Beyond Service Satisfaction: Institutional Trust and Social Legitimacy in Southeast Asia and Africa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47353/lawpass.v3i4.135Keywords:
public service delivery, institutional trust, social legitimacy, procedural fairness, Southeast Asia–Africa comparisonAbstract
Public service encounters are among the most visible ways in which citizens assess the competence, fairness, and responsiveness of the state. This article examines how experiences of public service delivery relate to institutional trust and the social legitimacy of public authority in Southeast Asia and Africa. It develops a comparative evidence synthesis around service accessibility and satisfaction, respectful treatment, procedural fairness, and institutional trust. The Asian evidence is anchored in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Government at a Glance: Southeast Asia 2025, which reports Gallup World Poll indicators on satisfaction with healthcare and education and confidence in the judicial system. The African evidence draws on Afrobarometer Round 9 (2021–2023), covering 39 countries, and published analyses of service access, dignity, and political trust. The sources are not harmonised: they differ in survey design, fieldwork, indicators, and populations. Accordingly, the article does not pool observations or rank the regions. Instead, it identifies convergent mechanisms and important measurement differences. The evidence indicates that service performance is relevant to trust, but that the legitimacy implications of service encounters depend on accessibility, respectful treatment, procedural fairness, and the institution to which citizens attribute responsibility. The article contributes a conditional social-legitimacy framework and specifies propositions for future harmonised, country-sensitive research.
References
Asunka, J., Torsu, A. K., & Sanny, J. A.-N. (2024). Dignity and respect in African public service delivery: A hidden driver of the global promise to leave no one behind (Dispatch No. 923). Afrobarometer. https://www.afrobarometer.org/publication/ad923-dignity-and-respect-in-african-public-service-delivery-a-hidden-driver-of-the-global-promise-to-leave-no-one-behind/
Baredes, B. (2022). Serving citizens: Measuring the performance of services for a better user experience (OECD Working Papers on Public Governance No. 52). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/65223af7-en
Bouckaert, G., & Van de Walle, S. (2003). Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of ‘good governance’: Difficulties in linking trust and satisfaction indicators. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(3), 329–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852303693003
Christensen, J., Aarøe, L., Baekgaard, M., Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2020). Human capital and administrative burden: The role of cognitive resources in citizen–state interactions. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13134
Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. Wiley.
Fledderus, J., Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2014). Restoring trust through the co-production of public services: A theoretical elaboration. Public Management Review, 16(3), 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.848920
Hardin, R. (2002). Trust and trustworthiness. Russell Sage Foundation.
Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2018). Administrative burden: Policymaking by other means. Russell Sage Foundation.
James, O. (2009). Evaluating the expectations disconfirmation and expectations anchoring approaches to citizen satisfaction with local public services. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum034
Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475–507. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Wiley.
Lwanja, B. K., & Mwandama, R. (2026). Service delivery and political trust: A comparative analysis of countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Afrobarometer Working Paper No. 224). Afrobarometer. https://www.afrobarometer.org/publication/wp224-service-delivery-and-political-trust-a-comparative-analysis-of-countries-in-sub-saharan-africa/
Moynihan, D. P., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu009
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025). Government at a glance: Southeast Asia 2025. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/bc89cb32-en
Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2008). What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institutions. Governance, 21(2), 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2008.00391.x
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
Van de Walle, S., & Bouckaert, G. (2003). Public service performance and trust in government: The problem of causality. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(8–9), 891–913. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-120019352
Van Ryzin, G. G. (2007). Pieces of a puzzle: Linking government performance, citizen satisfaction, and trust. Public Performance & Management Review, 30(4), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576300403
Yang, K., & Holzer, M. (2006). The performance–trust link: Implications for performance measurement. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00560.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mowafg Masuwd, Mohammad Ahmad Bani Amer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not grant all permissions required for your intended use. Other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may apply.
