Citizens’ trust in public institutions is strongly influenced by how these institutions perform in terms of competence and values, and it is a vital public policy outcome. While it is just a perception, its implications for policy are fundamental and multiple. Since the onset of the 2008 global financial crisis and resulting recession, trust has come to the forefront of the public debate in many OECD countries. While there is clear evidence that trust influences the relationship between citizens and governments, and has, in turn, an impact on the outcomes of public policy, there remains relatively limited comparative international or specific country experience with measuring the drivers of institutional trust.

This report was prepared by the OECD’s Public Governance Directorate, under the direction of Marcos Bonturi, in cooperation with the Korea Development Institute (KDI).

The erosion of public trust presents countries with complex and multidimensional challenges that have implications across a range of inter-related policy drivers, including institutional aspects, political events and cultural factors. From a public governance perspective, trust in public institutions can be considered as a final outcome, which is influenced by the performance of public institutions in terms of core competences and values. For the first time, this report offers a comprehensive analysis of these challenges, drawing on the Korean experience and on original data from a unique survey, which allowed bringing the citizens’ voice in this crucial policy debate.

This chapter explores the theoretical and practical relevance of trust in government institutions by providing a critical review of literature and presenting the framework and methodology constituting the basis of this report. It introduces the concepts of competence and values as the main drivers of institutional trust according to the public management literature. The measurement approach presented in this chapter allows disentangling the dimensionality of trust and generating meaningful evidence that could inform and guide policy action.

This chapter focuses particularly on the Korean case by analysing evidence stemming from several existing sources. It shows that while Korea has achieved and maintained rapid economic growth and development, and performs comparatively well in several existing measures of the quality of public administration, trust in government institutions is relatively low. Based on data specifically collected for this report this chapters shows empirically what are the main drivers of institutional trust in Korea.

Previous chapters presented the measurement and policy framework of this report and provided an overview of the levels of trust in government institutions and their evolution over time in Korea. This chapter deepens the discussion on a key dimension of the OECD Trust Framework: competence, or the ability of government to deliver to citizens the public services they need, at the quality level they expect. The chapter builds on the results of the OECD-KDI Trust Survey, complemented by a review of other relevant sources, it presents opportunities for policy action in Korea that could contribute to improve levels of institutional trust.

After discussing competence, the first key component of the OECD Trust Framework, in the previous chapter, this one will focus on the second component: values. As recognised in the public management literature, the process of policy making and its guiding motivations (values) are just as important as the actual results achieved for influencing trust in government institutions. The chapter builds on the results of the OECD-KDI Trust Survey, complemented by a review of other relevant sources, it presents opportunities for policy action in Korea that could contribute to improve institutional trust levels.

This chapter explores the relationship between public conflicts and institutional trust* in Korea. It emphasizes that the lack of effective mechanisms to prevent and resolve frequent and prolonged public conflicts in Korea may have generated a climate of distrust and animosity. In turn, based on evidence from the OECD-KDI survey, it argues that by endorsing innovative forms of conflict management such as sharing information on controversial policy issues before a decision is made, consulting public opinions early on and incorporating such opinions in the final decision, engaging relevant stakeholders in the creation of solutions, and finding facts jointly with stakeholders, a virtuous cycle transforming relations between citizens and public institutions from adversarial into collaborative could be created.* This chapter was drafted by Dong-Young Kim (KDI School of Public Policy and Management).

This chapter explores the relationship between different communication models and trust in government institutions in Korea.* Based on results from the OECD-KDI survey it argues that for achieving higher institutional trust levels the following features in government communication are essential: democratic governance values; commitment by government leaders to build a horizontal relationship with its citizens; using the right channels; clear ground rules; resource capacity; and principles of transparency and fairness.* This chapter was drafted by Taejun (David) Lee and Soonhee Kim from the KDI School of Public Policy and Management.