IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb597/171.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority

Author

Listed:
  • Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias

Abstract

Why do citizens support or reject the idea of global authority? The paper addresses this question by examining individual attitudes about UN authority in a comparative perspective. According to the main argument put forward in this paper, we may think of the formation of citizens' support for international authority as a two-step process. First, the paper theorizes the formation of global attitudes about the UN according to a process of cognitive mobilization. Using data from the fifth wave of the World Values Survey (2005-2007), I find strong empirical support for the role of individual attention to public cues for the relevance of the UN in rising global awareness of UN authority. In the second step, the paper examines how cognitively mobilized citizens use available information to make up their minds about UN authority. The analysis shows that global public support for UN authority largely depends on a cosmopolitan understanding of global interdependence and moral universalism. However, the analysis of contextual variables also suggests that a particularist calculus of national costs and benefits explains citizens' support for (and rejection of) UN authority to a remarkable extent.

Suggested Citation

  • Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2013. "Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority," TranState Working Papers 171, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb597:171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/76800/1/75140425X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, David A., 1980. "Interdependence and power: a conceptual analysis," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 471-506, October.
    2. Hainmueller, Jens & Hiscox, Michael J., 2006. "Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(2), pages 469-498, April.
    3. Lupia,Arthur & McCubbins,Mathew D., 1998. "The Democratic Dilemma," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521585934, July.
    4. Janssen, Joseph I. H., 1991. "Postmaterialism, Cognitive Mobilization and Public Support for European Integration," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 443-468, October.
    5. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Beitz, Charles R., 1979. "Bounded morality: justice and the state in world politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(3), pages 405-424, July.
    7. Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, 2004. "Explaining Government Preferences for Institutional Change in EU Foreign and Security Policy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 137-174, February.
    8. Eichenberg, Richard C. & Dalton, Russell J., 1993. "Europeans and the European Community: the dynamics of public support for European integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 507-534, October.
    9. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    10. Inglehart, Ronald, 1970. "Public Opinion and Regional Integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 764-795, October.
    11. Ruggie, John Gerard, 2004. "Reconstituting the Global Public Domain: Issues, Actors and Practices," Working Paper Series rwp04-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2010. "Problem perception and public expectations in international institutions: Evidence from a German representative survey," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2010-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Ronald D. Gelleny & Christopher J. Anderson, 2000. "The Economy, Accountability, and Public Support for the President of the European Commission," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(2), pages 173-200, June.
    3. Armen Hakhverdian & Erika van Elsas & Wouter van der Brug & Theresa Kuhn, 2013. "Euroscepticism and education: A longitudinal study of 12 EU member states, 1973–2010," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(4), pages 522-541, December.
    4. Hakhverdian, A. & Elsas, E. van & Brug, W. van der & Kuhn, T., 2013. "GINI DP 92: Euroscepticism and education: A longitudinal study of twelve EU member states, 1973-2010," GINI Discussion Papers 92, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    5. Brent F. Nelsen & James L. Guth, 2000. "Exploring the Gender Gap," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(3), pages 267-291, October.
    6. Kiratli, Osman Sabri, 2015. "The role of identity in support for supranational integration in EU Foreign and Security Policies," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 19, February.
    7. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    8. Daniele, Gianmarco & Geys, Benny, 2012. "Public support for institutionalised solidarity: Europeans' reaction to the establishment of eurobonds," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship & Project "The Future of Fiscal Federalism" SP II 2012-112, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Soetkin Verhaegen & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2014. "European Identity and Support for European Integration: A Matter of Perceived Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 295-314, May.
    10. Patricia Esteve‐González & Helmut Herwartz & Bernd Theilen, 2021. "National support for the European integration project: Does financial integration matter?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 357-378, July.
    11. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    12. Terrence L. Chapman, 2007. "International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 134-166, February.
    13. Caroline Mcevoy, 2016. "The Role of Political Efficacy on Public Opinion in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(5), pages 1159-1174, September.
    14. Chase Foster & Jeffry Frieden, 2021. "Economic determinants of public support for European integration, 1995–2018," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 266-292, June.
    15. Moland, Martin, 2024. "Comparing elite and citizen attitudes towards the differentiated implementation of EU law: Evidence from a large-N survey of citizens, politicians and bureaucrats," SocArXiv d8vbq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    16. Mark Copelovitch & Jon C. W. Pevehouse, 2019. "International organizations in a new era of populist nationalism," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 169-186, June.
    17. Dimiter Toshkov, 2011. "Public opinion and policy output in the European Union: A lost relationship," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 169-191, June.
    18. Sara B Hobolt & Sebastian Adrian Popa & Wouter Van der Brug & Hermann Schmitt, 2022. "The Brexit deterrent? How member state exit shapes public support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 100-119, March.
    19. Brilé Anderson & Thomas Bernauer & Aya Kachi, 2019. "Does international pooling of authority affect the perceived legitimacy of global governance?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 661-683, December.
    20. Roxana-Otilia-Sonia Hritcu, 2015. "Multilevel Models: Conceptual Framework and Applicability," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 11(5), pages 72-83, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:sfb597:171. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zesbrde.html .

    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.