The legitimacy of international organisations in public discourse

Anarbay Rajapov

The legitimacy of international organisations in public discourse

Anarbay Rajapov

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the key factors influencing the legitimacy of international organisations within public discourse. The methodological framework was based on an interdisciplinary approach that integrates political science, organisational theory, and media studies. This enables an examination of legitimacy through the analysis of normative and legal documents, official reports, open information platforms, and media discourse. The findings indicated that compliance with international law, transparency in governance processes, effectiveness in achieving stated objectives, and adherence to normative standards are crucial elements shaping support for international organisations from member states, the international community, and the public. In particular, successful peacekeeping initiatives, epidemic control programmes, and environmental projects contribute to strengthening organisational reputation. In contrast, failures in crisis response, inadequate accountability, or disproportionate influence by certain donors may undermine trust. The study also revealed that the media and the public play a pivotal role in shaping the image of international organisations. Negative narratives that highlight bureaucratic obstacles, conflicts of interest, or delays in decision-making often exert a stronger influence on public perception than positive reports of success. In this context, effective communication strategies are particularly important, especially those aimed at enhancing transparency, responding promptly to criticism, and engaging with civil society. The findings provided a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying the formation of legitimacy for international organisations within the current global governance framework. They contributed to the further development of theoretical concepts related to trust in supranational institutions, the dynamics of organisational reputation, and the role of communication in maintaining or undermining legitimacy. This research offers new perspectives for future analysis of the interconnections between normative rationality, political legitimisation, and public expectations – perspectives which may serve as a foundation for further scholarly exploration in the field of global governance

Keywords

legal validity; institutional accountability; global governance; public opinion; communication strategies

References

[1] African Union Peace Fund. (2022). Second continental report on the implementation of Agenda 2063. Retrieved from https://au.int/en/PeaceFund.

[2] Aleyomi, M.B. (2022). Major constraints for regional hegemony: Nigeria and South Africa in perspective. Insight on Africa, 14(2), 139-157. doi: 10.1177/09750878211049485.

[3] Association of Southeast Asian Nations. (2006). Annual report 2005-2006. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat.

[4] Association of Southeast Asian Nations. (2010). Annual report 2009: Bridging markets, connecting peoples. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat.

[5] Bargués, P., & Morillas, P. (2021). From democratization to fostering resilience: EU intervention and the challenges of building institutions, social trust, and legitimacy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Democratization, 28(7), 1319-1337. doi: 10.1080/13510347.2021.1900120.

[6] Bekele, T.A. (2021). Problematizing scientization in international organizations. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 5(3), 6-22. doi: 10.7577/njcie.4492.

[7] Bekele, T.A., Toprak, M., Karkouti, I.M., & Wolsey, T. (2021). Regional intergovernmental organizations in the Global South: Emerging education policy nodes between the global and the national. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29, 130-130. doi: 10.14507/epaa.29.6763.

[8] Besson, S. (2022). Democratic representation within international organizations: From international good governance to international good government. International Organizations Law Review, 19(3), 489-527. doi: 10.1163/15723747- 19030001.

[9] Binder, M., & Heupel, M. (2021). The politics of legitimation in international organizations. Journal of Global Security Studies, 6(3), article number ogaa033. doi: 10.1093/jogss/ogaa033.

[10] Blackwill, R.D., & Wright, T. (2020). The end of world order and American foreign policy. Retrieved from https://www. cfr.org/report/end-world-order-and-american-foreign-policy.

[11] Caretta, M. (2021). The construction of a European identity. Refugees and Europe’s identity crisis. (Master Thesis, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, USA).

[12] Chambers, S. (2021). Truth, deliberative democracy, and the virtues of accuracy: Is fake news destroying the public sphere? Political Studies, 69(1), 147-163. doi: 10.1177/003232171989081.

[13] Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (2000, December). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX%3A12012P%2FTXT.

[14] Charter of the United Nations. (1945, October). Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf.

[15] Cliffe, S., Dwan, R., Wainaina, B., & Zamore, L. (2023). Aid strategies in “politically estranged” settings. London: Chatham House. doi: 10.55317/9781784135485.

[16] Clift, B., & Robles, T.A. (2021). The IMF, tackling inequality, and post-neoliberal “reglobalization”: The paradoxes of political legitimation within economistic parameters. In Reglobalization (pp. 39-54). London: Routledge.

[17] Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa. (1998). Retrieved from https://www.comesa.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Annual-Report-1998.pdf.

[18] Constitution of the World Health Organization. (1948, April). https://apps.who.int/gb/bd/PDF/bd47/EN/constitution-en.pdf.

[19] Council of Europe. (2008). Activity report 2008. Retrieved from https://book.coe.int/en/activities-annual-report/4136-council-of-europe-activity-report-2008.html.

[20] Council of Europe. (2017). Council of Europe highlights 2017. Retrieved from https://edoc.coe.int/en/annual-activity-report/7631-pdf-council-of-europe-highlights-2017.html.

[21] Debre, M.J., & Dijkstra, H. (2021). Institutional design for a post-liberal order: Why some international organizations live longer than others. European Journal of International Relations, 27(1), 311-339. doi: 10.1177/1354066120962183.

[22] Dellmuth, L., Scholte, J.A., Tallberg, J., & Verhaegen, S. (2022). The elite-citizen gap in international organization legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 116(1), 283-300. doi: 10.1017/S0003055421000824.

[23] Dellmuth, L.M., & Tallberg, J. (2021). Elite communication and the popular legitimacy of international organizations. British Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 1292-1313. doi: 10.1017/S0007123419000620.

[24] Dumdum, O. (2023). Examining the influence of news media and public opinion in international institutions: A political communication approach to studying international organizations. (Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA).

[25] Dzhyhora, O., Kuchmenko, V., Kovalchuk, V., Melnyk, V., & Hrab, M. (2024). The role of international institutions in stabilising the global legal order: Assessing impact and effectiveness. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(10), article number e20242747. doi: 10.31893/multirev.2024247.

[26] Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2023). Building bridges or digging the trench? International organizations, social media, and polarized fragmentation. The Review of International Organizations, 20, 157-187. doi: 10.1007/s11558-023-09517-0.

[27] Economic Community of West African States. (2017). Fifty-second ordinary session of the ECOWAS Authority of heads of state and government: Final communiqué. Retrieved from https://docslib.org/doc/5997487/fifty-second-ordinary- session-of-the-ecowas-authority-of-heads-of-state-and-government-16-december-2017-abuja-nigeria-final-c.

[28] Efunniyi, C.P., Abhulimen, A.O., Obiki-Osafiele, A.N., Osundare, O.S., Agu, E.E., & Adeniran, I.A. (2024). Strengthening corporate governance and financial compliance: Enhancing accountability and transparency. Finance & Accounting Research Journal, 6(8), 1597-1616. doi: 10.51594/farj.v6i8.1509.

[29] European Parliament. (2025). What Europe does for me. Retrieved from https://what-europe-does-for-me.europarl. europa.eu/.

[30] Franck, T.M. (2006). The power of legitimacy and the legitimacy of power: International law in an age of power disequilibrium. American Journal of International Law, 100(1), 88-106. doi: 10.2307/3518832.

[31] Gelot, L., & Söderbaum, F. (2024). Legitimation struggles in international organizations: The case of the African Union. Globalizations, 21(5), 821-838. doi: 10.1080/14747731.2023.2275819.

[32] González-Silva, M., & Rabinovich, N.R. (2021). Some lessons for malaria from the Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Malaria Journal, 20(1), article number 210. doi: 10.1186/s12936-021-03690-6.

[33] Hooijmaaijers, B. (2021). China, the BRICS, and the limitations of reshaping global economic governance. The Pacific Review, 34(1), 29-55. doi: 10.1080/09512748.2019.1649298.

[34] Jobim, N.F. (2023). Brazil in the world. In Brazil after Bolsonaro (pp. 176-190). London: Routledge.

[35] Kgasoane, K. (2021). Factors influencing unconstitutional changes of government and their implications on governance in Africa. (Master Thesis, University of Johannesburg, South Africa).

[36] Lang, B. (2021). Framing and localizing anti-corruption norms in transnational civil society organizations: Transparency International in Portugal. Journal of Civil Society, 17(2), 155-178. doi: 10.1080/17448689.2021.1925405.

[37] Lee, B.T.F., & Sims, J.P. (2024). Legitimacy through diversity: China’s leadership in the BRICS+ expansion for global balance. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 18, 265-302. doi: 10.1007/s40647-024-00411-6.

[38] Lenz, T., & Schmidtke, H. (2023). Agents, audiences and peers: Why international organizations diversify their legitimation discourse. International Affairs, 99(3), 921-940. doi: 10.1093/ia/iiac323.

[39] Lenz, T., & Söderbaum, F. (2023). The origins of legitimation strategies in international organizations: Agents, audiences and environments. International Affairs, 99(3), 899-920. doi: 10.1093/ia/iiad110.

[40] Mahapoonyanont, N., & Songsang, N. (2024). Policy learning and adaptation: Lessons from PISA for educational reform worldwide. International Journal of Stress Management (IJSM), 31(4), 26-52. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14179522.

[41] Moch, E. (2024). The economic and geopolitical significance of the brics nations: A comparative analysis of their global influence in the 21st century. East African Journal of Business and Economics, 7(2), 86-100. doi: 10.37284/ eajbe.7.2.2310.

[42] Mohamed, A.M. (2023). African Union mission and peace keeping process in Mogadishu-Somalia. (Doctoral Dissertation, Kampala International University, Kampala).

[43] Nuruzzaman, M. (2022). “Responsibility to protect” and the BRICS: A decade after the intervention in Libya. Global Studies Quarterly, 2(4), article number ksac051. doi: 10.1093/isagsq/ksac051.

[44] Okorie, U.K. (2024). Role of United Nations and African Union in conflict resolution in Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. (Doctoral Dissertation, Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania).

[45] Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. (2005). 2005 annual report on OSCE. Retrieved from https://www.osce.org/secretariat/18847.

[46] Organization of American States. (2000). Annual report of the secretary general 1999-2000. Retrieved from https://library.uog.edu.gy/cgi-bin/koha/opac-MARCdetail.pl?biblionumber=48419.

[47] Pacific Islands Forum. (2018). Working collectively to build a strong blue Pacific. Retrieved from https://forumsec.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/CROP-Annual-Report-2018.pdf.

[48] Pan-African Parliament. (2025). About the Pan-African parliament. Retrieved from https://pap.au.int/en/about.

[49] Panke, D., Polat, G., & Hohlstein, F. (2022). Who performs better? A comparative analysis of problem-solving effectiveness and legitimacy attributions to international organizations. Cooperation and Conflict, 57(4), 433-456. doi: 10.1177/00108367211036916.

[50] Pant, H.V., & Scholz, T. (2022). BRICS: Expiring political relevance and inspiring new coalitions. In Handbook on global governance and regionalism (pp. 148-159). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: 10.4337/9781800377561.00020.

[51] Parnell, T. (2024). Brexit and disinformation. In The Routledge handbook of discourse and disinformation (pp. 187-200). London: Routledge.

[52] Pertiwi, N.Y., & Purwanti, N.D. (2023). Twitter for public organization: Communication and public engagement in the generation unlimited initiative. Indonesia Communication Journal, 12(1), article number 5. doi: 10.7454/jkmi. v12i1.1057.

[53] Pew Research Center. (2024). NATO seen favorably in member states; Confidence in Zelenskyy down in Europe, U.S. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/07/02/nato-seen-favorably-in-member-states-confidence-in-zelenskyy-down-in-europe-us/.

[54] Rautalin, M., Syväterä, J., & Vento, E. (2021). International organizations establishing their scientific authority: Periodizing the legitimation of policy advice by the OECD. International Sociology, 36(1), 3-24. doi: 10.1177/0268580920947871.

[55] Reinsberg, B., & Westerwinter, O. (2021). The global governance of international development: Documenting the rise of multi-stakeholder partnerships and identifying underlying theoretical explanations. The Review of International Organizations, 16(1), 59-94. doi: 10.1007/s11558-019-09362-0.

[56] Reinsberg, B., Stubbs, T., & Kentikelenis, A. (2022). Unimplementable by design? Understanding (non‐) compliance with International Monetary Fund policy conditionality. Governance, 35(3), 689-715. doi: 10.1111/gove.12605.

[57] Schmidtke, H., & Lenz, T. (2024). Expanding or defending legitimacy? Why international organizations intensify self-legitimation. The Review of International Organizations, 19, 753-784. doi: 10.1007/s11558-023-09498-0.

[58] Siposné Kecskeméthy, K., & Sipos, A. (2023). Evolving NATO partnerships in the light of the Madrid and Vilnius summits. In National and international security 2023: Proceedings of the 14th international scientific conference (pp. 396-404). Liptovsky Mikulas: Academy of Armed Forces General Milan Rastislav Stefanik.

[59] Southern African Customs Union. (2012). Annual report 2012: Implementing a common agenda towards regional integration. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/annualreport20121/42413871.

[60] Steffek, J. (2023). Triangulating the legitimacy of international organizations: Beliefs, discourses, and actions. International Studies Review, 25(4), article number viad054. doi: 10.1093/isr/viad054.

[61] Toshkov, D., Carroll, B., & Yesilkagit, K. (2022). Government capacity, societal trust or party preferences: what accounts for the variety of national policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe? Journal of European Public Policy, 29(7), 1009-1028. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1928270.

[62] TV BRICS. (2025). Retrieved from https://tvbrics.com/en/.

[63] Urbán, Á., & Polyák, G. (2023). How public service media disinformation shapes Hungarian public discourse. Media and Communication, 11(4), 62-72. doi: 10.17645/mac.v11i4.7148.

[64] World Bank. (2024). World development report 2024: The middle-income trap. Washington: World Bank.

[65] Yang, H. (2021). Contesting legitimacy of global governance institutions: The case of the World Health Organization during the coronavirus pandemic. International Studies Review, 23(4), 1813-1834. doi: 10.1093/isr/viab047.

[66] Zapp, M. (2021). The authority of science and the legitimacy of international organisations: OECD, UNESCO and World Bank in global education governance. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 51(7), 1022-1041. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2019.1702503.

[67] Zürn, M. (2018). A theory of global governance: Authority, legitimacy, and contestation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198819974.001.0001.

[68] Zürn, M., Tokhi, A., & Binder, M. (2021). The international authority database. Global Policy, 12(4), 430-442. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12971.

Suggested citation

Rajapov, A. (2025). The legitimacy of international organisations in public discourse. Foreign Affairs, 35(3), 64-75. https://doi.org/10.59214/2663-2675.35(3).2025.64