Page 33 - THE INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE’S ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES- A MULTI-METHOD INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS Ryan Gautier

Chapter Two
Theoretical Basis of the Thesis: Global Governance and Legitimacy
1. Introduction
Before embarking upon an examination of the IOC and the Olympic Games, this chapter will discuss the theoretical background framing this research: global governance, and the legitimacy of global governance actors. To unpack the theoretical framework of this thesis, I pose three research questions. First, how do the IOC and the Olympic Games fit into the broader discussion on global governance? Second, what role does legitimacy play for global governance actors, and what interest might the IOC have in legitimacy? Third, how might legitimacy be conceptualised as a framework for measurement?
This chapter will proceed over three additional parts. Part Two outlines the concept of global governance, and discusses the IOC’s place as a global governance actor. Part Three examines the concept of legitimacy. It defines legitimacy and outlines a framework with which to understand and evaluate legitimacy. This part also undertakes an initial look at the IOC’s legitimacy, and questions whether the IOC is facing a crisis of legitimacy at this point in time. Part Four concludes the chapter.
2. Global Governance and the IOC 2.1. Global Governance
Global governance is the exercise of institutional authority at the global level.1 In referring to ‘institutions’, I am using Samuel Huntington’s definition of institutions as “stable,
1 Robert O. Keohane, ‘Global Governance and Democratic Accountability’ in David Held and Mathias Koenig- Archibugi (eds), Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance (Polity Press 2003) 132.