IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amsocr/v87y2022i3p478-503.html

Operationalizing Legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Eric W. Schoon

Abstract

Legitimacy is widely invoked as a condition, cause, and outcome of other social phenomena, yet measuring legitimacy is a persistent challenge. In this article, I synthesize existing approaches to conceptualizing legitimacy across the social sciences to identify widely agreed upon definitional properties. I then build on these points of consensus to develop a generalizable approach to operationalization. Legitimacy implies specific relationships among three empirical elements: an object of legitimacy, an audience that confers legitimacy, and a relationship between the two. Together, these empirical elements constitute a dyad (i.e., a single unit consisting of two nodes and a tie). I identify three necessary conditions for legitimacy— expectations , assent , and conformity —that specify how elements of the dyad interact. I detail how these conditions can be used to empirically establish legitimacy (and illegitimacy), distinguishing it from dissimilar phenomena that often appear similar empirically. Followed to its logical conclusion, this operationalization has novel implications for understanding the effects of legitimacy. I discuss these implications, and how they inform debates over the relevance of legitimacy as an explanation for socially significant outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric W. Schoon, 2022. "Operationalizing Legitimacy," American Sociological Review, , vol. 87(3), pages 478-503, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amsocr:v:87:y:2022:i:3:p:478-503
    DOI: 10.1177/00031224221081379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00031224221081379
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00031224221081379?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pakulski, Jan, 1986. "Legitimacy and Mass Compliance: Reflections on Max Weber and Soviet-Type Societies," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 35-56, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ellis, S. James & Khanagha, Saeed & Aalbers, Rick & Tuertscher, Philipp, 2025. "Middle managers at the crossroads: Navigating legitimacy tensions in pursuit of radical innovation in nascent ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(8).
    2. Astrid L. Martens & Jarry T. Porsius & Kees Vringer, 2025. "What makes policy for wind- and solar energy on land acceptable? An assessment of perceived policy legitimacy," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Zengqiang Qin & Jinfeng Zhang & Bingsheng Liu, 2025. "Hiding behind the curtain: performance information and public officials’ policy instrument preferences in visible and invisible domains," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kyamusugulwa, Patrick M. & Hilhorst, Dorothea, 2015. "Power Holders and Social Dynamics of Participatory Development and Reconstruction: Cases from the Democratic Republic of Congo," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 249-259.
    2. William Maley, 2011. "Challenges of Political Development in Afghanistan: Mass, Elite and Institutional Dimensions," International Studies, , vol. 48(1), pages 21-41, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:amsocr:v:87:y:2022:i:3:p:478-503. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.