Skip Navigation


Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on August 8, 2005
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2006 30(3):371-387; doi:10.1093/cje/bei064
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/3/371    most recent
bei064v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beugelsdijk, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow B40 - General
Right arrow O11 - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
Right arrow O47 - Measurement of Economic Growth; [...]
Right arrow Z13 - Social Norms and Social Capital; Social Networks
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

Article

A note on the theory and measurement of trust in explaining differences in economic growth

Sjoerd Beugelsdijk*

* Nijmegen School of Management, The Netherlands

Address for correspondence: Nijmegen School of Management, Thomson Van Aquinostraat 5.0.65, Po Box 9108, 6500 H K Nijmegen, The Netherlands; email: s.beugelsdijk{at}fm.ru.nl

Abstract

This paper takes issue with the trend to attribute differences in economic growth rates to differences in interpersonal trust. I discuss the World Values Survey (WVS) measure that is used to operationalise trust at the macro level. I hypothesise that there is a mismatch between the theoretical argument and the empirical operationalisation of trust. Instead of measuring trust, the WVS measure may instead proxy the well-functioning of institutions. I provide circumstantial evidence for this thesis by a principal components analysis of trust and institutions and a robustness test of Zak and Knack's (2001. Trust and growth, Economic Journal, vol. 111, 295–321) seminal study on trust and economic growth.

Key Words: Trust • Institutions • Economic growth

JEL classifications: B40, O11, Z13

Manuscript received April 19, 2004; final version received October 25, 2004.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Cross-Cultural ResearchHome page
A. M. Ahmed and O. Salas
Trust in India and Sweden: An Experimental Examination of the Fukuyama Conjecture
Cross-Cultural Research, November 1, 2008; 42(4): 420 - 429.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
S. Beugelsdijk
Trust, institutions and the 'generally speaking question': a reply to Uslaner
Camb. J. Econ., July 1, 2008; 32(4): 633 - 638.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Sociol RevHome page
C. Bjornskov
Social Trust and Fractionalization: A Possible Reinterpretation
Eur. Sociol. Rev., July 1, 2008; 24(3): 271 - 283.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
E. M. Uslaner
The foundations of trust: macro and micro
Camb. J. Econ., March 1, 2008; 32(2): 289 - 294.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.