In the modern state, local governments are creatures of the state“ (Stephen Elkin). What kind of local government there is (its functions, legal status within a multi-level administrative system, electoral procedures, decision-making procedures, and financial sources) is regulated by the state (national or federal governments). Seen in this way, the legitimacy of local governments on the one hand is a function of the state’s legitimacy and on the other hand is one of many institutional resources the state uses to strengthen its legitimacy. The particularity of this “institutional resource”, however, is its relatedness to a localized political system. We thus have, firstly, to discuss local government’s legitimacy in the shadow of the state. In order to do this, we should, secondly, focus on the double functions of “sense-making” and “delivering” which form the two sides of institutional legitimacy generation. We should not misunderstand this as a distinction between “ideas” and “facts”, though, because “sense-making” has to rely on discourses that highlight (also) facts whereas “facts” are produced only within practices that produce knowledge. Thirdly, the particularity of local government’s legitimacy within the state can only be analyzed against the backdrop of narratives giving meaning to a localized political system. In my paper, I will dwell on four such narratives.
