The Edelman trust index of 2025 shows a varied level of trust in the government, media, business, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). China showed the highest average trust level at ** percent, followed by Indonesia at **. On the other hand, Japan had scores under ** percent.

The level of trust in governments around the world varies from country to country. Interestingly, the more ************* countries have the highest levels of trust, which is most likely explained by an economic development in recent years and a lack of a critical press. On the bottom of the scale, Spain and Japan show ** and ** percent confidence, respectively. On average, the level of trust was just above ** percent in the 28 countries surveyed.

A study examining perspectives on the news media from over 40 countries revealed that levels of trust differed notably around the world. Nigeria recorded the highest level of overall trust in news among the other countries surveyed, at 68 percent. Scandinavians in particular had greater trust in the news media, with 67 percent of Finns trusting the news, along with 56 percent of Danes and 54 percent of Norwegians —placing all three countries among the top ten globally for media trust in 2025. Who trusts the news the least? Greece and Hungary were placed among the lowest in the world when it came to how much consumers trusted the news media, alongside Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Romania. Media sources in some of these countries can be considered to be insufficiently independent from the establishment. Just 22 percent of Hungarian and Greek consumers had trust in the news media, the lowest among all countries in the report. What affects trust in news? One factor which can greatly affect trust in news is the outlet used. Globally, social media is seen as a less reliable source of news, and in the EU radio and television are viewed as more dependable. In the current climate of fake news and polarizing political events, young people around the world are having a tough time relying on the mass media , although this attitude is also seen among older generations.

Background: A high level of well-being is associated with personal, community and national income, as well as personal, social and political trust. How these measures relate to each other within and between countries and within and across structural levels of society is largely unknown. To study this, we propose a three-layer nested socio-structural model. Each layer (individual, community, country) contains a measure of income, trust and satisfaction.Method: With this model, we analyzed data from two waves of the European Social Survey (ESS, 2006, 2012) in 19 countries (N = 72,461; weighted N = 73,307) with multilevel techniques. Indicators were personal, community, and national income; personal, social and political trust; and personal life satisfaction, social and political satisfaction.Results: Personal life satisfaction was associated with all income and trust variables. Greatest effect on personal life satisfaction, came from the national level, including political trust and income. However, 2/3 of the variance in personal life satisfaction came from income, that is personal, community and national. Within each socio-structural level, satisfaction was associated with income, but significantly modified by trust. When income and trust at all three levels were included, there was a significant association of the national layer on the social layer, and of the social layer on the individual layer as to the income–personal life satisfaction relationship. Consistent with the “the buffer hypothesis,” all three forms of trust acted as a buffer against the effect of personal income on life satisfaction. Low-trust countries had strong income–personal life satisfaction associations and the moderating role of trust was also stronger. High- and medium-trust countries had no such associations. Likewise, direct associations between political and personal trust were much stronger in the low-trust countries.Conclusion: The model presented in this study provides authorities with a framework for policies that will improve the general well-being of their population. Trust and income strongly influence personal life satisfaction. Money is the most important. However, trust forcefully dampens the effect of income. Politicians who want to enhance their population's personal life satisfaction, should raise the levels of trust in their electorate.

Brazil Confidence in Government: Trust data was reported at 51.000 % in Mar 2019. This records an increase from the previous number of 7.000 % for Dec 2018. Brazil Confidence in Government: Trust data is updated quarterly, averaging 43.000 % from Dec 2010 (Median) to Mar 2019, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 75.000 % in Dec 2012 and a record low of 5.000 % in Sep 2018. Brazil Confidence in Government: Trust data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Confederation of Industry. The data is categorized under Brazil Premium Database’s Business and Economic Survey – Table BR.SM003: Confidence in Government.

According to a survey conducted by Statista among more than 50,000 consumers across 34 markets worldwide, trust was the most important aspect of banking. Customers were overall satisfied with the trustworthiness of their bank, giving roughly *** index points out of five. More in-depth information can be found in the 2025 global bank customer satisfaction survey.

Results of mediation models for the effect of institutional trust (aggregate measure and single institutions) on interpersonal trust through feelings of security.

This table provides information on how many inhabitants of various European countries aged 15 years or older trust other people, the legal system and politics. Figures are from 2002 onwards. The question concerning trust in other people is: Overall, do you think most people can be trusted, or that you can’t be too careful? Trust in the legal system and politics is determined by asking people how much they trust a number of political and organisational institutions, viz. national parliament, the legal system, the police, politicians, political parties, the European Parliament and the United Nations. The figures in this table are based on the European Social Survey (ESS). The ESS is conducted every two years commissioned by the European Committee, the European Science Foundation and various national organisations for scientific research.

Data available from: 2002

Status of the figures: Figures of 2020 are preliminary. Figures of 2002 until 2018 are definite.

Changes as of April 5, 2024. The preliminary figures of 2018 are corrected and made definite. Figures of 2020 are new.

When will new figures be published? New figures will be published in 2025.

Grant Thornton Vibrant Economy Index - Community, Trust and Belonging (Rank out of 324)

*This indicator has been discontinued

Background: A high level of well-being is associated with personal, community and national income, as well as personal, social and political trust. How these measures relate to each other within and between countries and within and across structural levels of society is largely unknown. To study this, we propose a three-layer nested socio-structural model. Each layer (individual, community, country) contains a measure of income, trust and satisfaction.Method: With this model, we analyzed data from two waves of the European Social Survey (ESS, 2006, 2012) in 19 countries (N = 72,461; weighted N = 73,307) with multilevel techniques. Indicators were personal, community, and national income; personal, social and political trust; and personal life satisfaction, social and political satisfaction.Results: Personal life satisfaction was associated with all income and trust variables. Greatest effect on personal life satisfaction, came from the national level, including political trust and income. However, 2/3 of the variance in personal life satisfaction came from income, that is personal, community and national. Within each socio-structural level, satisfaction was associated with income, but significantly modified by trust. When income and trust at all three levels were included, there was a significant association of the national layer on the social layer, and of the social layer on the individual layer as to the income–personal life satisfaction relationship. Consistent with the “the buffer hypothesis,” all three forms of trust acted as a buffer against the effect of personal income on life satisfaction. Low-trust countries had strong income–personal life satisfaction associations and the moderating role of trust was also stronger. High- and medium-trust countries had no such associations. Likewise, direct associations between political and personal trust were much stronger in the low-trust countries.Conclusion: The model presented in this study provides authorities with a framework for policies that will improve the general well-being of their population. Trust and income strongly influence personal life satisfaction. Money is the most important. However, trust forcefully dampens the effect of income. Politicians who want to enhance their population's personal life satisfaction, should raise the levels of trust in their electorate.

Graph and download economic data for Producer Price Index by Industry: Commercial Banking: Trust Services (PCU5221105221103) from Dec 2003 to Jul 2025 about trusts, commercial, banks, services, depository institutions, PPI, industry, inflation, price index, indexes, price, and USA.

In Colombia, the trust in the healthcare among people surveyed was recorded to be 50 percent which was one of the lower levels. Additionally, there were three countries which showed a predominant level of distrust - under 50 percent - including South Africa, Argentina, and Russia. This statistic illustrates the level of trust people have in their healthcare system in 2022, by country.

This dataset provides values for ECONOMIC OPTIMISM INDEX reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

The Opinions and Lifestyle Survey is a Face-to-face interview of individuals in households. Data is available for Government Office Regions.

The data for these tables is from the Well-Being Module, April, July and October, 2014.

They cover a range of subjective well-being indicators that measure the respondents opinions using a score out of 10.

The questions analysed here are:

1. Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?
2. Overall, to what extent do you feel that the things you do in your life are worthwhile?
3. Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday?
4. Overall, how anxious did you feel yesterday?
5. Overall, how satisfied are you with your relationships with family, including spouse/partner?
6. Overall, how satisfied are you with your relationships with friends?
7. Overall, how satisfied are you with your physical health?
8. Overall, how satisfied are you with your mental well-being?
9. Overall, how satisfied are you with the well-being of your child/children?
10. Overall, how satisfied are you with your financial situation?
11. Overall, how satisfied are you with your work situation?
12. Overall, how satisfied are you with your commute to work?
13. How satisfied are you with the the time you spend on your paid work and on other aspects of your life?
14. To what extent do you feel most people can be trusted?
15. To what extent do you feel you have any relatives, friends or neighbours that you can ask for help?
16. On a scale of 0 to 10 how lonely do you feel in your daily life?
17. Overall, how satisfied are you with the local area where you live?
18. How satisfied are you with the public gardens/parks etc. in the local area where you live?
19. To what extent do you feel that you are involved in the local area where you live?
20. To what extent do you feel you belong in the local area where you live?
21. How safe would you feel walking alone in this local area after dark?
22. Overall, how optimistic do you feel about the next 12 months?
23. How satisfied are you with living in this country?
24. How optimistic are you about the future of this country?

The measures included in the table are:

• Average score (out of 10)
• % giving low score (0-3)
• % giving high score (7-10)
• Unweighted Base

Graph and download economic data for Producer Price Index by Commodity: Credit Intermediation Services (Partial): Other Credit Intermediation Services, Including Trust Services (Partial) (WPU3931) from Apr 2009 to Jul 2025 about trusts, intermediate, credits, commodities, services, PPI, inflation, price index, indexes, price, and USA.

The aim of the statistical operation Indicators of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is to make available to all social agents a set of statistical indicators, aligned with the Global indicator framework established by the United Nations, which will allow a /indic/ods.html">continuous monitoring for the Basque Country the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals and Targets.

Measuring quality of life involves observing the different aspects of which it is composed, one of these aspects being personal or subjective well-being. The Survey on Personal Well-being offers detailed and up-to-date information about the population of the Basque Country's perception of well-being.

Context:

The "Global Happiness Index and Homicide Rate Dataset" provides a comprehensive overview of happiness rankings and homicide rates for countries around the world. This dataset is a valuable resource for researchers, analysts, policymakers, and anyone interested in exploring the relationship between happiness and crime rates. It combines two critical dimensions of a country's well-being: its citizens' happiness levels and the prevalence of homicides.

Content:

1.**Countries:** This column contains the names of the countries included in the dataset. It serves as the primary identifier for each data entry.

2.**Global Rank:** This column indicates the global ranking of each country based on its happiness index. The happiness index measures the overall well-being and contentment of a nation's citizens, taking into account factors like income, social support, life expectancy, freedom to make life choices, trust in government, and generosity. A lower rank suggests a higher level of happiness.

3.**Available Data:** This column provides information about the completeness and reliability of the data for each country. It may indicate whether there are missing values, data quality issues, or other relevant notes regarding the dataset's integrity.

This dataset can be used for various analytical purposes, such as:

• Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA): Researchers can explore the relationship between a country's happiness ranking and its homicide rate to identify potential correlations or patterns.

• Geospatial Analysis: Analysts can create maps and visualizations to display the geographic distribution of happiness rankings and homicide rates.

• Policy Insights: Policymakers can use this dataset to inform decisions related to public safety, social programs, and well-being initiatives.

• Machine Learning and Predictive Modeling: Data scientists can build predictive models to understand the factors that contribute to happiness and to forecast potential changes in homicide rates.

Social capital is taken to be a resource that is accessed through broad personal networks by means of which a person actively participates in the different social and economic spheres, in an atmosphere of trust and which can facilitate social and personal development, together with the economic development of a society. Specifically, in the survey conducted by Eustat, social capital is seen as a set of social participation and relationship dimensions, which include: friends and relatives social networks, trust in people and institutions, social participation and cooperation, information and communication, cohesion and social inclusion, and happiness and health.

This statistic illustrates the share of people who agree they trust artificial intelligence in 2018, by country. According to data published by IPSOS, ** percent of respondents from China reported finding artificial intelligence trustworthy, compared to ** percent of respondents from Japan.