OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions 2026 Results: Slovenia
Table of contents
The OECD Trust Survey explores people’s perceptions of different public institutions in their country and the degree to which they trust their government. These perceptions range from day-to-day interactions with public institutions to decision making on complex policy issues. It showcases evidence on people’s experiences with and expectations of government reliability, responsiveness, fairness, integrity and openness. The 2025 survey, which followed earlier rounds in 2021 and 2023, includes 33 OECD countries and 5 OECD accession countries. The survey covers a representative sample of the adult population of each participating country. It was carried out between 11 September and 17 November in Slovenia, aligned with data collection in a majority of participating countries.
Between 2023 and 2025, Slovenia recorded stable levels in trust in the national government. High or moderately high trust stood at 28% in 2023 and 2025, below the OECD average (40%).
Share of population who indicate different levels of trust in their national government (on a 0-10 scale), 2025
Note: ‘High or moderately high’ corresponds to the aggregation of response options 6-10 to the question “On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, how much do you trust the national/federal government?”; neutral to option 5 and “low or no” to response options 0-4.
Trust in public institutions in Slovenia varies across institutions, and tends to fall below the OECD averages for several political and administrative institutions. In 2025, trust was higher in law-and-order and administrative institutions than in political institutions, in line with OECD-wide patterns. 50% trust the police, 43% trust in the courts, while trust in political parties stands at 14%. 30% trust the civil service, compared to the OECD average of 45%.
Share of population with high or moderately high trust in different public institutions and the media, 2023 and 2025
Note: ‘High or moderately high’ corresponds to the aggregation of response options 6-10 to the question “On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, how much do you trust [institution]?”. Country-specific terms may have been used in the survey implementation for some public institutions. The labels in the figure are used to facilitate cross-country comparison.
Findings from the OECD Trust Survey 2025 indicate that trust gaps are generally largest along political dimensions, especially partisanship and political agency, while gaps linked to socio-economic conditions (such as financial hardship, education, or perceived discrimination) are typically narrower, and differences by age and gender are usually the smallest. In Slovenia overall, the pattern of which characteristics matter most is in line with the OECD-wide pattern.
In terms of gap size, the divides in Slovenia are smaller than the OECD average for political agency/voice (42 percentage points (p.p.), compared to an OECD gap of 47 p.p.); and smaller for financial hardship (15 p.p. compared to OECD 18 p.p.). Trust gaps by education are pronounced but smaller than the average OECD education trust gap of 14 p.p: trust in the national government is 6 percentage points higher among people with a post-secondary degree (31%) than among those without an upper secondary education (25%). Differences in levels of trust by age are larger than the OECD average: young people in Slovenia report less trust (20%) than those aged 50+ (34%). Among women in Slovenia, the share with high or moderately high trust in the national government is 10 percentage points smaller than among men (compared to OECD 7 p.p.).
Share of population with high or moderately high trust in the national government by population group, 2025
Note: ‘High or moderately high’ corresponds to the aggregation of response options 6-10 to the question “On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, how much do you trust the national/federal government?”.
Perceptions of day-to-day dealings with public institutions in Slovenia are less positive than the OECD average, with Slovenia scoring below the OECD average across indicators. This provides a snapshot of how well people feel public services and frontline interactions work in practice (for example, how easy it is to access services, get information, and have issues resolved).
Across OECD countries, people who report more positive day-to-day experiences with government also tend to report higher trust in the national government, particularly those who are more satisfied with administrative services, feel benefit applications are treated fairly, and believe the public sector uses data legitimately.
In Slovenia, satisfaction with administrative services decreased from 66% (2023) to 63% (2025); perceived fairness in benefit applications remained unchanged at 40% (2023 and 2025); and perceived legitimacy of public sector data use increased from 39% (2023) to 41% (2025). Overall, this indicates some gains in day-to-day experiences, which, in OECD-wide results, are meaningfully associated with trust.
Share of population who are satisfied with public services or find a positive action in the respective situation likely, OECD and Slovenia, 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted OECD averages and values for Slovenia of the share of respondents who choose a response of 6-10 on the 0-10 scale for the above questions. Satisfaction with public services is restricted to recent service users.
Overall, people in Slovenia rate decision making on complex policy issues below the OECD average across indicators, pointing to a less favourable public assessment of how well the governmental system handles complex, long-term issues, incorporates citizen input, weighs competing interests, and acts in the public interest.
At the OECD level, when it comes to more complex aspects of governance, trust is most strongly associated with positive perceptions that the government uses evidence in decision-making, that it can balance the interests of different generations, and that people like you have a say in what government does.
In Slovenia, positive perceptions of the use of evidence increased from 29% (2023) to 31% (2025); views on balancing intergenerational interests increased from 24% (2023) to 26% (2025); and political voice increased from 15% (2023) to 18% (2025). Taken together, this points to sustained gains in aspects of complex decision-making that, at the OECD level, are strongly associated with trust.
Share of population who are confident in or find a positive action in the respective situation likely, OECD and Slovenia, 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted OECD averages and values for Slovenia of the share of respondents who choose a response of 6-10 on the 0-10 scale for the above questions.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming embedded in the way governments design, deliver, and manage policies. Understanding how people expect governments to use AI, and the conditions under which they find that use acceptable, is therefore essential for shaping credible strategies and maintaining trust. For the first time, the 2025 OECD Trust Survey gathered evidence on familiarity with AI and public expectations about its potential benefits in government. In Slovenia, 45% say they understand AI “well enough to explain it to someone else” when asked to rate their familiarity with it.
When asked about future AI use in the public sector, 40% of Slovenians believe the government will use AI to provide more tailored services, while 39% think AI will be used to reduce costs. 30% are confident the government will protect personal information when using AI, 37% believe human oversight will be maintained, and 32% think the government will be transparent about how AI is used. Finally, 33% believe the government will ensure fair treatment when AI is deployed in public services. Overall, across the six dimensions, people in Slovenia are less positive about the potential use of AI by government agencies than the OECD average.
Levels of confidence in the potential of government AI use to fulfil the respective expectation, OECD, 2025
Note: The figure shows the OECD averages of responses to the question “Thinking about how government agencies could use AI in the future, how confident are you that government agencies will achieve the following outcomes?” “Confident” corresponds to a response of 6-10 on the 0-10 scale, “neutral” to 5 and “not confident” to 0-4 on the 0-10 scale. The OECD average is calculated as the unweighted average of weighted country averages.
This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Member countries of the OECD.
This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
The full book is available in English: OECD (2026), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions 2026 Results: Navigating Rising Expectations and New Horizons, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9eb63fec-en.
© OECD 2026
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. By using this work, you accept to be bound by the terms of this licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Attribution – you must cite the work.
Translations – you must cite the original work, identify changes to the original and add the following text: In the event of any discrepancy between the original work and the translation, only the text of original work should be considered valid.
Adaptations – you must cite the original work and add the following text: This is an adaptation of an original work by the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed in this adaptation should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its Member countries.
Third-party material – the licence does not apply to third-party material in the work. If using such material, you are responsible for obtaining permission from the third party and for any claims of infringement.
You must not use the OECD logo, visual identity or cover image without express permission or suggest the OECD endorses your use of the work.
Any dispute arising under this licence shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012. The seat of arbitration shall be Paris (France). The number of arbitrators shall be one.