TY - JOUR
T1 - Organizational legitimacy in the global education policy field
T2 - Learning from UNESCO and the global monitoring report
AU - Edwards, D. Brent
AU - Okitsu, Taeko
AU - Da Costa, Romina
AU - Kitamura, Yuto
N1 - Funding Information:
The research on which this article is based was supported by funding from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. Previous versions of this article were presented at the Education and Development Forum 2015 and the 2016 conference of the Comparative and International Education Society. We are grateful to David Post for feedback on an earlier version of this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 by the Comparative and International Education Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/2
Y1 - 2018/2
N2 - In the field of global education policy, it is common for scholars to reflect on the progress made toward internationally agreed-upon agendas, such as Education for All (EFA). However, scant research has turned the gaze back on the major multilateral institutions that commit to taking the lead in meeting these agendas in order to ask, what implications do such agendas have for these organizations? We respond in this article by investigating the way in which UNESCO used its position as the coordinator of FA to help it regain some of the legitimacy it lost in the preceding decades. To do so, the article first elaborates a tripartite conceptualization of organizational legitimacy and then applies it to the two prongs of UNESCO’s strategy—EFA coordination and the production of the Global Monitoring Reports (GMRs) during a key period, 2000–2014, that were at the forefront of UNESCO’s efforts to rebrand and reposition itself in the context of multilateralism.
AB - In the field of global education policy, it is common for scholars to reflect on the progress made toward internationally agreed-upon agendas, such as Education for All (EFA). However, scant research has turned the gaze back on the major multilateral institutions that commit to taking the lead in meeting these agendas in order to ask, what implications do such agendas have for these organizations? We respond in this article by investigating the way in which UNESCO used its position as the coordinator of FA to help it regain some of the legitimacy it lost in the preceding decades. To do so, the article first elaborates a tripartite conceptualization of organizational legitimacy and then applies it to the two prongs of UNESCO’s strategy—EFA coordination and the production of the Global Monitoring Reports (GMRs) during a key period, 2000–2014, that were at the forefront of UNESCO’s efforts to rebrand and reposition itself in the context of multilateralism.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040725763&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040725763&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/695440
DO - 10.1086/695440
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85040725763
SN - 0010-4086
VL - 62
SP - 31
EP - 63
JO - Comparative Education Review
JF - Comparative Education Review
IS - 1
ER -