000			01528nam a22001577a 4500
999			_c513624 _d513624
008			200313b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aSteffek, Jens _916812
245			_aThe limits of proceduralism: Critical remarks on the rise of ‘throughput legitimacy’
260			_bPublic Administration
300			_a97(4), 2019: p.784-796.
520			_aThroughput legitimacy’ is among the most successful conceptual innovations that scholars of public policy and administration have produced in recent years. I argue that this new understanding of legitimacy needs to be seen in the context of an increasing proceduralism in political science and public administration. Throughput legitimacy attracted so much attention because it is the perfect normative companion to the analytical concept of governance. Governance is procedure, and throughput legitimacy tells us what good procedures are. In my critical discussion of this innovation I examine the analytical value of the concept, as well as its normative and practical implications. I argue that, regarding concept formation, throughput legitimacy may enrich existing typologies of legitimacy but at the same time has a severe problem of fuzzy borders. Politically, throughput legitimacy lends itself to apologetic uses when it is applied as a tailor‐made normative standard for technocratic, non‐majoritarian institutions. - Reproduced.
650			_aLegitimacy _916813
773			_aPublic Administration
906			_aPublic administration
942			_2ddc _cAR