Trust is an important component of information-seeking, particularly as related to the policy-making process. For policy-relevant information to be utilized by decision-makers and, in turn, impact policy, the information source must be viewed as trustworthy. Thus, understanding the origins of trust in sources of information regarding a particular policy issue is necessary in understanding the policy process associated with that issue. In this paper, I examine the origins of trust in information regarding hydraulic fracturing ("fracking"). Specifically, this paper examines the role of cultural value predispositions in shaping trust in information from various sources (e.g. energy industry, environmental groups, and government) regarding fracking. Further, the moderating role of perceived value congruence is examined. This study utilizes a survey of local policy elites in Arkansas (a state with fracking operations) and Oregon (a state without fracking operations). Findings indicate that, for local policy elites (1) trust in sources of information is largely derived from culturally held values, (2) the perceived compatibility of values between local policy elites' and those within their community impacts these relationships, and (3) the triadic relationships between cultural values, perceived value congruence, and trust in information sources are distinct between contexts.
National Ethics Councils (NECs) advise governments on how to approach developments within the field of bioethics. While we want political decisions to be informed by reliable expert knowledge, this can come into conflict with important democratic concerns. This epistemic-democratic tension is accentuated in the case of NECs as their claim to expertise is more contentious because they advise on ethical issues. This article enhances our understanding of the epistemic-democratic tension through interviews with members of the Norwegian Biotechnology Advisory Board (NBAB). The interviews focus on three dimensions: expertise, consensus, and the main audience. NBAB is part of a well-established and trusted Nordic knowledge regime where government advisory commissions play a key role in policy development. The system has been regarded as a best practice candidate. Due to its contentious expertise and its place within the Nordic knowledge regime, it is interesting to study how the epistemic democratic tension plays out within NBAB.
This article examines the nonlinear effects of development assistance on governance in developing countries, comparing Western (OECD-DAC) and Chinese aid within a comparative policy framework. Challenging linear assumptions about aid, it shows that differences in policy design and delivery generate distinct governance trajectories across recipient states. Using country-year panel data from 2000 to 2023 and quadratic models, the analysis finds that Western aid exhibits diminishing and ultimately negative governance returns as aid intensity increases. Chinese aid, by contrast, follows a U-shaped pattern, with governance effects becoming more positive at higher levels of engagement, especially in countries with greater absorptive capacity. These results are robust across multiple governance indicators and estimation strategies. The findings show that governance outcomes depend not only on aid volume, but also on donor modalities and recipient capacity to absorb and embed external resources.
