Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: an experiment
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852311429667 |
| Published date | 01 March 2012 |
| Date | 01 March 2012 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
International Review of
Administrative Sciences
78(1) 50–73
!The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020852311429667
ras.sagepub.com
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Article
Linking transparency, knowledge
and citizen trust in government:
an experiment
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Abstract
Declining citizen trust in government is an important driver for NPM-style reforms.
Increasing people’s knowledge by providing factual knowledge about government
performance outcomes is seen as an important way of increasing citizen trust in
government. Does this promise hold or is knowledge about performance outcomes
not that important? Two rivalling hypotheses are being investigated. One proposition
postulates a link between knowledge and trust, whereas the alternative hypothesis
borrows from social-psychological research arguing that subconscious and affective
cues are more important. In order to investigate this question, this article presents
the results of an experiment (N¼658) investigating the effect of performance outcome
transparency on citizen trust in a specific government organization. Four groups visited
different websites with varying degrees of transparency and performance outcome.
The results demonstrate that the link between transparency and trust in a government
organization is determined by a mix of knowledge and feelings. Further, the overall
effect of transparency is limited. Pre-existing and fundamental ideas about what
government does and whether it is benign or not are far more determining than a
single experience with a government organization. This article concludes that
knowledge about performance outcomes is only part of the link between transparency
and trust, and that more realistic views about transparency’s effects should be
developed.
Points for practitioners
Transparency is generally hailed by many as the key to trust in government. This study
shows that the magnitude of transparency on citizens’ trust in government is often
exaggerated as most people have pre-existing, fundamental beliefs about government
which are only marginally influenced by transparency. However, transparency can
contribute to maintaining existing trust levels through a mix of people’s cognition and
feeling about government. Transparency is necessary, yet professionals in public
Corresponding author:
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen, Utrecht School of Governance, Utrecht University, Bijlhouwerstraat 6, 3511 ZC
Utrecht, The Netherlands
Email: s.g.grimmelikhuijsen@uu.nl
management and administration should develop realistic expectations about what
transparency can really achieve for trust in government.
Keywords
accountability, public sector reform, transparency, trust
1. NPM and the rise of performance outcome transparency
Declining citizen trust in government, be it real or perceived, is argued to be a main
driver ushering in New Public Management reforms (McNabb, 2009; Van de
Walle, 2011). An important goal of these reforms is to foster transparency of per-
formance outcomes in order to strengthen citizen trust (Kjaer, 2004; Pina et al.,
2007; Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2004). According to Van de Walle and Roberts (2008:
211), ‘we live in an age of quantified performance’. Transparency and quantified
performance measurement are two NPM-components that seem to be a ‘match
made in heaven’. Quantified performance indicators are easily stored in databases
and disclosed to a broad public, who can now use this information relatively
cheaply and conveniently because of its availability on the World Wide Web
(Snellen, 1998). Huge sets of performance data can now be published online in
real-time and in comprehensible formats (Meijer, 2007). Hence, the Internet has
potential to provide citizens with transparent government performance
information.
Does transparency of performance information really contribute to citizen trust
in government? In the debate on transparency and trust, ‘transparency optimists’
emphasize that transparency stimulates a ‘culture of openness’ within organiza-
tions, which is thought to have a positive effect on trust (Hood, 2006: 217).
Moreover, according to transparency proponents, lifting the veil of secrecy will
be beneficial to all of us and only those who have something to hide will oppose
transparency (see, for example, Florini, 1998). Further, transparency helps people
to become more familiar with government, brings them closer together and creates
understanding (Nye et al., 1997). This is based on the idea that when citizens do not
know what government is or does, they will not come to trust it. Therefore, several
authors argue that one cause for a lack of trust in government is that citizens are
not often enough provided with factual documentation about government pro-
cesses and performance (Blendon et al., 1997; Bok, 1997; Cook et al., 2010).
Regular disclosure of government performance information is crucial to increasing
citizen trust. In this article we will focus on citizens’ knowledge of the performance
of a government organization, as opposed to knowledge about its processes and
policies.
The central assumption behind this optimistic view on how trust can be fur-
thered is that citizens will use performance information to make rational and con-
scious decisions. However, according to Etzioni (2010: 399) this is a weak spot in
the optimists’ argument. Optimists assume that the public reading the information
Grimmelikhuijsen 51
To continue reading
Request your trial