[Public Opinion Brief No. 107] 2011 Survey on Trust and Influence of Powerful Institutions

[Public Opinion Brief No. 107] EAI · JoongAng Ilbo Joint Project

I. Project Overview and Progress

II. Overview of 2011 Survey Results

III. Survey Results on Trust and Influence of Key Power Institutions

IV. Changes in Trust and Influence of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party

V. Progressivism and Conservatism in Trust and Influence

I. Project Overview and Progress

■ Since 2005, EAI and JoongAng Ilbo have been conducting the "Survey on Trust and Influence of Powerful Institutions," which asks the public about the trust and influence of powerful institutions in Korean society. The survey covers a total of 26 institutions, including traditional power institutions, political parties, large corporations, civic groups, interest groups, and the judiciary, and has been conducted annually since 2005, with the exception of 2010.

■ As the social structure becomes rapidly complex and diverse interests are expressed, the importance of collaborative governance systems, which emphasize the participation and deliberation of various actors involved in decision-making, is growing, shifting from a vertical government system centered on the government and the president. For a mature governance system that accurately represents the public interest, is sensitive to public opinion changes, and enables efficient policy implementation, a strong foundation of trust in influential actors participating in governance must be a prerequisite.

■ This study aims to provide empirical data for deriving policy tasks for the development of a more mature and collaborative national governance system, based on the public's assessment of the trust and influence of major power institutions in the public and private sectors that affect national governance in Korean society. It serves as an indicator to evaluate whether each institution is perceived as a national actor that better converges public opinion and is trusted by the public.

■ To facilitate comparison with previous survey results, the list of power organizations surveyed this year was kept as consistent as possible. The survey questions were designed to ask about the influence and trust of each power organization, with responses rated on a scale of 0 to 10, where 5 is considered neutral, 0 is the lowest, and 10 is the highest.

■ Given the large number of power organizations surveyed, the survey was conducted over three days, divided into three sample groups. Therefore, when interpreting the survey results, the surveyed entities differ across sample groups, making direct comparison of results from different sample groups at the individual level impossible. This necessitates careful interpretation of rankings and scores.

1. Power Organizations Surveyed

­- Political Parties: Grand National Party, Democratic Party, Democratic Labor Party, Liberty Forward Party ­

- Large Corporations: Samsung, Hyundai Motor, SK, LG ­

- Government: Blue House, Prosecutor's Office, Supreme Court, Police Agency, National Tax Service, Board of Audit and Inspection, Financial Supervisory Service, National Intelligence Service ­

- Civil Society: Federation of Korean Industries, Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union, Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations, Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice, Lawyers for a Democratic Society, People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, Federation of Korean Trade Unions, New Right ­

2. Survey Implementation

­- Sampling: Proportional quota sampling by gender, age, and region using RDD (Random Digit Dialing) ­

- Target Population: Men and women aged 19 and over nationwide ­

- Sample Size: 600 per group ­

- Sampling Error: ±4.0% at a 95% confidence level ­

- Survey Method: Telephone survey ­

- Survey Period: October 4-6 (3 days) ­

- Survey Organization: JoongAng Ilbo Research Team

3. Participating Researchers (In alphabetical order by Korean surname) ­

Kang Won-taek (Seoul National University) · Shin Chang-woon (JoongAng Ilbo) · Lee Hyun-woo (Sogang University) · Jeong Won-chil (EAI) · Jeong Han-wool (EAI)

II. Overview of 2011 Survey Results

Jeong Won-chil (EAI)

[Table 1] 2011 Survey Results on Trust and Influence of Powerful Institutions

* The Financial Supervisory Service is a newly added institution in this year's survey.

■ Similar to 2009, large corporations continued to show strength in the trust survey results this year. Hyundai Motor ranked first with 5.58 points, and Samsung ranked second with 6.21 points. SK ranked third with 6.04 points, and LG ranked fifth with 5.87 points.

■ Trust in the judiciary also remained at a relatively high level. The Constitutional Court ranked fourth with 5.89 points, and the Supreme Court ranked sixth with 5.57 points.

■ The weakening of trust in national power institutions was also evident. The National Tax Service (4.99 points), the Police Agency (4.97 points), and the Board of Audit and Inspection (4.93 points) all scored above the overall average trust score of 4.78. However, the Blue House, the National Intelligence Service, the Prosecutor's Office, and the Financial Supervisory Service all scored below the average trust score.

■ Trust in civil society organizations mostly remained in the lower-middle range, with significant score variations. Among civil society and interest groups, the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) received the highest trust score, but it was still below the overall average at 4.66 points. The Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun) scored 4.54 points, People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy scored 4.43 points, and the Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations scored 4.37 points. The Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice and the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union followed, with the Federation of Korean Trade Unions and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions scoring the lowest among the surveyed institutions at 4.16 and 4.15 points, respectively.

■ Trust scores for political parties were all in the lower ranks. The Democratic Party ranked 17th with 4.41 points, still below the overall average. The Grand National Party scored 4.16 points, the Democratic Labor Party 3.99 points, and the Liberty Forward Party 3.67 points.

■ Consequently, large corporations, the judiciary, and government power institutions primarily formed the upper and middle ranks in terms of trust, while civil society organizations and political parties occupied the middle and lower ranks.

■ In terms of influence, Samsung ranked first with 7.18 out of a possible 10.00 points. Hyundai Motor, another large corporation, ranked second with 6.85 points. SK (6.54 points) and LG (6.30 points) ranked third and sixth, respectively, indicating the continued dominance of large corporations in terms of influence.

■ The judiciary can also be classified as influential organizations. The Constitutional Court (6.48 points) and the Supreme Court (6.29 points) ranked fourth and sixth, respectively. The influence of key national power institutions remained significant in this year's survey. The Prosecutor's Office and the Police Agency, followed by the National Tax Service, the Blue House, the Board of Audit and Inspection, and the Financial Supervisory Service, all scored above the overall average influence score of 5.48 points.

■ Civil society organizations, which mediate between citizens and the state, were ranked low again this year. Only the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) scored above the average with 5.55 points. The Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union, the Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations, the Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice, Lawyers for a Democratic Society, People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, the Federation of Korean Trade Unions, and the New Right all scored below the average.

■ The rankings and scores for political parties remained in the middle to lower range. With the exception of the Grand National Party, which ranked 14th with 5.52 points, the Democratic Party (4.80 points), the Democratic Labor Party (4.14 points), and the Liberty Forward Party (3.73 points) were all in the middle to bottom ranks.

■ Comparing trust and influence reveals several noteworthy points. Firstly, no institution scored higher in trust than in influence. As shown in [Figure 1] below, the positions representing institutions with high trust (↑) but low influence (↓) are empty.

■ Consequently, as indicated by the overall average trust score of 4.78 and the overall average influence score of 5.48, the trust in powerful institutions in Korean society has not kept pace with the assessment of their power. This also implies that public trust in these powerful institutions is low.

■ It is also important to note institutions that show significant differences between trust and influence when considering rankings rather than scores. Rankings indicate the relative order of the surveyed power institutions, thus comparing rankings signifies relative positions. In fact, there are cases where trust rankings are higher compared to influence rankings.

■ This is primarily observed among civil society organizations. For Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun), the influence ranking was 20th, but the trust ranking rose eight places to 12th. People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and the Federation of Korean Industries also saw their trust rankings improve compared to their influence rankings. People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy ranked 21st in influence but 16th in trust, while the FKI improved its rank from 13th to 10th.

■ Conversely, there are cases where trust rankings have fallen compared to influence rankings. Notable examples include the Prosecutor's Office, the Grand National Party, and the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union. The Prosecutor's Office ranked 5th in influence but plummeted to 14th in trust, a drop of nine places from its trust ranking of 12th last year. The Grand National Party fell from 14th in influence to 21st in trust, and the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union dropped from 16th to 20th. For these institutions, public trust appears to be lower than the power they are perceived to hold.

[Figure 1] Distribution of Survey Results on Trust and Influence of Powerful Institutions (Scores)

III. Survey Results on Trust and Influence of Key Power Institutions

Lee Hyun-woo (Sogang University)

- The persistent gap between trust and influence

- Continued distrust in key national power institutions amidst the dominance of large corporations

- Marked decline for organizations emphasizing ideology

■ In the 2011 Survey on Trust and Influence of Powerful Institutions, large corporations consistently ranked highest in both trust and influence. Samsung ranked first in influence and second in trust, while Hyundai Motor ranked first in trust and second in influence. Since the first survey in 2005, large corporations, led by Samsung, have consistently occupied the top positions in both metrics. Trust in large corporations is significantly higher than trust in state institutions.

■ The institution with the largest gap between influence and trust was the Prosecutor's Office. In this survey, the Prosecutor's Office ranked 5th in influence but only 14th in trust, a further decline from its 12th place ranking in trust last year. The significant disparity between the Prosecutor's Office's influence and trust has been an ongoing phenomenon since 2007. This implies that while the Prosecutor's Office wields considerable power, there are widespread negative perceptions regarding the fairness of its exercise. The trust score for the Prosecutor's Office has never surpassed the overall average trust score for all institutions.

■ The overall average influence score was 5.48 points, showing little change compared to 5.42 points in the 2009 survey. The overall average trust score slightly increased to 4.78 points this year from 4.62 points in 2009. However, with 20 out of 26 surveyed institutions receiving trust scores below 5.00, indicating negative evaluations, it cannot be said that the situation has improved.

■ Comparing the overall average influence and trust scores, the average influence is 0.7 points higher. However, no institution scored higher in influence than in trust. These results suggest that the public does not recognize the legitimacy of the surveyed institutions' influence on politics and society to the extent of their perceived power.

■ Notable institutions experiencing a decrease in influence include the Blue House and the Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations. The Blue House's influence ranking dropped four places to 10th compared to the survey two years ago, and its evaluation score (6.08) also decreased by 0.14 points. While these figures are higher than those for the Roh Moo-hyun administration in 2006 (ranking 14th, score 4.93) the year before the 17th presidential election, its influence ranking falling below that of the Prosecutor's Office, the Police Agency, and the National Tax Service, all under the President's command, cannot be considered normal.

■ Meanwhile, the Democratic Party's influence has risen five places compared to two years ago, and its trust score has surpassed that of the Grand National Party, which is noteworthy, although not ranked highly. Conversely, the influence of organizations emphasizing ideology has diminished. The decline in influence rankings for both the progressive Lawyers for a Democratic Society (Minbyun) and the conservative New Right indirectly suggests that the public's political dissatisfaction is not primarily ideological.

■ For the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), which was included in the survey for the first time this year, its influence is similar to that of the Board of Audit and Inspection, but its credibility is much lower. Although it received attention due to several financial incidents such as the non-performing savings bank issue this year, the public believes that it did not properly perform its duties and powers. As a result, among national institutions, the FSS shows the largest gap between influence and credibility, second only to the prosecution service.

■ The larger the gap between influence and credibility, the more prevalent public distrust is. The institutions with the largest gaps, excluding the Grand National Party, are all state institutions. There are six institutions where the score difference between the two assessments is more than 1.00 point. These six institutions are the prosecution service, the Blue House, the Grand National Party, the FSS, the police, and the National Tax Service, four of which are agencies responsible for audit functions. Although trust is essential for the nature of their work, their law enforcement credibility was rated much lower than their influence. This is because the partiality of these institutions has been pointed out several times.

[Table 2] Gap between Influence and Credibility of Key Power Institutions (Points)

■ The most concerning aspect of the results from five identical surveys over the past six years is that the gap between influence and credibility has not narrowed. While influence has slightly increased over time, credibility has remained largely unchanged. In 2007, the difference between the two measures was 0.45 points, which increased to 0.80 points in 2009 and 0.70 points this year. The fact that the gap is larger in state institutions than in large corporations with significant influence or civic groups with less influence is a more serious problem.

■ As civil society develops, autonomy in each domain increases. Consequently, the influence of interest groups and civic organizations, as well as economic groups, grows, while the influence of state institutions relatively diminishes. However, trust cannot be built without the efforts of each institution. Institutions that are consistently rated low in credibility will inevitably see their influence wane in the long run or face difficulties in exercising power due to public distrust. Therefore, they must strive to enhance public trust by shedding the old ways of political partiality or focusing solely on protecting their own organizational interests.

[Figure 2] Average Influence and Credibility Since 2005 (Points)

IV. Changes in Credibility and Influence of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party

Kang Won-taek (Seoul National University)

- Declining Influence: Grand National Party 5.22, Democratic Party 4.80

- Reversed Credibility: Grand National Party 4.19, Democratic Party 4.41

■ The trends in the changes of influence and credibility of political parties over the six surveys conducted from 2005 to the present year show interesting characteristics. First, regarding the trend of influence, the Grand National Party has generally remained in the 5-point range without significant changes.

■ In contrast, the trend in the perception of influence regarding the Democratic Party (including the Uri Party) is very interesting. In the first survey in 2005, the then-ruling Uri Party scored 4.83, and the opposition Grand National Party scored 5.12, with a relatively small gap.

■ However, the Democratic Party's influence score dropped to 3.55 in 2006 and further to 3.34 in 2007, widening the gap with the Grand National Party considerably. 2007 was the year of the presidential election, and the perceived difference in influence between the two parties was at its largest.

■ Since 2008, however, the perceived difference in influence between the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party began to narrow. In 2008, the Democratic Party's score rose significantly to 4.34 compared to the previous year, and in the 2011 survey, the gap in influence between the two parties converged for the first time since 2005.

[Figure 3] Changes in Influence of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party (Points)

■ In terms of credibility, the trend of change between the two parties is even more dramatic. While in 2005 the Grand National Party scored 4.56 and the Uri Party scored 3.98, relatively close, in 2006 the perception of the Grand National Party's credibility remained largely unchanged, whereas the Uri Party's score dropped significantly to 2.98, a trend that continued into 2007.

■ Amidst the presidential election competition in 2007, the Uri Party was perceived by the public to have a significant gap with the Grand National Party in both influence and credibility. However, this situation changed considerably after the Grand National Party came into power in 2008.

■ In the 2008 survey, the credibility score for the Grand National Party decreased to 4.11, while the Democratic Party's score increased significantly to 3.96. The gap in credibility ratings between the two parties narrowed compared to 2005. In the 2009 survey, the Democratic Party slightly surpassed the Grand National Party in perceived credibility, with scores of 3.65 for the Democratic Party and 3.62 for the Grand National Party.

■ In the 2011 survey, although the credibility scores of both parties increased, the Democratic Party surpassed the Grand National Party by a larger margin. The scores were 4.41 for the Democratic Party and 4.18 for the Grand National Party.

[Figure 4] Changes in Credibility of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party (Points)

■ As can be seen from the changes in the survey results for the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party, the gap between the influence and credibility of the Grand National Party and the Democratic Party (Uri Party) showed significant changes around 2008, with the launch of the Lee Myung-bak administration. Prior to this, the ruling Uri Party tended to lag far behind the opposition Grand National Party, but after the Grand National Party took power in 2008, the opposition Democratic Party's influence and credibility scores began to rise significantly.

■ This could be an expression of disappointment with policy implementation after taking power, or it could be the result of a check-and-balance mechanism at play. What is noteworthy here is that the gap in perceived influence and credibility between the two parties was largest at the time of the regime change in 2007.

■ The fact that the gap in influence between the two parties has narrowed in this year's survey, and moreover, that the opposition party leads the ruling party in credibility, can be seen as a significant shift in public sentiment ahead of next year's general and presidential elections.

V. Conservatism and Progressivism in Credibility and Influence

Jeong Won-chil (EAI)

- Conservative Influence Scores: High scores but a declining trend

- Progressive Influence Scores: Narrowed the gap with conservatives, but with significant fluctuations

■ The depth of distrust in Korean society encompasses both progressives and conservatives. In both progressive and conservative camps, influence scores were higher than credibility scores. This indicates that the public believes that both progressives and conservatives have not earned sufficient trust relative to their power. This phenomenon is not limited to the political sphere; it applies to both interest groups and civic organizations.

■ Looking first at this year's influence survey, the scores for conservative political parties and civic organizations are 4.76 points. Compared to the 5.15 points received in the first survey in 2005, this represents a decrease of 0.39 points, and the scores have been steadily declining year after year. This is evidence that the influence of conservatives in Korean society is not easily growing. Progressive organizations have also seen a decline compared to their 2005 scores. Their score, which was 4.91 in the 2005 survey, decreased by 0.30 points to 4.61 in this year's survey.

■ Compared to conservative organizations, two characteristics are observed. First, since the launch of the Lee Myung-bak administration in 2008, the influence of progressive organizations has actually increased relative to conservative organizations. This year's survey further narrowed the gap, with the average influence score for conservative organizations at 4.76 points, and progressive organizations scoring 4.61 points, only 0.15 points lower.

■ Second, there is a significant difference in the average influence score compared to conservative organizations. In fact, during the latter half of the Roh Moo-hyun administration, in 2006 and 2007, the influence scores for progressive organizations were only 4.40 and 4.28 points, respectively. This represents a difference of more than 0.50 points compared to the 2005 score.

■ Synthesizing these results, it can be seen that conservative organizations have shown a gradual decline in influence since 2005, without significant fluctuations in the magnitude of their influence.

■ In contrast, progressive organizations showed a sharp decline from 2005 to 2007, but have generally shown an upward trend since 2008. It can also be observed that the influence ratings for progressive organizations have shown greater fluctuations compared to conservative organizations. This implies that public perception of progressive organizations changes more significantly and rapidly.

[Figure 5] Changes in Influence by Ideological Orientation of Organizations (Points)

Conservative Organizations: FKI, Grand National Party, KCTU, KEF, New Right, Liberty Forward Party

Progressive Organizations: KPTU, Democratic Party, CCC, MINBYUN, PIAC, KCTU, DLP

- Progressive Credibility Scores: Surpassed conservatives after 2008

- For both progressives and conservatives, credibility scores are lower than influence scores

■ Unlike the influence survey results, the credibility survey showed a reversal. This is because progressive organizations scored 4.31 points, higher than the 4.16 points for conservative organizations. This phenomenon is not new this year; it has been observed since 2008. This is a clear contrast to the results from 2006 and 2007, corresponding to the latter half of the Roh Moo-hyun administration, when conservative organizations' credibility surpassed that of progressive organizations.

■ Similar to the influence assessment, the credibility of progressive organizations showed greater fluctuations compared to conservative organizations. This indicates that public perception of progressives reacts more sensitively than that of conservatives.

■ However, the most noteworthy point is that neither progressive nor conservative organizations have gained public trust. Credibility, which formed in the mid-4-point range in 2005, has not recovered significantly. In this context, ideological emphasis by progressives and conservatives is unlikely to gain public consensus. Ideological conflicts and debates that fail to gain trust may lead to public indifference and cynicism, thereby only increasing distrust and dissatisfaction. ▦

[Figure 6] Changes in Credibility by Ideological Orientation of Organizations (Points)

Conservative Organizations: FKI, Grand National Party, KCTU, KEF, New Right, Liberty Forward Party

Progressive Organizations: KPTU, Democratic Party, CCC, MINBYUN, PIAC, KCTU, DLP