Minna Ylikännö: Trust and confidence among BI receivers. Experimenting with Income Support in the Netherlands. Presentation at seminar "Finnish Basic Income Experiment – Science meets social security reform" in Kela 4.4.2019.

1. Finnish Basic Income Experiment –
Science meets social security reform
Helsinki, 4th April 2019
Trust and confidence among
BI receivers
1

2. Why trust matters?
• Trust is one of the key determinants of human activity and a prerequisite for people-to-people
interaction.
• Prosperous countries tend to be those where business relations between people can be
conducted on the basis of trust (Fukuyama 1985)
• Without trust nations fail (Acemoglu & Robinson 2012)
• Mechanic (1998) sees trust as an adhesive that enables community persistence and interpersonal
activity without much doubt and negotiation.
• Trust is 'loyalty' between people, of which all social relationships are dependent (Simmel 1990).
• It would be totally impossible for people to face a completely complex world where they would
not be able to predict the events of the coming day. Thus, the only alternative to trust is chaos
and depressing fear (Luhmann 1968).
• Without trust, interpersonal action would not be possible, and it would be difficult to create an
effective administration or other social and social institutions. (Newton 2001).
• People are more likely to comply with laws and pay taxes if they trust political institutions (Uslaner
2004).

3. Why we need confidence in the future?
• Luhmann (2000): “You are confident that your expectations will not be disappointed: that politicians
will try to avoid war, that cars will not break down or suddenly leave the street and hit you on your
Sunday afternoon walk. You cannot live without forming expectations with respect to contingent
events and you have to neglect, more or less, the possibility of disappointment. You neglect this
because it is a very rare possibility, but also because you do not know what else to do. The
alternative is to live in a state of permanent uncertainty and to withdraw expectations without having
anything with which to replace them.”
• Without confidence in future, one lives in constant uncertainty – this causes stress and affects
negatively wellbeing
• Permanent stress causes further mental health and cognitive problems
• Both trust and confidence are essential - in this case (Finnish BI experiment) for the unemployed job
seekers
• Several disappointments negatively affect the level of confidence and trust, and make the re-
employment more difficult

4. Trust in other people (Generalized trust)
• Generally speaking, would you say
that most people can be trusted,
or that you can’t be too careful in
dealing with people?
• 0 = no trust at all…10 = complete
trust
• Means:
• Treatment group: 6.8
• Control group: 6.3
– Sig. = .003
• The coefficient for treatment
remains significant (.015) after
controlling for gender, age,
income, education, health and
area of residence

5. Generalized trust: interactions between treatment and background variables

6. Trust in politics
• A sum variable was formed of three
variables measuring trust (trust in
political parties, trust in politicians,
trust in parliament)
– 0 = no trust at all…10 = complete
trust
• Means:
– treatment group 4.5
– control group 4.0
– Sig. = .002
• The coefficient for treatment remains
significant (.007) after controlling for
gender, age, income, education,
health and area of residence

7. Trust in politics: interaction between treatment and background variables

8. Trust in justice institutions
• A sum variable was formed of two
variables measuring trust (trust in justice
system, trust in police)
• 0 = no trust at all…10 = complete trust
• Means:
• treatment group 7.2
• control group 6.9
– Sig. = .031
• The coefficient for treatment is non-
significant (.166) after controlling for
gender, age, income, education, health
and area of residence

9. Trust in justice institutions: interaction between treatment and background variables

10. Confidence and ability to influence on social issues
• A sum variable was formed of three variables
measuring confidence and the ability to
influence (confidence in one’s future,
confidence in one’s financial situation, ability to
influence on social issues)
• 1 = no confidence at all… 5 = complete
confidence
• Means:
• treatment group 3.2
• control group 2.9
– Sig. = .000
• The coefficient for treatment remains significant
(.000) after controlling for gender, age, income,
education, health and area of residence

11. Confidence and ability to influence on social issues: interaction between treatment
and background variables

12. Conclusions
• Trust in other people and institutions,
and confidence in one’s future matter
• Trust makes nations prosper through
positively affecting individuals’ life-
satisfaction and well-being
• Amon BI recipients, levels of trust and
confidence were higher than in the
control group
• Differences remained significant after
controlling for background variables for
all other variables except trust in justice
institutions
• Disclaimers
• Low response rates
• Selection bias
– No major differences in observed
background characteristics
– Combining registers with survey data
offers possibilities to control for a
number of variables that cannot be
controlled for on the basis of the survey
data alone.
• Subjective measures
– Deals ‘only’ with opinions – HOWEVER
subjective measures are of importance
when assessing individuals’ wellbeing.

13. Minna Ylikännö
(minna.ylikännö@kela.fi)
Olli Kangas
Program director, Equal Society,
Strategic Research Council / Academy of Finland
Professor of Practice, University of Turku
(olli.kangas@utu.fi)