Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

Explaining political trus… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Webbkarta
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Explaining political trust: the role of social capital and procedural fairness

Konferensbidrag (offentliggjort, men ej förlagsutgivet)
Författare Ylva Norén Bretzer
Publicerad i Konferenspapper presenterat vid ‘Trust and Democracy: A Multidisciplinary Perspective’, Göteborg, May 19-20, Sweden
Publiceringsår 2005
Publicerad vid Centrum för forskning om offentlig sektor (CEFOS)
Statsvetenskapliga institutionen
Språk en
Ämneskategorier Statsvetenskap (exklusive studier av offentlig förvaltning och globaliseringsstudier)

Sammanfattning

The role of interpersonal trust in society has intensively been discussed among researchers during the last decade (Putnam 1993, 2000, Lin 2001, Uslaner 2002). This article specifically focuses on the role of interpersonal trust and trust in politicians, political institutions and democracy. Do people that trust other people also have more trust in politics, generally? A competing explanation to where the political trusters could be detected comes from the field of political psychology. Here, most notably Tom Tyler has argued that political trust is generated from the perceived procedures of the judicial system (Hibbing and Theiss-Morse 2001, Levi 1996, 1998, Tyler 1990, 1998, 2001). Persons that carry the perceptions that the judicial system is working in a fair and foreseeable way, also tend to be the political trusters, according to his claim. How will these two hypotheses play together? This is the topic of the presented article. This study has a multi-level design, where data include trust in Swedish national political institutions and Swedish municipal institutions. The reported analyses display a hypoteses test 2x2 at micro and macro levels respectively. The results confirm what Mishler and Rose have reported earlier, that it is institutional hypotheses at micro levels that best covary with political trust. Second, institutional hypotheses on macro levels are also helpful. Interpersonal trust at macro level displays no significant relation to political trust. However, small but significant effects can be detected at micro level. The consequences of the results are several. First, if we are truly interested in the issue of political trust, and what determines it, we should put much more attention to analyses of institutions, how they actually work and citizen’s perceptions of them. Second, the source of low political trust may be found within the public institutions themselves, not among the citizenry. If the judicial system is working in a fair and foreseeable way, and the attitude among the citizens are that the courts and the police are working in favor of this norm, this situation would pave the way to higher political trust much more easily, compared to if policymakers have the belief that the citizens should be “doped” with as much interpersonal trust as possible. The latter strategy may produce lots of interesting social effects, however, the effect on political trust would most likely be meager.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11
Dela:

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?