Abstract
Distributive justice is a headline issue in contemporary global governance. The policy-making of international organizations (IOs) generates unequal costs and benefits for states, but we know little about why and when the justice of this distribution shapes public perceptions of the appropriateness or legitimacy of IOs. This article unpacks different conceptions of distributive justice and their effects on the public belief in the legitimacy of IOs. It theorizes and tests the effects of distributive justice conceptions on legitimacy beliefs by using a largescale survey experiment. The experiment is conducted among nationally representative samples in Germany, Mexico, Portugal, and the United States in the context of two powerful yet different organizations with mandates in trade, the European Union and the United StatesMexico-Canada Agreement. The key findings are threefold. First, citizens perceive these IOs to be more legitimate the more these organizations work to achieve equally large gains for one’s own state and other states. Second, unequal outcomes in terms of relative gains and losses for states do not generally undermine the legitimacy of these organizations. Third, the effects of distributive justice on legitimacy beliefs vary systematically with individual political ideology and economic satisfaction. The results advance our understanding of justice and legitimacy in global governance.
Download paper and appendix (restricted access).
Please note that this paper is work in progress and thus has limited distribution, please contact us if you would like access. Do not cite without permission from the author.
If you would like to attend digitally, contact Silva Hoffmann to get the zoom link.