Next Article in Journal
Technology in Nature—mDGBL as a Successful Approach to Promote Complex Contents?
Next Article in Special Issue
Equity and Driving Factors of Medical Service Supply–Demand Balance for the Elderly in Rapidly Urbanized Communities Based on Big Data Analysis—A Case Study of Xiamen City
Previous Article in Journal
Finding a New Home: Rerouting of Ferry Ships from Merak–Bakauheni to East Indonesian Trajectories
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 1
10.3390/su15010628
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Social Well-Being for a Sustainable Future: The Influence of Trust in Big Business and Banks on Perceptions of Technological Development from a Life Satisfaction Perspective in Latin America

by
Arelys López-Concepción
1,*,
Ana Gil-Lacruz
1,
Isabel Saz-Gil
2 and
Víctor Bazán-Monasterio
3
1
Department of Business Management and Organisation, School of Engineering and Architecture, Faculty of Economics and Business, Rio Ebro Campus, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
2
Department of Business Management and Organisation, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas, Universidad de Zaragoza, 44003 Teruel, Spain
3
University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(1), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010628
Submission received: 29 November 2022 / Revised: 22 December 2022 / Accepted: 26 December 2022 / Published: 30 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Public Health and Sustainable Development: Justice, Inclusivity, and Financing for a Resilient Future)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Sustainable development is becoming increasingly important because it improves the quality of our lives. Businesses must focus beyond maximizing corporate economic profits, which are very important. They must internalize the fact that planning and governance-oriented strategies focused on promoting human health and well-being ensure a sustainable future. This study explores the influence exerted by trust in large companies and banks on the perception that technological development has on people’s life satisfaction. The research uses data from the World Value Survey (WVS) and the World Bank, contemplating six Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru, in the period between 2012 and 2018. Our main results show that the lower the trust in institutions, the stronger the negative association with perceiving science and technology as making life easier, healthier and more comfortable in the near future. We also confirm that people who have very high levels of national pride tend to trust institutions. We also confirm that people who have very high levels of national pride tend to trust institutions. Finally, with this work, we contribute new empirical evidence to the current field of research on the influence of technological development on issues related to human beings, specifically in Latin America.

1. Introduction

The technological transformation is accelerating due to the increasing capacity of electronic devices to store, process and communicate information [1]. New technologies are spreading rapidly, and the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” is changing the nature and location of work [2]. The digitization of the economy implies changes in the workplace, in employment figures, in quality and working conditions and in terms of social protection that can negatively affect workers [3]. To date, the mechanisms through which technology and automation risks affect life satisfaction have been little analyzed [4].
Technology is being made usable in a wide range of fields. This fact led academics to attach great importance to technological development research. However, the impact of technological development on human sustainability is an aspect less addressed in the literature review [5]. For this reason, the main purpose of this research is to investigate the association between trust in institutions and the perceptions of Latin Americans about how science and technology are considered positive or negative for our lives.
Using the public database of the World Value Survey (waves 2012/2018), it is looking for these associations through a multinomial regression. Findings are deemed noteworthy for Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Specifically, meanwhile, we may not develop reliable infrastructure to support economic development and human well-being, so we will not be able to achieve the Ninth SDG. Although technological development would be possible, not trusting in it could be considered a drawback to well-being promotion against the third SDG.
Trust is one of the issues inherent to human beings that is closely related to the approval and acceptance of the arrival of technology in our society [6]. It could be that the greater the trust in large companies, the better the workers’ perception of the effects of technology on social beings. This perception must be considered due to the repercussions it has on today’s society, especially due to its impact in facilitating economic growth and stability in developing countries [7].
At the same time, the literature has brought to light that technological development exerts a very weak influence on the reduction of inequality and the consolidation of strong institutions [5]. Citizen belief that technology does not reduce inequality and does not strengthen institutions may come from a lack of trust in institutions, not from the performance of technology. From here arises a question: If trust in institutions increases, could the current perception about the influence of technological development change?
It must be taken into account that companies increasingly incorporate technology in all their processes. The 2030 Agenda [8] recognizes their commitment and contribution to effectively comply with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). In this sense, the implementation of corporate social responsibility strategies by companies simultaneously generates legitimacy and trust, which contribute to positively promoting the perception of technology in people’s lives and their life satisfaction. The quadrennial progress report on the progress and regional challenges of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in Latin America and the Caribbean [8] highlights different challenges facing the region, to which must be added the challenges of the technological revolution that must be addressed [8].
To date, there is no evidence of research that has explored the role of institutional trust in the perception of technological development, not only in large companies and banks but also in society [9]. It is precisely at this point that the main contribution of this research lies.
It should be noted that institutions, understood in a broad sense, are the rules and procedures that restrict and allow political, economic and social behavior; they refer to the rules of the game, while the organizations refer to the players [10].
Therefore, we have set ourselves the following objectives: first, to explore the state of the art on the subject under investigation for the selected sample and period of time; and second, to develop an empirical study that identifies the association between trust in institutions and people’s perception of technological development and to what extent it impacts Latin Americans’ lives.
To respond to the objectives, we have outlined the following hypotheses that we intend to corroborate.
H1. 
Lower levels of trust in large companies will be negatively associated with higher levels of positive Latin American attitudes towards technology related to its impact on their perceived subjective well-being.
H2. 
Lower levels of trust in governments will be negatively associated with higher levels of positive Latin American attitudes towards technology related to its impact in their perceived subjective well-being.
H3. 
Lower levels of trust in banks will be negatively associated with higher levels of positive Latin American attitudes towards technology related to its impact on their perceived subjective well-being.
The research is structured in two innovative and complementary parts: a literature review of the bibliometric analysis type and an empirical study about the perception of technological development and its consequences for the people of the Latin American countries analyzed. To do this, we face the following perspective: technological development is impaired when institutional trust is low [11].

2. Theoretical Framework

The literature review is carried out with the aim of finding, selecting, analyzing and systematizing the evidence presented by recent research on the relationship between institutional trust and the perception of technological development in life satisfaction. Considering that when evaluating citizens’ perceptions of institutional trust, their cultural orientations must be taken into account [12].

2.1. Technological Development and Impact on People’s Life

Economists, policymakers and business leaders alike have claimed that the world is on the cusp of the “fourth industrial revolution” [13,14]. Three vectors of change are identified, each of which implies the combined application of digital technologies in economic processes, especially relevant due to their possible socio-labor impacts: (a) automation of work; (b) digitization of processes; and (c) platform coordination [1].
Due to rapid technological development [15], technologies have become the means and solutions for many of the world’s problems, linked to industrial capabilities, equipment, spare parts, specifications and technical standards [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23].
Knowing that total government revenue positively affects technology outcomes [24], developing countries have increasingly embarked on technology foresight. To identify technologies whose adoption could serve as a platform for future economic growth. However, activities for seeing the future have not translated into well-developed policy initiatives. Therefore, developing countries are advised to adopt a clear definition of the technologies that must be developed internally versus those that must be obtained from abroad [25].
On the other hand, technological progress has profound implications for almost all aspects of human life and the progress of society because it leads to a better quality of life and even a higher level of human intelligence. It is still a critical issue in emerging economies, such as Latin America, since its application is usually in consolidated economies. The literature review has indicated that the advancement of technology is deeply linked to the design and implementation of the rules of state institutions. However, this relationship has not been sufficiently elaborated and addressed [26].
Although appropriate technology for sustainable development in third-world countries must consider social aspects and, at the same time, ensure that the target areas are capable of sustainable transformation. The existing one has focused mainly on engineering [4,27,28,29] or the achievement of sustainability [16,30,31,32,33]. Thus, it becomes a short-term or one-time technology transfer, or, despite the social sciences approach, it does not have a definite theoretical basis [34].
Given the projected scale of automation, understanding whether it has detrimental effects on the life satisfaction of citizens, especially workers, has implications for public policy. However, few studies have examined these potential impacts [35].

2.2. Life and Technological Development

The exponential progress on issues inherent to technology is rapidly transforming industries and societies around the world. The way we work, live and interact with others is expected to transform at a speed and scale unseen in human history. On the one hand, the current technological development must bring about an increase and improvement in our lives and societies. On the other hand, a high potential arises that can cause great upheavals in our way of life and our social norms. So, the opportunity to understand the impact of these technologies and to prevent their negative effects is rapidly closing. Humanity must be proactive instead of reactive when managing it [36].
There are multiple studies that address issues related to life, technological development and disease [37,38,39,40,41,42]. However, there are really few published studies that address the subject of life from the perspective of how to live better [43,44,45,46]. Although, in general, they agree that, to achieve this, the current situation must be reversed, where many human beings find daily life very stressful and are unable to work, study or participate in other structured activities, particularly with others.
New and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, advanced robotics and the “Internet of Things” are changing the way people live, work and communicate with each other. While these innovations offer opportunities to increase efficiency and productivity in the long term, they are also expected to lead to job displacement [47]. This reality has meant that in recent years, there has been an increase in concern about the effects of technological advances and digitization on the health and well-being of the workers who perform them. Attention is paid from both the academic field [48,49,50] as well as from different agencies and organizations related to the field of work.
To achieve the aforementioned, the mediating role of institutional trust in the perception of life satisfaction should be taken into account [51,51,52,53,54]. An issue that has been underestimated in Latin American countries and that we intend to prove is possible from an appropriate perspective regarding the perception of technology. It should be noted that technology is developing at an accelerated rate, which is counterproductive for people’s lives since they do not evolve at the same rate or to the same extent or proportion [15]. We think that an easier life can be achieved with an adequate perception of technological development. Despite the fact that, up until now, no research has been found in the analyzed literature that jointly addresses both issues.

2.3. Different Types of Trust and Institutional Trust

There are 129 different measures of trust, for example, managers’ interpersonal trust, organizational trust inventory, and people’s trust in the role of boundaries, among others, so their measurement remains highly fragmented [55]. However, over the years, research has emerged that groups trust at the interpersonal level [56] or at the inter-organizational level [57]. At the structural level, various types of trust are classified, among which general trust stands out, where the level of trust is broad in all senses, and particular trust, where people have a marked tendency to trust themselves and very little on the rest [58].
The scientific literature also identifies the existence of institutional trust, seen as the trust of citizens in public bodies [12], which has been addressed in recent research due to its impact on business management, in economic order and sustainability [59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73]. It is precisely on this trust that our study is based, since we will specifically analyze trust in large companies and in banks.
Regarding the determinants of trust [68,74], among which social trust stands out due to the causal impact it has on the fact of believing in institutions [75,76], increasing individuals’ feelings of security [77], positively influencing people’s behavior [78,79,80] and fostering interpersonal trust [77].
The sustainability of social trust tends to increase proportionally to the increase in the level of commitment of people to institutions [11,81] because it is also a partial mediator between labor adversities that can be perceived by workers and subjective well-being [65].

2.4. State of the Art of Institutional Trust (Large Companies and Banks)

Institutional trust responds to legal regulations related to state laws [11]. This trust positions large companies and banks before their employees, clients and other interested parties as formal institutions, increasing their visibility and/or recognition in society. The more visible they are, the greater the authority they exercise, and a higher level of trust is generated among citizens [12]. Likewise, it has been suggested that organizational structuring, the development of institutional capacity [82] and the promotion of organizational commitment [83] are important to generate institutional trust.
The importance of institutions adopting an optimal strategy that heads their work agenda to build trust is due to the fact that this is the basis for coping with social changes and thinking about alternatives to an eroded traditional structure [84]. Robbins and Judge [85] understand trust as “a positive expectation that another person does not act opportunistically: with words, actions or decisions”. Ariely [86] points out different strategies to increase the willingness to trust on the part of the interest groups and the communities where the economic activity is carried out. This author proposes that companies should design methods based on five trust generators: (1) the establishment of long-term relationships; (2) transparency; (3) the open declaration of intent; (4) offering punishment options for the company in case of non-compliance with commitments and (5) designing strategies where the objectives between the company and the community are aligned. On the other hand, ref. [85] mention other elements that underlie the concept of trust, such as integrity, honesty, competence, consistency between words and actions, loyalty and openness.
When corporate social responsibility (CSR) is given strategic importance, stakeholders’ trust in the company can improve [87,88]. Integrating CSR actions into the company’s strategy makes it possible to improve business confidence through an emotional factor. Through CSR, the company is perceived as an agent involved in social improvement, and emotionally, they feel more confident with their management [89,90,91,92,93]. To advance in this direction, a dialogue must be established with those involved and/or affected by the actions and decisions of the organization; that is, from the legitimacy offered by the possible agreement with all its internal and external stakeholders” [94]. Likewise, good practices converge towards a structural change that seeks to transform the development models of companies, providing more efficient solutions to environmental and social problems related to their business activity [95].
Trust is related to economic development and the social well-being of communities [96]. In this way, being reliable is a strategic intangible asset for companies, since it is a characteristic that positively influences the attitudes of the individuals who relate to them [97].
In addition, institutional trust has been seen as a central issue in establishing, developing and maintaining success among stakeholders in a business negotiation [98]. Consequently, in the absence of an effective inter-institutional framework, trust quickly erodes [99], and the same happens when there are economic crises [100].
Although the propensity to trust others is strongly determined by cultural components, it can also change over time and be influenced by changes in the environment [96]. In the case of Latin America, trust in institutions turns out to be moderated by contextual factors [101]. Sometimes paradoxical behaviors take place, since it is sometimes expected that with only new institutional economies, an increase in institutional trust can be aspired to [102]. In reality, institutional trust in Latin America is not homogeneous, and it is generally stated in the literature that men trust institutions more than women [74].
Another factor that can undermine trust in institutions in this geographical area is inequality. Until now, scientists have dealt extensively with income inequality, neglecting other salient forms such as regional wealth distribution, an issue that we intend to prove with our research using empirical data since this argument points to a deficiency in the literature [68]. In fact, inequality in the geographical area under study in our research is becoming more latent every day.

2.5. National Pride in Latin American Countries

Since 1910, the subject of national pride has been addressed in the scientific literature, although in a very reserved way. It was not until 2016 that more contributions from academics on the subject began to be observed, although it is considered that they are still insufficient due to the small number of publications that are observed, of which the majority correspond to titles of publications belonging to other fields of research other than the social sciences, which gives the authors the measure that this issue is little explored in the literature (Web of Science Main Collection, 2022).
We found several recent studies on national pride whose common point is its impact on society generally [103,104,105,106,107]. We found other investigations that, if they focus on and address social and/or national pride, are related to social trust, although they are in the minority. Where it is stated that the association between national pride and culture is stronger in the regions with greater national pride [108,109]. However, after all, this bibliographical search does not find research that relates national pride with people’s trust in institutions.

2.6. Inequality in Latin America. Regional Problems

Between 2003 and 2010, Latin America experienced economic growth, coupled with a notable reduction in income inequality. The regional Gini coefficient fell from 0.55 to 0.52, denoting a decrease in inequality. However, it was difficult to sustain this decline, as there is evidence of continued increases in inequality after 2010 and up to the present [110].
Even today, inequality in Latin America is increasing every day [111,112,113,114]. Although it should be noted that the gaps related to the increase are greater in Colombia (60%), followed by Paraguay (30%), Peru (20%) and El Salvador (20%) [115], this was not caused by higher income growth among the bottom of the income distribution, but due to negative or no income growth of households in the top decile of the income distribution [110] and an inadequate distribution of regional wealth, an aspect little addressed in the literature [68].
Similarly, the Latin American countries present different and good performances according to the contribution of the gross domestic product (GDP) for research and development expenses, this being the main input that contributes to the high technology exports of these countries [116]. Taking into account the slowdown in the growth of the gross domestic product in the geographical area analyzed in recent times [117], it is believed that political decision makers should take measures aimed at increasing the GDP in order to increase technology exports and increase trust in large companies [118].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Databases

On the one hand, the World Value Survey is an international research program dedicated to the scientific and academic study of the social, political, economic, religious and cultural values of people in the world. Its purpose is to assess what impact the stability or change of values over time has on the social, political and economic development of countries and societies. On the other hand, the World Bank is one of the most important sources of financing and knowledge for developing countries; it is made up of five institutions that are committed to reducing poverty, increasing shared prosperity and promoting sustainable development. It offers free access to its data, knowledge and research to promote innovation and increase transparency in the fields of development, aid flows and financing.

3.2. Analysis of Bibliometric Networks

To carry out the bibliographic exploration, the Web of Science (WoS) database was used because it is a platform that contains a wide collection of bibliographic databases, citations and references to scientific publications in any discipline of knowledge, including science, technology, the social sciences, the arts and the humanities. Four components are used in the search strategy: [1] technology development, [2] institutional trust, [3] easier living and [4] national pride. The search for these components is carried out in the database selected for the study. The search strategies were the following:
See Supplementary Table S1. Search Strategies.

3.3. Application of the WVS and the World Bank in Research

From the World Value Survey (WVS), a total of 16,662 observations in the sixth wave (2010–2014) and seventh wave (2017–2022) have been selected. The sample includes men and women residing in Latin American countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico and Peru). For the total sample, the variables gender, education, type of employment relationship, marital status, political orientation and generational cohort were analyzed. Data from the World Bank were also used specifically for gross domestic product per capita (GDP), the inequality index (GINI) and gross national spending on research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product (GRED). We have taken into account the same year for those data of the WVS and those data of the World Bank: Argentina, wave 6th year 2013; wave 7th year 2017; Brazil, wave 6th year 2014, wave 7th year 2018; Chile, wave 6th year 2012, wave 7th year 2018; Colombia, wave 6th year 2012, wave 7th year 2018; México, wave 6th year 2012, wave 7th year 2018; and Peru, wave 6th year 2012, wave 7th year 2018. Empirical analysis was performed with the statistical software Stata v. 14.0.
Three indicators were also considered as independent variables: national pride, trust in companies and trust in banks. At the same time, it was possible to describe the number and characteristics of the respondents, and we were able to analyze indicators such as GDP, GINI and GRED. Most of the answers to the related questions are dichotomous, where a value of one is given or, otherwise, a value of zero. In the case of the national pride variable (1, if the national pride marked in the survey was “4”; 0, otherwise).
Trust in institutions (big companies, governments and banks) appears when it is a dependent, dichotomous variable, taking three categories: 1, if trust is high; 2, if confidence is medium; 3, if confidence is low. Finally, three dummy variables (high, medium and low) have been created for each of the trusts. The questions related to attitudes towards technologies in the survey used are shown below.
There is a list of various changes in our way of life that might take place in the near future. Please tell me for each one, if it were to happen, whether you think it would be a good thing, a bad thing, or do you not mind?
Q44. More emphasis on the development of technology, three options are available: Good, do not mind and bad.
Q158. Science and technology are making our lives healthier, easier, and more comfortable.
Linkert scale. Ten options are available, from 1 (completely disagree) to 10 (completely agree). We have created six dummy variables.
Regarding the education variable, dummy variables were created, and the observations were classified as follows: Primary education, for those respondents who marked the values 0, 1, 2 and 3 (that is, “upper secondary education” or a lower level). Secondary education, for those respondents who scored values 4 and 5 (“Post-secondary non-tertiary education” and “Short-cycle tertiary education”). Tertiary education, for those respondents who marked the values 6, 7 and 8 (that is, a university degree, a master’s degree and a doctorate).
As a first econometric approximation, we ran the following multinomial regression models, which are used when a dependent variable has more than two categories. The one that allows us to obtain estimates of the probability of an event and to identify the risk factors that determine these probabilities as well as the influence or relative weight that these have on them. This model allows us to understand how the behavior of X variables alters the probabilities of the occurrence of Y events [119,120,121]. This model gives the probability of respondent i choosing alternative j in choice situation t as it can be seen in the formula [121,122]:
Pr ( y i t = j | β ) =   e β i ′ x i t j Σ k = 1 J e β i ′ x i t k
i = 1, …, N; t = 1, …, T; j = 1, …, J
“where xitj is a vector of observed attributes of alternative j and βi is a vector of individual-specific parameters” [122]. If J = 1, we would be in a binary regression [121].
After multinomial regression, it estimated the marginal effects. We used mfx command, which is useful for estimating the marginal effect of a single variable, given specific values of the independent variables [10].

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Statistical Description of the Variables

Table S2 shows the statistical description of independent variables, and 50% of those surveyed have primary education, compared to the other half who have secondary and tertiary education (SD = 0.50). A total of 17% of respondents are self-employed (SD 0.38), and the rest are housewives, students, retirees and unemployed. 79% reside in urban areas (SD = 0.40). 27% have a medium-high national pride (SD = 0.45), 9% medium—low (SD = 0.29), the majority, with 60%, have a high national pride (SD = 0.48).
See Supplementary Table S2. Descriptive Statistics. Dependent variables. Means (%).
Regarding the dependent variables, Table S3 shows the statistical description of the dependent variables. Between all survey respondents, Mexican people show the highest percentage of low trust in the three institutions. As an example, 25% of people who answered that had low trust in major companies were Mexican. Moreover, Mexican people also display the higher percentages of positive attitudes toward science and technology. Almost all of the 24% people who answered that technological development would be a good thing for changing lives were Mexican. These are the reasons why we chose Mexico as the reference variable.
See Supplementary Table S3. Descriptive statistics. Macroeconomic Variables.
In terms of economic indicators, Table S4 shows that Peru is the country with the lowest GDP per capita of those studied. This decreased in Argentina and Brazil, while in Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru an increase was observed for the period analyzed. When analyzing the poverty indicator, GINI per capita, it remains stable in all the countries included in the research. Regarding expenditure on research and development, a stable behavior of the GRED is seen, which indicates that great efforts are not being made in research in Latin America.
See Supplementary Table S4. Trust in Institutions.

4.2. Results

Table S5 shows the estimations obtained for the variables related to trust in institutions (banks, big companies and governments). If we focus our attention on the gender variables, being male shows a slightly positive association with high trust in these institutions, compared to being female (coef. high trust in big companies = 0.02, p-value < 0.01). Regarding the occupational categories, counterproductively, unemployed people and domestic workers are slightly associated positively with trust in governments (coef. high trust in governments in both cases = 0.02, p-value < 0.01), compared to the employee. Compared to self-positioning on the left of the political spectrum, people on the right and center are negatively correlated with low trust in the analyzed institutions. X and Y generations are negatively associated with low trust in banks and big companies (coef. low trust in bank of generation X = −0.04, p-value < 0.01; coef. low trust in bank of generation Y = −0.05, p-value < 0.01), compared to being from the Baby Boomer generation. Living in a city is associated positively with low confidence in governments (coef. = 0.05, p-value < 0.01), compared to those who reside in a rural area. Compared to Mexico, Brazil and Chile are associated positively with low trust in banks, big companies and governments, while the opposite is true for Colombia, Peru and Argentina. The lower levels of national pride, the lower levels of trust in the analyzed institutions. There is an association between GINI and trust in institutions, negative if the trust is low and positive if it is high.
See Supplementary Table S5. Technology makes life easier, healthier and more comfortable (mfx).
Table S6 shows the results obtained for perceiving technology as making our lives easier, healthier and more comfortable. Low trust in companies and banks are negatively associated with a positive attitude towards science and technology (for example, coef. positive perception and low confidence in the company = −0.52, p-value < 0.01). Men show higher levels of positive attitude towards science and technology than women (coef. positive perception = 0.06, p-value < 0.01). The positive attitude toward technology is lower in wave seventh than in wave sixth.
Compared to workers, students show a positive relationship with perceiving that technology and science make our lives easier, healthier and more comfortable (coef. = 0.06, p-value < 0.01). People who self-position on the right of the political spectrum are positively associated with positive attitudes (coef. positive and right = 0.08, p-value < 0.01). People residing in Brazil and Chile are negatively associated with perceiving that technology and science do not make life easier, healthier and more comfortable, compared to Mexican people. Colombian and Peruvian people show a positive relationship with negative attitudes towards science and technology. Positive attitudes decrease when national pride is lower.
See Supplementary Table S6. More emphasis on the development of technology changes in our way of life (mfx).
Table S7 shows the perception that more emphasis on the development of technology would be a bad thing, a good thing or neither for our way of life. The results of this variable are along the lines of the previous one. Highlighting the differences, not only is low trust in large companies negatively associated with a positive attitude towards technology development, in line with the previous attitude’s dimension, but also low trust in governments is negatively associated with the perception that technology development is a good thing for changing our way of life (coef. low confidence in government and positive = 0.10, p-value < 0.05). People residing in Brazil and Chile are negatively associated with perceiving that technology and science do make life easier, healthier and more comfortable our, whereas the opposite is true for Peruvian and Argentinian people, compared to Mexican people.
See Supplementary Table S7. More emphasis on the development of technology changes in our way of life (mfx).

5. Conclusions

With this work, we contribute new evidence to the current field of research on attitudes towards technology related to subjective well-being. Furthermore, our study offers future lines of research on the development of these attitudes today and how to improve them.
We conclude that technological development is closely related to aspects of human life and societal progress because it leads to a better quality of life. It must be taken into account in emerging economies, such as Latin America, because it remains a critical issue, as its application tends to occur in consolidated economies. Our review of the literature has indicated that the advancement of technology is deeply linked to the design and implementation of norms, such as corporate social responsibility, within state institutions. However, this relationship has not been sufficiently elaborated and addressed [26].
We can confirm H1: Lower levels of trust in large companies will be negatively associated with higher levels of positive Latin American attitudes towards technology related to its impact on their perceived subjective well-being. We found that trust is a central element that gives organizations the ability to manage their dynamics efficiently and effectively and to ensure their growth and survival [123], given that low confidence in large companies is positively associated with the perception that neither science nor technology are good things for changing our way of life nor for making our lives easier, healthier and more comfortable. Its proper calibration for effective technology management requires that the factors affecting it are properly accounted for and their relative importance correctly quantified [124]. For example, national pride is also associated indirectly through confidence and directly with attitudes toward technology: low national pride is correlated with both lower confidence in institutions and negative attitudes toward science and technology.
The hypothesis H2 is also confirmed, at least partially: A low level of trust in governments is negatively associated with a higher level of positive Latin American attitudes towards development technology. Technological development offers a lot of potential to continue improving people’s living conditions in a sustainable way. The key issue is how these technologies are used and integrated [5]. It is necessary to approach this from a theoretical pespective so that technology activities are successful and sustainable [34]. Future research may focus more on understanding the factors that determine the heuristics that people use to assess hazards [36].
Finally, hypothesis H3 is also accepted: medium and low levels of trust negatively influence Latin American perceptions of the influence that technological development can have on our lives.

6. Limitations Improve

Although the research provides further empirical evidence on the influence of institutional trust and national pride on technological development, it is not without technical problems. Using cross-sectional data, rather than panel data, does not allow for unobserved heterogeneity to be controlled for, so the magnitude of our estimated coefficients should be interpreted as sparingly as possible. In addition, only two waves of WVS could be used since the necessary data to carry out the investigation did not exist in the others, which reduced the temporal dimension of the analysis.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su15010628/s1, Table S1. Search Strategies. Table S2. Descriptive Statistics. Dependent variables. Means (%). Table S3. Descriptive statistics. Macroeconomic Variables. Table S4. Trust in Institutions. Table S5. Technology makes life easier, healthier and more comfortable (mfx). Table S6. More emphasis on the development of technology changes in our way of life (mfx). Table S7. More emphasis on the development of technology changes in our way of life (mfx).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.S.-G.; Methodology, A.G.-L.; Software, V.B.-M.; Investigation, A.L.-C.; Writing—original draft, A.L.-C.; Writing—review & editing, A.G.-L. and I.S.-G.; Supervision, A.G.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data used in this manuscript is available in the World Value Survey Database (https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSDocumentationWVL.jsp, accessed on 6 September 2021) or in the World Bank Open Data (https://data.worldbank.org/, accessed on 6 September 2021), depending on the variables as it is explained above.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Fernández-Macías, E. Automation, Digitalisation and Platforms: Implications for Work and Employment; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, Luxembourg, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Piccarozzi, M.; Aquilani, B.; Gatti, C. Industry 4.0 in management studies: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Büchi, G.; Cugno, M.; Castagnoli, R. Smart factory performance and Industry 4.0. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 150, 119790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Potter, A.; Graham, S. Supplier involvement in eco-innovation: The co-development of electric, hybrid and fuel cell technologies within the Japanese automotive industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 210, 1216–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Mabkhot, M.M.; Ferreira, P.; Maffei, A.; Podržaj, P.; Mądziel, M.; Antonelli, D.; Lanzetta, M.; Barata, J.; Boffa, E.; Finžgar, M. Mapping industry 4.0 enabling technologies into united nations sustainability development goals. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Craggs, B.; Rashid, A. Trust beyond computation alone: Human aspects of trust in blockchain technologies. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS), Montreal, QC, Canada, 15 August 2019; pp. 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Martín, J.C.; Román, C.; Viñán, C. An institutional trust indicator based on fuzzy logic and ideal solutions. Mathematics 2020, 8, 807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tassara, C. Agenda 2030 y retos de inclusión social en América Latina y el Caribe. Doc. Trab. Fund. Carol. Segunda Época 2020, 29, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fuglsang, L.; Jagd, S. Making sense of institutional trust in organizations: Bridging institutional context and trust. Organization 2015, 22, 23–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Norton, E.C.; Wang, H.; Ai, C. Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models. Stata J. 2004, 4, 154–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Nadirov, O.; Aliyev, K.; Dehning, B.; Sharifzada, I.; Aliyeva, R. Life Satisfaction and Tax Morale in Azerbaijan: Mediating Role of Institutional Trust and Financial Satisfaction. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jamil, I.; Baniamin, H.M. How culture may nurture institutional trust: Some empirical insights from Bangladesh and Nepal. Dev. Policy Rev. 2021, 39, 419–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Philbeck, T.; Davis, N. The fourth industrial revolution. J. Int. Aff. 2018, 72, 17–22. [Google Scholar]
  14. Rainnie, A.; Dean, M. Industry 4.0 and the future of quality work in the global digital economy. Labour Ind. J. Soc. Econ. Relat. Work 2020, 30, 16–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Harwood, S.; Eaves, S. Conceptualising technology, its development and future: The six genres of technology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2020, 160, 120174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Abdel-Basset, M.; Gamal, A.; Chakrabortty, R.K.; Ryan, M. Development of a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach for sustainability evaluation of bioenergy production technologies: A case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 290, 125805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chen, J.; Zhang, K.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, L.; Chen, Z.; Yin, L. Exploring the development of research, technology and business of machine tool domain in new-generation information technology environment based on machine learning. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Hoosain, M.S.; Paul, B.S.; Ramakrishna, S. The impact of 4IR digital technologies and circular thinking on the United Nations sustainable development goals. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liu, W.; Shao, X.-F.; Wu, C.-H.; Qiao, P. A systematic literature review on applications of information and communication technologies and blockchain technologies for precision agriculture development. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 298, 126763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lizarralde, R.; Ganzarain, J.; Zubizarreta, M. Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10087. [Google Scholar]
  21. Sisinni, E.; Saifullah, A.; Han, S.; Jennehag, U.; Gidlund, M. Industrial internet of things: Challenges, opportunities, and directions. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 14, 4724–4734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Soares, A.M.; Kovaleski, J.L.; Gaia, S.; Chiroli, D.M.d.G. Building sustainable development through technology transfer offices: An approach based on levels of maturity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Upham, P.; Smith, B. Using the Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix to synthesize biofuel and bioenergy impact assessment results: The example of medium scale bioenergy heat options. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 65, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sadeh, A.; Radu, C.F.; Feniser, C.; Borşa, A. Governmental intervention and its impact on growth, economic development, and technology in OECD countries. Sustainability 2020, 13, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Feige, D.; Vonortas, N.S. Context appropriate technologies for development: Choosing for the future. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2017, 119, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Jiang, H.; Zhao, S.; Yuan, Y.; Zhang, L.; Duan, L.; Zhang, W. The coupling relationship between standard development and technology advancement: A game theoretical perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 135, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bolcar, M.R. The Large UV/Optical/Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR): Decadal Mission concept technology development overview. In Proceedings of the UV/Optical/IR Space Telescopes and Instruments: Innovative Technologies and Concepts VIII, San Diego, CA, USA, 6–10 August 2017; Volume 10398, pp. 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kasperczyk, D.; Urbaniec, K.; Barbusiński, K.; Rene, E.R.; Colmenares-Quintero, R.F. Development and adaptation of the technology of air biotreatment in trickle-bed bioreactor to the automotive painting industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 309, 127440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Quitzow, R.; Huenteler, J.; Asmussen, H. Development trajectories in China’s wind and solar energy industries: How technology-related differences shape the dynamics of industry localization and catching up. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 158, 122–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ganda, F. The impact of innovation and technology investments on carbon emissions in selected organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 217, 469–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hussin, F.; Aroua, M.K. Recent trends in the development of adsorption technologies for carbon dioxide capture: A brief literature and patent reviews (2014–2018). J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mossberg, J.; Frishammar, J.; Söderholm, P.; Hellsmark, H. Managerial and organizational challenges encountered in the development of sustainable technology: Analysis of Swedish biorefinery pilot and demonstration plants. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 276, 124150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Yoon, B.; Shin, J.; Lee, S. Technology assessment model for sustainable development of LNG terminals. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 927–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Shin, H.; Hwang, J.; Kim, H. Appropriate technology for grassroots innovation in developing countries for sustainable development: The case of Laos. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 1167–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Venkatesh, V. Impacts of COVID-19: A research agenda to support people in their fight. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 55, 102197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Siegrist, M. Trust and risk perception: A critical review of the literature. Risk Anal. 2021, 41, 480–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Genoe, M.R.; Zimmer, C. Breathing easier? The contradictory experience of leisure among people living with COPD. Act. Adapt. Aging 2017, 41, 138–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kayler, L.K.; Dolph, B.; Seibert, R.; Keller, M.; Cadzow, R.; Feeley, T.H. Development of the living donation and kidney transplantation information made easy (KidneyTIME) educational animations. Clin. Transplant. 2020, 34, e13830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Matsui, T.; Onishi, K.; Misaki, S.; Fujimoto, M.; Suwa, H.; Yasumoto, K. Easy-to-deploy living activity sensing system and data collection in general homes. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops), Austin, TX, USA, 23–27 March 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  40. Reale, M. Living one day is easy, living a life is hard: A Sudanese refugee in Sicily. Cult. Stud. Crit. Methodol. 2015, 15, 490–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Roos, R.; Myezwa, H.; van Aswegen, H. “Not easy at all but I am trying”: Barriers and facilitators to physical activity in a South African cohort of people living with HIV participating in a home-based pedometer walking programme. AIDS Care 2015, 27, 235–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Segal, E.; Hassoun, G.; Maor, C.; Shahar, E. Quantitative ultrasonometry: An alternative and easy method to evaluate bone quality in people living with human immunodeficiency virus. J. Musculoskelet. Neuronal Interact. 2019, 19, 112. [Google Scholar]
  43. Chilvers, S.; Chesterman, N.; Lim, A. ‘Life is easier now’: Lived experience research into mentalization-based art psychotherapy. Int. J. Art Ther. 2021, 26, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Henke, O.; Mauter, D.; Behzadi, A.; Bhusal, D.; Singh, A.; Riedel, T.; Thuss-Patience, P. Schmerzen sind eher zu ertragen als das Alleinsein. Z. Palliativmedizin 2015, 16, 254–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Longo, C.; Shankar, A.; Nuttall, P. “It’s not easy living a sustainable lifestyle”: How greater knowledge leads to dilemmas, tensions and paralysis. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 154, 759–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pesantes, M.A.; Tetens, A.; Valle, A.D.; Miranda, J.J. “It is Not Easy Living with This Illness”: A Syndemic Approach to Medication Adherence and Lifestyle Change among Low-income Diabetes Patients in Lima, Peru. Hum. Organ. 2019, 78, 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Blien, U.; Dauth, W.; Roth, D.H. Occupational routine intensity and the costs of job loss: Evidence from mass layoffs. Labour Econ. 2021, 68, 101953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Neumann, W.P.; Winkelhaus, S.; Grosse, E.H.; Glock, C.H. Industry 4.0 and the human factor–A systems framework and analysis methodology for successful development. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 233, 107992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Parry, E.; Battista, V. Generation Z in the UK: More of the Same–High Standards and Demands. In Generations Z in Europe; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2019; ISBN 1-78973-492-4. [Google Scholar]
  50. Rimbau-Gilabert, E. Digitalización y bienestar de los trabajadores. IUSLabor Rev. Anàlisi. Dret. Treb. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ciziceno, M.; Travaglino, G.A. Perceived corruption and individuals’ life satisfaction: The mediating role of institutional trust. Soc. Indic. Res. 2019, 141, 685–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Nilsen, L.G.; Thoresen, S.; Wentzel-Larsen, T.; Dyb, G. Trust after terror: Institutional trust among young terror survivors and their parents after the 22nd of July terrorist attack on Utøya Island, Norway. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Saz-Gil, M.I.; Cosenza, J.P.; Zardoya-Alegría, A.; Gil-Lacruz, A.I. Exploring corporate social responsibility under the background of sustainable development goals: A proposal to corporate volunteering. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Thoresen, S.; Birkeland, M.S.; Wentzel-Larsen, T.; Blix, I. Loss of trust may never heal. Institutional trust in disaster victims in a long-term perspective: Associations with social support and mental health. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. McEvily, B.; Tortoriello, M. Measuring trust in organisational research: Review and recommendations. J. Trust Res. 2011, 1, 23–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sitkin, S.B.; George, E. Managerial trust-building through the use of legitimating formal and informal control mechanisms. Int. Sociol. 2005, 20, 307–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Horak, S.; Yang, I. Affective networks, informal ties, and the limits of expatriate effectiveness. Int. Bus. Rev. 2016, 25, 1030–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Horak, S.; Klein, A.; Li, X. Can general and particularistic types of trust mix? Advancing the trust (dis-) continuity debate in a Chinese context. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2022, 17, 1273–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bagasra, A.B.; Doan, S.; Allen, C.T. Racial differences in institutional trust and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and refusal. BMC Public Health 2021, 21, 2104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Çera, G.; Çera, E.; Ribeiro, H.N.R.; Maloku, S. The role of trust in government and institutional environment in future business climate. Int. J. Entrep. Ventur. 2021, 13, 425–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Coulibaly, T.P.; Du, J.; Diakité, D.; Abban, O.J.; Kouakou, E. A proposed conceptual framework on the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices: The role of network contact frequency and institutional trust. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kim, Y.; Sommet, N.; Na, J.; Spini, D. Social class—Not income inequality—Predicts social and institutional trust. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 2022, 13, 186–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kricorian, K.; Turner, K. COVID-19 vaccine reluctance in older black and hispanic adults: Cultural scensitivity and institutional trust. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2021, S1, S214. [Google Scholar]
  64. Latov, Y.V. Institutional Trust as a Social Capital in Modern Russia (on the Results of Monitoring). Polis Polit. Stud. 2021, 5, 161–175. [Google Scholar]
  65. Lee, S. Subjective well-being and mental health during the pandemic outbreak: Exploring the role of institutional trust. Res. Aging 2022, 44, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Liang, J.; Ma, H. Interpersonal injustice and perceived legitimacy of authority: The role of institutional trust and informational justice. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2021, 31, 184–197. [Google Scholar]
  67. Ling, D.C.; Wang, C.; Zhou, T. Institutional common ownership and firm value: Evidence from real estate investment trusts. Real Estate Econ. 2021, 49, 187–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Lipps, J.; Schraff, D. Regional inequality and institutional trust in Europe. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2021, 60, 892–913. [Google Scholar]
  69. Malkina, M.Y.; Ovchinnikov, V.N.; Kholodilin, K.A. Institutional factors influencing political trust in modern Russia. J. Inst. Stud. 2020, 12, 77–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Qi, L.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, R.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zeng, L. Perceived quality of primary healthcare services and its association with institutional trust among caregivers of persons diagnosed with a severe mental illness in China. J. Psychiatr. Ment. Health Nurs. 2021, 28, 394–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Schaap, D. Police trust-building strategies. A socio-institutional, comparative approach. Polic. Soc. 2021, 31, 304–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Silverberg, S.L.; Puchalski Ritchie, L.M.; Gobat, N.; Murthy, S. COVID-19 infection prevention and control procedures and institutional trust: Perceptions of Canadian intensive care and emergency department nurses. Can. J. Anesth. Can. Anesth. 2021, 68, 1165–1175. [Google Scholar]
  73. Silvola, H.; Vinnari, E. The limits of institutional work: A field study on auditors’ efforts to promote sustainability assurance in a trust society. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2021, 34, 1–30. [Google Scholar]
  74. Ishiyama, J.; Martinez, M.; Ozsut, M. Do “Resource-Cursed States” Have Lower Levels of Social and Institutional Trust? Evidence from Africa and Latin America. Soc. Sci. Q. 2018, 99, 872–894. [Google Scholar]
  75. Seifert, N. Yet another case of Nordic exceptionalism? Extending existing evidence for a causal relationship between institutional and social trust to the Netherlands and Switzerland. Soc. Indic. Res. 2018, 136, 539–555. [Google Scholar]
  76. Sønderskov, K.M.; Dinesen, P.T. Trusting the state, trusting each other? The effect of institutional trust on social trust. Polit. Behav. 2016, 38, 179–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Spadaro, G.; Gangl, K.; Van Prooijen, J.-W.; Van Lange, P.A.; Mosso, C.O. Enhancing feelings of security: How institutional trust promotes interpersonal trust. PloS ONE 2020, 15, e0237934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Amemiya, J.; Fine, A.; Wang, M.-T. Trust and discipline: Adolescents’ institutional and teacher trust predict classroom behavioral engagement following teacher discipline. Child Dev. 2020, 91, 661–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Chen, G.; Tan, W.; Zhang, S.; Yan, B. Influence of Interpersonal and Institutional Trust on Farmers’ Participation Willingness of E-commerce Poverty Alleviation. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 727644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Yeager, D.S.; Purdie-Vaughns, V.; Hooper, S.Y.; Cohen, G.L. Loss of institutional trust among racial and ethnic minority adolescents: A consequence of procedural injustice and a cause of life-span outcomes. Child Dev. 2017, 88, 658–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Daskalopoulou, I. Individual-level evidence on the causal relationship between social trust and institutional trust. Soc. Indic. Res. 2019, 144, 275–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Esau, M.V. Exploring institutional trust and organizational performance through the case of the City of Cape Town. Int. J. Public Adm. 2016, 39, 686–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Baek, Y.M.; Jung, C.S. Focusing the mediating role of institutional trust: How does interpersonal trust promote organizational commitment? Soc. Sci. J. 2015, 52, 481–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ingenhoff, D.; Sommer, K. Trust in companies and in CEOs: A comparative study of the main influences. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 95, 339–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Robbins, S.P.; Judge, T. Organizational Behavior; Pearson South Africa: Cape Town, South Africa, 2009; ISBN 0-13-600717-1. [Google Scholar]
  86. Ariely, D. Payoff: The Hidden Logic That Shapes Our Motivations; Simon and Schuster: New York, NY, USA, 2016; ISBN 1-5011-2005-0. [Google Scholar]
  87. Petrick, J.A.; Quinn, J.F. The challenge of leadership accountability for integrity capacity as a strategic asset. J. Bus. Ethics 2001, 34, 331–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Priego, A.M.; Lizano, M.M.; Madrid, E.M. Business failure: Incidence of stakeholders’ behavior. Acad. Rev. Latinoam. Adm. 2014, 27, 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. De Leaniz, P.M.G.; del Bosque Rodríguez, I.R. Corporate image and reputation as drivers of customer loyalty. Corp. Reput. Rev. 2016, 19, 166–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2010; ISBN 0-521-15174-0. [Google Scholar]
  91. Gonzalez-Padron, T.L.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ferrell, O.C. A stakeholder marketing approach to sustainable business. In Marketing in and for a Sustainable Society; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2016; ISBN 1-78635-282-6. [Google Scholar]
  92. Peterson, D.K. The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Bus. Soc. 2004, 43, 296–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Weber, M. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-level measurement approach for CSR. Eur. Manag. J. 2008, 26, 247–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Calvo, N.; Calvo, F. Corporate social responsibility and multiple agency theory: A case study of internal stakeholder engagement. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 1223–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Vallaeys, F. ¿ Por qué la Responsabilidad Social Empresarial no es todavía transformadora? Una aclaración filosófica. Andamios 2020, 17, 309–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Murtin, F.; Fleischer, L.; Siegerink, V.; Aassve, A.; Algan, Y.; Boarini, R.; González, S.; Lonti, Z.; Grimalda, G.; Vallve, R.H. Trust and its determinants: Evidence from the Trustlab experiment. OECD Stat. Work. Pap. 2018, 29, 514–552. [Google Scholar]
  97. Fuoli, M.; Hart, C. Trust-building strategies in corporate discourse: An experimental study. Discourse Soc. 2018, 29, 514–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Masri, N.W.; You, J.-J.; Ruangkanjanases, A.; Chen, S.-C. The Effects of Customer Learning and Shopping Value on Intention Purchase and Reuse in a Digital Market: The Institutional Trust–Commitment Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Spink, P.; Lotta, G.; Burgos, F. Institutional vulnerability and trust in public agencies: Views from both sides of the street. Governance 2021, 34, 1057–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ervasti, H.; Kouvo, A.; Venetoklis, T. Social and institutional trust in times of crisis: Greece, 2002–2011. Soc. Indic. Res. 2019, 141, 1207–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Mathias, A.; Páez, D.; Espinosa, A.; Sandoval, S.; Alzugaray, C.; Arnoso, M.; Cárdenas, M.; da Costa, S.; Reyes, C.; Rimé, B. The association between Truth Commissions evaluation, emotional climate and institutional trust: Comparison and meta-analysis of surveys in six South American countries (La relación entre la evaluación de las Comisiones de la verdad, el clima emocional y la confianza institucional: Comparación y metanálisis en seis países de Sudamérica). Int. J. Soc. Psychol. 2020, 35, 203–245. [Google Scholar]
  102. Arellano-Gault, D. The quest for public trust: The limits of information access reforms based on the new institutional economics. The case of Mexico. Int. J. Public Adm. 2016, 39, 694–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Bechert, I. Of Pride and Prejudice—A Cross-National Exploration of Atheists’ National Pride. Religions 2021, 12, 648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Erdem, S. History as Antidote to Wounded National Pride: Politics of History in Kemal Tahir’s Devlet Ana. Turk. Hist. Rev. 2021, 11, 257–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Kim, G.; Lee, J.M. National Pride and Political Participation: The Case of South Korea. Asian Perspect. 2021, 45, 809–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Shibli, N. Political Geographies of Islamophobia: Chinese Ethno-Religious Racism and Structural Violence in East Turkestan. Islam. Stud. J. 2021, 6, 150–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Yen, W.-T.; Kay, K.; Chen, F.-Y. Is Trading with China Different? Self-Interest, National Pride, and Trade Preferences. J. East Asian Stud. 2021, 21, 97–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Kim, H.H.; Kim, H.J.K. National pride, social trust, and cultural nativism: Findings from East and Southeast Asia. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 2021, 84, 251–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Mlinar, K.; Krammer, G. Multicultural attitudes of prospective teachers: The influence of multicultural ideology and national pride. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 2021, 84, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cord, A.F.; Bartkowski, B.; Beckmann, M.; Dittrich, A.; Hermans-Neumann, K.; Kaim, A.; Lienhoop, N.; Locher-Krause, K.; Priess, J.; Schröter-Schlaack, C. Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: Main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 28, 264–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Bittencourt, T.A.; Giannotti, M.; Marques, E. Cumulative (and self-reinforcing) spatial inequalities: Interactions between accessibility and segregation in four Brazilian metropolises. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2021, 48, 1989–2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Bucca, M. Merit and blame in unequal societies: Explaining Latin Americans’ beliefs about wealth and poverty. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 2016, 44, 98–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Signor, D.; Kim, J.; Tebaldi, E. Persistence and determinants of income inequality: The Brazilian case. Rev. Dev. Econ. 2019, 23, 1748–1767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Winkelried, D.; Escobar, B. Declining inequality in Latin America? Robustness checks for Peru. J. Econ. Inequal. 2022, 20, 223–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Houghton, C.; Meskell, P.; Delaney, H.; Smalle, M.; Glenton, C.; Booth, A.; Chan, X.H.S.; Devane, D.; Biesty, L.M. Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers’ adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: A rapid qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Torres-Samuel, M.; Vásquez, C.L.; Luna, M.; Bucci, N.; Viloria, A.; Crissien, T.; Manosalva, J. Performance of education and research in Latin American countries through data envelopment analysis (DEA). Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 170, 1023–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Adsera, A.; Menendez, A. Fertility changes in Latin America in periods of economic uncertainty. Popul. Stud. 2011, 65, 37–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Neubert, M.; Van Der Krogt, A.S. Decision-makers impact on the internationalization of high-technology firms in emerging markets. J. Glob. Entrep. Res. 2019, 9, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Gómez Mejía, A. Liberalización económica y crecimiento económico. Modelo Logit Multinomial aplicado a la metodología de “Doing Business”. Entramado 2011, 7, 32–49. [Google Scholar]
  120. Mercado, M.E.; Macías, E.F.; Bernardi, F. Análisis de datos con Stata; CIS-Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas: Madrid, Spain, 2012; ISBN 84-7476-512-9. [Google Scholar]
  121. Pérez López, César; Moral Arce, Ignacio. In Econometría a través de Stata; Garceta, Grupo Editorial: Madrid, Spain, 2021; ISBN 978-84-17289-74-4.
  122. Gu, Y.; Hole, A.R.; Knox, S. Fitting the generalized multinomial logit model in Stata. Stata J. 2013, 13, 382–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Tyler, T.R. Trust within organisations. Pers. Rev. 2003, 3, 556–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Gebru, T.; Krause, J.; Wang, Y.; Chen, D.; Deng, J.; Aiden, E.L.; Fei-Fei, L. Using deep learning and Google Street View to estimate the demographic makeup of neighborhoods across the United States. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 13108–13113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

López-Concepción, A.; Gil-Lacruz, A.; Saz-Gil, I.; Bazán-Monasterio, V. Social Well-Being for a Sustainable Future: The Influence of Trust in Big Business and Banks on Perceptions of Technological Development from a Life Satisfaction Perspective in Latin America. Sustainability 2023, 15, 628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010628

AMA Style

López-Concepción A, Gil-Lacruz A, Saz-Gil I, Bazán-Monasterio V. Social Well-Being for a Sustainable Future: The Influence of Trust in Big Business and Banks on Perceptions of Technological Development from a Life Satisfaction Perspective in Latin America. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010628

Chicago/Turabian Style

López-Concepción, Arelys, Ana Gil-Lacruz, Isabel Saz-Gil, and Víctor Bazán-Monasterio. 2023. "Social Well-Being for a Sustainable Future: The Influence of Trust in Big Business and Banks on Perceptions of Technological Development from a Life Satisfaction Perspective in Latin America" Sustainability 15, no. 1: 628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010628

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop