[CSR Monitor Vol.4-2] Determinants of Anti-Corporate Sentiment: The Influence of CSR and Political Variables

1. Is CSR a Solution to Corporate Distrust?

Large corporations, once lauded as the engines of South Korea's economic growth, began to be perceived as subjects of economic restructuring and reform following democratization and the 1997 IMF financial crisis (Lee Jae-youl 2011, Jeong Han-wool 2013). Figure 1 shows the changes in trust regarding the social role of large corporations in CSR international perception surveys conducted by Globescan since the 2000s. In the 2001 survey alone, only about 35% of the public believed that large corporations were contributing to solving social problems, before and after the emergence of Roh Moo-hyun in 2002. During the Roh Moo-hyun administration, the conservative camp strongly criticized that anti-corporate policies or the political climate of targeting chaebols were stifling corporate activities ("Is there really no anti-corporate sentiment?" Maeil Business Newspaper 2005/09/28; "Targeting Samsung is the Participatory Government's Policy to Expand Anti-Corporate Sentiment," OhmyNews 2005/09/28). Conversely, the Lee Myung-bak administration, which initially promoted business-friendly policies, faced strong backlash from the progressive camp and the opposition parties ("President Lee, 'Anti-corporate sentiment is very bad'" EBN 2012/02/22). Indeed, ideological conflict in South Korean society regarding large corporations consistently manifests between the conservative stance emphasizing the market and the progressive stance emphasizing state intervention and regulation. Therefore, anti-corporate sentiment could be understood as being influenced by the political sector's policies toward large corporations or its strategies for ideological mobilization (Kang Won-taek 2010).

Amid growing concerns about ideological and political conflicts surrounding industries and corporations regarding anti-corporate sentiment, the discussion of CSR introduced in South Korea has acted as a factor that has led to stronger interest and expectations in CSR from both corporate and societal perspectives. This led to the argument that strengthening communication between CSR activities and corporations and their stakeholders not only contributes to improving corporate reputation and credibility, ultimately expanding economic benefits, but also serves as an effective crisis management tool. Most large corporations have established dedicated CSR departments and personnel, investing considerable resources in social contribution activities or CSR activities. In fact, corporations themselves believe that CSR contributes to resolving distrust and enhancing their image (Federation of Korean Industries 2009, Ko Dong-soo 2011). Furthermore, empirical research findings are increasingly showing that CSR activities and related communication efforts contribute to strengthening corporate image, brand, purchase intention, and attitudes toward corporations (Cha Hee-won & Park Soo-jung 2009, Han Eun-kyung & Ryu Eun-ah 2003). In other words, CSR has acquired an image as a solution for restoring corporate trust.

In Figure 1, trust in large corporations has continuously improved until 2012 (Lee Jae-youl 2011, Hong Ki-hyun 2011). This period saw a rapid increase in CSR-related expenditures, particularly by large corporations, which can be interpreted as supporting the effect of CSR in enhancing corporate trust. However, this inference has a problem: it does not sufficiently control for political and social factors, which are strong alternative hypotheses when examining the impact of CSR on corporate trust. That is, most studies examine the impact of corporate CSR activities or communication activities on corporate image or trust without excluding political and social variables. There is a scarcity of research that has examined the impact of these factors on corporate trust under conditions where the influence of each factor is controlled. Therefore, it is questionable whether CSR will exert a significant influence in improving corporate trust even when considering partisan attitudes toward political parties and ideological orientations.

Furthermore, questions are being raised about the positive effects of CSR in improving corporate distrust and anti-corporate sentiment because, despite continuous CSR spending by corporations, anti-corporate sentiment has intensified, and political factors are being highlighted as the cause of this change (Jeong Han-wool 2013). Through the general elections and presidential election in 2012, the 'economic democratization' agenda emerged prominently in South Korean society, and the issue of distrust in large corporations resurfaced. In fact, in a survey conducted in January 2013 by Globescan, the East Asia Institute, and the Social Enterprise Research Center, trust in large corporations dropped to 36%, the same level as in 2002. The sharp decline in trust in large corporations in 2013, after a period of steady improvement since the mid-2000s, can be confirmed by other data. The Corporate Favorability Index (CFI) conducted by the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry fell to its lowest level since the 2008 financial crisis in the 2013 survey (Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry 2013). The Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry evaluated that "due to the economic democratization issue that has been continuously raised since the latter half of last year, anti-corporate sentiment has intensified among the public, making it difficult for corporate favorability to find upward momentum" ("One month after the launch of the Park Geun-hye administration... nothing has been decided or improved," Asia Economy 2013/03/25).

It is ironic that while discussions in reality focus on political and social factors as the main drivers of anti-corporate sentiment, CSR research and discussions do not consider political factors. To what extent does the political-ideological conflict surrounding anti-corporate sentiment exist, and can CSR be an effective means of resolving corporate distrust even when considering political and social factors? To answer these questions, empirical analysis is needed from a more comprehensive perspective, examining whether political variables influence corporate trust, along with public perception of corporate CSR activities.

Figure 1 _ Changes in Trust Regarding the Social Role of Large Corporations (%)

Data: Globescan International CSR Survey (2001-2007); Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

2. Factors Affecting Corporate Trust

This study will examine the influence of (1) control variables: individual socioeconomic background variables (social and economic status), (2) CSR perception, and (3) political orientation on corporate trust. Existing research indicates that perceptions of corporate regulation or attitudes toward corporate policy are influenced by individual socioeconomic status, such as generation, education level, and income (Kang Won-taek 2010; Lee Hyun-chul 2005). Therefore, although not the central focus of this study, these factors need to be considered as control variables when examining the impact of CSR factors or political factors on trust in large corporations.

Regarding the effect of CSR in mitigating anti-corporate sentiment, it can be inferred that the higher the efficacy and engagement with corporate social responsibility activities, the stronger the trust in corporations (Orlitzky et al. 2003; Park Soo-jung & Cha Hee-won 2009; Lee Eun-young 2011). Conversely, this study will focus on verifying the constraining influence of political factors on individuals' trust in large corporations. Attitudes toward large corporations have also been a significant subject of ideological debate and political division. Progressive parties tend to favor corporate regulation, while conservative parties advocate for deregulation and a favorable attitude toward corporations (Kang Won-taek 2010; Lee Nae-young 2011). If political ideology and party affiliation as political variables influence trust in large corporations, it is expected that individuals with conservative ideological orientations and supporters of conservative parties will be relatively favorable toward large corporations, while those with progressive ideological orientations and supporters of progressive parties will have a relatively strong distrust of large corporations. Section 2 will describe the extent to which these three dimensions of variables influence corporate trust through correlation analysis (cross-tabulation).

Socioeconomic Background Factors (SES Factors)

First, let us examine the influence of socioeconomic background variables as control variables on trust in large corporations. The focus of this paper is to examine the impact of CSR factors and political factors on trust in large corporations. Generally, attitudes toward socioeconomic issues and political disputes are influenced by an individual's socioeconomic status (SES factors) and social group identity related to their group and class affiliation (Campbell et al. 1960; Eikson and Tedin 2005). Applying this logic to the realm of large corporations, one can hypothesize that attitudes toward corporations are determined not by a rational evaluation of corporate activities and products/services, but by the interests of one's socioeconomic group or collective psychology. Socioeconomic group variables that can influence attitudes toward corporations include gender, education level, age (generation), and income class.

Let's examine the variance in trust in large corporations by gender and education level (measured on a scale of 1: Very Trust, 2: Generally Trust, 3: Do Not Trust Much, 4: Do Not Trust at All) in Figure 2. By gender, trust in large corporations is generally similar between men and women. The proportion of women and men who distrust large corporations (those who chose 3 or 4) did not differ significantly, and the chi-square test results also showed no statistically significant difference in trust in large corporations by gender (p > 0.1). By education level, trust in large corporations is relatively stronger among those with lower education levels (middle school or below), while the proportion of respondents who distrust large corporations is higher among those with high school diplomas or higher education. Notably, the chi-square test results for the response distribution of trust in large corporations by education level show a significant difference at the 95% confidence level, confirming that differences in education level can be a potential factor influencing the cleavage in attitudes toward large corporations.

Figure 2 _ Trust in Large Corporations by Gender and Education Level (%)

Chi-square test for Gender X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=5.006, df=3, p=0.171

Chi-square test for Education Level X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=17.642, df=6, p=0.007***

Trust in Large Corporations: 1=Very Trust, 2=Generally Trust, 3=Do Not Trust Much, 4=Do Not Trust at All.

Data: Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

In Figure 3, the correlation between trust in large corporations by generation and income class is not clearly evident. First, by generation, older generations (50s-60s) show relatively higher trust in large corporations, while younger generations show relatively stronger distrust. However, it is noteworthy that distrust in large corporations is highest among those in their 30s compared to those in their 20s or 40s. While political and social issues often show the highest levels of political distrust and social dissatisfaction among those in their 30s, and they tend to exhibit stronger progressive tendencies than those in their 20s, it is interesting to find a similar pattern in their perceptions of large corporations. Although it may be too early to generalize anti-corporate sentiment among those in their 30s, further research will be needed to investigate the consolidation of this attitude and its causes. Meanwhile, regarding income class, the lower-income bracket (household income below 2 million KRW per month) shows higher trust in corporations, whereas consistent differences in perception are difficult to ascertain across income brackets above 2 million KRW per month.

Overall, individuals with lower education levels, older generations, and lower income levels tend to have higher trust in large corporations, while those with higher education levels, younger generations (especially those in their 30s), and higher income levels tend to have lower trust. The low-education, older-generation, low-income group tends to strongly support conservative parties like Saenuri Party in the political sphere, while the high-education, younger-generation, high-income group tends to exhibit strong support for opposition parties like the Democratic Party or progressive political stances (Kang Won-taek 2010). These perceptual gaps in trust in large corporations based on socioeconomic background suggest that they may reflect the influence of political orientation.

Figure 3 _ Trust in Large Corporations by Generation and Income Class (%)

Chi-square test for Generation X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=32.286, df=12, p=0.001***

Chi-square test for Income Class X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=17.642, df=12, p=0.004***

Trust in Large Corporations: 1=Very Trust, 2=Generally Trust, 3=Do Not Trust Much, 4=Do Not Trust at All.

Data: Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

CSR Perception and Trust in Large Corporations

Meanwhile, the impact of CSR on trust in large corporations will be examined by focusing on how trust in large corporations differs based on CSR efficacy and the evaluation of CSR activities' outcomes. If CSR influences corporate trust as the CSR discourse suggests, it is hypothesized that respondents with greater confidence in their ability to influence corporate CSR activities and those who feel the outputs of CSR activities are sufficient will have higher trust in large corporations.

The cross-tabulation results are shown in Figure 4. Let's examine the changes in trust in large corporations according to CSR efficacy (positive evaluation of the statement 'I can influence corporations to strengthen their social responsibility activities'). The stronger the CSR efficacy or interest (respondents who answered 'very strong' + 'somewhat strong'), and conversely, the lower the CSR efficacy, the higher the proportion of respondents who distrust large corporations. This supports the traditional view of CSR that engagement with CSR positively influences perceptions of corporations (Lee Eun-young 2011).

Furthermore, it can be seen that trust in large corporations is also influenced by the evaluation of domestic companies' CSR activities (measured by agreement with the statement 'Currently, South Korea is sufficiently supplied with products or services produced by companies considering their social and environmental responsibilities'). The more positive the perception of corporate social responsibility management, such as companies sufficiently supplying products manufactured responsibly, the higher the proportion of respondents who trust large corporations (58.48% of those who answered 'very sufficient' trusted large corporations). Conversely, the more negative the perception, the overwhelmingly higher the proportion of respondents who distrusted corporations (only 13.78% of those who answered 'very insufficient' trusted large corporations). A chi-square test to determine if this difference is statistically significant confirmed a statistically significant result at or above the 95% confidence level. This implies that CSR perception has a high correlation with trust in large corporations, even when controlling for other variables that may influence trust in large corporations.

Figure 4 _ Trust in Large Corporations by CSR Efficacy and Evaluation (%)

Chi-square test for CSR Efficacy X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=27.801, df=12, p=0.006***

Chi-square test for CSR Supply Evaluation X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=29.788, df=12, p=0.003***

Trust in Large Corporations: 1=Very Trust, 2=Generally Trust, 3=Do Not Trust Much, 4=Do Not Trust at All.

Data: Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

Political Variables: Party Affiliation, Political Ideology, Trust in Government

The political variables emphasized in this paper examine the impact on trust in large corporations, focusing on party affiliation, political ideology, and attitudes toward government. The primary determinants of an individual's political attitudes are party affiliation and political ideology (Kang Won-taek 2010; Jeong Han-wool 2012; Campbell et al. 1960; Lewis-Beck et al. 2008). While there are various debates regarding which factor is the ultimate determinant of attitude, party affiliation and ideological orientation are known to determine an individual's position on economic and social issues, and they have a significant impact on the political and social perceptions of South Korean citizens. Generally, it is understood that those who support conservative parties and hold conservative ideological orientations have pro-corporate attitudes, while those who support progressive parties and hold progressive ideological identities have anti-corporate orientations.

So, to what extent are South Korean citizens and consumers influenced by political factors when trusting corporations? In other words, let's examine if there are distinct perceptual gaps in trust in large corporations based on party affiliation and ideological orientation. First, in Figure 5, by party affiliation, the proportion of those who trust large corporations is 48.82% for Saenuri Party supporters, which is higher than for independents, Democratic Party supporters, and supporters of minor progressive parties (Unified Progressive Party, 진보신당). Conversely, the proportion of those who distrust large corporations is very high among Democratic Party supporters (72.95%) and progressive party supporters (76.93%). By ideological orientation (self-assessed ideological position), the proportion of conservatives who trust large corporations is relatively high, and the proportion who distrust them is relatively low. However, the difference in trust levels by ideological orientation was not statistically significant based on the chi-square test results.

Figure 5 _ Trust in Large Corporations by Party Affiliation and Ideological Orientation (%)

Chi-square test for Party Affiliation X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=42.210, df=12, p=0.000***

Chi-square test for Ideological Orientation X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=4.247, df=6, p=0.643

Trust in Large Corporations: 1=Very Trust, 2=Generally Trust, 3=Do Not Trust Much, 4=Do Not Trust at All.

Data: Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

Meanwhile, attitudes toward government can also be a variable that influences trust in large corporations. Traditionally, attitudes toward corporations have often been perceived as inversely related to attitudes toward government. This approach frames the relationship as a dichotomy between government-led versus market (corporate)-led initiatives. The left side of Figure 6 illustrates this traditional framework. Progressive ideologies generally favor government regulation of corporations, while conservative ideologies emphasize small government and corporate autonomy. Indeed, the power dynamics were understood as government-centric in the relationship between corporations, politics (government), and civil society. The activation of CSR discussions reflects the reality of shrinking government roles in solving social problems and expanding corporate roles. As government influence diminishes and corporate influence grows, the traditional dichotomous view of government and corporations has led to debates between those advocating for government-centric regulation in Europe and those emphasizing voluntary corporate efforts, as in the United States (Ko Dong-soo 2011).

Regardless of the stance taken, ideological orientation determines preference for either government or corporations, but both perspectives share the commonality of understanding the relationship between government and corporations as a dichotomy at opposite ends. However, new perspectives that deviate from this dichotomous view are also gaining attention. As shown in the right side of Figure 5, arguments are being made that the interface between government and corporations is expanding in the realm of social problem-solving compared to the past, focusing on the size of the contact area. From this perspective, the relationship between corporations and politics (government) can be understood not as adversarial, but as a relationship of stakeholders and partners collaborating to solve public issues. The relationship between government and corporations is not a zero-sum adversarial one, but a cooperative and complementary one. In this case, trust in large corporations should be understood not as inversely proportional, but as directly proportional to trust in government (Marrewijk 2003; Tullberg 2004).

In Figure 7, the relationship between trust in government and trust in large corporations shows a high positive correlation, unlike the traditional perception of an adversarial relationship between corporations and government (Tullberg 2004). Instead of the dichotomous thinking where distrust in government leads to favoring corporations, and vice versa, it is perceived that the more one trusts large corporations, the more one trusts the government, and distrust in large corporations leads to distrust in government. In summary, while perceptions of corporations vary depending on party affiliation and ideological orientation, they exhibit a complementary relationship with attitudes toward government. This is a significant finding, as it demonstrates that, contrary to previous interpretations that viewed the government-corporate relationship as adversarial, a majority of South Korean citizens perceive the government-corporate relationship not as an either/or dichotomy, but as a collaborative one.

Figure 6 _ Conceptual Diagram of the Relationship Between State-Corporation-Civil Society (Marrewijk 2003)

Figure 7 _ Changes in Trust in Large Corporations According to Trust in Government (%)

Chi-square test for Trust in Government X Trust in Large Corporations: χ2=164.591, df=9, p=0.000***

Trust in Large Corporations: 1=Very Trust, 2=Generally Trust, 3=Do Not Trust Much, 4=Do Not Trust at All.

Data: Globescan, East Asia Institute, Social Enterprise Research Center

3. Verification of Determinants of Trust in Large Corporations: Ordinal Regression Model

Correlation analysis has limitations in verifying the explanatory power of variables because it only shows the presence or absence of correlation, not causality, without controlling for the influence of other variables. Therefore, in Chapter 3, we will use an ordinal regression model (Polytomous Universal Model) to more precisely verify whether the factors examined previously actually influence trust in large corporations. That is, we will determine whether CSR has a significant effect even when political and social factors are controlled.

Analysis Model

Ordinal regression is a statistical analysis method that verifies whether various independent variables have a significant explanatory power on the dependent variable, while controlling for other variables, when the dependent variable is an ordinal variable. Given that the dependent variable in this study, trust in large corporations, is an ordinal variable measured on a scale of 1. Very Trust, 2. Generally Trust, 3. Do Not Trust Much, 4. Do Not Trust at All, an ordinal regression model is applied.

As independent variables, CSR factors include CSR efficacy (1=Very Strong to 4=Very Weak) and CSR activity evaluation (1=Very Sufficient to 4=Very Insufficient) variables examined previously. In addition, the level of ethical consumption behavior of respondents ('I only purchase products and services from ethical and responsible companies,' 1=Strongly Agree to 4=Strongly Disagree) is also included as a CSR factor, as it is believed to influence individuals' trust in large corporations. Political factors included in the analysis model are trust in government for solving social problems (1=Very Trust to 4=Very Distrust), ideological orientation, and party affiliation. Among these, ideological orientation and party affiliation are categorical variables, so they were created as dummy variables with progressives and progressive party supporters as the reference group for comparison. Socioeconomic background factors as control variables include gender, generation (1=20s to 5=60s and above), education level (1=Middle school or below to 3=University or above), and household income (1=2 million KRW or less to 5=5 million KRW or more). Variables other than gender and political variables were adjusted so that lower values would strengthen trust in large corporations and higher values would strengthen distrust, consistent with the dependent variable.

Analysis Results

The ordinal regression analysis results table shows that out of a total sample of 500, 412 individuals were included in the actual analysis after excluding missing values. The model fit test results are statistically significant, and the model's explanatory power is 24.1% of the change in the dependent variable based on Cox and Snell Pseudo R2, and 12.4% based on McFadden R-squared. Key analysis results reveal the following characteristics. First, socioeconomic background variables were not statistically significant in their influence on trust in large corporations when considering CSR effects and political attitude variables. This result lends weight to the inference that the correlation between socioeconomic background factors and corporate trust observed earlier is actually mediated by third causal factors such as political attitude factors.

Meanwhile, the CSR effect, which has been highlighted in previous research, also showed no significant impact on trust in large corporations for all three variables measuring attitudes toward CSR, based on the 95% confidence level. In this study, (*) indicates statistical significance at the 90% confidence level, (**) at the 95% confidence level, and (***) at the 99% confidence level. However, for the CSR evaluation variable, the impact on trust in large corporations was statistically significant only when the confidence level was relaxed to 90%. In other words, unlike previous studies claiming that CSR activities have a positive impact on corporate image and reputation, the effect of CSR in improving trust in large corporations is marginal when political factors are controlled. This can be considered the most significant implication of this study.

More specifically, the positive direction of the coefficients indicates that the more positive the CSR efficacy and evaluation of CSR outputs, the higher the trust in large corporations, and the more negative, the greater the distrust. However, the CSR consumption behavior variable, although not statistically significant, shows a negative sign, suggesting that CSR consumption behavior may weaken rather than strengthen trust in corporations. This implies that consumer behavior in response to corporate CSR activities may be motivated by negative intentions.

The most important result among the analysis findings is that, as hypothesized in this study, the variables that exert the most direct and powerful influence on trust in large corporations are political attitude factors. Judging by the coefficient estimates (B) and the absolute value of the Wald coefficients, the political variables have larger coefficients than the CSR factors. Furthermore, based on statistical significance, the influence of political variables was stronger than that of other variables among the indicators included in this analysis model. Examining the direction of influence, greater distrust in government leads to greater distrust in large corporations (+), and distrust in large corporations is lower among conservatives than among progressives (-). Also, trust in large corporations is higher among Saenuri Party supporters and independents compared to progressive party supporters. This demonstrates the validity of the interpretation that progressive orientations lead to anti-corporate attitudes, while conservative respondents exhibit pro-corporate attitudes, as hypothesized in this study. However, no significant difference in perceptions of trust in large corporations was found between progressive party supporters and Democratic Party supporters, or between progressives and moderates.

Meanwhile, comparing the absolute values of the coefficient estimates (B) and Wald coefficients, the influence of government factors is greater than that of party affiliation or ideological orientation. Particularly noteworthy is the direction of the influence of trust in government on trust in large corporations. A (-) sign indicates an adversarial relationship between government and corporations, while a (+) sign indicates an interdependent relationship. The results of this analysis, with a (+) sign for the coefficient, demonstrate that higher trust in government leads to higher trust in corporations, and greater distrust in government leads to greater distrust in corporations. This result supports the interpretation, as discussed earlier, that the government-corporate relationship is perceived as interdependent rather than adversarial.

Table 1 _ Analysis Results of Determinants of Trust in Large Corporations

*p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4. Conclusion

Synthesizing the analysis results, it is found that, contrary to the claims of previous studies, the effect of corporate CSR activities in improving corporate trust is significantly weakened when political and social factors, particularly political factors, are controlled. This is the most significant finding of this study. Previous studies have overlooked political factors when verifying the relationship between CSR activities and trust and reputation in large corporations. However, when political factors are considered, the influence of socioeconomic background variables and CSR factors in explaining trust in large corporations is greatly diminished. Of course, the statistical verification results of this study should not be absolute, as the measurement indicators for CSR factors used in this study have not undergone sufficient validity and reliability testing, although the measurement indicators for political factors are highly valid and have been tested over a long period. Nevertheless, it is sufficient to show that political variables such as trust in government, party affiliation, and ideology, which have been excluded from CSR-related research thus far, must be considered in research on corporate reputation and trust due to CSR, in terms of their significance and explanatory power.

The fact that a significant portion of trust and distrust in large corporations is determined by political ideology and party affiliation means that corporate social responsibility activities are viewed through a political and ideological prism, colored by this perspective. In other words, if we accept the findings of this study that trust in corporations is largely determined by political orientation, then the effectiveness of CSR activities in alleviating and improving anti-corporate sentiment will be limited. Therefore, the expectation that CSR will help enhance a company's image and pursue tangible economic benefits may be nothing more than a rosy illusion. In essence, the results of this study highlight the need for fundamental changes in the political and ideological environment of Korean society to overcome anti-corporate sentiment. Rather than solely emphasizing consistent and sincere CSR, a shift in political culture and perception, where issues related to corporations can easily escalate into political and ideological disputes, is urgently needed.

As emphasized earlier, the fact that trust in corporations and trust in government do not move in opposite directions but are interdependent has significant political implications. In the past, political circles and the media have tended to analyze corporations and government in an adversarial, dichotomous framework. Indeed, regulation versus autonomy, or government versus market, have been the traditional axes of economic ideological debate. However, the general public and consumers are increasingly perceiving corporations and government not as adversarial but as complementary entities that need to cooperate in solving social problems. This suggests that as social problems emerge that extend beyond the scope of what government or corporations can solve alone, the perception of emphasizing mutual cooperation and shared responsibility is spreading. For corporations to gain respect and trust from the public and consumers, efforts to resolve distrust in government must be undertaken alongside their own efforts. According to the results of this study, even considering that attitudes toward corporations are heavily influenced by ideological partisanship, trust in government was confirmed as a key factor influencing trust in corporations. Therefore, moving beyond the outdated framework of corporate-led initiatives versus government-regulation-centric approaches, it is crucial to build a cooperative relationship where government and corporations jointly pursue wisdom and efforts to solve public issues. A fundamental shift in the perception of government and corporations is necessary to pave the way toward a sustainable society.

The arguments and content of this report are the personal opinions of the author and do not represent the official position of the East Asia Institute (EAI) or the Social Enterprise Research Center, which are collaborating institutions. When citing data from this report, please specify that it is from the 'GlobeScan Survey' (or 'Globescan, Social Enterprise Research Center, EAI Survey').