Trust and the coronavirus crisis

Peter Bursens, Patricia Popelier & Petra Meier

• ​Bursens, P., Popelier, P. & Meier, P. (2021). Belgium’s response to the first and second COVID-19 wave. How to manage a pandemic in a competitive federal system? In: Rupak Chattopadhyay, Felix Knüpling, Diana Chebenova, Liam Whittington, Phillip Gonzalez (ed.). Federalism and the Response to COVID-19: A Comparative Analysis. Routledge.
  
• Abstract: Belgian federalism is characterized by a ‘falling apart’ evolution. The centrifugal nature of Belgian federalism is exemplified by six constitutional reforms since 1970, each one resulting in more autonomy and more competences for the federated levels. The state reforms did not follow a masterplan but rather responded to ad hoc demands from the dominant political parties to solve political and policy discord (Deschouwer 2012). The competitive logic of Belgian federalism puts all government levels on equal footing while granting them exclusive powers in allocated competences. The bricolage character of the state reforms gave the country a complex division of competences that crosscuts policy domains. Moreover, Belgium ended up with two separate party systems and four electoral colleges resulting in different government coalitions defending diverging interests across the levels of government (Swenden and Jans 2006). The Belgian response to the first two waves of the COVID-19 crisis has been a textbook illustration of how these features (mal)function in practice.
  

Patricia Popelier & Peter Bursens

• Popelier, P. & Bursens, P. (2021). Managing the Covid-19 crisis in a divided Belgian Federation. Cooperation against all odds. In: N. Steytler (ed.) Comparative Federalism and Covid-19. Combating the Pandemic. Abingdon: Routledge: 88-105.
  
• Abstract: The virus outbreak hit Belgium in the middle of a political crisis, after elections that put the confederalism debate back on the table. Combined with the decentralised and dual form of Belgian federalism, it was to be expected that the sub-states would take a prominent role in the fight against the spread of the virus. Instead, the virus turned out to be an external factor that, for the time being, reshaped de jure dual federalism into de facto cooperative federalism, with the federal authorities taking the lead after coordination with the sub-states. However, in the absence of an adequate pre-existing legal framework for coordinated crisis management, decision-making suffered from a lack of unity of command and from confusion about the distribution of competences. Lessons are to be learned in view of an upcoming seventh state reform. Preferably, reformers provide clarity on the allocation of competences, develop clear and efficient schemes for coordination and cooperation and lines of command in crisis management policies, and also factor in the local level.
  

Frédérique Six, Steven de Vadder, Monika Glavina, Koen Verhoest & Koen Pepermans

• ​Six, F., de Vadder, S., Glavina, M., Verhoest, K. & Pepermans, K. (2021). What drives compliance with COVID-19 measures over time? Explaining changing impacts with Goal Framing Theory. Regulation & Governance.
• Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to study which factors drive compliance and how the evolving context in society –virus fluctuations and changing government measures – changes the impact of these factors. Extant literature lists many factors that drive compliance – notably enforcement, trust, legitimacy. Most of these studies, however, do not look across time: whether a changing context for citizens changes the impact of factors driving compliance. In this study, we use Lindenberg's Goal Framing Theory to explain the dynamics of these drivers of compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic. We formulate hypotheses for pro-socialness, trust in government, observed respect for rules, rule effectiveness, rule appropriateness, fear of COVID-19 (severity and proximity), opportunities for pleasure and happiness, as well as worsened income position. We test our hypotheses with data collected at three different moments during the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis in Flanders, Belgium. Findings show that over time the constellations of factors that drive compliance change and, later in the pandemic, more distinct groups of citizens with different motivations to comply are identified. The overall conclusion is that the voluntary basis for compliance becomes more fragile over time, with a more differentiated pattern of drivers of compliance emerging. Public policy and communication need to adapt to these changes over time and address different groups of citizens.
  

Patricia Popelier, Bjorn Kleizen, Carolyn Declerck, Monika Glavina & Wouter Van Dooren

• Popelier, P., KLeizen, B., Declerck, C., Glavina, M., & Van Dooren, W. (2021). Health Crisis Measures and Standards for Fair Decision-Making: A Normative and Empirical-Based Account of the Interplay Between Science, Politics and Courts. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 1-26.
  
• Abstract: This paper examines, in the light of the COVID-19 crisis, the room for judicial oversight of health crisis measures based on the public’s expectations of how governments should act in the interplay with experts. The paper explains how trust theory and procedural rationality review help to address concerns related to legitimacy and expertise. The paper argues that courts should distinguish between two stages. In the initial stage, fear as a driver for government support based on expertise justifies that the proportionality test is limited to the question of whether measures were based on virologist expert advice. In the next stage, people expect the government to take expert-informed decisions, but also require that the government takes into account societal needs. Procedural rationality review in this stage demands that courts examine whether the decision was based on an informed balance of rights and interests.
  

Koen Verhoest

• The University of Antwerp's Faculty of Social Sciences organised an event Lesson of the Century on February 5, 2021. The topic of the event was "Corona-related Social Science Research" and was aimed at an audience of 16 to 18 year old secondary school students. Koen Verhoest presented the research on trust in government and compliance with corona measures.
• The video recording of the presentation is available on Youtube.
• ​More information about the event (in Dutch)

Karolien Poels

• The University of Antwerp's Faculty of Social Sciences organised an event Lesson of the Century on February 5, 2021. The topic of the event was "Corona-related Social Science Research" and was aimed at an audience of 16 to 18 year old secondary school students. Karolien Poels presented her research on addressing concerns on the COVID-19 vaccines through appropriate communication.
  
• The video recording of the presentation is available on Youtube.
• ​More information about the event (in Dutch)

Patricia Popelier, Bjorn Kleizen, Carolyn Declerck, Monika Glavina & Wouter Van Dooren

First research report from the project "Trust, legitimacy and intended compliance with COVID-19 exit strategy measures"

• Report only available in Dutch: read more and download​
• Description: The report brings the first results of a survey experiment on the perceptions of citizens on government measures after the first wave of Covid-19. In particular, it examines how the support of citizens for the exit measures changed according to the focus on either social needs or security considerations in a government decision. 

​Frédérique Six & Monika Glavina

• Presentation at the TiGRE webinar series "Trust & Regulatory Governance in an Age of Crisis", 17 December 2020
• Presentation slides and a video recording of the webinar are available on the TiGRE website.
• Description: As the Covid-19 crisis proceeds, motivating citizens to continue to comply with regulations that impact heavily on the life that they were accustomed to before the outbreak, gets more and more challenging. The literature shows convincing evidence that trust in government (regulator) has a positive impact on rule compliance, both under normal conditions and in times of crisis. In the webinar, Frédérique Six, together with Monika Glavina, compared insights from several theoretical perspectives and provided implications for practice.

​Patricia Popelier

• Popelier, P. (2020). Crisisbeheer per ministerieel besluit. Tijdschrift voor wetgeving, 4(2020), p. 282-291.
• Description: In dealing with the coronavirus pandemic, several measures were taken by government (e.g. lockdown, social distancing, citizen wellbeing, economy support, etc.). In Belgium, these measures were established in different ways, but mostly by way of a ministerial decree. The central question in this article is: what is constitutionally the most acceptable basis for rapid and decisive action in crisis situations?

​Koen Verhoest, Sophie Op de Beeck & Monika Glavina

• Presentation at the TiGRE webinar series "Trust & Regulatory Governance in an Age of Crisis", 18 November 2020
• Presentation slides and a video recording of the webinar are available on the TiGRE website.
• Description: Large-scale vaccination with an eventual COVID-19 vaccine is considered by most governments and citizens to be the ultimate solution of the current health crisis. However, vaccination hesitancy, intensified by anti-vaccination movements, is a major problem, both in normal times and in health crises. During a webinar in the TiGRE webinar series on "Trust & Regulatory Governance in an Age of Crisis", Koen Verhoest, Sophie Op de Beeck and Monika Glavina reviewed the theoretical and empirical insights in literature on the effect of trust on vaccination hesitancy and vaccination refusal and discussed its explanatory power in relation to other relevant factors. They also discussed recent findings on vaccination hesitancy in the context of the COVID-19 crisis.

Jan Wynen, Sophie Op de Beeck, Koen Verhoest, Frédérique Six, Monika Glavina, Pierre Van Damme & Koen Pepermans

• Wynen, J., Op de Beeck, S., Verhoest, K., Glavina, M., Six, F., Van Damme, P., Beutels, P., Hendrickx, G., Pepermans, K. & Verlinden, S. (2021). Vertrouwen en vaccinatietwijfel in Vlaanderen : de invloed van vertrouwen in de overheid en experts op de bereidheid om zich te laten vaccineren tegen COVID-19. Vlaams Tijdschrift voor Overheidsmanagement, 2021 (1), 9-24.
  
• Paper presented at the digital conference 'Political Trust in Crisis', 22-23 October 2020
• Paper presented at the virtual NIG (Netherlands Institute of Governance) Annual Work Conference 2020, 12 November 2020
• Abstract: Governments worldwide are currently focusing on the development of a COVID-19 vaccine to end the coronavirus pandemic and the resulting crisis. Although the scientific progress in the development of a vaccine appears to be promising, policymakers are facing an extra hurdle as increasingly more people appear to be hesitant in their intention to take such a vaccine. This paper aims to explain the intention to get vaccinated by linking it to trust in government and experts, while also taking into account risk perceptions and prosocialness of individuals. Trust in government’s capacity to deal with the coronavirus crisis and trust in experts’ advice provides legitimacy to policymakers’ actions and is, therefore, expected to play a pivotal role in the vaccination decision. The link between trust in government and experts and the intention to get vaccinated is examined using a large Corona survey conducted in Flanders, a region within Belgium. We find that trust in government has a positive, but a rather small effect on the intention to get vaccinated. Trust in experts has a more pronounced influence on vaccination intention. Also, individuals who believe the COVID-19 disease is likely to have serious consequences, and who have underlying medical conditions making them more vulnerable have a stronger intention to get vaccinated, as well as individuals with stronger prosocial attitudes. Furthermore, men, older people and people with higher education are more likely to accept a new COVID-19 vaccine. Given the important consequences of vaccine uptake for the success of a COVID-19 vaccine, we hope these results lead to a better understanding of this important issue.

Frédérique Six, Steven De Vadder, Monika Glavina & Koen Verhoest

• Paper presented at the online EGPA conference, 4 September 2020
• Paper presented at the virtual NIG (Netherlands Institute of Governance) Annual Work Conference 2020, 12 November 2020
• Abstract: Extant literature shows convincing evidence that there is a positive relationship between trust and rule compliance. This effect is seen in two different strands of research: during normal, non-crisis times and in times of crisis. There is, however, very little research that combines these different strands and traces how the relationship between trust and rule compliance changes over time, especially during a major international crisis. In this study we integrate these strands of literature, formulating hypotheses to test whether trust and other relevant drivers - fear, (rule) legitimacy, pro-socialness and observed other people’s compliance (social contagion) - impact rule compliance during the different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. We test our hypotheses with data collected at three different moments during the COVID-19 crisis in Flanders, Belgium (Survey Wave 1, April 7, N = 207,304; Survey Wave 2, April 28, N = 108,415; Survey Wave 3, June 30; N = 25,241). Survey Wave 1 was at the peak of the crisis, with a stringent lockdown and still increasing numbers of daily infections and deaths; Survey Wave 2 was completed when the number of daily infections and deaths had reduced substantially and many physical distancing measures were still in force; while Survey Wave 3 was just before yet another relaxation of measures with low numbers of daily infections and deaths. We use regression analyses with bootstrapping to analyse the data. Our findings suggest that the impact of trust on compliance is more nuanced than hitherto found, especially during crises; and that social contagion and fear are important drivers of compliance. We suggest that Lindenberg’s Goal Framing Theory is a potential candidate to explain the dynamics of the drivers of rule compliance during a prolonged crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic and propose further research to test that hypothesis.

​Patricia Popelier

• Popelier, P. (2020). COVID-19 legislation in Belgium at the crossroads of a political and a health crisis. The Theory and Practice of Legislation, vol. 8, issue 1-2, pp. 131-153.
• Abstract: This paper discusses the corona virus crisis legislation in Belgium, against the background of a political crisis. It raises the questions how a minority government could find legitimacy to take drastic measures that impact upon fundamental rights and how the political crisis impacted the position of Parliament. This is examined from the viewpoint of input, throughput and output legitimacy, and with a comparison to the position of Parliament in Belgium during earlier crises and in the federated entities. The conclusions point to the increased importance of expert advice, an over-use of ministerial police powers, but also to a more important role for Parliament than what we could have expected under the reign of a majority government. While the political crisis did not hinder firm intervention in an initial phase, it is, however, problematic to deal with the effects of the crisis over the longer term.

Koen Verhoest, Wouter Van Dooren & Steven De Vadder

• Research note available online: read more.
• Abstract: In democratic regimes, trust of citizens in government policy is of great importance to ensure successful policy implementation. It is impossible to put a police officer on each street corner to enforce compliance. Since successful COVID-19 policy also depends on the acceptance of that policy by the citizens, citizens’ trust in these policies is crucial. In this short research note, prof. dr. Koen Verhoest, prof. dr. Wouter van Dooren and Steven de Vadder, together with the other members of GOVTRUST, discuss novel results on Flemish citizens' trust in government during the coronavirus crisis based on three waves (April 7th, April 28th and May 26, 2020) of the University of Antwerp’s weekly Corona Study. These results provide insight into citizens’ risk perception, trust in government to properly deal with the coronavirus crisis, the trustworthiness of information sources regarding coronavirus, and the extent to which government measures are perceived to be effective and/or restrictive.