Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust‐erosion
研究了政策冲突与信任侵蚀的关系，发现信任侵蚀背景下处理冲突的做法可能适得其反，导致冲突升级。基于对比利时安特卫普高速公路项目冲突的32次访谈，揭示了不同行动者对“管理公众支持”的不同理解如何加剧信任侵蚀。
Abstract This article investigates the relationship between policy conflict and trust‐erosion. It concludes that in a context of trust‐erosion, practices to deal with conflict may backfire and lead to further conflict escalation. The article draws on an in‐depth analysis of 32 interviews with key actors in the conflict over a contested multibillion‐euro highway project in Antwerp (Belgium). It concludes that while all actors draw on the policy repertoire of “managing public support” to explain the conflict, their perspectives of what it means for a policy to have public support differ. Practices to “manage public support” that made sense from one perspective, contributed to the erosion of trust from those holding a different perspective, thus further escalating the conflict. Practices intended to end conflict proved to be fatal remedies.