发出合法性信号:竞争多边主义时代八国集团和二十国集团的自我合法化

Q3 Social Sciences World Political Science Pub Date : 2016-04-01 DOI:10.1515/wps-2016-0005
J. Gronau
{"title":"发出合法性信号:竞争多边主义时代八国集团和二十国集团的自我合法化","authors":"J. Gronau","doi":"10.1515/wps-2016-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Given our pluralistic world today, the G8 or rather G7, is an anachronism. How has the club of Western nations managed to prevail over its four decades of existence? This question is even more relevant in the light of the rise of the G20 at the beginning of the financial crisis in 2008. By making use of the concept of self-legitimation, this paper seeks to gain a better understanding of how both informal institutions ended up in a state of coexistence rather than with the replacement of the G8 by the G20. The main argument is that both needed (and still need) to carefully position themselves as distinct from each other in order to prevail and to inspire adherence. By including visual data and examining two informal institutions rather than formalized international organizations, the analysis complements concurrent research on the legitimation efforts of international institutions. The article traces three modes of public self-legitimation: legitimation policies, legitimation talk and nonverbal self-presentation. Based on textual analysis and a reconstruction of ideal-typical summit photographs (1975–2013), this contribution shows how both institutions present themselves as inclusive, accountable managers for the benefit of all. Despite these similarities, a normative as well as a de facto division of labor makes it more likely for today’s G7 to prevail, even in – or even because of – today’s more pluralistic world.","PeriodicalId":37883,"journal":{"name":"World Political Science","volume":"107 1","pages":"107 - 145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Signaling Legitimacy: Self-legitimation by the G8 and the G20 in Times of Competitive Multilateralism\",\"authors\":\"J. Gronau\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/wps-2016-0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Given our pluralistic world today, the G8 or rather G7, is an anachronism. How has the club of Western nations managed to prevail over its four decades of existence? This question is even more relevant in the light of the rise of the G20 at the beginning of the financial crisis in 2008. By making use of the concept of self-legitimation, this paper seeks to gain a better understanding of how both informal institutions ended up in a state of coexistence rather than with the replacement of the G8 by the G20. The main argument is that both needed (and still need) to carefully position themselves as distinct from each other in order to prevail and to inspire adherence. By including visual data and examining two informal institutions rather than formalized international organizations, the analysis complements concurrent research on the legitimation efforts of international institutions. The article traces three modes of public self-legitimation: legitimation policies, legitimation talk and nonverbal self-presentation. Based on textual analysis and a reconstruction of ideal-typical summit photographs (1975–2013), this contribution shows how both institutions present themselves as inclusive, accountable managers for the benefit of all. Despite these similarities, a normative as well as a de facto division of labor makes it more likely for today’s G7 to prevail, even in – or even because of – today’s more pluralistic world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Political Science\",\"volume\":\"107 1\",\"pages\":\"107 - 145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/wps-2016-0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/wps-2016-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

鉴于我们今天的多元化世界,八国集团或更确切地说,七国集团是一个时代的错误。西方国家俱乐部是如何在其存在的四十年中取得胜利的?考虑到G20在2008年金融危机之初的崛起,这个问题就显得更为重要了。通过利用自我合法化的概念,本文试图更好地理解这两个非正式机构如何最终处于共存状态,而不是以G20取代G8。主要的论点是,双方都需要(并且仍然需要)谨慎地将自己定位为彼此不同,以便获胜并激发人们的坚持。通过纳入可视化数据和考察两个非正式机构而不是正式的国际组织,该分析补充了同时进行的关于国际机构合法化努力的研究。本文探讨了公共自我正当化的三种模式:正当化政策、正当化谈话和非语言自我呈现。基于文本分析和对理想的典型峰会照片(1975-2013)的重建,这篇文章展示了这两个机构如何将自己呈现为包容的、负责任的管理者,以造福所有人。尽管有这些相似之处,规范的和事实上的劳动分工使得今天的七国集团更有可能占上风,即使是在今天更加多元化的世界里——或者甚至正是因为这个世界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Signaling Legitimacy: Self-legitimation by the G8 and the G20 in Times of Competitive Multilateralism
Abstract Given our pluralistic world today, the G8 or rather G7, is an anachronism. How has the club of Western nations managed to prevail over its four decades of existence? This question is even more relevant in the light of the rise of the G20 at the beginning of the financial crisis in 2008. By making use of the concept of self-legitimation, this paper seeks to gain a better understanding of how both informal institutions ended up in a state of coexistence rather than with the replacement of the G8 by the G20. The main argument is that both needed (and still need) to carefully position themselves as distinct from each other in order to prevail and to inspire adherence. By including visual data and examining two informal institutions rather than formalized international organizations, the analysis complements concurrent research on the legitimation efforts of international institutions. The article traces three modes of public self-legitimation: legitimation policies, legitimation talk and nonverbal self-presentation. Based on textual analysis and a reconstruction of ideal-typical summit photographs (1975–2013), this contribution shows how both institutions present themselves as inclusive, accountable managers for the benefit of all. Despite these similarities, a normative as well as a de facto division of labor makes it more likely for today’s G7 to prevail, even in – or even because of – today’s more pluralistic world.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Political Science
World Political Science Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: World Political Science (WPS) publishes translations of prize-winning articles nominated by prominent national political science associations and journals around the world. Scholars in a field as international as political science need to know about important political research produced outside the English-speaking world. Sponsored by the International Political Science Association (IPSA), the premiere global political science organization with membership from national assoications 50 countries worldwide WPS gathers together and translates an ever-increasing number of countries'' best political science articles, bridging the language barriers that have made this cutting-edge research inaccessible up to now. Articles in the World Political Science cover a wide range of subjects of interest to readers concerned with the systematic analysis of political issues facing national, sub-national and international governments and societies. Fields include Comparative Politics, International Relations, Political Sociology, Political Theory, Political Economy, and Public Administration and Policy. Anyone interested in the central issues of the day, whether they are students, policy makers, or other citizens, will benefit from greater familiarity with debates about the nature and solutions to social, economic and political problems carried on in non-English language forums.
期刊最新文献
Frontmatter The National Strategy for Inner Areas: Innovation, Policy Transfer and Post-Earthquake Reconstruction “Listen, Marxist!”: On the Forgotten Past of Self-Management and the Contemporary Orgasms of History Frontmatter A Rising Tide that Lifts no Boats. The European Union and the Development of the Transnational Economy of Crimigration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1