Trust in Uzbekistan
| Author | Eric Gleave,Blaine Robbins,Beth Kolko |
| Published date | 01 March 2012 |
| Date | 01 March 2012 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0192512110379491 |
Corresponding author:
Eric Gleave, Department of Sociology, University of Washington, 211 Savery Hall, Box 353340, USA
[email eric.gleave@gmail.com]
Trust in Uzbekistan
Eric Gleave, Blaine Robbins and Beth Kolko
Abstract
Although trust is a lively area of research, it is rarely investigated in countries outside of commonly available
cross-national public-opinion datasets. In an effort to fill this empirical void and to draw conclusions
concerning the general determinants of trust, the current article employs detailed survey data from a
frequently overlooked Central Asian country, Uzbekistan, to test the relationship between particularized
trust and demographic traits previously identified as influential. While a number of Uzbek demographic
characteristics coincide with previously identified determinants of trust, age and education yield negative
effects not previously found. Interestingly, individual-level demographic variables become insignificant when
controlling for regional, religious, and linguistic variation. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical
implications.
Keywords
trust, heterogeneity, Uzbekistan
Introduction
Trust is often identified as a fundamental element of social order (Durkheim, 1984), and is fre-
quently credited as affecting institutional performance (Bjørnskov, 2009; Knack, 2002; Putnam,
1993), economic development (Fukuyama, 1995), collective action (Kollock, 1998), and crime
reduction (Messner et al., 2004).1 Due to the widespread consequences of trust, social scientists
have devoted increasing attention to understanding its determinants (Cook, 2001; Hardin, 2002). A
number of recent works show that at the individual level classic sociological demographic charac-
teristics, such as education and age (Herreros and Criado, 2008; Paxton, 2007), are positively
related to trust, while the content of social ties and being a member of a group that is historically
the target of discrimination can stunt its growth (Alesina and La Ferrara, 2002; Simpson, 2006;
Smith, 2010). Likewise, at the regional and national levels, recent research finds that political
institutions (Freitag and Bühlmann, 2009), income equality (Bjørnskov, 2007; Uslaner, 2002), and
civic liveliness (Putnam, 2000) are necessary conditions for the development of trust.
International Political Science Review
33(2) 209–229
© The Author(s) 2010
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0192512110379491
ips.sagepub.com
210 International Political Science Review 33(2)
It is surprising to find, however, that the effects of these correlates vary from study to study
(Nannestad, 2008). A key reason may be that the majority of research looking at the determinants of
trust are localized within the USA and other western nations (for example, Brehm and Rahn, 1997;
Claibourn and Martin, 2000; Putnam, 2000, 2007). International studies exist (Bjørnskov, 2007,
2008; Delhey and Newton, 2005; Freitag and Bühlmann, 2009; Herreros, 2004; Herreros and
Criado, 2008; Hooghe et al., 2009; Knack and Keefer, 1997; Paxton, 2007; Zak and Knack, 2001),
but they primarily investigate differences between a restricted number of countries in order to pin-
point the structural origins of trust (for an exception, see Bjørnskov, 2007, 2008). In addition,
although the importance of examining trust using historical, ethnographic, or survey methods within
specific countries is not new (Banfield, 1958; Gambetta, 1993; Huysseune, 2003; Kumlin and
Rothstein, 2005; Leigh, 2006; Lühiste, 2006; Putnam, 1993; Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994), it is
rarely done for countries outside of the World Values Survey (WVS) and European Values Survey
(EVS) sampling frames. Those outside these samples are among the most understudied in the trust
literature. The present article examines the characteristics believed to foster trust in individuals and
investigates these processes in Uzbekistan: a previously understudied, Central Asian, post-socialist,
Muslim country that is currently under authoritarian rule and, until recently, beyond the reach of
public opinion surveys. By doing so, we hope to compare and contrast the present results with those
previously found in order to tease out factors such as state repression and ethnic homogeneity that
may or may not contribute to rendering or eroding trust.
To accomplish this task, we use Uzbek survey data collected in the spring of 2007 on trust in
family, friends, and neighbors. Using multilevel models, we find compelling results that are partly
consistent and partly inconsistent with the prior literature. While the positive effect of socioeco-
nomic status parallels results found elsewhere, age, education, and family size are linked in oppo-
site ways than has been identified in prior research. Interestingly, these factors become statistically
insignificant when individuals are grouped by region, religion, and the language spoken at home.
The findings relate to a burgeoning literature on the relationship between trust and ethnic het-
erogeneity (for example, Glaeser et al., 2000; Herreros and Criado, 2008; Leigh, 2006; Putnam,
2007). In conjunction with prior investigations, the results suggest that homophily across linguis-
tic, ethnic, and religious characteristics are critical determinants of trust and that being a minority
reduces one’s willingness to trust others. While prior work associates such a pattern with histories
of discrimination (Alesina and La Ferrara, 2002; Smith, 2010), this explanation may have less
explanatory power in the Uzbek case than in other countries.
The remaining article is organized as follows. We first outline a number of competing theoreti-
cal traditions within sociology and political science that attempt to conceptualize trust. Then we
briefly review the empirical literature by detailing the various correlates of trust at the individual
and regional levels. We then identify unresolved issues within the trust literature and highlight how
the present investigation can help alleviate some of these problems. Next, we present the data and
methods and illustrate how we tested for general mechanisms with multilevel models. The article
ends with a discussion of our findings and a conclusion.
Literature review
What is trust?
An agreed-upon definition of trust, along with a dominant theory outlining its determinants, eludes
the literature. In a foundational attempt, Luhmann (1979) equates trust with a coping mechanism
To continue reading
Request your trial