ABSTRACT Club governance is among the most contested of global governance approaches. This article investigates legitimacy evaluations of two informal governance clubs from the perspective of both old powers and rising powers. It examines how legitimate the G7/G8 and the G20 are perceived to be and which (de-)legitimation criteria are used in the context of these summit regimes, assessing how legitimacy evaluations in the media vary across these two settings, across different types of actors and over time. The article shows that rising powers challenge certain aspects of the global order more than old powers. While the criteria linked to output legitimacy, such as effectiveness, tend to be more prominent than criteria on input legitimacy, such as participation, the latter seem to be more important for rising powers than for old powers. This article contributes to the various bodies of literature on club governance, the legitimacy of international institutions and the role of rising powers in global governance.

中文翻译：

---

俱乐部治理与合法性：老牌和新兴大国对 G7 和 G20 的看法

摘要 俱乐部治理是最具争议的全球治理方法之一。本文从旧势力和新兴势力的角度考察了对两个非正式治理俱乐部的合法性评价。它考察了 G7/G8 和 G20 被认为是多么合法，以及在这些峰会制度的背景下使用了哪些（去）合法性标准，评估了媒体对合法性评估在这两种环境下、不同类型的演员和随着时间的推移。文章表明，新兴大国比旧大国更能挑战全球秩序的某些方面。虽然与产出合法性相关的标准（如有效性）往往比与投入合法性相关的标准（如参与）更为重要，但后者似乎对新兴大国比对旧大国更为重要。