Citizens' Communication and Policy Acceptance Behaviors for Resolving Public Disputes: Does Perceived Transparency and Trust in Government Matter?

How to manage communication between citizens and government is one of the most important public management concerns in an era of governance and digital government. Government agencies have paid attention to how to effectively... [ view full abstract ]

How to manage communication between citizens and government is one of the most important public management concerns in an era of governance and digital government. Government agencies have paid attention to how to effectively utilize offline and online channels for delivering the right communication with the right population and stakeholders at the right stage of policy decision-making, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. In a setting of public disputes on a public policy decision, however, government agencies face daunting challenges for designing and delivering the right communication strategies for the right population and stakeholders in a timely manner.

Given the declining public trust in government and increasing demands for transparency in government in South Korea, particular questions are being raised about what communication strategies should be considered and utilized by government agencies in order to deliver effective dispute resolutions and policy legitimacy. Focusing on the citizens participated in the dispute resolution process in a specific policy setting in South Korea, this study aims to analyze the following research questions: 1) what is the role of perceived government transparency and trust in government in citizens’ communication behaviors of handling and resolving public disputes on a policy decision?; and 2) what are the situational factors affecting citizens’ motivation to engage in the process of public dispute resolution and accept government policy?

The Situational Theory of Problem Solving (STOPS) developed by Kim & Grunig (2011) is adopted for analyzing these questions in a setting of policy disputes. Based on the analysis of STOPS, the study examines the role of transparency and trust in government in facilitating citizens’ communication behaviors of handling and resolving public disputes and conflicts. It further investigates the effects of situational factors of the dispute resolution process (i.e., problem recognition, involvement recognition, constraint recognition, referent criteria, and situational motivation) on active versus inactive communication behaviors of citizens and policy acceptance behavior of the citizens.

To address the research objectives, a survey research was conducted with 320 lay citizens facing public disputes related to the construction of high voltage transmission towers in their communities in South Korea in 2015. Based on a structural equation modeling (SEM) testing using the survey data, this study presents theoretical and empirical evidences of how and why lay citizens become more motivated to engage in the process of public dispute resolution and accept government policy. In particular, trust in government is posited as a meaningful moderator in the effects of citizens’ psychological process and communicative behavior of solving public disputes in government policy acceptance depending upon the varying level of transparent government communication. It also addresses what communication and information interventions may create a better resolution process for facilitating citizens’ communication and policy acceptance behaviors. Lastly, the results of this study can provide government managers with feasible and effective public engagement approaches in the public dispute context on a policy decision.