[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/iuiwop/1356.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Stranger Thing? Sweden – The Upside Down of Multilevel Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Erlingsson, Gissur Ó

    (Centre for Local Government Studies)

Abstract
There are good reasons to expect that citizens will appreciate local government more than central government. Sure enough, previous studies have found support for this assumption. Nevertheless, I will argue that it is theoretically far too simple to think that decentralization and citizen’s proximity to decision-making by definition trumps centralization and distance. As with comparative country studies, institutional quality must be taken into account in analyses of local government and multilevel trust. To illustrate this point, a closer investigation of Sweden – a decentralised, high-trust and low-corruption country – is conducted. Looking back over the past 20 years, and studying several indicators of trust, Sweden turns out to be a curious outlier from the general pattern: Swedes trust municipalities far less than the state. Ex ante, these findings are puzzling. To make them intelligible, while at the same time aiming to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of multilevel trust, I argue that the unfortunate combination of three factors have brought about this curious circumstance: 1) the far-reaching decentralisation and principal role Swedish municipalities have successively been given in implementing assignments which lie at the heart of Swedish welfare state policies; 2) that several of the municipalities’ assignments are particularly susceptible to corruption; and 3) that the increase in responsibilities as well as the increased danger zones for corruption has not been accompanied by institutions that ensure transparency and checks-and-balances in local government, ultimately leaving Swedish local government with institutions that obfuscate accountability.

Suggested Citation

  • Erlingsson, Gissur Ó, 2020. "A Stranger Thing? Sweden – The Upside Down of Multilevel Trust," Working Paper Series 1356, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:iuiwop:1356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifn.se/wfiles/wp/wp1356.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. Gulsun Arikan, 2004. "Fiscal Decentralization: A Remedy for Corruption?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(2), pages 175-195, March.
    2. Luis Diaz-Serrano & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2015. "Decentralization and the Welfare State: What Do Citizens Perceive?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 120(2), pages 411-435, January.
    3. Bracco, Emanuele & Revelli, Federico, 2018. "Concurrent elections and political accountability: Evidence from Italian local elections," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 135-149.
    4. Ligthart, Jenny E. & van Oudheusden, Peter, 2015. "In government we trust: The role of fiscal decentralization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 116-128.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Agnese Sacchi, 2017. "The Impact Of Fiscal Decentralization: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1095-1129, September.
    2. David Bartolini & Agnese Sacchi & Domenico Scalera & Alberto Zazzaro, 2018. "The closer the better? Institutional distance and information blurring in a political agency model," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 146, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    3. Aaron Soans & Masato Abe, 2015. "Bribery, Corruption and Bureaucratic Hassle: Evidence from Myanmar," ARTNeT Working Papers 152, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
    4. Cantoni, Enrico & Gazzè, Ludovica & Schafer, Jerome, 2021. "Turnout in concurrent elections: Evidence from two quasi-experiments in Italy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. George Crowley & Russell Sobel, 2011. "Does fiscal decentralization constrain Leviathan? New evidence from local property tax competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 5-30, October.
    6. Anisah Alfada, 2019. "Does Fiscal Decentralization Encourage Corruption in Local Governments? Evidence from Indonesia," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, July.
    7. Marius Constantin PROFIROIU & Septimiu Rares SZABO, 2016. "Outsourcing vs decentralisation: A comparative analysis in Central and Eastern Europe," Eco-Economics Review, Ecological University of Bucharest, Economics Faculty and Ecology and Environmental Protection Faculty, vol. 2(2), pages 3-26, December.
    8. Andreas P. Kyriacou & Oriol Roca-Sagalés, 2019. "Local Decentralization and the Quality of Public Services in Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 145(2), pages 755-776, September.
    9. Foellmi, Reto & Heim, Rino & Schmid, Lukas, 2022. "Voter Turnout in Concurrent Votes," Economics Working Paper Series 2209, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, revised Sep 2022.
    10. Rajeev K. Goel & Aaron N. Mehrotra, 2012. "Financial payment instruments and corruption," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(11), pages 877-886, June.
    11. Brueckner, Jan K., 2006. "Fiscal federalism and economic growth," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 2107-2120, November.
    12. Lessmann, Christian & Markwardt, Gunther, 2010. "One Size Fits All? Decentralization, Corruption, and the Monitoring of Bureaucrats," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 631-646, April.
    13. Ryota Nakatani & Qianqian Zhang & Isaura Garcia Valdes, 2024. "Health Expenditure Decentralization and Health Outcomes: The Importance of Governance," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 54(1), pages 59-87.
    14. Kayode Taiwo, 2024. "The Effect of Decentralisation on Access to Sanitation and Water Services: An Empirical Test using International Data," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 249(2), pages 157-180, June.
    15. Lessmann, Christian & Markwardt, Gunther, 2010. "Fiscal federalism and foreign transfers: does inter-jurisdictional competition increase foreign aid effectiveness?," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/10, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    16. Olena Chygryn & Yuriy Petrushenko & Alina Vysochyna & Anna Vorontsova, 2018. "Assessment of Fiscal Decentralization Influence on Social and Economic Development," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 14(4), pages 69-84.
    17. Zhiguo Wang & Liang Ma, 2014. "Fiscal Decentralization in China: A Literature Review," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 15(1), pages 51-65, May.
    18. Philip Bodman & Harry Campbell & Kelly-Ana Heaton & Andrew Hodge, "undated". "Fiscal Decentralisation, Macroeconomic Conditions and Economic Growth in Australia," MRG Discussion Paper Series 2609, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    19. François, Abel & Méon, Pierre-Guillaume, 2021. "Politicians at higher levels of government are perceived as more corrupt," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    20. Luis Diaz-Serrano & Enric Meix-Llop, 2019. "Decentralization and the quality of public services: Cross-country evidence from educational data," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 37(7), pages 1296-1316, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trust; Multi-level trust; Accountability; Impartiality; Corruption; Local government; Decentralisation; Sweden;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • H70 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hhs:iuiwop:1356. 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: Elisabeth Gustafsson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iuiiise.html .

    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.