A Multidisciplinary Analysis of Emergence, Stability, and Consequences

Theoretical Framework: Defining High Trust Societies

Defining Trust and High Trust Societies

At its core, trust is a social expectation and a willingness to be vulnerable based on positive perceptions of others' behavior. Fukuyama famously defines trust as "the expectation of regular, honest, and cooperative behavior, based on commonly shared norms" minneapolisfed.org. A high trust society is one in which such expectations are broadly shared, meaning that individuals confidently trust most other people and institutions in their community. In these societies, ethical norms of honesty and reciprocity are widely internalized, enabling cooperation beyond close personal circles minneapolisfed.org.

High trust societies are characterized by extensive social capital – the networks and norms that facilitate collective action – which "arises from the prevalence of trust in a society" minneapolisfed.org. By contrast, low trust societies have a narrow "radius of trust," where people trust only their family or in-group, leading to fragmented social cohesion minneapolisfed.org.

In sum, a high trust society is one with strong generalized trust (trust in strangers), robust institutional trust, and cultural norms that sustain honest, cooperative behavior at the societal scale.

Trust Across Disciplines

Trust is a multifaceted concept studied in sociology, political science, economics, and psychology. Each discipline sheds light on how high trust emerges and why it matters, as summarized below:

Sociology

Sociologists view trust as a fundamental social construct that underpins social order. Classic works by Luhmann, Barber, and others describe trust as essential to reduce the complexity of modern life. Trust acts as a heuristic that allows people to interact without constantly fearing exploitation, thereby "reducing the complexity" of social relations.

Lewis and Weigert (1985) even call trust "indispensable in social relationships," and Zucker (1986) argues it is "vital for the maintenance of cooperation in society… necessary as grounds for even the most routine, everyday interaction" revista.appsicologia.org.

High trust societies, from a sociological perspective, are rich in social capital: dense networks of civic engagement, norms of reciprocity, and widespread interpersonal trust. These elements reinforce each other, creating communities where collective action and mutual aid flourish.

Political Science

In political science, trust is seen as the glue of stable governance and democracy. A baseline of trust in institutions (government, courts, police) and in fellow citizens is considered indispensable for democracy. In Making Democracy Work, Putnam's seminal study of Italian regions, the areas with longstanding traditions of civic engagement and social trust enjoyed far superior institutional performance and responsive governance en.wikipedia.org.

Citizens' mutual trust and participation produced effective, accountable governments, whereas low-trust regions were plagued by clientelism and dysfunction en.wikipedia.org. High trust societies thus typically feature strong, transparent institutions and low corruption, creating a virtuous cycle: trust in government encourages compliance and civic participation, which in turn improves governance.

Indeed, social trust, norms of reciprocity, and effective institutions are "mutually reinforcing" en.wikipedia.org. Political scientists highlight that institutional trust (confidence that authorities and public institutions will act fairly) is both an outcome of good governance and a necessary condition for governments to implement policies without coercion. In high trust societies, citizens grant legitimacy to institutions, resolving collective problems through cooperation rather than coercion.

Economics

Economists emphasize the role of trust as an informal institution that reduces transaction costs and facilitates trade and innovation. Nobel laureate Kenneth Arrow observed that "virtually every commercial transaction has within itself an element of trust" ourworldindata.org. Trust lowers the need for expensive contracts, monitoring, and enforcement, thus enabling more efficient markets.

In high trust societies, businesses can rely on handshake deals and informal agreements underpinned by mutual confidence, greatly reducing the friction of economic activity minneapolisfed.org. Empirical studies find a strong positive correlation between societal trust and economic prosperity: countries with higher interpersonal trust also tend to have higher GDP per capita ourworldindata.org.

More importantly, recent research demonstrates a causal link: trust appears to drive economic growth by encouraging investment and innovation ourworldindata.org. Mechanisms include lower transaction costs, greater investment in public goods, and a more dynamic entrepreneurial sector ourworldindata.org.

Fukuyama categorizes nations like the US, Germany, and Japan as historically "high-trust" economies able to form large-scale corporations and cooperative enterprises, whereas lower-trust cultures (e.g. Italy, China) rely more on family firms and narrow circles minneapolisfed.org. Thus, from an economic perspective, a high trust society is a form of invisible capital that fosters innovation and growth minneapolisfed.org.

Psychology

Psychology provides the micro-level foundations of societal trust. Trust formation begins with individual dispositions and early socialization. Developmental psychologists (e.g. Erikson) note that infants who reliably experience care develop a basic sense of trust, which later extends outward. Personality traits like agreeableness or optimism can influence one's propensity to trust.

At the collective level, cultural psychology shows that shared values and norms condition people's readiness to trust strangers. For example, societies with cultural norms of fairness and charity tend to cultivate individuals with a "trusting stance" toward others. Trust is also studied through experiments like the trust game, which reveal that many people exhibit an innate willingness to trust and reward trustworthiness, even when rational self-interest might predict otherwise.

In high trust cultures, these psychological tendencies are reinforced by positive feedback: trustworthy behavior is common, so individuals learn through experience that extending trust is rewarded. Moreover, psychological research finds that trust is closely tied to well-being and social connection – people in high trust societies report greater happiness and lower anxiety, as trust reduces the fear of exploitation in daily interactions theguardian.com.

Overall, psychology helps explain how collective trust emerges from individual beliefs and experiences, and how those, in turn, are shaped by the surrounding culture's norms and institutions.

Why Trust Matters for Societal Functioning

Across all these disciplines, a consistent theme is that trust is a foundational "public good" revista.appsicologia.org for society. High trust isn't just a moral nice-to-have – it has concrete consequences for how societies function. When generalized trust is high, communities can more easily overcome collective action problems, build public goods, and enforce social norms.

Everyday transactions – from economic exchanges to neighborly cooperation – proceed with lower friction ourworldindata.org. People are more willing to engage in civic life, volunteer, and share knowledge when they trust their fellow citizens and leaders gu.se.

High trust in government improves policy compliance (for example, citizens will pay taxes honestly if they trust that others do the same and that the funds will be used properly). In short, trust underlies social cohesion and enables the "complex web of cooperation" on which modern societies rely revista.appsicologia.org.

Conversely, low trust imposes steep costs: if people expect cheating or incompetence, they withdraw from public life, contracts become costlier, corruption proliferates, and economic activity shifts to the informal sector. The stakes of trust are vividly illustrated by cross-country differences. In Norway and Sweden, over 60% of people say "most people can be trusted," whereas in low-trust societies like Brazil or Peru, that figure is below 10% ourworldindata.org.

Such differences translate into divergent outcomes in governance, economic prosperity, and social peace, as summarized below.

Characteristics of High-Trust vs. Low-Trust Societies

Generalized Social Trust

• High-Trust Society:
  • High levels of interpersonal trust
  • Majority believe "most people can be trusted" (~60% in Scandinavia)
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Low levels of interpersonal trust
  • Most people fear exploitation (<10% in parts of Latin America)

Scope of Trust ("Trust Radius")

• High-Trust Society:
  • Broad radius extending beyond kin
  • Trust extends to out-groups
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Narrow trust focused on family/clan
  • Suspicion of outsiders

Institutional Quality

• High-Trust Society:
  • Transparent, accountable institutions
  • Low corruption
  • Impartial rule of law
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Weak institutions
  • Prevalent corruption
  • Nepotism and patronage

Economic Organization

• High-Trust Society:
  • Large-scale enterprises
  • Low transaction costs
  • High innovation and investment
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Family-centered businesses dominate
  • High transaction costs
  • Reduced investment

Social Capital & Civic Life

• High-Trust Society:
  • Strong civic engagement
  • Dense networks of community groups
  • Active volunteering
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Weak civic engagement
  • Few effective civil society organizations
  • Low volunteering rates

Social Norms and Values

• High-Trust Society:
  • Emphasis on honesty and reciprocity
  • Concern for common good
  • Internalized ethical norms
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Loyalty confined to in-group
  • Endemic skepticism
  • Amoral familialism

Governance and Stability

• High-Trust Society:
  • Stable democracy
  • High civic participation
  • Peaceful conflict resolution
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Unstable/authoritarian politics
  • Polarization
  • Higher conflict/crime rates

Quality of Life Outcomes

• High-Trust Society:
  • Higher happiness and satisfaction
  • Strong social cohesion
  • Well-provisioned public goods
• Low-Trust Society:
  • Lower well-being
  • Weak cohesion
  • Poor public services
  • High inequality

Historical and Contemporary Examples of High Trust Societies in the West

Historical trajectories illustrate how high trust societies have formed and what benefits they have reaped. Here we examine three Western contexts often cited for their high levels of societal trust: post-WWII Scandinavia, post-war Western Europe, and late 20th-century America. Each case highlights how trust evolved in specific cultural and institutional settings.

Post-WWII Scandinavia: The Nordic Trust Paradigm

Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland) are frequently regarded as prototypes of high trust societies. In the aftermath of World War II, these relatively small, ethnically homogeneous nations built on traditions of social solidarity to create modern welfare states. By the late 20th century, surveys showed the Nordics consistently had the highest interpersonal trust in the world – in Sweden and Norway around two-thirds of people say that most others can be trusted ourworldindata.org.

Several factors help explain this exceptional trust. Culturally, the Nordic countries inherited communitarian values (some tracing back to Protestant egalitarian ethics and rural self-governance traditions) that emphasize honesty, Janteloven (the Nordic norm discouraging excessive individual ego), and inclusion. Politically, Scandinavia developed universalist welfare states after WWII that provided education, healthcare, and social security for all citizens, thereby reducing inequality and social risk. This universalistic approach fostered a sense of shared fate and fairness, which bolstered trust across classes gu.se.

Economically, strong labor unions and employers' associations forged cooperative labor relations (the "social partnership" model), avoiding the class conflict seen elsewhere. This culminated in the famous Nordic model of capitalism: open and competitive markets combined with a generous safety net and collective bargaining. Notably, the Danish concept of "flexicurity" – high labor market flexibility with strong unemployment protections – "rests on—and bolsters—trust between employers and employees" foreignaffairs.com.

In practice, a Danish worker who loses a job trusts that the society will support retraining and a new opportunity, while businesses trust that workers will adapt to change, enabling the country to embrace globalization without fracturing social cohesion foreignaffairs.com.

The outcomes of Nordic high trust are visible in governance and quality of life: the region consistently ranks among the lowest in corruption and highest in government effectiveness gu.se. Citizens' trust in public institutions is reinforced by decades of reliable, low-corruption public services. Social trust also feeds an exceptionally vibrant civil society – Scandinavians have some of the world's highest rates of membership in voluntary associations and community groups gu.se.

In short, post-WWII Scandinavia achieved a self-reinforcing high-trust equilibrium: inclusive institutions and cultural norms created trust, which in turn allowed those institutions to function effectively and adapt to modern challenges while maintaining social solidarity.

Post-War Western Europe: Rebuilding Trust Through Democracy and Welfare

In Western Europe, the period after World War II through the late 20th century saw a remarkable reconstruction not only of economies and cities, but also of social cohesion and trust. The devastations of war had ruptured social fabrics, and in some countries initial levels of trust were low (wartime betrayals and hardships bred understandable suspicion). However, the establishment of stable democracies and broadly shared prosperity in the post-war decades provided the conditions for trust to grow.

Key Western European nations like West Germany, France, the Netherlands, and the UK all implemented some variant of the welfare state and mixed economy in the post-war era. The Marshall Plan and domestic reforms jump-started economic growth, creating jobs and improving living standards across classes. As inequality fell and a middle-class society emerged, people's confidence in the social contract increased.

For example, West Germany's "social market economy" balanced free enterprise with worker protections and social insurance, which helped reconcile former class conflicts. Coupled with the memory of totalitarianism's horrors, this created strong public commitment to democratic institutions. By the 1960s–1970s, citizens in Western Europe had relatively high trust in their governments and fellow citizens, especially compared to the interwar period.

A culture of consensus often prevailed (e.g. the post-war consensus in Britain, or konzertierte Aktion in West Germany), wherein political parties and social partners sought compromise rather than extreme confrontation, reflecting and reinforcing mutual trust. Western Europe's high trust was also evident in the emergence of the European Community – the willingness of nations and peoples to cooperate and surrender some sovereignty to a common good was underpinned by growing trust between former adversaries.

Socially, the post-war baby boom generation grew up in unprecedented security, often translating to optimistic and trusting outlooks. By the late 20th century, many Western European societies enjoyed both high social trust (people felt safe in their communities and believed in the "stranger on the street") and high political trust (confidence in institutions).

However, this trust was not uniform across Europe – for instance, Scandinavia and the Netherlands scored higher on interpersonal trust than Italy or France, where regional and historical divides persisted minneapolisfed.org. Importantly, where trust lagged (e.g. in parts of Southern Italy), economic and governance outcomes were poorer, underscoring the trust-development link.

Overall, the Western European experience suggests that inclusive institutions, social safety nets, and democratic stability in the post-war decades enabled societies to overcome past traumas and foster high trust, which in turn contributed to unprecedented social and economic success in the latter 20th century.

Late 20th-Century America: High Trust and its Unraveling

The United States in the mid-20th century is often cited as a case of a high trust society that later faced decline. In the decades following WWII (approximately the 1940s through 1960s), American society had strong communal bonds and institutions that cultivated trust. Community life was vibrant – this was the era of peak participation in civic organizations, churches, unions, and clubs across America historyofsocialwork.org.

In 1960, roughly 55–60% of Americans agreed that "most people can be trusted," a strikingly high figure by both historical and international standards pewresearch.org.

Several factors contributed to this high trust. The U.S. emerged from WWII economically dominant, with rising incomes widely shared (the rising tide lifted most boats in the 1950s). A sense of national unity was reinforced by external threats (the Cold War), which often galvanized Americans to see each other as one people. Government institutions, while not without flaws, enjoyed broad confidence – trust in the federal government was very high in the early 1960s.

Socially, homogeneity in many communities (e.g. ethnically European, or in small-town America) and the prominence of integrative institutions (public schools, the military draft, mass media that created a common culture) helped produce a shared identity and baseline of trust. Political scientist Robert Putnam notes that in this period Americans were deeply engaged in civic life: they joined PTAs, sports leagues, professional associations, and civic clubs in record numbers, building dense networks of reciprocity historyofsocialwork.org.

This rich social capital meant neighbors knew and looked out for each other. The late 20th century portion of this story, however, includes the warning signs of trust erosion. Starting in the late 1960s and accelerating through the 1970s–1990s, the U.S. experienced declines in social trust and institutional confidence. Surveys show that by 1998 only about one-third of Americans said most people can be trusted, down from more than half in 1960 pewresearch.org.

Putnam famously documented this trend in Bowling Alone, showing declines in membership of civic organizations and community activities after the 1960s historyofsocialwork.org.

Factors behind America's trust decline likely included the tumult of the 1960s (assassinations, Vietnam War, Watergate) which shattered confidence in leaders, rising economic inequality after the 1970s, increased residential mobility and suburbanization (weakening community ties), and more recently, growing racial and cultural heterogeneity without commensurate integration.

By the late 20th century, American society was internally more divided and less trusting than in mid-century – a shift that has had profound consequences for its politics and social cohesion (discussed further below). Still, it is instructive that at its peak, America demonstrated how a large, diverse democracy could enjoy high social trust when economic opportunities, civic engagement, and competent governance aligned. The U.S. case underscores both the potential of a high trust society to spur prosperity (the post-war boom, moonshot scientific cooperation, etc.) and the fragility of trust in the face of social upheaval.

Psychological and Cultural Foundations of Societal Trust

Understanding why some societies achieve high trust requires probing the psychological and cultural underpinnings of trust at both individual and collective levels. Trust begins as an interpersonal, psychological phenomenon – essentially a bet on the goodwill of others – but it is profoundly shaped by culture.

Individual Psychology of Trust

From a young age, people develop generalized trust (a baseline sense of whether others are trustworthy) through their experiences. Positive personal interactions accumulate to raise one's inclination to trust strangers, whereas traumatic experiences can scar individuals with mistrust pewresearch.org.

Psychologically, trust involves risk and vulnerability: the trustor must suspend fear of betrayal. This decision is often guided by social heuristics and emotions rather than pure calculation. For instance, empathy and a sense of shared identity can lead someone to trust another instinctively.

High trust societies typically nurture these pro-trust dispositions. Studies find that people who grow up in secure, fair environments become more trusting adults pewresearch.org. Conversely, if one frequently witnesses cheating, discrimination, or lawlessness, one learns to be cautious ("you can't be too careful").

The culture around an individual sends signals: if honesty is rewarded and most interactions prove benign, trust becomes a rational default stance. On a cognitive level, trust also simplifies life – as Luhmann quipped, "trust is necessary to reduce complexity… absence of trust would prevent [one] from getting up in the morning" revista.appsicologia.org.

In a high trust society, this psychological ease is widespread: people leave their doors unlocked, transact business with minimal anxiety, and collaborate readily, reflecting an underlying sense that "people are generally good."

Cultural Norms and Values

Culture plays a pivotal role in expanding individual trust into a collective ethos. Anthropologists and sociologists speak of the "radius of trust" – whom one is culturally expected to trust. In low-trust cultures, that radius is tight: trust is reserved for kin and longtime acquaintances, often due to traditions of clan-based loyalty.

By contrast, high-trust cultures instill norms of generalized morality, where ethical rules (like "don't lie or cheat") apply in interactions with anyone, not just family. For example, the cultural norm of honesty in Nordic countries means a lost wallet is likely returned by a stranger – a behavior that consistently astonishes outsiders and reinforces locals' trust.

Such norms are often rooted in religious or philosophical teachings as well: many cultures' golden rules ("do unto others as you would have them do unto you") encourage extending trust and kindness universally. High trust cultures also promote out-group trust: tolerance and respect for those of different backgrounds.

A salient aspect is how historical experiences shape culture – societies that endured periods of stability and fair governance may evolve a culture of trust, whereas histories of invasion, betrayal, or oppression can ingrain collective wariness. Cultural narratives (myths, proverbs, literature) often reflect and propagate these lessons.

For instance, in parts of the world with chronic instability, sayings equivalent to "trust no one" or "sleep with one eye open" are common. In contrast, Japanese business culture embraces the concept of wa (harmony) and long-term relationships, which fosters trust in corporate settings, while American culture long celebrated the "handshake deal" as a symbol of trusting business partnerships.

Thus, cultural values set the baseline upon which institutions build – a society where trust is seen as a virtue will more readily support and comply with trust-promoting laws or policies.

Trust and Social Identity

Trust is deeply intertwined with social identity – how people define their "in-group" versus "out-group." High trust societies often foster broad identities that include diverse groups. For example, in many Nordic countries, the concept of "folkhemmet" (the people's home) creates a sense of shared identity that transcends class or regional differences.

Education plays a crucial role here. Schools that teach inclusive narratives and emphasize shared values can help bridge identity divides. Similarly, media that portrays diverse groups positively can expand the "radius of trust" beyond traditional boundaries.

Moral Psychology and Trustworthiness

For a high trust society to function, trust must be justified – people need to be trustworthy. This involves both individual character and social reinforcement. High trust societies typically have strong cultural and psychological factors that encourage trustworthiness:

1. Personal Integrity: A sense of honor and personal responsibility that makes people want to be trustworthy
2. Social Sanctions: Clear consequences for breaking trust, from social disapproval to legal penalties
3. Institutional Support: Systems that make trustworthiness the rational choice (e.g., reliable courts, transparent governance)
4. Cultural Narratives: Stories and examples that celebrate trustworthiness and condemn betrayal

The moral psychology of trustworthiness is complex. It involves both internalized values ("I want to be honest") and external incentives ("I'll be punished if I'm not"). High trust societies typically achieve a balance where trustworthiness becomes both a moral imperative and a practical necessity.

Institutions, Economics, and Social Norms

The psychological and cultural foundations of trust are reinforced and operationalized through institutions, economic systems, and social norms. These structural elements create the conditions under which trust can flourish or wither.

Institutional Framework

Strong institutions are both a cause and effect of high trust. Key institutional elements include:

1. Rule of Law: Predictable, fair legal systems that protect rights and enforce contracts
2. Transparent Governance: Open decision-making processes that reduce suspicion of corruption
3. Independent Media: Free press that holds power accountable and informs citizens
4. Civil Society: Active participation in voluntary organizations and community groups

These institutions create a "trust infrastructure" that makes trust both possible and rational. For example, knowing that contracts will be enforced makes business relationships more trustworthy.

Economic Systems

Economic arrangements can either promote or undermine trust:

1. Market Regulation: Balanced regulation that prevents exploitation while allowing innovation
2. Social Safety Nets: Systems that reduce economic insecurity and promote social stability
3. Fair Competition: Rules that prevent monopolies and ensure equal opportunity
4. Corporate Governance: Structures that align business interests with social trust

High trust societies often feature "stakeholder capitalism" rather than pure shareholder capitalism, recognizing that long-term business success depends on maintaining trust with employees, customers, and communities.

Social Norms and Networks

Beyond formal institutions, informal social norms and networks play crucial roles:

1. Civic Engagement: Active participation in community life and public affairs
2. Social Capital: Dense networks of relationships that facilitate cooperation
3. Reciprocity: Cultural expectations of mutual aid and fair dealing
4. Social Mobility: Opportunities for advancement that reinforce trust in the system

These elements create a "virtuous circle" where trust begets more trust. For instance, when people see others cooperating successfully, they're more likely to trust and cooperate themselves.

Feedback Loops and Challenges

High trust societies are not static achievements but dynamic systems maintained through complex feedback loops. Understanding these loops helps explain both the stability of high trust and its potential fragility.

Positive Feedback Loops

Several reinforcing cycles help maintain high trust:

1. Institutional-Trust Loop: Strong institutions build trust, which in turn strengthens institutions
2. Economic-Trust Loop: Trust enables economic cooperation, whose benefits reinforce trust
3. Social-Capital Loop: Trust builds social networks, which facilitate more trust
4. Cultural-Trust Loop: Trust-promoting values are reinforced by successful trust-based interactions

These loops create stability but also mean that trust can be difficult to rebuild once lost.

Challenges to High Trust Societies

Despite their advantages, high trust societies face several challenges:

1. Globalization: Increased interaction with low-trust societies can create friction
2. Technological Change: Digital platforms can both enhance and undermine trust
3. Economic Inequality: Growing gaps can erode social cohesion and trust
4. Cultural Diversity: Managing trust across different cultural traditions
5. Political Polarization: Divisive politics can fracture social trust
6. Institutional Decay: Bureaucratic inefficiency or corruption can undermine trust

These challenges require constant attention and adaptation to maintain high trust.

Erosion of Trust in Western Democracies

Recent decades have seen concerning declines in trust across many Western democracies:

1. Political Trust: Declining confidence in government and political institutions
2. Media Trust: Growing skepticism toward traditional news sources
3. Interpersonal Trust: Reduced trust between citizens, especially across political lines
4. Institutional Trust: Weakening faith in key institutions like courts and police

This erosion has multiple causes:

• Economic stagnation and inequality
• Political polarization and gridlock
• Social media and information fragmentation
• Globalization and cultural change
• Institutional failures and scandals

The consequences are serious:

• Reduced civic engagement
• Weakened social cohesion
• Impaired economic cooperation
• Increased political extremism
• Difficulty addressing collective challenges

Preserving and Restoring Trust

Given the importance of trust and the challenges it faces, societies must actively work to preserve and restore it. This requires action at multiple levels:

Institutional Reforms

1. Transparency: Making government and corporate decision-making more open and accountable
2. Anti-Corruption: Strengthening systems to prevent and punish corruption
3. Fairness: Ensuring institutions treat all citizens equally and justly
4. Efficiency: Making institutions more responsive and effective

Economic Policies

1. Inclusive Growth: Ensuring economic benefits are widely shared
2. Social Safety Nets: Protecting citizens from economic insecurity
3. Fair Competition: Preventing monopolies and ensuring equal opportunity
4. Corporate Responsibility: Encouraging businesses to act as good citizens

Social and Cultural Initiatives

1. Civic Education: Teaching the importance of trust and cooperation
2. Community Building: Creating opportunities for diverse groups to interact
3. Media Reform: Supporting quality journalism and combating misinformation
4. Cultural Programs: Celebrating shared values and achievements

Individual Actions

1. Personal Integrity: Being trustworthy in one's own actions
2. Civic Engagement: Participating in community and political life
3. Bridge-Building: Reaching across social and political divides
4. Critical Thinking: Evaluating information carefully and responsibly

Conclusion

High trust societies represent a remarkable human achievement – the ability to cooperate effectively beyond small groups of kin and close associates. They demonstrate how trust, when properly nurtured and maintained, can create societies that are not only more prosperous but also more humane and fulfilling.

The challenges to trust in the modern world are significant, but not insurmountable. By understanding the foundations of trust, the feedback loops that maintain it, and the actions needed to preserve it, societies can work to maintain and restore this precious social resource.

The future of high trust societies depends on our collective commitment to building and maintaining trust at all levels – from individual relationships to global institutions. It is a challenge worth meeting, for the benefits of trust extend far beyond economics to the very quality of our social lives and the functioning of our democracies.