Trust¶
Basis
OECD 2022, which is likely about trust, has no PDF and is not included.
Definitions in the sources¶
| Source | Definition/use | Page | U/T |
|---|---|---|---|
| Warren 2018 | An individual's judgement that another is motivated and competent to act in her interests without being monitored | 75 | U |
| Warren 2018 | Social trust, first-order institutional trust (in agencies holding a ‘public trust’) and second-order institutional trust (in the rules for political conflict) | 76, 82–91 | U |
| Warren 2018 | Democratic participation should involve ‘engaged distrust’ | 80 | U |
| Grimmelikhuijsen et al. 2013 | (Rousseau et al.) A psychological state of willingness to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations; trustworthiness as competence, benevolence and honesty | 577 | U |
| Abiteboul & Stoyanovich 2019 | Transparency and accountability are ‘intrinsically linked’ with trust, especially when algorithms are used in government processes | 4 | U |
| Fairfield & Engel 2015 | When schools and advertising teach that no one can be trusted online, this may undermine cooperation based on reciprocity | 448 | U |
| Hankey et al. 2018 | The electorate may lose faith in both the regulatory regime and the democratic process | 5 | U |
| Latour & Woolgar 1986 | Credibility links economic and epistemological notions | 238–239 | U |
Where usage diverges¶
- Warren distinguishes several forms of trust and sees distrust of political institutions as a democratic resource (pp. 76–80) [U]. Grimmelikhuijsen et al. measure trust as perceived trustworthiness with three dimensions (p. 577) [U].
- Abiteboul & Stoyanovich link transparency and trust (p. 4) [U]. Grimmelikhuijsen et al. find that transparency has a subdued and sometimes negative effect on trust (p. 575) [U]. See transparency [T].
Concepts easily confused with this one¶
- Trust and transparency: transparency is often presented as a means to trust, but Grimmelikhuijsen et al. and Warren both suggest transparency is not enough on its own (Grimmelikhuijsen et al. 2013, p. 584; Warren 2018, p. 91) [U].
- Trust and credibility: Latour & Woolgar's credibility concerns scientific credit, not citizens' trust in the state (pp. 238–239) [U].
- Trust and legitimacy: Bear & Mathur write that bureaucracies' legitimacy rests on claims to serve the public good (p. 18) [U]. Legitimacy and trust are not the same [T].
How the concept is used in the primary documents¶
- NOU 2022:11:
- Trust (tillit) in the public administration is a precondition for a well-functioning democracy (p. 61) [U].
- The commission cites the OECD's 2021 measurement, in which 77% of Norwegians trusted the government (p. 61) [U].
- The relationship between the data subject and the authorities is marked by an asymmetrical balance of power, and the administration therefore has a special obligation to create and maintain trust (p. 61) [U].
- Further processing contrary to residents' expectations can be experienced as a breach of trust (p. 62) [U].
- FFI report:
- The report counts attempts to undermine trust in politicians, authorities and democracy as negative influence (Sivertsen et al. 2026, pp. 13–14) [U].
- It describes influence as aimed at the frameworks for opinion formation, including trust (p. 127) [U].
Open questions for Rebekka¶
- Which trust do the documents appeal to: trust in agencies, in politicians or in the rules (Warren's distinction)?
- Is distrust presented in the documents as a problem or as a resource?
- Do you have OECD 2022, and is it the same report the NOU cites?