[EN] In light of current debates on democratic backsliding and institutional legitimacy, this
research is relevant for two key reasons. First, if, as Munck and Luna (2022) posit,
institutions are intended to serve as “avenues of inclusion”, then understanding why they
fail to inspire trust, particularly among marginalized populations, is essential. In this sense,
the relevance of this research lies in its potential to offer insights into the responsiveness
and inclusiveness of democratic representation in socially diverse and fragmented
landscapes. The principle of equal opportunity is a foundational element of contemporary
democratic systems (Milanovic, 2020). Research shows that institutions designed to
promote political equality tend to enhance levels of trust among citizens (Nannestad et al.,
2014; Rothstein & Uslaner, 2005), just as societies characterized by high political trust are
more likely to support inclusive institutional frameworks (Berg & Bjørnskov, 2011;
Bjørnskov & Svendsen, 2013). Second, this dissertation challenges the dominant assumption that declining political trust
necessarily harms democracy. Understanding how low levels of trust, echoing Hirschman’s
(1970) loyalty notion, may impact citizen engagement (through exit or voice behaviors) is
important for assessing whether declines in political trust weakens democracy, as suggested
by the traditional literature (Dalton, 2004; Klingemann and Fuchs, 1995; Linz and Stepan,
1996; Mishler and Rose, 1997), or whether, on the contrary, they might actually foster an
active democratic citizenship. In this sense, by regarding political trust as not only the
outcome but also the predictor, this study sheds light on its potential consequences, an area
that remains underexplored, as several scholars have exposed (Carstens, 2023; Devine,
2024; Citrin & Stoker, 2018; Levi & Stoker, 2000).
