Analysing the Radius of Trust in Rural Cameroon
Survey data have generally found trust to be much lower in Africa than in developed countries. This paper analyses the extent to which trust decreases with social distance, using data from a survey conducted in a village in rural Cameroon. Participants are asked a number of questions about trust in people with varying levels of social distance: fellow group members, fellow villagers, people from neighbouring villages and people in general. The results indicate that the level of trust diminishes as social distance (the radius of trust) increases. There is more trust in fellow group members than there is in other villagers, and more trust in fellow villagers than there is in those outside the village. I also analyse the correlation between the respondents' characteristics and trust. A substantial part of the variation in levels of trust can be explained by observable individual characteristics. The main correlates of trust are education, whether the respondent is divorced and the number of years lived in the village. Divorced persons are significantly less trusting, while increases in the number of years lived in the village are associated with increases in the levels of trust. People who have completed primary education are significantly more trusting. In only one case (trust in fellow villagers) is age significantly correlated with trust, and its effect is negative. Income is significantly positively correlated with trust in fellow villagers and trust in people from neighbouring villages as well, but uncorrelated with trust in people in general. Respondents' personal characteristics are insignificantly correlated with trust as social distance increases. Copyright 2010 The author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for the Study of African Economies. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: firstname.lastname@example.org, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 19 (2010)
Issue (Month): 5 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK|
Phone: +44-(0)1865 271084
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.jae.oupjournals.org/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jafrec:v:19:y:2010:i:5:p:691-717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.