Does process matter more for predicting trust in government? Participation, performance, and process, in local government in Japan
| Published date | 01 September 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221099395 |
| Author | Shaun Goldfinch,Kiyoshi Yamamoto,Saizo Aoyagi |
| Date | 01 September 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Does process matter more
for predicting trust in
government? Participation,
performance, and process,
in local government in
Japan
Shaun Goldfinch
Curtin University and Australia and New Zealand School of
Government, Australia
Kiyoshi Yamamoto
University of Tokyo and Kamakura Women’s University, Japan
Saizo Aoyagi
Komazawa University, Japan
Abstract
Trust in government and its antecedents and development remain leading policy and
research concerns. Drawing on a broadly representative online survey of 3100
respondents in Japan, we examine measures of trust in three local government
actors. We find political participation is not associated with trust in local govern-
ment, contrary to our expectations. Civic participation is associated with trust in
the mayor, but not councillors or administrators. Satisfaction with services provided
by local government, and positive perceptions of policy process, are associated with
trust, with interactions suggesting process is the stronger antecedent. To develop
greater trust in local government, it is important that public sector actors exhibit
respect for rights and follow procedure, laws, and regulations, as well as deliver posi-
tive outcomes.
Corresponding author:
Shaun Goldfinch, Curtin University and Australia and New Zealand School of Government, GPO Box U1987,
Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
Email: shaun.goldfinch@curtin.edu.au
Article
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
2023, Vol. 89(3) 842–863
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00208523221099395
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Points for practitioners
•Building trust in government remains a key concern for policy makers, as it is related
to successful adoption of policies.
•Trust in local government in Japan is related to perceived performance and citizen
satisfaction.
•Civic participation is also related to some forms of trust in government.
•However, possibly more important are citizen perceptions that policy processes respect
rights, procedures, and laws.
•To increase trust in government, practitioners need to practice, and show that they
practice, good processes in developing and delivering policy, and show that policy
leads to better perceived outcomes.
Keywords
Due process, citizen participation,civic participation, policy process, political participation,
social capital, local government, performance, trust
What factors predict trust in local government in Japan? Trust in government influences
effective delivery and adoption of policies, instruments, directives, ‘moral suasion’, tax
collection, and income redistribution; and its antecedents and development remain
leading policy and research concerns (Goldfinch et al., 2021; Mahmood et al., 2020).
Local government, owing to its importance in service delivery to citizens, is central to
this debate (Manning and Guerrero, 2013). Moreover, there is a growing interest in,
and literature on, Japan, Asia, and trust (Imada, 2010; Kim, 2010; Noda, 2019;
Pekkanen, 2006), albeit with claims the Asia-Pacific and Japan have been neglected in
public sector studies (Suzuki et al., 2020; Van der Wal and Demircioglu, 2020).
Surveying 3100 Japanese citizens, we focus on three possible antecedents of trust in
local government: civic and political participation (social capital), performance of local
government measured by satisfaction, and perceptions of policy processes. We test
these for three local government actors: the mayor, councillors, and administrators. We
add novelty by comparing these possible antecedents of trust, and making conclusions
on their relative verisimilitude. We are not aware of research that tests all three antece-
dents in one study.
By focussing on these three antecedents in this single article, we are also engaging
with the broader literature on public administration reform. In the context of public
administration reform models or ‘paradigms’: Is trust related to the way local government
performs its functions, by exhibiting attention to law, procedure, and rights as ‘traditional
public administration’is claimed to promote (the process of our title)? Is it about what is
achieved either through results, outcomes, or outputs of New Public Management (NPM)
doctrine, perhaps measured by citizen satisfaction (performance)? Or is it whether
Goldfinch et al. 843
To continue reading
Request your trial