English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper critically assesses the (de)legitimation strategies used by rising powers against existing formal and informal International Organizations (IOs), especially the G7/8, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In doing so, it first analyzes how legitimacy relates to multilateralism and vice versa. Then, it examines why legitimacy matters to rising powers and explores the two main (de)legitimation strategies—regime shift and competitive regime creation—used by rising powers when they contest the legitimacy of the existing IOs. Finally, it uses the cases of the G20 and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to highlight the strengths and limits of regime shift and competitive regime creation strategies. This paper argues that rising powers' quest for enhanced legitimacy by means of joining alternative existing institutions (G20) or creating new institutions (AIIB) seems to have produced limited results because, like the status-quo institutions, the G20 and AIIB also suffer from legitimacy deficit.

Rising powers’ quest for increased legitimacy through IOs in an era of loose multilateralism