IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v11y2015i04p823-846_00.html

Trust and prosocial behaviour in a process of state capacity building: the case of the Palestinian territories1

Author

Listed:
  • ANDRIANI, LUCA
  • SABATINI, FABIO

Abstract

This paper contributes to the literature by conducting the first empirical investigation into the determinants of prosocial behaviour in the Palestinian Territories, with a focus on the role of trust and institutions. Drawing on a unique dataset collected through the administration of a questionnaire to a representative sample of the population of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, we have found that institutional trust is the strongest predictor of prosociality. This result suggests that, in collectivist societies with low levels of generalized trust, the lack of citizens’ confidence in the fairness and efficiency of public institutions may compromise social order. The strengthening of institutional trust may also reinforce prosocial behaviour in individualist societies, where a decline in generalized trust has been documented by empirical studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Andriani, Luca & Sabatini, Fabio, 2015. "Trust and prosocial behaviour in a process of state capacity building: the case of the Palestinian territories1," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 823-846, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:11:y:2015:i:04:p:823-846_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137414000575/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabatini, Fabio & Sarracino, Francesco, 2013. "Will Facebook save or destroy social capital? An empirical investigation into the effect of online interactions on trust and networks," EconStor Preprints 88145, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Sabatini, Fabio & Sarracino, Francesco, "undated". "E-participation: Social Capital and the Internet," Economy and Society 186606, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Daria Denti & Alessandra Faggian, 2021. "Where do angry birds tweet? Income inequality and online hate in Italy," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 483-506.
    4. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Fabio Sabatini, 2017. "Social cooperatives, social welfare associations and social networks," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 75(2), pages 212-230, April.
    5. Piyapong Janmaimool & Chaweewan Denpaiboon, 2016. "Rural Villagers’ Quality of Life Improvement by Economic Self-Reliance Practices and Trust in the Philosophy of Sufficiency Economy," Societies, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Fabio Sabatini & Francesco Sarracino, 2019. "Online Social Networks and Trust," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 229-260, February.
    7. Dimitrios Zikos, 2020. "Revisiting the Role of Institutions in Transformative Contexts: Institutional Change and Conflicts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Habibov, Nazim & Cheung, Alex, 2016. "The impact of unofficial out-of-pocket payments on satisfaction with education in Post-Soviet countries," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 70-79.
    9. Tamilina, Larysa & Ma, Wenting, 2024. "Understanding the Ukrainian Syndrome: Recipes for High and Low Institutional Trust Amid the Military Conflict," MPRA Paper 123112, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Luca Andriani & Gaygysyz Ashyrov, 2022. "Corruption and life satisfaction: Evidence from a transition survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(4), pages 511-535, November.
    11. Filippetti, Andrea & Vezzani, Antonio, 2022. "The political economy of public research, or why some governments commit to research more than others," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • H79 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Other
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:cup:jinsec:v:11:y:2015:i:04:p:823-846_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    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.