.jpg)
printPolitical Trust, Satisfaction and Perceptions of the Causes of Poverty:
the Role of the Normative Aspects of Institutions in the Production of Trust
Terin D.F.,
Researcher, Institute of Sociology of the Federal Research Sociological Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, terin@isras.ru
elibrary_id: 878218 |
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.03.10
For citation:
Terin D.F. Political Trust, Satisfaction and Perceptions of the Causes of Poverty: the Role of the Normative Aspects of Institutions in the Production of Trust. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No. 3. P. 144-157. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.03.10
Abstract
The article deals with issues around the relationship between political trust and satisfaction with political institutions, and confirms the isomorphism of these phenomena on the basis of the empirical data provided by all-Russian research. Existing research into trust in this field has concluded that, regarding institutions of the modern service state, satisfaction with the services they provide often reveals no relationship between this satistifcation and the level of trust in the government and other political institutions. In contrast to the satisfaction associated with the instrumental aspects of public institutions, satisfaction with the work of political institutions in this study demonstrates a strong correlation with trust, and is associated with the normative aspect of institutions. The article also examines the relationship between trust in political institutions and satisfaction with the perceptions of the causes of poverty in society as a fundamental social phenomenon related to the normative foundations of social order in Russia. The use of principal component factor analysis found that there are two alternative justifications of the causes of poverty: a structural justification (which associates poverty with the properties of existing institutions) and a non-structural justification (which does not associate poverty with institutional reasons). The structural justification of poverty negatively correlates with indicators of political trust and satisfaction with the performance of political institutions, whilst the justification of poverty by factors not controlled by institutions is associated with trust and satisfaction with positive correlation. People who assume that institutions are responsible for the reproduction of an unjust social order are less likely to trust them and less satisfied with their performance. The findings confirm that the normative aspect of political institutions is more important than the instrumental one.
Keywords
political trust, satisfaction, political institutions, normative expectations, social order, causes of poverty, good governance.
References
Beeri I., Uster A., Vigoda-Gadot E. 2019. Does Performance Management Relate to Good Governance? A Study of Its Relationship with Citizens’ Satisfaction with and Trust in Israeli Local Government. – Public Performance & Management Review. Vol. 42. No. 2. P. 241-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1436074
Bouckaert G., Van de Walle S., Maddens B., Kampen J.K. 2002. Identity vs Performance: An Overview of Theories Explaining Trust in Government. Second Report “Quality and Trust in Government”. Working Paper. Leuven, Belgium: Public Management Institute, Katholike Universiteit Leuven. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Van_de_Walle/publication/299437211_Identity_vs_Performance_An_Overview_of_Theories_Explaining_Trust_in_Government/links/56f6e2a308ae81582bf2fb24/Identityvs-Performance-An-Overview-of-Theories-Explaining-Trust-in-Government.pdf (accessed: 29.03.2020).
Bouckaert G., Van de Walle S. 2003. Comparing Measures of Citizen Trust and User Satisfaction as Indicators of ‘Good Governance’: Difficulties in Linking Trust and Satisfaction Indicators. – International Review of Administrative Sciences. Vol. 69. No. 3. P. 329-343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852303693003
Devos T., Spini D., Schwartz S.H. 2002. Conflicts Among Human Values and Trust in Institutions. – British Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 41. No. 4. P. 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602321149849
Doornbos M. 2001. ‘Good Governance’: The Rise and Decline of a Policy Metaphor? – Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 37. No. 6. P. 93-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/713601084
Hoyer H.C., Monness E. 2016. Trust in Public Institutions – Spillover and Bandwidth. – Journal of Trust Research. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2016.1156546
Koivisto I. 2014. Varieties of Good Governance: A Suggestion of Discursive Plurality. – International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 587-611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-013-9329-6
Luhmann N. 2018. Trust and Power. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 228 p.
Mishler W., Rose R. 2001. What Are the Origins of Political Trust?: Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies. – Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 34. No. 1. P. 30-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414001034001002
Mizrahi S., Vigoda-Gadot E., Van Ryzin G. 2010. Public Sector Management, Trust, Performance, and Participation: A citizens Survey and National Assessment in the United States. – Public Performance & Management Review. Vol. 34. No. 2. P. 268-312. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576340207
Shlapentokh V. 2006. Trust in Public Institutions in Russia: The Lowest in the World. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 39. No. 2. P. 153-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2006.03.004
Smith K.B., Stone L.H. 1989. Rags, Riches, and Bootstraps: Beliefs about the Causes of Wealth and Poverty. – The Sociological Quarterly. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1989.tb01513.x
Standard Eurobarometer 90. Autumn 2018. First Results. Public Opinion in the European Union. 2018. 40 p.
Bednost’ i neravenstva v sovremennoi Rossii: 10 let spustya. Analiticheskii doklad [Poverty and Inequality in Modern Russia: 10 Years Later. Analytical Report]. 2013. Ed. by M.K. Gorshkov, N.E. Tikhonova. Moscow: IS RAS. 168 p. (In Russ.)
Gorshkov M.K., Tikhonova N.E. 2004. Wealth and poverty in the minds of Russians. – Sociological Studies. No. 3. P. 16-21. (In Russ.)
Mareeva S.V., Tikhonova N.E. 2016. Public Perceptions of Poverty and Social Inequality in Russia. – Universe of Russia. Sociology. Ethnology. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 37-67. (In Russ.)
Terin D.F. 2018. The Structure of Political Trust in Russia: Performance and Fairness of Political Institutions. – Sociological Journal. Vol. 24. No. 2. P. 90–109. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2018.24.2.5846
Yuzhakov V., Boikov V., Dobrolyubova E., Pokida A., Zybunovskaya N. 2014. On the Way to ServiceOriented State: Satisfaction of Public Services Recipients. – Economic Policy. No. 3. P. 116-142. (In Russ.)
Content No. 3, 2020
See also:
Tomashov I.A.,
The year of 2012: russian politics and political professions. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No3
Barsukova S.Yu.,
Enforceable Trust in the World of Social Networks. – Polis. Political Studies. 2001. No2
Zhukova O.A.,
Subculture of power and russian social order: M.M. Speransky’s reform experience. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No2
Zagladin N.V., Kucherenko A.A.,
Global Crisis: Reasons, Consequences and Russia (Returning to What’s Been Read). – Polis. Political Studies. 2009. No3
Petukhov R.V.,
The Russian Society’s Confidence in the Local Governments as a Problem. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No6
.jpg)
.jpg)