PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 2, 2026Global Studies Quarterly1 citationsOpen Access

Empowering the Global South? Legitimacy in Regional Internet Registries

View Full Paper
HJHortense JongenJSJan Aart ScholteDCDebora Christine

Key Points

  • The article explores how legitimacy is perceived in Regional Internet Registries located in the global south.
  • Conducted data analysis of approximately 400 mixed-methods interviews
  • Examined the legitimacy beliefs for AFRINIC, APNIC, and LACNIC
  • Assessed participants' endorsement of a south-centered governance approach
  • LACNIC and APNIC have some of the highest legitimacy beliefs among internet governance bodies
  • AFRINIC shows considerably mixed legitimacy perceptions
  • Participants generally support a south-centered and regional approach to internet governance despite varied assessments of its practice

Abstract

Abstract This article examines levels and patterns of legitimacy for three Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) centered in the global south. These organizations in Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America-Caribbean are unique in that they govern a key global resource in a south-led, regional, and nongovernmental manner. How far does such a distinctive approach to internet governance attract foundational confidence and approval from affected constituencies? The article first introduces the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC), the Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC), and the Latin American and Caribbean Network Information Centre (LACNIC)—and discusses how legitimacy is important for their work. Data analysis of some 400 mixed-methods interviews then reveals that average legitimacy beliefs for LACNIC and APNIC are among the highest of all internet governance institutions. In contrast, AFRINIC attracts considerably mixed legitimacy perceptions. Furthermore, participants in these RIRs strongly endorse the principle of a south-centered, regional, and nongovernmental approach to internet governance, even if their assessments of actual practice are more mixed. Overall, then, we conclude that south-centered, regional, nongovernmental arrangements for internet governance can acquire solid approval, thereby pointing toward a possible alternative approach for handling other crucial global resources.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Jongen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6980ffb4c1c9540dea812696https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksaf125
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Bridging the Global Digital Divide2003 · 96 citations
  2. 2The Hidden Standards War: Economic Factors Affecting IPv6 Deployment2019 · 6 citations
  3. 3Consequences of Legitimacy in Global Governance2018 · 42 citations
  4. 4Digital Colonialism: The 21st Century Scramble for Africa through the Extraction and Control of User Data and the Limitations of Data Protection Laws2019 · 160 citations
  5. 5Governance, Regulation and Powers on the Internet2012 · 54 citations