Dialogue forums have been mushrooming in international economic institutions as a strategy to enhance their legitimacy. Promoted as deliberative spaces allowing for an open, direct exchange with civil society actors, forums have since been criticized as mere talking shops or public relations events. The article analyses why the forums are still maintained despite widespread criticism, with a particular focus on audiences, legitimation agents and the organizational field as sources and driving forces of legitimation strategies. Our findings on the Civil Society Policy Forum, organized by the IMF and the World Bank, and the Civil 20, one of the G20 engagement groups, highlight strong interactive effects between these sources: civil society actors have been pressing for the maintenance of forums as deliberative spaces. Additional pressure on institutions arise from the organizational field, with the inclusion of non-state actors increasingly becoming a norm. International economic institutions react strategically to these external demands by choosing the path of least resistance: maintaining dialogue forums helps showcasing their openness without granting much influence to civil society actors.

中文翻译：

---

阻力最小的路径：国际机构为何维持对话论坛

作为增强其合法性的战略，对话论坛在国际经济机构中如雨后春笋般涌现。论坛被提升为允许与民间社会行为者进行公开、直接交流的审议空间，但后来却被批评为仅仅是清谈会或公共关系活动。文章分析了为什么这些论坛在受到广泛批评的情况下仍然存在，特别关注作为合法化策略来源和驱动力的受众、合法化代理人和组织领域。我们对由国际货币基金组织和世界银行组织的民间社会政策论坛以及 G20 参与小组之一的民间 20 组织的调查结果强调了这些来源之间的强烈互动效应：民间社会参与者一直在敦促维护论坛，因为审议空间。随着非国家行为者的参与越来越成为一种常态，机构面临的额外压力来自组织领域。国际经济机构通过选择阻力最小的路径对这些外部需求做出战略性反应：维持对话论坛有助于展示它们的开放性，而不会给民间社会参与者带来太大影响。