New

OECD’s methods of legitimation and self-authorisation in water governance

Farhad Mukhtarov
Assistant Professor of Governance and Public Policy, International Institute of Social Studies (ISS), Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Hague, Netherlands; mukhtarov@iss.nl

Des Gasper
Professor Emeritus, International Institute of Social Studies (ISS), Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Hague, Netherlands; gasper@iss.nl

Michael Farrelly  
Independent researcher, Sheffield, United Kingdom; michaelfarrelly@discourseacademy.org

Malte Lüken
Research Software Engineer, Netherlands e-Science Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; m.luken@esciencecenter.nl

Kody Moodley
Senior Research Software Engineer, Netherlands e-Science Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; k.moodley@esciencecenter.nl

ABSTRACT: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has established itself since 2009 as an authority in water governance. This paper examines the strategies behind that emergence, applying quantitative and qualitative text analysis techniques to a corpus of 55 OECD documents produced between 2009 and 2022. We discern five legitimating strategies. First, the OECD followed a formula from its earlier engagement in other fields that had three components: 1) reframing existing knowledge and manufacturing a declared consensus in contentious areas, 2) formulating and disseminating blueprints for good governance, and 3) formulating and disseminating corresponding frameworks with which to evaluate performance. Its second strategy has been to stress topics and themes where it already had an established reputation, that is, 'good governance' and 'new public management'. The third strategy involved referencing a limited pool of external sources that were mostly from other international organisations and consultancy groups, and underutilising the academic literature on the subject. Fourth, it referenced itself extensively in both formal citations and frequent in-text references. Fifth and finally, it orchestrated temporary networks of actors to endorse its efforts and tools. Taken together, these strategies point to the self-referential nature of the OECD’s authority in this new field. We call attention to these legitimating strategies with the goal of challenging the OECD and other international organisations to adopt more adequate and inclusive knowledge bases.

KEYWORDS: OECD, water governance, authorisation, soft power, critical discourse analysis, Structural Topic Modelling