IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v29y2017i2p160-178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional trust and the provision of public goods: When do individual costs matter? The case of recycling

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan Rompf

    (University of Cologne, Germany)

  • Clemens Kroneberg

    (University of Cologne, Germany)

  • Thomas Schlösser

    (University of Cologne, Germany)

Abstract

This research asks whether and how institutional trust—trust in the reliability, effectiveness, and legitimacy of public institutions—promotes the provision of public goods. To understand the underlying mechanisms, we apply three choice models to the example of recycling behavior: a standard rational choice model, the low-cost hypothesis, and a dual-process theory. The models carry competing hypotheses about the interplay of trust and incentives in recycling behavior. Using survey data collected in four countries (Sweden, Denmark, the United States, and the United Kingdom), we find a positive and significant interaction effect of institutional trust and recycling costs on self-reported recycling behavior. No such interaction was found using generalized social trust as a second measure of trust. Our results support a dual-process perspective and indicate that high levels of institutional trust can suppress the inhibiting effect of individual costs on cooperation in a collective action dilemma.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan Rompf & Clemens Kroneberg & Thomas Schlösser, 2017. "Institutional trust and the provision of public goods: When do individual costs matter? The case of recycling," Rationality and Society, , vol. 29(2), pages 160-178, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:29:y:2017:i:2:p:160-178
    DOI: 10.1177/1043463117701124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043463117701124
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1043463117701124?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Gachter & Ernst Fehr, 2000. "Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 980-994, September.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Stephen Knack & Philip Keefer, 1997. "Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(4), pages 1251-1288.
    4. Clemens Kroneberg & Meir Yaish & Volker Stocké, 2010. "Norms and Rationality in Electoral Participation and in the Rescue of Jews in WWII," Rationality and Society, , vol. 22(1), pages 3-36, February.
    5. Toshio Yamagishi & Shigeru Terai & Toko Kiyonari & Nobuhiro Mifune & Satoshi Kanazawa, 2007. "The Social Exchange Heuristic: Managing Errors in Social Exchange," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(3), pages 259-291, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Mohammad Reza Farzanegan & Hans Philipp Hofmann, 2021. "A Matter of Trust? Political Trust and the Covid-19 Pandemic," CESifo Working Paper Series 9121, CESifo.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fetchenhauer, Detlef & Dunning, David, 2012. "Betrayal aversion versus principled trustfulness—How to explain risk avoidance and risky choices in trust games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 534-541.
    2. Christoph Engel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2011. "Fairness Ex Ante and Ex Post: Experimentally Testing Ex Post Judicial Intervention into Blockbuster Deals," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 682-708, December.
    3. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    4. Katharina Werner & Ahmed Skali, 2023. "Violent Conflict and Parochial Trust: Lab-in-the-Field and Survey Evidence," HiCN Working Papers 404, Households in Conflict Network.
    5. Cubitt, Robin P. & Drouvelis, Michalis & Gächter, Simon & Kabalin, Ruslan, 2011. "Moral judgments in social dilemmas: How bad is free riding?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 253-264.
    6. Sabatini, Fabio, 2006. "The Empirics of Social Capital and Economic Development: A Critical Perspective," Knowledge, Technology, Human Capital Working Papers 12097, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    8. Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Kajisa, Kei & Pede, Valerien O. & Aoyagi, Keitaro, 2015. "Neighborhood effects and social behavior: The case of irrigated and rainfed farmers in Bohol, the Philippines," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 227-246.
    9. Xavier Giné & Pamela Jakiela & Dean Karlan & Jonathan Morduch, 2010. "Microfinance Games," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 60-95, July.
    10. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    11. Karl-Dieter Opp, 2013. "Norms and rationality. Is moral behavior a form of rational action?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 383-409, March.
    12. Blume, Lorenz & Sack, Detlef, 2006. "Regional preferences for hierarchies, markets, and networks: Exploring social capital data for Germany," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 85, University of Kassel, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    13. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    14. Matteo Rizzolli & Luca Stanca, 2012. "Judicial Errors and Crime Deterrence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(2), pages 311-338.
    15. Abhijit Ramalingam & Brock V. Stoddard, 2021. "Does reducing inequality increase cooperation?​," GRU Working Paper Series GRU_2021_022, City University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics and Finance, Global Research Unit.
    16. Fabio Galeotti & Valeria Maggian & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Fraud Deterrence Institutions Reduce Intrinsic Honesty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(638), pages 2508-2528.
    17. Füllbrunn, Sascha & Vyrastekova, Jana, 2023. "Does trust break even? A trust-game experiment with negative endowments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    18. Torgler, Benno, 2006. "The importance of faith: Tax morale and religiosity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 81-109, September.
    19. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2017. "Decisions under uncertainty in social contexts," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 290, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2017.
    20. Anya Savikhin Samek & Roman Sheremeta, 2014. "Recognizing contributors: an experiment on public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 673-690, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:29:y:2017:i:2:p:160-178. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.