Chapter 8: Public Trust in Institutions in Pre- and Post-Crisis Iceland (II): Institutionalised Mistrust

S. Sigurgeirsdóttir, Gudrun Johnsen
{"title":"Chapter 8: Public Trust in Institutions in Pre- and Post-Crisis Iceland (II): Institutionalised Mistrust","authors":"S. Sigurgeirsdóttir, Gudrun Johnsen","doi":"10.1108/978-1-78743-347-220181012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract \nPublic trust in institutions in Iceland plunged after the country’s banking sector collapsed. The political system wobbled under outrage and anger when the general public took to the streets. The Parliamentary Special Investigation Commission conducted a ground-breaking crisis-induced investigation, delivering a report that was a milestone in Iceland’s history of politics and public administration. Yet, despite this endeavour and the fact that subsequent investigations have disclosed ample information intended to restore trust in institutions, public trust remains unsteady. This chapter addresses the following questions: How has public trust in institutions progressed after the crash? Why is it taking so long for trust to return? In Chapter 3 in this volume, we examine data on public trust in Icelandic institutions from Gallup surveys over the 15 years from 2002 to 2017 in order to identify and explain patterns of trust in the aftermath of the crisis. Our interpretation of theory in this chapter suggests that elements of mistrust inherent in the principal–agent approach to accountability in public administration, implemented in previous New Public Management reforms, undermined the creation of a climate of trust necessary to ensure effective accountability mechanisms. We argue that in the absence of a climate of trust, accountability mechanisms of culpability that conflict with mechanisms of answerability, combined with a succession of post-crisis scandals, mainly explain the slow return of the public’s trust.","PeriodicalId":145304,"journal":{"name":"The Return of Trust? Institutions and the Public after the Icelandic Financial Crisis","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Return of Trust? Institutions and the Public after the Icelandic Financial Crisis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78743-347-220181012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Public trust in institutions in Iceland plunged after the country’s banking sector collapsed. The political system wobbled under outrage and anger when the general public took to the streets. The Parliamentary Special Investigation Commission conducted a ground-breaking crisis-induced investigation, delivering a report that was a milestone in Iceland’s history of politics and public administration. Yet, despite this endeavour and the fact that subsequent investigations have disclosed ample information intended to restore trust in institutions, public trust remains unsteady. This chapter addresses the following questions: How has public trust in institutions progressed after the crash? Why is it taking so long for trust to return? In Chapter 3 in this volume, we examine data on public trust in Icelandic institutions from Gallup surveys over the 15 years from 2002 to 2017 in order to identify and explain patterns of trust in the aftermath of the crisis. Our interpretation of theory in this chapter suggests that elements of mistrust inherent in the principal–agent approach to accountability in public administration, implemented in previous New Public Management reforms, undermined the creation of a climate of trust necessary to ensure effective accountability mechanisms. We argue that in the absence of a climate of trust, accountability mechanisms of culpability that conflict with mechanisms of answerability, combined with a succession of post-crisis scandals, mainly explain the slow return of the public’s trust.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第八章:危机前后冰岛公众对制度的信任(II):制度化的不信任
冰岛银行业崩溃后,公众对冰岛机构的信任度大幅下降。当公众走上街头时,政治体系在愤怒和愤怒中摇摇欲坠。议会特别调查委员会(Parliamentary Special Investigation Commission)开展了一项由危机引发的开创性调查,并提交了一份报告,成为冰岛政治和公共行政史上的一个里程碑。然而,尽管做出了这种努力,而且随后的调查披露了大量旨在恢复对机构信任的信息,但公众的信任仍然不稳定。本章讨论了以下问题:危机后公众对机构的信任是如何发展的?为什么要花这么长时间才能恢复信任?在本卷的第3章中,我们研究了2002年至2017年15年间盖洛普调查中关于冰岛机构公众信任的数据,以确定和解释危机后的信任模式。我们在本章中对理论的解释表明,在以前的新公共管理改革中实施的公共行政问责制的委托-代理方法中固有的不信任因素破坏了确保有效问责机制所必需的信任气氛的创造。我们认为,在缺乏信任氛围的情况下,与责任机制相冲突的责任问责机制,再加上危机后一连串的丑闻,是公众信任恢复缓慢的主要原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chapter 11: Post-Crisis Regulation and Supervision of Icelandic Banks Chapter 5: ‘Not Just Crying About the Money’: Iceland and Globalisation During Boom and Crisis Chapter 10: Trust and Financial Services: The Impact of Increasing Digitalisation and the Financial Crisis Chapter 4: Trust: Some Questions from a Layperson Chapter 12: Restoring Trust Through Improved Corporate Governance and Adherence to Gender Quotas
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1