Mohamed Yusuf Ahmed*
| Abdi A. Gele | Hassan Abdikadir Hussein | Abdulkadir Mohamed Abdullahi
© 2023 IIETA. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Whether in a democratic or non-democratic system, public trust is a fundamental component for the survival and development of any political system. Using a comprehensive representative survey, this study examines and assesses the factors influencing public trust in the Somali government. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire completed by 354 Somali residents in Mogadishu. The data were examined using a quantitative structural equation modeling approach with SmartPLS 4. Additionally, our analysis of the study findings revealed that the quality of public services, Participation in government, and Transparency all have positive and significant effects on public trust in government; in contrast, citizen satisfaction with police services has a negligible impact on public trust in government. However, citizens believe in and trust their governments regarding responsiveness, top-notch public services, and government openness. As a result, citizens fulfill their obligations honestly and fairly. By identifying the factors influencing public trust in the government, this study contributes to the empirical knowledge base used to develop targeted and practical initiatives to enhance public trust.
public trust, citizen satisfaction, public services, participation, transparency, police services
A fundamental component for the survival and development of any political system, democratic or not, is public trust [1]. A functioning authoritarian government demands more confidence than one that is democratically administered [2]. Taxpayers' investment in public goods must lead to better efficiency, effectiveness, and responsiveness to the people's requirements for institutions to serve the citizens as customers appropriately [3]. Due to concerns over the lack of public trust and negative perceptions of the government and public sector, Western nations have been compelled to implement modernization strategies for their public services. This approach is predicated on the notion that improving public services will increase customer happiness and public trust in the government [4].
Public trust in the government has decreased during the past 40 years. Politicians, public administrations, and people face complex challenges due to the deterioration, which shows widespread dissatisfaction with public services and a loss of confidence in political and administrative competence [5]. Public trust has considerably declined in affluent nations and regions like Canada, Japan, and the EU. Many theories and studies in the US and other developed countries have concentrated on reversing the drop in public confidence in government by looking at its pertinent factors [6]. Somalia, located in the Horn of Africa, frequently comes up in global discussions about public trust. According to the most recent Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) report, Somalia is ranked 180th out of 180 countries, with a score of 10 out of 100, making it the most corrupt nation in the world [7]. A fragile state cannot carry out basic tasks, such as preserving security and promoting economic progress. Somalia is ranked at the top of the list of fragile states [8]. In recent decades, many governments have faced increasing challenges in performing traditional governmental duties.
Since the fall of the Siad Barre administration in 1991, Somalia has been characterized as the most persistent and utterly failed state in the world. When the state collapsed in 1991, militants overran the nation, seizing control of the military infrastructure and significant arsenals that belonged to the Somali government. A substantial portion of the soldiers that fled with their weapons formed fresh clan militias [9]. Since 1991, Somalia has been embroiled in several wars, including a civil war, a battle on the ground, and insurgency and counterinsurgency. Three-quarters of Somalis under 35 cannot remember when their country had an official government that functioned [10]. After the government fell in 1991, the secular legislation of the state was no longer applied in most localities. In Somalia, the lack of a centralized government gave rise to the archetypal signs of state collapse: corruption, incompetent administration, lack of political will and effort, and exploitation of resources for private gain [11]. The government is regarded for providing public amenities, including roads, schools, and law and order. Due to the protracted wars, the nation is impoverished and corrupt and unable to do even the most basic tasks, such as supplying its population with essential amenities like health and education [12].
Examining citizen satisfaction and people's trust in government, as well as the fact that public trust in government is an essential tenet for the survival and growth of the nation, demonstrates that the public's trust in political institutions is a foundational component of their legitimacy and long-term viability [13]. Additionally, people who have a high level of trust in their government are more likely to follow the law, grant demands made of them, and engage in public affairs. While disgruntled people are more likely to cease backing their government [14]. Numerous academics have examined the innumerable variables connected to public trust in government to determine what elements influence it. Wu et al. [15] said that improved general satisfaction has resulted in improvements in the public's trust in both municipal and federal governments. In Indonesia, Lanin and Hermanto [16] 's research shows that citizen satisfaction with services significantly influences public trust in the regional administration. According to the findings of the study of Van Ryzin [17], the pleasure of a citizen can predict future attitudes and actions related to trusting their local government. On the other hand, research by Romero-Subia et al. [18] indicates that the extent to which an individual is satisfied with the public services provided by the government strongly determines that person's loyalty to government officials. Researchers, such as He and Ma [19], argued that increasing the proportion of contented individuals will significantly boost public sector confidence. However, no study had evaluated how citizen satisfaction with "quality of public services," "transparency of government," "participation in government," and "police services" affected public trust in Somalia's government. Therefore, this study aims to comprehend Somali public trust. The Micro-performance theory will be used in this study to assess the connection between citizen satisfaction with "quality of public services," "transparency of government," "participation in government," and "police services" and public trust in the Somali government.
The rest of this study is organized as follows. In the following section of this study, the literature review and the formulation of hypotheses will be covered along with the research methodology. Then the study discusses the results and the discussion and highlights the research conclusion and implications. Finally, the study’s limitations are discussed, providing starting points for further investigation.
Public trust in the government is often considered crucial for fostering successful governance in any democratic system [20]. Almuqrin et al. [21] assert that public trust is typically seen as a determinant of the efficiency of government services, whereas a lack of confidence in the government results in the breakdown of social cohesiveness. Eliminating uncertainty among residents promotes trust and facilitates the coordination of social expectations and interactions. Lang and Hallman [22] and Gracia and Arino [23] suggest that public trust in the government should be considered to enhance the long-term connection between citizens and the general administration. According to the definition of trust at the personal level, trust is "having faith in someone, feeling that they are good, real, and honest, and believing that something is accurate, correct, or reliable." [24]. Zhi et al. [14] public trust in government is the citizens' faith or confidence in the government to provide results that live up to their expectations. Public trust in government is also defined by Gozgor [25], and Vu [26] as a dependable measure of social capital, which enhances economic performance and leads to more effective decision-making, coordination, and regulations. It is generally acknowledged that citizens are losing faith in the government and its representatives. Several theories have been proposed to explain the lack of trust, and both scholars and observers have suggested various explanations for this decline or questioned the extent to which it is happening [27]. Public confidence in governance has received significant attention from political science and public administration researchers during the past 40 years [28]. The importance of factors like public service quality, service delivery, government performance, citizen participation, Transparency, health system performance, democratic governance, financial regulation, political attitudes, and legitimacy, among others, has been highlighted in numerous studies, including Rhee and Rha [29] who explored the factors that influence public trust in government. Furthermore, Welch et al. [5] argued that a variety of elements involved in perception and expectation aspects impact the degree of public trust in governmental performance. Additionally, Kim and Lee [30] suggest that interactions between citizens and states, political culture, changing citizen behaviors and attitudes, and the institutional environment are essential factors in determining the degree of confidence in government.
2.1 Theoretical background
Trust is significant in studying public organizations from a theoretical and practical standpoint [31]. Some academics say high performance is the foundation of public trust in government, whereas low performance is predominantly associated with mistrust [32]. According to the micro-performance theory, variations in confidence are driven by changes in the quality of public services or how residents perceive those services, according to the micro-performance theory [33]. Micro-performance theory states that more substantial public service delivery would increase public trust in the political system, which the foundation of good government [34]. On the other hand, several academics have heavily relied on the micro-performance theory to illuminate the causes of institutional trust and institutional mistrust in public institutions [35]. This suggests that people will have higher confidence in the government, for example, if the level of public services they get is up to par [36]. Numerous studies have identified several critical parameters for assessing the micro-performance of every organization. For instance, Morgeson and Petrescu [37] examined the components of citizen-perceived performance as drivers of citizen satisfaction, trust, and confidence using a model based on micro-performance theory. They argued that good government performance will increase citizen satisfaction, which will then increase citizen trust, by extending the ideas of micro-performance theory into several sub-elements, including service quality, information dissemination, e-government, and citizen demographic variables. Based on those mentioned above, the Micro-performance theory may support our conceptual paradigm. By substituting government transparency, Participation in government, and police services for the sub-elements of information distribution, e-government, and citizen demographic data, we can build upon themodel more easily [37]. Therefore, we apply the Micro-performance theory to study Somalia's public trust in government about citizen satisfaction with the "quality of public services," "transparency of government," "participation in government," and "police services."
2.2 Hypotheses development
Citizen's satisfaction with the quality of public services and trust in government
The level of satisfaction with public institutions' goods and services is called citizens' satisfaction with public services. It also concerns how well residents perceive that the government is meeting their needs [38]. The definitions and metrics of citizens' satisfaction with public services have been explicated by several academics, including [39]. According to Engdaw [40], providing people with services that meet their preferences and are provided at the most reasonable cost are two ways to ensure that they are satisfied with the public services they get. These include the following services: government, public works, health, education, social welfare, and tourism [41]. Assessing the quality of governance in terms of the public services that governments create and provide to citizens has long been a significant issue for political scientists and many other social scientists [42]. Citizens' satisfaction with public services is frequently utilized as critical performance data [43]. Romero-Subia et al. [18] argues that the effectiveness of the government's operations is greatly influenced by the quality of the public services it offers. Numerous studies, for example, Abdelkader Benmansour [44], indicate that a citizen's satisfaction with the quality of public services plays a crucial role in influencing that person's level of trust in the government. According to Mishra and Attri [45], citizens' confidence in the government increased due to using public services and interacting with the government. Byaro and Kinyondo [46] showed a substantial correlation between individuals' increased satisfaction with public services and their trust in the government. According to a study by Kim [24] in both Japan and South Korea, public confidence in the government is highly correlated with how well the government performs in terms of the quality of public services. In light of the evaluations mentioned in the above literature, we hypothesize:
H1: Citizen satisfaction with the quality of public services is positively associated with trust in government in Somalia.
Citizen's satisfaction with the transparency of government and trust in government
Citizens' trust in the government's overall performance is significantly influenced by their satisfaction with the Transparency of their government [47]. Today, transparency in government is believed to be crucial for sound decisions and equitable resource distribution [48]. Transparency is commonly thought to strengthen democracy, public trust in the government, and the development of an accountability, fairness, and justice system [49]. The definitions and metrics of people's satisfaction with government transparency have been explained by several experts, including Yang [50]. Transparency is commonly characterized by the open exchange of information [51]. In the context of governance, Venkatesh et al. [52] defines transparency as the level of a citizen's understanding of how a particular government functions. Transparency, as described by Grimmelikhuijsen [53], is the extent to which an institution makes relevant information regarding its decision-making, operations, and performance available to the public. Numerous studies have demonstrated that a person's faith in their government is significantly influenced by their contentment with the openness of their government. For instance, Song and Lee [54] discovered that views of government openness are positively and substantially associated with confidence in government using 2009 National E-Government Survey data from the Pew Research Center. Grimmelikhuijsen and Klijn [55] assert that judicial transparency does enhance public confidence in the government. In two survey studies conducted by Grimmelikhuijsen et al. [56], samples of US individuals were given basic knowledge about the availability of accessible government data. They ultimately discovered that widespread belief in transparency had a favorable impact on the public's confidence in their government. According to Porumbescu [57], citizen use of public sector social media favorably correlates with opinions about the government's dependability. In light of the evaluations mentioned in the above literature, we hypothesize:
H2: Citizen's satisfaction with government transparency is positively associated with trust in the government in Somalia.
Citizen's satisfaction with the participation in government and trust in government
A key component of democratic governance is the involvement of the citizens in the political process. Some individuals are horrified by the idea of an isolated government that does not involve any citizen engagement. No one would logically respect or believe in such governments [58]. Additionally, it is widely accepted that citizen engagement enhances democracy, is crucial for obtaining ideas and support, and aids governments in problem-solving [59]. Many academics, notably Rosilawati et al. [60], have clarified the definitions and metrics of citizens' satisfaction with their engagement in government. According to Lee and Schachter [61], civic engagement is a proactive action in which people try to persuade the government to act in a way that is more favorable to them. Xu and Zhu [62] defined Participation in government as Participation in formulating and implementing public policy. There is a consensus that encouraging citizen involvement in government can boost public confidence and inform people about what the government does [63]. Numerous studies have also demonstrated that citizens' confidence in the government is significantly influenced by their happiness with its engagement. For instance, a survey experiment in Buenos Aires, Argentina, indicated that giving residents precise information on public engagement in government affected their perception of political trust and the effectiveness of their government [64]. To increase the public's impression of government trust, Hu et al. [65] showed that activities like boosting local election participation and cultivating a stronger sense of social justice are viable options. Similarly, Hooghe and Marien [66] shows that emphasizing citizen engagement in government favorably connects with political trust and that non-institutionalized Participation is inversely correlated with political confidence. According to the research of Fennema and Tillie [67], there is a significant relationship between the level of political trust in Amsterdam and the level of involvement among people of the city's numerous ethnic groups. In light of the literature mentioned above evaluations, we hypothesize:
H3: Citizen satisfaction with Participation in government is positively associated with trust in government in Somalia.
Citizen's satisfaction with the police services and trust in the government
A key element in shaping how people perceive public safety and police operations is citizen confidence, which is directly tied to police performance [68]. Numerous academics, including [69], have examined discussions regarding citizen satisfaction with police services over the last few decades. According to Merenda et al. [70], public perceptions of the police have reportedly been a significant focus of research in criminal justice literature for a long time. Furthermore, in a democracy, the public's contentment with police work is crucial. It fosters support for the effort to maintain order and lends institutional legitimacy to the organization due to the appreciation of citizens [71]. According to Bouranta et al. [72], police should also strive to improve residents' perceptions of safety in their communities, as these perceptions are crucial factors in determining residents' satisfaction, thereby enhancing the quality of life in the neighborhood. Numerous studies have shown that citizen satisfaction with police services is a critical factor in determining their level of trust in the government. For example, public trust is closely connected with community satisfaction with the performance of the South African police, according to data from the 2014–2015 South African Victims of Crime Survey [73]. Using information from the 2016 "Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey" to assess public opinion on confidence in local government, Silva et al. [74] discovered that financing regional programs to decrease police violence should boost public trust in local government. According to Bradford et al. [75], raising positive perceptions of police competence will raise interaction standards and potentially even boost public confidence in the government. In light of the evaluations mentioned in the above literature, we hypothesize:
H4: Citizen satisfaction with the police services is positively associated with trust in the government in Somalia.
The following factors were examined to determine what factors influence public trust in government: (1) Public service quality; (2) Government transparency; (3) Participation in government; and (4) Police services.
We employed a cross-sectional survey methodology to collect the data for this study. Questionnaires were distributed to residents of Mogadishu, the capital of Somalia, to gather the data. Between January and March 2023, the survey was distributed through various platforms, including WhatsApp, Facebook, emails from responders, and others, in addition to the Google document form. Each survey question was translated into the appropriate local language for easier comprehension. A total of 400 people freely participated in the survey. After 46 surveys were deleted due to excessive blank replies, there were 354 accurate responses.
3.1 Study measures
The survey instrument was designed with 20 items covering five constructs (four on public trust in government, four on citizen satisfaction with the quality of public services, four on citizen satisfaction with government transparency, four on citizen participation in government, and four on citizen satisfaction with police services), as well as some questions about the respondents' demographics. A variety of literary works had an impact on how the question items were formatted. The first of four questions to gauge public trust in the government was, "Do you trust the federal government?" [76]. The second item was "To what degree are you satisfied with the government's public works construction projects?" [51], third item was "How much do you satisfy your Country's Parliament council?" [77]. The fourth item was "Please state your satisfaction with the public institution's ability to always act in the public's best interest." [78]. The quality of public services was measured with 4-items; the first item was "How would you rank the general quality of governmental services in light of your most recent experiences?" [79], the second item was " How satisfied are you with the local public schools, housing, etc.?" [80], the third item was "Are you pleased with the government's services, such as parks, street cleaning, police protection, and rubbish collection?" [77], and the fourth item was "How satisfied are you with the nine elements listed below, such as housing, health care services, etc.?" [44]. The transparency of government was measured with 4-items, the first three items which are "Plans and programs for government administration are carried out openly", "Transparency is maintained throughout the administrative procedures", and "Residents can monitor development and general administration if enough information is made available." [81]. The fourth item was "Your government is constantly actively engaged in disseminating to the public government information, such as expenditures, through a website or other channels." [6]. Participation in government was measured with four items [81]. The police services were measured with four items [82]. Close-ended questions on a 5-point Likert scale (1- Not at all satisfied, 2- Slightly satisfied, 3- Moderately satisfied, 4- Very satisfied, 5- Completely satisfied). Respondents provided demographic data, including their gender, age, marital status, and educational background.
3.2 Data analysis and results
Utilizing structural equation modeling with SmartPLS4 to evaluate the measurement and structural model presented by Henseler et al. [83], the authors of this study investigated the hypothesized paths and verified the study's findings. Structural equation modeling with SmartPLS4 is a collection of statistical methods that may be used to explore one or more independent variables and one or more dependent variables to see whether there are any relationships between them [84]. Formally, it may be defined by two sets of linear equations: the structural model, which describes the connections between the constructs, and the measurement model, which depicts the interactions between a construct and its observable indicators [85]. It has been utilized in the social sciences and psychology for a long time and in various business fields like marketing [86]. The authors chose SmartPLS for two key reasons: first, PLS is a more effective technique for this study since it is exploratory [87], and second, it has lately attained tremendous respect in the domains of business research and other scientific disciplines [88]. Using hypothesis testing in research to determine causal linkages was widely considered suitable [89].
3.3 Respondents' demographic profile
According to the characteristics of the respondents, 36.4 percent of the sampled respondents are women, whereas 63.6 percent of all respondents are men. Regarding age categories, 79.7% of the total respondents, or the majority of respondents, were between 18 and 29. At the same time, 15% of responders are between 30 and 39. Only 1.4 percent of respondents were above 50, compared to 4% of those in the 40 to 49 age. Regarding marital status, single respondents comprised the majority of the study's sample, 78.8% of all respondents, while married respondents comprised just 21.2% of the total. According to their educational background, most research participants—58.8% of all respondents—had bachelor's degrees. The next largest group, at 13.6 percent, had diplomas, followed by 10.7% in secondary school and 16.9% with master's or above, as depicted in Table 1.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents (N = 354)
|
Character |
Frequency |
Percent |
|
Gender |
||
|
Male |
225 |
63.6 |
|
Female |
129 |
36.4 |
|
Age (in years) |
||
|
18-29 |
282 |
79.7 |
|
30-39 |
53 |
15 |
|
40-49 |
14 |
4 |
|
50+ |
5 |
1.4 |
|
Marital status |
||
|
Single |
279 |
78.8 |
|
Married |
75 |
21.2 |
|
Education |
||
|
Secondary |
38 |
10.7 |
|
Diploma |
48 |
13.6 |
|
Bachelor |
208 |
58.8 |
|
Master’s |
60 |
16.9 |
3.4 Assessment of the measurement model
To confirm the validity of the psychometric properties of the instruments, confirmatory factor analysis was carried out using SmartPLS 4. The measurement model was evaluated using the average variance extracted (AVE), composite reliability, discriminant validity, and convergent validity. All data showed that factor loadings for each item used to measure variables were more than 0.70, as shown in Table 2. Additionally, for all study variables, the "average variance extracted (AVE)" and "composite reliability (CR)" of latent variables exceeded 0.50 and 0.70, respectively.
The authors chose the Fornel-Larcker criteria to evaluate discriminant validity in the research. A comparison is made between the AVE root square and all inter-construct correlations. Each concept's AVE must be more than its squared correlation with any other construct to pass the model's test of discriminant validity [90]. Given that the Fornel-Larcker criteria are satisfied and no cross-loadings exceed the corresponding loadings, the discriminant reality is preferable in this investigation, as shown in Table 3.
Additionally, researchers claimed that the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio is the most reliable indicator of discriminating validity when employing SmartPLS4 [83]. Since the HTMT ratio should be less than 0.9, all the values for the complete model in this investigation were less than 0.9, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 1.
Table 2. Factor loadings, reliability, and validity
|
Constructs |
Factor Loadings |
CR AVE |
|
|
Public trust in the government |
|||
|
PTG1 |
0.745 |
0.846 |
0.579 |
|
PTG2 |
0.787 |
||
|
PTG3 |
0.762 |
||
|
PTG4 |
0.751 |
||
|
Quality of public services |
|||
|
CSQPS1 |
0.741 |
0.825 |
0.541 |
|
CSQPS2 |
0.710 |
||
|
CSQPS3 |
0.710 |
||
|
CSQPS4 |
0.778 |
||
|
Transparency of government |
|||
|
CSTG1 |
0.812 |
0.867 |
0.619 |
|
CSTG2 |
0.796 |
||
|
CSTG3 |
0.771 |
||
|
CSTG4 |
0.767 |
||
|
Participation in government |
|||
|
CSPG1 |
0.766 |
0.883 |
0.654 |
|
CSPG2 |
0.848 |
||
|
CSPG3 |
0.847 |
||
|
CSPG4 |
0.771 |
||
|
Police services |
|||
|
CSPS1 |
0.789 |
0.868 |
0.623 |
|
CSPS2 |
0.801 |
||
|
CSPS3 |
0.835 |
||
|
CSPS4 |
0.728 |
||
Table 3. Inter-construct correlation (Fornell-Larcker Criterion)
|
CSPG |
CSPS |
CSQP |
CSTG |
PTG |
|
|
CSPG |
0.809 |
||||
|
CSPS |
0.670 |
0.789 |
|||
|
CSQPS |
0.608 |
0.539 |
0.735 |
||
|
CSTG |
0.707 |
0.636 |
0.636 |
0.787 |
|
|
PTG |
0.622 |
0.499 |
0.666 |
0.595 |
0.761 |
Table 4. Heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT)
|
CSPG |
CSPS |
CSQP |
CSTG |
PTG |
|
|
CSPG |
|||||
|
CSPS |
0.823 |
||||
|
CSQPS |
0.793 |
0.717 |
|||
|
CSTG |
0.872 |
0.802 |
0.838 |
||
|
PTG |
0.784 |
0.632 |
0.895 |
0.757 |
Figure 1. Measurement model
3.5 Assessment of the structural model
The structural paths were evaluated using the Bootstrapping method, and 5,000 sub-samples were used to examine the hypothesized linkages. The $\beta$-coefficient, $\mathrm{t}$-value, and $\mathrm{p}$-value were noted to verify the hypothesized correlations. The total model fitness was determined using the coefficient of determination, $R^2$. According to Figure 2, the $R^2$ revealed a 52.7 percent change in the general people's trust in government due to all the study's independent variables, such as the quality of public services, government transparency, Participation in government, and police services. The findings of the study's direct hypotheses are shown in Table 5. Overall public trust in government is positively and significantly correlated with the quality of public services $(\beta=0.410, p=$ $0.000)$, government transparency $(\beta=0.137, p=0.022)$, and Participation in government $(\beta=0.270, p=0.000)$ according to the study's findings. While there is no statistically significant correlation between public trust in government and police services $(\beta=0.010, p=0.417)$.
Table 5. Hypothesis testing results
|
Hypotheses |
Relationship |
Beta (b) |
STDEV |
t-value |
p-values |
Findings |
|
H1 |
CSQPS ->PTG |
0.410 |
0.057 |
7.199 |
0.000 |
Accepted |
|
H2 |
CSTG -> PTG |
0.137 |
0.068 |
2.011 |
0.022 |
Accepted |
|
H3 |
CSPG -> PTG |
0.270 |
0.068 |
3.976 |
0.000 |
Accepted |
|
H4 |
CSPS -> PTG |
0.010 |
0.049 |
0.208 |
0.417 |
Rejected |
Figure 2. Structural model
Based on data gathered from a survey asking citizens of Mogadishu about their level of trust in the government. The current study used empirical analysis to determine how public trust in government is influenced by factors such as the quality of public services, government transparency, citizen participation, and police services. In addition to confirming the study's initial hypothesis, several fascinating findings about the connection between citizens' satisfaction with the quality of public services and trust in government are revealed in this study. According to the study's findings, there is a positive correlation between public confidence in government and the quality of services provided to the people. This implies that while public mistrust is frequently attributed to poorly performing public services, it is thought that well-functioning public services help to build public confidence in the government. Along with growth and regulation, public services are the most crucial role of the government for the people [91]. The study's most recent findings are consistent with prior ones [45]. Kim [24] discovered that public confidence in government was positively correlated with the degree of perceived government performance on the quality of public services, using data from the 2003, 2004, and 2006 Asia Barometer Survey collected from individuals in Japan and South Korea. The quality of government service delivery and citizen trust was correlated in Korea [92] using structural equation analysis. Therefore, the most crucial element affecting public confidence in government is how satisfied citizens are with the quality of public services. Thus, the critical factor influencing trust in government is citizens' satisfaction with the level of public services.
Confirming the study's second hypothesis, this study finds some intriguing results concerning the link between citizens' satisfaction with government transparency and their trust in the government. According to the current research findings, government transparency often correlates positively with public trust in government. This means that government transparency is seen as a democratic ideal and a necessary component of an effective and dependable administration. By bridging the information gap between the government and the people, government transparency enhances the public's view of institutions' "responsiveness to citizens" activities. Without it, there is a decline in public confidence in government operations and acts [93]. The study's most recent results agree with those of earlier investigations. For instance, Song and Lee [54] used data from the Pew Research Center's 2009 National E-Government Survey to demonstrate that views of government transparency are positively and significantly connected to confidence in government. In contrast, Grimmelikhuijsen et al. [56] did two survey tests in which samples of US citizens were given basic knowledge regarding accessible government data and ultimately discovered that the widespread belief in Transparency had a favorable impact on the public's confidence in their government. Because of this, citizens' satisfaction with the Transparency of their local government is the primary factor determining whether they have trust in it.
On the other hand, this study provides some fascinating findings that support the third study hypothesis on the connection between citizens' satisfaction with Participation in government and trust in government. The study's central premise was that civic engagement increases people's confidence in the government. The study's findings showed that Participation in government significantly increases public trust in government. This indicates that citizen involvement in public administration and policy helps elicit preferences for public services and improve government performance; similarly, effective citizen involvement in health policy aids in reestablishing trust between citizens and the government, strengthening accountability and policy legitimacy [19]. The most current findings of the study are consistent with prior ones. For instance, Wang et al. [94] Using path analysis to examine the premise that greater public Participation enhances public trust. They found that public engagement raises citizens' confidence in government. Similarly, Fennema and Tillie [67] determined a strong association between the amount of political trust in Amsterdam and the degree of civic engagement among the city's diverse ethnic groups. Hu et al. [65] actions like boosting local election participation and cultivating a stronger sense of social justice are practical approaches to improve the public's view of government trust. Therefore, trust in municipal government is primarily based on how satisfied citizens are with their ability to participate in the political process.
The role of institutions, especially those related to the police, is critical and significant in a democratic society. Frontline police officers' attitudes and behavior are crucial for enforcing a country's law and order system, promoting peace, and creating unity [95]. This study shows some intriguing data on the relationship between residents' satisfaction with police services and trust in government, which is not supporting our study's ultimate premise. According to the study's findings, no statistically significant correlation exists between public trust in government and residents' satisfaction with police services. This contradicts the results of Malone and Dammert [96], who discovered a substantial positive relationship between public trust in government and citizens' satisfaction with police services. Somalia has gone over thirty years without a functional central government, one of modern memory's most extended periods of state disintegration. Even the most basic requirements, such as preserving access to safety, healthcare, and educational resources, were challenging for Somalis to meet during that time. Nearly 80% of those who responded to our survey were between 18 and 29, showing that most lacked fundamental needs, such as security services. As a result, they perceived the security services as a simple or unimportant issue.
In the context of Somalia, this study explored the relevance of the relationship between public trust in government and the citizen's satisfaction with the "quality of public services," "transparency of government," "participation in government," and "police services." 354 Mogadishu, Somalia residents contributed their opinions to the study. Our research showed that public trust in government is positively and significantly correlated with the quality of public services, government transparency, and citizen involvement. However, there is no statistically significant correlation between police services and public trust in the government. Being the first thorough quantitative survey to be conducted in Somalia at the national level, this study significantly advances our understanding of how the population views the Somali government. This study is the first to identify the factors causing the Somalian public's loss of trust in its administration.
The current study gives some thoughts on the practical implications. Somalia's administrative, governmental, and policymaking organizations should consider the main factors related to public trust and good governance practices. Based on the factors that affect public confidence in government, the government needs to think about developing practical solutions to boost public trust. The administration should closely monitor the difficulties the public's faith in the government brings. Governments may maintain the public's trust by communicating effectively and efficiently, earning the public's confidence, and providing the public with important information, especially during emergencies. The Somali government should develop strategies at all administration levels and ensure accountability, responsiveness, and transparency to guarantee the prompt delivery of critical information to the public and to promote the highest level of public trust in local government. Citizens believe in and trust their governments. Consequently, they carry out their duties honestly and fairly, especially regarding responsiveness, high-quality public services, and government openness. In conclusion, by identifying the variables that influence public trust in government, the current study contributes to empirical research to create concrete and valuable solutions to increase public confidence.
5.1 Limitations and future research directions
The current study contains various limitations and merits, such as the following: Firstly, the authors go to Mogadishu to perform this empirical investigation. It has geographical restrictions as a result. Future research may be done on Somalia's rural areas and other cities to understand the public trust in the government better. Second, the study's factors that might affect confidence in the government are few; as a result, future researchers can offer additional, pertinent information, such as demographic data, that may have an impact on public trust in government (e.g., age, health, status, education, etc.). Third, quantitative research methods were employed; however, future researchers might use a mixed-method approach by combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to find other factors involved in fostering public confidence in government. As a result, suggestions for more research might be made, such as looking at how different factors like corruption, economic stability, or historical context affect public trust.
The research was funded by SIMAD University, which the authors gratefully acknowledge.
[1] Wong, T.K.Y., Hsiao, H.H.M., Wan, P.S. (2009). Comparing political trust in Hong Kong and Taiwan: Levels, determinants, and implications. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 10(2): 147-174. https://doi.org/10.1017/S146810990900351X
[2] Clark, J.R., Lee, D.R. (2001). The optimal trust in government. Eastern Economic Journal, 27(1): 19-34.
[3] Beeri, I., Uster, A., Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2019). Does performance management relate to good governance? A study of its relationship with citizens’ satisfaction with and trust in Israeli local government. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(2): 241-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1436074
[4] 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
[5] Welch, E.W., Hinnant, C.C., Moon, M.J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3): 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui021
[6] Zhao, D., Hu, W. (2017). Determinants of public trust in government: Empirical evidence from urban China. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2): 358-377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315582136
[7] Mishra, S.S., Abdullahi, M.M. (2020). Citizens’ satisfaction with government in a highly corrupt public life: Role of trust in democracy and civil society participation in Somalia. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 55(5): 762-779. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021909619900193
[8] Haar, R.J., Rubenstein, L.S. (2012). Health in Postconflict and Fragile States. Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace.
[9] Bryden, M., Brickhill, J. (2010). Disarming Somalia: Lessons in stabilisation from a collapsed state: Analysis. Conflict, Security & Development, 10(2): 239-262. https://doi.org/10.1080/14678801003665992
[10] Menkhaus, K. (2017). Elections in the hardest places: The case of Somalia. Journal of Democracy, 28(4): 132-146. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0073
[11] Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2020 Country Report Somalia, 2022. https://www.bti-project.org.
[12] Gele, A.A., Ahmed, M.Y., Kour, P., Moallim, S.A., Salad, A.M., Kumar, B. (2017). Beneficiaries of conflict: A qualitative study of people’s trust in the private health care system in Mogadishu, Somalia. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 10: 127-135. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S136170
[13] Lee, Y. (2021). Government for leaving no one behind: Social equity in public administration and trust in government. Sage Open, 11(3): 21582440211029227. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211029227
[14] Zhi, K., Tan, Q., Chen, S., Chen, Y., Wu, X., Xue, C., Song, A. (2022). How does social security fairness predict trust in government? The serial mediation effects of social security satisfaction and life satisfaction. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11): 6867. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116867
[15] Wu, C., Shi, Z., Wilkes, R., et al. (2021). Chinese citizen satisfaction with government performance during COVID-19. Journal of Contemporary China, 30(132): 930-944. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2021.1893558
[16] Lanin, D., Hermanto, N. (2019). The effect of service quality toward public satisfaction and public trust on local government in Indonesia. International Journal of Social Economics, 46(3): 377-392. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-04-2017-0151
[17] 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
[18] Romero-Subia, J.F., Jimber-del Rio, J.A., Ochoa-Rico, M.S., Vergara-Romero, A. (2022). Analysis of citizen satisfaction in municipal services. Economies, 10(9): 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10090225
[19] He, A.J., Ma, L. (2021). Citizen participation, perceived public service performance, and trust in government: Evidence from health policy reforms in Hong Kong. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(3): 471-493. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1780138
[20] Jameel, A., Asif, M., Hussain, A., Hwang, J., Sahito, N., Bukhari, M.H. (2019). Assessing the moderating effect of corruption on the e-government and trust relationship: An evidence of an emerging economy. Sustainability, 11(23): 6540. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540
[21] Almuqrin, A., Mutambik, I., Alomran, A., Gauthier, J., Abusharhah, M. (2022). Factors influencing public trust in open government data. Sustainability, 14(15): 9765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159765
[22] Lang, J.T., Hallman, W.K. (2005). Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 25(5): 1241-1252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00668.x
[23] Gracia, D.B., Arino, L.C. (2015). Rebuilding public trust in government administrations through e-government actions. Revista Española de Investigación de Marketing ESIC, 19(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reimke.2014.07.001
[24] Kim, S. (2010). Public trust in government in Japan and South Korea: Does the rise of critical citizens matter? Public Administration Review, 70(5): 801-810. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02207.x
[25] Gozgor, G. (2022). Global evidence on the determinants of public trust in governments during the COVID-19. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 17(2): 559-578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-020-09902-6
[26] Vu, V.T. (2021). Public trust in government and compliance with policy during COVID-19 pandemic: Empirical evidence from Vietnam. Public Organization Review, 21(4): 779-796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-021-00566-w
[27] Gustavsen, A., Pierre, J., Røiseland, A. (2017). Participation or satisfaction? Examining determinant of trust in local government. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 21(3): 3-16. https://doi.org/10.58235/sjpa.v21i3.11554
[28] Carlin, B.I., Dorobantu, F., Viswanathan, S. (2009). Public trust, the law, and financial investment. Journal of Financial Economics, 92(3): 321-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.07.001
[29] Rhee, S.K., Rha, J.Y. (2009). Public service quality and customer satisfaction: Exploring the attributes of service quality in the public sector. The Service Industries Journal, 29(11): 1491-1512. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060902793441
[30] Kim, S., Lee, J. (2012). E‐participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review, 72(6): 819-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02593.x
[31] Carnevale, D.G., Wechsler, B. (1992). Trust in the public sector: Individual and organizational determinants. Administration & Society, 23(4): 471-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539979202300404
[32] Mishler, W., Rose, R. (2001). What are the origins of political trust? Testing institutional and cultural theories in post-communist societies. Comparative Political Studies, 34(1): 30-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414001034001002
[33] Danaee Fard, H., Anvary Rostamy, A.A. (2007). Promoting public trust in public organizations: Explaining the role of public accountability. Public Organization Review, 7: 331-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-007-0041-4
[34] Kampen, J.K., De Walle, S.V., Bouckaert, G. (2006). Assessing the relation between satisfaction with public service delivery and trust in Government. The impact of the predisposition of citizens toward Government on evalutations of its performance. Public Performance & Management Review, 29(4): 387-404.
[35] Espinal, R., Hartlyn, J., Kelly, J.M. (2006). Performance still matters: Explaining trust in government in the Dominican Republic. Comparative Political Studies, 39(2): 200-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005281933
[36] Boateng, F.D. (2018). Institutional trust and performance: A study of the police in Ghana. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 51(2): 164-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865817712335
[37] Morgeson, F.V., Petrescu, C. (2011). Do they all perform alike? An examination of perceived performance, citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal agencies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(3): 451-479. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852311407278
[38] Pribadi, U., Kim, H.J. (2022). Impacts of cultural behavior of civil servants on citizens' satisfaction: A survey on licensing services of Indonesian local government agencies. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(4): e2662. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2662
[39] Chen, Z., Li, D., Wang, J. (2010). Citizens' attitudes toward local government public services: A comparative analysis between the City of Xiamen and the City of Phoenix. Public Performance & Management Review, 34(2): 221-235. https://doi.org/10.2753/pmr1530-9576340204
[40] Engdaw, B.D. (2020). The impact of quality public service delivery on customer satisfaction in Bahir Dar city administration: The case of Ginbot 20 sub-city. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(7): 644-654. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1644520
[41] Gabinete, G., Tanan, C., Tutor, J.A., Escantilla-Lebuna, M.L. (2022). Public service delivery assessment using the citizen satisfaction index system in Western Visayas, Philippines. Pakistan Journal of Life & Social Sciences, 20(1): 36-44.
[42] Clifton, J., Fernández-Gutiérrez, M., Howlett, M. (2022). Assessing public services from the citizen perspective: What can we learn from surveys? Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 25(1): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17487870.2020.1795444
[43] Song, M., An, S.H., Meier, K.J. (2021). Quality standards, implementation autonomy, and citizen satisfaction with public services: Cross-national evidence. Public Management Review, 23(6): 906-928. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1730939
[44] Abdelkader Benmansour, N. (2019). Citizens and expatriates satisfaction with public services in Qatar–evidence from a survey. International Journal of Social Economics, 46(3): 326-337. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-03-2018-0118
[45] Mishra, J., Attri, V. (2020). Governance, public service delivery and trust in government. Studies in Indian Politics, 8(2): 186-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/2321023020963518
[46] Byaro, M., Kinyondo, A. (2020). Citizens' trust in government and their greater willingness to pay taxes in Tanzania: A case study of Mtwara, Lindi, and Dar es Salaam Regions. Poverty & Public Policy, 12(1): 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/pop4.271
[47] Porumbescu, G.A. (2017). Does transparency improve citizens’ perceptions of government performance? Evidence From Seoul, South Korea. Administration & Society, 49(3): 443-468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715593314
[48] Cucciniello, M., Nasi, G. (2014). Transparency for trust in government: How effective is formal transparency? International Journal of Public Administration, 37(13): 911-921. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.949754
[49] Wu, W., Ma, L., Yu, W. (2017). Government transparency and perceived social equity: Assessing the moderating effect of citizen trust in China. Administration & Society, 49(6): 882-906. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399716685799
[50] Yang, Y. (2018). Is transparency a double-edged sword in citizen satisfaction with public service? Evidence from China’s public healthcare. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 28(4): 484-506. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-06-2017-0102
[51] Park, H., Blenkinsopp, J. (2011). The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(2): 254-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852311399230
[52] Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., Chan, F.K., Hu, P.J. (2016). Managing citizens’ uncertainty in e-government services: The mediating and moderating roles of transparency and trust. Information Systems Research, 27(1): 87-111. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2015.0612
[53] Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2012). Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: An experiment. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1): 50-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852311429667
[54] Song, C., Lee, J. (2016). Citizens’ use of social media in government, perceived transparency, and trust in government. Public Performance & Management Review, 39(2): 430-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1108798
[55] Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Klijn, A. (2015). The effects of judicial transparency on public trust: Evidence from a field experiment. Public Administration, 93(4): 995-1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12149
[56] Grimmelikhuijsen, S.G., Piotrowski, S.J., Van Ryzin, G.G. (2020). Latent transparency and trust in government: Unexpected findings from two survey experiments. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4): 101497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101497
[57] Porumbescu, G. (2017). Linking transparency to trust in government and voice. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(5): 520-537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074015607301
[58] Holum, M. (2022). Citizen participation: Linking government efforts, actual participation, and trust in local politicians. International Journal of Public Administration, 46(13): 915-925. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2048667
[59] Siebers, V., Gradus, R., Grotens, R. (2019). Citizen engagement and trust: A study among citizen panel members in three Dutch municipalities. The Social Science Journal, 56(4): 545-554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.09.010
[60] Rosilawati, Y., Rafique, Z., Habib, S., Mahmood, A. (2022). Citizen participation for the effectiveness of local governance system: A quantitative study of local health and sanitation sectors. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(4): e2653. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2653
[61] Lee, Y., Schachter, H.L. (2019). Exploring the relationship between trust in government and citizen participation. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(5): 405-416. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1465956
[62] Xu, H., Zhu, W. (2021). Evaluating the impact mechanism of citizen participation on citizen satisfaction in a smart city. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48(8): 2466-2480. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320980746
[63] Wilkinson, C., Briggs, J., Salt, K., Vines, J., Flynn, E. (2019). In participatory budgeting we trust? Fairness, tactics and (in) accessibility in participatory governance. Local Government Studies, 45(6): 1001-1020. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2019.1606798
[64] Ardanaz, M., Otálvaro-Ramírez, S., Scartascini, C. (2023). Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust? World Development, 162: 106132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106132
[65] Hu, R., Sun, I.Y., Wu, Y. (2015). Chinese trust in the police: The impact of political efficacy and participation. Social Science Quarterly, 96(4): 1012-1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12196
[66] Hooghe, M., Marien, S. (2013). A comparative analysis of the relation between political trust and forms of political participation in Europe. European Societies, 15(1): 131-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2012.692807
[67] Fennema, M., Tillie, J. (1999). Political participation and political trust in Amsterdam: Civic communities and ethnic networks. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 25(4): 703-726. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.1999.9976711
[68] Fondevila, G. (2008). Police efficiency and management: Citizen confidence and satisfaction. Mexican Law Review, 1(1): 109-118.
[69] Merenda, F., Trent, J., Rinke, C.R., Buchanan, M. (2021). Understanding citizen satisfaction with the police: Results from a community survey. Police Practice and Research, 22(1): 692-710. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2020.1772784
[70] Dai, M., Jiang, X. (2016). A comparative study of satisfaction with the police in the United States and Australia. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 49(1): 30-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865814545684
[71] Zhao, J.S., Tsai, C.F., Ren, L. Lai, Y.L. (2014). Public satisfaction with police control of disorder crime: Does the public hold police accountable? Justice Quarterly, 31(2): 394-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.667140
[72] Bouranta, N., Siskos, Y., Tsotsolas, N. (2015). Measuring police officer and citizen satisfaction: Comparative analysis. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 38(4): 705-721. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-01-2015-0008
[73] Olutola, A.A., Bello, P.O. (2016). An exploration of the factors associated with public trust in the South African Police Service. International Journal of Economics and Finance Studies, 8(2): 219-236.
[74] Silva, A., Esparza, D., Martinez-Ebers, V., Branton, R. (2022). Perceived police performance, racial experiences, and trust in local government. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 10(3): 343-366. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1824122
[75] Bradford, B., Jackson, J., Stanko, E.A. (2009). Contact and confidence: Revisiting the impact of public encounters with the police. Policing & Society, 19(1): 20-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439460802457594
[76] Tolbert, C.J., Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e‐government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3): 354-369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00594.x
[77] Maxwell, R. (2010). Trust in government among British Muslims: The importance of migration status. Political Behavior, 32: 89-109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-009-9093-1
[78] Cooper, C.A., Knotts, H.G., Brennan, K.M. (2008). The importance of trust in government for public administration: The case of zoning. Public Administration Review, 68(3): 459-468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00882.x
[79] Ryzin, G.G.V. (2004). The measurement of overall citizen satisfaction. Public Performance & Management Review, 27(3): 9-28.
[80] Devereux, P.J., Weisbrod, B.A. (2006). Does “satisfaction” with local public services affect complaints (voice) and geographic mobility (exit)? Public Finance Review, 34(2): 123-147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142105282963
[81] Arkorful, V.E., Lugu, B.K., Hammond, A., Basiru, I. (2021). Decentralization and citizens’ participation in local governance: Does trust and transparency matter?–An empirical study. In Forum for Development Studies, 48(2): 199-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2021.1872698
[82] Moreira, S., Cardoso, C., Nalla, M.K. (2015). Citizen confidence in private security guards in Portugal. European Journal of Criminology, 12(2): 208-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370815571946
[83] Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43: 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
[84] Lee, L., Petter, S., Fayard, D., Robinson, S. (2011). On the use of partial least squares path modeling in accounting research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 12(4): 305-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2011.05.002
[85] Henseler, J. (2017). Partial least squares path modeling. In: Leeflang, P., Wieringa, J., Bijmolt, T., Pauwels, K. (eds) Advanced Methods for Modeling Markets. International Series in Quantitative Marketing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53469-5_12
[86] Fornell, C., Bookstein, F.L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4): 440-452. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378201900406
[87] Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sinkovics, R.R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New Challenges to International Marketing, 20: 277-319. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
[88] Sarstedt, M., Cheah, J.H. (2019). Partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS: A software review. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 7(3): 196-202. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-019-00058-3
[89] Restuputri, D.P., Indriani, T.R., Masudin, I. (2021). The effect of logistic service quality on customer satisfaction and loyalty using kansei engineering during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1): 1906492. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1906492
[90] Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
[91] Pareek, U., Sole, N.A. (2020). Delivery of time-bound public services to citizens: Indian experience. Indian Journal of Public Administration, 66(3): 343-355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019556120953806
[92] Kim, S.K., Park, M.J., Rho, J.J. (2019). Does public service delivery through new channels promote citizen trust in government? The case of smart devices. Information Technology for Development, 25(3): 604-624. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2017.1412291
[93] Krah, R.D.Y., Mertens, G. (2020). Transparency in local governments: Patterns and practices of twenty-first century. State and Local Government Review, 52(3): 200-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X20970245
[94] Wang, X., Wan Wart, M. (2007). When public participation in administration leads to trust: An empirical assessment of managers’ perceptions. Public Administration Review, 67(2): 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00712.x
[95] Wahyurudhanto, A. (2022). Predictors of citizens' satisfaction and trust in police as a function of good governance and cooperative culture. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 9(3): 152-167.
[96] Malone, M.F.T., Dammert, L. (2021). The police and the public: Policing practices and public trust in Latin America. Policing and Society, 31(4): 418-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2020.1744600
