Decision Responsiveness and the Legitimacy of Public Agencies

The procedural qualities of decisions made by public agencies are known to shape citizens' perceptions of decision legitimacy. Existing empirical studies focus on procedures such as whether citizens are consulted, and whether their preferences are taken into account. Less is known about whether decisions made by public agencies are deemed legitimate if they reflect citizens' broad interests rather than their immediate preferences. Yet, many contemporary issues confront policy-makers with dilemmas of whether to respond to citizens' demands or instead to act on their interests. Using an experimental approach among a sample of British citizens, we analyse the effects on perceived legitimacy of various aspects of decision responsiveness. We focus in particular on whether public agencies are rewarded if they ignore citizens' preferences while showing they are acting in their broader interests. Our results show that perceived legitimacy is indeed higher when decisions are seen to reflect citizens' collective interests. But this boost disappears if individuals disapprove of the agency's decision. We conclude that acting in citizens' broad interests is unlikely to stimulate legitimacy among individuals who do not favour a decision's outcome.