Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 30, No. 3: High Influence, Low Trust

Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 30: 2008 Survey on Powerful Institutions' Trust and Influence

[1] Summary of the 4th Survey on Powerful Institutions' Trust and Influence - Shin Chang-woon, Jeong Han-wool

[2] Changes in the Influence and Trust Base of Powerful Institutions and Policy Implications - Kang Won-taek

[3] Decline in Trust Reaches Concerning Levels / High Influence, Low Trust Persist - Lee Hyun-woo

Decline in Trust Reaches Concerning Levels / High Influence, Low Trust Persist

Lee Hyun-woo (Sogang University)

This year, the trend of consistently low trust relative to influence, observed since the 2005 survey, continued. The current survey shows an average influence score of 5.4 and an average trust score of 4.7. This indicates that while the influential capacity of key surveyed institutions remains high, public trust in them continues to be negative. Only 6 out of 25 institutions received trust scores above 5 points.

A notable characteristic of this year's survey results is the significant increase in institutions experiencing a decline in trust, with as many as 13 institutions showing lower trust compared to the previous year. In 2007, only 6 institutions saw a decrease in trust compared to the year before. The fact that more than half of the surveyed institutions experienced a decline in trust this year, more than double the previous year's rate, suggests a rapid erosion of institutional confidence, a fundamental element of democracy. When institutional confidence falls to critically low levels, it can lead to the weakening of representative democracy and an increased tendency for citizens to engage directly in politics.

Institutions experiencing a marked decline in trust include the New Right (-0.97), Samsung (-0.75), the Grand National Party (-0.37), the Prosecutor's Office (-0.24), and the National Tax Service (-0.2). The New Right also saw a decrease in influence (-0.12). During the Roh Moo-hyun administration, the New Right garnered public support as a critical force against progressivism. However, their failure to establish a proper role in response to the new environment under the Lee Myung-bak administration appears to be the cause of their diminished influence and trust. Furthermore, the ideological controversy sparked by the publication of 'Alternative Textbook: Korean History - Modern and Contemporary' in March also impacted the evaluation of the New Right.

Samsung's decline in trust is attributed to public outcry over issues such as the special prosecutor investigation into slush funds. Interestingly, despite the drop in trust, Samsung's influence rating was higher than in the 2006 or 2007 surveys. This suggests that the public believes the operations of the Samsung conglomerate will remain largely unaffected by the legal repercussions faced by its executives.

The Prosecutor's Office and the National Tax Service share the commonality of being institutions that directly enforce laws upon the public. The increase in influence for both institutions compared to last year, coupled with a significant decrease in trust, can be interpreted as a reflection of growing public dissatisfaction with the transparency and fairness of these bodies. The results likely reflect public disappointment stemming from incidents of corruption within the National Tax Service and suspicions surrounding investigations, including the Samsung case.

When categorized by group, the high influence (6.6) and trust (6.0) attributed to corporations, and the positive perception of the judiciary, including the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, with scores of 6.2 and 5.7 respectively on both metrics, indicate a stable fundamental environment for capitalism and democracy. However, the trust scores below 5 points for both power institutions and political parties suggest a lack of adequate representation of public will and dissatisfaction with national governance. Furthermore, the evaluation of citizen groups and interest groups with influence and trust scores below 5 points implies that the role of civil society remains insufficient compared to state power. In a pluralistic democracy that values diversity, the roles of citizen groups and interest groups, which represent individuals, should become more significant.