Trust and Hope in Democracy and Regulation

1
Trust and Hope in Democracy and Regulation
Valerie Braithwaite Regulatory Institutions
Network The Australian National University
Queensland Department of Environment and Resource
Management, July 9, 2010
2
Simple models of regulation
The traditional model from law command and
control The dominant model from economics
rational cost-benefit analysis Neither do the
job by themselves
3
Regulation is
steering the flow of events
4
The way forward
Compliance cannot be elicited effectively either
through making law and imposing penalties or
through direct appeals to self interest. But both
are an important part of a coordinated,
multi-pronged and responsive compliance plan
(Gunningham Grabosky Smart Regulation 1998,
Ayres J Braithwaite Responsive Regulation 1992)
5
Compliance without coercion
Know what is required Have capacity or ability
to comply Willing to comply (Bandura 1986
Carver Scheier 1998 Kagan Scholz 1984
Mitchell 1994)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Turning talk into action
Law - Authorities can use coercion to gain
compliance Incentives Authorities can make it
easier to comply and show benefits Opportunities
Authorities make it hard not to
comply Significant Others Authorities can
delegate compliance management to others
9
New implications
Nodal governance (Burris, Drahos and Shearing
2005 Shearing and Wood 2003) Government
regulates the regulators Meta-regulation
(Grabosky 1997) Government can appear
ineffectual Government can lose face with the
people
10
Two models about steering
Wheel of Social Alignments Responsive Regulatory
Pyramids
11
Braithwaite, Valerie (2009) Tax evasion In M.
Tonry, Handbook on Crime and Public Policy
Oxford Oxford University Press
12
Figure 1 The Regulatory System surrounding the
Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC)
and Unlawful Non-Citizens (UNC)/Bridging Visa E
Holders (BVE)
13
What have we learnt?
Context matters Individual differences
matter Social relationships matterWe are in
the business of managing personal and social
identities
14
Responsive regulation is a practice that
addresses and deals with complexity. It
welcomes the voice of dissidents, deliberates
on shared community goals and understandings,
enforces agreed upon standards, preferably
through teaching, persuading and encouraging
those who fall short, but it uses coercion when
necessary to achieve its regulatory objectives.
15
GNR gang fighting control pyramid in Timor-Leste
Courtesy of John Braithwaite
16
The ATO Compliance Model
17
ATO Compliance Model
18
Regulatory Pyramid
Strengths-based Pyramid
From J. Braithwaite, T. Makkai and V.
Braithwaite, Regulating Aged Care, Edward Elgar,
2007.
19
Network partner
Network partner
Network partner
Network partner
Network partner
Network partner
Networked regulation plus-plus
Network partner
Network partner
Networked regulation plus
Network partner
Network partner
Networked regulation
Network partner
Network partner
Self-regulation
J. Braithwaite, Responsive Regulation and
Developing Economies, World Development, 34,
2006, 884-898.
20
Responsive regulatory models
Be responsive to the conduct of those being
regulated in deciding whether a more or less
intrusive intervention should be used to gain
compliance Use only as much force as is required
to elicit the desired outcome Set out a series
of options that an authority might use to win
compliance, sequenced from the least intrusive at
the bottom to the most intrusive at the top Make
people aware that coercion will be used, but that
most are expected to comply with education and
persuasion because the regulatory system has the
support of the democracy/community The level of
intrusiveness may be escalated up the pyramid
until the intervention elicits the desired
response De-escalation is desirable, once
cooperation is forthcoming
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
Motivational Postures
are sets of beliefs and attitudes that sum up how
individuals feel about and wish to position
themselves in relation to authority.
Motivational postures send social signals or
messages to the authority about how that
authority is regarded.
26
The Central Ideas of Threat Agency
and Social Distance
Authority threatens everyone, by virtue of being
an authority. As an authoritys threat
increases, people use their motivational postures
to adjust their social distance and establish a
comfort zone for themselves in relation to the
authority. Different contexts bring to the fore
different postures, and different postures direct
individuals to make different responses, some
obliging and deferential, others adversarial and
dismissive.
27
Five motivational postures
Commitment Capitulation Resistance Disengagemen
t Game playing
28
How Do We Measure Socially Proximal Postures?
Commitment (alpha reliability coefficient .82 homogeneity ratio .43) Paying tax is the right thing to do. Paying tax is a responsibility that should be willingly accepted by all Australians. I feel a moral obligation to pay my tax. Paying my tax ultimately advantages everyone. I think of tax paying as helping the government do worthwhile things. Overall, I pay my tax with good will. I resent paying tax. (reversed) I accept responsibility for paying my fair share of tax.
Note Respondents were asked to rate each
statement on a five-point scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
29
How Do We Measure Socially Proximal Postures?
Capitulation (alpha reliability coefficient .63 homogeneity ratio .27) No matter how cooperative or uncooperative the Tax Office is, the best policy is to always be cooperative with them If you cooperate with the Tax Office, they are likely to be cooperative with you. Even if the Tax office finds that I am doing something wrong, they will respect me in the long run as long as I admit my mistakes. The Tax Office is encouraging to those who have difficulty meeting their obligations through no fault of their own. The tax system may not be perfect, but it works well enough for most of us.
Note Respondents were asked to rate each
statement on a five-point scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
30
How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures?
Resistance (alpha reliability coefficient .68 homogeneity ratio .31) As a society, we need more people willing to take a stand against the Tax Office. Its important not to let the Tax Office push you around. The Tax Office is more interested in catching you for doing the wrong thing, than helping you do the right thing. It's impossible to satisfy the Tax Office completely. Once the Tax Office has you branded as a non-compliant taxpayer, they will never change their mind. If you don't cooperate with the Tax Office, they will get tough with you.
Note Respondents were asked to rate each
statement on a five-point scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
31
How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures?
Disengagement (alpha reliability coefficient .64 homogeneity ratio .27) I don't really know what the Tax Office expects of me and I'm not about to ask. I don't care if I am not doing the right thing by the Tax Office. If I find out that I am not doing what the Tax Office wants, Im not going to lose any sleep over it. I personally dont think that there is much the Tax Office can do to me to make me pay tax if I dont want to. If the Tax Office gets tough with me, I will become uncooperative with them.
Note Respondents were asked to rate each
statement on a five-point scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
32
How Do We Measure Socially Distal Postures?
Game playing (alpha reliability coefficient .69 homogeneity ratio .32) I enjoy talking to friends about loopholes in the tax system. I like the game of finding the grey area of tax law. I enjoy the challenge of minimizing the tax I have to pay. I enjoy spending time working out how changes in the tax system will affect me. The Tax Office respects taxpayers who can give them a run for their money.
Note Respondents were asked to rate each
statement on a five-point scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
33
(No Transcript)
34
12
Game playing
11
9
Disengagement
8
50
Resistance
55
70
Capitulation
62
82
Hope
Commitment
Democracy
84
0
20
40
60
80
100
Percent agreement
Percent endorsing each motivational posture to
federal government
35
From Postures to Defiance
A factor analysis of the postures produced two dimensions that represented two kinds of defiance One was critical, but accepting of the system Resistance The other was cynical and rejecting of the system Dismissiveness
36
Defiance
is a signal that individuals express
attitudinally or behaviourally toward an
authority (and shared with others) that
communicates unwillingness to follow the
authoritys prescribed path without question or
protest. Any of us can experience, indeed
practice defiance if the circumstances are right.
37
Two Types, Two Purposes
Resistance The purpose is to change the course
of action that the authority is taking but not
destroy the authority itself. I dont like the
way you are doing this and I want you to change,
but I dont dispute that we need an authority to
regulate us in this area
Dismissiveness The purpose is to disable the
authority, to prevent the authority from
intervening in this aspect of life You have no
business telling me what to do no-one should
have the authority that you have over me
38
Resistant defiance is
A battle between pathways of moral obligation and
of grievance. Moral obligation or the belief
that the law should be obeyed reins in a persons
defiance. Grievance or the belief that
government has broken its contract with citizens
fuels defiance.
39
Impact on Governance Resistance
Resistant defiance is noisy and time consuming
but does not necessarily lead to law
breaking. Reducing resistant defiance means
authorities have to improve their institutional
integrity. Individual agencies can improve their
institutional integrity, but importantly
government needs to lead by example.
40
Dismissive Defiance is
A battle between pathways of moral obligation and
of status seeking. Moral obligation or the
belief that one shouldnt bend the rules to get
ahead reins in a persons defiance. Status
seeking and competitiveness involving going
around the state and finding new alternative
authorities fuels dismissive defiance.
41
Impact on Governance Dismissive Defiance
Dismissive defiance involves competition to beat
the system it is strategic, non-responsive to
integrity interventions and leads to law
breaking. Dismissive defiance threatens
government authorities and can become organized
around alternative authorities. Agencies can
improve their institutional integrity, but this
may not contain dismissive defiance. Power
sharing may be the only option for dismissive
defiance.
42
Disillusionment with Democracy
Values (seeking status, harmony)
43
Disillusionment with Democracy
Values (seeking status, harmony)
Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling
oppressed)
Perceived Deterrence
44
Disillusionment with Democracy
Values (seeking status, harmony)
Social Modelling (bending rules, winning)
Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling
oppressed)
Perceived Deterrence
45
Disillusionment with Democracy
Values (seeking status, harmony)
Social Modelling (bending rules, winning)
Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling
oppressed)
Defiance (resistance, dismissiveness)
Perceived Deterrence
46
Perceived Institutional Integrity
Disillusionment with Democracy
Trust
Values (seeking status, harmony)
Social Modelling (bending rules, winning)
Coping Styles (thinking morally, feeling
oppressed)
Defiance (resistance, dismissiveness)
Perceived Deterrence
47
Trust in Institutions
Institution trusting a lot or a fair bit
Insurance companies 22
Media 29
Banks 36
Government 35
Law courts 48
Tax authority 52
Local police station 80
Local schools 78
Local hospitals 77
48
48
Freemarket
38
40
85
Tax HFHE (L) 2005
Disillusionment
87
Hope 2003
Tax CHFAS 2000
86
0
20
40
60
80
100
Percent agree or strongly agree
A comparison of levels of disillusionment with
Australian democracy and support for small
government and free markets 2000 - 2005
49
Hope is a process of
identifying goals having capacity to achieve the
goals having institutional pathways for the
realization of the goals
50
Private Hope Hopes that individuals have for
themselves Collective Hope Hopes that
individuals have for their community or
nation Public Hope creation of feel-good
community sentiments by spin, marketing
51
Charters of Respect
Content Transparency in quality decision-making
and respectful treatment of taxpayers Idea
Procedural justice ? Increases legitimacy of
rules and law, cooperation with authority and
compliance Obtaining favourable decisions or
outcomes is far less important to individuals
than experiencing procedural fairness Procedural
fairness means impartiality in decisions,
consistency in decisions, being treated with
respect Reference Tyler, Tom (2008) Psychology
and Institutional Design, Review of Law and
Economics 4 (3) 801-887.
52
Implications for Governance
Culture of respect Strazdins (2000) concept of emotional work (help, share/empathize, regulate) Institutional integrity a meaningful and valued purpose achieved with justice (procedural and distributive) Authentic, open and accountable deliberation opportunity to show benefits, to acknowledge and diligently monitor risks Appreciation of cooperation