How is High Trust in China Possible? Comparing the Origins of Generalized Trust in Three Chinese Societies
| Published date | 01 June 2012 |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00909.x |
| Author | H. Christoph Steinhardt |
| Date | 01 June 2012 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
How is High Trust in China Possible?
Comparing the Origins of Generalized
Trust in Three Chinese Societiespost_909 434..454
H. Christoph Steinhardt
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Although China is an outlier in terms of generalized trust, it has attracted little scholarly attention so far. Employing
survey data from Mainland China,Hong Kong and Taiwan, this article seeks to address this gap. The article makes use
of the comparative leverage provided by political and socio-cultural variation to investigate two plausible reasons for
the high levels of measured trust in Mainland China: a spillover from high institutional confidence;and problems of
measurement validity. The study finds a comparatively strong link between institutional confidence and trust in
Mainland China, which suggests that high confidence in institutions contributes to high levels of generalized trust in
this context. By situating the Chinese case in the debate on the institutional foundation of generalized trust,the article
suggests a heuristic to interpret this finding and points out its theoretical implications. The findings on measurement
validity are mixed.While the results do not suggest that political fear causes a significant distortion in measured trust
levels,the study finds circumstantial evidence for a culturally induced response bias to the standard item in Mainland
China.This would havecrucial implications for comparative research on generalized trust beyond the Chinese context.
Keywords: China; generalized trust; institutions; culture; social capital
The People’s Republic of China would be an unlikely candidate for inclusion in a list of
countries where one would expect to find widespread generalized trust.1Following
common assumptions about the conditions required for cultivating high trust in society,
China’s autocratic single-party system and its endowment with a cultural tradition that is
often regarded as familistic should lead to generalized trust being a scarce resource. In
addition, China is characterized by sharp income inequalities and is – in per capita terms
– still economically disadvantaged.Neither of these aspects should bode well for cultivating
trust.
Nonetheless, surveys using the standard instrument for measuring generalized trust
(hereafter, the standard item) – the dichotomous question ‘Generally speaking,would you
say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with them?’
– have consistently indicated that generalized trust in Mainland China is among the highest
worldwide, thus making it a notor ious outlier in comparative studies (Allik and Realo,
2004; Bjørnskov, 2006;Delhey and Newton, 2005;Inglehart, 1999;Uslaner, 2002;Whiteley,
2000). However, despite its controversial nature and significance,so far,no English language
study on generalized trust has been devoted to the Chinese case.2This article seeks to
address this gap by situating the case in relevant literature on the origins of trust and
investigating it in a comparative fashion with survey data from Mainland China, Hong
Kong and Taiwan.
There are essentially two plausible explanations for the counter-intuitive extent of
measured generalized trust in China: first,the country is not merely an outlier in terms of
bs_bs_banner
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00909.x
POLITICAL STUDIES: 2012 VOL 60, 434–454
© 2011The Author.Political Studies © 2011 Political Studies Association
trust in people but also in terms of confidence in institutions. Contrary to many other
authoritarian systems where survey research is possible,numerous studies have revealed that,
overall, the Chinese political system is perceived in surprisingly positive terms by its
citizenry (Chen, 2004; Li, 2004; Shi, 2001; Shi and Chen, 2001; Tang, 2005; Wang, 2005).
Since the institutional theory of trust explains generalized trust as an outcome of institu-
tional confidence, it seems reasonable to look for possible sources of high generalized trust
in the perception of political institutions. Hence, the article addresses the effect of institu-
tions on generalized trust in different political systems and links up with other recent
scholarship on this issue (Jamal, 2007; Jamal and Nooruddin, 2010; Rothstein and Stolle,
2008). It also looks at the moderating impact of societal context on the linkage between
institutions and trust and thereby contributes a case study to a rarely studied (for an
exception compare Uslaner and Badescu, 2004) but probably significant question.
Second, some scholars have cautioned that the authoritarian political system or the
cultural conditions in Mainland China may inflate trust survey results (Bjørnskov, 2005;
2006; Tang,2005, p.105; Uslaner,2002, p. 226). These caveats should be taken seriously and,
thus, the article examines specific claims about measurement validity in Mainland China. In
so doing it intends to speak to an emerging strand of research concerned with the
measurement validity of the standard item (Delhey et al., forthcoming; Miller and Mita-
mura,2003;Reeskens and Hooghe,2008; Sturgis and Smith,2010). The Chinese case is not
only critical to this discussion because it is arguably the most controversial one.It also has
potential relevance for a number of otherAsian societies – such as Japan, South Korea and
Vietnam – that display high levels of survey-elicited trust even though their cultural and/or
politico-economic conditions would suggest otherwise.
Additionally, the study contributes to a growing body of research that looks at the
origins of generalized trust in different cultural and political contexts. So far, there have
been few such studies on non-European and non-Western contexts (for exceptions,
compare Freitag, 2003; Jamal, 2007; Radnitz et al., 2009). Being not only an outlier but
also the most populous non-Western society, the Mainland Chinese case is crucial to this
discussion.
The article will continue with a review of institutional and socio-cultural explanations
of trust and derive four hypotheses. After a brief clarification of methodological questions
these hypotheses will be empirically tested. The article concludes with a discussion of the
empirical findings.
Theories and Hypotheses
Generalized trust is theorized as an optimistic attitude that regards interaction with others,
including those that one does not know personally, as an opportunity rather than a threat
(Uslaner, 2002, p. 34). Theorists agree that generalized trust necessarily widens the ‘radius
of trust ... to others outside of the traditional circle of family, neighborhood, and village’
(Realo et al., 2008, p. 450) and thereby transcends the boundary of intimate personal
relationships.It includes ‘people at a greater social distance from the truster’ and particularly
strangers (Putnam, 2000, p. 466). Hence, this attitude has been defined as a ‘ “standing
decision” to give most people – even those whom one does not know from direct
experience – the benefit of the doubt’ (Rahn and Transue, 1998, p. 545).
HOW IS HIGH TRUST IN CHINA POSSIBLE? 435
© 2011The Author.Political Studies © 2011 Political Studies Association
POLITICAL STUDIES: 2012, 60(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial