Losers’ Consent in Changing Welfare States

Output Dissatisfaction, Experienced Voice and Political Distrust

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6345847
AutoresLisanne De Blok (0000-0002-5949-7408, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, autor de correspondencia), Staffan Kumlin (0009-0001-1974-4064, University of Oslo)
Año2022
Volumen70
Número4
Páginas867-886
Fecha de publicación2022-11-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaPolitical Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0032321721993646
OpenAlexW3133895347
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas19
Referencias citadas53

Mature welfare states must increasingly handle growing fiscal pressures and a multitude of needs with smaller resources. Meanwhile, evaluations of policy outputs are characterized as ‘the weakest link’ in welfare state support, resulting in generalized political distrust. We assess the procedural fairness argument that citizens are not only concerned with welfare state outcomes but also assess the fairness of the processes of service delivery. The fairness perspective has usually been tested in cross-sectional studies, experiments or on the ‘input side’ of democracy. By contrast, we use primary three-wave panel data on evaluations and experiences with welfare state institutions. The random-effects within-between framework allows improved causal evidence that both outputs (service quality satisfaction) and procedural fairness (experienced voice opportunities) affect political trust. Crucially, however, perceived fairness mitigates detrimental effects of poor outcomes. This is because procedural voice matters, especially for the formation of political trust among losers

Argument (complex analysis · Distrust · Economics · Market economy · Political science · Politics · Public economics · Service (business · Service delivery framework · Welfare · Welfare state · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Social Capital and Networks · Social Policy and Reform Studies · Social Psychology