• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对治理薄弱的经济体信任的瓦解。

Meltdown of trust in weakly governed economies.

作者信息

Polasky Stephen, Scheffer Marten, Anderies John M

机构信息

Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108.

Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Apr 8;122(14):e2320528122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2320528122. Epub 2025 Mar 28.

DOI:10.1073/pnas.2320528122
PMID:40153465
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12002020/
Abstract

A well-functioning society requires well-functioning institutions that ensure prosperity, fair distribution of wealth, social participation, security, and informative media. Such institutions are built on a foundation of trust. However, while trust is essential for economic success and good governance, interconnected mechanisms inherent in weakly governed market economies tend to undermine the very trust on which such success depends. These mechanisms include the intrinsic tendency for inequality to grow, media to boost perceived unfairness, and self-interest to gain rewards at the expense of others. These mechanisms, if left unchecked, allow wealth concentration to result in state capture where institutions facilitate further wealth concentration instead of the promoting the common good. As a result, people may become alienated and untrusting of fellow citizens and of institutions. Several democracies now experience such dynamics, the United States being a prime example. We discuss ways in which well-functioning democracies can design institutions to help avoid this social trap, and the much harder challenge of escaping the trap once in it. Successful cases such as the ability of Scandinavian democracies to maintain high-trust, and the US progressive era in the early 20th century provide instructive examples.

摘要

一个运转良好的社会需要运转良好的制度,这些制度要确保繁荣、财富的公平分配、社会参与、安全以及信息丰富的媒体。这样的制度建立在信任的基础之上。然而,尽管信任对于经济成功和良好治理至关重要,但治理薄弱的市场经济中固有的相互关联机制往往会破坏这种成功所依赖的信任本身。这些机制包括不平等加剧的内在趋势、媒体加剧人们感受到的不公平以及自利行为以牺牲他人为代价获取回报。如果这些机制不加以控制,就会导致财富集中,进而出现国家俘获现象,即制度助长进一步的财富集中而非促进共同利益。结果,人们可能会变得疏离,对同胞和制度都失去信任。现在有几个民主国家正经历着这样的动态变化,美国就是一个典型例子。我们讨论运转良好的民主国家可以如何设计制度来帮助避免这种社会陷阱,以及一旦陷入陷阱后摆脱它所面临的更艰巨挑战。斯堪的纳维亚民主国家维持高信任度的能力以及20世纪初美国进步时代等成功案例提供了具有启发性的范例。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/6bef7ff826f5/pnas.2320528122fig03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/913b481a1c62/pnas.2320528122fig01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/66294353fb0c/pnas.2320528122fig02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/6bef7ff826f5/pnas.2320528122fig03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/913b481a1c62/pnas.2320528122fig01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/66294353fb0c/pnas.2320528122fig02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1eb0/12002020/6bef7ff826f5/pnas.2320528122fig03.jpg

相似文献

1
Meltdown of trust in weakly governed economies.对治理薄弱的经济体信任的瓦解。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Apr 8;122(14):e2320528122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2320528122. Epub 2025 Mar 28.
2
How democracy alters our view of inequality - and what it means for our health.民主如何改变我们对不平等的看法——以及这对我们的健康意味着什么。
Soc Sci Med. 2021 Aug;283:114190. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114190. Epub 2021 Jun 30.
3
Cooperation, Trust, and Antagonism: How Public Goods Are Promoted.合作、信任与对抗:公共物品如何得到促进。
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2013 Dec;14(3):119-65. doi: 10.1177/1529100612474436.
4
Income inequality and the erosion of democracy in the twenty-first century.21世纪的收入不平等与民主的侵蚀。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Jan 7;122(1):e2422543121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2422543121. Epub 2024 Dec 30.
5
Social Trust in Polarized Times: How Perceptions of Political Polarization Affect Americans' Trust in Each Other.两极分化时代的社会信任:对政治两极分化的认知如何影响美国人对彼此的信任。
Polit Behav. 2022;44(3):1533-1554. doi: 10.1007/s11109-022-09787-1. Epub 2022 Mar 18.
6
Who are Your Joneses? Socio-Specific Income Inequality and Trust.谁是你的攀比对象?社会特定收入不平等与信任。
Soc Indic Res. 2017;134(3):877-898. doi: 10.1007/s11205-016-1460-9. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
7
Variations in Unmet Health Care Needs by Perceptions of Social Media Health Mis- and Disinformation, Frequency of Social Media Use, Medical Trust, and Medical Care Discrimination: Cross-Sectional Study.社交媒体健康错误和虚假信息认知、社交媒体使用频率、医疗信任和医疗保健歧视方面的未满足医疗需求的变化:横断面研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024 Jul 11;10:e56881. doi: 10.2196/56881.
8
Resources or trust: What matters more in the vaccination strategies of high-income liberal democracies?资源还是信任:在高收入自由民主国家的疫苗接种策略中,哪个更重要?
Health Policy Technol. 2022 Jun;11(2):100618. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2022.100618. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
9
Variation in Trust in Cancer Information Sources by Perceptions of Social Media Health Mis- and Disinformation and by Race and Ethnicity Among Adults in the United States: Cross-Sectional Study.美国成年人中,社交媒体健康错误信息和虚假信息认知以及种族和民族因素对癌症信息来源信任度的影响:横断面研究
JMIR Cancer. 2024 May 8;10:e54162. doi: 10.2196/54162.
10
Land, ecology, and democracy. A twenty-first century view.土地、生态与民主。二十一世纪的视角。
Politics Life Sci. 2006 Mar-Sep;25(1-2):42-56. doi: 10.2990/1471-5457(2006)25[42:LEAD]2.0.CO;2.

引用本文的文献

1
Anti-science and the science community.反科学与科学界。
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2025 Aug 13. doi: 10.1038/s41579-025-01231-5.

本文引用的文献

1
The vulnerability of aging states: A survival analysis across premodern societies.衰老状态的脆弱性:前现代社会的生存分析。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Nov 28;120(48):e2218834120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2218834120. Epub 2023 Nov 20.
2
Sweden's economic inequality gap is widening and worrying.瑞典的经济不平等差距正在扩大,令人担忧。
Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2023 Mar 1;26:100610. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100610. eCollection 2023 Mar.
3
Conspiracy theories and social media platforms.阴谋论和社交媒体平台。
Curr Opin Psychol. 2022 Oct;47:101407. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101407. Epub 2022 Jun 30.
4
Resilience of countries to COVID-19 correlated with trust.国家对 COVID-19 的韧性与信任相关。
Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 6;12(1):75. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-03358-w.
5
Loss of resilience preceded transformations of pre-Hispanic Pueblo societies.前西班牙时期普韦布洛社会的转型之前,就已经出现了弹性丧失的情况。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 May 4;118(18). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2024397118.
6
The spread of true and false news online.网络上真实和虚假新闻的传播。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559.
7
History meets palaeoscience: Consilience and collaboration in studying past societal responses to environmental change.历史与古科学相遇:在研究过去社会对环境变化的反应时的一致性和合作。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Mar 27;115(13):3210-3218. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1716912115. Epub 2018 Mar 12.
8
Inequality in nature and society.自然与社会中的不平等。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Dec 12;114(50):13154-13157. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1706412114. Epub 2017 Nov 28.
9
Conspiracy theories as part of history: The role of societal crisis situations.作为历史一部分的阴谋论:社会危机局势的作用。
Mem Stud. 2017 Jul;10(3):323-333. doi: 10.1177/1750698017701615. Epub 2017 Jun 29.
10
Inequality in the long run.长期不平等。
Science. 2014 May 23;344(6186):838-43. doi: 10.1126/science.1251936.