The decision oriented theory of the public firm (Feng, Friedrich 2013) becomes extended. The authors consider that sometimes public firms compete horizontally as well. This can be due to competition among the public owners (e.g. municipalities) considering location choices for public firms they own, or public firms competing against each other. We mention some results related to the first type of competition and we refer to how the literature on location choices under oligopolic conditions could be referred to within the framework of our basic approach. One approach by Cornes and Hartley (2001) also allows modelling the establishment of joint ventures and their location choices. The basic model of the public firm is used to provide insight into the location choices of a trust of public firms. The trust exhibits coordination at three levels via the politically-oriented decision-making body of the public owner, the trust's headquarters and subsidiary public firms. The resulting model illustrates the interplay of different decisionmakers and the effects of the coordinating activities. The first attempts to formulate a public firm decision-making oriented location theory exist.
"It is clear that public trust plays a critical role in developing a vibrant economy and a strong society. A reasonably high level of public trust will enable the public, the Government, and the various organisations and groups in the different sectors in Singapore to work together to build a cohesive and adaptive community. This means a community characterised by constructive relationships embedded in positive economic, human, social, political and psychological capital. Public trust is important because it affects how people think, feel and behave. Trust takes time to build, is easy to lose, and once lost is difficult to restore. Trust is multi-dimensional, having to do with distinct aspects relating to competence, integrity and benevolence. Trust is also dynamic — it changes over time and the direction of change is not pre-determined. Given how critical and complex the concept of trust is, we need to have a valid and honest understanding of trust, if we want to shed light on how and why public trust changes, and how we can repair public trust violation and develop public trust in Singapore. The book is organised into four parts. Part 1 provides an overview of issues involved in thinking about public trust. Part 2 examines public trust in the context of upholding public accountability and discusses specific issues of public transport in Singapore. Part 3 analyses the relationships linking trust to social media analytics as well as healthcare. Part 4 addresses specific questions on public trust in Singapore in terms of social harmony, race and religion, education, civil society, social inequalities, dealing with differences and disagreements, political leadership, and relationships between people and government. This book will provide the reader new perspectives and possibilities related to questions that have become more salient in recent years as Singapore society underwent significant changes that likely impact on the nature and level of public trust."--
This paper focuses on discussing the role of trust in strategic alliances aimed at creating new knowledge and developing novel products in the rapidly changing technological setting. Trust is regarded as a salient factor in forming collaborative relationships among direct or indirect competitors for high technology markets. Trusting attitudes also foster organizational learning and unhampered knowledge exchange within an alliance structure. Finally, trust plays a considerable role in distributing and enforcing property rights for the objects of innovation when their valuable features cannot be meaningfully predicted or fully defined due to the rapidly changing environment as well as incomplete firms' knowledge caused by radical shifts of technology.
As health care applications derived from human genetics research are likely to move increasingly from 'clinic to community', there is growing interest not just in how patients understand and take up health-related genetic information but also in the views of the wider population, as well as a range of professional groups. In this paper, issues relating public knowledge and public trust are raised and discussed in an attempt to move forward debates about public involvement in genomic research and the role of sociologists within interdisciplinary teams. As the field of public understanding of science has developed, we have seen a shift from a focus on the lack of scientific literacy as problem to a recognition of the range of different knowledges that people have and use as they confront science and technology in their everyday lives. As a mood for dialogue pervades many institutions in their relations with 'publics', attention must now be paid to the way in which knowledge and expertise is expressed, heard and acted upon in dialogic encounters. There is increasing concern about public trust in science and calls to increase public confidence, particularly through more open engagement with a range of publics. However, lack of trust or loss of confidence may be constructed as problems rather than reflecting empirical reality, where more complex relationships and attitudes prevail. Lack of trust is often privatized, deeply rooted in lived experience and routinely managed. Trust relations are generally characterized by ambivalence, uncertainty and risk, and are always provisional. Drawing on selected literature and empirical research to review and illustrate this field, this paper argues that scepticism or ambivalence on the part of publics are not necessarily problems to be overcome in the interest of scientific progress, but rather should be mobilized to enhance open and public debates about the nature and direction of genomics research, medicine, and the related social and ethical issues. Just as there can be no resolute expression of public knowledge or public opinion, it is unlikely that there is a resolute expression of public trust in genomics. However, ambivalence and scepticism can be harnessed as powerful resource for change, whether through the mobilization of public knowledges or the development of greater reflexivity within scientific institutions. This demands a sharing of power and greater public involvement in the early stages of policy formation and scientific and medical agenda setting.
"Public trust in business is one of the most important but least understood issues for business leaders, public officials, employees, NGOs and other key stakeholders. This book provides much-needed thinking on the topic. Drawing on the expertise of an international array of experts from academic disciplines including business, sociology, political science and philosophy, it explores long-term strategies for building and maintaining public trust in business. The authors look to new ways of moving forward by carefully blending the latest academic research with conclusions for future research and practice. They address core drivers of public trust, how to manage it effectively, the consequences of low public trust, and how best to trust challenges and restore trust when it has been lost. This is a must-read for business practitioners, policy makers and students taking courses in corporate social responsibility or business ethics"--
Higher education in the United States faces a loss of trust. Much of the response to the public's decreasing confidence has been through the accountability movement's focus on individual, private benefits. Public trust, however, will require proactive societal engagement that provides a compelling case for the contributions that higher education makes to the public good. While these challenges are discussed from a US perspective, there are global implications.
