ABSTRACT

As a rule, citizens appreciate local more than central government. This paper proposes a new research agenda for multilevel trust studies by arguing that it is premature to believe that citizen’s proximity to officials by definition trumps distance. As in country-comparative studies, close attention needs to be paid to institutional quality in analyses of multilevel trust. To put this argument to work, a closer investigation of Sweden is conducted. Tracking three indicators of trust, with time-series stretching over two decades, Sweden turns out to be a curious outlier from the international pattern: Swedes trust their local government less than the state. To make this observation intelligible – while simultaneously aiming to contribute to a more nuanced theoretical understanding of multilevel trust – the mix of three features is identified for bringing this circumstance about: (1) the principal role Swedish municipalities have successively been given in implementing core welfare state assignments; (2) that several of the municipalities’ assignments are susceptible to corruption; and (3) that the increase in municipal responsibilities has neither been accompanied with institutions that guarantee accountability of politicians nor the impartiality of local bureaucracies.

摘要

作为一项规则，公民比中央政府更欣赏地方。本文提出了一个多层次信任研究的新研究议程，认为现在相信公民与官员的接近程度胜过距离还为时过早。与国家比较研究一样，在分析多层次信任时需要密切关注制度质量。为了使这一论点发挥作用，对瑞典进行了更仔细的调查。跟踪三个信任指标，时间序列跨越 20 年，瑞典被证明是国际模式中的一个奇怪的异常值：瑞典人对当地政府的信任低于对国家的信任。为了使这一观察结果易于理解——同时旨在促进对多层次信任的更细致入微的理论理解——确定了三个特征的组合来实现这种情况：(1) 瑞典市政当局在实施核心福利方面相继发挥了主要作用国家任务；(2) 一些直辖市的任务容易受到腐败的影响；(3) 市政责任的增加既没有保证政客问责的制度，也没有保证地方官僚机构的公正性。(2) 一些直辖市的任务容易受到腐败的影响；(3) 市政责任的增加既没有保证政客问责的制度，也没有保证地方官僚机构的公正性。(2) 一些直辖市的任务容易受到腐败的影响；(3) 市政责任的增加既没有保证政客问责的制度，也没有保证地方官僚机构的公正性。