Trust and Trustworthiness in National and Global Governance

国家和全球治理中的信任和可信度

• 批准号: ES/S009809/1
• 负责人: Will Jennings
• 金额: $ 170.66万
• 依托单位: University of Southampton
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2019
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2019 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FS009809%2F1
• 关键词: Trust; Trustworthiness; National; Global; Governance

There is widespread concern among scholars and popular commentators that citizens have grown more distrustful of politicians, sceptical about political institutions, and disillusioned with democratic processes and principles. Cynicism about government is thought to erode civic engagement and conventional forms of political participation, to reduce support for progressive public policies, and to provide the oxygen fuelling authoritarian-populist forces. The risks of democratic backsliding are regarded as particularly serious if public scepticism spreads upwards from core institutions of governance to corrode citizens' evaluations about the performance of liberal democracy and even its core ideals. Some fear a flagging civic culture may potentially contribute towards what many observers see as a liberal democratic retreat around the world. To date, most research has emphasised demand-side explanations of trust: what it is about citizens, like their education, class, attitudes, or cohort of birth, which makes them trusting. This project develops a theoretically novel, empirically ambitious and methodologically innovative approach to understanding how trust in agencies of national and global governance relates to trustworthiness, measured by performance indicators for governance agencies. We identify two primary dangers about any mismatch between trust and trustworthiness; where citizens are cynical about benevolent actors, which genuinely serve the public interest, and also where citizens naively trust malevolent actors, such as corrupt leaders. By contrast, the theory of critical citizens suggests that people should ideally trust but verify trustworthiness. The preponderance of evidence has compared political trust in the U.S., Europe and other established liberal democracies. By contrast, we will compare a far broader range of countries and types of regimes worldwide. The inclusion of authoritarian regimes, institutions and leaders, in particular, challenges many conventional theoretical and normative assumptions about trust and trustworthiness. We also will focus on analyzing trust across a range of national and global agencies of government (e.g. the UN, World Bank, IMF, WTO, and NATO, and regional multilateral organizations such as the EU, OAS, OSCE, and AU), which have received far less systematic attention in comparative research. How agencies might mobilize popular support is a highly practical and policy-relevant question, to which this study will contribute.To undertake our analysis, we will draw primarily upon large-scale longitudinal and cross-national survey data from the World Values Survey/European Values Survey (WVS/EVS) and Eurobarometer, combined with national-level performance indices (including expert surveys) and individual-level perceptions of regime performance. We will commission additional national surveys from the WVS/EVS, prioritising fieldwork in authoritarian regimes - enabling us to develop global comparisons across a range of contexts. Building on the WVS/EVS will provide added value at relatively low cost. Our comparative analysis will combine aggregate- and individual-level analysis, and will use multi-level methods to understand individuals embedded within broader contexts. We will also use focus groups and survey and lab experiments. The project will additionally pilot new questions for measuring trust in political institutions.

学者和大众评论员普遍担心，公民越来越不信任政治家，对政治机构持怀疑态度，对民主进程和原则不再抱有幻想。对政府的犬儒主义被认为会侵蚀公民参与和传统形式的政治参与，减少对进步公共政策的支持，并为威权民粹主义势力提供氧气。如果公众的怀疑从核心治理机构向上蔓延，侵蚀公民对自由民主的业绩甚至其核心理想的评价，民主倒退的风险就被认为特别严重。一些人担心，萎靡不振的公民文化可能会导致许多观察人士所认为的世界各地自由民主的倒退。到目前为止，大多数研究都强调了对信任的需求方解释：公民的教育、阶级、态度或出生年代，使他们信任。该项目开发了一种理论新颖，经验雄心勃勃和方法创新的方法，以了解国家和全球治理机构的信任如何与可信赖性相关，并通过治理机构的绩效指标进行衡量。我们确定了两个主要的危险之间的任何不匹配的信任和可信赖性;公民是愤世嫉俗的善良的演员，真正服务于公共利益，也在公民天真地信任恶意的演员，如腐败的领导人。相比之下，批判公民理论认为，人们应该理想地信任，但要验证可信度。大量证据表明，美国的政治信任，欧洲和其他已建立的自由民主国家。相比之下，我们将比较世界范围内更广泛的国家和政权类型。特别是将专制政权、机构和领导人包括在内，挑战了许多关于信任和可信赖性的传统理论和规范假设。我们还将重点分析一系列国家和全球政府机构（例如联合国，世界银行，国际货币基金组织，世贸组织和北约，以及欧盟，美洲国家组织，欧安组织和Au等区域多边组织）的信任，这些机构在比较研究中受到的系统关注要少得多。政府如何动员民众支持是一个非常实际的问题，也是一个与政策相关的问题。为了进行分析，我们将主要利用世界价值观调查/欧洲价值观调查（WVS/EVS）和欧洲晴雨表（Eurobarometer）的大规模纵向和跨国调查数据，结合国家层面的绩效指数（包括专家调查）和个人层面的政权绩效感知。我们将委托WVS/EVS进行更多的国家调查，优先考虑专制政权的实地调查-使我们能够在一系列背景下进行全球比较。在WVS/EVS的基础上构建将以相对较低的成本提供附加值。我们的比较分析将结合联合收割机聚合和个人层面的分析，并将使用多层次的方法来了解嵌入在更广泛的背景下的个人。我们还将使用焦点小组和调查和实验室实验。此外，该项目还将试行新的问题，以衡量对政治机构的信任。

项目成果

Political trust in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a meta-analysis of 67 studies

• DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2023.2169741
• 发表时间: 2023-01-28
• 期刊: JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN PUBLIC POLICY
• 影响因子: 4.2
• 作者: Devine, Daniel;Valgarosson, Viktor;McKay, Lawrence
• 通讯作者: McKay, Lawrence

Trust, Mistrust and Distrust: A Gendered Perspective on Meanings and Measurements

• DOI: 10.3389/fpos.2021.642129
• 发表时间: 2021-07-06
• 期刊: FRONTIERS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE
• 作者: Bunting, Hannah;Gaskell, Jennifer;Stoker, Gerry
• 通讯作者: Stoker, Gerry

Political Trust and Climate Policy Choice: Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment

政治信任和气候政策选择：联合实验的证据

• 发表时间: 2022
• 作者: Devine D

Voter Decision-Making in a Context of Low Political Trust: The 2016 UK EU Membership Referendum

政治信任度低下的选民决策：2016 年英国脱欧公投

• 发表时间: 2021
• 期刊: Political Studies
• 影响因子: 3.1
• 作者: Clarke N

Stability and Change in Political Trust: Evidence and implications from six panel studies

政治信任的稳定性和变化：六项小组研究的证据和影响

• 发表时间: 2023
• 期刊: European Journal of Political Research
• 影响因子: 5.3
• 作者: Devine D