Trust in crisis: Europe’s social contract under threat

Years of crises have eroded citizens’ trust in institutions. Without it, the very fabric of our democracy is at risk.

Trust in times of crises

Jean Monnet, one of the founding fathers of the EU, famously foretold: 

Europe will be forged in crisis, and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises

In recent years, the EU has faced a polycrisis. The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly shook EU societies, followed by the war in Ukraine which triggered a surge in energy and food prices. This, in turn, ignited a cost-of-living crisis.

While on the surface Europe looks to have weathered the storm well, the strain of the last five years has triggered an insidious undertow: a deep erosion of trust both in the EU and the national institutions that hold the bloc together.

Trust is the glue that holds us together; it is the force of the social contract and the bedrock of democracy. Trust fosters cooperation, strengthens social cohesion, facilitates policy implementation, and encourages public engagement and participation. 

Without trust, societies fall victim to social fragmentation, which cripples cooperation and can empower populism, thereby undermining the stability and well-functioning of our societies during periods of geopolitical confrontation. This is particularly pertinent in light of  the upcoming European Parliament elections that will contribute to shaping the future direction of the European Union overall.

Decreasing trends of institutional trust

The fact is that while trust in the EU has actually increased since the onset of the pandemic, it still remains at a low level. More alarming, however, is that trust in national governments has decreased.  

The level of trust is unevenly distributed and decreased unevenly among socio-demographic groups. This means social fragmentation is a real risk.

In general, trust in both the EU and national governments is higher for students, employed and retired people. However, it is much lower amongst those who are unemployed or outside the labour market.  

Why the decline in trust?

The main drivers of this erosion of confidence include a mix of economic and social factors including: the cost-of-living crisis; a sense of being unheard; and the divisive power of alternative media sources such as social media, which serve to exploit and amplify discontent. These factors all lead to a growing disconnect between citizens and their governments.

The cost-of-living crisis

The fact is that people are struggling to make ends meet. Those more affected by the cost-of-living crisis show a much lower level of trust than the rest, particularly those who struggle to make ends meet or are behind in their energy bills. 

The cost-of-living crisis currently gripping Europe not only negatively affects people’s economic well-being, but it also chips away at their broader belief that governing bodies have the ability – or even the intention – to act in the best interests of their citizens. Escalating issues such as rising inflation, stagnant wages, and increased financial strain all serve to gradually unravel the very fabric of trust in institutions.
This affects some more than others. Low-income families, rural communities, unemployed people and low wage earners feel the burden more acutely and perceive a lack of targeted support from institutions, leading to a sense of unfairness and neglect. This can result in feelings of alienation and a decline in trust towards institutions seen as unresponsive to the plight of vulnerable groups.

Lack of recognition and feeling unheard

The fact is that a large part of the population in Europe feels a lack of political recognition, particularly those in rural communities with lower income levels and limited employment opportunities compared to urban areas. 

A crucial component of institutional trust hinges on the belief that citizens' voices are heard and that their concerns are acknowledged. However, many citizens across Europe, particularly those in rural and marginalised communities that are more vulnerable to the cost-of-living crisis, feel their concerns and grievances are not being adequately addressed by the EU. These people often feel ignored by policymakers, highlighting rural–urban disparities. This feeling is also common among those outside the labour market and those with lower levels of educational attainment.

This sense of invisibility and lack of recognition fosters resentment and fuels the flames of discontent, manifesting in various forms of protest and demonstration.

The amplification of discontent

The fact is that the rise of social media and alternative news sources amplifies feelings of exclusion and marginalisation. In particular, the use of social media as a main news source has demonstrably impacted public discourse and political attitudes.

Echo chambers can provide fertile ground for the dissemination and validation of polarising ‘us vs. them’ narratives that emphasise and reinforce a lack of recognition, thereby widening the gap between citizens and institutions. These virtual spaces, where users are primarily exposed to content that reinforces their existing beliefs, hinder exposure to diverse perspectives and can lead to the demonisation of opposing viewpoints. 
What’s more, the ease of content creation and dissemination on social media platforms facilitates the spread of misinformation and ‘fake news’. This fabricated or misleading information – often emotionally charged and sensationalised – can erode trust in established institutions by portraying them as corrupt, incompetent or out of touch with the concerns of ordinary citizens. Data confirms that those who use social media and non-traditional media sources as their main source of information have much lower levels of trust in institutions.

This trend is concerning because the fast-paced, often hostile nature of online discourse on social media can hinder constructive dialogue about complex issues and, instead, lead to social fragmentation. This decline in dialogue could make it difficult for institutions to communicate effectively and address public concerns in a way that fosters trust.

Consequences of diminished trust 

The fact is democracy doesn’t work without trust. 

When citizens lose trust in the institutions that underpin democratic processes, democracy itself loses its legitimacy. Then what? The value of participation is undermined, and the rule of law is thrown into question. The implications are alarming.

Data shows that those with low trust in institutions also have very low rates of satisfaction with democracy. This can lead to a rejection of existing democratic structures and a yearning for strong leadership that bypasses traditional institutions. Such trends potentially undermine democratic processes and, consequently, the stability of our societies.

A lack of institutional trust creates fertile ground for the rise of populist movements and anti-establishment sentiment. Populist leaders often exploit public disillusionment by portraying established institutions as corrupt, self-serving or out of touch.

Citizen disengagement and political polarisation 

When citizens see institutions as unresponsive or unrepresentative, they may become disengaged from the political process. This can manifest as decreased voter turnout, a decline in participation in civic activities and a general sense of political apathy. This disengagement weakens democratic systems by reducing the pool of active citizens who hold institutions accountable and contribute to a healthy political discourse.

Data show that those who are unwilling to vote in the next elections are those who have low levels of institutional trust.

A decline in institutional trust can exacerbate existing social divisions and fuel political polarisation. When citizens lose faith in shared institutions, they may turn inward, reinforcing their own group identities and vilifying those who hold different views. This hinders dialogue across ideological divides and undermines the ability of democracy to represent the diverse interests that exist in any given society.

EU support for Ukraine

The fact is that people with lower levels of trust in institutions are much less in favour of supporting Ukraine, providing humanitarian aid or assisting refugees.

This is of great concern in times of geopolitical tensions, particularly following the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. In times where unity is needed, low trust in institutions can lead to an opposition to EU support for Ukraine. While third countries could exploit this polarisation and lack of support, people with low levels of trust may view additional aid to Ukraine, however necessary, as a distraction from domestic issues like the cost-of-living crisis. This can fuel a perception that their leaders prioritise foreign concerns over their well-being. This disconnect can lead to public backlash and potentially embolden populist movements who exploit such sentiments. It also weakens the EU's ability to present a unified front in its support for Ukraine.

Data shows that the share of people with a low level of trust in institutions who believe that support to Ukraine – be it military or humanitarian – is too much is up to 5 times larger than those with a higher level of trust. Almost 50% of those with low levels of institutional trust believe that military support has been too much, and around 33% of them believe that humanitarian support to refugees has been too much. 

These are alarming numbers for the future of EU involvement in the crisis and leave the door open for third countries to work to further destabilise the EU.

Rebuilding institutional trust 

So, what can we do?

Rebuilding trust is crucial for the EU to navigate the challenges it faces and ensure a prosperous and united future for its citizens. Several key areas demand attention:

Effective and transparent dialogue: EU institutions and national governments must improve their dialogue and their communication with citizens. This involves fostering open and transparent dialogue, for instance through broader participation of citizens in the policymaking, actively listening to citizens’ concerns, addressing them directly also thought place-based policies, and ensuring clear and consistent messaging on key policies and decisions.

Delivering on promises: The EU needs to demonstrate its effectiveness by delivering on its promises and implementing policies that demonstrably improve the lives of its citizens. Ensuring equitable access to essential services, addressing regional inequalities, and finding solutions to shared challenges like migration and climate change will be crucial in regaining public confidence.

Combating disinformation and manipulation: The fight against disinformation and the manipulation of information online is crucial. This requires collaboration between governments, social media platforms and civil society organisations to tackle the spread of fake news and promote responsible online behaviour.

Investing in social cohesion: The EU should prioritise initiatives that foster social cohesion and bridge the gap between different communities. This includes supporting cultural exchange programs, promoting civic engagement and fostering a sense of shared European identity.

The decline in trust in the EU is a complex challenge with no easy solutions. However, by addressing the root causes of this problem, fostering open dialogue, delivering on promises, and investing in social cohesion, the EU can rebuild trust and ensure a more united and prosperous future for its citizens. This requires a collective effort from national governments, the EU institutions and civil society, all working together to bridge the divides and rebuild faith in the European project.

Image © Koshu Kunii/Unsplash