Legitimacy in Conflict: Concepts, Practices, Challenges

Abstract

The study of legitimacy in situations of conflict and peacebuilding has increased in recent years. However, current work on the topic adopts many assumptions, definitions, and understandings from classical legitimacy theory, which centers on the relationship between the nation-state and its citizens. In this introduction, we provide a detailed critical overview of current theories of legitimacy and legitimation and demonstrate why they have only limited applicability in conflict and post-conflict contexts, focusing on the three main areas that the articles included in this special issue examine: audiences for legitimacy, sources of legitimacy, and legitimation. In particular, we show how conflict and post-conflict contexts are marked by the fragmentation and personalization of power; the proliferation and fragmentation of legitimacy audiences; and ambiguity surrounding legitimation strategies.

Virtuous or Vicious Circle? Governance Effectiveness and Legitimacy in Areas of Limited Statehood

“…It would give rise to the hope that effective service provision is the first step in a self-reinforcing process, which ultimately generates effective and legitimate political institutions in parts of the world where these are currently absent. It is for this reason that legitimacyunderstood here as a population's belief that its political institutions have a right to ruleis increasingly seen both as an antidote to state fragility (Zoellick 2008;World Bank 2011, xi, 84-89), and as a panacea for the ills of ineffective development assistance (Beisheim et al 2014;Schäferhoff 2014), peace-building (Whalan 2013;von Billerbeck and Gippert 2017) and even full-scale state-building interventions (Lemay-Hébert 2009;Lake 2016).…”

Of locals and insiders

“…Conflict often amplifies actor multiplicity. Social power relations are fluid and unstable, and legitimacies are challenged when state authorities are contested or absent (Von Billerbeck and Gippert, 2017). The perceived legitimacy of state actors is convoluted.…”

UN Peace Operations and Conflicting Legitimacies

“…Coleman (2007) adds that legitimacy can apply both to actions and actors. As noted in the Introduction to this Special Issue, however, these conceptions, which were largely developed in state-based analytical frameworks, neglect the fleeting nature of power, the changeability of relations and alliances, the proliferation of potential audiences for legitimacy, and the lack of agreement on what constitute appropriate, good, or correct behaviour in conflict and post-conflict settings (von Billerbeck and Gippert 2017).…”