., Leites, N., & Associates (Eds.), Language of politics: Studies in quantitative semantics: 15369. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Kerwer, D. 2005. Rules that many use: Standards and global regulation. Governance, 18: 611–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsbury, B. 1999 Sovereignty and inequality. In Hurrell, A., & Woods, N. (Eds.), Inequality, globalization, and world politics: 6694. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirton, J.J., & Trebilcock, M.J. 2004. Hard choices, soft law: Voluntary standards in global trade, environment and social governance. Aldershot: Ashgate. Google Scholar
Kitschelt, H.P. 1986. Political opportunity structures and political protest: Anti-nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 16: 5785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kobrin, S.J. 2008 Globalization, transnational corporations and the future of global governance. In Scherer, A.G., & Palazzo, G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship: 249–72. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar
Kobrin, S.J. 2009. Private political authority and public responsibility: Transnational politics, transnational firms and human rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 349–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig-Archibugi, M. 2004. Transnational corporations and public accountability. Government and Opposition, 39: 234–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. 2008. A perspective on multinational entreprises and climate change: Learning from “An inconvenient truth”?. Journal of International Business Studies, 39: 1359–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwok, C.C.Y., & Tadesse, S. 2006. The MNC as an agent of change for host-country institutions: FDI and corruption. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 767–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labour Rights in China 1999. No illusions: Against the global cosmetic SA8000. http:// www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/law/intlaw/ibuslaw/docs/noillusions.doc, first accessed December 2009.Google Scholar
Laufer, W.S. 2003. Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43: 253–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, D.L. 2008. Political contestation in global production networks. Academy of Management Review, 33: 943–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, R., Qin, F., &Brause, A. 2007. Does monitoring improve labor standards? Lessons from Nike. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 61: 331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lövbrand, E., Rindefjäll, T., & Nordqvist, J. 2009. Closing the legitimacy gap in global environmental governance? Lessons from the emerging CDM market. Global Environmental Politics, 9(2: 74100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Y. 2006. Political behavior, social responsibility, and perceived corruption: A structuration perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 747–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maignan, I., & Ralston, D.A. 2002. Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the US: Insights from businesses’ self-presentations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33: 497514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marx, A. 2008. Limits to non-state market regulation: A qualitative comparative analysis of the international sport footwear industry and the FLA. Regulation & Governance, 2: 253–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathews, J.T. 1997. Power shift. Foreign Affairs, 76(1: 5066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matten, D., & Crane, A. 2005. Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30: 166–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Misangyi, V.F., Weaver, G.R., & Elms, H. 2008. Ending corruption: The interplay among institutional logics, resources, and institutional entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review, 33: 750–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, J.D. 2003. Rawls and Habermas on public reason: Human rights and global justice. Annual Review of Political Science, 6: 257–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanz, S.P. 2006 Democratic legitimacy and constitutionalisation of transnational trade governance: A view from political theory. In Joerges, C., & Petersmann, E.-U. (Eds.), Multilevel trade governance, social regulation and the constitutionalization of international trade: 5982. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Google Scholar
Nanz, P., & Steffek, J. 2004. Global governance, participation and the public sphere. Government and Opposition, 39: 314–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, D. 2003. Outsourcing regulation: Analyzing nongovernmental systems of labor standards and monitoring. Policy Studies Journal, 31: 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, D. 2006. Multi-stakeholder regulation: Privatizing or socializing global labor standards? World Development, 34: 899918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A.G. 2006. Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66: 7188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A.G. 2010 The United Nations Global Compact as a learning approach. In Rasche, A., & Kell, G. (Eds.), The United Nations Global Compact: Achievements, trends and challenges: 23447. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattberg, P. 2005. What role for private rule-making in global environmental governance? Analysing the FSC International Environmental Agreements, 5: 175–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pies, I., Hielscher, S., & Beckmann, M. 2009. Moral commitments and the societal role of business: An ordonomic approach to corporate citizenship Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 375401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pieth, M. 2007. Multistakeholder initiatives to combat laundering and bribery. In Brütsch, C., & Lehmkuhl, D. (Eds.), Law and legalization in transnational relations: 81100. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
Raines, S.S 2003. Perceptions of legitimacy and efficacy in international environmental management. Global Environmental Politics, 3(3): 4773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rainforest Foundation. 2002. Trading in credibility: The myth and reality of the FSC. http://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/files/trading.pdf, first accessed May 2009.Google Scholar
Rametsteiner, E., & Simula, M. 2003. Forest certification: An instrument to promote sustainable forest management?. Journal of Environmental Management, 67: 8798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Risse, T. 2004. Global governance and communicative action. Government and Opposition, 39: 288313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Risse, T. 2007. Transnational governance and legitimacy. In Benz, A., & Papadopoulos, I. (Eds.), Governance and democracy: Comparing national, European and international experiences 179–99. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
Ronit, K., & Schneider, V. 1999. Global governance through private organizations. Governance, 12: 243–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenau, J.N., & Czempiel, E.-O. (Eds.). 1992. Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rucht, D. 2005. Civil society plus global governance: What can we expect? In Petschow, U., Rosenau, J., & von Weizsäcker, E.-U. (Eds.), Governance and sustainability: New challenges for states, companies and civil society: 219–30. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, J.G. 2007. Business and human rights: Mapping international standards of responsibility and accountability for corporate acts. United Nations: Human Rights Council, Report A/HRC/4/035.Google Scholar
Sandel, M. 1982. Liberalism and the limits of justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schäferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. 2009. Transnational public-private partnerships in international relations: Making sense of concepts, research frameworks, and results. International Studies Review, 11: 451–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharpf, F.W. 1997. Economic integration, democracy and the welfare state. Journal of European Public Policy, 4: 1836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharpf, F.W. 1999. Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharpf, F.W. 2009. Legitimacy in the multilevel European polity. European Political Science Review, 1(2): 173204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schepers, D.H. 2010. Challenges to legitimacy at the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 92: 279–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A.G., & Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32: 10961120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A.G., & Palazzo, G. 2008. Globalization and corporate social responsibility. In Crane, A., Mc-Williams, A., Matten, D., Moon, J., & Siegel, D.S. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility: 413–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Scherer, A.G., & Palazzo, G. 2011. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48: 899931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A.G., Palazzo, G. & Baumann, D. 2006. Global rules and private actors: Toward a new role of the TNC in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16: 505–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholte, J.A. 2005. Globalization: A critical introduction Houndmills: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sethi, S.P. 2003. Setting global standards: Guidelines for creating codes of conduct in multinational corporations Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Spar, D.L., & La Mure, L.T. 2003. The power of activism: Assessing the impact of NGOs on global business. California Management Review, 45(3): 78101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. 1989. Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Teegen, H., Doh, J.P., & Vachani, S. 2004. The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35: 463–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thérien, J.-P., & Pouliot, V. 2006. The global compact: Shifting the politics of international development? Global Governance, 12: 5575.Google Scholar
United Nations. 1997. UN conference on environment and development (1992). http:// www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html, first accessed April 2010.Google Scholar
Utting, P. 2002. Regulating business via multi-stakeholders initiatives: A preliminary assessment. Geneva: UNRISD.Google Scholar
van Tulder, R., & Kolk, A. 2001. Multinationality and corporate ethics: Codes of conduct in the sporting goods industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 32: 267–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visseren-Hamakers, I.J., & Glasbergen, P. 2007. Partnerships in forest governance. Global Environmental Politics, 17(3–4): 408–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, D. 2007. Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science, 11: 261–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, D. 2010. The private regulation of global corporate conduct. Business-Society, 49(1): 6887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waddell, S. 2003. Global action networks: A global invention helping business make globalisation work for all. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 12: 2742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waddell, S., & Khagram, S. 2007. Multi-stakeholder global networks: Emerging systems or the global common good. In Glasbergen, P., Biermann, F., & Mol, A.P.J. (Eds.), Partnerships, governance and sustainable development: Reflections on theory and practice: 261–87. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar
Waddock, S. 2008. Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(3): 87108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Water Aid & Tearfund 2005. An empty glass: The EU Water Initiative’s contribution to the water and sanitation millennium targets. http://www.wateraid.org/documents/ an_empty_glass.pdf, irst accessed May 2009.Google Scholar
Witte, J.M., Benner, T., & Streck, C. 2005. Partnerships and networks in global environmental governance: Moving to the next stage. In Petschow, U., Rosenau, J., & von Weizsäcker, E.-U. (Eds.), Governance and sustainability: New challenges for states, companies and civil society: 141–51. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, I.M. 2000. Inclusion and democracy Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, I.M. 2006. Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social Philosophy-Policy, 23(1): 102–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zadek, S. 2004. The path to corporate responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 82: 125–32.Google ScholarPubMed
Zürn, M. 2004. Global governance and legitimacy problems. Government and Opposition, 39: 260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *