Eroding societal trust: a game-changer for EU policies and institutions?Footnote^†

†. Views expressed in this article are purely personal and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Commission.

References

• Alahuhta, P., P. De Hert, and S. Delaitre. 2006. Dark Scenarios in Ambient Intelligence: Highlighting Risks and Vulnerabilities. Report of the SWAMI consortium to the European Commission, November 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Alessina, A., and E. La Ferrara. 2000. The Determinants of Trust. Working Paper 7621. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Armingeon, K., and B. Ceka. 2014. “The Loss of Trust in the European Union during the Great Recession since 2007: The Role of Heuristics from the National Political System.” European Union Politics 15 (1): 82–107. doi:10.1177/1465116513495595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, B. 1987. “Trust in Science.” Minerva 25 (1–2): 123–134. doi: 10.1007/BF01096860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjørnskov, C. 2007. “Determinants of Generalized Trust. A Cross-Country Comparison.” Public Choice 130 (1–2): 1–21. doi:10.1007/s11127-006-9069-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blankesteijn, M., G. Munnichs, and L. van Drooge. 2014. Contested Science: Public Controversies About Science and Policy. Amsterdam: Rathenau Instituut.
   Google Scholar
• Blind, P. K. 2007. “Building Trust in Government in the Twenty-First Century: Review of Literature and Emerging Issues.” Paper presented at the 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government Building Trust in Government Vienna, 26–29 June.
   Google Scholar
• Boda, Z. forthcoming. “Trust in Justice.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Dietz, G. 2011. “Going Back to the Source: Why Do People Trust Each Other?.” Journal of Trust Research 1 (2): 215–222. doi:10.1080/21515581.2011.603514.
   Google Scholar
• Eurofound. 2013. “Political Trust and Civic Engagement during the Crisis.” 3rd EQLS policy brief. Dublin.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. forthcoming. Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2010. Europe 2020 – A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. COM (2010) 2020. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2014. Digital Futures – Final Report. A Journey into 2050 Visions and Policy Challenges. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015. Energy Union Package – A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy. COM (2015) 80. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Flyverbom, M. forthcoming. “Datafication, Transparency and Trust in the Digital Domain.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. 1996. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Property. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fulmer, C. A., and M. J. Gelfand. 2013. “How Do I Trust Thee? Dynamic Trust Profiles and their Individual and Social Contextual Determinants.” In Models for Intercultural Collaboration and Negotiation, edited by K. Sycara, M. J. Gelfand, and J. Abbe, 97–131. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grabbe, H., and S. Lehne. 2015. Emotional Intelligence for EU Democracy. Brussels: Carnegie Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Harteveld, E., T. van der Meer, and C. E. De Vries. 2013. “In Europe We Trust? Exploring Three Logics of Trust in the European Union.” European Union Politics 14 (4): 542–565. doi:10.1177/1465116513491018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermerén, G. forthcoming. “Trust and Mistrust of Science.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Hetherington, M. J. 2006. Why Trust Matters: Declining Political Trust and the Demise of American Liberalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, J. forthcoming. “Constellations of Trust and Distrust in Internet Governance.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Hooghe, M., T. Reeskens, D. Stolle, and A. Trappers. 2009. “Ethnic Diversity and Generalized Trust in Europe: A Cross-National Multilevel Study.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (2): 198–223. doi:10.1177/0010414008325286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosking, G. forthcoming. “Prolog: Trust in the Trustworthy: A Key to Social Cohesion?.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson, J. 2006. “Institutional Trust and Subjective Well-being across the EU.” KYKLOS 59 (1): 43–62. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6435.2006.00319.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, P. H., A. Palangkaraya, and E. Webster. 2015. “Trust and the Market for Technology.” Research Policy 44 (2): 340–356. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordahl, H. 2007. “Inequality and Trust.” IFN Working Paper, No. 715, Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Juncker, J.-C. 2014. New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Kiss, J. 2014. Privacy Tools Used by 28% of the Online World, Research Finds. The Guardian. Accessed 21 January. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/21/privacy-tools-censorship-online-anonymity-tools.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, R. M. 1999. “Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Emerging Perspectives, Enduring Questions.” Annual Review of Psychology 50: 569–598. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancee, B. forthcoming. “Diversity, Trust and Social Cohesion.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Lewicky, R. J., D. J. McAllister, and R. J. Bies. 1998. “Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities.” The Academy of Management Review 23 (3): 438–458. doi:10.5465/AMR.1998.926620.
   Google Scholar
• Li, P. P. 2012. “When Trust Matters the Most: The Imperatives for Contextualising Trust Research.” Journal of Trust Research 2 (2): 101–106. doi:10.1080/21515581.2012.708494.
   Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, J. 1997. “Social and Cultural Causes of Dissatisfaction with US Government.” In Why People Don’t Trust Government?, edited by J. S. Nye, Ph. Zelikow and D. C. King, 133–153. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mansell, R., and B. S. Collins. 2005. “Introduction: Trust and Crime in Information Societies.” In Trust and Crime in Information Societies, edited by R. Mansell, and B. S. Collins, 1–10. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Mariën, S., and M. Hooghe. 2011. “Does Political Trust Matter? An Empirical Investigation into the Relation between Political Trust and Support for Law Compliance.” European Journal of Political Research 50 (2): 267–291. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01930.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaren, L. M. 2012. “Thee Cultural Divide in Europe: Migration, Multiculturalism, and Political Trust.” World Politics 64 (2): 199–241. doi:10.1017/S0043887112000032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, M., L. Smith-Lovin, and J. M. Cook. 2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27: 415–444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morales, L. forthcoming. “Political Confidence and Political Behaviour.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Necker, S. 2014. “Scientific Misbehavior in Economics.” Research Policy 43 (10): 1747–1759. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, K., and P. Norris. 2000. “Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture, or Performance?” In Disaffected Democracies: What’s troubling the Trilateral Democracies? edited by S. J. Pharr, and R. D. Putnam, 52–73. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2013a. Idea Factory 2013 – (Re)Building Trust. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2013b. “Trust in Government, Policy Effectiveness and the Governance Agenda.” In Government at a Glance 2013, edited by OECD, 19–37. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Pitlik, H. forthcoming. “Trust and the Regulation of Economic Activities.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D. 2007. “E Pluribus Unum. Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century.” Scandinavian Political Studies 30 (2): 137–174. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RAND Europe. 2014. “Foresight Services to Support Strategic Programming within Horizon 2020.” Report prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content & Technology. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Rousselet, V. 2014. “Using Foresight to Support the Next Strategic Programming Period of Horizon 2020 (2016–2018).” Study prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General Research and Innovation. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Stiglitz, J. E. 2012. The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future. New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Stolle, D., S. Soroka, and R. Johnston. 2008. “When Does Diversity Erode Trust? Neighborhood Diversity, Interpersonal Trust and the Mediating Effect of Social Interactions.” Political Studies 56 (1): 57–75. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00717.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sztompka, P. 1998. “Trust, Distrust and Two Paradoxes of Democracy.” European Journal of Social Theory 1 (1): 19–32. doi:10.1177/136843198001001003.
   Google Scholar
• UN Scientific Advisory Board. 2014. “Towards a Strengthened Science-Policy Linkage.” Background paper for the Inaugural Meeting of the SAB, Berlin, 30–31 January 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Walle, S. forthcoming. “Trust in Public Administration and Public Services.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Vigoda-Gadot, E., and S. Mizrahi. 2014. Managing Democracies in Turbulent Times – Trust, Performance, and Governance in Modern States. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R. G., and K. Pickett. 2009. The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. London: Allen Lane.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, D. forthcoming. “Privacy and Trust at Risk in Surveillance Societies: A Policy and Research Agenda.” In Trust at Risk: Implications for EU Policies and Institutions, edited by European Commission. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Yarborough, M. 2014. “Openness in Science is Key to Keeping Public Trust.” Nature 515 (20 November 2014): 313. Accessed http://www.nature.com/news/openness-in-science-is-key-to-keeping-public-trust-1.16371. doi: 10.1038/515313a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar