Expert authority is regarded as the heart of international bureaucracies’ power. To measure whether international bureaucracies’ expert authority is indeed recognised and deferred to, we draw on novel data from a survey of a key audience: officials in the policy units of national ministries in 121 countries. Respondents were asked to what extent they recognised the expert authority of nine international bureaucracies in various thematic areas of agricultural and financial policy. The results show wide variance. To explain this variation, we test well-established assumptions on the sources of de facto expert authority. Specifically, we look at ministry officials’ perceptions of these sources and, thus, focus on a less-studied aspect of the authority relationship. We examine the role of international bureaucracies’ perceived impartiality, objectivity, global impact, and the role of knowledge asymmetries. Contrary to common assumptions, we find that de facto expert authority does not rest on impartiality perceptions, and that perceived objectivity plays the smallest role of all factors considered. We find some indications that knowledge asymmetries are associated with more expert authority. Still, and robust to various alternative specifications, the perception that international bureaucracies are effectively addressing global challenges is the most important factor.

中文翻译：

---

官僚权力的核心：解释国际官僚机构的专家权威

专家权威被视为国际官僚机构权力的核心。为了衡量国际官僚机构的专家权威是否确实得到承认和尊重，我们从一项关键受众的调查中汲取了新数据：121 个国家的国家部委政策部门的官员。受访者被问及他们在多大程度上认可九个国际官僚机构在农业和金融政策不同主题领域的专家权威。结果显示出很大的差异。为了解释这种变化，我们测试了关于事实上的专家权威来源的公认假设。具体来说，我们着眼于部委官员对这些来源的看法，因此，关注权威关系中研究较少的方面。我们考察了国际官僚机构的公正性所起的作用，客观性、全球影响和知识不对称的作用。与普遍的假设相反，我们发现事实上的专家权威并不依赖于公正的看法，并且感知的客观性在所有考虑的因素中起着最小的作用。我们发现一些迹象表明，知识不对称与更多的专家权威有关。尽管如此，对于各种替代规范而言，国际官僚机构正在有效应对全球挑战的看法是最重要的因素。我们发现一些迹象表明，知识不对称与更多的专家权威有关。尽管如此，对于各种替代规范而言，国际官僚机构正在有效应对全球挑战的看法是最重要的因素。我们发现一些迹象表明，知识不对称与更多的专家权威有关。尽管如此，对于各种替代规范而言，国际官僚机构正在有效应对全球挑战的看法是最重要的因素。