Trust, Heterogeneity and Fairness in the EU
A contemporary examination
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32826/reyf.v4i11.418Keywords:
generalized trust, fairness, heterogeneity, FINO indexAbstract
High levels of generalized trust are usually associated with economic growth and lower transaction costs, while heterogeneous populations have been linked to lower levels of trust. As societies are rapidly diversifying on many fronts, it is important to investigate the relationship between heterogeneity and trust so that policymakers can respond appropriately. Research on this topic commonly uses fractionalization indices. In this paper, we develop a new Fractionalization Index of National Origin (FINO) to capture contemporary heterogeneity. We then conduct a two-step hierarchical logit regression analysis on contemporary data, including over 40,000 observations from 23 EU countries. Our results indicate that both fairness and heterogeneity are significant predictors of generalized trust in the EU. We theorize that the relationship between heterogeneity and generalized trust may be context-dependent, becoming relevant only once countries have established a certain level of fairness.
References
Alesina, A., Devleeschauwer, A., Easterly, W., Kurlat, S., & Wacziarg, R. (2003). Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2): 155-194.
Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2002). Who trusts others? Journal of Public Economics, 85(2): 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(01)00084-6
Anderson, C. J., & Paskeviciute, A. (2006). How ethnic and linguistic heterogeneity influence the prospects for civil society: A comparative study of citizenship behavior. The Journal of Politics, 68(4): 783-802.
Bergh, A., & Öhrvall, R. (2018). A sticky trait: Social trust among Swedish expatriates in countries with varying institutional quality. Journal of Comparative Economics, 46(4): 1146–1157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2018.06.002
Bossert, W., D’Ambrosio, C., & La Ferrara, E. (2011). A generalized index of fractionalization. Economica, 78(312), 723–750.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press.
Delhey, J., & Newton, K. (2005). Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: Global pattern or Nordic exceptionalism? European Sociological Review, 21(4), 311-327. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jci022
Fearon, J. D. (2003). Ethnic and cultural diversity by country. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2): 195–222. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024419522867
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.
Gomer, B. (2019). MCAR, MAR, and MNAR Values in the Same Dataset: A Realistic Evaluation of Methods for Handling Missing Data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 54(1–1). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00273171.2018.1557033
International Organization for Migration. (2022). World migration report.
Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1997). Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4): 1251-1288.
Kumlin, S., & Rothstein, B. (2010). Questioning the new liberal dilemma: Immigrants, social networks, and institutional fairness. Comparative Politics, 43(1): 63–80. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041510X12911363510394
Leeuw, J. D., & Meijer, E. (Eds.) (2008). Introduction to multilevel analysis. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/9780-387-73186-5 1
Mood, C. (2009). Logistic Regression: Why We Cannot Do What We Think We Can Do, And What We Can Do About It. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2007). E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century, the 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2): 137–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007. 00176.x
Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. New York: Belknap Press.
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10. 1037/1082-989X.7.2.147
Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2018). Introduction to Econometrics, 4th edition. Pearson.
Tsai, M.-C., Laczko, L., & Bjørnskov, C. (2011). Social diversity, institutions and trust: A cross-national analysis. Social Indicators Research, 101 (3), 305–322.
Uslaner, E. M. (2002). The moral foundations of trust. New York: Cambridge UP.
Uslaner, E. M. (2004). Trust and corruption. In J. G. Lambsdorff, M. Taube, & M. Schramm (Eds.), The new institutional economics of corruption (pp. 76–92). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413920
Uslaner, E. M. (2006). Does diversity drive down trust? FEEM Working Paper.
World Bank (2023). Gini Index (World Development Indicators).
https://data.worldbank. org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI.
World Justice Project. (2021). Rule of law index 2021 (Tech. Rep.).
World Values Survey. (2022). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2022) Cross-national dataset 4.0.0. https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSDocumentationWV7.jsp
You, J. S. (2012). Social trust: Fairness matters more than homogeneity. Political Psychology, 33(5): 701–721.
Zak, P. J., & Knack, S. (2001). Trust and Growth. The Economic Journal, 111(470): 295–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00609
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms:
- The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Recognition License that allows third parties to share the work whenever its author is indicated and its first publication is this magazine.
- Authors may adopt other non-exclusive licensing agreements for the distribution of the published work (eg, deposit it in an institutional telematic file or publish it in a monographic volume) whenever the initial publication is indicated in this magazine.
- Authors are allowed and advised to disseminate their work through the Internet (eg in institutional telematic files or on their website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase the citations of the published work. (See The effect of open access ).
