The Legitimizing Role of International Rankings: The Case Study of Georgia

Abstract This paper examines how international indices can confer liberal democratic legitimacy on a hybrid, competitive authoritarian regime. By examining the case of Georgia and employing discourse analysis in the style of the Essex School, it demonstrates that reputed international organizations have depoliticized key concepts in their rankings to varying degrees across the spheres of budget transparency, economic freedom, corruption, and the rule of law. “Depoliticization” and “repoliticization” are understood in relation to “politics,” conceived as the power-laden nature of human relationships operating at the macro level of an entire regime. The paper outlines three modes of depoliticization - technicalization, economicization, and criminalization - and illustrates how these contribute to the construction of authoritative international indices. It then shows how, in certain instances, the Georgian government repoliticized the previously depoliticized concepts and used Georgia’s ranking achievements to assert its liberal democratic credentials. The paper argues that the legitimizing discourse surrounding international indices can take on a peculiar character, in which depoliticization leads to a powerful form of repoliticization, contradicting the original aim of international rankings to promote liberal democratic values and institutions. It concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for understanding the complex relationship between non-democratic regimes and the international liberal community, and suggests directions for future research.