PLATO started off by distinguishing indicators along two dimensions. The one, indicators of democratic legitimacy such as public control, political equality, participation, representation, accountability, a public sphere, civil society relations, and political community. The second, a series of behavioural attitudinal indicators that can be used to investigate the legitimacy of any political system: support, trust, awareness of the political system, compliance, complaint, protest and so on. As shown in the below table summarising the indicators used in each project, each PhD project involves different combinations of indicators along the two dimensions. A large part of each of the 15 PhD projects has, therefore, involved further theoretical specification of particular indicators; or, in other words, the formulation of testable expectations of how components of legitimacy and legitimacy crisis are likely to function under particular conditions.
That has had two results. First, in providing a general template for theory development through the specification of general indicators of legitimacy and legitimacy crisis in particular contexts; and second through our own contribution to a better theoretical specification of legitimacy and legitimacy crisis as standard-dependent, actor-dependent and context-dependent in the case of the EU.
In operationalising indicators in their own research, the ESRs were supported by a living review. This showed how the two dimensions of indicators used by PLATO followed from (a) general conceptions of legitimacy crisis; from (b) three models of how a legitimacy crisis might develop in the case of the EU and (c) from theories and methods commonly used in the normative and sociological/empirical study of legitimacy. How each PhD project operationalises each indicator is also set out in a joint book that writes up important findings of the PLATO project through chapters based on the individual projects, edited by Chris Lord, Peter Bursens, Dirk De Bièvre, Jarle Trondal and Ramses Wessel.
Indicators of democratic legitimacy |
||
|
ESR1 |
Identity |
|
|
ESR2 |
Non-compliance and discretion |
|
|
ESR3 |
Attention Awareness of the political order Politicisation Public sphere |
|
|
ESR4 |
Co-operation and conflict on rules Compliance Disregard |
|
|
ESR5 |
Ability to solve collective action problems |
|
|
ESR6 |
Commonalities of worth and of interest Diffuse support: trust, identity, tolerance |
|
|
ESR7 |
Legitimacy of the European Semester: does parliamentary involvement make a difference? |
Parliamentary participation and involvement Implementation |
|
ESR8 |
Accountability Participation Trust in institutions |
|
|
ESR9 |
The public and the Euro: on legitimacy, visibility and political imagination |
Salience Awareness of the political order Politicisation Public sphere Public political thought |
|
ESR10 |
Trust |
|
|
ESR11 |
Emotions and emotional identification |
|
|
ESR12 |
Stakeholder involvement as legitimation strategy? An illustration of EU financial agencies |
Acceptability Fairness |
|
ESR13 |
Trust in institutions Discourse and justification in the public sphere Complaint, protest and criticism |
|
|
ESR14 |
Public sphere Salience of discourses Animation of debate |
|
|
ESR15 |
Analyzing the unexpected outcomes of the EU’s normative power in the South Caucasus |
Contestation vs. acceptance of normative claims |

