Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests
In this contribution the argument is made that the current operationalization of empirical legitimacy falls short in cases of severely conflicting societal interests where alignment on moral values between conflict resolution authorities (policy makers, courts, controlling institutions) and subordin...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Utrecht University School of Law
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | Utrecht Law Review |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://account.utrechtlawreview.org/index.php/up-j-ulr/article/view/865 |
| _version_ | 1797804388783226880 |
|---|---|
| author | Miranda Boone Mieke Kox |
| author_facet | Miranda Boone Mieke Kox |
| author_sort | Miranda Boone |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In this contribution the argument is made that the current operationalization of empirical legitimacy falls short in cases of severely conflicting societal interests where alignment on moral values between conflict resolution authorities (policy makers, courts, controlling institutions) and subordinates is lacking. We attribute this shortcoming to two dominant features of the empirical concept of legitimacy and the research based on it: first, the overwhelming procedural character of the empirical legitimacy concept; second, the dominance of deductive, quantitative survey research. The argument is substantiated by the results of ethnographic fieldwork among unauthorized migrants that show that the existing approaches are important, but insufficient to explain the constitution of legitimacy perceptions of subordinates in this field. Feelings of justice are seriously violated because fundamental substantive needs are insufficiently taken into account according to these migrants, although this does not always mean that they feel badly treated in terms of the current empirical justice concept. In the discussion we reflect on the consequences of these insights for the conceptualization of empirical legitimacy and argue that these insights are not only important for our understanding of empirical legitimacy, but should also lead to a reflection on the (interpretation of the) normative frameworks on which decision-making in this field is built. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T05:36:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5062684204634f23b8b533773ece1199 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1871-515X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T05:36:28Z |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | Utrecht University School of Law |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Utrecht Law Review |
| spelling | doaj.art-5062684204634f23b8b533773ece11992023-06-14T07:30:22ZengUtrecht University School of LawUtrecht Law Review1871-515X2023-05-0119213–2513–2510.36633/ulr.865489Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social InterestsMiranda Boone0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5333-4587Mieke Kox1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0332-5030Professor of Criminology and Comparative Penology Leiden UniversityLecturer and Researcher Erasmus University RotterdamIn this contribution the argument is made that the current operationalization of empirical legitimacy falls short in cases of severely conflicting societal interests where alignment on moral values between conflict resolution authorities (policy makers, courts, controlling institutions) and subordinates is lacking. We attribute this shortcoming to two dominant features of the empirical concept of legitimacy and the research based on it: first, the overwhelming procedural character of the empirical legitimacy concept; second, the dominance of deductive, quantitative survey research. The argument is substantiated by the results of ethnographic fieldwork among unauthorized migrants that show that the existing approaches are important, but insufficient to explain the constitution of legitimacy perceptions of subordinates in this field. Feelings of justice are seriously violated because fundamental substantive needs are insufficiently taken into account according to these migrants, although this does not always mean that they feel badly treated in terms of the current empirical justice concept. In the discussion we reflect on the consequences of these insights for the conceptualization of empirical legitimacy and argue that these insights are not only important for our understanding of empirical legitimacy, but should also lead to a reflection on the (interpretation of the) normative frameworks on which decision-making in this field is built.https://account.utrechtlawreview.org/index.php/up-j-ulr/article/view/865empirical legitimacyprocedural justicenormative legitimacyunauthorized migrantsimmigration detention |
| spellingShingle | Miranda Boone Mieke Kox Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests Utrecht Law Review empirical legitimacy procedural justice normative legitimacy unauthorized migrants immigration detention |
| title | Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests |
| title_full | Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests |
| title_fullStr | Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests |
| title_short | Reconceptualizing Empirical Legitimacy for Situations of Severely Conflicting Social Interests |
| title_sort | reconceptualizing empirical legitimacy for situations of severely conflicting social interests |
| topic | empirical legitimacy procedural justice normative legitimacy unauthorized migrants immigration detention |
| url | https://account.utrechtlawreview.org/index.php/up-j-ulr/article/view/865 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mirandaboone reconceptualizingempiricallegitimacyforsituationsofseverelyconflictingsocialinterests AT miekekox reconceptualizingempiricallegitimacyforsituationsofseverelyconflictingsocialinterests |