How can we restore our declining trust capital?

Oh Se-jung

The author is a professor emeritus of physics and astronomy and a former president of Seoul National University. 

Francis Fukuyama, the American political scientist best known for “The End of History and the Last Man” (1992), also wrote “Trust” (1995). In that book, he argued that trust constitutes essential social capital underpinning national competitiveness. Countries lacking trust face higher transaction costs, making economic advancement difficult.

In its 2006 report “Where Is the Wealth of Nations? Measuring Capital for the 21st Century,” the World Bank estimated that intangible capital, encompassing human skills, institutional quality and social trust, accounted for 81 percent of national wealth in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries.

Trust also matters internationally. It facilitates cooperation, encourages pursuit of common interests and contributes to stable relations among nations.

Yet trust is deteriorating both internationally and domestically, generating serious challenges.

Internationally, confidence in the United States, which long shaped the global order through its economic and military strength, has weakened considerably.

After World War II, Washington and Europe established a values-based alliance advocating free trade, national sovereignty, universal human rights and cooperation against global threats, including climate change. Although American policies did not always reflect these principles, Washington generally sought to uphold them publicly.

Recently, however, the United States has increasingly disregarded those shared values while openly prioritizing its national interests. This has undermined trust among allies. That may help explain why most European countries have been reluctant to actively support U.S. President Donald Trump in the Iran war.

The resulting deterioration of international trust is contributing to geopolitical instability, with consequences extending to Korea.

Domestic political turmoil likewise reflects a crisis of confidence.

President Lee Jae Myung maintained approval ratings above 60 percent during his first year in office, exceeding his vote share in the presidential election. His decision to make ministerial briefings and Cabinet meetings public conveyed an image of diligence, reinforced by tangible achievements.

But approval began declining during his second year and has now fallen into the mid-30 percent range. Many dissatisfied respondents identify housing policy as a principal reason. Despite repeated government measures to stabilize real estate prices, market uncertainty persists.

People have consequently begun questioning the administration's ability to manage housing problems. Fundamentally, this represents a loss of trust.

The problem extends beyond the administration to the political establishment.

Many citizens have been dismayed by lawmakers' conduct during recent parliamentary audits. Meanwhile, internal power struggles within the two major parties, seemingly disconnected from everyday concerns, have further eroded public confidence.

Korea already performs poorly on international measures of social capital. The British think tank Legatum Institute ranked Korea 107th among 167 countries in its 2023 assessment. Continued political confrontation threatens further deterioration.

As Fukuyama argued, sustained national development is difficult without social trust. This becomes especially important amid the profound transformation brought about by artificial intelligence, which demands cooperation and collective problem-solving.

Unfortunately, trust can disappear almost instantly, while rebuilding it requires sustained effort.

Nevertheless, abandoning that effort is not an option.

I propose three starting points.

The first is listening. Recognizing our own imperfections and accepting that nobody can fully understand or control every situation should make us more willing to hear people holding opposing views.

The second is observing basic norms of conduct. Throughout history, humanity has learned to coexist with people of different backgrounds, including adversaries. Courtesy and established social conventions embody wisdom accumulated through that experience.

The third is restraint, which I consider particularly essential today.

Having an opportunity to speak does not justify inflicting intolerable wounds on others. Nor does possessing political power justify ruthlessly suppressing opponents. Such behavior merely deepens resentment, making mutual trust harder to establish.

For societies to endure and prosper, those exercising power must demonstrate restraint. Without it, even well-intentioned appeals for cooperation will ring hollow.

Rebuilding trust ultimately requires more than declarations of principle. It demands everyday conduct demonstrating respect for others, particularly when disagreements are profound and the temptation to exercise power without limits is greatest.