Do Collaborative Platforms Breed Trust? A Repeated Measures Study of Trust in Social Security Consultative Bodies (SSCBs)
As governments increasingly lead collaborative governance to deliver public services, we need confirmation that they can generate authentic collaboration that performs. Research suggests trust is imperative for collaborative performance but fostering dynamics of trust may prove particularly challenging in the context of government-led collaborative governance. This paper leverages the case of Social Security Consultative Bodies (SSCBs) in South Korea to empirically test whether governments serving as collaborative platforms can breed trust. Repeated measures data collected from a panel of SSCB participants over a 16-month period is analyzed using multilevel models to track participants’ trust trajectories as they partake in government-led collaborative governance. Trust is analyzed at two distinct levels including institutional and individual levels. Preliminary findings reveal that as a result of participating in government-led collaborative governance, SSCB participants report an increase in individual-level trust but no change in institutional-level trust. The paper also finds that trust is affected by positive histories of interaction, trustingness, perceived fairness and transparency, as well as perceived value congruence. However, these factors relate to trust at different levels suggesting that distinct mechanisms shape institutional and individual level trust in the context of government-led collaborative governance.
Does Government-led Collaborative Governance Crowd Out Alternative Venues of Civic Participation? A Study of Policy Feedback Effects
What impact does the proliferation of government-created collaborative venues have on the broader policyscape? This paper studies how feedback effects of government-led collaborative governance affect citizen participation in alternative venues. A mixed-methods approach is used to examine explanations offered by two contrasting theoretical perspectives. The institutional rational choice (IRC) perspective suggests that collaboration in a venue lowers transaction costs of collaborating in other venues, creating a spillover effect that sustains the mutual prosperity of multiple participatory venues. Contrastingly, the ecology of games (EG) framework implies there will be a crowding-out effect, especially if citizens are attracted to government-created venues that can offer greater legitimacy and resources. Social Security Consultative Bodies (SSCBs)—legislatively mandated collaborative governance arrangements in South Korea—provide the context for this study. Survey and interview data collected from SSCB members are analyzed to understand if and how resource effects and interpretive effects shape their participation in other social security-related venues. Preliminary quantitative analysis provides support for the IRC perspective. Participants report greater trust in other participants and higher interest levels in regional social security issues since joining the SSCBs. These changes, which imply the presence of resource effects and interpretive effects, are positively associated with higher levels of participation in other social security venues. Qualitative analysis will triangulate preliminary findings to confirm that the changes are attributable to policy feedback effects created by government-led collaborative governance.