Trust is an important indicator of how people perceive public institutions. This chapter examines the contextual factors and concerns that affect people’s expectations of public institutions and presents levels of trust in public institutions across Latin American and Caribbean countries. It then provides a preview of findings in later chapters, looking at people’s perceptions of their day-to-day interactions with public institutions (Chapter 3) and of government decision making on complex policy issues (Chapter 4). Lastly, this chapter outlines the key areas for policy action that are most strongly associated with public trust in institutions. These findings seek to support policymakers in reforming policies and processes to enhance trust in national and local government and the civil service in LAC countries.
OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean 2025 Results
Abstract
Overall, roughly one-third (35%) of people in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) place high or moderately high trust in the national government, while nearly half (48%) have low or no trust. Local government benefits from slightly higher levels of trust (37%), while the national civil service (32%) and the national legislature (27%) show, on average, lower levels of trust.
While some day-to-day interactions with public institutions are positively perceived by a majority, others are viewed with more scepticism. Notably, a majority is satisfied with administrative services (55%) and believe information on public services is easily available (57%). Satisfaction with the education (50%) and healthcare system (40%) is lower. Moreover, only 36% of respondents believe that their application for government benefits would be treated fairly, and only 31% believe that public employees would refuse a bribe. Compared to the OECD, people in LAC find institutions slightly more responsive to novel ideas and complaints.
Positive perceptions of day-to-day interactions with public institutions are strongly associated with higher levels of trust in the civil service and local government. Satisfaction with administrative services, a core feature of day-to-day interactions, is the most important driver of trust in the national civil service, and it is also associated with higher levels of trust in the national government. With less than half of Latin Americans satisfied with essential services such as health and education, there is significant room for improvement. For trust in local government, satisfaction with administrative services ranks second only to people’s perceived ability to voice opinions about decisions affecting their communities. Positive assessments of public institutions’ legitimate use of personal data, of fair treatment of public benefit applications, and of service improvements following complaints are also significant for trust in the civil service and local government.
Confidence in public bodies is mixed when it comes government decision making on complex issues. A narrow majority is confident that governments can tackle long-term policy problems – such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions (52%) – and co-operate well with other stakeholders (51%). Yet a lower proportion believe that decisions are open and responsive to citizen inputs and evidence and are taken free from the interference of special interests. The share who believes politicians and the government withstand special interests is slightly larger in LAC than across the OECD but remains a clear minority.
Perceptions of decision making on complex policy issues play a decisive role in shaping trust in the national government and the civil service. People who believe that the government adequately balances intergenerational interests, makes decisions based on the best available evidence, and is held accountable by the legislature are more likely to have high or moderately high trust in the national government and the civil service. Perceived preparedness for large-scale emergencies is also related to a higher likelihood of trusting these two institutions as well as local government.
Perceptions of political voice and accountability are weak. Only 25% feel people like them have a say in government decisions, and just 36% believe national governments are held accountable by legislatures. Those who believe people like them have a say in government are moderately more likely to trust in the national government, with a slightly stronger relationship with trust in the national civil service.
Levels and drivers of trust are similar in LAC and the OECD, with some notable differences. Trust in the national government and public institutions are comparatively low, with lower averages in LAC affecting trust towards the national civil service in particular. The drivers of trust in different institutions are similar across countries. However, relatively positive perceptions of complex decision making are generally more impactful for trust in the national civil service in LAC than across the OECD, while satisfaction with administrative services is a more decisive – and perceptions of political voice a less decisive – predictor of whether someone trusts the national government in LAC. Different policy concerns likely further shape people’s expectations and assessments of public governance. Security, corruption and jobs are top of mind in LAC countries, compared to inflation, inequality and essential services in non-LAC OECD countries.
How can public institutions improve and foster trust?
Many of the same public policy measures have the potential to improve trust across different public institutions, though regression analysis reveals different sizes and strengths of these associations:
At the national level, trust in government can be significantly enhanced through initiatives that reinforce the belief that governments fairly balance interests across generations and ground decisions in reliable evidence. Institutional accountability is also crucial, with perceptions of legislative oversight over the executive associated with higher levels of trust in the national government. Additional trust-building areas include better incorporation of public and stakeholder input in policymaking, demonstrating competence in handling large-scale emergencies, better communication about reforms, and regulating new technologies in the public interest.
For the civil service, trust could be strengthened by improving satisfaction with administrative services. This entails ensuring fairness and responsiveness in service delivery and adapting services to diverse needs. At the same time, initiatives that demonstrate fairness across generations, balance the interests of different groups in society, and are grounded in reliable evidence will likely also have a positive impact on trust. Additional trust-building steps for the civil service include improving people’s sense of having a say in policymaking and ensuring that public agencies use personal data legitimately, that people’s claims for benefits are treated fairly, and that institutions are prepared to protect lives during emergencies.
For the local government, providing meaningful opportunities for community input on local decisions would likely yield the largest gains for trust in local government. This should be paired with efforts to improve administrative service satisfaction, demonstrate emergency management capability, and balance the interests of different groups. Trust in local government can be further strengthened by improving services based on complaints, fair treatment of individuals and applications for benefits or government support, and reassuring people that their data will be only used for legitimate purposes.
People form expectations, perceptions and trust in public institutions through a complex interplay of factors (Brezzi et al., 2021[1]). The OECD's work on drivers of trust in public institutions focuses primarily on how the perceived competencies and values in day-to-day interactions and complex decision making by these institutions relate to levels of public trust (see Chapters 3 to 5 of this report). However, individuals’ backgrounds also play a role (see Chapter 2), as do structural factors such as the economy. Simultaneously, external shocks can alter how people evaluate public institutions at a given time.
This section presents results from the OECD Trust Survey on people’s top concerns and worries in LAC. Data for the OECD Trust Survey in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) were collected in 2023 (for the OECD LAC countries) and in 2025 (for the participating non-OECD LAC countries). Throughout this period, the region was still recovering from the economic and social fall-out from the COVID-19 pandemic. Structural challenges relating to, for example, crime and high levels of informal employment likely further shaped perceptions of public institutions.
Crime and physical security are on top of mind for most people in LAC. On average, 60% of respondents identify crime or violence as one of the three most important issues facing their country, compared to an OECD-wide average of 30% (or 25% across OECD countries excluding OECD member countries in Latin America)1 (Figure 1.).2 At the country level, the shares highly worried about crime or violence range from 45% in Paraguay to 75% in Peru. Nearly nine in ten respondents report being always (42%), frequently (27%), or occasionally (20%) worried about becoming a victim of violent crime, and 14% state that someone in their household has been a victim of a criminal offence in the past year.
These reported concerns coincide with a period of expanding crime in the region. Homicide rates continue to climb, making LAC the region with the highest rates globally (UNODC, 2023[2]), with one in two homicides connected to criminal networks, compared to one in four globally (Messari, 2024[3]). Organised crime has expanded into new economic areas, such as illegal mining and migrant smuggling, and its traditional domain of drug production has also seen a recent surge (Winter, 2025[4]).
Share of population who view the listed policy issue as among the three most important ones facing their country, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted LAC and OECD averages of the share of people who select the respective answer choice in response to the question “What do you think are the three most important issues facing [COUNTRY]?”. Immigration was not a response option in Mexico and Norway. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD, including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey and 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Corruption is the second most pressing concern for respondents in Latin America and the Caribbean, even as other surveys have shown progress over time in perceptions of corruption (Latinobarometro, 2024[5])3. One in ten respondents (11%) reports that someone in their household has been asked to pay a bribe in the past 12 months, and nearly half (49%) identify corruption as one of the top three challenges facing their country. Despite significant country differences, ranging from 32% in Chile to 64% in Peru, the concern is more prevalent in all LAC countries than on average across the OECD (20% concerned with and 16% concerned without the four LAC OECD countries).
Economic issues are a shared concern in LAC and beyond, driven by a global context of uncertainty, inflation above central bank targets, tight fiscal spaces, and increasingly, rising trade barriers (OECD, 2025[6]). An average of 39%, 36%, and 31% of respondents in the region signal unemployment, inflation, and poverty and social inequality, respectively, among the three most important issues facing their country. Unemployment is more frequently cited, and inflation less frequently cited, than the OECD average. Differences in perceptions about the most pressing problem facing the country are shaped by individual experiences and concerns. A higher share of people in Latin America (82%, compared to 71% across the OECD) report concerns about their household's financial situation and overall economic well-being, and more than four in ten respondents in LAC indicate that someone in their household has lost their job in the past year (Figure 1.2).
Popular worries about the economy are perhaps not surprising considering the context since the beginning of the 2020s. The COVID-19 pandemic led LAC to experience severe GDP declines and exacerbated poverty for one in three Latin Americans who already lived in poverty (OECD et al., 2023[7]; OECD, 2020[8]). While there are some signs of economic improvement, such as gradually decreasing inflation rates, current and expected economic growth continue to be anemic (OECD et al., 2024[9]) (OECD, 2025[10]). Poverty and economic inequality likewise remain high: one in four people live in poverty, with one in ten in extreme poverty, and the region experiences some of the highest levels of income inequality worldwide (OECD et al., 2024[9]).
Share of population who reports their household was affected by any of the following issues, 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted LAC average of responses to the question “In the last 12 months, was your household affected by any of the following issues? (You can select more than one option)]. Shares present the unweighted average across the six LAC countries (Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay, and Peru) in 2025.
Source: 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Governments worldwide face challenging times. Despite following different paths around the world, governments must navigate critical transitions in a context of heightened uncertainty and widespread trust deficits in public institutions.
Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean are no exception to this global trend. Trust deficits in the region are not only restricted to trust in public institutions but extend to social trust as well (see Box 1.1). The extent of the trust deficit naturally differs from institution to institution and from country to country. Cross-country differences in trust can relate to cultural, socio-economic and institutional features and therefore need to be interpreted with care. Within-country differences in trust in different institutions point towards a region-wide result of a more pronounced trust deficit in the civil service compared to the national government.
The OECD Trust Survey finds that, on average, only about one in three respondents (35%) expresses high or moderately high trust in their national government across LAC countries, below the average across the OECD (39%). Nearly half (48%) of Latin Americans express low or no trust in government, compared to 44% across OECD countries. An average share of 16% of respondents across both LAC and OECD countries express neutral trust toward their government (Figure 1.3.). There are, however, notable differences between countries. While 54% of respondents in Mexico and 50% in Ecuador report high or moderately high trust in the national government, the shares are 27% in Paraguay and Guatemala, and 20% in Peru. Survey timing may play a role in explaining part of these differences.4
Share of population who indicates different levels of trust in their national government, 2023 or 2025
Note: This figure presents the within-country distributions of responses 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 government?” A 0-4 response corresponds to “low or no trust “, a 5 to “neutral“, and a 6-10 to “high or moderately high trust”. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
There is a reciprocal association between interpersonal and institutional trust (Figure 1.4). Individuals who express higher trust in others are generally more likely to trust institutions (Zmerli and Newton, 2008[11]; Bäck and Kestilä, 2009[12]). Conversely, in societies where public institutions are perceived to act effectively and fairly, interpersonal trust also tends to be stronger.
Share of respondents reporting high or moderately high trust in national government and in others
Note: This scatterplot presents the share of high or moderately high responses 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 government”, equal to the values of responses 6-10 on the response scale, on the y-axis. The x-axis presents the share of respondents who answered 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 most people?”. ““OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD, including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
In LAC, interpersonal trust has historically been low, with limited fluctuations during the past three decades (Latinobarómetro Corporation, 2023[13]). Findings from the OECD Trust Survey in LAC are consistent with these data and show that only half of Latin Americans trust in others, with very few variations across countries, and below the average across OECD countries (62%).5
Several factors likely contribute to persistent distrust. High levels of income and wealth inequality and perceptions of limited opportunities for social mobility are known to negatively affect trust in society as a whole and not just among the socio-economically disadvantaged (Uslaner, 2002[14]; Scartascini and Valle Luna, 2020[15]; Keefer and Scartascini, 2022[16]; Granados and Sánchez, 2025[17]). Similarly, persistent high rates of violence may also erode people’s willingness to trust strangers (Corbacho, Philipp and Ruiz-Vega, 2015[18]).
1.2.1. The civil service is less trusted than the national government in LAC
Overall, Latin Americans tend to place greater confidence in local and national governments, compared to the national civil service. The exceptions to this trend are Brazil and Mexico (Figure 1.5.).
On average, nearly four in ten people (37%) in LAC report high or moderately high trust in the local government, slightly above the share of 35% that trust the national government. Trust in local government is lower than across the OECD on average (45%). Interestingly, it tends to vary less across countries than trust in national government, ranging from 29% in Peru to 48% in Mexico. The greater variation at the national level may reflect the frequently more complex and divisive nature of national compared to local politics, where the broader scale implies a wider diversity of interests (Norris, 2011[19]).
Share of respondents who express high or moderately high trust into the national government, civil service, local government and legislatures, 2023 and 2025
Note: The figure presents the within-country distributions of responses 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 [insert name of institution]?” The share with high or moderately high trust correspond to those who select an answer from 6 to 10 on the 0-10 response scale. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
Whilst people in OECD countries tend to place greater trust in the national civil service (45%) than in the national government (39%), Latin Americans show higher trust in national government (35%) than in the civil service (32%). Differences may be partially explained not only by the functioning and performance of civil services, but also diverse expectations of public institutions. Moreover, in many LAC countries, civil service appointments are perceived as politicised, which can undermine public perceptions of professionalism, impartiality, and competence of the civil service (S. Grindle, 2012[20]). In contrast, many OECD countries rely heavily on merit-based recruitment systems, supported by strong institutional oversight, which helps to foster greater confidence (Box 1.2).
According to the 2023 OECD Trust Survey, national civil services are among the most trusted public institutions in OECD countries. On average, 45% of OECD respondents report trusting the national civil service – putting the national civil service among the three most trusted institutions, behind the judiciary (54%) and the police (63%). High levels of public trust in the national civil service are often explained by several features of public administration:
1. Merit-based recruitment: Civil servants are often selected through transparent and competitive processes, including public examinations. This helps ensure competence, professionalism, and limits political influence in hiring. It also ensures that national civil services are highly performing while meeting people’s needs.
2. Impartial and rules-based systems: Administrative decisions are guided by established laws and procedures rather than personal discretion. This fosters a perception of fairness and neutrality among people.
3. Transparency and performance accountability: Many OECD governments track the performance of civil services using measurable indicators, public benchmarking tools, and digital platforms that enable people to monitor service delivery and outcomes.
4. Reliable service delivery: Consistent access to quality public services - such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure- strengthens trust through positive day-to-day interactions with government institutions.
5. Commitment to long-term societal interests: National civil services serve society’s long-term interests by anticipating challenges, providing honest advice to governments, and ensuring continuity beyond electoral cycles.
6. Stable institutional traditions: Over time, many OECD countries have developed strong bureaucratic cultures rooted in integrity, professionalism, and continuity, reinforcing trust in the national civil service across generations.
1.2.1. The armed forces, police, civil society and media elicit more trust than the judiciary, civil service and political institutions
Public trust varies significantly across different institutions. Results of the OECD Trust Survey in LAC show security and order institutions elicit the highest levels of public trust, while other institutions, especially those of a political nature, tend to be less trusted. These findings are similar to results across OECD countries, though with lower averages in LAC (OECD, 2024[22]).
The armed forces are the most trusted institution in LAC, with a majority of respondents reporting high or moderately high trust consistently across the six LAC countries surveyed in 2025. On average, a share of 55% of respondents trust the armed forces, even surpassing the share of those who report trust in others (50%). In a similar vein, though with a lower share and more variation across countries, 44% report high or moderately high levels of trust in the police (Figure 1.6.).
Share of population with high or moderately high trust in the listed public institution and media, 2023 and 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted average response 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 [insert name of institution]?” for LAC and OECD countries. The share with high or moderately high trust correspond to those who select an answer from 6 to 10 on the 0-10 response scale. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries. The questions on armed forces were excluded from the 2023 OECD Trust Survey but will be included in the 2025 survey of OECD countries. The average for the armed forces is, therefore, only computed by using data for Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala and Paraguay. The questions on the electoral system and civil society organisations were excluded from the 2023 OECD Trust Survey, except in Chile, and were included in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries. Therefore, the average for these questions was computed using data from Brazil, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Peru.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
On the other hand, people are less trusting of institutions of a political nature. On average, 27% of Latin Americans report high or moderately high trust in national legislatures, and 19% in political parties, the least trusted institution. These shares are both below the respective OECD averages of 37% and 24%. Variations across countries are significant: whilst 43% report trust in the legislature in Mexico, only 15% in Peru and 19% in Chile do. Overall, however, there are several countries in the region in which trust in the legislature is comparatively high (such as Mexico or the Dominican Republic). Likewise, the share who trust political parties ranges from 33% in Mexico to 13% in Costa Rica.
The previously discussed national civil service elicits significantly less trust than the armed forces, police and even the national government, but more trust than legislatures and parties. The regional and/or local civil service is slightly more trusted, with 34% of people in LAC placing high or moderately high trust in the regional compared to 32% in the national civil service. This difference is however driven by a few countries, since in both LAC and OECD countries, many people indicate similar levels of trust in both institutions.
A further institution that faces important trust deficits in the region is the judicial system, though these deficits are more apparent when comparing trust levels to the OECD average than to trust in other institutions. Across OECD countries, courts and the judicial system are among the most trusted institutions, with one out of two respondents (54%) reporting confidence in them. In contrast, across LAC countries, only 36% have high or moderately high trust in courts and the judicial system.
The share of those who report high or moderately high levels of trust in the electoral system – defined as the set of rules and methods by which votes are turned into elected seats – is not much larger. On average,6 39% of respondents express confidence in the electoral system, ranging from 28% in Paraguay to 48% in Brazil.
People’s trust in public institutions is shaped by an array of interrelated factors (see Annex.1A). Some of these factors fall outside the scope of the government’s purview, at least in the short and medium term. Others relate to the perceptions of the competencies and values of public institutions – the so-called "public governance drivers of trust" in this report – in the realms of day-to-day interactions with citizens and decision making on complex policy issues. These perceptions can be more readily influenced by the actions of all levels of government.
While governments must continuously improve their interactions with constituents, ranging from delivering quality public services and proactively providing information to addressing corruption, the OECD Trust Survey in LAC suggests that the most significant drivers of trust in the region today relate to how governments tackle complex governance challenges. Perceptions of decision making on complex policy issues – such as balancing between the interests of current and future generations or relying on the best available evidence to make policy decisions– play a decisive role in shaping trust not only in the national government, but also the civil service.
Several different aspects of complex decision making – such as confidence in the ability of governments to co-operate with diverse stakeholders – are already seen in a positive light by a sizeable share of the population in the region, highlighting an area of strength that governments can leverage to build trust. Other facets of complex decision making, such as the ability of citizens to influence government actions, are viewed with more scepticism.
In parallel, positive perceptions of day-to-day interactions with public institutions are strongly associated with higher levels of trust in the civil service and local government. Satisfaction with administrative services is the most important driver of trust in the national civil service. For trust in the local government, satisfaction with services ranks second only to people’s perceived ability to voice opinions about decisions affecting their communities.
Improved satisfaction with administrative services is also associated with higher levels of trust in the legislature and national government, although to a lesser degree than for the civil service and local government. This core feature of day-to-day interactions with public institutions is seen positively by a majority of their users in Latin America and the Caribbean. Yet there remains room to improve on different aspects related to day-to-day interactions that could help enhance trust.
1.3.1. Governments in Latin America and the Caribbean could further invest in improving people's everyday experiences with public institutions (Chapter 3)
Results of the OECD Trust Survey in LAC show that while some day-to-day interactions with public institutions – notably satisfaction with administrative services (55%) and the availability of information on administrative services (57%) – are positively perceived by a majority, other day-to-day interactions are viewed with more scepticism and fall short of people’s expectations.
For instance, fewer than half of users of public services across the region report being satisfied with their country's healthcare (40%), and 50% are satisfied with education systems. Moreover, more people believe it is unlikely (41%) than likely (38%) that public agencies would use their personal data only for legitimate purposes; only 36% believe that their application for government benefits would be treated fairly; and 31% believe that public employees would refuse a bribe. These perceptions of institutions’ reliability, fairness and integrity in daily interactions are significantly lower than the averages observed in OECD countries, where people generally assess government performance in these areas more positively (Figure 1.7).
At the same time, perceptions of government responsiveness, such as finding it likely that services are improved after complaints, are marginally more positive in the region than across OECD countries. On average, slightly more respondents across LAC countries believe services can improve after their complaints (43%) or are open to innovative ideas (41%) than their OECD peers (39%).
Share of population who are satisfied with public services or find a positive action in the respective situation likely, OECD and LAC, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted OECD and LAC averages 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 (reported) service users. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
1.3.2. How can governments improve trust through improved day-to-day interactions with the public?
Where can targeted government action in day-to-day interactions yield the greatest gains in public trust? Figure 1.8 shows the key areas for action related with day-to-day interactions that are most strongly associated with public trust. These aspects of public governance are identified based on their statistical and practical significance7 as drivers of trust and the degree to which people hold positive or negative perceptions about them.8 This analysis looks at the ten countries collectively and therefore does not capture significant variations across countries that would require further research at the national level. Annex A explains the analysis’ methodology, and Chapters 3 and 4 provide details on the results of different measures of people’s perceptions of their day-to-day interactions with public institutions and government decision making on complex policy issues.
When comparing the relationship between daily interactions and trust across different institutions (Figure 1.8), the potential impact improvements in perceptions of day-to-day interactions is more pronounced for trust in local governments and the civil service than in the national governments, both in LAC and OECD countries (OECD, 2024[22]).
With one major exception – having a voice on decisions affecting one’s local community – the drivers of trust in the civil service and in local government are largely identical. People’s satisfaction with administrative services is associated with higher trust in both institutions, as are perceptions of fair treatment of applications to government benefits, the legitimate use of people’s data and the responsiveness to service quality complaints (Figure 1.8). These aspects of public governance are also associated with higher trust in local governments and the civil service across OECD countries. For local governments across LAC (only), the most influential public governance aspect for trust is whether people believe that they can voice their opinion on policy decisions affecting their community.
Trust in the national government is also related to satisfaction with administrative services. This relationship is stronger in LAC countries than is true across the OECD. The expectation that applications for public benefits will be treated fairly is likewise associated with a higher probability of having high or moderately high trust in the national government (Figure 1.8).
Public governance drivers linked to day-to-day interactions that have a statistically significant relationship with trust in the respective institution weighted by their average marginal effect and relative room to improve, 2023 and 2025
How to read: The figure shows the combined information of the statistically significant drivers of trust in the respective institution (from the regression analysis) and the difference between the average share with a positive perception of the respective driver to an 80% threshold (considered as an optimal ceiling). Drivers that are more positively associated with trust in the respective institution and for which only a low average share across LAC have a positive perception can potentially have a higher impact on trust, as there is important scope for improvement and the improvement would likely be associated with increased levels of trust. On the other hand, drivers with a low positive association with trust, and for which perceptions are already quite positive across LAC countries have a lower potential for contributing to positive improvements on trust. Nevertheless, all drivers listed in this figure are statistically significant and improvements in the respective areas may therefore all contribute to improving trust. Where results are not significant, the driver is excluded from the schematic.
Note: The figure shows the statistically significant correlates of trust in the national government, civil service, and local government, obtained through logistic regressions of trust in the respective institutions on the public governance drivers. The analyses control for individual characteristics, including whether people voted or would have voted for one of the current parties in power, self-reported levels of interpersonal trust, and country fixed effects. All variables depicted are statistically significant at the 5% level and their marginal effect is above 1.5 percentage points. For more details on the econometric analysis, including the average marginal effects associated with each variable, see Annex A.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC
1.3.3. Whilst Latin Americans are relatively positive about their governments' ability to handle complex policy challenges, governments should look to improve perceptions of the use of evidence in policies and balance intergenerational interests (Chapters 4 and 5)
Trust in government can be reinforced gradually through each interaction individuals have with public institutions. Beyond day-to-day encounters between public institutions and people, however, people also assess governments based on their ability to reliably tackle long-term, complex societal challenges. People in Latin America and the Caribbean express relative optimism in this regard – an encouraging finding as positive perceptions in this area are very important for strengthening trust in the national government.
On average, 52% of respondents are confident that their governments will succeed in reducing greenhouse gas emissions over the next decade, and 46% believe their governments will appropriately balance the interests of current and future generations (Figure 1.9). These shares are above the averages across OECD countries, of 42% and 37%, respectively. The positive perceptions of intergenerational fairness in decision making are an important factor for bolstering trust in the national government in the region.
Share of population who are confident in or find a positive action in the respective situation likely, OECD and LAC, 2023 or 2025
Note: The figure presents the unweighted OECD and LAC averages of the share of respondents who choose a response of 6-10 on the 0-10 scale for the above questions. “OECD” presents the unweighted average across 30 OECD including the four LAC OECD countries in 2023. “LAC” presents the unweighted average across the ten LAC countries, gathered in 2023 for the OECD LAC countries and in 2025 for the non-OECD LAC countries. Data concerning perceptions of government co-operation with other stakeholders only covers Brazil, Chile, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Peru, and those about courts making decisions free from political influence only covers Brazil, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Peru.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC.
However, the proportion of Latin Americans who believe that decisions are open and responsive to public inputs and evidence and taken free from the interference of special interests are lower. On average, and similar to perceptions of their OECD peers (41%), only 38% of respondents in LAC are confident that their governments will base decisions on the best available evidence, research, and data. Notably, this dimension of responsiveness is the second strongest predictor of trust in national government in LAC, as well as across the OECD. But in addition, it is also the public governance driver with the second-highest association with trust in the national civil service in the region, while the relationship is more attenuated in OECD countries.
Beyond investing in improving evidence-based policies, governments also need to be open and transparent about how the government decisions can impact people’s lives. On average, only 36% of Latin Americans (and 39% of respondents across the OECD) believe they will be clearly informed about how they would be affected by relevant reforms.
Similarly, while few respondents across the surveyed countries feel their voices are heard, many believe that certain interests are over-represented in public policies. Results of the OECD Trust Survey in LAC show that only one in four Latin Americans (25%) believe that the political system in their country allows people like them to have a say in government decisions, and only 36% find it likely that the government would adopt opinions expressed in a public consultation. Conversely, only one-third (36% in LAC, and 31% across OECD countries) believe politicians would turn down a well-paid job in exchange for a political favour. Furthermore, just 33% are confident that their government could resist lobbying by corporations for policies potentially harmful to the public, slightly above the average of 30% across the OECD. These concerns about political voice and integrity are also significant drivers and are correlated with trust across the main public institutions under analysis in Latin America and the Caribbean, and across OECD countries.
1.3.4. How can governments improve trust in their decision making on complex policy issues?
In both LAC and OECD countries, positive perceptions of decision making on complex policy issues play a crucial role in shaping trust in the national government. In LAC countries, they are also decisive for affecting trust in the civil service. In part, this appears related to the fact that the correlation between trust in the two institutions at the individual level is higher in the region (0.73) than is true across the OECD (0.64). Moreover, the relationship between perceptions of having a say and trust in the national government is about twice as pronounced across the OECD compared to LAC countries (OECD, 2024[22]).
People’s perceptions of their government’s ability to consider and balance intergenerational interests, ensure competent and evidence-based decision making, and uphold accountability to both constituents and representative institutions have a greater impact on trust in national government than perceptions related to day-to-day interactions do. The most significant potential gains in trust in national government today could result from initiatives that reinforce the belief that decisions are made fairly for all generations, are grounded in reliable evidence, and that institutions are held accountable for their actions (Figure 1.10). Moderate drivers of trust in the national government include positive perceptions of political voice and responsiveness to inputs from public consultations, of emergency preparedness, and of government communicating about reform impacts and regulating new technologies so that business and people can use them responsibly.
Public governance drivers linked to decision making on complex policy issues that have a statistically significant relationship with trust in the respective institution weighted by their average marginal effect and relative room to improve 2023 and 2025
How to read: The figure shows the combined information of the statistically significant drivers of trust in the respective institution (from the regression analysis) and the difference between the average share with a positive perception of the respective driver to an 80% threshold (considered as an optimal ceiling). Drivers that are more positively associated with trust in the respective institution and for which only a low average share across LAC have a positive perception can potentially have a higher impact on trust, as there is important scope for improvement and the improvement would likely be associated with increased levels of trust. On the other hand, drivers with a low positive association with trust, and for which perceptions are already quite positive across LAC countries have a lower potential for contributing to positive improvements on trust. Nevertheless, all drivers listed in this figure are statistically significant and improvements in the respective areas may therefore all contribute to improving trust. Where results are not significant, the driver is excluded from the schematic.
Note: The figure shows the statistically significant correlates of trust in the national government, civil service, and local government, obtained through logistic regressions of trust in the respective institutions on the public governance drivers. The analyses control for individual characteristics, including whether people voted or would have voted for one of the current parties in power, self-reported levels of interpersonal trust, and country fixed effects. All variables depicted are statistically significant at the 5% level and their marginal effect is above 1.5 percentage points. For more details on the econometric analysis, including the average marginal effects associated with each variable, see Annex A.
Source: 2023 OECD Trust Survey, 2025 OECD Trust Survey in LAC
Positive perceptions of evidence-informed decision making and emergency preparedness also influence trust in the civil service and local governments, though to a lesser extent than for national government. In addition, a positive assessment of the legislature balancing between the interests of different groups or regions is also positively related with trust in these two institutions. Finally, trust in the civil service is positively influenced by people’s belief that they have a say in what government does, services are improved after complaints, that government balances the needs of current and future generations, and that the legislature holds the government accountable.
The findings suggest that to foster trust in government across LAC, people expect core democratic principles – such as institutional accountability and meaningful public participation – to be visibly upheld in practice. In parallel, other strategic priorities, such as resisting undue influence and tailoring public policies to address the needs of diverse regions and social groups, could also generate gains in public trust, especially for trust in the local government.
References
[21] Andersen, D. (2021), “The Limits of Meritocracy in Stabilizing Democracy and the Twin Importance of Bureaucratic Impartiality and Effectiveness”, Social Science History, Vol. 45/3, pp. 535-559, https://doi.org/10.1017/ssh.2021.15.
[12] Bäck, M. and E. Kestilä (2009), “Social Capital and Political Trust in Finland: An Individual-level Assessment”, Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 32/2, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2008.00218.x.
[1] Brezzi, M. et al. (2021), “An updated OECD framework on drivers of trust in public institutions to meet current and future challenges”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 48, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b6c5478c-en.
[18] Corbacho, A., J. Philipp and M. Ruiz-Vega (2015), “Crime and Erosion of Trust: Evidence for Latin America”, World Development, Vol. 70, pp. 400-415, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.04.013.
[17] Granados, C. and F. Sánchez (2025), “Eppur si Muove. Social Mobility, Inequality, and Political Trust in Latin America”, Social Justice Research, Vol. 38/2, pp. 167-190, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-025-00452-6.
[26] Jütten, M. (2024), “Political turmoil in Peru”, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (accessed on 22 July 2025).
[16] Keefer, P. and C. Scartascini (eds.) (2022), Trust: The Key to Social Cohesion and Growth in Latin America and the Caribbean, Inter-American Development Bank, https://doi.org/10.18235/0003792.
[5] Latinobarometro (2024), Informe 2024. LA DEMOCRACIA RESILIENTE, Latinobarometro, Santiago de Chile.
[13] Latinobarómetro Corporation (2023), Latinobarómetro Study 1996 to 2023 Waves, https://www.latinobarometro.org/latinobarometro-2023.
[3] Messari, N. (2024), Violence and Politics in Latin America: A Long and Tragic History. PB - 36/24, Policy Center for the New South.
[19] Norris, P. (2011), “Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited”, Cambridge University Press.
[24] OECD (2025), Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Australia, Building Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/28a876c2-en.
[6] OECD (2025), OECD Economic Outlook, Volume 2025 Issue 1: Tackling Uncertainty, Reviving Growth, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/83363382-en.
[10] OECD (2025), Perspectivas Económicas de la OCDE. Foco en América Latina., OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/es/topics/policy-sub-issues/economic-snapshot-pages/Perspectivas-economicas-OCDE-Junio-2025-ESP-PRT-Final-opt.pdf.
[22] OECD (2024), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions – 2024 Results: Building Trust in a Complex Policy Environment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9a20554b-en.
[23] OECD (2022), Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy: Main Findings from the 2021 OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions, Building Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b407f99c-en.
[8] OECD (2020), “COVID-19 in Latin America and the Caribbean: Regional socio-economic implications and policy priorities”, OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/93a64fde-en.
[25] OECD (2017), OECD Guidelines on Measuring Trust, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264278219-en.
[9] OECD et al. (2024), Latin American Economic Outlook 2024: Financing Sustainable Development, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c437947f-en.
[7] OECD et al. (2023), Latin American Economic Outlook 2023: Investing in Sustainable Development, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8c93ff6e-en.
[20] S. Grindle, M. (2012), Jobs for the Boys: Patronage and the State in Comparative Perspective, Harvard University Press.
[15] Scartascini, C. and J. Valle Luna (2020), “WHOM DO WE TRUST? The Role of Inequality and Perceptions”, in Busso, M. and J. Messina (eds.), THE INEQUALITY CRISIS. Latin America and the Caribbean at the Crossroads., Inter-American Development Bank, Washington DC.
[2] UNODC (2023), Global Study on Homicide, UNODC, Vienna.
[14] Uslaner, E. (2002), The Moral Foundations of Trust, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[4] Winter, B. (2025), Navigating Trump and three other trends shaping Latin America in 2025. Vol 19, Issue 1..
[11] Zmerli, S. and K. Newton (2008), “Social Trust and Attitudes Toward Democracy”, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 72/4, pp. 706-724, https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn054.
People’s trust in public institutions is influenced by multiple interrelated factors. The OECD Framework on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions identifies three types of factors that affect levels of trust. First, five main public governance drivers assess the degree to which people expect institutions to be reliable and responsive in formulating and implementing policies and services while upholding values of fairness, integrity, and openness. Institutions that align their behavior with these expectations can foster people’s sense of security and dignity. Governments can more directly influence these perceptions of public institutions’ performance and values and leverage them to strengthen trust. Second, trust in public institutions is driven by the perceived ability of government to address complex, including global, challenges. People need to be confident that public institutions can manage services responsively and tackle policy issues reliably while maintaining accountability, upholding the public interest, and ensuring public participation. Lastly, various individual and group-based cultural and socio-economic factors, as well as political preferences, influence trust.
Building trust in public institutions requires a holistic approach: It first needs to focus on people’s evaluation of the performance on public governance aspects, which can be influenced by how institutions deliver but also by how they communicate. In addition, the approach also needs to acknowledge that people’s demographic and socio-economic background, as well as their sense of political agency, affect their experiences with and perceptions of public institutions and therefore their trust on them.
← 1. Throughout the report, the LAC and OECD averages are obtained by, first, obtaining the weighted average for each country, taking the cross-country average of the individual country averages, unweighted by their population size. For example, if in half of the included LAC countries a given variable has a weighted average of 25% and in the other half, the weighted average was 75%, the LAC average would be 50%, regardless of the population size of the countries in the first and in the second group. In most cases, the OECD-wide average including or excluding the four OECD LAC countries are very similar with a deviation of 1-2 percentage points.
← 2. For country disaggregated results, please refer to the StatsLinks provided for each figure in this report.
← 3. In 2024, 37% of Latin Americans said that “a lot” or “some” progress had been made in reducing corruption within state institutions over the past two years. This marks the highest level recorded since the indicator was first measured in 2004, when it stood at just 23 percent.
← 4. The fact that data were collected only for the urban adult population in Mexico, and the timing for data collection, could potentially explain some of these differences. Mexico and Ecuador held elections only a few months before the implementation of the survey, and research has found “honeymoon effects” that temporarily increase trust in newly elected governments (OECD, 2022[23]; OECD, 2024[22]). On the other hand, Peru was undergoing high levels of street violence and demonstrations and a complete change of cabinet members following the political turmoil and impeachment in 2022 (Jütten, 2024[26]), and data collection for OECD LAC countries occurred in a period of sustained high inflation (2022-2023).
← 5. Differences in results of the OECD Trust Survey and those from the Latinobarometer may be linked to the phrasing of the question addressing interpersonal trust. In the Latinobarometer the question asked to respondents is: “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?”, while in the OECD Trust Survey it is: “On a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, in general how much do you trust most people?”. The question as included in the OECD Trust Survey allows for a more nuanced response than a binary answer. In addition, the phrasing of this question is long discussed in OECD Guidelines on Measuring Trust (OECD, 2017[25]), including through primary evidence generated by the National Statistical Office of the United Kingdom. Their analysis concludes that interpersonal trust questions that use a “People cannot be too careful” phrasing, compared to a more neutral question wording that focuses solely on trust ‘’in other people’’, induce a priming effect that can lead some respondents to reply more negatively.
← 6. This average includes data for the seven countries where available: Brazil, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Peru.
← 7. The variables included in the figure are statistically significant at least at a 5% (statistical significance), and the estimated average marginal effect exceeds 1.5 percentage points (practical significance).
← 8. The estimated average marginal effect is weighted by the difference between the average share with a positive perception of the respective driver to an 80% threshold (considered as an optimal ceiling).