FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG – A majority working in the shadows expected to contribute through paying revenue in exchange (Burchi et al. 2000: 19ff). 3 To find sufficient scope for such reform there are three cru­cial questions we need to answer. How much are people willing to pay and what would they be able and/or aspiring to demand in exchange? Is the existing tax system perceived to be fair? Who is expected to contribute more and who is considered to deserve support? The results of the survey presented in this chapter provide some indications. Health and education are the top priority areas that informally employed people would like govern­ments to focus on. Generally speaking, informally employed people are open to contribute more via taxes and fees if they themselves or even poorer people obtain better ser­vices in exchange. The vast majority also expressed support for a vision of the state that targets services at the poor, regardless of whether they are able to contribute to the fiscal effort. One major political and social obstacle to coordinat­ing and implementing more ambitious reforms seems to be the informally employed’s lack of trust in various social and political institutions, especially so-called intermediary institutions, such as political parties and trade unions. This is problematic, especially if we envision expansion to be based on democratic and participatory processes, as intermediary institutions play an essential role in navigating reforms and sustaining consent during implementation. Overall, there seems to be scope for reform but much work is needed to create the socio-political conditions required for the vision to be implemented and become a reality. 6.2 PRIORITY POLICY AREAS FOR THE INFORMALLY EMPLOYED AND PERCEPTIONS OF VARIOUS POLITICAL AND SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS To identify the scope for reform in health and social services a crucial starting point is understanding the degree to which informally employed people consider these priority policy areas. The results of the survey clearly indicate that better health and schools are the most relevant issues for them (Table 6.1; see Chapter 2 for more on these issues). Hence, it is fair to say that improvements in these areas are of interest to the informally employed. The articulation of these expectations, as well as the definition and implementation of measures to achieve them definitely requires the intervention of various institutions. In fact, it is essential to understand how informally employed people assess different institutions 3 Note that a fiscal contract does not imply that benefits and payments have to be levelled out. It can be the case that poor people are con­sidered to be entitled to some benefits without contributing any reve­nue. Also it can be the case that rich people accept paying more than they formally get back in the form of direct benefits(Berens and von Schiller 2017). At the extreme, consider so-called»rentier states«, in some of which there are high expectations of what the state should provide based on resource wealth without insisting that members should pay any financial contribution in exchange. In fact, one essen­tial characteristic of rentier states is that they need not tax – or need not tax much(Herb 2005: 298). Table 6.1 Stated main priorities among informally employed people (unweighted average for all countries in the sample) Better schools and education Better roads and bridges Better police services Better health services Better electricity supply Better water supply Better pensions for the elderly Better food programmes in times of crisis Mentions among the top three priorities 56.2% 37.5% 14.0% 67.6% 30.8% 41.9% 12.4% Mentioned as first priority 22.5% 11.3% 2.7% 30.3% 7.3% 14.8% 3.0% 24.5% 8.1% Note: Exact wording of the question: Please rank the sectors you have highlighted above(first, second and third priority). The question is put after asking: If the government wants to improve services for people, what in your opinion are the sectors the government should focus on? In this question the respondent has the option of saying yes or no on each of the sectors above before they are asked to prioritize. to get a feeling of which actors they trust to take care of these demands and who therefore might represent potential allies. The data reveal that, in the countries analysed, trust among the informally employed is particularly high for the president (Figure 6.1). In all six countries included in the analysis, this is the formal political institution with the highest trust levels. The only group consistently close to and sometimes even above the presidency in terms of level of trust comprises religious leaders. Civil society organizations, and particularly political parties and trade unions, are the least trusted insti­tutions among those discussed here. 4 It is also remarkable how these trends in trust are stable across countries and subgroups. We might expect that the age of respondents, their income and education level, as well as whether they live in rural or urban areas might have a strong effect on trust. However, this effect seems to be minor (see Figure 6.A7, appendix). Beyond trust as such, in order to understand which actors are seen by the informally employed as potential vehicles for 4 It is certainly relevant to consider that exposure to institutions and knowledge of them might affect people’s assessments. We added a question on people’s knowledge of trade unions that partly allows us to investigate this issue. In general, the level of trust changed only marginally. Among those stating that they have never heard of trade unions the mean value for trust is(2.11); this value is marginally lower for those stating that they»have heard about trade unions but do not know about them«(2.10). Trust increases among those stating »I know a little about trade unions«(2.21), but actually decreases for those who claimed to know most about trade unions(»I have heard about trade unions and I know what they are doing«). In general, however, there is considerable variance among countries regarding responses; among those declaring they know what trade unions do the assessment is particularly positive in Kenya, Zambia and E­ thiopia, but particularly negative in Côte d’Ivoire, Senegal and Benin. In any case, for all countries, the number of people who report knowing trade ­unions well is low. 50