In Switzerland, trust and stability are interwoven

Open-air ballot: a local vote in Zollikon, canton Zurich, during the Covid-19 pandemic. Keystone/Ennio Leanza

Even as populism, disruption and authoritarianism reshape the world order, Switzerland remains relatively stable. SWI swissinfo.ch journalist Benjamin von Wyl examines why this is so.

The world stands on the brink of major changes in 2025. Traditional geopolitical alliances no longer seem viable. Populist forces have done well in elections, or even come to power, over the past year.

In the United States, the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, can now apply his ideas of disruption to the workings of government.

In Switzerland, meanwhile, the four largest political parties continue to share executive power in the Federal Council – as they have done almost continuously since 1959.

Reporting on democracy in Switzerland to an international audience often means showing the country’s stability, explaining the finer details of its polished image, and identifying different shades of grey.

It is nonetheless always worth stressing that, in terms of how politics and institutions are perceived by the citizens, Switzerland fares comparatively rather well. 

Highest trust in government

We live in an age when trust in political institutions is in jeopardy – above all at the national, but also at the supranational, level. Thus, a 2023 survey in the US found that less than one-third of respondents trusted Congress, while over two-thirds trusted their local government. This is probably because, locally, people know their politicians and can see the impact of their work: a new road, a new playground, or parking spaces for people with disabilities.

Meanwhile, in the latest survey by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), published in July 2024External link, less than 40% of respondents across the participating countries said they trusted their national government.

Here, Switzerland achieved the best result in two ways: it had the highest share of people who expressed trust in the government, and the lowest share of people who did not.

Thus, 61.9% of respondents in Switzerland had “high or moderately high trust” in the national government in November 2023. Only 23.6% had “low or no trust”, while 13.1% were “neutral” on the matter, and 1.4% said they did not know.

Trust engenders stability

Not long ago, the SWI swissinfo.ch democracy team sat down and asked themselves the question of why Switzerland scored so highly here.

Was it because of the relative affluence of many? Or a political culture in which government members just take the train like everyone else? Or was it thanks to direct democracy?

We wrote many articles on the subject, each focusing on a particular aspect. This gave rise to a crazy collage that sought to explain Switzerland.

Now, when I try to put all the pieces together, I come to the personal conclusion that trust engenders stability and stability enables trust. 

Without stability, there can be no trust. But in a democracy, stability does not mean an absence of action to bring about change.

It means that the mechanics of political institutions must be reliable and transparent. In a democracy, this is what enables them to act in the first place.

How institutions respond to ‘wake–up calls’

Noémie Roten, director of the association Citizens’ Service, set in motion the recent scandal regarding the collection of fake signatures for people’s initiatives.

It would be understandable if she were annoyed with the Swiss authorities. When I interviewed her, however, she said she did not think such “wake–up calls” were a bad thing for a democracy. The whole question is how they are dealt with.

Are measures taken? Are critical voices not simply dismissed? Is communication transparent? These are the key points.

False election results in 2023

The OECD survey in which Switzerland performed so well took place in Switzerland from October 25 until late November 2023.

This was right after the national elections, in which the Swiss authorities communicated incorrect results. Three cantons had made mistakes in counting the votes. The authorities rectified the error on October 25.

It could well be pure chance that the false results did not lead to a transfer of seats in parliament or spark a major outcry. But it may also be because the authorities clearly acknowledged the mistake and explained how it had come about.

Stability in authoritarian societies

But stability alone does not create trust.

It is a well-known fact that stability can also exist in authoritarian societies. And perhaps it because of a longing for stability that more people in many countries are now voting for authoritarian parties – even if their strongmen are notorious liars.

People who can trust politics and institutions are less likely to opt for disruption or populism. Social trust really does generate democratic stability.

The vast majority of people in Switzerland – as a recent survey again showed – consider Swiss semi-direct democracy to be the best system in the world. The citizens are part of the political debate – and in so doing they also learn exactly what this entails.

Perhaps, however, the exact contribution of the right of initiative and referendum in building social cohesion is sometimes misunderstood. The tools of direct democracy are often seen as valuable above all for enabling social debate on a given issue and then bringing about a decision. As if to say: it was great that we could all discuss this, and now the majority decides what happens next.

Minority discontent

But perhaps, when it comes to ensuring social cohesion, the main impact of democratic instruments is not in bringing about a majority decision. Maybe it is the other way round: thanks to these tools, the minority can voice their discontent and society has to deal with it.

Political scientists have delved into how direct democratic rights help to meet the needs of the political minority. Julien Jaquet, who lectures at the University of Geneva, analysed direct democracy in Switzerland and in US states for his dissertation.

His study showed that Republican citizens in Democrat–dominated states are particularly likely to make use of the tools of direct democracy. More people’s initiatives are held when citizens feel under-represented, he concluded.

This shows that direct democratic rights are a way for citizens who are not properly represented to tackle the representation gap, Jaquet told me.

Dissenting views in direct democracy

This means that all citizens – be it a social democrat in the town council in the conservative Bernese Oberland, or a centre-right representative in the left-wing city of Biel/Bienne – can bring about a vote.

Their proposals will most likely be resoundingly defeated by the local majority, but in some cases their arguments may catch on and lead to a compromise. Or they might even win people over.

And even if their ideas are unsuccessful, the local government will at least be careful not to make mistakes in its work. This is because those who think differently have rights and make use of them, and these rights are guaranteed.

Interconnected body politic

If levels of trust in Switzerland are relatively high, it may well be because the citizens see democracy as an interwoven web in which the media, voluntary work, associations and trade unions all have a role to play.

Switzerland is thus a web in which citizens can have their say and have an impact, the same as the government. And in some, not so rare, moments, what they say makes the authorities sit up. This is the case when the government is taught a lesson on “voting Sundays”.

All of this also means that people in Switzerland can feel how local, cantonal and national politics are interconnected. Citizens who trust their local government do not necessarily understand the federal parliament and government, but they can see that the local government is part of the same whole. The trust factor in Switzerland is an interplay between all levels.

Edited by Giannis Mavris. Adapted from German by Julia Bassam/gw.

This article is based on a talk given by the author, representing SWI swissinfo.ch, at the Politforum Thun in March 2025.