IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v14y2025i9p522-d1737688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pilot Study on Institutional Trust, Security, and Democratic Support in Ecuador During the 2024 Crisis

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Chiliquinga-Amaya

    (Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Educación Comercial y Derecho FACSECYD, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador)

  • Michela Andrade-Vásquez

    (Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Educación Comercial y Derecho FACSECYD, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador)

  • Patricio Álvarez-Muñoz

    (Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Educación Comercial y Derecho FACSECYD, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador
    Universidad Agraria del Ecuador, Guayaquil 090102, Guayas, Ecuador)

  • Romina Sánchez

    (Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Educación Comercial y Derecho FACSECYD, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador)

  • Efraín Vásquez

    (Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Educación Comercial y Derecho FACSECYD, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador)

  • Marco Faytong-Haro

    (Facultad de Investigación, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Guayas, Ecuador
    Instituto de Investigación, Universidad Agraria del Ecuador, Guayaquil 090102, Guayas, Ecuador)

Abstract

This pilot study seeks to answer the following question: How does the ongoing security crisis in Ecuador shape public support for democracy and approval of the incumbent government? Using a panel design with monthly surveys of 84 university students between June and November, perceptions of the armed forces, police, political parties, parliament, and ideological self-placement were assessed. The analysis shows that trust in the armed forces and the police significantly increases the probability of approving of the government, although only trust in the police is positively associated with the approval of democracy. For political institutions, only trust in parliament had a significant impact on both the dependent variables. Trust in political parties was not statistically significant. These findings suggest that, in crisis contexts, security institutions reinforce the legitimacy of the executive, while the legislative branch can become a key agent of democratic stability. Constant monitoring of institutional confidence is recommended, considering the risk of autocratization in presidential regimes in scenarios of prolonged conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Chiliquinga-Amaya & Michela Andrade-Vásquez & Patricio Álvarez-Muñoz & Romina Sánchez & Efraín Vásquez & Marco Faytong-Haro, 2025. "Pilot Study on Institutional Trust, Security, and Democratic Support in Ecuador During the 2024 Crisis," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:9:p:522-:d:1737688
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/9/522/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/9/522/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerschewski, Johannes, 2013. "The three pillars of stability: legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 20(1), pages 13-38.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fenja Søndergaard Møller, 2019. "Blue blood or true blood: Why are levels of intrastate armed conflict so low in Middle Eastern monarchies?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(5), pages 517-544, September.
    2. Ryan H Murphy, 2020. "Does democracy die in recessions? A descriptive analysis of aggregate demand shortfalls and regime transition," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 63-76, February.
    3. Vakhtang Putkaradze, 2023. "The Dictator Dilemma: The Distortion of Information Flow in Autocratic Regimes and Its Consequences," Papers 2310.01666, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    4. Caner Bakir, 2023. "The vicious circle of policy advisory systems and knowledge regimes in consolidated authoritarian regimes," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 419-439.
    5. John Ishiyama & Marijke Breuning & Taekbin Kim, 2024. "Personalism and purges: Are personalist dictators more likely to engage in elite purges?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1180-1192, July.
    6. Vadhanavisala Onvara, 2019. "Democracy Towards Authoritarianism Under Illiberal Populist Leaders in Hungary and Poland," Central and Eastern European Review, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 31-48, December.
    7. Seraphine F. Maerz & Carsten Q. Schneider, 2020. "Comparing public communication in democracies and autocracies: automated text analyses of speeches by heads of government," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 517-545, April.
    8. Schlumberger, Oliver, 2021. "Puzzles of political change in the Middle East: Political liberalisation, authoritarian resilience and the question of systemic change," IDOS Discussion Papers 5/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    9. Todor S. Lohwasser & Felix Hoch & Franz W. Kellermanns, 2022. "Strength in Stability: A Meta-Analysis of Family Firm Performance Moderated by Institutional Stability and Regime Type," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(1), pages 117-158, January.
    10. Andreas Lichter & Max Löffler & Sebastian Siegloch, 2021. "The Long-Term Costs of Government Surveillance: Insights from Stasi Spying in East Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 741-789.
    11. Jinrui Xi, 2018. "Sustainable Legitimacy: Chinese Government Inspections and Public Approval of Village Leadership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Lorch, Jasmin & Bunk, Bettina, 2016. "Gender Politics, Authoritarian Regime Resilience, and the Role of Civil Society in Algeria and Mozambique," GIGA Working Papers 292, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    13. Ruckteschler, Christian & Malik, Adeel & Eibl, Ferdinand, 2022. "Politics of trade protection in an autocracy: Evidence from an EU tariff liberalization in Morocco," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Olga Filatova & Yury Kabanov & Yuri Misnikov, 2019. "Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 133-144.
    15. Tsourapas, Gerasimos, 2019. "The Long Arm of the Arab State," SocArXiv 265fg, Center for Open Science.
    16. Emmanuelle Auriol & Jean-Philippe Platteau & Thierry Verdier, 2023. "The Quran and the Sword," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 1772-1820.
    17. Wyrwich, Michael & Steinberg, Philip J. & Noseleit, Florian & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Is open innovation imprinted on new ventures? The cooperation-inhibiting legacy of authoritarian regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    18. Darwisheh,Housam, 2025. "Repression, Co-optation, and Legitimation: Authoritarian Resilience and Youth Movement Fragmentation in Sisi's Egypt," IDE Discussion Papers 956, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    19. von Haldenwang, Christian, 2016. "Measuring legitimacy: new trends, old shortcomings?," IDOS Discussion Papers 18/2016, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    20. Andrea Vaccaro, 2023. "Digging deeper into the state-democracy nexus: The role of civic participation in fostering impartial bureaucracy," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2023-85, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:9:p:522-:d:1737688. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.