[Public Opinion Briefing 50-1] Changes in Trust and Influence of Key Power Institutions Over Five Years

[Public Opinion Briefing 50] A Five-Year Comprehensive Evaluation of Trust and Influence in 25 Korean Power Institutions

1. Changes in Trust and Influence of Key Power Institutions Over Five Years

2. Analysis of Influence and Trust by Institutional Ideological Orientation

3. 2009 Basic Analysis Results

Key Power Institutions: Influence Grows, but Trust Weakens

Institutions Representing the Public (Political Parties/Interest Groups/Civic Groups): Influence Stagnates, and Trust Declines



Over the past five years of surveying power institutions, interesting trends in public perception of their influence and trust have been observed. The most prominent characteristic is the widening gap between the influence and trust of power institutions in our society. In the first survey in 2005, the average trust was about 0.55 points lower than the average influence; by this year's survey, the difference had widened to 0.8 points. Notably, while the average influence of power institutions shows an upward trend since 2007, trust has actually declined. In other words, power institutions have become stronger, but public trust in them has decreased.

[Figure 1] Trends in Average Influence/Trust Across 25 Power Institutions

*Surveys covered 23 institutions from 2005-2007; in 2008-2009, 25 institutions were surveyed (including the Board of Audit and Inspection and the Liberty Forward Party).

The prosecution stands out as the institution showing the most significant gap between influence and trust. Since 2006, the prosecution's influence has continuously increased. Particularly, according to this year's survey results, while the influence of all 25 institutions increased by only 0.05 points compared to last year, the prosecution's influence rose by a substantial 0.49 points. In contrast to this strengthening influence, the prosecution's trust has been on a downward trend since the launch of the Lee Myung-bak administration. This year's survey revealed the largest gap among all surveyed institutions, with a difference of 2.2 points between influence and trust.

Comparing the 2007 and this year's surveys, the trust scores for national power institutions, including the Blue House, decreased by 0.39 points for the prosecution, while the overall decrease for national power institutions was 0.09 points. Considering the controversial investigations by the prosecution, such as the probe into former President Roh and the disclosure of emails, these results offer significant implications.

[Figure 2] Trends in the Prosecution's Influence and Trust

Perception of the Blue House's influence has surged since 2008. Compared to the latter half of the Roh Moo-hyun administration (2006-2007), the Blue House's influence score this year has increased by 1.3 points. However, its trust has not risen proportionally. In fact, compared to the 2008 survey, the Blue House's trust slightly declined in the 2009 survey. Since the launch of the Lee Myung-bak administration, the Blue House's trust score has not surpassed the 4.34 points recorded in the first survey in 2005. While people perceive the Blue House's influence as having grown, it appears to have not yet fully captured public confidence.

[Figure 3] Trends in the Blue House's Influence and Trust

The most serious problem consistently identified across the five years of surveys lies within the political sphere. Political parties rank at the very bottom among all power groups in both influence and trust. While the average influence for the entire surveyed group ranges between 5.2-5.6 points, political parties scored in the early 4-point range. Similarly, with the average trust for the entire group between 4.6-5.1 points, political parties scored in the late 3-point range, showing a significant difference from other groups. This indicates that political parties are not only failing to fulfill their roles but are also becoming objects of extreme distrust. This situation highlights the fragility of the representative function of political parties and the emergence of 'street politics'.

Another interesting point is that trust in political parties varies depending on whether they are in power. When a party holds power, its trust tends to decline, while when it is in opposition, its trust tends to increase. The Millennium Democratic Party's predecessor, Uri Party, which was the ruling party in the past, saw a surge in trust after losing the presidential election in 2007. Conversely, the Grand National Party maintained high trust until 2007 when it was in opposition, but its trust sharply declined thereafter. This demonstrates that trust in political parties is closely linked to public evaluation of the president. This is a noteworthy aspect in terms of realizing 'responsible politics' through political parties.

[Figure 4] Trends in Influence of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party [Figure 5] Trends in Trust of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party