Whom do we trust to take trade policy decisions? Evidence from Citizen Juries in the UK

Non-Technical Summary

This research explores public attitudes towards trade policy in the UK through a series of citizen juries. The study utilises deliberative methods to gain in-depth insights into public perceptions, reasoning, and preferences regarding trade policymaking, particularly focusing on the crucial aspect of trust. Five juries, geographically representative of their localities across the UK, deliberated on four trade-off scenarios encompassing workers' rights, sectoral balancing, digital trade, and food/environmental standards. The key findings are summarised below.

1. Government as the default decision-maker, but lack of public trust

The prevailing view among participants is that the national government should be responsible for making trade policy decisions. However, this preference stems not from inherent trust in the government, but rather from a perceived lack of viable alternatives, especially given the complexity of trade policy. This distrust is substantially rooted in:

• Lack of transparency and accountability: Participants consistently expressed concerns about the lack of transparency in trade policy processes, which fuelled scepticism about the government’s motivations and priorities.
• Lack of expertise: In scenarios involving specialised knowledge, such as pesticide regulations or cross-border data flows, participants questioned the government's competence to make informed decisions. They highlighted the need for expert advice but also expressed doubts about the actual influence of experts on policy choices.

2. Preference for expert advice

Across all scenarios, participants emphasised the crucial role of experts in informing trade policy decisions. This desire for expert input reflects the public's recognition of their own limited knowledge and the complexity of trade issues. Specifically, two types of expertise were valued:

• Independent expertise: Academics and researchers were seen as trustworthy sources of information due to their perceived impartiality and lack of vested interests. Their independence was considered crucial for providing objective assessments of the potential impacts of trade policies.
• Sectoral expertise: Participants also recognised the value of "hands-on" expertise from individuals working within specific sectors. They acknowledged that businesses, workers, and civil society organisations possess valuable insights into the practical implications of trade policies on their industries and communities. However, they also stressed the importance of ensuring that such sectoral expertise is not unduly influenced by financial interests.

3. Public consultation is desired, but not direct decision-making

While participants generally did not advocate for direct public decision-making on trade policy, they consistently expressed a desire for greater public consultation. They felt that their perspectives and concerns should be considered in the policy process, even if they were not the ultimate decision-makers.
This preference for consultation over direct decision-making likely stems from two key factors:

• Information asymmetry: Participants acknowledged their own lack of expertise and the difficulty of accessing reliable information on trade issues. They felt that greater public education and access to diverse sources of information were essential prerequisites for meaningful participation.
• Complexity of trade-offs: The intricate nature of trade policy underlies participants' desires for specialised knowledge, including the challenges of weighing various economic, social, and environmental considerations.

4. Sensitivity to distributional impacts and fairness

Participants were sensitive to the distributional consequences of trade policies, particularly their potential impacts on specific sectors and regions. They expressed concerns about job losses in agriculture, potential harm to the environment, and the risks associated with cross-border data flows. They did not always perceive such sensitivity in government, and still less in business, for which they saw no role in trade decision-making.

These findings provide valuable insights into public attitudes towards trade policy in the UK. They highlight the need for greater transparency, accountability, and public consultation in trade policymaking, along with a strong emphasis on expert advice and considerations of fairness and distributional impacts. This research also underscores the importance of addressing public distrust in government and business to foster a more inclusive and legitimate trade policy process.

Read Working Paper 018