《9781839109003 - Handbook of Culture and Glocalization 2022》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在行业资料-天天文库。
©VictorN.RoudometofandUgoDessì2022Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystemortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanicalorphotocopying,recording,orotherwisewithoutthepriorpermissionofthepublisher.PublishedbyEdwardElgarPublishingLimitedTheLypiatts15LansdownRoadCheltenhamGlosGL502JAUKEdwardElgarPublishing,Inc.WilliamPrattHouse9DeweyCourtNorthamptonMassachusetts01060USAAcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibraryLibraryofCongressControlNumber:2022932878ThisbookisavailableelectronicallyintheSociology,SocialPolicyandEducationsubjectcollectionhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781839109010ISBN9781839109003(cased)ISBN9781839109010(eBook)VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:01AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
1ContentsListofcontributorsviiAcknowledgmentsxiii1Cultureandglocalization:anintroduction1VictorRoudometofandUgoDessìPARTIHUMANITIES2Frombronzizationto‘worldsystem’:globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000bce–1500ce)28MatthewAdamCobb3Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment45SandhyaRaoMehta4Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal:philosophy’sdiversedebtsandduties61BruceB.Janz5Lawandglocalization76SalvatoreMancuso6Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart92NikosPapastergiadis7Foodandglocalization105FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStanoPARTIISOCIALSCIENCES8Glocalizationandtourismexperiences123JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar9Glocalizationandthereligiousfield138UgoDessì10Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism:casestudiesofHongKongandTaiwan156YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChaoandJiaLing11Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry171GemaVaronaMartínezvVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:03AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
2viHandbookofcultureandglocalization12Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications186Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamseyandNowfalSamkari13Glocalsports200HabibulHaqueKhondkerPARTIIICOMMUNICATIONANDMEDIA14Digitalglocalization217BarrieAxford15Glocalizingculturesandorganizations:ahumanistic,complexandmultiparadigmaticmodel235FabrizioMaimone16Fromglobalizationtoglocalization:configuringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands256IngyuOhandWonhoJang17Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry272BalaA.Musa18Glocalizationandnewsproduction289JonathanIlan19Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsintheinternationalentertainmentlandscape:theNetflixCaseinItaly305PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofaloPARTIVNEWRESEARCHFRONTIERS20Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration322VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier21Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization:culturebetweentransnationality,structuration,rationalizationandactorhood337RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori22Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld354GiampietroGobo23Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures:globalpopcultureandtheexampleofitsKoreanglocalization371VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre24Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue386VivianeRiegelIndex400VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:03AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3ContributorsBarrieAxfordisProfessorEmeritusinpoliticalscienceatOxfordBrookesUniversity,wherehewasfoundingDirectoroftheCentreforGlobalPoliticsEconomyandSociety.HisbooksincludeTheGlobalSystem(1995);TheoriesofGlobalization(2013);TheWorld-MakingPowerofNewMedia:MereConnection?(2018)andPopulismVStheNewGlobalization(2021).Hisworkhasbeentranslatedintoeightlanguages.HeiscurrentlystartingworkontheIndifferentGlobalitiesofViruses,BigDataandAI.NicoCarpentierisExtraordinaryProfessorattheInstituteofCommunicationStudiesandJournalismatCharlesUniversityinPrague.HeiscurrentlythePresidentoftheInternationalAssociationforMediaandCommunicationResearch(IAMCR).Tzu-YuanStessaChaoisProfessorandHeadoftheDepartmentofUrbanPlanning,NationalChengKungUniversity,Taiwan.Herresearchfocusesondemographicchangeandurbanplanningsystems.ShewasthefirstprojectleaderoftheNationalAge-FriendlyCitiesPrograminTaiwanin2010–2011andhasbeenactivelyinvolvedinAge-FriendlyCitiesresearchinTaiwanaswellasAsia.VincenzoCicchelliisanAssociateProfessor(Ceped,UniversitédeParis/IRD)andDirectorofInternationalRelations(Grip,UniversitédeParis).AtBrill,heistheEditor-in-Chief(withSylvieOctobre)ofthe‘GlobalYouthStudies’suite.Amonghislastbooksare:(withSylvieOctobre)TheSociologyofHallyuPopCulture:SurfingtheKoreanwave(Palgrave,2021);(withSylvieMesure,eds),CosmopolitanisminHardTimes(Brill,2020);(withSylvieOctobreandVivianeRiegel,eds)AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture(Brill,2019);(withSylvieOctobre)Aesthetico-CulturalCosmopolitanismandFrenchYouth(Palgrave,2018);PluralandShared:TheSociologyofaCosmopolitanWorld(Brill,2018).GiovanniCiofaloisAssociateProfessorinsociologyofculturalandcommunicationpro-cessesattheSapienzaUniversityofRome.Hismainresearchinterestsfocusonthedynamicsofmediaproductionandculturalconsumption,onmediaecology,onthetheoriesandeffectsofcommunication,onthelogicandpracticesofsocialmediaandtransmediality.HehaspublishedarticlesandbookchaptersontheevolutionoftheItaliancultureindustry,ontherelationshipbetweenmedia,genderandstereotypesandontheculturalandtechnologicalimpactofcommunicationandmediatization.MatthewAdamCobbisalecturerinancienthistoryattheUniversityofWalesTrinitySaintDavid.HisresearchfocusesonMediterraneanintegrationintothewiderIndianOceannetworksoftradeduringAntiquity.Amongotherpublications,heistheauthorofRomeandtheIndianOceanTradefromAugustustotheEarlyThirdCenturyCE(2018)andtheeditedbookTheIndianOceanTradeinAntiquity:Political,CulturalandEconomicImpacts(2019).UgoDessìisOeNBProfessorialFellowattheDepartmentofReligiousStudies,UniversityofVienna.HehaspublishedwidelyonShinBuddhism,includingEthicsandSocietyinContemporaryShinBuddhism(Lit2007),andontheinterplayofJapaneseReligionswithviiVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4viiiHandbookofcultureandglocalizationglobaldynamics,includingJapaneseReligionsandGlobalization(Routledge2013)andTheGlobalRepositioningofJapaneseReligions:AnIntegratedApproach(Routledge2017).HislastbookReligionieglobalizzazione.Un’introduzione(Carocci2019)isacriticalintroductiontothecomparativestudyofreligionunderglobalization.GiliS.DroriisprofessorofsociologyandanthropologyattheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem,Israel,anddirectoroftheEuropeanForumattheHebrewUniversity.GiliservedaspresidentoftheIsraeliSociologicalSocietyfrom2018to2020.SheearnedheracademicdegreesatTelAvivUniversity(BA,1986;andMA,1989)andStanfordUniversity(PhD,1997,sociology).BeforejoiningthefacultyoftheHebrewUniversityin2011,GiliservedasdirectoroftheIRHonorsProgramandtaughtatStanfordUniversityforadecade.Gili’spublicationsspeaktoherresearchinterestsinglobalizationandglocalization;organizationalchangeandrationalization;institutionaltheoryandworldsocietytheory;science,innovationandhighereducation;andcultureandpolicyregimes.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuelisAssociateProfessorofComparativeandInternationalEducationatOhioUniversity,andCoordinatoroftheEducationalLeadershipprogram.Hismostrecentbooksinclude:TransnationalPerspectivesonInnovationonTeachinginLearningTechnologies,PerspectivesinTransnationalHigherEducation,BuildingGlobalEducationwithaLocalPerspective:AnIntroductiontoGlobalHigherEducation,andTrans-culturalBlendedLearningandTeachinginPost-secondaryEducation.HeistheEditorofthepeer-reviewedjournalTheAfricanSymposium,theJournalofComparativeStudiesandInternationalEducation,theChairoftheAfricanEducationalResearchNetwork,andthePast-PresidentoftheTransnationalEducationandLearningSociety.GiampietroGoboisProfessorofMethodologyofSocialResearchandSociologyofScienceattheUniversityofMilan,Italy.Hisinterestsconcernthescientificcontroversiesonhealthissuesandworkplacestudies.HeiscurrentlyundertakingprojectsonimmunizationandCovid-19policies,andethnographicexperimentsintheareaofcooperationinsmallteamwork.HisbooksincludeDoingEthnography(Sage,2008),QualitativeResearchPractice(co-editedwithC.Seale,J.F.GubriumandD.Silverman,Sage,2004),ConstructingSurveyData:AnInteractionalApproach(withS.Mauceri,Sage,2014)andMergedMethods:FromMixedtoFullyIntegratedMethods(withN.Fielding,G.LaRoccaandW.vanderVaart,Sage,2021).JonathanIlanisaseniorlecturerattheSchoolofCommunication,Bar-IlanUniversity,Israel.Heisinterestedinvariousformsofculturalproductionandvisualculture,andparticularlyinthewaystheseintersectwithnewsmedia.Hisresearchworkisfocusedonnewsorganiza-tions,newsproduction,internationalnewsmedia,newstechnologyandphotojournalism.Hisbook,TheInternationalPhotojournalismIndustry(Routledge,2018),illustratesanextensiveethnographicexplorationoftheproductionprocessesofnewsphotosinaninternationalnewsagency.Hehaspublishedhisworkinvariousinternationalpeer-reviewedjournals.WonhoJangisProfessorofUrbanSociologyatUniversityofSeoul,Korea.HehasconductedresearchonHallyuStudies,popularcultureandsocialempathy.HeisthePresident-electattheKoreanSociologicalAssociationandCo-EditorofCultureandEmpathy.BruceB.JanzisProfessorintheDepartmentofPhilosophy,co-directoroftheCenterforHumanitiesandDigitalResearch,andfacultyintheTextsandTechnologyPhDprogram,allVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5ContributorsixattheUniversityofCentralFlorida.HeworksinAfricanphilosophy,conceptsofplaceandspace,andphenomenology,amongotherareas.HehastaughtinCanada,theUS,Kenya,andSouthAfrica.HabibulHaqueKhondker,(PhD,Pittsburgh)isProfessoratZayedUniversity,AbuDhabi,UAEandco-chairofResearchCommittee9(SocialTransformationsandSociologyofDevelopment)oftheInternationalSociologicalAssociation.HisresearchinterestsareinAsianglobalization,globalinequality,migration,andgovernance.Khondkerco-editedCOVID-19andGovernance(Routledge,2021)withJanNederveenPieterseandHaeranLim,co-authoredGlobalization:East/West(Sage,2010;Turkishtranslation,2019)withBryanTurner.Heco-editedAsiaandEuropeinGlobalization:Continents,Regions,andNations(Brill2006)withGoranTherbornandTheMiddleEastandthe21stCenturyGlobalization(ZayedUniversityPress,2010)withJanNederveenPieterse.JiaLingisaPhDstudentintheDepartmentofBuildingandRealEstateatTheHongKongPolytechnicUniversity.Herresearchinterestsincludeurbanstudies,politicaleconomyofspaceandstateentrepreneurialism.Shehasbeeninvolvedintheresearchprojectthatinves-tigateslivabilityandregionaldevelopmentatGuangdong-HongKong-MacaoGreaterBayArea.SheiscurrentlydoingherPhDresearchonstateentrepreneurialismandlanddevelop-mentinQianhaiPilotDevelopmentZoneofShenzhen,China.FabrizioMaimonehasaMAinInternationalPoliticsandaPhDinCommunicationSciencesandComplexOrganizations.HeisAssociateProfessorofOrganizationStudiesatLUMSAUniversity,inRome.Heisauthor,amongothers,ofthebookInterculturalKnowledgeSharinginMNCsAGlocalandInclusiveApproachintheDigitalAge.London:PalgraveMacmillan,2018,andco-editorwithP.MaliziaandC.CannavaleofEvolutionofthePost-BureaucraticOrganization.HersheyPA:IGIGlobal,2017.SalvatoreMancusoisProfessorofComparativeLawandLegalAnthropologyattheUniversityofPalermo(Italy),HonoraryProfessorofAfricanLawatXiangtanUniversity(People’sRepublicofChina)andVisitingProfessoratSomaliNationalUniversity(Somalia).HehaspublishedwidelyonComparativeandAfricanLaw.HeisamemberoftheInternationalAcademyofComparativeLaw,VicePresident(Events)oftheJurisDiversitasgroup,andco-coordinatoroftheTWGonRuleofLaw&JusticeReformattheWorldBankGFLJD.GemaVaronaMartínezisalecturerinVictimologyandCriminalPolicyattheUniversityoftheBasqueCountry(UPV/EHU)andseniorresearcherattheBasqueInstituteofCriminology(Donostia/SanSebastian,Spain).Coordinatorofthedegreeincriminology(2013–2017),currentcoordinatoroftheUPV/EHUMOOConVictimologyandco-directoroftheMasterinVictimologyofthatUniversity,sheisalsotheco-editoroftheJournalofVictimology.Shehaspublishedonmigrationandhumanrights,restorativejustice,genderviolence,victimsofterrorism,andsexualabuse.SandhyaRaoMehtaisanAssociateProfessorintheDepartmentofEnglishLanguageandLiteratureatSultanQaboosUniversity,Oman.ShehaspublishedwidelyintheareasofDiasporaStudiesandMigration,withparticularreferencetotheIndiancommunityinOman.HerpublicationsincludeaneditedanthologyentitledLanguageandLiteratureinaGlocalWorldpublishedbySpringer.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6xHandbookofcultureandglocalizationRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanisapostdoctoralfellowattheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem,Israel,andalecturerattheKibbutzimCollegeinIsrael.RavitearnedheracademicdegreesatBenGurionUniversityoftheNegev(BA,1995)andtheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem(MA,2010,education;andPhD,2017,sociology).Ravit’sresearchinterestsfocusonglobali-zationandglocalization,agencyandactorhoodinorganizations,worldsocietytheory,highereducation,professionalidentityandeducationalleadership.BalaA.Musa(PhD,RegentUniversity),isProfessorofCommunicationStudies,AzusaPacificUniversity,Azusa,USA.HeisrecipientoftheCliffordG.ChristiansEthicsResearchAward;Fellow,NationalMassMediaEthicsColloquium;andSeniorFellow,AfricaPolicyandStrategicDevelopmentInstitute(APSDI).Musa’smostrecent(edited)bookisNollywoodinGlocalPerspective(2019).Heservesontheboardsofmanyacademicjournalsandnon-profitorganizations.Hisresearchinterestsincludemediaethics,popcultureandprosocialentertainment,newmediacommunication,developmentcommunication,religiouscommu-nication,andconflictmanagement,amongothers.Heisvisitingprofessor,consultantandexternalexamineratnumerousinstitutions.SylvieOctobreisresearcheratDépartementdesétudes,delaprospective,desstatistiquesetdelapolitiquedocumentaire,FrenchMinistryofCultureandresearcheratCentreMaxWeber.AtBrill,sheistheEditor-in-Chief(withVincenzoCicchelli)ofthe‘GlobalYouthStudies’suite.Amongherlastbooksare:(withVincenzoCicchelli)TheSociologyofHallyuPopCulture:SurfingtheKoreanwave(Palgrave,2021);YouthTechnoculture(Brill,2021);(withVincenzoCicchelliandVivianeRiegel,eds.)AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture(Brill,2019);¿Qiénetemealasculturasjuveniles?Lasculturasjuvenilesenlaeradigital(OceanoTraverso,2019);(withVincenzoCicchelli)Aesthetico-CulturalCosmopolitanismandFrenchYouth:TheTasteoftheWorld(Palgrave,2018).IngyuOhisProfessorofHallyuStudiesatKansaiGaidaiUniversity,Japan.HehaspublishednumerousbooksandarticlesonHallyu,gender,ethnicityandglobalization.HeistheEditorofCultureandEmpathyandAssociateEditorofAsiaPacificBusinessReview.NikosPapastergiadisisDirectoroftheResearchUnitinPublicCulturesandProfessorattheSchoolofCultureandCommunicationattheUniversityofMelbourneandVisitingProfessorintheSchoolofArt,DesignandMedia,atNanyangTechnologicalUniversity,Singapore.Hisrecentpublicationsinclude:CosmopolitanismandCulture(2012),AmbientPerspectives(2014),OnArtandFriendship(2020),TheMuseumsoftheCommons(2020).ClaireRamseyearnedherBAinEnglishandaMAinSecondaryEducationatWestVirginiaUniversityandiscurrentlyanOhioUniversity(OU)DoctoralCandidateinEducationalLeadership.AtOU,ClaireisalsoanAdvisorfortheOfficeofDiversityandInclusionandanAdministrativeInternatalocalhighschool.Sheisinterestedinexpandingherresearchoppor-tunities,exploringtheoutdoors,andsafelyspendingtimewithfamilyandfriends.InadditiontoherexperienceintheUS,Clairehasteaching,volunteer,andresearchexperienceinBolivia,France,Germany,andKenya.VivianeRiegelisaresearcheratESPM,SãoPaulo.Hermaininterestsofresearchareglobali-zation,consumptionandculture.Herrecentworkisrelatedtomigrationandyoungpeople.Hermainpublicationsare:Riegel,V.(2020)“MediacoverageoftheAnthropoceneintheVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7Contributorsxisocialsciencesandenvironmentalhumanities”In:L.Sklair(ed.)TheAnthropoceneinGlobalMedia.1stedn,Oxon:Routledge;Riegel,V.(2020)“DigitalcommunicationinthemakingofcosmopolitanspacesbySãoPaulo’simmigrants”,JournalofMulticulturalDiscourses;Cicchelli,V.,Octobre,S.andRiegel,V.(eds.)(2019)AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture,Brill.VictorRoudometof(PhDSociologyandCulturalStudies,Pittsburgh)hasheldpositionswithPrincetonUniversity,theAmericanCollegeofThessaloniki,WashingtonandLeeUniversity,MiamiUniversityofOhio&theUniversityofCyprus.HeisalsoFacultyFellowwithYaleUniversity’sCenterforCulturalSociology&Professor(adj.)withtheUniversityofTampere(Finland).Heistheauthoroffourmonographsandeditorof11volumesandspecialissuesofrefereedjournals.HislatestmonographisGlocalization:ACriticalIntroduction(London:Routledge,2016).Currently,heisamemberintheinternationaladvisoryeditorialboardsoftheEuropeanJournalofSocialTheory(London:Sage),NationsandNationalism(Wiley/Blackwell),theGreekReviewforSocialResearch,andReligions(Basel,Switzerland:MDPI).Forafullprofile,seewww.roudometof.comNoelB.SalazarisprofessorinsocialandculturalanthropologyatKULeuven,Belgium.HeiseditoroftheWorldsinMotion(Berghahn)bookseriesandauthorofMomentousMobilities(2018),EnvisioningEden(2010)andnumerouspeer-reviewedarticlesandbookchaptersonhuman(im)mobility.Salazarissecretary-generalofIUAES,past-presidentofEASAandonUNESCO’sandUNWTO’sofficialrosterofconsultants.In2013,hewaselectedasmemberoftheYoungAcademyofBelgium.NowfalSamkariisDoctoralCandidateinEducationalLeadership,withaspecializationinComparativeandInternationalEducationalLeadership.Hehasamaster’sdegreeinFinancialEconomics.NowfalhasworkedintheBankingindustryfor12yearspriortoengagingininternationaleducation.HisresearchinterestisonInternationalBranchCampuses(IBC)andtheirinfluenceonArabianGulfStates.FranciscuSeddaisAssociateProfessorattheUniversityofCagliari,whereheteachesGeneralSemioticsandCulturalSemiotics.Hewasvice-presidentintheItalianAssociationofSemioticStudiesandsince2017isthegeneralsecretaryoftheItalianSocietyofPhilosophyofLanguage.Hewasawardedthe“SandraCavicchioli”prize,chairedbyUmbertoEco,forthebestMAthesisinsemioticsin2000–2001:theworkispublishedunderthetitleTradurrelatradizione.Sardegna:suballu,icorpi,lacultura(2003,newedn.2019).Amonghismanyothermonographsandeditedvolumes:Glocal.Sulpresenteavenire(2005,ed.),Imperfettetraduzioni.Semiopoliticadelleculture(2012),Isole.Unarcipelagosemiotico(2019,ed.).PaoloSigismondi,MBA,PhD,isClinicalProfessorofCommunicationattheAnnenbergSchoolforCommunicationandJournalismoftheUniversityofSouthernCalifornia.Hisresearchinterestsfocusonthephenomenaofglobalizationandtheirmultifacetedeconomic,political,socialandlinguisticimpactonsocietiesaroundtheworld.HisresearchhasbeenpresentedatinternationalconferencesandpublishedinleadingacademicjournalsandheistheauthorofthebookTheDigitalGlocalizationofEntertainment:NewParadigmsinthe21stCenturyGlobalMediascape(Springer,2012)andeditorofthevolumeWorldEntertainmentMedia:Global,RegionalandLocalPerspective(Routledge,2020).VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
8xiiHandbookofcultureandglocalizationJoelleSoulardisanAssistantProfessorintheRecreation,SportandTourismDepartmentattheUniversityofIllinoisatUrbanaChampaign,USA.ShecompletedherPhDintheHospitalityandTourismManagementprogramatVirginiaTech.Herresearchfocusesoninvestigatingsustainablesolutionstocommunity-basedtourismdevelopmentanddesigningempoweringtravelexperiences.Herinterestsresideinthedesiretocreateresearchthatisactionable,inclusive,andofferscreativesolutionstochallengesencounteredbycommunitymembersandtravelersatdestinations.SimonaStanoistenure-trackAssistantProfessorattheUniversityofTurin.SheworkedasSeniorResearcherattheInternationalSemioticsInstitute(2015–2018)andcollaboratedasVisitingResearchScholarwiththeUniversityofToronto(2013),theUniversityofBarcelona(2015–2016),ObservatoriodelaAlimentación(2015–2016)andNewYorkUniversity(2019–2021).Recently,shehasbeenawardedaMarieCurieGlobalFellowshipforaresearchproject(COMFECTION,2019–2021)onthesemioticanalysisoffoodcommunication.Herresearchfocusesmainlyonthesemioticsofculture,food,corporealityandmedia.Onthesetopicsshehaspublishedseveralpapers,editedvolumes(includingspecialissuesoftopsemi-oticjournalssuchasSemioticaandLexia),andmonographs(Isensidelcibo,2018;EatingtheOther.TranslationsoftheCulinaryCode,2015).YiSunisAssistantProfessorattheDepartmentofBuildingandRealEstate,TheHongKongPolytechnicUniversity.Hehasbeentrainedasanurbanplanner.Hisresearchareasincludeurbanandregionalplanninganddevelopment,age-friendlycitiesintheAsia-Pacificregionandthepoliticaleconomyofspace.Hehaspublishedwidelyontheseareasintoprefereedjournals.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9AcknowledgmentsThisHandbookistheresultofaninvitationaddressedin2019toVictorRoudometofbythepublishertoeditahandbookonglobalization.Roudometofsuggestedthatinsteadofglobali-zationthefieldcoulduseahandbookofcultureandglocalization.IntheinitialstepsoftheprojectRoudometofinvitedGiliDroriandUgoDessìasco-editors.ProfessorDrorihadtowithdrawfromtheco-editorshipduetoongoingcommitmentsbutsheremainsamongthevolume’scontributors.Theeditorshavecontactednumerousauthorsinvariousdisciplinesandinter-orcross-disciplinaryfieldsofstudy.Allcorrespondenceandotherworkforthisprojecthasbeenconductedexclusivelyoveremail,astheeditors,theassistantmanagingeditor,andtheauthorsliveindifferentcountriesandsometimesevenindifferentcontinents.Thefinallistofcontributorshasbeenshapedbothbytheeditors’effortsaswellasbythesheeravailabilityofauthors.Timeconstraintsandmanyotherinstitutionalandacademicresponsibilitieshaveconstrainedsomeauthorsintheproject.Thevolume’sfinallistofcontributorsincludes33contributorsfrom20countriesfromallovertheglobe.Weconsiderthisachievementimpor-tant,sinceourcoverage,althoughfarfromperfect,hasastronginternationalflavour.Inourview,thisshowofinterestisindicativeofthetopic’sinterestandrelevancefortheinterna-tionalscholarlycommunity.Inordertocoordinatethevoluminouscorrespondenceandrelatedtasks,VictorRoudometofhasusedtheinvaluableassistanceofDr.LinaMolokotos-Liedermanasassistantmanagingeditorforthemajorityofthehandbook’schapters.TheeditorsthankLinaforherassistancewithtrackingdownthenecessaryinformationandhandlingcorrespondencewiththeauthors.ThisprojecthascoincidedwiththeCOVID-19pandemicandwasshapedinadecisivewaybytheexperiencesoflockdown,curfewandtheotherrelatedrestrictionsimposedinnumerouscountriesacrosstheglobe.Theisolationallofusenduredduringthepandemicmighthavecontributedtothevolume’srapidprogress;butithasbeen,innosmallway,duetotheextraor-dinarypositiveresponsefromourcontributorsandreviewers.Allchaptershavegonethroughblindreview,atleasttotheextenthumanlypossible.Althoughthatisnotconventionalforeditedvolumes,wefeelthatthereviewingprocessgreatlyenhancedthequalityofscholarship.Ourgoalhasbeentoaffordtheacademiccommunitytheopportunitytoreadbothoverviewsofthestateoftheartinspecificresearchareasaswellasnewandinterestingargumentssetforthbythecontributors.Reviewingisachallengingbutindispensabletask.Inadditiontotheeditors,wehavesolic-itedtheassistanceoftensofacademicstohelpuswiththeblindreviewofindividualchapters.Wefeelweshouldpubliclythankthosewhoselflesslydonatedtheirexpertiseandtimetotheprocess.Withtheirpermission,wecanpubliclythankthefollowing45colleaguesfortheirassistance:xiiiVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:07AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
10xivHandbookofcultureandglocalizationLISTOFREVIEWERSFORACKNOWLEDGMENTSerenaAutiero(SunYat-SenUniversity)PeterBeyer(UniversityofOttawa,Canada)CarrieBoden(TexasStateUniversity,USA)KatrinBromber(Leibniz-ZentrumModernerOrientBerlin,Germany)DidemBuhari(lzmirKatipCelebiUniversity,Turkey)PaulCarter(RMITUniversity,Melbourne,Australia)ChangTouChuang(NationalUniversityofSingapore)AkibaCohen(TelAvivUniversity,Israel)JoseLuisdelaCuesta(UniversidaddelPaisVasco,Spain)Elenadell’Agnese(UniversitàdegliStudidiMilano-Bicocca,Italy)BirgitEnglert(UniversityofVienna,Austria)SueFarran(NewcastleUniversity,UK)UteFendler(UniversityofBayreuth,Germany)MichaelFonkem(UniversityofWisconsinOshkosh)PazFrancés(UniversidadPúblicadeNavarra,Spain)ModestoGuillermoGayoCal,(UniversidadDiegoPortales,Chile)SunilGupta(AllahabadMuseum,India)KatrinaGutierrez(LantanaPublishing,UK)RicardoGutiérrezAguilar(UniversidadComplutenseMadrid,Spain)PäiviHasu(UniversityofHelsinki,Finland)MarkusHöllerer(ViennaUniversityofEconomicsandBusiness,Austria)MarkusKroger(UniversityofHelsinki,Finland)ZhigangLi(WuhanUniversity,Wuhan,China)CláudiaMadeira(UniversidadeNovadeLisboa,Portugal)SlawekMagala(ErasmusResearchInstituteofManagement,Netherlands)AntonellaMascio(UniversityofBologna,Italy)JonathanMatusitz(UniversityofCentralFlorida,USA)JohnMeyer(StanfordUniversity,USA)LionelObadia(UniversitéLyon2Lumière,France)Greg-VictorC.Obi(OhioUniversity,USA)IngyuOh(KansaiGaidaiUniversity,Japan)NissimOtmazgin(HebrewUniversityofJerusalem,Israel)MariannaPapastephanou(UniversityofCyprus)ClemencePerronet(UniversitéCatholiquedel’OuestBretagneSud,France)TimothyPosada(SaddlebackCollege,USA)VivianeRiegel(ESPMSãoPaulo,Brazil)NoelSalazar(UniversityofLouvain,Belgium)HaunSaussy(UniversityofChicago,USA)OrenSoffer(TheOpenUniversityofIsrael)MaricaSpalletta(LinkCampusUniversity,Italy)DavidSudre(UniversitéLittoralCôted’Opale,TVES,France)PeterWalgenbach(FriedrichSchillerUniversityJena,Germany)HoratiaMuirWatt(SciencesPoLawSchool,Paris,France)FranklinYartey(UniversityofDubuque,USA)XianchunZhang(ZhejiangUniversity,China)VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:07AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
11AcknowledgmentsxvForassistancewiththestylistichomogenizationandformattingofthehandbook’schapterswethankLaraBastajianforherprofessionalismandexcellentwork.Thefinalstagesoftheeditorialworkaswellastheconstructionofthevolume’sIndexhasbeendonebythepublish-er’sprofessionalstaff.WethankAlexO’Connellandthepublisher’scopyeditor.FinancialsupportforpaidworkthathashelpedthetimelyconclusionofthisprojectwasprovidedbyVictorRoudometof’spersonalresearchbudgetfor2020and2021.Noadditionaloutsidefundingsourcesweremadeavailable.Thisprojectshouldperhapsserveasanantidotetothosewhomistaketheprocessofobtainingoutsidefundingforthesubstanceofacademicwork.Asallacademicworkisdeeplyintertwinedwithpersonallives,especiallyinthecontextoftheCOVID-19pandemic,wewishtoexpressourpersonalthankstooursignificantothers.Lastly,thevolume’seditorsareultimatelyresponsibleforwhatevershortcomings,mistakes,omissionsorerrorsmightappearintheHandbook.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:07AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
12VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:07AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
131.Cultureandglocalization:anintroductionVictorRoudometofandUgoDessìINTRODUCTIONThepurposeofthisvolumeistoofferaninter-andcross-disciplinaryengagementwiththethemesofglocalizationandculture.Glocalizationhasbeenemployedinnumerousdisciplinesandhybridfieldsofstudy,includingappliedareassuchaspublichealthandarchitecture.However,thisvolume’sfocusisrestrictedtothehumanitiesandsocialsciencesatlarge.ThisIntroductionaimstosumupthecurrentstateofaffairsinintellectualconversationsaboutglocalizationandtosituatethishandbookwithinthecontextoftheongoingscholarlyproduc-tiononthistopic.Inordertoaccomplishtheseobjectives,afterthisintroductorysectionthechapterisstructuredintothreeparts.Inthefirstsection,thediscussiontracksthecontoursoftheintellectualdiscussionsoncultureandglobalization,andsituatestheterms‘glocal’and‘glocalization’inscholarlydiscourse.Thediscussionthenmovesontolocateglocalizationwithinacademia’scurrentdivisionoflabour.Inthisregard,specialattentionisplacedonthedifferentdisciplinaryperspectivesonthethemeofglocalizationandculture.Theacknowl-edgementofdifferentinterpretationsconstrainsthetemptationtoengageinsomesortofdisci-plinaryimperialism.Inthischapter’sfinalpart,thediscussionshiftstothedescriptionofthisvolume’sobjectives,thescopeofrestrictionswithregardtocoverageofdifferentsubtopicsandfields,andtheorganizationalstructureofthiscollection.Inadditiontobriefdescriptionsofindividualchapters,thereisafurtherefforttosituatethedifferentpartsofthevolumewithinbroaderscholarlypreoccupations.FromGlobalCulturetoGlocalCultures:IntellectualTrajectoriesCA1945Insharpcontrasttoitsinitialconnectiontothefieldofsocialorculturalanthropology,overthepost-WorldWarIIera,culturehasexpandeditsconceptualreach,graduallybecomingoneofthecentralproblematicsinsocialsciences.Infact,whileanthropologistsusedthetermtoinitiallyindicate‘awayoflife’amongpre-literateorcolonialsocieties,culturehasgraduallybecomeamajorfocusforotherdisciplines,too.ByfarthemostwidelyknownexampleisSociology,where,sincethe1980s,CulturalSociologyhasemergedasoneofthediscipline’smostpopularspecialties(seeSpillman,2020).Thistransformationofthemeaningofcultureiscloselyrelatedtothegrowthinthecentralityofculturefortheeconomyandsocietyofmostnations.Theriseoftheso-called‘cultureindustries’,andtheproliferationofmedia-basedindustrieshasamplifiedtheusesofcommercialproductsfortheconstructionandreconstructionofidentities,turningcultureintoamajorresearchareabothforbusinessandthehumanities.Cultureplayedasignificantroleinpost-WorldWarIImodernizationtheories.Thisparticu-larlineageleadsallthewaytotheproblematicofglobalorworldcultureassuch.Thegradualformationofthe‘ThirdWorld’blocofcountriesintensifiedthegeopoliticalcompetitionbetweenthe‘freeworld’andthecommunistbloc.De-colonializationcreatednewstatesthat1VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
142HandbookofcultureandglocalizationhadtochoosebetweenthecompetinggeopoliticalblocsofcapitalistWestandcommunistEast,allthewhilefacingthepressingissueofmodernization.Upuntiltheearlytwentiethcentury,modernityandmodernizationwerewidelyviewedasproductsofWesternciviliza-tion.Thatceasedtobethecaseinthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury.Thenecessityofdevelopinganattractivealternativetocommunism,aswellasasuitablevenueforprogress,fosteredtheconceptualseparationbetweenmodernityandtheWest.Modernitybecametheresultofmodernization,and,intheory,theprocesswasopentoall.Globalmodernizationwasthechampionoftheday;anditisnotaccidentalthatitisfromwithintheselensesthatglobalizationwasinitiallyformulated–atleastaccordingtoRobertson’s(2014)ownautobi-ographicalrecollection.Inthepost-WorldWarIIera,modernizationanddevelopmentbecameamajorresearcharea.Thisparticularspecialtyeventuallytransmigratedintoglobalizationstudies.ThetitleofTimmonsandHite’s(2000)editedcollectionofpreviouslypublishedmaterialonthetopicistelling:FromModernizationtoGlobalization.Buttheformativeintellectualforcesthatshapedthistransitiondidnotbelongtotheso-calledclassicalmodernizationtheories(foranoverviewseeSo,1990).Instead,itwasthe‘Stanfordschool’ofworldpolity,orworldsocietyperspective,whichmosteffectivelychampionedthenotionofglobalmodernization(seeKrücken&Drori,2010).Sincethe1970s,theworldsocietyperspectiveemergedasaviablealternativetoolderinterpretations,and,toaconsiderableextent,itremainsboundbyseveralassumptionsofthepost-WorldWarIIproblematic.SomeoftheseassumptionsincludeanalmostuncriticalacceptanceoftheWesternoriginsofmodernityandanempiricalpredis-positiontofocusonunidirectionalflowsfromtheWesttotherest.Thegoalistounpacktheinstitutionalizedcultureof‘modernity’andtocharacterizesocial‘actors’(individualpersons,aswellasstatesandorganizations)asproductsofthatculture.Worldsocietyscholarsempha-sizerationalization,universalism,beliefinprogressandindividualismasfoundationalculturalassumptionsthatundergirdglobaldiscourseandorganization(Boli&Thomas,1999).Thisdeepculturesupportsawidearrayofmovements,initiativesandinnovations,butproscribesmanyothers.TheworldsocietyperspectivehasbeenshapedbyDurkheim’sstronglegacyuponthenotionof‘culture’;thatis,cultureasanelementofintegrationonaworldscale.Italsodisplaysanunderstandingofcultureasdeepculture(culture=rules,scripts,models,andsoon).Thisviewisstronglyreminiscentoftwentieth-centurystructuralism(foranoverview,seeBuhari-Gulmez,2010).Incontrast,Robertson(1992;Robertson&Lechner,1985)offeredamoreculturallycentredalternativetoneo-institutionalismandstructuralism.ThepresenceofanalternativetotheStanfordschoolhasbeenoccasionallyreferredtoasthe‘Pittsburghschool’ofculturalglobali-zation.The‘globalizationdebates’ofthe1990s(Featherstone,1990;Featherstoneetal.,1995;King,1991)providedanarenaforproposingdifferentinterpretationsformakingsenseofglo-balization(foradiscussionseeRoudometof,2021a).WhileLechnerandBoli(2005)speakof‘worldculture’,theterm‘globalculture’(Featherstone,1990)hadalreadybeenintroducedasanewcatchwordintheearly1990s.Nocompleteunanimityexistsonwhetherglobalcultureissingularorplural,orwhetheritsupersedesnationalcultures.Understandably,thisissuehasbeenofconsiderablesignificanceformediaandmasscommunicationstudies,wheretheexpansionofpost-nationalortransnationalorglobalbroadcastinghasofferedtheopportunityforempiricalexplorationsofthesealternativescenarios.Traditionalinterpretationspittedpro-ponentsofAmericanization,orculturalhomogeneity,againstthoseofheterogeneity(Marling,2006;Ritzer,2003a,2003b;Tomlinson,1991).VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
15Introduction3InGlobalizationandCulture,JanNederveenPietersedistinguishesthreemainparadigmsthroughwhichthegrowingawarenessofculturaldifferencebroughtaboutbyglobalizationcanbeapproached:‘culturaldifferentialism’,‘culturalconvergence’and‘culturalhybridiza-tion’.Byculturaldifferentialism,theDutch-bornscholarmeanstheperspectiveaccordingtowhichdifferencesbetweencultureswillsurviveglobalization,aframeworkwellexemplifiedbythe‘clashofcivilizations’thesis;culturalconvergencerefersinsteadtotheworldwidehomogenizationofsocietiesandcultures,asexemplifiedbythe‘McDonaldization’thesis;and,lastly,culturalhybridizationreferstotheideathatworldculturesmix,and,indeed,havealwaysmixed,witheachother(NederveenPieterse,2009,pp.43–63).Besidesprovidingapotentialantidotetobothculturaldifferentialismastheideaofafuturedominatedbyculturaldivisions,purityandnationalisms,andculturalconvergenceasthetriumphofculturalimperi-alism,theculturalhybridizationparadigmillustratedbyNederveenPietersehelpstoputintoperspectivetheplaceoccupiedbyglocalizationandglocalcultureswithinglobalization.Thatis,itbringsattentiontoglobalizationastheworldwidemulticentricprocessofcross-culturalinteractionsbeginninginancienthistorythathasbecomemoreintense,especiallyinthecon-temporaryphaseduetotheimpactofthenewcommunicationtechnologiesandthegrowingscopeofspecializedsocialsystems,thusbringingaboutunprecedented(thoughunequallydistributed)interconnectedness.And,againstthisbackground,theglocalizationofculturecanbeunderstoodasahybridizationrequiringtheinterplayofboth‘global’and‘local’factors.Inthesocialsciencesandhumanities,glocalizationhasbeenintroducedmostlythroughRobertson’s(1992,p.173,seealso,Robertson1994,1995)work.Giventhepost-1989popu-larizationofglobalizationintheacademicandpopularpress,theproblematicofglobal–localrelationsemergedasakeyresearchtheme,withthemostpopularinterpretationsatthetimesuggestingthewitheringawayofthelocalandtheadventofglobalsocialintegration.Goingagainstsuchinterpretation,Robertson(1995,p.35)arguedthat‘theglobalisnotinandofitselfcounterpoisedtothelocal’,butinstead,‘whatisoftenreferredtoasthelocalisessen-tiallyincludedwithintheglobal’.Globalizationinvolvesthelinkingoflocalitiesandthevery‘invention’ofnotionoflocalityassuch.Accordingly,theallegedproblemoftherelationshipbetweenthelocalandtheglobal[can]beovercomebyadeceptivelysimpleconceptualmove.Ratherthanspeakingofaninevitabletensionbetweenthelocalandtheglobalitmightbepossibletothinkofthetwoasnotbeingoppositesbutratherasbeingdifferentsidesofthesamecoin.(Robertson&White,2007,p.62)The‘linkingoflocalities’andthe‘inventionoflocality’(viaHobsbawm&Ranger,1983)aspartlyanoutcomeofglobalforceshavebecomewidelypopularideas,quicklyreproducedacrossdisciplinaryboundaries.Robertson’s(1995)workcontributedheavilytotheintroductionandpopularizationofthenotionofglocalization.Itisnotcoincidentalthatthisparticularbookchapterhasbeencited(accordingtoGoogleScholar)over6,600times.Asaresult,thetermsofthedebateshiftedfromdebating‘globalculture’(intheearly1990s)todebating‘glocalcultures’.Thistwistinintellectualconversationshasamplifiedtheroleandsignificanceofglocalization.Theshiftisreflectedintheincreaseinthecitationmetricsoftheterm‘glocalization’overthepost-1989era(reportedinRoudometof,2015b,2016b).Ithasfurtherpromptedthenecessityforandthesignificanceofthisvolume,whichisthefirst-everhandbookoncultureandglocalizationinthesocial-scientificliterature.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
164HandbookofcultureandglocalizationWhileenthusiasmdominatedasaviewpointinthe1990soverthenotionofglobalization,thedecadesthatfollowedalteredacademia’sconventionalwisdomconsiderably.Intheaftermathofthe2008GreatRecession,aswellasthemorerecentCOVID-19pandemic,scepticismaroundglobalizationhasbecomewidespread–asevidencedforexamplebyCave’s(2020)pointedquestionofwhetherlocalisbetterthanglobal,astatementthatwouldhavebeenconsideredcompletelyhereticalinthe1990s.Thenotionsofglocalandglocalizationareameansforgraspinganincreasinglycomplicatedreality.Whileglocalizationdoesnotseemtooccupyacentralstagewithintheoriginalscholarlycommunitythatpioneeredthestudyofglobalizationinthe1990s(seeforexample,Featherstone,2020),overthelastthreedecades,theconcepthasbeenemployedbyawidearrayofauthors(foranoverview,seeRoudometof,2015b).Thishandbookexemplifiesitsapplicabilitytomultidisciplinaryandinterdisciplinarycontexts.Robertsonhimselfhasrevisitedthetopicand(jointlywithRichardGiulianotti)artic-ulatedatypologyofglocalizationstrategies.Thistypologyincludesrelativization,accommo-dation,hybridizationandtransformation(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004,2006,2007,2009).Buttheappealofglocalizationextendsevenfurther;forexample,notethenot-so-coincidentaldeploymentofglocalstrategiesinthecontextofclimatechangedebates(Guptaetal.,2007);aswellasitsdeploymentforcommunicationinhealthcaresystems(Tufte,2012).TheCOVID-19pandemichasincreasedtheimportanceofglocalstrategiesforsustainabledevelopment(Goffman,2020;Patel,2020).AnevenmorerecentexampleisaspecialissueofGlocalism,co-editedbyUgoDessìandFranciscuSedda,whichapproachesglocalizationfromacross-disciplinaryperspectivewithafocuson‘everydaylife’(Dessì&Sedda,2020).Roudometof(2016b)offersthemostrecentandcomprehensiveattempttooutlinethefieldofglocalizationstudies.Hiscriticalintroductiontoglocalizationarguesforitsanalyticalautonomyandproposesaworkingdefinitionofthisconcept‘astherefractionofglobalizationthroughthelocal’(Roudometof,2016b,p.79).Roudometof(2015b,2016b)hasintroducedthenotionthatscholarshiphasundergonea‘glocalturn’,wherebyresearchisincreasinglyaddressingtheproblematicofglocalizationinavarietyofscholarlycontexts.Robertson(2020)lateradoptedtheidea,albeitwithoutacknowledgingthatitwasalreadyincirculation.ButirrespectiveofwhetherreaderssubscribetoRobertson’sorRoudometof’s(distinct,yetcloselyconnected)interpretations,theintentofthishandbookistofeature–totheextentpossible–thecurrentstateoftheartinthemultitudeofresearchprogrammesthatare,onewayoranother,involvedinthescholarlystudyofglocalization.Assuch,thepresenteffortispredominantlydescriptive,ratherthanprescriptive.Theauthorswhoseworkisfeaturedinthishandbook’spageshavebeenexclusivelyselectedonthebasisoftheirpastorpresentengagementwiththesubjectmatter,andnotanyaprioricommitmenttoaspecificapproachorideology.Astendstobethecasewitheditedcollections,readersmightfeelthatspecificsubfieldshavenotbeensufficientlyaddressed.Thatisinevitable,astheprocessofeditinganaca-demichandbookentailspracticalconsiderationsandcompromisesthatmightcircumscribetheeditors’originalaims.Forthisparticularvolume,theeditorsfeelthatperhapsamajoroversightistheabsenceofachapteronglocalizationandsocialmovements.Rangingfromprotests(Castells,2012)toriots(Auyero,2001)tolabourmovements(Bebbington,2001;Lindell,2009)researchershavebeenabletouse‘glocal’asameansforassessingtheabilityofsocialmovementstobuildtranslocalcoalitionsandusetheminordertosucceedinthepublicdomain.Thepopularizationofinformationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICT)anddigitizationhasgreatlyamplifiedsuchtrends(seeHarsin,2014;Waisanen,2013).Moreover,VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
17Introduction5therelevanceofglocalizationforthecross-nationalortransnationaldimensionsoffeminismandmobilizationonissuesofgenderremainslargelyunexplored(foranexception,seeOhandJang’schapterinthishandbook;also,Chubin,2020).GlocalizationandtheAcademicDivisionofLabourWhileRobertson’sworkhasbeeninstrumentalforthepopularizationofglocalizationinthesocialsciencesandthehumanities,itisnecessaryheretoaddresstheoriginsandsignificanceofthenotionof‘glocal’,aswellasthedisciplinary,inter-disciplinaryandcross-disciplinarylensesthathavehadanimpactupontheintellectualconversationsaboutglocalization.Byallaccounts,thetermcameintoexistencearoundthelate1980sorearly1990s(WordstoWatch,1990;Roudometof,2015a).TheJapaneseprecursorideaof‘globallocalization’isconvention-allycitedasthecentralideabehindthenotionof‘glocal’(Edgington&Hayter,2012).Bywayofprefacingthefollowingoverview,itisimportanttopointoutthatthesurveyoftheliteraturedoesnotvindicatethepopularacademicmythologythatglocalizationemergedwithinthecontextofmanagementorbusinessstudies.Rather,thepopularizationofthisterminologyinthesefieldstookplaceinstepwithitsuseinotherdisciplinarycontexts(seeRoudometof,2015b).Forexample,thereareindicationsthatdochakukawasusedinJapanasearlyasthe1960sinthecontextofdiscussionsonthe‘indigenization’ofChristianity(comparewithAriga,1963;Dessì,2013,p.150).Inthisregard,readersareadvisedtoreadKhondker’sbriefremarksontheoriginsofglocalization(inhischapterinthisvolume–‘GlocalSports’)withinthebroadercontextdiscussedabove.Aroundthesametime,butindependentlyofRobertson’swritings,UK-basedsocialgeog-rapherErikSwyngedouw(1992,1997,2004;Swyngedouw&Baeten,2001;Swyngedouw&Kaïka,2003)pioneeredadifferentnotionofglocalizationthatinvolvesthenotionofglocalasalayerinanestedhierarchyofspaces.Theselayersmayormaynotbehierarchical,withouthavinganeffectuponthelogicoftheprocess.Thisnotionofglocalizationwasfurtherpopu-larizedbySassen(2006)andreceivedextensiveacceptancewithinthefieldofglobalstudies(forexample,seeNederveenPieterse,2013;andforamorerecentapplicationofthisstrategyontoglobalstudies’methodologicalapproaches,seeDarian-Smith,2017,p.5).Itisusuallyreferredtoasa‘multi-scalar’conceptionofsocialrelations.Thisinterpretationcanandhasbeenusedtoshedlightonurbandynamicsaswellastheglobalandtransnationalprocessesthatunderminenation-statesinfavourofcitiesandtrans-borderorganizationalandinstitutionalstructures.InBarber’s(2013)work,thislineofreasoningisextendedtoitslogicalconclusion.Barber’sworkhascontributedtowardsatrendamongscholarsandjournalistsofre-evaluatingtheroleofcitiesaspioneersofglobalizationattheexpenseofthenation-state,whichisseenasincapableoftheinstitutionalandculturalflexibilityrequiredinthetwenty-firstcentury.Thisinterpretationisnotentirelyunproblematicthough.Thegeographicalunderstandingofspacelooksuponspaceasabsolute(forexample,measurableorobjective)space.Itdoesnottakestockof‘socialspace’–inthesensethattherelationshipsthatareexaminedtakeplaceinspace,butarenotconstitutiveofspaceassuch(Roudometof,2015a).Thatisbynomeansanovelcriticism.Asearlyasthe1970s,humanistgeographerswerecriticizingtheabsolutenotionofspaceas‘abstract’anddevoidofhumaninput.Influencedbyphenomenologicalperspectives,humanistgeographerswereledtothenotionofa‘senseofspace’andevenintroducedtheconceptof‘place’(insteadofspace)asamoreappropriateunitofanalysis.Geographers’debateshavenotalwaysbeentakenintoaccountbysociologistsorpoliticalVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
186Handbookofcultureandglocalizationscientists(forfurtherdiscussion,seeRoudometof,2019a).Rather,itwasanthropologistswhoexpressedadeepinterestinexploringnotionsofsocialspatialityasameansofre-designingresearchsites.Inresponsetothenotionofglobalization,anthropologistssuggestedthat‘local’and‘global’donotnecessarilyrefertoaspatiallylimitedorboundedlocale(Gupta&Ferguson,1997;Moore,2004;Tsing,2005).Thesecanbeseenasconceptmetaphorsforcollectivelyimaginedspaces.Inthisconnection,oneshouldresistthetemptationtoconsidertheglobalandthelocalasmerephysicallocations,andapproachtheminsteadasprocesses.ForRobertson,combiningthemtoformtheneologism‘glocalization’referstothefactthatglobalizationtypicallyinvolves‘theadaptationofpanlocaldevelopmentstolocalcircumstances’.Inotherwords,thisshowsthenatureofglobalizationasa‘self-limitingprocess’,sinceallideasandphenomenacirculatingglobally‘havetoadapttocontextsandniches’(Robertson,2004;Robertson&White,2007).Thisapproachcouldleadtoanunderstandingthat‘globalizationisglocalizationitself’(Khondker,2019,p.93).Inturn,suchaninterpretationdoesnotaffordtheglocalanymeaningfulanalyticalautonomy(comparewithRoudometof,2016a).Instead,ithaspromptedcriticismabouttheprivilegingoftheglobaland,especiallyinanthropologyandgeography,aturntowardsthesupposedlyrivalconceptoftranslocality(whichisdiscussedatlengthbothinthecurrentchapterandthroughoutthishandbook).However,ithasalsobeensuggestedthattakingseriouslytheimpossibilityofglobalizationasahomogenizingforcedoesnotneces-sarilyleadtotheconflationofglobalizationandglocalization,providedthatglobalizationisconsideredatdifferentlevelsofanalysis(forexample,attheintra-systemic,inter-systemicanddiscretecultural-objectslevel).Suchamovewouldalsoseemtoofferampleroomfortheanal-ysisofpowerandotherfactorsunderlyingtheprocessofglocalization(comparewithDessì,2017,pp.162–86).Itshouldalsobeacknowledgedthatunansweredquestionshaveemergedthatareofcriticalimportanceforsocialscientists.Thatis,ifbothglobalandlocalaremutuallyconstituentconcepts,howisthisdone?Whatistheroleofpowerinthisprocess?Towhatextentareglocalizationanddiffusionidenticalorsimilarprocesses,asRobertsonandWhite(2007,p.62)suggest?Researchershaveattemptedtoprovidetheirownanswerstothesequestions,oftenrevisingRobertson’sapproachormodifyingkeyaspectsofhisinitialinter-pretationordevelopingtheirowntheoryortheoriesinresponsetoRobertson’sinterpretation.Undoubtedly,themostvexingissueinvolvestheroleofpower,whichisanissuethatoccu-piescenterstageinRitzer’s(2003a,2003b)interpretation.Accordingtothisinterpretation,glocalizationandtherelatednotionofculturalheterogeneityareexplicitlyacknowledgedasatheoreticaloption,atleastinprinciple.Althoughthisalternativeistheoreticallyaccepted,Ritzerneverthelessconcentratesuponthenegativeaspectsofcapitalism.Ritzer’sconceptualoppositeofglocalizationis‘grobalization’,whichhedefinesasthe‘imperialisticambitionsofnations,corporations,organizations,andthelikeandtheirdesire,indeedneedtoimposethemselvesonvariousgeographicareas’(Ritzer,2003b,p.73).However,Ritzeralsohasanimplicitreadingofglocalizationaspartofhisoverallperspective(whichfallsoutsideofthescopeofthediscussionhere).Forhim,onceaproductorservicehasbeentouchedbytheglobal(andvirtuallyeverythinghasbeenbynowtouchedinthatway),itisbetterthoughtofasamixofglobalandlocal,asglocal.Inotherwords,itcanneveragainbethoughtofas‘purelylocal’(ifanythingeverwaspurelylocal).Atotalcessation—impossibleintheglobalage—oflocalinteractionwithglobalprocesseswouldberequiredforsome-thingtobeconsidered‘purelylocal’.(Ritzer&Ritzer,2012,p.802)VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
19Introduction7UnlikeRobertson’sreading,inRitzer’sunderstanding,theglobalandthelocalaremutuallyexclusive:onecannotexistwithintheother,asRobertsonwouldhaveit.Whenthelocalisincorporatedorsubsumedbytheglobal,thenitmorphsintotheglocal.Andtheglocalisnot‘really’local.Somethingisirretrievablylost.Thespreadofglobalizationmeansthatthelocaldisappears;allthatisleftistheglocalandthat,ofcourse,isinsufficientforchallengingcapi-talism.Thekeypointissimplythatitbecomesimpossibletounderstandtheglocalasoutsideoftheglobal,andonceinsidetheglobal,thenthesystem’slogicprevails.Whiletheintroductionofpowerintothedebatearoundglocalizationiswelcome,thereareseveralimportantcriticismsconcerningRitzer’sunderstandingofglocalization.First,glocal-izationisseenasamereoppositetogrobalization–aviewpointthatignorestheliteratureinfieldsotherthanconsumercultureresearch(forexamples,seeRoudometof,2015a,2016b).Second,RitzeroffersaWestern-centredviewoftheworldthatisoftenrelatedtoanostalgicdesiretomaintainthe‘exoticism’oftheOther,whereby‘culture’isusedasanexplanatorycategorythathelpsaccountforthedifferenceinOthersandinothersalone(seeMarling,2006).Third,glocalizationandglobalizationareanalyticallyconflated(seeVizureanu,2013).Lastly,themodelsuggeststhefutilityofhumanaction,therebyofferingapessimisticviewofthesocialworld.Despiteallthesecriticisms,itisstillpossible,assuggestedbyRitzerhimself,toviewhisideaofgrobalizationmoresimplyasawayofconceptualizingthetendencytowardhomogenizationwithintheprocessofglobalization,withglocalizationrepresentinginsteadthetrendtowardheterogenizationandhybridity(comparewith,forexample,Ritzer,2010,p.272).Fromwithinthelensofworldsociety,glocalizationisseenasaprocessthatcomplementstheworldsocietyperspective’straditionalthemesofloosecoupling,incompletediffusionanddisjuncture(Drorietal.,2013a,2013b,2014;Roudometof,2020).Diffusionisseenasakeymechanismformodernizationandasamatterofmainlyunidirectionalflows(fromtheWesttotherest).Diffusionoccursthroughits‘theorization’bythevarious‘actors’(agenerictermthatcanincludestates,organizationsandindividuals)whoareresponsiblefortheadoptionofmodelsandblueprints.Drorietal.(2013b,p.10)considerthat‘glocalizationandtheorizationaresimilar’.Theorizationisseenasanotion‘thatenablesglocalization’,albeitonlypartially,becauseglocalization‘involvestranslation—asinordertoadjustideas,structures,andmodelstonewanddifferentsocialandculturaldomains’(Drorietal.,2013b,p.10).Translationisseenasameansforestablishingequivalencyofmeaning(andofcoursethisisapointthatknowledgeableexpertscanextensivelydebate).Althoughtheworldsocietyperspective’snotionoftheorization‘emphasizestop-downinfluence’intheprocessofglobaldiffusion,‘thedynamicnatureoftranscendentalglocalizationisareboundeffect...wherelocallyenactedideasandmodelsinfluencethegloballytheorizedschemes’(Drorietal.,2013b,p.10).Inotherwords,glocalizationbecomesafeedbackloopthatconnectstop-downandbottom-upinfluences.Basedonsuchanabstraction,constructionofequivalencyacrossboundariesonamoremacrolevelbecomespossible:thatis,socialactorscanextrapolatesimilaritybetweendistinctentitiesorcontexts;theycanadoptandenactagloballytheorizedideaormodelthroughprocessesoftranslation,adaptation,re-contextualizationormodificationinordertofitthelocalcontext;andlastly,itisfurtherpossibletohaveareboundeffectofsuchalocallyadaptedandenactedideaormodelbackintothemoreabstractorgeneraltheorizedtemplatesorblueprintsofsocialaction.Ofspecialsignificanceforsuchacyclicalprocessisthenotionof‘culturaltranslation’.OriginallydevelopedbyCzarniawska(2010,pp.119,133),itsintroductionwasmeanttoVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
208Handbookofcultureandglocalizationexplainsocialprocessesthatleadto‘allomorphism’.Theoverallargumentismeanttoofferacomplementaryaccounttotheworldsocietyperspective’snotionofinstitutionalisomor-phismbysuggestingthatculturaltranslationcanofferameansofproducingdifference(forexample,allomorphism)insteadofsimilarity(forexample,isomorphism).Hence,theextenttowhichitistheoreticallymeaningfultospeakof‘culturaltranslation’thatiscapableofestablishingan‘equivalencyofmeaning’acrosssocialandculturalcontextscancertainlybedebated(especiallygiventhepropensityformeaningmutationacrossculturalcontexts,seeforexample,Gluck&Tsing,2009).Butitisworthrecallingthat,fromwithinthepostulatesoftheworldsocietyperspective,theabovecriticismisamootpoint.AsBuhari-Gulmez(2010,p.254)observes,fromtheworldsocietyperspective,‘cultureisdefinedincognitiveandinstrumentalterms’,whichinturnrendersthisapproach‘distinctfromstudiesthatfocusontheexpressivecultureassociatedwithlanguage,music,food,art,anddress’.WhiletheworldsocietyperspectiveischaracterizedbyastrongcommitmenttotheuniversalityofWesternmodernity,suchaviewpointisnotnecessarilysharedbyothers.Worldsocietycriticstypicallyassertthatvariouslocalactorsshouldbeviewedaspossessingfarmorepowerandinfluencethanthatconventionallyassumedbytheworldsocietyperspective.Overall,asthissectionhassoughttoillustrate,scholarlyworkfeaturesseveralconceptualalternativesanddistincttheoreticalreadingsofglocalization.Whiletheseareoftendevelopedfromwithindistinctresearchprogrammes,asharedexplicitgoalistointerpretprocessesofcross-culturalinteractioninamannerthatacknowledgeslocalagency.Perhapsthemostinflu-entialamongthesedifferentalternativesisthenotionoftranslocality–whichisexploredingreaterdepthinRoudometofandCarpentier’schapterinthishandbook,entitled‘TranslocalityandGlocalization:AConceptualExploration’.Scope,OrganizationandMajorThemesThecoverageoffieldsinthisvolume’sTableofContentsreflectsatwofoldeffort:ontheonehand,thegoalistocombinetheconventionalwayofslicingupacademicknowledgeamongmajorclustersofdisciplines(humanities,socialsciences,mediaandcommunication),whileontheotherhand,thereisanefforttohighlightatrans-disciplinaryperspectivethatfocusesonspecifictopicsorareasordomainsofscholarship(suchastourism,archaeology,youth,digitalmedia,education,sports)asopposedtotraditionaldisciplines.Thenecessityofsuchatrans-disciplinaryoutlookisdictatedbytheacknowledgementthatresearchonseveralofthesetopicsisincreasinglyinter-disciplinary;asaresult,strictdisciplinaryboundariesarecounter-productive.Thevolume’sfinalpartismeanttobuildbridgesbetweenglocalizationandrelatedconcepts(suchaspost-colonialismandtranslocality)andtochartnewresearchfrontiers(insocialsciencemethods,worldsocietytheoryandcosmopolitanismstudies).Theemphasisplacedonmediaandcommunicationisbydesign:thisisaresearchareawhereglo-calizationisofconsiderablescholarlyrelevance,especiallysincetheadventofdigitalmedia(seeRoudometof,forthcoming-a).Thegoalistoshowcasetherelevanceofglocalizationforthisrapidlyexpandingfieldorfieldsofstudy.AlthoughtheCOVID-19pandemicisnotaddressedinadedicatedchapterinthisvolume,theeditorsfeelthattheselectionoftopicscoverstheoverwhelmingmajorityofareaswhereglocalizationhasbeenappliedthusfar.Hence,inanindirectmanner,itispossibleforreaderstodetectthegapsintheliteraturewherethereisfurtherroomforapplicationoftheconcept.Knowledgefrontiersaremoreexplicitlyaddressedinthisvolume’sfinalpart,withtheexplicitVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
21Introduction9caveatthatthesereflecttheeditors’ownunderstanding.Ourbriefoverviewoftheusesoftheconceptmakesthatquiteclear.Inthetwenty-firstcentury,theglocalturn(Roudometof,2015b)hashadameaningfulimpactonthebroadareaofthehumanities,whichiscoveredinthishandbook’sfirstpart.Withinthiscontext,itisnoticeablethatnotalldisciplineshavebeenequallywillingorreadytoincorporateglocalizationasaconceptualtool.Fieldssuchasthestudyofreligions,languageandliterarystudies,aswellasthearts,areclearexamplesofhowalongstandingfamiliaritywithempiricalcasesofglocalization(onemayjustthinkofthefragmentationofChristianity,thelocaladaptationsofcoloniallanguagessuchasEnglishandSpanish,andmusicalgenressuchasjazzandflamenco)mayleadtoareflexiveawarenessofandmeta-reflectiononthosedynamics.Inotherfields,thisreceptionhasbeenmoreimplicitorevenperipheral.Forhistoryandarchaeology,thisisperhapsnotdisconnectedfromacertainenduringtendencytoidentifytheoverallthemeofglobalizationwiththeeffectsofWesternmodernization.Inthecaseofphilosophythereseemstobeasortofresiliencetoengagewiththe‘foreign’conceptualproblemoftheglocalinpurelyphilosophicaltermsandwithoutheavilyencroachingonotherfields.Eventhoughahistoricaloutlookisobviouslyingrainedintheverypossibilityofapproach-ingglobalizationasalongueduréeprocess,historyandarchaeologyassuchhavebeenlessreadytoadopttheconceptofglocalization.Whileinthisfield,too,otherterms(forexample,hybridity)havebeenusedtoexploreanalogousdynamics,earlyexamplesofanexplicituseofglocalizationinhistoryandarchaeologytracebacktolittlemorethanadecadeagoinarticlesonRomanBritain(Pitts,2008)andMycenaeanculture(Maran,2011).PresentedasabasicaspectofglobalizationbyTamarHodosinherintroductiontoTheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization(Hodos,2017)anddeployedasaconceptualtoolinsomeofitschapters(forexample,Lilley,2017),theexplanatoryrelevanceofglocalizationhasyettobefullyacknowledgedinthisfieldofstudies.Still,afewyearsago,forexample,theeditorsofaspecialissuecalled‘GlocalArchaeology’fortheArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridgelamentedthat‘itsapplicationtoarchaeologyremainsrelativelyoverlooked’(Fine&Thompson,2018).Inhischapter‘FromBronzizationto“WorldSystem”:GlobalizationandGlocalizationacrosstheGlobe(2000bce–1500ce)’,MatthewCobbprovidesadetailedover-viewoftheshorthistoryofglocalizationinthisfieldofresearch,andarguesthattheconceptpresentsanadvantageoverhybridizationandcreolization.ForCobb,glocalizationallowsustofocuson‘heterogeneityandthere-embeddingoflocalculture’withoutnecessarilyreferringtocore–peripherydynamics,thusalsoapplyingtoinstancesinwhichpowerdifferentialsplayalimitedrole.Cobbalsosuggests,withexamplesconcerningtheadaptationofculturalobjectsfromtheRomanworldinSouthAsia,thattheheuristicvalueofglocalizationcouldbeenrichedusingamaterialtransculturalityperspective.Asawhole,thefieldoflanguageandliterarystudiesoffersanexampleofapromptreceptionoftheconceptofglocalization.Asalreadynotedelsewhere(Roudometof2016b,pp.115–6),inthiscasetoo,thedebateonpostcolonialism(forexample,Bhabha,1994)hascontributedtoanearlyinterestonthistopic,inconnectionwiththespreadofEnglishanditslocalversions,andtheissueofhybridculturalidentities.Thequestionofglocallanguageshasinspiredgeneralapproacheswithattentiontocasestudies(Coupland,2010;Rubdy&Alsagoff,2014),withacertainemphasisonAsia(Bhaduri,2008;Eoyang,2005;Kamada,2014;Tong&Cheung,2011).Inthespecificcaseofliterature,asrecalledbySandhyaRaoMehtainherchapter‘WeavingLiteraryNarratives:WorldLiteratureanditsGlocalMoment’,VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
2210Handbookofcultureandglocalizationtheimpactoftheglocalturnhasbeensomehowmilderalsoduetothecentralityofnationalliteratures.Inherdetailedoverviewofthecurrentdebate,MehtahighlightsashiftinworldliteraturefromAnglo-centrismtowardtherecognitionoflocalityassomethinginscribedinanetworkoftexts.WithreferencetotheworkofRoudometof(2016b)andDamrosch(2003),sheelaboratesontheopportunitiesprovidedbythecreationofsuch‘poetics’frommarginalspaces,providingpetrofictionasanexampleofhowworldliteraturecancombineaglobalandlocaloutlookwithoutrenouncingcriticalityorattentivenesstoequityandrepresentation.Theconceptofglocalizationappearstohavemadesmallinroadsintothefieldofphilos-ophy.Tobesure,thisinterpretiveframeworkplaysameaningfulroleinearlycontributionssuchasGiacomoMarramao’s(2003)workonphilosophyandglobalization,and,toalesserextent,ElenaPulcini’s(2013)reflectionsonresponsibilityandjusticeintheglobalageandHwaYolJung’s(2009)approachtopublicphilosophy.Morerecently,scatteredreferencestotheglocalarealsofoundinNaderChokr’s(2014)elaborationsonthethemeofculturalcomplexityandinthePhilosophyofGlobalizationvolumeeditedbyConchaRoldán,DanielBrauerandJohannesRohbeck(2018).However,assuggestedbyBruceJanzinhischapter‘TheUniversalandtheIndividual,theGlobalandtheLocal:Philosophy’sDiverseDebtsandDuties’,glocalizationremainstodatelargelyperipheraltophilosophy’scoreinterests,especiallybecauseofitsprovenancefromotherdisciplinaryfields.Andyet,Janzargues,philosophyhasacertainfamiliaritywiththetensionembodiedbytheglocal,whichconnectstothequestionofhowtheuniversalismanifestedinthehumanworld.Againstthisbackdrop,heidentifiesanddiscussesfourmainmodalitiesofengagementbetweenphilosophyandtheglocal,whichincludes:ananalysisofthenatureandapplicationsofglocalization;aninquiryonhowphilosophyisimplicatedbyitsownplaces,flowsandlocalities;anexplorationofphilosophyasanagentofglocality;and,finally,whatJanzterms‘philosophy-in-place’,thatis,anengagementwithconceptsrelatedtoplacesandtheproductionofmoresuitableones.Asimilarsituationcanalsobeseeninthefieldoflegalstudies.Whileexplicitreferencestotheglocalizationoflawhavebeenrelativelyrare,legalscholarshavebeenincreasinglyengagedwiththisnotionintheareasofintellectualpropertyrightsande-commerce(Chander,2013;seealsoBirnhack,forthcoming),withinthecontextofgeneraldiscussionson‘limit-lesslaw’(Ferrarese,2006),andwithreferencetotheinterplayoftheWorldBank,NGOsandstates(Randeria,2003).Otherscholarshavepreferredtoapproachthisissuefromtheperspectiveof‘legalhybridity’(Donlan,2010;Palmer,2012).SalvatoreMancuso’schapter‘LawandGlocalization’isanattempttoshedlightonhowthisconceptualproblemhasbeenapproachedsofarwithinthecontextoflegalstudies,whilealsoprovidingsomesuggestionsforfutureresearchagendas.Afterapreliminarydiscussionofconceptsthatoverlaptosomeextentwiththatofglocalizationsuchasmixity,hybridityanddiffusion,Mancusofocusesonthetensionbetweenandthecombinedeffectofglocalismandgrobalisminanagecharacter-izedbytheprogressiveweakeningoflaw’sterritorialconnotation.Inparticular,henoteshowlegalglocalismmitigatestheeffectofsuchdynamics,allowingthestatetoplayameaningfulroleintheprocessoflegaldevelopment.ForMancuso,legalgrobalisminsteadrepresentstheothersideofthecoin,beingessentiallythewayinwhichpowerfulstatesattempttoinvadeotherjurisdictions.TheItalianscholarnotesthatthistrendismostprobablygoingtobecomestrongerinthecomingyears,notleastbecauseoftheimpactoftheglobaleconomy,andthatabalancebetweenlegalglobalismandgrobalismwouldindeedbedesirabletoavoidanoverlydisruptiveeffect.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
23Introduction11Theimpactoftheglocalturninthesphereoftheartshasbeensomewhatstronger,espe-ciallybecauseofthepracticalimplicationsinsomeofitsdisciplines.Onemayjustthinkoftheexampleofmusic,intertwinedasitiswithglobalflowsandculturalhybridity.Theglocaldimensionofmusichasbeenstudiedwithreferencetodifferentculturalareas,suchasCentralAfrica(Oduro-Frimpong,2009)andEastAsia(Kim&Shin,2010;Ma,2002),globaldynam-icsandconsumeractivism(Yazıcıoglu&Firat,2008),musiceducation(Richerme,2013),andwithattentiontoavarietyofgenresandtheoreticalaspects(Hebert&Rykowski,2018).Otherdisciplines,too,haveshownaninterestintheglocalimplicationsofart,includingphotography(Baetens,2011),painting(Ming,2014)andtheatre(Ben-Shaul,2008).Attheintersectionofartandphilosophy,theglocalhasfoundrecognitionaspartofacounter-hegemonicagenda(deDuve,2007).Inhischapter‘CosmosfromtheGlobalSouth:FromGlocaltoDecolonialPerspectivesonArt’,NikosPapastergiadisnotesthat,whileinitsintroductionasaterm,glocalizationrespondedtothefearsgeneratedbythehomogenizingaspectofculturalglobalization,inthefieldofart,thehegemonyofWesternarthadbeensubjectfromtheverystartto‘institutionalcritique’.Asaresult,Papastergiadisclaims,newstreamsofinterestemergedinthe1990s,amongwhichwereastrongtendencytoincludeartistsfromallpartsoftheworldinthebiennales,anemphasisonartasatransnationalphe-nomenonaswellasagatewaytocosmopolitanism,andareclamationofthecosmicvisionofIndigenouscultures.Thischapter’sanalysisreverberatesinthediscussionundertakenbyVivianeRiegelinherchapter‘GlocalizationandthePost/DecolonialPerspectives:ACriticalDialogue’.Aninterestingperspectiveontheintersectionofthehistoryoffood,semioticsandtheglocalisofferedinthishandbookbyFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStanointheirchapter‘FoodandGlocalization’.WhileSeddahasbeenoneofthemainplayersintheconceptualizationoftheglocalinthegeneralfieldofsemiotics(forexample,seeSedda,2005,2014),inthischapterthetwoscholarsshow,withreferencetoexamplessuchasthe‘Columbianexchange’,thattheglocalizationoffoodisdependentonseveralinterwovenprocesses,includingthe‘filtering’and‘purifying’ofimportedfoods,their‘naturalization’,andfinallytheir‘incorporation’,whichbringsfoodsfromforeignnesstofamiliarity.Allthis,theyobserve,speaksofthecrucialroleplayedbyfoodintheaugmentedinterpenetrationbetweendifferentsemiospheres,aswellasoftheabilityofspecificfoodstoinnovatehostfoodspheresbyintegratingthestructuresoftheirlanguages.Foodcontinuestoplayamajorroleincontemporaryconsumerculture–withMcDonaldsbeingperhapsthemostwell-knowncaseofglocalizationoffood(Turner,2003).TheCOVID-19pandemichasofferedtheopportunityforsomenewinnovativetwistsontheglocalizationoffood,mostspectacularlyinthecaseoftheKorean-inspireddo-it-yourself(DIY)dalgonacoffeethatfirstgainedprominenceduringthesocialdistancingordersinSouthKorea,eventuallybecominganiconic‘quarantine’drink.Movingintothesecondpartofthishandbook–thesocialsciences–themethodologicalapproachistostructuretheindividualchaptersthematicallyandtotry,totheextentpossible,toavoidtheconstraintsimposedbydisciplinaryboundaries.Whilethatisinlinewiththecurrentcross-fertilizationandcross-disciplinarycharacterofsocialresearch,itiscertainlynotanironcladrule,andisimplementedpragmatically.Thisstrategyallowstheintegrationofdifferentthemesthatareoftenseenthroughdisciplinarylensesthatimposesignificantscoperestrictions.Thetopicoftourismoffersanexcellentillustration.Intheirchapter‘GlocalizationandTourismExperiences’,JoelleSoulardandNoelSalazarexploredistinctfacetsofthenexusVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
2412Handbookofcultureandglocalizationbetweenthetwo.Glocallensesofferameanstointerrogatetheculturaldimensionoftourismbutglocalizationalsoemergesasafactorthatcanbedeployedinordertomitigateornegotiateobstaclesandcrisesthatemergeinthecontextofthetourismindustry.Itisimportanttohigh-lightthepre-pandemicstatusofthesector–by2020,internationalarrivalswereexpectedtoreachnearly1.6billion,ofwhich1.2billionwereintraregionaland378millionwerelong-haultravellers.Between2010and2020,internationalarrivalsweresettoexperiencea3.8%increase(UNWTO,2014).ThesefiguresdemonstratenotonlytheimportanceofthissectorfortheglobaleconomybutalsothesignificantsetbackcausedbytheCOVID-19pandemic.Itisalsoacertaintythattheindustry’spost-COVID-19recoveryisboundtouseemergentand/orprovenstrategies.Withtheseconsiderationsinmind,thesignificanceofglocalizationforbothculturalandeconomicprocessesbecomesevident.Giventheimportanceofglocalizationfortourism,itisnotsurprisingthatglocalbusinessstrategieshavebeenappliedinordertoarticulateandpromotesuccessfultourismexperiences–asSalazar(2005,2010)haspointedout.Lastly,glocalizationprovidesanimpetusfortransformativetourismexperiences.Ontheonehand,tourismpractitionerscanprovideculturallyauthentictourismexperiencesandhenceattractloyaltyamongtheirclients;ontheother,theycancultivatepositiverelationshipswithlocalresidentsthroughtheintegrationofelementsfromlocalculturesintotheirmanagerialstrategies.Perhapsthemostinterestingcaseoffunctioningasaninterdisciplinaryfieldbridgingsocialsciencesandhumanitiescomesfromthestudyofreligions.Rathersignificantly,religionhasoccupiedanimportantplaceinRobertson’spreparatoryreflectionsofthethemeofglocaliza-tion,asisshown,forexample,bythewayinwhichheexplainedJapan’smodalityofglobalinvolvementintermsoftheselectiveadaptationofexternalideasbasedonspecificaspectsoflocalreligiousculture(syncretism,polytheismandritualpurity)(Robertson,1987;comparewith1992,pp.85–96).Sincethetimeofitsadoptionwithinthestudyofreligionsinthelate1990s,glocalizationhasbeenusedasaconceptualtoolinseveralmonographs:tomakesenseofreligiousmicro-marketingstrategieswithinAmericanChristianity(Vásquez&Marquardt,2003);todefinedifferentmodalitiesofinterpenetrationbetweenOrthodoxChristianuniver-salismandlocalparticularismbothsynchronicallyanddiachronically(Roudometof,2014);toindicatehowJapanesereligionscanachieveaglobalrepositioningthroughthecreativeadoptionofglobalideassuchashumanrightsandecology(Dessì,2013,2017);toexplainhowJohnofGod’shealingpracticeswerereframedbyrelatingthemtoelementsofglobalculturefamiliartoforeignaudiences(Rocha,2017);andasasynonymforthestrategicuseofthemasterframesofhumanrights,democracyandjusticebyanewgenerationofIslamists(Karagiannis,2018).Theseandotherpublicationsinthisfield,including‘GlocalReligions’,arecentspecialissueofthejournalReligions(Roudometof,2018)andagrowingnumberofarticles,arereviewedbyUgoDessìinhischapter,‘GlocalizationandtheReligiousField’.Here,Dessìalsoshowshowvariousscholarshaveapproachedtheproductionofreligiouslocalitywithinglobalizationfromalternativeperspectives(forexample,hybridityandbri-colage),andhowtheterm‘glocalization’hasbeenusedbyreligionistswithinthecontextofnormativediscourses,notablybyChristiantheologians.Dessìhighlightsongoingweaknessesofthisfieldofstudies,suchasanoveremphasisoncertainareasandtraditions,apreferenceforsynchronicperspectives,andacertainunder-theorizationoftheconcept,andsuggestspotentialavenuesforfurtherresearch.Amongthese,heemphasizestheneedtosystematicallyexplorethefactorsthatfacilitateorobstructtheglocalizationofreligion–includingissuesVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
25Introduction13ofpower,culturalresonanceandchangesinconsciousness–andtoclarifytherelationshipbetweenglocalizationandotherdimensionsoftheglobalizationofreligions.AsYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChaoandJiaLingaptlyelaborateintheirchapter,theideaoftheglocalalsofindsapplicationinthefieldofurbanstudies.Startingfromtheassumptionthatglocalizationisstrictlylinkedtoaprocessofreterritorializationandreassemblingthatgivesrisetoavarietyofurbanismsworldwide,theauthorsfocusontheWHO-promotedage-friendlycity(AFC)initiativeasactualizedinHongKongandChiayiCity(Taiwan).TheircomparativeanalysisshowshowtheimplementationofWHO’sinternationalagendahasbeenconstrainedinthesetwoEast-Asianlocationsbyboththe‘localregulatoryframework’and‘path-dependentcharacteristicsinpolicymaking’.Specifically,theHongKongcaseislargelydependentonalaissez-faireapproachandrevealstheprominentroleplayedbyNGOsandcharities;conversely,theTaiwanesecasefollowsa‘corporatistwelfare-state’approachinwhichthecentralgovernmentislargelyresponsibleforframingthepoliciesfortheelderlyandthecitygovernmentcoordinatesthiseffortlocallyinclosecollaborationwithnon-governmentsectors.Inherchapterontheglocalizationofcrime,GemaVaronaMartínezaddressesatopicthatisofconsiderablesignificanceforscholarsofinternationalcriminologyandglobalization.CrimeisanactivitythathasgainedextensivevisibilityinglobalmediaandhasbeenoneofthedomainsseekingtoexploittheopeningsaffordedbythedevelopmentsofICT.The‘glocal’hasbeeninvokedindiscussionsaboutItalianmafiaconnections(Sergi&Lavorgna,2016)butalsoinresearchoninternationalterrorism(Marret,2008)andgangs(VanHellemont&Densley,2019).Inhercontribution,VaronaMartínezrelatestheacademicunderstandingofinternational,transnationalandglobalcrimestotheneedforabetterunderstandingoftheinterrelationbetweenmicro-andmacro-victimizationbyincorporatingaglocalizedvision.Hercontributionmightcarryimplicationsforthefutureofglocalizationasaconceptwithinthefieldofcriminology.Intheirchapteronglocaleducation,Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamseyandNowfalSamkariaddressanareaofdeepconcernandinterestforacademicsworldwide,namely,theglobalizationofhighereducationmarketsandthequestforincreasedrevenuesamonginstitu-tionsofhigherlearning,whichhavetogetherdeeplyaffectedthestatusandworkingconditionsoftheoverwhelmingmajorityofacademics.Astheauthorsshowintheirchapterthough,theissuesinvolvedintherelationshipbetweenglocalizationandeducationaremultifaceted.Glocalizationhasledtothenotionofglocaleducation,whichisemployedasaframeworkthataimstoreconcilelocalandglobalperspectives.Theobjectiveisglocalcompetence,thatis,theabilitytobebothgloballymindedandlocallysensitive.Itinvolvesseveralglocaltargets(rangingfromentrepreneurstoeducatorstostudents)whostandatthecrossroadsbetweenaglobalizedworldandlocalinteractions.Glocalcompetenceisnurturedthroughgloballiter-acy,sustainability,localliteracy,digitalliteracy,criticalthinking,interculturalengagement,interculturalself-efficacyandlanguagecommunication.Inhischapteronglocalsports,HabibulHaqueKhondkeroffersaninterpretationoftherelationshipbetweensportsandglocalizationlargelyalignedwiththebroaderreadingof‘glo-calizationasglobalization’(Khondker,2004,2019;comparewithRoudometof,2016a).Heoffersageneralreadingoftherelationshipbetweenglobalizationandpopularculture,whichrelatestoanumberofthemescoveredinotherchapters,aswellasanoverviewofresearchintosportsand,inparticular,football(soccer)–withspecialreferencemadetothecreativeincorporationofthesesportsinAsiansocieties.KhondkerprovidesasplendidsummaryoftheVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
2614HandbookofcultureandglocalizationworkundertakenbyhimselfandRobertson(Khondker&Robertson,2018)oncricket,aswellasbyGiulianottiandRobertson(2004,2006,2007)onfootball.Giventhechapter’sparticularorientationandscope,readersaretreatednotonlytoadiscussionofsportsbutalsotoamoregeneralperspectiveoncultureandglocalization.Broadlyspeakingthough,glocalizationhasestablisheditselfasoneofthemainresearchagendasinthesocial-scientificstudyofsports;thatis,itisnotjustcricketandfootballthathavebeenstudiedbutalsoothersports,suchasbasketball(Cho,2020),baseball(Chen,2012)andevenparkour(Puddleetal.,2019).Foramorecompleteviewofthestateoftheartontheproblematicofsportsandglocalization,readersmightsupplementthischapter’sdiscussionbylookingintotheworksofJijon(2013,2017),ShorandGalily(2012),Ferrando(2010),WhitsonandHorne(2006),Choetal.(2012)andHorton(2011).Thehandbook’sthirdpartfocusesoncommunicationandmedia.Thisisafieldwhereglocalizationhasalonghistoryofbeingappliedto–goingallthewaybacktoboyd’s(2005)initialstatementontheemergingformsofparticipatorymediaanddigitalmedia.Glocalizationisverymuchpartofthebroaderandhigh-profileproblematicconcerningtheongoingdebateovertherelationshipbetweenthemediaandglobalization(forrelevantdiscussions,seeIwabuchi,2018;Russell&Boromisza-Habashi,2020).Withinthisbroaderproblematic,theglocalemergesasawayofnavigatingbetweentwooppositeviewpoints.Ontheonesidearetheproponentsofthethesisthatcontemporarysocietieshaveenteredintoanewhistoricalstagecharacterizedbymediatization(Couldry&Hepp,2016);ontheother,thosehighlyscep-ticalofsuchclaims(Hafez,2007).Certainly,ifcross-culturalcurrentsaretakenintoaccount,researchresultssuggestthatthereisconsiderablevariabilityintheusesofICTaroundtheworld(deMooij,2014),whichinturnmightbeviewedasevidencesuggestingthatmediastudiesdemandananalysisthatintegratesthesocialintoissuesofmediausethatconcernthe‘super-connected’aspectsoftechno-socialliving(seeChayko,2018;Fuchs,2008).Inlightofthisproblematic,thechapters’topicshavebeenselectedspecificallyforthepurposesofbridge-buildingbetweentheareasofcommunicationandthoseofsociology,anthropologyandpoliticalscience.Thechapterondigitalglocalizationoffersasplendidapplicationofthisproblematic.Inthischapter,BarrieAxfordtakeshisdeparturepointfromtheworkofRobertson(1992,1995),GiulianottiandRobertson(2006,2009)andRoudometof(2016b)inordertoofferananalysisoftherecentdevelopmentsinICTusuallyreferredtoas‘Web3.0’ordigitalmedia.Hisbasicperspectivebuildsonthethesisthatglocalizationisacontemporaryformofhybridizationthatisamplifiedbytheadventofdigitalmedia.Usingcontemporarypopulistpoliticsashisexample,heshowshowmedia-relatedperformativityenhancestheappealofpopulistideas.Forafulltreatmentoftherelationshipbetweenglocalizationandthenewpopulism,readersmightfurtherglanceatAxford’s(2021)bookontherelationshipbetweenglobalizationandpopulism.Inthesecondhalfofhischapter,Axfordswitchestoanexaminationofsportsandglocalization.Inthissection,thenotionofmediatizationisusedinordertomakethecasethatcontemporarysportsofferaninstanceofdigitalglocalization.Inthisregard,hisanalysisoperatesascomplementarytoKhondker’schapteronglocalsports.Inhischapteronglocalization,culturesandorganizations,FabrizioMaimoneexaminestherepercussionsofglocalizationontheareaofdigitalmarketingandmultinationalcorporations(MNCs)inparticular.MNCsoccupyaprivilegedpositioninprocessesofsocio-culturalchangeandofferrichresearchsettingsforunpackingthecomplexitiesofinterculturalinterac-tion(seealsoHollensen,2020;Maimone,2017).Inhischapter,Maimone’saimistotransformVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
27Introduction15culturalglocalizationintoamodelthatcanbeusedtoanalysetransnationalandmulticulturalorganizationsandMNCs.Theauthoradoptsacomplex,multi-paradigmaticandhumanisticperspectivethatisoftenlackinginresearchonthesetopics.Thegoalistoillustratethemannerinwhichglocalculturalprocessesentanglewiththeorganizationalsystemsofenterprises.Inthecourseofthechapter,Maimonefeaturesamodelthatcapturesthecomplexinterplayamongkeydimensionsofglocality.IntheirchapteronK-PoporHallyuglocalization,IngyuOhandWonhoJangofferahighlyrelevantanalysisofK-Pop,whichisoneofthemostwidespreadculturalphenomenaofourtime.Alsoreferredtoas‘theKoreanWave’,Hallyuisamajorfeatureofthetwenty-firstcentury’songoingprocessesoftheglocalizationofyouthculture(Roudometof,2019b).Intheirchapter,theauthorsapproachglocalizationinatwofoldmanner–thereistheprocessoflocalizingtheKoreanWave,andthenofglobalizingit.Inlinewiththeprinciplesofglocalmarketing,glocalizationistakentomeanthesuccessfullocalizationofaforeignglobalproducttosuchanextentthattheoriginaldevelopersmightoptforitslocalvariantinsteadoftheso-called‘original’version.Seeninthislight,glocalizationisahighlyproactivecounter-trendto‘top-down’globalization.Itisimportanttonotethattheiruseofglocalizationisfundamentallyclosetothegoalsoftenproclaimedbyresearcherswhoadvocatethenotionoftranslocality(asobservedinthechapterbyRoudometofandCarpentier).Itshouldbenotedthat,inadditiontotheirsplendidanalysis,thischapteroffersahighlyinformativesketchofthecross-disciplinaryfieldofHallyustudies,whichmightbeextremelyusefultoscholarsoutsideofAsia.Inthechapterontheglocalizationoffilmandthemovieindustry,BalaA.Musaundertakesanexaminationoftheusesofglocalizationinoneofthemostpopularculturalindustriesworldwide.Inearlierwork,Musa(2019)exploredtheroleofthefilmindustryinthesocialandeconomicdevelopmentofNigeriaandAfrica.Inthischapter,heexploresthemultitudeofwaysthatagentsfromtheSouthandtheEasthavecounteredHollywoodandreshapedtheglobalfilmindustry–tothepointofhavinga‘foreign’movie,suchasKoreandirectorBongJoon-ho’sfilmParasite(2019),gainuniversalacclaimattheOscars.Specificexamples(ThirdCinema,CinemaNovoandNewWaveCinema)areusedtoshowcasethecoexist-enceandcross-fertilizationamongdifferentregionalmoviesectors.Thechapteraddressestheeconomic,cultural,politicalandtechnologicalfactorsthatbothmirrorandcounteractthe‘Hollywood’star-systemandinfrastructure(suchasinthecaseofNollywoodandthewell-knownvenerableIndianandChinesecinemaindustries).Italsoanalysestheimplicationsoftheindustry’sculturalshifttowardsgreaterlevelsofcooperationandcoordinationbetweennationalandtransnationallevels.Inhischapterontheglocalizationofnewsproduction,JonathanIlanaddressestheinterplaybetweenglocalizationandtherecentgrowthofglobaland/ortransnationalnewsbroadcasting.AsNorrisandInglehart(2009)havedemonstratedintheirmajorinternationalsurvey–and,asdeMooij’s(2014)workaffirms–the‘nationalfilter’persistsinspiteoftheriseofinter-national,globalortransnationalformsofbroadcasting.Infact,newsmightbeconceivedofasglocalizedinlargepartbecauseplayersinthemarketplacecannotaffordtoignorelocalnews(forexamples,seeRoberts,2019;Sariyati,2016).Thecontemporaryquestforaudienceandprofitmaximizationhaspropelled(internationalorglobal,aswellasnationalandlocal)newsorganizationstoadoptastrategyofglocalizednewsproduction.Thechapteroffersanoverviewofthecurrentglocalnewsnetworks,addressingboththeimpactofnewentrantsaswellasexistingrivalriesamongthem.Asaresult,newsproductionisdesignedtocombineVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
2816Handbookofcultureandglocalizationinternationalappealwithatailoringtowardslocalmarketdemands.Additionally,glocaliza-tionaffectsboththeinternaldynamicsofnewsorganizationsandintheircomplexrelationsbetweenthelocalandglobalplayers.Thechapterconcludeswithanoverviewofcurrenttrendsandsuggestionsforfuturepathsinthestudyofglocalizationandnewsproduction.IntheirchapteronNetflixinItaly,PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalopresentbothanoverviewofbroadertrendsintheentertainmentindustryaswellasanapplicationofthesedynamicsinthecaseofItaly.TheirchapteroffersacomplementaryargumenttoMusa’schapterontheglocalizationofthefilmindustrybyfocusingonhowfirmsglocalizetheirproductsinordertomaximizetheirreturnsinthedigitalmarketsofthetwenty-firstcentury.Netflixisawidelyknownandhighlyregardedcompanythathasgainedareputationasaninternationalplayerinashortspanoftime.Intheiranalysis,theauthorsexplorethemedi-ascapeoftheentertainmentindustrywhilepushingforwardtheoriginalresearchagendasetoutbySigismondi’searlierwork(2012,2019).Theyshow,inpainstakingdetail,theinnerworkingsofthisprocess–andthusofferaparticularlyrelevantapplicationoftherealitythathasmadeRobertson(2013)declarethattodayonlytheglocalexists.Thehandbook’sfourth(andfinal)partisdevotedtonewresearchfrontiers,whichtendstobeavaguelabel.Takingstockofthedevelopmentsinthesocialsciencesatlargeaswellaswithintheliterature,ourselectionoftopicsforthispartreflectsatwofoldobjective.Ontheonehand,weneedareassessmentoftherelationshipbetweenglocalizationandrelatedconcepts;ontheother,wemustexaminethefuture(s)ofglocalizationwithinhighlyactiveandongoingresearchagendas.Thechaptersontherelationshipamongtranslocality,post-colonialityandglocalizationareameansforassessingtheformer;whilethechaptersontheentertainmentindustry,socialsciencemethodologyandtheworldsocietyperspectiveareameansforassess-ingthelatter.Intheirchapterontranslocalityandglocalization,VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentierexplorethecloseelectiveaffinitybetweenthesetwoterms.DrawingonAppadurai’swork(1990,1995),thenotionoftranslocalityhasbeenquiteinfluentialintermsofagenda-settinginthedisciplinesofanthropologyandgeography,aswellasinseveralotherfields(Brickell&Datta,2011;Freitag&vonOppen,2010;Greiner&Sakdapolrak,2013;Kraidy&Murphy,2003;McFarlane,2009).Oneofthemajordifferencesbetweenglocalizationandtranslocalityisthattheformerhascertainlybeenfarmorepopularthanthelatter–atleastaccordingtoGoogleScholar.Intheirchapter‘TranslocalityandGlocalization:AConceptualExploration’,theauthorsexploretheaffinitybetweenthetwoconceptsandhighlighttheextenttowhichtranslocalityhasbeenusedtoflaganagency-centredprocessofbuilding‘local-to-local’linkages.Inthisregard,theconcepthasbeensuccessfulamongthosemorescepticalofusingglocalizationtodescribesuchlinkagesorwhoseeglocalizationthroughthelensesofa‘global-to-local’relationship.Additionally,translocalityhasbeeneagertochallengetheoncedominantperspectiveoftransnationalismbysuggestingthatthetransnationalismisonlyasubsetoftranslocalconnections.Whiletheaboveoffersparticulardivergencesbetweenthetwoconcepts,thecloseelectiveaffinitybetweenthemisundeniable.Theauthorsofthischapterconcludebysuggestingthatthisturnofeventsmightbeseenasemblematicoftheemergenceofanewconceptualvocabularyfortwenty-firstcenturysocialsciences.Bothtranslocalandglocalarepartofthisnewvocabulary–andbecausetermsundergothecontin-uousprocessofbeingtestedandrevisedinthefield,itisnotunusualtohavetermswithsuchacloseaffinity.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
29Introduction17Intheirchapteronglocalizationandworldsocietytheory,RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Droriengagethetopicfromwithinthelensesoftheworldsocietyorworldpolityperspective,whichtothisdayremainsperhapsthemostsuccessfulapproachtoglobalmod-ernization.Theirchapteropenswithabrilliantoverviewofthehistoricaltenetsandconceptualelaborationoftheworldsocietyperspective.Thisbroadoverviewshouldbeparticularlyrelevanttoreadersnotnecessarilyfamiliarwithitslonghistoryanddistinguishedrecordofempiricalresearch.GlocalizationisinterpretedwithinthecontoursofMeyer’s(2007)ownengagementwiththebroaderproblematicofglobalization(whichisdiscussedatgreaterlengthinRoudometof,2020).Comingfromabroadlydefinedneo-institutionaltradition,theauthorsanalysetheengagementandinterpretationofthenotionofglocalizationinthecontextofworldsociety’sresearchagenda.GiampietroGobo,inhischapteronthechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld,inter-rogatesatopicofmajorsignificanceforallsocialsciencepractitioners–howtoreconciletheuniversalistictraditionsofWesternsocialsciencewiththechallengeposedbytheriseofIndigenousMethodologies.ItisimportanttonoteherethatGobo’schapterengagesdirectlywiththemethodologicaloeuvreofthepost-colonialagendaandcomplementsRiegel’schapterinthishandbook.Inthecontextofhisfascinatingpresentation,Goboinvokesexamplesfromresearchinquitedistinctsocio-culturalcontextsandadeptlyillustratestheinterplaybetweencontextandmethods.GoboinvokestheexampleoftheFulladolltoillustratehisproposalforcreolizingmethodology.ThisideafollowsHannerz’s(1992,pp.264–6)notionofcreolization,whichsupplementsthemorebroadlycirculatednotionsofglocalizationandtranslocality.CreolizationhasbeentypicallyevokedintheCaribbeancontext,butinhischapter,Goboemploysthisideaalonglinessimilartomethodologicalglocalism(Holton,2009).ForGobo,cross-culturalencountersbetweentwolocalmethodologicalcultureshavethepotentialtocreateaninter-ortrans-localizedmethodology.Thisisperhapsareasonanthropologistsinparticularhaveimplicitlyfoundthenotionoftranslocaltobehighlyrelevanttotheirfieldresearch(asRoudometofandCarpentierargueintheirownchapterinthishandbook).Ultimately,forGobo,thefinalfusion(orhybridormestizo)betweenmethodologiesisanoutcomebasedondialogicalandsymmetricrelationshipderivedofhegemonicmethodologi-calclaims.Intheirchapteronyouthcosmo-cultures,VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobrecrea-tivelyapplyacosmopolitanperspectivetooneofthemainfeaturesoftwenty-firstcenturysociallife–theglocalizationoftheworld’syouthculturesandsubcultures(Kjeldgaard&Askeraard,2006;Roudometof,2019a).Intheircontribution,theauthorsexpandupontheirpastworkonthistopic(Cicchelli&Octobre,2018)throughaninnovativeinterpretationoftheKoreanHallyu(thatis,K-pop)phenomenon.TheirchapterneverthelessadoptsaverydifferentapproachthanthatofOhandJang;thetwochaptersoffercomplementarybutdistinctreadingsofaprimeexampleofculturalglocalization.Inadditiontobridge-buildingbetweenglocalizationandcosmopolitanstudies,theirapproachoffersaninterpretativeparadigmfortheinterrogationofglocalyouthcultures.Knowledgeablereaderscanengagecreativelywiththeirapproach,especiallywithregardtowhetherK-popparticipantsconsiderthemselvestobecosmopolitanamateurs.Inthehandbook’sfinalchapter,VivianeRiegelinterrogatestherelationshipbetweenglocalizationandthewidelydiscussedperspectiveofpost-colonialorde-colonialstudies.Post-colonialismisofcoursebynomeansnewtoacademia(Bhambra,2007;Go,2016;Roudometof,1994;Young,2016).Butwhileinitialideasgobackseveraldecades(Gilroy,VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3018Handbookofcultureandglocalization1993;Hall,1992;Said,1978;Todorova,1997),inthetwenty-firstcentury,thereisrenewedinterestin‘Southern’perspectives(Connell,2007;deSousaSantos,2014).Fortheseper-spectives,the‘South’isnolongerdefinedintermsofsocio-economicdisadvantage(asintheoriginalNorth–Southdistinctionpopularinthetwentiethcentury).TheSouthisatoposofthoseexcludedandmarginalized,asPapastergiadismakesclearinhisownchapterinthisvolume.AsdeSousaSantos(2016,pp.18–9)writes:TheglobalSouthisnotageographicalconcept,eventhoughthegreatmajorityofitspopulationsliveincountriesoftheSouthernhemisphere.TheSouthisratherametaphorforthehumansufferingcausedbycapitalismandcolonialismonthegloballevel,aswellasfortheresistancetoovercomingorminimisingsuchsuffering.Itis,therefore,ananti-capitalist,anti-colonialist,anti-patriarchal,andanti-imperialistSouth.ItisaSouththatalsoexistsinthegeographicNorth(EuropeandNorthAmerica),intheformofexcluded,silencedandmarginalisedpopulations,suchasundocumentedimmigrants,theunemployed,ethnicorreligiousminorities,andvictimsofsexism,homophobia,racismandislamophobia.Thedialoguebetweenthenotionofglocalandthatofpost-andanti-colonialperspectivesisanimportantyetratherunder-developedthemeincurrentscholarship.AsPothier(2014)insinu-ates,theradicalresistanceofthepastmightfinditscontemporaryequivalenttocontemporarystrategiesofintellectualappropriation.Inherchapter,Riegeloffersaninsightfuloverviewofdifferentperspectivesandhighlightstheextenttowhichlocationstillmatterswhenitcomestoanti-colonialideals.Thedifferentcurrentsofscholarshiparethenrelatedtotheproblematicofthisvolume.Initsengagementwithpost-colonialandSoutherntheory,thischaptermightbeapreludetoideasthatareworthyoffurtherfutureexploration(forfurtherdiscussion,seeRoudometof,forthcoming-b).Afterall,akeytaskofacademicscholarshipistocriticallyreshapecon-ventionalunderstandingsofscholarlyfieldsofknowledge;and,certainly,post-colonialscholarshiphasincreasinglysoughttoappropriateandemploythelabel‘global’asameansof‘de-colonizing’thecurriculumofthesocialsciences(seeforexample,Susen,2020;andtheGlobalSocialTheorywebsite).ConcludingRemarksThisintroductorychapterhassetouttopresentabroadlookatthestateoftheartonthetopicofglocalization.Inthischapter’sopeningsection,wesoughttoofferabriefoverviewoftheintellectualpathwaysthatgraduallycontributedtoglocalization,assumingaprominentplaceinacademicscholarship.Next,weaddressedthedifferentinterpretationsorreadingsofglocalization–asthesehaveemergedinthecourseofintellectualcontributionsfromdiverseresearchagendas.Wehavesoughttobalanceourpresentationbetweenofferingabird’s-eyeviewofseveralintellectualtrajectoriesinvolvedinthestudyofglocalizationontheonehand,andathematicaccountofthishandbook’scontentsontheother.Theintertwiningbetweenthetwoisadeliberatefeatureofourpresentationinthisintroductorychapter.Thehandbookalsooffersanoverviewofvariousfieldsandsubfieldsinwhichthenotionofglocalizationcanbeexplored.Glocalizationisparticularlyrelevantinapost-pandemicworld.Whilethe‘endofglobalization’(King,2017)mighthavebeenprematurelyannounced,itisneverthelesstruethatavarietyofinterpretationssuggestincreasedcomplexitybeyondsim-plisticvisionsof‘one-worldism’.Theseinterpretationsrangefrompost-globalization(Flew,VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
31Introduction192021)tolocalization(Livesey,2018),orthe‘new’globalizationorneo-globalization(Steger&James,2019).Inspiteoftheirdifferencesintermsoffociandpredictions,theseconvergetosuggestanewintellectualphase.Someofthetrendshighlightedbytheseinterpretationspre-datethepandemic.Still,thepandemichassignificantlyacceleratedpre-existingtrends.Inapost-pandemicworld,glocalizationwillbeahighlysuitableconceptualvehicle,applicabletonumerouscasesandfields.Asthisintroduction’sconceptualoverviewsuggests,theintellectualconversationonglocalizationhasbeenimpactedbydiverseresearchagendasthatcomefromdifferentdisci-plinesandfieldsofstudy.Asaresult,researchandscholarlyworkhaveincreasinglyadoptedacross-orinter-disciplinaryperspectivenecessaryfordealingwiththeuncertaintiesthatareomnipresentinourcurrentageofincreasedcomplexity.Thisisalsoreflectedintheselectionandorganizationofthecurrentvolume–theeditorshavenotsoughttolegislateorsuper-imposeasinglevisionorperspectiveon‘whatisglocalization?’(seeRoudometof,2021b)orwhatitshouldbeorhowitshouldbeinterpreted,butinsteadfosteredthepresentationofdiverseperspectivesfromdifferentregionsoftheglobeandfromdifferentdisciplines.Itisoursincerehopethatthemulti-andinter-disciplinaryendeavourpromotedbythisvolume,whichitselfconstitutesanexampleofthevariousglocalizationsofknowledge,willcontributetothecontinueddevelopmentofreflectionsanddiscussionsonglocalculture.Lastly,glocalizationisbutoneofthenewtermsthathavebeenintroducedintosocial-scientificvocabularyinthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury.Assuggestedelse-where(Roudometof,2021a),thisnewvocabularyregisterstheabilityofthesocialsciencestointroducenewterminologyasameansofcapturingongoingtrendsinthe‘realworld’.Inthetwenty-firstcentury,increasedand/orgeneralizeduseofthisvocabularybecomesamatterofurgencyandrespondstoreal-lifecontingencies.Beingpartofthisnewvocabulary,glocaliza-tionisheretostay–itsuseslimitedonlybyourownimaginationandcreativecapacity.REFERENCESAppadurai,A.(1990),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,inM.Featherstone(ed.),GlobalCulture:Nationalism,GlobalizationandModernity,London,UK:Sage,pp.295–310.Appadurai,A.(1995),‘Theproductionoflocality’,inR.Fardon(ed.),Counterworks:ManagingtheDiversityofKnowledge,London,UK:Routledge,pp.204–25.Ariga,T.(1963),‘Theproblemofindigenization’,JapaneseReligions,3(1),40–50.Auyero,J.(2001),‘Glocalriots’,InternationalSociology,16(1),33–54.Axford,B.(2021),PopulismVersustheNewGlobalization,London,UK:Sage.Baetens,J.(2011),‘Editorial’,HistoryofPhotography,specialissueonglocalphotography,35(2),95–7.Barber,B.(2013),IfMayorsRuledtheWorld:DysfunctionalNations,RisingCities,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Bebbington,A.(2001),‘GlobalizedAndes?Livelihoods,landscapesanddevelopment’,Ecumene,8(4),414–36.Ben-Shaul,D.(2008),‘Glocalizedtheatrummundi:Thecaseofcomédiedescomédiens’,ModernDrama,51(2),165–87.Bhabha,H.K.(1994),TheLocationofCulture,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Bhaduri,S.(ed.)(2008),Negotiating‘Glocalization’:ViewsfromLanguage,LiteratureandCultureStudies,NewDelhi,India:AnthemPress.Bhambra,G.K.(2007),RethinkingModernity:Post-ColonialismandtheSociologicalImagination,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Birnhack,M.(forthcoming),‘Theglocalnet:StandingonJoelReidenberg’sshoulders’,FordhamLawReview.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3220HandbookofcultureandglocalizationBoli,J.andG.M.Thomas(eds)(1999),ConstructingWorldCulture:InternationalNongovernmentalOrganizationsSince1875,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.boyd,d.(2005),‘Whyweb2.0matters:Preparingforglocalization’,Apophenia:MakingConnectionsWhereNonePreviouslyExisted,accessed13September2021athttp://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2005/09/05/why_web20_matte.html.Brickell,K.andA.Datta(eds)(2011),TranslocalGeographies.Spaces,Places,Connections,Farnham,UKandBurlington,VT:Ashgate.Buhari-Gulmez,D.(2010),‘StanfordSchoolofSociologicalInstitutionalism:Aglobalculturalapproach’,InternationalPoliticalSociology,4,253–70.Castells,M.(2012),NetworksofOutrageandHope:SocialMovementsintheInternetAge,Oxford,UK:Polity.Cave,D.(2020),‘Whatiflocalanddiverseisbetterthannetworkedandglobal?’,TheNewYorkTimes,16October,accessed13September2021athttps://nyti.ms/33GMEkc.Chander,A.(2013),TheElectronicSilkRoad:HowtheWebBindstheWorldTogetherinCommerce,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Chayko,M.(2018),SuperConnected:TheInternet,DigitalMedia,andTechno-SocialLife,2ndedition,London,UK:Sage.Chen,T.-H.(2012),‘Fromthe“TaiwanYankees”totheNewYorkYankees:Theglocalnarrativesofbaseball’,SociologyofSport,29(4),546–58.Cho,Y.(2020),GlobalSportsFandominSouthKoreaAmericanMajorLeagueBaseballanditsFansintheOnlineCommunity,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Cho,Y.,C.LearyandS.J.Jackson(Guesteds)(2012),‘Specialissue:GlocalizationandsportsinAsia’,SociologyofSportJournal,29(4).Chokr,N.(2014),‘Philosophy’–AftertheEndofPhilosophy:InaGlobalizingandGlocalizingWorld,NewcastleuponTyne:CambridgeScholarsPublishing.Chubin,F.(2020),‘Glocalizingwomen’sempowerment:FeministcontestationandNGOactivism’,IranJournalofContemporaryEthnography,49(6),715–44.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2018),Aesthetico-CulturalCosmopolitanismandFrenchYouth:TheTasteoftheWorld,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Connell,R.W.(2007),SouthernTheory:TheGlobalDynamicsofKnowledgeinSocialScience,Oxford,UK:Polity.Couldry,N.andA.Hepp(2016),TheMediatedConstructionofReality,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Coupland,N.(ed.)(2010),TheHandbookofLanguageandGlobalization,Oxford,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.Czarniawska,B.(2010),ATaleofThreeCities:OrtheGlocalizationofCityManagement(2002),Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Damrosch,D.(2003),WhatisWorldLiterature?Princeton,NJandOxford,UK:PrincetonUniversityPress.Darian-Smith,E.(2017),TheGlobalTurn:Theories,ResearchDesigns,andMethodsforGlobalStudies,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.deDuve,T.(2007),‘Theglocalandthesinguniversal:Reflectionsonartandcultureintheglobalworld’,ThirdText,21(6),681–8.deMooij,M.(2014),HumanandMediatedCommunicationaroundtheWorld:AComprehensiveReviewandAnalysis,NewYork,NY:Springer.deSousaSantos,B.(2014),EpistemologiesoftheSouth.JusticeagainstEpistemicide,Boulder,CO:ParadigmPublishers.deSousaSantos,B.(2016),‘EpistemologiesoftheSouthandthefutureFromtheEuropeanSouth’,17(1),17–29,accessed13September2021athttp://europeansouth.postcolonialitalia.it.Dessì,U.(2013),JapaneseReligionsandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Dessì,U.(2017),TheGlobalRepositioningofJapaneseReligions:AnIntegratedApproach,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Dessì,U.andF.Sedda(eds)(2020),‘Glocalizationandeverydaylife:Constraintsandincentives’,specialissue,Glocalism.JournalofCulture,PoliticsandInnovation,1.Donlan,S.P.(2010),‘Comparativelawandhybridlegaltraditions:Anintroduction’,inE.Cashin-Ritaine,S.P.DonlanandM.Sychold(eds),ComparativeLawandHybridLegalTraditions,Zurich,Switzerland:Schulthess,pp.9–18.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
33Introduction21Drori,G.S.,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds)(2013a),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,London,UK:Routledge.Drori,G.S.,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(2013b),‘Theglocalizationoforganizationandmanagement:Issues,dimensions,andthemes’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,London,UK:Routledge,pp.3–24.Drori,G.S.,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(2014),‘Unpackingtheglocalizationoforganization:Fromterm,totheory,toanalysis’,EuropeanJournalofCulturalandPoliticalSociology,1(1),85–99.Edgington,D.W.andR.Hayter(2012),‘“Glocalization”andregionalheadquarters:JapaneseelectronicsfirmsintheASEANregion’,AnnalsoftheAssociationofAmericanGeographers,103(3),647–68.Eoyang,E.C.(2005),Two-wayMirrors:Cross-culturalStudiesinGlocalization,Plymouth,UK:Lexington.Featherstone,M.(ed.)(1990),GlobalCulture:Nationalism,GlobalizationandModernity,London,UK:Sage.Featherstone,M.(2020),‘Problematizingtheglobal:Anintroductiontoglobalculturerevisited’,SpecialSectionGlobalCultureRevisited,Theory,Culture&Society,accessed13September2021athttps://doi.org/10.1177/0263276420957715.Featherstone,M.,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds)(1995),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage.Ferrando,M.G.(2010),‘Theglocalizingdualityofcontemporarysport’,EuropeanJournalforSportandSociety,7(3-4),209–19.Ferrarese,M.R.(2006),Dirittosconfinato:Inventivagiuridicaespazinelmondoglobale,RomeandBari,Italy:Laterza.Fine,L.J.andJ.E.Thompson(eds)(2018),‘Glocalarchaeology’,Specialissue,ArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge,33(1).Flew,T.(2021),‘Globalizationandpost-globalization’inL.A.LievrouwandB.D.Loader(eds),RoutledgeHandbookofDigitalMediaandCommunication,London,UK:Routledge,pp.350–62.Freitag,U.andA.vonOppen(eds)(2010),Translocality.TheStudyofGlobalizingProcessesfromaSouthernPerspective,Leiden,Netherlands:Brill.Fuchs,C.(2008),InternetandSociety.SocialTheoryintheInformationAge,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Gilroy,P.(1993),TheBlackAtlantic:ModernityandDoubleConsciousness,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2004),‘Theglobalizationoffootball:Astudyintheglocalizationofthe“SeriousLife”’,BritishJournalofSociology,55(4),545–68.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2006),‘Glocalization,globalizationandmigration:ThecaseofScottishfootballsupportersinNorthAmerica’,InternationalSociology,21(2),171–98.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2007),‘Formsofglocalization:Globalizationandthemigrationstrate-giesofScottishfootballfansinNorthAmerica’,Sociology,41(1),133–52.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(eds)(2009),Globalization&Football,London,UK:Sage.GlobalSocialTheory(n.d.),accessed13September2021athttps://globalsocialtheory.org/about/.Gluck,C.andA.L.Tsing(eds)(2009),WordsinMotion:TowardaGlobalLexicon,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Go,J.(2016),PostcolonialThoughtandSocialTheory,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Goffman,E.(2020),‘InthewakeofCOVID-19,isglocalizationoursustainabilityfuture?’,Sustainability:Science,PracticeandPolicy,16(1),48–52.Greiner,C.andP.Sakdapolrak(2013),‘Translocality:Concepts,applicationsandemergingresearchperspectives’,GeographyCompass,7(5),373–84.Gupta,A.andJ.Ferguson(eds)(1997),AnthropologicalLocations:BoundariesandGroundsofaFieldScience,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Gupta,J.,K.vanderLeeuwandH.deMoel(2007),‘Climatechange:a“glocal”problemrequiring“glocal”action’,EnvironmentalSciences,4(3),139–48.Hafez,K.(2007),TheMythofMediaGlobalization,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Hall,S.(1992),‘Thewestandtherest:Discourseandpower’,inB.GiebenandS.Hall(eds),FormationsofModernity,Oxford,UK:Polity,pp.275–332.Hannerz,U.(1992),CulturalComplexity,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3422HandbookofcultureandglocalizationHarsin,J.(2014),‘“TheFrenchdemocracy”:Mappingpromiseandlimitationofglocaldigitalprotest’,Communication,Culture&Critique,7,174–91.Hebert,D.andM.Rykowski(eds)(2018),MusicGlocalization:HeritageandInnovationinaDigitalAge,NewcastleuponTyne,UK:CambridgeScholarsPublishing.Hobsbawm,E.andT.Ranger(eds)(1983),TheInventionofTradition,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Hodos,T.(ed.)(2017),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Hollensen,S.(2020),‘Glocalization:Companiessearchfortherightbalancebetweenglobalizationandlocalization’,inG.H.BrodowskyandC.P.Schuster(eds),HandbookonCross-CulturalMarketing,Cheltenham,UKandNorthampton,MA:EdwardElgarPublishing,pp.20–36.Holton,R.(2009),Cosmopolitanisms:NewThinkingandNewDirections,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Horton,P.(2011),‘SportinAsia:Globalization,glocalization,Asianization’,inP.Pachura(ed.),NewKnowledgeinaNewEraofGlobalization,accessed5February2020athttps://www.intechopen.com/books/new-knowledge-in-a-new-era-of-globalization/sport-in-asia-globalization-glocalization-asianization.Iwabuchi,K.(2018),‘Globalization,culture,andcommunication:Renationalizationinaglobalizedworld,’OxfordResearchEncyclopaediaofCommunication,accessed13September2021athttps://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.63.Jijon,I.(2013),‘Theglocalizationoftimeandspace:SoccerandmeaninginChotaValley,Ecuador’,InternationalSociology,28(4),373–90.Jijon,I.(2017),‘Themoralglocalizationofsport:LocalmeaningsoffootballinChotaValley,Ecuador’,InternationalReviewfortheSociologyofSport,1,82–96.Jung,H.Y.(2009),‘Transversalityandpublicphilosophy:Philosophyintheageofglobalization’,inJ.Y.Park(ed.),ComparativePoliticalTheoryandCross-CulturalPhilosophy:EssaysinHonorofHwaYolJung,Plymouth,UK:Lexington,pp.19–54.Kamada,L.D.(2014),‘Contestedandcelebratedglocalhybrididentitiesofmixed-ethnicgirlsinJapan’,inR.RubdyandL.Alsagoff(eds),TheGlobal–LocalInterfaceandHybidity:ExploringLanguageandIdentity,Bristol,UK:MultilingualMatters,pp.247–64.Karagiannis,E.(2018),TheNewPoliticalIslam:HumanRights,Democracy,andJustice,Philadelphia,PA:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.Khondker,H.H.(2004),‘Glocalizationasglobalization:Evolutionofasociologicalconcept’,Bangladeshe-JournalofSociology,1(2),1–9.Khondker,H.H.(2019),‘Glocalization’,inM.Juergensmeyer,S.Sassen,M.B.StegerandV.Faessel(eds),TheOxfordHandbookofGlobalStudies,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.93–113.Khondker,H.H.andR.Robertson(2018),‘Glocalization,consumptionandcricket:TheIndianPremierLeague’,JournalofConsumerCulture,18(2),279–97.Kim,P.H.andH.Shin(2010),‘Thebirthof“Rok”:Culturalimperialism,nationalism,andtheglocal-izationofrockmusicinSouthKorea,1964–1975’,Positions:EastAsiaCulturesCritique,18(1),199–230.King,A.(ed.)(1991),Culture,GlobalizationandtheWorld-System:ContemporaryConditionsfortheRepresentationofIdentity,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.King,S.D.(2017),GraveNewWorld:TheEndofGlobalization:TheReturnofHistory,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Kjeldgaard,D.andS.Askeraard(2006),‘Theglocalizationofyouthculture:Theglobalyouthsegmentasstructuresofcommondifference’,JournalofConsumerResearch,33,231–47.Kraidy,M.M.andP.D.Murphy(2003),‘Mediaethnography:Global,localortranslocal?’inM.M.KraidyandP.D.Murphy(eds),GlobalMediaStudies:AnEthnographicPerspective,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.299–312.Krücken,G.andG.S.Drori(eds)(2010),WorldSociety:TheWritingsofJohnW.Meyer,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Lechner,F.J.andJ.Boli(2005),WorldCulture:OriginsandConsequences,Oxford,UK:BasilBlackwell.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
35Introduction23Lilley,I.(2017),‘Melanesianmaritimemiddlemenandpre-colonialglocalization’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.335–53.Lindell,I.(2009),‘“Glocal”movements:Placestrugglesandtransnationalorganizingbyinformalworkers’,GeografiskaAnnaler,SeriesB:HumanGeography,91(2),123–36.Livesey,F.(2018),FromGlobaltoLocal:TheMakingofThingsandtheEndofGlobalization,NewYork,NY:Vintage.Ma,E.K.-W.(2002),‘Translocalspatiality’,InternationalJournalofCulturalStudies,5(2),131–52.Maimone,F.(2017),InterculturalKnowledgeSharinginMNCs:AGlocalandInclusiveApproachintheDigitalAge,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Maran,J.(2011),‘Lostintranslation:TheemergenceofMycenaeancultureasaphenomenonofglocalisation’,inT.C.Wilkinson,S.SherrattandJ.Bennet(eds),InterweavingWorlds:SystemicInteractionsinEurasia,7thto1stMillenniaBC,Oxford,UK:Oxbow,pp.282–94.Marling,W.H.(2006),How‘American’isGlobalization?,Baltimore,MD:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.Marramao,G.(2003),PassaggioaOccidente.Filosofiaeglobalizzazione,Turin,Italy:BollatiBoringhieri.Marret,J-L.(2008),‘Al-QaedainIslamicMaghreb:A“glocal”organization’,StudiesinConflict&Terrorism,31(6),541–52.McFarlane,C.(2009),‘Translocalassemblages:Space,powerandsocialmovements’,Geoforum,40(4),561–67.Meyer,J.(2007),‘Globalization:Theoryandtrends’,InternationalJournalofComparativeSociology,48(4),261–73.Ming,C.(2014),‘ContemporaryChineseartandthedreamofglocalisation’,SocialSemiotics,24(2),225–42.Moore,H.L.(2004),‘Globalanxieties:Concept-metaphorsandpre-theoreticalcommitmentstoanthro-pology’,AnthropologicalTheory,4(1),71–88.Musa,B.A.(ed.)(2019),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.NederveenPieterse,J.(2009),GlobalizationandCulture,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.NederveenPieterse,J.(2013),‘Whatisglobalstudies?’,Globalizations,10(4),1–16.Norris,P.andR.Inglehart(2009),CosmopolitanCommunications:CulturalDiversityinaGlobalizedWorld,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Oduro-Frimpong,J.(2009),‘Glocalizationtrends:ThecaseofHiplifemusicincontemporaryGhana’,InternationalJournalofCommunication,3,1085–106.Palmer,V.(ed.)(2012),MixedJurisdictionsWorldwide:TheThirdLegalFamily,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Patel,F.(2020),‘Glocaldevelopmentforsustainablesocialchange’,inJ.Servaes(ed.),HandbookofCommunicationforDevelopmentandSocialChange,NewYork,NY:Springer,pp.501–17.Pitts,M.(2008),‘GlobalizingthelocalinRomanBritain:Ananthropologicalapproachtosocialchange’,JournalofAnthropologicalArchaeology,27(4),493–506.Pothier,J.(2014),‘Fromanthropophagytoglocalization:Ahundredyearsofpostcolonialresponsestoglobalization’,inS.Croisy(ed.),Globalizationand‘Minority’Cultures:TheRoleof‘Minor’CulturalGroupsinShapingOurGlobalFuture,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill,pp.23–30.Puddle,D.,B.WheatonandH.Thorpe(2019),‘Theglocalizationofparkour:aNewZealand/Aotearoacasestudy’,SportinSociety,22(10),1724–41.Pulcini,E.(2013),CareoftheWorld:Fear,ResponsibilityandJusticeintheGlobalAge,Dordrecht,Germany:Springer.Randeria,S.(2003),‘Glocalizationoflaw:Environmentaljustice,WorldBank,NGOsandthecunningStateinIndia’,CurrentSociology,51(3-4),305–28.Richerme,L.K.(2013),‘Nomadswithmaps:Musicalconnectionsinaglocalizedworld’,Action,Criticism,andTheoryforMusicEducation,12(2),41–59.Ritzer,G.(2003a),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Ritzer,G.(2003b),TheGlobalizationofNothing,London,UK:Sage.Ritzer,G.(2010),Globalization:ABasicText,Chichester,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3624HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRitzer,G.andZ.Ritzer(2012),‘Stillenamouredoftheglocal:Acommenton“Fromlocaltogrobal,andback”’,BusinessHistory,54(5),798–804.Roberts,C.(2019),‘Allnewsis“glocal?”Considerationsofcommunityandpersonalprivacywithglobalpublicationoflocalnews’,JournalofMediaEthics,34(4),205–14.Robertson,R.(1987),‘Globalizationandsocietalmodernization:AnoteonJapanandJapanesereligion’,SociologicalAnalysis,47,35–42.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1994),‘Globalisationorglocalisation?’TheJournalofInternationalCommunication,1(1),33–52.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time–spaceandhomogeneity–heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–54.Robertson,R.(2004),‘Theconceptualpromiseofglocalization:Commonalityanddiversity’,Art-e-fact4,accessed13September2021athttp://artefact.mi2.hr/_a04/lang_en/theory_robertson_en.htm.Robertson,R.(2013),‘Situatingglocalization:Arelativelyautobiographicalintervention’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.25–36.Robertson,R.(2014),‘RolandRobertson’,Globalizations,11(4),447–59,Robertson,R.(2020),‘Theglocalturn’,inI.Rossi(ed.),ChallengesofGlobalizationandProspectsforanInter-civilizationalWorldOrder,NewYork,NY:Springer,pp.25–38.Robertson,R.andF.Lechner(1985),‘Globalization,modernizationandtheproblemofcultureinworld-systemtheory’,Theory,Culture,andSociety,2(3),103–18.Robertson,R.andK.E.White(2007),‘Whatisglobalization?’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Oxford,UK:BasilBlackwell,pp.54–66.Rocha,C.(2017),JohnofGod:TheGlobalizationofBrazilianFaithHealing,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Roldán,C.,D.BrauerandJ.Rohbeck(eds)(2018),PhilosophyofGlobalization,Berlin,Germany:WalterdeGruyter.Roudometof,V.(1994),‘Globalizationormodernity?’ComparativeCivilizationsReview,31(2),18–45.Roudometof,V.(2014),GlobalizationandOrthodoxChristianity:TheTransformationsofaReligiousTradition,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2015a),‘Theglocalandglobalstudies,’Globalizations,12(5),774–87.Roudometof,V.(2015b),‘Mappingtheglocalturn:Literaturestreams,scholarshipclustersanddebates’,Glocalism:JournalofCulture,Politics,andInnovation,3,1–21.Roudometof,V.(2016a),‘Theorisingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Roudometof,V.(2016b),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(ed.)(2018),GlocalReligions,Basil,Switzerland:MDPI.Roudometof,V.(2019a),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–17.Roudometof,V.(2019b),‘Cosmopolitanism,glocalizationandyouthcultures’,YouthandGlobalization,1(1),19–39.Roudometof,V.(2020),‘Globalization:Interactiveandintegral’inB.Axford,A.Brisbourne,S.HalperinandC.Lueders(eds),PoliticalSociologiesoftheCulturalEncounter:EssaysonBorders,CosmopolitanismandGlobalization,London:Routledge,pp.125–38.Roudometof,V.(2021a),‘Thenewconceptualvocabularyofthesocialsciences:The“globalizationdebates”incontext’,Globalizations,18(5),771–80,accessed13September2021athttps://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2020.1842107.Roudometof,V.(2021b),‘Qu’est-cequelaglocalisation?’,Réseaux,2(2-3),45–70.Roudometof,V.(forthcoming-a),‘Globalization,glocalizationandtheICTrevolution’,GlobalMediaandCommunication.Roudometof,V.(forthcoming-b),‘Globalsociologyanditsdiscontents’,Diogenes.Rubdy,R.andL.Alsagoff(2014),‘Theculturaldimensionsofglobalization:problematizinghybridity’,inR.RubdyandL.Alsagoff(eds),TheGlobal–LocalInterfaceandHybidity:ExploringLanguageandIdentity,Bristol,UK:MultilingualMatters,pp.1–14.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
37Introduction25Russell,V.andD.Boromisza-Habashi(2020),‘Theglobalcirculationofdiscursiveresourcesandthelivedexperienceofglobalization’,AnnalsoftheInternationalCommunicationAssociation,44(2),101–19,accessed13September2021athttps://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1709530.Said,E.(1978),Orientalism,London,UK:Penguin.Salazar,N.B.(2005),‘Tourismandglocalization:Localtourguiding’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,32(3),628–43.Salazar,N.B.(2010),‘Fromlocaltoglobal(andback):Towardsglocalethnographiesofculturaltourism’,inG.RichardsandW.Munsters(eds),CulturalTourismResearchMethods,Oxfordshire,UK:CABI,pp.188–98.Sariyati,F.A.(2016),‘De-globalizingglobalcommunicationresearch:A“glocal-comparative”takeontransnationalresearch’,Sarjana,31(1),15–28.Sassen,S.(2006),Territory,Authority,RightsFromMedievaltoGlobalAssemblages,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Sedda,F.(2005),‘Riflessionisulglocalapartiredallostudiosemioticodellacultura’,inF.Sedda(ed.),Glocal.Sulpresenteavenire,Rome,Italy:Sossella,pp.231–51.Sedda,F.(2014),‘Formsoftheworld.Roots,histories,andhorizonsoftheglocal’,inR.Robertson(ed.),EuropeanGlocalizationinGlobalContext,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.35–61.Sergi,A.andA.Lavorgna(2016),‘Ndrangheta:TheGlocalDimensionsoftheMostPowerfulItalianMafia,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Sigismondi,P.(2012),TheDigitalGlocalizationofEntertainment:NewParadigmsinthe21stCenturyGlobalMediascape,NewYork,NY:Springer.Sigismondi,P.(ed.)(2019),WorldEntertainmentMedia:Global,RegionalandLocalPerspectives,London,UK:Routledge.Shor,E.andY.Galily(2012),‘Betweenadoptionandresistance:GrobalizationandglocalizationinthedevelopmentofIsraelibasketball’,JournalofMedia&CulturalStudies,24(4),559–71.So,A.(1990),SocialChangeandDevelopment:Modernization,DependencyandWorld-SystemTheories,London,UK:Sage.Spillman,L.(2020),WhatisCulturalSociology?Oxford,UK:Wiley.Steger,M.andP.James(2019),GlobalizationMatters:EngagingtheGlobalinUnsettledTimes,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Susen,S.(2020),Sociologyinthe21stCentury:KeyTrends,Debates,andChallenges,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Swyngedouw,E.(1992),‘TheMammonquest.“Glocalisation”,interspatialcompetitionandthemone-taryorder:Theconstructionofnewscales’,inM.DunfordandG.Kafkalas(eds),CitiesandRegionsintheNewEurope,London,UK:BelhavenPress,pp.39–67.Swyngedouw,E.(1997),‘Neitherglobalnorlocal:“Glocalisation”andthepoliticsofscale’,inK.R.Cox(ed.),SpacesofGlobalization:ReassertingthePoweroftheLocal,NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress,pp.137–66.Swyngedouw,E.(2004),‘Globalisationor“glocalization”?Networks,territoriesandrescaling’,CambridgeReviewofInternationalAffairs,17(1),25–48.Swyngedouw,E.andG.Baeten(2001),‘Scalingthecity:Thepoliticaleconomyof“glocal”development—Brussels’conundrum’,EuropeanPlanningStudies,9(7),827–49.Swyngedouw,E.andM.Kaïka(2003),‘Themakingof“glocal”urbanmodernities:Exploringthecracksinthemirror’,City,7(1),5–20.Timmons,R.andA.Hite(eds)(2000),FromModernizationtoGlobalization,London,UK:Wiley.Todorova,M.(1997),ImaginingtheBalkans,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Tomlinson,J.(1991),CulturalImperialism:ACriticalIntroduction,Baltimore,MD:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.Tong,H.K.andL.H.Cheung(2011),‘Culturalidentityandlanguage:Aproposedframeworkforculturalglobalizationandglocalization’,JournalofMultilingualandMulticulturalDevelopment,32(1),55–69.Tsing,A.L.(2005),Friction:AnEthnographyofGlobalConnection,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
3826HandbookofcultureandglocalizationTufte,T.(2012),‘Communicationandpublichealthinaglocalizedcontext:Achievementsandchal-lenges,’inR.ObregonandS.Waisbord(eds),TheHandbookofGlobalHealthCommunication,Oxford,UK:Wiley,pp.608–22.Turner,B.S.(2003),‘McDonaldization:Linearityandliquidityinconsumerculture’,AmericanBehavioralScientist,47(2),137–53.UNWorldTourismOrganization(UNWTO)(2014),‘AnnualReport2013’,accessed13September2021athttps://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284416110.VanHellemont,E.andJ.A.Densley(2019),‘Gangglocalization:Howtheglobalmediascapecreatesandshapeslocalgangrealities’,Crime,MediaandCulture,15(1),169–89.Vásquez,M.A.andM.F.Marquardt(2003),GlobalizingtheSacred:ReligionacrosstheAmericas,NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversityPress.Vizureanu,V.(2013),‘Someremarksconcerningtheconceptofglocalization’,PublicReason,5(1),69–86.Waisanen,D.J.(2013),‘(Trans-)NationaladvocacyintheoustingofMilosevic:TheOtpormovement’sglocalrepercussions’,CommunicationStudies,64(2),158–77.Whitson,D.andJ.Horne(2006),‘Part2.Theglocalpoliticsofsportsmega-events:Underestimatedcostsandoverestimatedbenefits?Comparingtheoutcomesofsportsmega-eventsinCanadaandJapan’,TheSociologicalReview,Supplement2,71–89.WordstoWatch(1990),USNewsandWorldReport,10(26),84–5.Yazıcıoglu,E.T.andA.F.Firat(2008),‘Musicaleffects:Glocalidentitiesandconsumeractivism’,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,35,576–83.Young,J.C.(2016),Postcolonialism:AnHistoricalIntroduction,Oxford,UK:WileyBlackwell.VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:09AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
392.Frombronzizationto‘worldsystem’:globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000bce–1500ce)MatthewAdamCobbINTRODUCTIONThischapterconsidersthewaysinwhichpre-modernhistoriansandarchaeologistshave,todate,engagedwithglocalization.Whileitwillbecomeapparentthattherehasbeensomeengagement,thisisoftensubsumedwithinbroaderdiscussionsabouttheapplicationofconceptsfromglobalizationtothestudyofthepast.Inpart,thismayreflectthefactthatdiscussionsofglobalizationhavebecomemorenuanced.Earliernotionsthatsawglobaliza-tionprimarily(orexclusively)intermsofconvergence,homogenizationanduniversalizingtrajectorieshavetendedtobereplacedbyamorecomplexsensethatsuchphenomenaalsogeneratedlocalizedresponses,oftenintheformofadaption,resistance,rejectionandamelio-ration(seePitts,2008,p.494).Assuch,thewaysinwhichglocalizationmaybemoreclearlydistinguishedandemployedareconsideredhere,aswellastheconcept’spotentialutilitywhencomparedwithotherlongerstandingmodels,suchashybridity,creolizationandWorldSystemsTheory(henceforthWST).Beyondthis,itisarguedthattheconceptofmaterialtrans-culturalitymightbeusefullyintegratedintoglocalizationorglobalizationthinkingasameansoflookingatindividualinstancesofglocalresponsestoimported‘foreign’objects.DEFININGANDAPPLYINGGLOCALIZATIONINARCHAEOLOGYANDHISTORYGlocalization,likeglobalization,isaneologism–afusionofthetermslocalandglobal(Barrett,inBarrettetal.,2018,pp.16–17;Roudometof,2016,p.1).Likeglobalization,thereareanumberofcontesteddefinitions,noneofwhichisyettoachieveanoverridingconsensus(Editors,inBarrettetal.,2018,p.12;Osterhammel,2011,p.90;Seland,2008,p.68).Thesevarying(andpotentiallyoverlapping)definitionsofglocalizationincludetheviewthatitper-tainstoaspectsofthe‘global’penetratingintolocal(beitintheformofgoods,ideas,technol-ogy,andsoon)whichisthenreformulatedintoafusion,orintosomethingnewanddistinct,orintoarefractionofglobalizationthroughthelocal(forslightlydifferingconceptionsoftheglocalandglocalization,seeRitzer,2003,p.193;Robertson,1995;Roudometof,2016,p.79;Stek,2014,p.39).Onemajorpointofcontentioniswhetherglocalizationshouldbeseenasconceptuallyindependent(seeRoudometof,2016,pp.1,44),orindeedasameta-concept(incorporatingglobalizationandlocalization,seeSalazar,inBarrettetal.,2018,p.15),asopposedtothenotionthatitcannotbeseparatedoutfromglobalization(seeRitzer,2003;Robertson,1992).28MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
40Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)29Thislackofconsensusisperhapsunsurprising.Inpartbecause,whilethetermdochakukacanbetracedbacktothe1960s,inconnectiontotheadaptationofChristianpractices,andsubsequentlybeingmodifiedinthe1980sasaJapanesemarketingtool,itdoesnotappearinitsanglicizedformuntilthe1990s,andthenonlyreallystartstoseewideracademicuptakefromthemid-late2000s(Dessì,2013,p.150;NederveenPieterse,2009,p.52;Pitts,2008,p.494;Roudometof,2016,pp.2–3,24).Inevitably,everydisciplinewilladapttheparametersofglocalizationtosuititsownneeds.Infact,SusanSherrat(inBarrettetal.,2018,p.15)hasquestionedwhethera‘standardizeddefinitionthatgoesbeyondthegeneral’isevenpossibleandconsequentlywhetherithasmuchvalueasaheuristictool.Iamnotquiteaspessimistic,butdoagreewiththepointthatanydefinitionwillhavetoprovebroadlysatisfactorytothoseworkinginaparticulardiscipline,andthatineachstudyaspecificsetofparameterswillneedtobeestablished,notleastwhatconstitutesthe‘global’andthe‘local’(Barrett,inBarrettetal.,2018,p.16).Incontrasttofieldssuchasmarketing,urbanstudiesandthesocialsciences(Roudometof,2016,pp.1,27),thetermglocalizationhassofarreceivedamodestuptakeinarchaeologyandhistory.ItisnotableinVictorRoudometof’svaluableGlocalization:ACriticalIntroduction(2016)thatarchaeologydoesnotreceiveanydirectmentionnorishistorymuchdiscussed.InSebastianConrad’ssimilarlyusefulwork–WhatisGlobalHistory?–thetermglocalizationappearsonceinrelationtoadiscussionof‘[m]icro-historiesoftheglobal’(2016,pp,129–32);althoughtheexamplesgivenpertaintoearly-moderntomodernhistory.However,inthelastdecade-and-a-half,increasedsignsofengagementareapparent.Forexample,asearlyas2008,MartinPittstouchedupontheconceptofglocalizationinanarticleonsocialchangeinRomanBritain,while,morerecently,anumberofthecontributorstoTheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization(Hodos,2017a)soughttodeploytheconcept.Additionally,ina2018volumeoftheArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge(Barrettetal.,2018),spacewasprovidedforacross-disciplinarydialogueonglocalization’svaluetoarchaeology.Onereasonwhytheemploymentofglocalizationbypre-modernhistoriansandarchaeolo-gistsisarelativelyrecentphenomenonmaybethecontinuedpopularityofpotentiallyoverlap-pingconceptssuchashybridizationandcreolization.Theformerrelatestoculturalblendingthatcanleadtonewforms,ideas,objectsandpractices(Hodos,2017b,p.5;thoughnotnecessarilytonewcultures;on‘personalizedbricolage’seeRoudometof,2016,p.14),whilethelattercanbeseenasadevelopmentofthisculturalblending,whenthefusionofvariousdistinctculturalpracticesandformsleadstothefoundationofnewcultures(Roudometof,2016,p.13).Asweshallsee,however,theseconceptshavebeenvariouslycritiqued.Inwhatwaysmightthoseinthefieldsofhistoryandarchaeologyseektoemployglocaliza-tion?Whyshouldweadoptthetermattheexpenseofexistingconceptssuchashybridizationandcreolization,orindeed,conceptssuchasWST?Idonotofferastandardizedapproachhere,butsomethoughtsonthewaytheconceptcouldbeappliedareconsideredinthecurrentchapter.Inparticular,itissuggestedthatanumberofthehallmarkswhichJennings(2011,2017)identifiesaskeymanifestationsofglobalization,suchasheterogeneityandthere-embeddingoflocalculture,mightfruitfullybestudiedundertherubricofglocalization.Thisisnotintendedtostripouttheseconceptsfromglobalization,sinceglocalizationisclearlyinterrelatedwithit.Instead,itisintendedasareflectionofthefactthatlocalvariationsto‘global’phenomenamaysometimesbeamoreaccessibleavenueforanalysisandconceptual-izationofthepast.ItallowsustomaintainafocusonhowlocalorglocaldevelopmentsfitintoMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4130Handbookofcultureandglocalizationawiderglobalpicture,perhapswithaneyetocontrastingdifferentglobalizingorglocalizingtrajectoriesacrossdiverseregions.WHYGLOCALIZATION?Ashasbeenmadeclear,conceptssuchashybridization,creolizationandWSThavebeenemployedtoexplainavarietyofphenomena.TheseincludetheconstructionofidentityamonggroupssuchastheScordiscan(fourthtothirdcenturiesbce;inwhatwillbecomeIllyricum)throughahybridizingofculturalinfluencesfromtemperateEuropeandtheMediterranean(asopposedtotheBrennusmodel,seeDžino,2007).KillebrewhassuggestedthattheappearanceofAegean-stylebichromepotteryisanexampleofcreolizationinlateBronzeAgePhilistine(2005,pp.249–51).AndWoolf(1990)hasusedWSTasameansofanalysingthepowerstructuresoftheRomanEmpire.Itmightthenbeasked,whyreplacethesenotionswithglocalization?Onereasonisthattheseconceptsmaynotalwaysbesuitedtoeverycontextandcertainlysomecriticismshavebeenlevelledatthem.Inthecaseofhybridity,itcanbearguedthat,inonewayoranother,everythingishybrid(ontheubiquitoususeofthistermtodescribeartefactsinRomanarchaeology,seePitts&Versluys,2015b,p.6;Versluys,2014a,p.8).Arguably,almostallhistoricalsocietieshavebeeninfluencedinsomewayoranotherbyotherculturesand,inanycase,thehybridmaynotnecessarilycontaina‘local’element(onthequal-itativedistinctionbetweenhybridityandglocalizationseeRoudometof,2016,pp.14–15).Theconceptofhybridityhasalsobeencritiquedforseemingtoimplyasenseofcultural‘purity’onthepartofthecontributingpartnersthatpassivelydevelopswithoutagency(Hodos,2017b,p.5;Webster,2001,p.212).Additionally,conceptssuchasacculturationandhybriditycanassumeunequalpowerrelationsbetweendifferentsocieties,withthe‘weaker’culturebeingpresumedtochangemoredramaticallyasaresultofinteractionandexchange(Barclay,2005,p.317;Ferraro,2004,p.388;acculturationhasbeenparticularlycriticizedforitsassumptionofpassivityonthepartofthe‘recipientculture’,seeHitchcock&Maeir,2013;foramoregeneralcritique,Versluys,2015,pp.144–6).Thismaybetrueincertaincases,butitismuchlesssuitedtootherareasofstudysuchaspre-modernlong-distancetrade,wheredifferentialsinpowerdynamicsplayedalimitedroleintheeconomic,socialandculturaltransformationwhichresultedfromit(Cobb,forthcoming-a).Withregardstocreolization,thetermwasinitiallycoinedtodenotethemergingoftwolan-guagesintoanewdialect,butbecamemorebroadlyappliedtodescribetheprocessinwhichculturalelementsfromthecolonizerandcolonizedbecameblended(Roudometof,2016,p.13;Webster,2001,pp.217–19).Likesomeusesofhybridityandacculturation,itnecessarilyassumesanunequalpowerdynamic.However,whileitmayprovideameansofnuancingissuesofcolonialismandimperialism,andofdominanceandresistance,inearly-moderntomoderncontexts,theseprecisedynamicsdonotnecessarilyholdgoodformostancientandmedievalempires(ontheseissues,seeGosden,2004).Indeed,ithasbeensuggestedthatthisconceptmay,infact,beathinlyveiledsubstituteforthetermcolonialism(Hitchcock&Maeir,2013,p.55)thatisperhaps,inanycase,unnecessaryforanalysingpowerdynamics(Woolf,2014,pp.48–9).Againcreolization,whilepotentiallyusefulasananalyticconceptinimperialcontexts,maynotbesowell-suitedtoanalysinghistoricalphenomenawheredifferentiationsofpowerhaveamuchmorelimitedroletoplay.MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
42Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)31Whilesomehaveregardedcreolizationandhybridizationasessentiallysynonymouswithglocalization(NederveenPieterse,2009;Ritzer,2003,foracritiqueofthisseeRoudometof,2016,p.142),tomymind,thelattertermlacksthebaggagethatcomeswiththeseearlierconcepts.Localagencyinthecontextof‘global’influencesisinherenttoglocalization.However,unlikeinthenativistturnthatcoincidedwiththeriseofpostcolonialperspectives,approachestoglocalizationshouldnotbeaccusedofdownplayingorpotentiallyignoringexternal(imperial,colonialorcommercial)influences(onthisaccusationseeDomínguez,2012;Hodos,2014,p.29;Hodos,2017b,p.8;contravanDommelen,2014,p.44).Infact,itimplicitlysituateslocaldevelopmentsinawidercontext.Additionally,itdoesnotsubscribetothenotionofa‘culturallycontained’ethnicgroup(ontheproblemsof‘ethnicentitiesandcultural-containerthinking’seePitts,2020;Versluys,2014a,p.12;Versluys,2015,pp.145–6).Bycontrast,glocalization(andglobalization)allowsustothinkmoredynamicallyaboutthenegotiation,adaptation,ameliorationorrejectionof/resistancetooutsideinfluencesinaparticularlocality,aswellasthereinforcement(orinvention)oflocalculturalpracticesinresponsetowider‘global’influences(Hodos,2017b,p.8).Furthermore,asalreadynoted,incertaincontexts,likeintheancientandmedieval(touseoverlybroadperiodizations)IndianOceanworlds,whereconceptssuchasimperialismorcentre–peripherydynamicsmaybelesshelpful,glocalizationseemstoofferabetterexplanatorymodel.Onthislatterpoint,itisworthnotingthatWSTcouldbeseenasanolderalternativemodeltoglocalizationandglobalization.ThistheorywasdevelopedbyImmanuelWallersteinasameansofexplaininghowthemoderncapitalistWorldSystemcameintobeing.Heneverreallyintendedforittobeappliedpriortothesixteenthcentury(Wallerstein,2011[1974]).Nevertheless,itwaspopularlyadaptedbyanumberofhistoriansandarchaeologistsinterestedinpre-modernsocieties(Frank&Gills,1993).Inparticular,WSTprovedpopularamonganumberofIndianOceanspecialists(onthis,seeVink,2007),ascanbeseenwiththeworkofAbu-Lughod(1989),andmorerecentlythatofBeaujard(2005)andFitzpatrick(2011).Oneofthekeytenetsofthismodelisthecore–peripherydynamic(oraseriesofcoresandperipheries),inwhichthecoreextractssurpluses,oftenintheformofrawmaterials,fromtheperipheryinanexploitativerelationshipthattransformsboththeeconomicandpoliticalsituationsintheregionsconcerned.Certainly,thereisnoreasontodoubtthathistoricallyexploitativerelationshipsexisted,especiallywithregardstovariousempiresandtheirsubjectterritories.However,ithasbeenrightlyobservedthatprojectionsofpowerintheancientandmedievalworldswereoftenlimitedbytransportationhurdles,weak‘state’bureaucraticsystems,andlowintensitynetworksofexchange(Jenningsetal.,2015,p.64;Stein,1999,pp.55–62).Moreover,WSTisoftenaccusedoffailingtogobeyondeconomicfactorsinexplainingwhy‘periphery’societiesmighthaveengagedwiththe‘centre’(focusingonthemacro-scaleattheexpenseoflocalizedresponsestothesewiderprocesses),howthisledtoculturalchangesandwheretheagencyforthislay(Maran,2011,pp.282–3;Pitts,2008,p.493;Pitts&Versluys,2015b,pp.8–10;Woolf,1990,p.55).Indeed,asMiddleGroundthinkinghasshown,eveninsituationsofunevenpowerrelations,othermeansbesidescoer-cionandeconomicimperativeswerenecessaryforthedevelopmentofelaboratesocial,cul-tural,commercialandpoliticalties(Deloria,2006;White,2011).Tomymind,glocalizationandglobalizationprovideamoreneutralmeanswithwhichonecanaddresstheissueoflocalagencyinthecontextofwiderglobalprocesses.Havingnotedthesecritiques,itisworthstressingthatglocalization(orglobalization)neednotbeseenasautomaticallyatoddswiththesetheoriesornecessarilya‘better’alternativeMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4332Handbookofcultureandglocalizationineveryinstance.Infact,certainolderconcepts,suchastransculturality(whichderivedfromFernandoOrtiz’s1940studyContrapunteocubanodeltabacoydelazúcar)mayactuallybefruitfullyintegratedintoglocalizationthinking.Ifglocalizationoffersusatoolforanalysinghowparticular‘local’societies,orbelowthatlevel,socialgroups,respondedtoconditionsofincreasing‘global’connectivity–oftenproducingnewculturalresponsesoroutputs(creatingmanifestationsofglocality)–Iwouldsuggestthattransculturaltheorymayofferanevenfinerleveloffocus,whatcouldbecalledmicro-historiesoftheglocal,tomodifyConrad’sterminol-ogy.Itistentativelysuggestedherethatanadaptedformoftransculturaltheorythatfocusesonindividualmaterialobjectsin‘foreign’contextsmightprovideanadditionalavenueforanaly-sis(onmorerecentapplicationsoftransculturality,seeAutiero,2017,2019;Vandkilde,2014).Specifically,howanitemproducedinonelocation,andsubsequentlytransmittedvianetworksof(longdistance)exchange,becameadopted,adapted,andre-interpretedinadifferentculturalcontext:whatIwouldlabelmaterialtransculturality.Thiscantakeplacewithinthecontextofwiderglobalizingandglocalizingprocesses(thoughthisisnotaprerequisite).Thisconceptallowsustogobeyondsimplyconsideringissuesofstatusdisplayandcon-spicuousconsumption(thoughsuchissuesareimportant)thatcantypicallybeassociatedwiththeuseofperceivedexoticorforeign‘luxury’goods,andalsoconsiderthepractical,ideo-logical,aesthetic,philosophicalandreligiousrepurposingofaparticularitem,irrespectiveofwhattheoriginalculturethatproducedsuchanobjectmayhaveintended(whatSwift,2017,pp.154–5,callssystemfunction(thediscrepantuseofanobject),asopposedtoproperfunc-tion(usingtheobjectasoriginallyintended)).Thepotentialvalueofadoptingsuchaframeforanalysisisthatitincorporatesbothaneconomicandculturalassessmentofwhyparticularobjectsmovedtocertainlocations(formoredetaileddiscussion,seebelow).Thatistosay,itimpactsourassessmentofchoice,demandandtheselectionofitemsforexchange.And,bycorollary,practicesofimitation,adaptationofstylesandwiderquestionsregardingidentity.GLOBALIZATIONORGLOCALIZATION?Itcouldbearguedthatthedistinctionbetweenglobalizationandglocalizationisoneofscale.Bothconceptshavingastheirraisond’êtreaninterestintheimpactsofwiderphenomena–economicandcultural–onvarioussocieties;thefocusofthelattersometimesbeingonaspecificlocale(but,necessarily,keepingthewiderpictureinmind).TheseoverlappinginterestsareapparentfromJustinJennings’sGlobalizationsandtheAncientWorld(2011),andhissubsequentchapterinTheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization(2017).Jenningslaidouteightcriteriaforidentifyinginstancesofglobalizationinpre-modernsocieties–notaspartofalinealprocess(withfitsandstarts)thatultimatelyledto‘modern’globalization–butratherasacyclicalprocess(Jennings,2017,p.12;forthosethatdoadoptamoreprogressiveorsequentialapproachtoglobalizationsee,forexample,Rossi,2008;alsoHopkins,2002and2010,who,inthelatterwork,suggestsamorerefinedconceptofoverlappingsequencesratherthanstages).Theeighthallmarksderivelargelyfromdiscussionsofmodernglobalizationinthesocialsciences(suchastheworkofTomlinson,1999),andinclude‘Time-SpaceCompression’,‘Deterritorialization’,‘Standardization’,‘Unevenness’,‘Homogenization’,‘Heterogeneity’,‘Re-embeddingoflocalculture’and‘Vulnerability’.Thereisnotthescopeinthischaptertogivefulltreatmenttoeachofthesehallmarks.However,asnotedintheintroduction,earlierconceptionsofglobalizationasprincipallyMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
44Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)33converging,homogenizinganduniversalareinadequate,andindividualsandgroupsengagewith‘global’phenomena,oftenadapting,resisting,rejectingoramelioratingitfortheirownpurposes.Arguably,thosewhoareinterestedintheglocalcanfocustheirattentiononparticu-larphenomena,suchasheterogeneity(theadaptations,modificationsandtransformationsofproductsandpracticesfromelsewhere),re-embeddingoflocalculture(reactingtoperceivednegativeexternalinfluences,often(selectively)reassertinglocaltraditions(orreinventingthem)inresponsetoglobalinfluences),anddeterritorialization(thepotentialforpeopletofeelconnectionswiththoseatagreatdistance,andnotonlywiththeirimmediateneighbours).Whytaketheseconceptsandplacethemundertherubricofglocalization?Onereasonisthatitallowsustoexaminetheimpactof‘global’interconnectionsonvarious‘local’societies,withouthavingtonecessarilydeterminewhether‘globalized’isalabelapplicableineveryinstance.Itmayperhapsbeeasiertoidentifyprocessofglocalizationinmanypre-modernsocieties.AsJennings(2017,p.14)acknowledges,identifyinginstancesofglobalizationinpastsocieties,especiallypre-literateones,isparticularlychallenging.Notleastbecauseitoftenrequiresaqualitativeassessmentofevidenceacrossdifferentregions.Thereislikelytobeunevenlevelsofarchaeologicalwork,preservationandrecordingofmaterial(especiallythewiderthegeographicscopeoneisdealingwith).Thiscertainlymakesanyquantitativeassessmentoftheevidenceextremelychallenging.Forexample,itisdoubtfulwhetheronecouldreliablyassesstheintensityofcontactandtradeexperiencedbetweendifferentregionsoftheIndianOceanperipherybasedonthequantityofarchaeologicalmaterialindifferentareasduetotheaforementionedissues(Cobb,2018,pp.26,180,216–18).Ofcourse,settingahighbarfordeterminingwhetheragivensociety(orinteractingsocie-ties)meetsthethresholdtowarrantthelabelglobalizedmakessense.Ifallthatwasrequiredtoachievethislabelisforasocietytohaveinteractedwithothersocietiesovertheshort,mediumandlongdistance,thenprettymucheveryhistoricalpolitywouldmeetthemark.Itisnotable,however,thatthoseentitiesJenningsidentifiesasglobalized(suchasUruk-Warsa,Cahokia,WariandtheChavin),andforthatmattertheRomanEmpire(relativelyrecentlydiscussedinamonographonGlobalisationandtheRomanWorld,Pitts&Versluys,2015a),arequiteregionallybounded.AsKnappett(2017,p.32)notes,thosecultureswhichJenningsexaminesseemtoencompassanareaofaround1000kilometres–consequentlyraisingthequestion‘isthereaparticularscaleforancientglobalizations’?InmyownworkexaminingtheusefulnessofglobalizationforanalysingtheancientIndianOceanworld(latecenturiesbceintothemid-firstmillenniumce),ithasbecomeapparentthatidentifyingalleightofthehallmarkssetoutbyJenningsinasatisfactory,coherentandconsistentmanneracrossvariousinterconnectedsocietiesisfarfromstraightforward(Cobb,forthcoming-a).Ofcourse,partoftheproblem,asnotedabove,relatestotherangeandnatureoftheevidence.DifferentregionsstretchingfromEastAfricatoSoutheastAsiahavereceivedvaryingandunevenlevelsofarchaeologicalwork,recordingandpreservation.Moreover,dealingwithsuchawiderangeofsocietieswithdifferinglevelsofliteracy(literaryanddocu-mentary),ornoliteracywhatsoever,addsafurtherdegreeofcomplication.Admittedly,itisoftennotedthatglobalizationisexperiencedinanunevenmanneracrosstheglobe,includinginthemodernworld(Conrad,2016,pp.95–7;Hodos,2017b,p.4;NederveenPieterse,2009,pp.32–4;Pitts&Versluys,2015b,p.14),and,therefore,itcouldbearguedthatitisnotnecessarytoidentifyalleighthallmarksuniversally,butonlybroadlyacrossalltheinterconnectedregions.Inanycase,tomymindweshouldbelessconcernedabouttryingtoapplyglobalizationorglocalizationasalabel(asadescriptor),butmoreaboutMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4534Handbookofcultureandglocalizationtheheuristicvalueoftheseconceptsforanalysingglobal,localandglocalphenomena.Thisisnotonlyintermsoftheexistenceofnetworksofexchangeandwhatmovedalongthem(goods,peoples,ideas),butalsotheveryrealimpacts(economic,political,cultural,psycho-logical)thattheseexchangeshadonvarioussocieties.Globalizationandglocalizationhavetheadvantageofavoidingsomeoftheproblemsnotedabovewithregardstoissuesofagencyandunequalpowerrelations.Thisisnottodenythatglobalization,inparticular,hashaditsshareofproblematicbaggagethatrequiredshedding.However,earliernotionsthatitcouldbeseenaslargelysynonymouswithWesternization(orMcDonaldization),onlyapplicableinapost-sixteenthcenturycontext,andprimarilyconcernedwithprocessesofstandardizationandhomogenization(totheexclusionoflocalvariations),havebeencogentlychallengedinrecentdecades(seeHodos,2017b,pp.3–4).GLOCALIZATIONANDPRE-MODERNHISTORYThepremisehasbeensetoutthatcertainoftheaforementionedhallmarks–notablyheteroge-neity,re-embeddinglocalcultureanddeterritorialization–canbediscussedundertherubricofglocalization.Onesuchreasonforthisisitallowsustoexamine‘local’responsesto‘global’phenomenawithouttheneedtodeterminewhetherweshouldspeakofawiderprocessofglobalizationtakingplace.Thatistosay,regardlessofwhethertheparticularcultureisexpe-riencingaphaseofglobalization,asmightbesuggestedbyJennings’criteria.Consequently,itisworthconsideringinfurtherdetailsomeexampleswherewecanidentifymanifestationsofglocalization.Itisnotpossibletobeexhaustiveinthisshortchapter,butafewexamplesfromacrossthegloberelatingtotheperiod2000bceto1500ceareconsidered.BronzizationTheconceptofBronzizationhasgainedinpopularityinthelastfewyears(Vandkilde,2016,2017).Itdenotesaformofpre-modernglobalizationthatspannedmuchofEurasiafromtheAtlantictoChinaandfromScandinaviatoNorthAfrica(Vandkilde,2017,p.511;onthespu-riousnessofinsistingthatglobalizationmustencompasstheentireglobe,seeConrad,2016,pp.95–7;Knappett,2017,p.29;Pitts,2020).Onekeydriverfornecessitatingwidespreadconnectivity,especiallyduringtheperiod2000–1200bce,wastheneedfortin(somethingmoresparselysourced)asacomponentofbronzealloy(Vandkilde,2016,p.105).However,thiswentbeyondexchangeatlocal,regionalandtransregionallevels,withthemetalfindingavastarrayofusesinsocietiesacrossEurasia.Itsdemandcreatedincreasingdependencies,technologicaladaptationandthegenerationofarangeofglocalmaterialculture(‘neitherimportsnorgenuinelyindigenous’)(Vandkilde,2016,pp.510–12).TheconceptualadaptationofBronzizationitselfhasinspiredaninterestinmoreregionallyboundedvariants,suchasMinoanizationandMycenaeanization(Knappett,2017).Thesealsoseektodeploymanyoftheconceptsfromglobalizationandglocalization,albeitprivilegingtheMinoanorMycenaeanperspective.OneimportantcontributiontothisdebateisMaran’s(2011)studyofMycenaeanculturalresponsesinacontextofengagementwithMinoanCrete.Maranarguesthatthevariouscul-turalexpressions,particularlymanifestedinmaterialcultureconnectedtotheelite(mid-secondmillenniumbce),couldbestbeexplainedintermsofglocalization,where‘materialandMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
46Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)35immaterialtraitscomingfromoutsidearereinterpretedandmergedtoformnewsyntheses’(Maran,2011,pp.283–5).Forexample,certainobjectsarrivingtothe‘Mainland’worldthroughgift-exchangebecameincorporatedintoanewfunerarycontext(whereanaggressivemilitaristicidentitywasoftenemphasized)aspartofalocalorglocalexpressionofidentity;bycontrast,intheiroriginalCretancontext,theyseemtohavehadreligioussignificanceandwerenormallystoredinpublictreasuries,andnotprivatefunerarycontexts(Maran,2011,p.289).TheRomanEmpireTheRomanEmpiremightseemlikeanobviouscandidatefortheapplicationofcompeting,distincttheories,suchasWSTandcreolization.Inthecaseoftheformertheory,itcouldbecharacterized(ingeneralizedterms)ashaving(originally)consistedofacorepolitythatwasabletoexpanditsterritorialinfluencequitesubstantially,subordinatingarangeofmulti-ethnicpeoplesinanexploitativerelationship(althoughtopurelycharacterizeitinthosetermswouldbereductive).Withregardstothelattertheory,theeconomicandculturalinteractionsresult-ingfromimperialexpansionsawadiverserangeofsocialresponsesintheprovinces(andItaly)whichsomehavecharacterizedasaformofcreolization(forexample,Webster,2001).However,theaforementionedissuesraisedwithWSTandcreolizationhaveledanumberofRomanistsoverthepast15to20yearstoexploretheconceptofglobalizationasanalternativetoolforanalysis(Hingley,2005;Pitts,2020;Pitts&Versluys,2015a;Witcher,2000,2017).Indeed,thetermitselfhasseepedintowider(undefined)usage(onthelatter,seeWitcher’s(2017,p.634)critiqueofPanella(2012)).Similarly,glocalizationhasreceivedsomeattentionoverthelast15-oddyears.Forexample,asameansofunderstandingsocialchangeinRomanBritain,particularlythroughmaterialculture(Pitts,2008),aswellasglocalvariationsintheperformanceoftheprosaluteImperatorisritual(avowforthesafetyoftheimperialfamily)(vanAlten,2017).Thishasoccurredinthecontextofacontinueddesiretofindbetteralter-nativestothegrandnarrativeofRomanization,whichhasprovedsocontroversialsincethelate-twentiethcentury(Pitts,2008,p.494;Pitts&Versluys,2015b,pp.5–6;vanDommelen,2014,pp.43–4).Romanizationstandsaccusedofoverlookinglocalvariations(Editors,inBarrettetal.,2018,p.12),whichtheadoptionofmodelssuchashybridityandcreolizationwereintendedtocounter.WhilesomehaveseenthepotentialtomodifyRomanization(2.0)throughtheuseofglobalizationtheory(Versluys,2014a,2014b),othersaremoredoubtfulaboutitspotentialtoberevived(Hingley,2014,p.23;Woolf,2014,pp.48–9).Witcher(2017,p.635)suggeststhattheconceptofglobalizationcannotonlyhelpusde-centreRome,butitalsoallowsustoconsiderhow‘earlyRomeitself’wasa‘glocalizationofGreekcultureontheperipheryofanEastMediterraneannetwork’.Greekliterature,ico-nography,art,mythologyandreligiouspracticesbecameincreasinglyinfluentialinRome,butthisdidnotleadtotheRomansbecomingGreek;instead,therewasanewglocaladaption,ameliorationandtransformationthatfedintothecontinueddevelopmentofRomanidentity(Vlassopoulos,2013;Witcher,2017,p.643).Infact,theRomanEmpirewasnotglobalizedprimarilybecauseofthescaleofitseconomicactivityortheextentofitsroadnetworks,butbecauseofits‘symbolicexchange’:rituals(imperialcult),socialpractices(forexample,bathcomplexes),iconography(forexample,imageryoftheemperoroncoins),andbureaucraticdemands(suchaspayingtaxes,conductingcensuses);theseaspectsthemselvesbeingsubjecttotheirownglocalresponsesacrosstheprovinces(Witcher,2017,pp.644–8).MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4736HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGlocalizationintheAmericasManyofthecasestudiesthatJenningsdiscussesasinstancesofpastglobalizationrelatetopre-ColumbiansocietiesintheAmericas,suchastheCahokia(Mississippiregion),Wari(south-centralAndes)andChavin(northernAndeanhighlands)cultures.Asarguedabove,anumberofthelocalorglocalresponsestoglobalinterconnectivity,whichJenningsdiscussesintermsofheterogeneityandre-embeddinglocalidentities,couldalsobeexaminedwithintheframeworkofglocalization.Indeed,Jenningsandhisco-authorsnoteasmuchwhendis-cussingaspectsofheterogeneousdevelopmentinPeru’sMiddleHorizonPeriod(600–1000ce).Forexample,inrelationtothecreationofWari-esqueobjectsattheTenahahaandLaRealsites(particularlytupusorbronzeclothingpins)thatrepresentlocalorglocaladaptationsofWariprestigeobjects;thatistosayanadaptationofstylesandtechnologiesinthefaceofinterregionalinteraction(Jenningsetal.,2015,pp.63–72).Indeed,oneofthecultureswhichJennings(2017,pp.19–22)identifiesasnotanexampleofglobalization,theso-calledHopewellInteractionSphere,could,nevertheless,bediscussedinthecontextofglocalization.Thatistosay‘global’(orratherinterregional)interconnectionsthatdidnotnecessarilyrepresentaninstanceofpre-modernglobalization,butneverthelessrevealhowthelocalcoulddevelopintosomething‘glocal’.DuringtheMiddleWoodlandPeriod(150bce–450ce)thereisevidenceforlong-distancelinksacrosseasternNorthAmericaandsomedegreeofmigration,aswellasthephenomenonwherepeoplescametogether(oftenfromhundredsofkilometresaway)at‘rituallychargedlocations’toburythedead,makeofferingsandbuildmonumentalearthen-works(Jennings,2017,p.19).Jenningsarguesthattheremaybe‘paleechoesofglobalizationinthetensionsbetweenstylistichomo-geneityandheterogeneityandattemptstore-embeddedlocaltraditions’,buthefeelsitfallsshortofa‘globalculture’(Jennings,2017,p.22).Itmightinsteadbethoughtofintermsofcomplexconnectivitiesthatfallshortofglobalization(onthis,seeHodos,2017b;Tomlinson,1999).Thatsaid,thedevelopmentoflocalartefacts,oftenusinglocalmaterials,butinstylesdrawinguponbothlocalandinterregionalinfluences,seemslikeagoodcandidateforaninstanceofglocalization.Long-distanceTradeinAncientandMedievalAfro-EurasiaTheIndianOceanisanexampleparexcellenceofinterconnectivityacrossthepre-modernworld.Goods,peoplesandideastravelledalongvariousroutesconnectingEastAfrica,theMediterraneanandwesternAsiawithSouth,SoutheastandEastAsia.Thiswasacomplexsystemofnetworksspanningvariousregions,operatingalongsidemorelocalizednetworks(suchashinterlandandemporialinks).Ashasbeenstressed,however,itisnottheexistenceofwidespreadconnectivityalonethatmatters,butalsotheresultantimpacts(economic,political,culturalandpsychological)on,andtransformationwithin,varioussocietieswhichtookplace.Jennings’shallmarkshaveprovedparticularlypopularasabenchmarkforarchaeologistsandpre-modernhistoriansinmakingsuchanassessment.Applyingthesecriteriatothepre-modernIndianOceanworldisfarfromstraightforward,althoughsomeattemptshavebeenmadetoengagewiththeconceptofglobalizationmoregenerally(see,forexample,Seland,2008,ontheconceptofoikoumenization;foracritiqueofthisterm,seeHodos,2014,pp.26–7).IntheIndianOcean,theconsistentsummerandwintermonsoonwindsdeterminedsailingschedulesintheArabianSea,BayofBengalandSouthChinaSea(technicallypartoftheMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
48Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)37Pacific).Butlocalizedwindsandcurrents,andfactorssuchasshoalsandtidalboresneededtobetakenaccountofaswell(Chaudhuri,1985,pp.126–8,133,dividestheIndianOceanintosixregionalyetinterconnectedseas;seealsoVink,2011,p.406).Abu-Lughod(1989,pp.251–3;seealsoBeaujard,2005,p.413)characterizedtheseasthreeinterlockingcircuits–ArabianSea,IndianOcean,andSouthChinaSea–withmerchantslargelyconfiningthem-selvestoaparticularzone(thisisdiscussedinrelationtotheearlysecondmillenniumce,butisapplicabletoearlierperiodsaswell,seeCobb,2018,pp.170–8).Wedoseesomehistoricalexceptions,suchasduringthelatterfirstmillenniumce,whenPersianandArabmerchantssailedasfarasGuangzhou(Canton),insouthernChina;however,thispracticefellintoabeyancearoundthetenthtoeleventhcenturies,withsouthernIndiaandtheMalayPeninsulacontinuingtoactasvitalintermediarypointsofexchange(Daryaee,2003;Hourani,1995).Theexistenceofnetworksthatinterwovethesevariouszonesinevitablyraisesageographicquestion:doweattempttoidentifyparticularinstancesofpan-IndianOcean(includingtheSouthChinaSea)globalizationthatlinkedthewiderAfro-Eurasianworldtogetherormoreregionallyboundedinstancesofglobalization,suchasintheArabianSearegion?Alternatively,doweassessthisintermsofmulti-scalarprocessesacrossthewiderIndianOceanandwithinspecific(sub)regions?Asimilarquestionmayberaisedabouttheintensitywithwhichgoodscirculated.Whileconnectivityaloneisnotenoughtoestablishglobalization,dotheseexchangesneedtoachieveasufficientscaleofexchange(intermsofvolume,valueandimpactonwidereconomicactiv-ities)?Doesdistancecompensateforlesserintensity(ontheimportanceof‘weak’ties,seeKnappett,2017,pp.31–2)?Belichetal.(2016,p.5)suggestarangeofcategoriesfordifferinglevelsofexchange,from‘contact’(occasionalandindirecttrade),‘interaction’(regularandongoingcontact,whichtheysuggestisexemplifiedbyluxurytrade),‘circulation’(bulktrade),andfinally‘integration’(atleastpartoftheglobalsystemismutuallydependent,formingpartofasingleeconomicorculturalwhole).WhileIwouldarguethatpreviouscharacterizationsoftheIndianOceantradeasoneofluxuriesisfartoosimplistic,andthatwedoseemanyinstancesof‘circulation’andperhapseven‘integration’(Cobb,forthcoming-a),doesthisachieveasufficientthresholdtobeclassedasevidenceforglobalization?Canweseeglo-balizingforcesinaction,butwithvaryinglevelsofstrengthinpartsofthesewidernetworks?Athirdissuethatcanberaisedisoneoftemporality:ifwewanttoavoidseeingglobaliza-tionaspartofalinealprogressiontowards‘modernglobalization’,whichIwouldagreewithJenningsweshouldavoid,howdowegoaboutestablishingperiodizationfortheIndianOceanworld?ThisisanevenmorecomplicatedmatterwhendealingwithadiverserangeofsocietiesacrossAfro-Eurasia.Therewerenofixed,staticnetworksofexchange.Political–militaryorculturaltransformationsmightleadtothealterationanddeclineofcertainnetworksandthecreationofnewones,butthisonitsownmaynotbeenoughtoidentifyan‘epochalchange’.PossiblytheriseofIslammightrepresentadistinctbreakbetweenthe‘ancient’and‘medieval’IndianOcean,duetotheprofoundcultural,religious,politicalandeconomicconsequencesthatwouldpermeatethewiderAfro-Eurasianworld.IhavedeployedthetermancientandmedievalIndianOceantradeasalabelofconvenience,butitisahighlyartificialmeansofreferringtotheperiodstretchingfromthelatterfirstmillenniumbceto1500ce.Identifyingsub-periodsacrossthevariousregionsoftheIndianOceanworldiseminentlymorecomplex.Clearlythereareanumberofchallengesinvolvedwhenapplyingglobalizationtothestudyofthepre-modernIndianOceanworld,butarguablyutilizingconceptsfromthiscanhelprefineouranalysisandprovidebetterexplanatoryframeworksthanothermodelssuchMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
4938HandbookofcultureandglocalizationasWSThavehithertodone.Iwouldsuggestthatwemightfinditproductivetoalsoconsiderwhetherwecanidentifyprocessesofglocalizationtakingplace,andinstancesofglocality,indifferentsocietieslinkedtogetherbywiderIndianOceannetworksofexchange.Thishastheadvantageofallowingregionalspecialiststoconsiderthesocietiestheystudyinaglobalcontext,andhowtheseinterconnectionsimpactedontheir‘local’culture,perhapswithaneyetocomparingdifferentgloc/globalizingtrajectoriesacrossregionsoftheIndianOcean.Thiscreatesscopeformulti-disciplinaryglobalhistoricalresearch,whichifdoneindividually,wouldbeadauntingtask(onthechallengesraisedbytrans-regionalstudies,suchaspotentialinformationoverloadandmiscomprehensionduetodiscrepantdisciplinarymethodologyandterminology,seeDarley,2015,pp.61–2).ThatglocalizationandglobalizationseemtoofferbetteralternativestoWSTforthestudyofthepre-modernIndianOceanworldcanbeseenfromarecentattempttoapplytheformermodelinrelationtoRomanengagementwithIndianOceantradenetworks.FitzpatrickhasarguedthattheEmpirewasessentiallyaperipherythat‘lackedthecapacitytoactasthe“core”oftheglobaleconomy’andthatitleachedoutaportionofitssurplus(intheformoftheexportofgoldandsilvercoins)toAxumiteAfrica,ArabiaandIndia(Fitzpatrick,2011,pp.48,53).WhiletheattempttoavoidaRomano-centricperspectiveislaudable,thedynamicofsurplusextractionbyacore(orcores),oftentakenintheformofrawmaterials(utilizedforthecore’sownproductionofgoods),doesnotappropriatelyreflectthecomplexrangeofcrafteditems(metal-wares,glass-wares,terracottas,ceramics,beads,textiles,perfumes,andsoon)and‘rawmaterials’(plantproducts,(semi-)preciousstones,pearls,andsoon)thatwereexchanged.Thepatternsweseebelieanysimpleidentificationofproduceror‘manufacturing’regionsandperipheriesthatmerelysuppliedrawmaterials(seeCobb,2018;Seland,2014);themovementoftextilesbeinganexcellentexampleofthis,withabroadrangeofvaryingqualityitemsbeingexchangedinalldirections(seeSeland,2016).Also,theoftenrepeatednotionthatRomehaemorrhagedgoldandsilver‘bullion’toplaceslikeIndiaisgrosslysimplistictosaytheleast(see,Cobb,2015;Darley,2015,pp.68–75).Furthermore,thedifferentialsinpowerdynamicsdonotreallyplayoutifoneimagines,forexample,alargeterritorialempirelikethatofRomeservingastheperipherytothesmallpolitiesoftheTamilakam(southernIndia).ThiscritiqueisnotintendedtodenythepossibilitythatWSTcouldbeemployedatamorescaled-downleveltoconsiderrelationshipsbetweencertainhinterlandsandthepolitiesthatexploitedthem:Ptolemaichuntingactivity(thirdtosecondcenturiesbce)alongtheAfricancoastlinesoftheRedSeaandGulfofAdenmightbeonesuchexample.ButwhenconsideringwiderIndianOceannetworksofexchange,itisclearlylesssuitable.Bycontrast,abriefexaminationofthosehallmarks–heterogeneity,re-embeddinglocalculture,anddeterritorialization–whichfallundertherubricofglocalization(andglobali-zation),demonstratehowtheycanprovideamoreflexiblemeansofanalysingthesocialconsequencesofexchangeacrossthewiderIndianOceanworld.Iprovideherethreeexamplesofbroadchronologicalandgeographicscope.Thefirstexamplerelatestore-embeddinglocalculture,specificallytheimportationofincense(frankincense,myrrh,andrelatedproductsfromArabiaandEastAfrica)intotheRomanEmpireasaresultoftradelinkswithportslikeQana’/Qāni’(ancientKane,seeSalles&Sedov,2010)andKhorRori(ancientSumhuram/MoschaLimen,seeAvanzini,2016)inthesouthernArabianPeninsula.Incensearrivedasaresultof‘global’(Afro-Eurasian)tradenetworksandbecameembeddedintoanarrayofRomansocialpracticesandactsofconsumption,rangingfromitsuseinperfumesandmedicine,toreligiousandfuneraryrituals(Cobb,2013).WhileinrealityvariousformsofincensehadalonghistoryMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
50Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)39ofuseinsocietiesacrosstheMediterraneanworld,earlyImperialwriterssuchasOvidandPliny(latefirstcenturybcetofirstcenturyce),whowereacutelyconsciousofthemoreinterconnectedworldinwhichtheylived,couldpresentitsemploymentinreligiousritualsasanovelty(Pliny,HN12.41.18;Ovid,Fast.1.337–42).Thiswasallpartofadiscourseharken-ingbacktosupposedtraditionsofsimplicityandself-reliance,wherecheaper,localofferingslikespeltgrainweretoberegardedaspreferabletoexotic,expensiveimports.Thesecondexamplerelatestothehallmarkofheterogeneity.IntheJavaSeaShipwreck,datedtothethirteenthcenturyce,arangeofceramicsproducedinChinaand(possibly)Thailandhavebeenfound.However,theseshownumerousMiddleEasternandCentralAsianinspirationsintermsofformanddesign.Forexample,kendis(pouringvessels),likelymadeinsouthernThailand,showclearsimilaritieswithIndian-stylepottery,whileaceramicboxevidentlyadapteditslatticedesignfromthosefoundinIslamicartandarchitecture(Niziolek&Respess,2017,pp.797–9).Thethirdexamplerelatestodeterritorialization.Thiscanbeseenparticularlyinrelationtomerchantdiasporacommunities,whereindividualsestablishedthemselvesindistantplacesinordertofacilitatethemovementofgoodsbetweentheirpresentlocationandtheirhomeland(potentiallyaspartofwiderfamilynetworksorbusinessconsortia).OnesuchinstanceofthisistheArabmerchantswhosetthemselvesupatRhapta,anemporiumsomewherenearthecoastofTanzania,intheearlycenturiesce.Theyhadintermarriedwiththelocalcommu-nityandlearntthelanguage,butclearlymaintainedsocialandcommercialbondswiththeirhomeland(Periplus16;seealsoClaudiusPtolemy,Geographia,4.7.12).AfurtherexampleofthisphenomenonisthesouthIndianJewishdiaspora(earlysecondmillenniumce)whomain-tainedlinkswithassociatesbackinEgypt,asseenfromtheGenizaarchive(Goitein,1980).MaterialTransculturalityintheAncientIndianOceanWorldGlocalizationandglobalizationthinkingprovideusefulconceptsforanalysingthemovementsofpeople,goodsandideasacrosstheIndianOceanandthecultural,political,economicandpsychologicalimpactsresultingfromthisconnectivity.Belowthislevel,itcanbearguedthatmaterialtransculturalityallowsforamorefocusedexaminationofparticularobjectsorclassesofobjectsin‘new’locations;ameansofprovidinggreaterdepthofanalysisforthoseinter-estedinlong-distancetrade,globalization,glocalizationandglobalhistory.AnumberofusefulcasestudiescanbegleanedfromstudyingobjectsproducedintheRomanworld,whichbecameadoptedandadaptedinSouthAsia(forexamplesoftransculturalanalysis,withandwithoutspecificreferencetothisterminology,seeAutiero,2017,2019;Cobb&Mitchell,2019;Darley,2015;DeSaxcé,2015,2018).Onesuchexamplerelatestoanalabasterfigurineofayoungmalechildlayinginsidehalfanegg(cutlongitudinally),thatwasfoundnearJunnar(Deccanregion),andhasusuallybeeninterpretedasarepresentationofthegodEros(Dhavalikar,1992).TheprevailingassumptionhasbeenthatthisobjectwasboughtasapersonalsouvenirbyamerchanttravellingfromAlexandriawhohadcometotheDeccanregion(Dhavalikar,1992,p.326–7).However,itsownershippriortoitsfinaldispositionisfarfromclear.Itisjustasplausiblethatthisobjectcouldhavebeenobtainedbysomeoneindigenoustotheregion.Therewerelong-standingIndiancosmologicaltraditionsregardingthecreationoftheuniversefromanegg(Mitchell,2019).Thus,regardlessoftheobject’soriginalmeaning(properfunction),possiblyarepresentationofthebirthofEros,itwasfeasibleforittobeinvestedwithnewmeaninginadifferentgeographicalandculturalMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5140Handbookofcultureandglocalizationcontext(systemfunction).Ultimately,thereisnodefinitiveansweronhowthisobjectshouldbeinterpreted,buttheadoptionofatransculturalperspectiveallowsustodivestourselvesoftheimmediateassumptionthatitspresenceinIndiamustbeattributabletoaforeignresident(Cobb&Mitchell,2019).AsecondexamplerelatestofigurinesofthegodBes(anancientEgyptianprotectorgod,usuallyrepresentedasalong-haired,beardeddwarf)thatwereproducedinEgyptandfoundtheirwaytotheDeccanregioninIndia(aspartofthemovementofotherHellenistictoImperialRomaneraterracottafigurinesfromtheMediterraneanworldtoSouthAsia,seeBrancaccio,2005).TheimageryandformoftheseBesfigurineswasadaptedasameansofrepresentinglocalganasoryakshas(naturespirits),likelybecause,asAutierosuggests,thegrotesqueandexoticfeaturesofthesefigurinesmadethemidealforrepresentingtheliminalyakshas(Autiero,2017).AthirdexampleconcernsRomangold(aurei)andsilver(denarii)coinsthatfoundtheirwaytoSouthAsia.FrequentlydiscussedenmasseintermsofbullionexportstotheEastandissuesof‘balanceoftrade’,weactuallyfindmanyindividualinstancesofadaptation,modificationandrepurposing,whichclearlyneedtobeunderstoodinculturalaswellaseconomicterms.OnesuchtransculturaladaptationisthepiercingofRomancoins(genuineandimitationsmadeofpreciousandbasemetals)tomakekasumala-stylejewellery,aswellasvariousslashesandcountermarkedsymbolsonsomeofthesecoins,likesvastikasanddots,thatweredoneforreasonsthatarenotentirelyclear(seeDarley,2015;Suresh,2004).Thesecoinsalsofrequentlyappearinconnectiontogift-givingritualsanddonationsofBuddhistsanctuaries,insomeinstancesevenbeingvaluedabovetheirmetalliccontent,suggestingtheyhadmorethanbullionvalue(DeRomanis,2006).AtransculturalanalysisoftheseobjectsallowsustorealizethatinterpretingthemprimarilyasbullionandexplainingtheirexportbasedonfactorswithintheRomanEmpirealone(duecoinreforms)ishighlyinadequate(seeCobb,2022);culturaldynamicsmustbeconsideredalongsideeconomicdynamics.SUMMARYGlocalization,likeglobalization,isavaluabletoolforhistoriansandarchaeologists.Itisausefulanalyticalframeworkforexaminingparticularsocietiesina‘global’contextandhowsuchinterconnectionsimpactedthemeconomically,culturally,politicallyandpsycho-logically.Theconceptofglocalizationalsohastheadvantageofallowingustoassesssuchphenomenawithouthavingrecoursetoassumptionsaboutcore–peripherydynamicsortoavoidsomeofthecritiquesthathavebeenmadeofotherconcepts,suchascreolizationandhybridity.Moreover,thelitanyofexamplesjustdiscusseddemonstratesthat,regardlessofwhetherasocietyisthoughttomeetthethresholdnecessarytobeclassedasglobalized(basedonJennings’seighthallmarks)–arguablyasecondaryissueinanycase(possiblyusefulforconceptualclarity,butimmaterialtoitsheuristicuse)–itisoftenpossibletoidentifylocalresponsesandadaptionstowider‘global’phenomenathatresultedinglocality.Glocalization,therefore,mayhaveparticularvalueforthosewhowishtofocusonmorespecificorregionalresponsestoglobalphenomena,potentiallyalsoasameansofcontrastingglobalizingorglocalizingtrajectoriesindifferentsocieties.Belowthislevel,materialtransculturalitymayprovideausefulmeansofanalysingparticularinstancesof‘local’adoptionandadaptationofMatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
52Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)41‘foreign’materialobjectsorclassesofobjects(whichcanbeunderstoodasfeedingintowidersocialprocessesofglocalizationorglobalization).REFERENCESAbu-Lughod,J.L.(1989),BeforeEuropeanHegemony:TheWorldSystemA.D.1250–1350,NewYork,NYandOxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Autiero,S.(2017),‘BesfigurinesfromRomanEgyptasagentsoftransculturationintheIndianOcean’,Thiasos,6,79–89.Autiero,S.(2019),‘Iconographyasagentofculturalglobalization–bronzefigurinesfromSouthArabia’,inA.Manzo,C.ZazzaroandD.J.DeFalco(eds),StoriesofGlobalisation:TheRedSeaandthePersianGulffromLatePrehistorytoEarlyModernity.SelectedPapersofRedSeaProjectVII,Leiden,Netherlands:Brill,pp.408–42.Avanzini,A.(2016),‘ThePortofSumhuram:Recentdataandfreshreflectionsonitshistory’,inM.Boussac,J.SallesandJ.Yon(eds),PortsoftheAncientIndianOcean,NewDelhi,India:PrimusBooks,pp.111–24.Barclay,J.M.G.(2005),‘Theempirewritesback:JosephanrhetoricinFlavianRome’,inJ.Edmondson,S.MasonandJ.Rives(eds),FlaviusJosephusandFlavianRome,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.315–32.Barrett,J.H.,RobertsonR.,RoudometofV.,SalazarN.andS.Sherratt(2018),‘Discussion:Interdisciplinaryperspectivesonglocalization’,ArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge,33(1),11–32.Beaujard,P.(2005),‘TheIndianOceaninEurasianandAfricanWorld-Systemsbeforethesixteenthcentury’,JournalofWorldHistory,16(4),411–65.Belich,J.,Darwin,J.andC.Wickham(2016),‘Introduction:Theprospectofglobalhistory’,inJ.Belich,J.Darwin,M.FrenzandC.Wickham(eds),TheProspectofGlobalHistory,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.3–22.Brancaccio,P.(2005),‘SātavāhanaTerracottas:ConnectionswiththeHellenistictradition’,EastandWest,55(1),55–69.Chaudhuri,K.N.(1985),TradeandCivilisationintheIndianOcean:AnEconomicHistoryfromtheRiseofIslamto1750,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.ClaudiusPtolemy,Geographia,trans.byJ.FischerandE.L.Stevenson(2011),GeographyofClaudiusPtolemy,NewYork,NY:CosimoClassics.Cobb,M.A.(2013),‘ThereceptionandconsumptionofeasterngoodsinRomansociety’,Greece&Rome,60(1),136–52.Cobb,M.A.(2015),‘Balancingthetrade:RomancargoshipmentstoIndia’,OxfordJournalofArchaeology,34(2),185–203.Cobb,M.A.(2018),RomeandtheIndianOceanTradefromAugustustotheEarlyThirdCenturyCE,Leiden,Netherlands:Brill.Cobb,M.A.(forthcoming-a),UsingglobalisationtoconceptualisetheancientIndianOceanworld(300BCEto700CE).Cobb,M.A.(2022,‘MediterraneangoodsinanIndiancontext:theuseoftransculturaltheoryforthestudyoftheancientIndianOceanworld’,inS.AutieroandM.A.Cobb(eds),GlobalizationandTransculturalityfromAntiquitytothePre-ModernWorld,London:Routledge,pp.165–182.Cobb,M.A.andF.Mitchell(2019),‘ErosatJunnar:ReconsideringapieceofGraeco-Romanart’,Greece&Rome,66(2),203–26.Conrad,S.(2016),WhatisGlobalHistory?Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Darley,R.(2015),‘Self,otherandtheuseandappropriationofLateRomancoinsinSouthIndiaandSriLanka(4th–7thcenturiesA.D.)’,inP.RHimanshu(ed.),NegotiatingCulturalIdentity:LandscapesinEarlyMedievalSouthAsianHistory,NewDelhi,India:CRCPress,pp.60–84.Daryaee,T.(2003),‘ThePersianGulftradeinlateantiquity’,JournalofWorldHistory,14(1),1–16.Deloria,P.J.(2006)‘Whatisthemiddleground,anyway?’TheWilliamandMaryQuarterly,63(1),15–22.MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5342HandbookofcultureandglocalizationDeRomanis,F.(2006),‘Aureiafterthetrade:Westerntaxesandeasterngifts’,inF.DeRomanisandS.Sorda(eds),Daldenariusaldinar.L’Orienteelamonetaaurearomana,Rome,Italy:IstitutoItalianodiNumismatica,pp.55–82.DeSaxcé,A.(2015),Commerce,transferts,réseaux:DeséchangesmaritimesenmerérythréeleIIIesiècleav.n.è.etleVIIesiècleden.è.,UniversityofParis,Sorbonne:PhDThesis.DeSaxcé,A.(2018),‘AppropriationsculturellesenAsieduSudauxdébutsdenotreère’,RevueHistoiredel’art,82,87–96.Dessì,U.(2013),JapaneseReligionsandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Dhavalikar,M.K.(1992),‘ErosfromJunnar’,inD.W.MacDowall,S.SharmaandS.Garg(eds),IndianNumismatics,History,Art,andCulture:EssaysintheHonourofDr.P.L.Gupta,Delhi,India:AgamKalaPrakashan,pp.325–7.Domínguez,A.J.(2012),‘Localresponsestocolonisation.Someadditionalperspectives’,AncientWest&East,11,205–18.Džino,D.(2007),‘TheCeltsinIllyricum-whoevertheymaybe:ThehybridizationandconstructionofidentitiesinsoutheasternEuropeinthefourthandthirdcenturiesBC’,Opusculaarchaeologica,31(1),93–112.Ferraro,G.(2004),CulturalAnthropology:AnAppliedPerspective(fifthedition),Toronto,ON:ThompsonWadsworth.Fitzpatrick,M.(2011),‘ProvincializingRome:TheIndianOceantradenetworkandRomanimperial-ism’,JournalofWorldHistory,22(1),27–54.Frank,A.G.andB.K.Gills(eds),(1993),TheWorldSystem:FiveHundredYearsorFiveThousand?London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Goitein,S.D.(1980),‘FromAdentoIndia:SpecimensofthecorrespondenceofIndiatradersofthetwelfthcentury’,JESHO,23(1/2),43–66.Gosden,C.(2004),ArchaeologyandColonialism:CulturalContactfrom5000BCtothePresent,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Hingley,R.(2005),GlobalizingRomanCulture:Unity,DiversityandEmpire,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Hingley,R.(2014),‘StrugglingwithaRomaninheritance.AresponsetoVersluys’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),20–4.Hitchcock,L.A.andA.M.Maeir(2013)‘Beyondcreolizationandhybridity:Entangledandtranscul-turalidentitiesinPhilistia’,inW.P.vanPelt(ed.),ArchaeologyandCulturalMixture,Cambridge,UK:ArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge(Volume28.1),pp.51–73.Hodos,T.(2014),‘Stagesettingsforaconnectedscene.Globalizationandmaterial-culturestudiesintheearlyfirst-millenniumB.C.E.Mediterranean’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),24–30.Hodos,T.(ed.)(2017a),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Hodos,T.(2017b),‘Globalization:Somebasics.AnintroductiontoTheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.3–11.Hopkins,A.G.(2002),‘Introduction:Globalization–anagendaforhistorians’,inA.G.Hopkins(ed.),GlobalizationinWorldHistory,London,UK:Pimlico,pp.1–10.Hopkins,A.G.(2010),‘Thehistoriographyofglobalizationandtheglobalizationofregionalism’,JournaloftheEconomicandSocialHistoryoftheOrient,53(1–2),19–36.Hourani,G.F.(revisedandexpandedbyJ.Carswell)(1995),ArabSeafaringintheIndianOceaninAncientandEarlyMedievalTimes,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Jennings,J.(2011),GlobalizationsandtheAncientWorld,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Jennings,J.(2017)‘Distinguishingpastglobalizations’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.12–28.Jennings,J.,VelardeM.I.,MoraF.andW.YépezÁlvarez(2015),‘Wariimperialism,bronzeproduc-tion,andtheformationoftheMiddleHorizon:Complicatingthepicture’,JournalofAnthropologicalArchaeology,39,63–75.Killebrew,A.E.(2005),BiblicalPeoplesandEthnicity:AnArchaeologicalStudyofEgyptians,Canaanites,PhilistinesandEarlyIsrael,1300-1100B.C.E.,Atlanta,GA:SocietyofBiblicalLiterature.MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
54Globalizationandglocalizationacrosstheglobe(2000BCE–1500CE)43Knappett,C.(2017),‘Globalization,connectivitiesandnetworks’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.29–41.Maran,J.(2011),‘Lostintranslation:TheemergenceofMycenaeancultureasaphenomenonofglocalization’,inT.C.Wilkinson,S.SherratandJ.Bennet(eds),InterweavingWorlds;SystemicInteractionsinEurasia,7thtothe1stmillenniaBC,Oxford,UK:OxbowBooks,pp.282–94.Mitchell,F.(2019),‘Theuniversefromanegg:AncientGreekandIndiancreationnarratives’,inM.A.Cobb(ed.),IndianOceanTradeinAntiquity:Economic,SocialandCultural,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.171–90.NederveenPieterse,J.(2009),GlobalizationandCulture:GlobalMélange,Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield.Niziolek,L.C.andA.Respess(2017),‘GlobalizationinSoutheastAsia’searlyageofcommerce:EvidencefromthethirteenthcenturyCEJavaSeaShipwreck’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.789–807.Ortiz,F.(1940),Contrapunteocubanodeltabacoydelazúcar,Havana,Cuba:JesúsMontero.Osterhammel,J.(2011),‘Globalizations’,inJ.H.Bentley(ed.),TheOxfordHandbookofWorldHistory,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.89–104.Ovid,Fasti,trans.byJ.G.FrazerandrevisedbyG.P.Goold(1931),LoebClassicalLibrary,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Panella,C.(2012),‘LemerciaRoma’,inA.Carandini(ed.),AtlantediRomaantica:biografiaeritrattidellacittà,Rome,Italy:Electa,pp.108–15.PeriplusMarisErythraei,trans.byL.Casson(1989),Introduction,Translation,andCommentaryofPeriplusMarisErythraei,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Pitts,M.(2008),‘GlobalizingthelocalinRomanBritain:Ananthropologicalapproachtosocialchange’,JournalofAnthropologicalArchaeology,27,493–506.Pitts,M.(2020),‘Globalization,Consumption,andObjectsintheRomanWorld:NewPerspectivesandOpportunities’,inV.MihajlovićandM.A.Janković(eds),PervadingEmpire:RelationalityandDiversityintheRomanProvinces,Stuttgart:FranzSteinerVerlag,pp.155–166.Pitts,M.andM.J.Versluys(eds),(2015a),GlobalisationandtheRomanWorld:WorldHistory,ConnectivityandMaterialCulture,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Pitts,M.andM.J.Versluys(eds),(2015b),‘GlobalisationandtheRomanworld:Perspectivesandopportunities’,inM.PittsandM.J.Versluys(eds),GlobalisationandtheRomanWorld:WorldHistory,ConnectivityandMaterialCulture,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.3–31.Pliny,NaturalisHistoria,trans.byH.Rackham(1945),LoebClassicalLibrary,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:SagePublications.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.25–44.Rossi,I.(2008),‘Globalizationasanhistoricalanddialecticalprocess’,inI.Rossi(ed.),FrontiersofGlobalizationResearch:TheoreticalandMethodologicalApproaches,NewYork,NY:Springer,pp.27–63.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Salles,J.andA.Sedov(eds)(2010),QĀNI’LeportantiqueduḤaḍramawtentrelaMéditerranée,l’Af-riqueetl’Inde:FouillesRusses1972,1985–89,1991,1993–94,Turnhout,Belgium:Brepols.Seland,E.H.(2008),‘TheIndianOceanandtheglobalisationoftheAncientWorld’,AncientWest&East,7,67–79.Seland,E.H.(2014),‘ArchaeologyoftradeinthewesternIndianOcean,300BC–AD700’,JournalofArchaeologicalResearch,22,367–402.Seland,E.H.(2016),‘Here,thereandeverywhere:AnetworkapproachtotextiletradeinthePeriplusMarisErythraei’,inK.Droß-KrüpeandM.Nosch(eds),Textiles,TradeandTheories:FromtheAncientNearEasttotheMediterranean,Münster,Germany:Ugarit-Verlag,pp.211–20.MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5544HandbookofcultureandglocalizationStein,G.J.(1999),RethinkingWorld-Systems:Diasporas,Colonies,andInteractioninUrukMesopotamia,Tucson,AZ:TheUniversityofArizonaPress.Stek,T.D.(2014),‘Romanimperialism,globalizationandRomanizationinearlyRomanItaly.Researchquestionsinarchaeologyandancienthistory’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),30–40.Suresh,S.(2004),SymbolsofTradeRomanandPseudo-RomanObjectsFoundinIndia,Delhi,India:Manohar.Swift,E.(2017),‘Design,functionandeverydaysocialpractice:ArtefactsandRomansocialhistory’,inA.VanOyenandM.Pitts(eds),MaterialisingRomanHistories,Oxford,UK:OxbowBooks,pp.153–67.Tomlinson,J.B.(1999),GlobalizationandCulture,Chicago,IL:ChicagoUniversityPress.vanAlten,D.C.D.(2017),‘GlocalizationandreligiouscommunicationintheRomanEmpire:Twocasestudiestoreconsiderthelocalandtheglobalinreligiousmaterialculture’,Religions,8,1–20.vanDommelen,P.(2014),‘FetishizingtheRomans’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),41–5.Vandkilde,H.(2014),‘BreakthroughoftheNordicBronzeAge:TransculturalwarriorhoodandaCarpathiancrossroadinthesixteenthcenturyBC’,EuropeanJournalofArchaeology,17(4),602–33.Vandkilde,H.(2016),‘Bronzization:TheBronzeAgeaspre-modernglobalization’,PraehistorischeZeitschrift,91(1),103–23.Vandkilde,H.(2017),‘Small,mediumandlarge:GlobalizationperspectivesontheAfro-EurasianBronzeAge’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.509–21.Versluys,M.J.(2014a),‘Understandingobjectsinmotion.AnarchaeologicaldialogueonRomanization’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),1–20.Versluys,M.J.(2014b),‘Gettingoutofthecomfortzone.Replytoresponses’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),50–5.Versluys,M.J.(2015),‘RomanvisualmaterialcultureasglobalisingKoine’,inM.PittsandM.J.Versluys(eds),GlobalisationandtheRomanWorld:WorldHistory,ConnectivityandMaterialCulture,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.141–74.Vink,M.(2007),‘IndianOceanstudiesandthe“newthalassology”’,JournalofGlobalHistory,2(1),41–62.Vink,M.(2011),‘TheAfrasianMediterranean:PortcitiesandurbannetworksintheIndianOceanworld’,JournaloftheEconomicandSocialHistoryoftheOrient,54(3),405–16.Vlassopoulos,K.(2013),GreeksandBarbarians,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Wallerstein,I.(2011[1974]),TheModernWorld-SystemI:CapitalistAgricultureandtheOriginsoftheSixteenthCentury(withanewprologue),Berkeley,CA,LosAngeles,CAandLondon,UK:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Webster,J.(2001),‘CreolizingtheRomanprovinces’,AmericanJournalofArchaeology,105(2),209–25.White,R.(2011),TheMiddleGround,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Witcher,R.(2000),‘GlobalisationandRomanimperialism:PerspectivesonidentitiesinRomanItaly’,inE.HerringandK.Lomas(eds),TheEmergenceofStateIdentitiesinItalyintheFirstMillenniumBC,London,UK:Accordia,pp.213–25.Witcher,R.(2017),‘TheglobalizedRomanworld’,inT.Hodos(ed.),TheRoutledgeHandbookofArchaeologyandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.634–51.Woolf,G.(1990),‘World-systemsanalysisandtheRomanempire’,JournalofRomanArchaeology,3,44–58.Woolf,G.(2014),‘Romanization2.0anditsalternatives’,ArchaeologicalDialogues,21(1),45–50.MatthewAdamCobb-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:11AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
563.Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmomentSandhyaRaoMehtaTHELOCALINTHEGLOBALApopularmemethatemergedintheearlydaysoftheCOVID-19pandemic,inMarch2020,hadtheHindugoddessDurgaexasperatedlywashingalltenofherhands,perhapswishing,inthisinstance,thatshehadjustthehumantwo.InHinduism,thevarioushandsofthegoddessaresaidtoworktogethertoprotectdevoteeswithtendifferentweapons,eachrepresentingdif-ferentqualities,eachsustainedbytheformofthegoddessherself.Asimagesofglocalizationgo,thisisperhapsanaptrepresentationofthesymbioticrelationshipbetweentheglobalpersonandtheglocalarms,eachofwhichhavedifferentabilitiesandqualities,butworktogethertoprotecthumanity.Thisiconicrepresentationofindividualpartsthatmakeawholeisanaptdescriptionofcurrenttheoriesofglocalization,whichfocusontherelationbetweenthelocalandtheglobal.Roudometof(2015a)usesHinduthoughttodescribethisinterrelationshipwhenhedescribesglocalizationasaconditionwhen‘[t]heglobalinterpenetratesthelocal;theresultisanimageakintotheHinduconceptionofdeities.Theseareseenasmanifestationsofasingleentity,butcantakemultipleforms,andthousandsofthemexist’(p.392).Whileglocalizationhaspermeatedmuchoftheworldofbusinessandmarketing,itsimplicationsfortheliteraryworldhavebeenlessexplored,owinglargelytothecontinuingdebatesonglobalandnationalliteratures.Withthevastandswiftchangesinthetwenty-firstcentury,glocaliza-tioncouldofferaconstructivewaytonegotiatebetweenglobalforcesandlocalapplications,ideallyensuringamoreequitableparticipationofdifferentpartsoftheworld.Intheliterarycontext,continuingdebatesonwhatconstitutesworldliteraturehaveacceleratedduringthelockdownfollowingtheglobalpandemic.Alternateformsofproduction,circulationanddisseminationhaveredefinedreadership,consumptionandreception.Thishasfurtheredthedebateonaccess,pointingtoquestionsofwhoisrepresented(andwhohasavoice),whohasaccesstocurrentmodesofliteraryconsumption,andwhattheimplicationsofthesechangesare.Glocalization,whetherviewedasatime–spaceanalyticalconceptoraliterarystrategy,offersacriticaltoolwhichenablesreadingatextbeyondthebinariesofcentre–peripheryandglobal–local,offeringalensthroughwhichliteraturecanberead,interpretedandpedagogi-callyused.Itcouldsuggestwaystoframethepresentdiscourseofbinariesbyofferingalter-nativewaysofapproachingpoeticsandliterarytexts,wayswhichcouldconsiderthequestionofwhatitmeanstoreadatextglocally.Suchglocalstrategiestaketheformofrevisitingtheliterarycanon,localizingpoeticdiscourseandtheory,andfindingwaystoapplyglobalmove-mentstolocalcontexts.Glocalizationthusoffersacriticaltoolwithwhichtoviewliteraturebeyondthedebatesofhomogeneityandheterogeneity(Roudometof,2015b),andtofindwaystoidentifytheinterconnectionsbetweenworksacrosstimeandspace.Asmanyeconomists(Farrell&Newman,2020;Fiedler,2020;Rajan,2020),sociologists(UNDESA,2020;White,2020)andculturalcritics(Bhaba,2020;Spivak,2020)havenoted,45SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5746HandbookofcultureandglocalizationtheCOVID-19pandemichasonlyexacerbatedtheexistinginequalitiesandstructuralfaultlinesofthecurrentsocio-economicsystem,towhichglobalizationhasinarguablycontributed.Thepandemic,whichfirstlookedtobethegreatequalizer,turnedouttoreflectvastlydifferentoutcomes,whetherintheformofinternalmigrationinIndia,thedemocracyversusauthori-tarianruledebateorquestioningthedependenceonglobalsupplychainsformedicalsupplies.Globalizationhasthusbeguntobequestionedforpromotinginterdependenceofakindthatremovesagencyatthenationallevel.Whetherinthehealthsectororitsimpactontheenvi-ronment,globalizationmaybethegivenrealityofthecontemporaryworld,butitisarealitythathasshownitselftobeproblematicwhenitcomestoaccess,equityandrepresentation.Inthiscontinuingdebateonglobalization,theworkofglocalizationistimelyandnecessary,for,asRobertson(2014)hasnoted,‘thereis,inmyview,aninevitablenecessityforthingsthatarespreading—music,food,fashion—toaccommodatethemselvestoaparticularculturalcontext’(p.457).Viewedasawayofnegotiatingbetweentheglobalandlocal,thehistoryofglocalizationcanbetracedbacktothelate1990sasanaturalcontinuationofstudiesinglobalization:‘glocalizationisglobalizationrefractedthroughthelocal’(Roudometof,2015a,p.399).Robertson(1995,2012)suggeststhatthehomogenizingpotentialofglobalizationcouldbesolvedwiththeintroductionofglocalization:‘Inordertomakeveryexplicitthe“heterogenising”aspectsofglobalisationtheideaofglocalisationisintroduced’(Robertson,2012,p.191).Althoughglocalizationlargelyremainsaneconomicandsocialconceptorig-inallyattributedtofarmingtechniquesinJapan(Khondker,2013),ithasincreasinglyfoundplaceinsuchdiverseareasasurbanstudies(Hampton,2010;Lee&Ducruet,2009),music(Oduro-Frimpong,2009;Rao,2010),journalism(Rao,2009),literature(Langwald,2011)andlanguagestudies(Mehta,2018).Infact,GiulianottiandRobertson(2012,p.881)statethat:theconcepthasbeenusedtoexplaintheimpactofglobalizationon,forexample,transnationalcrime,Asianbeautypageants,Chinesecinema,environmentalgovernance,Britishtelevision,SouthAfricancricket,socialriskinRomania,theworldcarindustry,communitycare,thestatusofcitizenship,Italianradio,andEuropeancivicpolicies.Asanevolvingconcepttodescribetradeandcommerceinthenewmillennium,glocalizationcanbeseentobeaseriesofparts,allbelongingtoalargerwhole,muchlikematryoshka,theRussiandollsnestledoneinsidetheother,allsimilarbutnotexactlythesame(Roudometof,2016).Whetherviewedasawayof‘experiencingthegloballocallyorthroughlocallenses’(Roudometof,2016,p.68),orasatop-downformofcorporatecontrolwithconcessionsmadetolocalconditions(Ritzer,2000),mosttheoriesofglocalizationprivilegeadynamicrelationbetweengeographicallydiverseplaces,adiffusionofideasfromoneplacetoanother(Giulianotti&Robertson,2012).Itisalsoseentobeaversionofcosmopolitanismwhichisa‘non-linear,dialecticalprocessinwhichtheuniversalandparticular,thesimilarandthedissimilar,theglobalandthelocalaretobeconceived,notasculturalpolaritiesbutasinterconnectedandreciprocallyinterpenetratingprinciples’(Beck,2006,pp.72–73).Whetherviewedasatop-downmanagerialformatwithorganizationsandinstitutionsimposingatem-platewithregional,localconsiderations,oftenreferredtoasMcDonaldization(Ritzer,2000),Disneyization(Bryman,2006),orcentringparticipatoryplatformsthroughculture,enter-tainmentanddigitalgames(Jenkins,2006),glocalizationremainsanevolvingconceptwithdiverseapplications.Distinctfromrelatedconceptsofhybridity,transnationalismandthirdspace,glocalizationcentresthefocusofstudynotonthefissuresbetweenglobalcurrentsandSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
58Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment47localapplications,butonwaysthatconnectthemtorevealnewwaysofunderstanding,aresultofglobalideasandlocalapplications(Khondker,2013).GLOBALIZATIONANDLITERATUREIntheworldofpoeticsandcreativewriting,considerablylessattentionhasbeenplacedonusingglocalizationasacriticalapproach.Intheaftermathofcolonialism,nationalliteraturestookprecedence,resultingindecades-longdiscussionsontheliterarycanonthatcontinuetobeWestern-centric.Gutierrez(2017),inherworkonchildren’sliterature,showshowthearcofliterarytheoryhasbeenunidirectional,withWesternsubjectivitiesoverridingallotherpossibleapproaches.Shesuggeststhat‘[g]lobalization,intheformofglocalization,canthenbeunderstoodasamovementtowardsdiversificationandhybridizationratherthantowardsanoverarchingsameness’(p.xv).1Asglobalizationpointedtopossiblealternatereadings,issuesoftranslation,authenticityandvoiceemergedascontentiousareasofdiscourse.Livingston(2001)voicedtheconcernthat‘LiteraryStudieshashistoricallyinscribeditselfinthetensionbetweencanonicaluniversalsandserialparticularity’(p.147)andsuggestedthatlocalversionsoftenoutlastmoreuniversalones,giventheexigenciesofacademiccirculation.AnalternatebutsimilarviewisofferedbyEoyang(2005),whosuggestsatwo-waymirrortoanalysecomparativeliterature–amirrorthatlooksintotheshop,butindoingso,alsoreflectsoneself(thereader).Readingthusbecomesabi-directionalprocessthatoverturnstraditional,Westernmodesforamorecomplexanddynamicone.Insomeways,glocalismpointstowaysinwhichthecentre–peripherydebatecouldbeapproached:notbyfocusingonthespatialrelationshipoftexts,butinsteadsuggestingcross-culturalcriticalreadingsandapproachestoexamine,notonlyhowglobalmovementsandideasarerepresentedinthelocalcontextbut,moreimportantly,howlocalvoicesareexpressedonaglobalplatform.Inliteraryworksandpoetics,glocalizationprovidesanopportunitytogobeyondthedebateonnationalandworldliterature,pointingtoreadingswhere‘localdistinctivenessblendsorintertwineswithglobalblueprints’(Roudometof,2015b,p.5).Investigatingtheseconnectionsandnetworksofinflu-encesbetweenliteraryworks,theirauthorsandreaderspointtomodesofreadingthatcouldleveragelocalpracticesinextricablylinkedtoglobalideas.Thephilosophicalandpoliticaldebatefollowingpostcolonialismanditspossibleend(Dabashi,2012;Yaeger,2007),followingthecollapseoftheSovietUnion,theriseofauni-polarUnitedStates,andtheArabSpring,amongotherevents,hasledtolengthydiscussionsonthenatureofliteraturebeyondthedebatesoncentreandperiphery.Thedebatebetweennationalismandglobalismtowardstheendofthetwentiethcenturycanbeseenasacorollarytopostcolonialism,wheretheriseofnationswasitselfseentobecentrallyexpressedthroughitsliterature.2Whilesustainedattemptsweremadetofocusonliteraturefromnon-Westerncontexts(Hassan,2000;Lawall,2010),theforcesofglobalizationasmanifestedintransna-tionalismmeantthattheframeworkwithwhichtoapproachliteraturewouldhavetochange:‘Thewaningofthehegemonyofthenationalparadigmandtheopeningoutofaburgeoningglobalperspective,then,makethisanauspicioustimetocontemplatetheprojectofahistoryofworldliterature’(Damrosch,2008,p.482).Untiltheendofthetwentiethcentury,interna-tionalliteraturewaspredominantlyWestern,mostoftenwritteninEnglish.Withthe‘arrival’ofafewauthorswhoprimarilywroteinEnglishorhadtheirworkstranslatedintoEnglish(ChinuaAchebeandSalmanRushdieareexamplesoftheformer,andNaguibMahfouzandSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
5948HandbookofcultureandglocalizationOrhanPamukofthelatter)attheendofthetwentiethandthebeginningofthetwenty-firstcenturies,worldliteraturewasseentobeappropriatedbytheforcesofglobalizationwithitsattendantconcernsofmigration,diaspora,hybridityandidentityincosmopolitancentres.3Literaryanthologiescreatednewcanonsthatprovidedtokenrepresentationtonon-WesternworkbyrestrictingthemselvestowhatwasalreadyavailableinEnglish.Thecanonwasalsoprimarilyfocusedonworksfromthepartsoftheworldthathadfoundrepresentationwithinthenewglobalworld,especiallyChina,IndiaandBrazil.Globalizationthusreplicatedtheinequalitiesofrepresentation,privilegingtextsthatappeartoreflectthe‘cosmopolitan’experienceofitsAnglo-Americanreaders.Mufti(2016)articulatestheconnectionofworldliteraturewitheconomicandculturalglobalizationwhenhesays:Agreatdealmoreisatstakeinthequestionofworldliteraturethansomeofitsleadingcontemporaryelaboratorsseemtorecognize:theoriginsofbourgeoismodernity–thatis,thecultureofcapitalistsociety–withinahistoryofworldwideimperialviolence;thepersistenceintoourtimes…oftheracialandculturalantagonismsofthecolonialworld;andtheongoingstruggleovertherightandtheabilitytodefinethecontoursofthehumanexperience.(Mufti,2016,pp.xi–xii)Thedebateonexactlywhatconstitutesworldliteraturecontinues,withcriticsvariouslypointingtoitsclassistandcolonialistleaningsandofferingalternativeoptionstothecanon,whichonlysucceedincreatinganewsetofhierarchies.Thereis,then,aneedtoapproachtheconceptofworldliteratureinawaythatwouldfocusnotonspecifictexts,regionsorpersons,butontheinterconnectionofallaspectsofaliteraryworktootherliteraryproductionsacrosstimeandspace.Inthiscontext,glocalizationcouldbeastrategytoapproachliterarytexts,notmerelyincomparisontooneanotherinisolatedcontexts,butinrelationtoeachother,revealingalternativewaysofreadingthatemphasizeinterconnectednessoverindividuality,heterogeneityoverhomogeneity.Thisispossiblebyfocusingonformsofreading(poetics)fromnon-Westerncontextstoframeworldliteratures,disseminatingtheminwaysthatensurelocalityinaglobalcontext,andre-readingestablishedconceptsofhybridityandtransnational-ismincontextsthatareremovedfromthecosmopolitancentresofproduction.GLOCALPOETICSWhilecomparatistsandliterarycriticshavesuggestedwaysinwhichtheglobal–localdynamiccouldbesuccessfullyinvestigatedinworldliteraturebyquestioningandre-formulatingthelit-erarycanon,theimpactofglocalizationonliterarypoeticshasbeenlesscomprehensive.BasedontheSocratictradition,WesternliteraryandphilosophicalstudiescontinuetobebasedinWesternuniversities,including,ironically,postcolonialstudieswhicharemeanttodecolonizecriticaltheory,amongotherareas.Besidescallingoutpostcolonialtheory,fewalternativeframeworksforstudyingliteraturehavebeenofferedorbecomecentraltoculturalandpoeticstudies.Whilerecognizingtheimportanceofcriticaltheory,amoreglocalapproachtoframingandunderstandingworldliteratureandindividualtextscouldallowfornuancedread-ingsthattakeintoaccountlocalpoeticsandliterarytraditions.SuchglocalreadingscouldbeintheformofusingtraditionalIndianaesthetics,ChinesephilosophyorAfricanfolktechniquestointerpretliteraturefromotherpartsoftheworld.Ifglocalizationis‘theinterpenetrationoftheglobalandthelocal,resultinginuniqueoutcomesindifferentgeographicareas’(RitzerSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
60Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment49&Dean,2015,p.215),itbecomesimperativetoviewtheinterrelationshipbetweenthetwo,underliningthedynamicrelationbetweenthelocalandtheglobalintextualanalyses.Oneofthecontinuingfrustrationswithpostcolonialtheoryisthat,counterintuitively,themostimpactfulworkstillcomesfromWestern(mainlyAmerican)contexts.Evensubalternstudies,whichwereinitiallymeanttogivevoicetomarginalizedandcolonizedpeople,areguiltyofusingspecificWesternmethodologytoexploreregionalliteratures.NotedBlackAmericanauthorbellhookssaysthattheacademics’approachis,Iwanttoknowyourstory.AndthenIwilltellitbacktoyouinanewway.Tellitbacktoyouinsuchawaythatithasbecomemine,myown.Re-writingyou,Iwritemyselfanew.Iamstillauthor,authority.Iamstill[the]colonizer,thespeakingsubject,andyouarenowatthecenterofmytalk.(hooks,1990,p.343)Attemptsatre-framingthisdiscoursetowardshearingthevoicesofthemarginalizedhaverecentlybeenmanifestedinstudyingnon-Westernformsof‘knowing’byfocusingonnarra-tivescentredonoraltraditions,mythandfolklorefromacrosstheworld(Sharp,2008).Wang(2014)notesthatChineseliteraturemaypartakeoftheConfucianconceptof‘brotherhoodallovertheworld’(p.171),buttherearemanyaspectsofChineseliterature,includingci,aformofalyricalpoem,fu,aliteraryformcombiningproseandpoetryandsao,alongpoemusingsix-syllablecouplets(p.173),whichareuniquetoChineseliteratureandrequireanalysisviaspecificpoeticsthatusenon-Westernliterarytheories.WhilecomparativeliteraturewasunderstoodtobeawaytoframeChineseliteratureusingWesternconcepts(Ma,2016),thisbegantobequestionedaftertheriseofnationalliteraturesacrosstheworld,andwaysto‘read’literaturefromauniquelyChineseperspectivearestillunderway(Saussy,2001).ThecomplexpoeticsofAfricanliteratureswithinandoutsidethecontinentareexploredfortheirpostcolonialresistance,butalsoforwaysinwhichlanguages,culturesandnarrativestylesinfactemphasizethevarietyofAfricaratherthanitscoloniallyimposedunity(Amuta,1989[2017];Doherty,2014).TheriseofDalitliteratureinIndiapointstothewaysinwhichnotionsofintersectionalityhavebeenapplied,notonlytomarginalizationinaglobalNorth–Southcontext,butalsowithinsocietiesthatreplicate(andsustain)socialhierarchiesandinequal-ities.InitiallyseentoresistBrahmanicalandSanskritizedprivilege,Dalitliteratureisnowbeingviewedaspartofthelargermovementtowardgivingvoicetosilencedcommunitiesindifferentpartsoftheworld,reflectingglobalformsofrepression.4GiventhatthequestionofcastehasbecomeapointofcontentioninSiliconValley,5theglocalizationofthesemodesofrepresentationistimely.Increasingly,therehavealsobeencriticswhohavepushedforthestudyoftheinfluencesofEasternculturesonWesternliteratures.HoganandPandit(1995),Matar(2000)andRenda(2005),amongothers,lookattheculturalencountersoftheIndiansubcontinent,TurkeyandtheOttomanEmpireforwaysinwhichtheyimpactedEuropecul-turallyandliterally.ThereisalsoariseinIndianOceanstudiesthatreflectonglobalizationnotonlyasanancientconcept,butalsoasonewhichdidnotnecessarilyinvolveEuropeandtheWest(Goswami,2016;Sanyal,2016),placingthemarkersofcross-culturalinfluenceintoamorecomplexwebofreligiousandculturalcontactwithintheglobalEast.6Evenwithinthefieldofliterarypoetics,therehasbeenincreasedinterestindiscovering‘marginal’conceptsandapproachesthathaveremainedrestrictedtospecificcommunitiessuchasancientIndia(Govind,2016),lookingforwaysinwhichtheseideasarelinkedtobroaderaspectsofliterarytheory.Krishnaswamy(2010),forexample,saysthattherehasonlybeenaminimalwideningofliterarystudiestoincludenon-Westerntheories;whereSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6150Handbookofcultureandglocalizationthishashappened,theendresulthasmerelyreplicatedtheexistinghierarchiesincolonialstudies.MaintainingthatpostcolonialcriticismframesnarrativesintheWesternnotionsof‘multiculturalism,theoriesofethnicityandrace,nationalallegories,magicalrealism,andthepostmodernistaestheticofthefragment’(p.402),shesuggeststhatverylittlethoughtisgiventohowthesetextsareimaginedandconceivedatthepointofproduction.Toaddressthis,shegoesontoproposeusing‘worldliteraryknowledges’,whichcouldusepoeticsandliterarytheoryfromdifferentpartsoftheworldtoviewworldtexts.Elaboratingonthescopeofsuchanapproach,shestates:suchaninclusiveapproachtotheorycan(1)promotegreaterunderstandingofdiverseliterarytexts/traditionsbyenlargingtheglobalrepertoireofaestheticepistemologies;(2)uncoverculturaldiffer-encesaswellascommon(possibly‘universal’)featuresofoursharedaestheticnaturebyplacingdifferentconceptualizationsofliterature/literarinesssidebyside;and(3)exposewithinandacrossliterarytraditionsnewhistoricalnetworksofinfluence,antagonism,andaffiliation.(Krishnaswamy,2010,p.401)InanattempttosteercomparativeliteratureandpoeticsawayfromitsgroundinginWesterncriticaltheory,KrishnaswamyusesTamilpoeticstodescribethenon-Sanskritliterarytra-dition.Asjustoneofmorethan22officiallanguagesinIndia,Tamilisspokenbyover70millionandyetitspoetics(aswellasitsliterature)remainsunexploredbyanationalhistorywhichprivilegesSanskritizedliteraryroots.ShedrawsonTolkappiyam,afifthcenturyadworkonliterarytheorywhichusestheideaoftinai(landscape),whichisinturnbasedontheCancamliteratureof200bc.Elaboratingontinaiasrepresentingmountains,deserts,rivers,oceansandforests,sheshowsthatpoemsandstoriesatthattimetookofffromoneofthesenaturallandscapes,usingrelevantcharacterssuchasfarmersandfishermenworkingwithappropriateimagerylikefishandvegetation.Suggestingthatsuchpoeticscouldbelinkedtocurrentdayecocriticism,Krishnaswamysays:Tamiltypologyoflandscapescouldbeusedtoisolatedifferentgenericconventionsthroughcross-culturalcomparisonwithothertraditions(suchastheJapanese)thatexhibitsimilarpatterns.Furthermore,theTamilmodeofreadingliteraryproductionintermsoflandscapecouldprovidethebasisforanalternative(third-world-based)ecologicallygroundedapproachtocriticism–onethatcouldconceivablyenterintoaproductivedialoguewithwhatiscurrentlyaWest/North-basedecocriticism.(Krishnaswamy,2010,p.409)Literarypoeticsthusoffersawaytoinvestigateaglocalmovementofideasandtheirapplica-tionsamongdifferentnetworksthatprecludeWestern-centricreadingsandapproaches.Thisisevenmoresignificantinthetwenty-firstcentury,whentransnationalismandcosmopolitanismhavebecomesynonymouswithliberatoryhybridityofthekindthatSalmanRushdiecelebratesinImaginaryHomelands(1992).7Whileglobalizationhasmadepossibleseamlessphysicalandvirtualmovementsacrosstheworld,glocalizationremindsusthatthisisaluxuryforthefewandthatthetropesofmigrationandbelonginghavedifferentmeaningstodifferentcom-munities.FocusingontextswhichexploremigrationfromwithinaSouth–Southperspectivechallengesthenotionthateconomicandlabournetworksinevitablyleadtopersonalsuccess.Inthiscase,glocalitycanbeseenasaliteraryapproachthatre-definesessentialistconceptsofthirdspace,whileretainingitasan‘imagined’perspectivefromwhichtoviewmigrationanditsliteraryrepresentations,withvastlyvaryingoutcomes.SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
62Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment51PETROFICTIONASGLOCALLITERATUREIn1992,writerandcriticAmitavGhoshlamentedthelackofsustainedcreativeworkonwhathecalled‘theoilencounter’,contrastingitwiththerichliteraryproductionsthatfollowedthebeginningsofthespicetradeinthefifteenthcentury.Speakingofthenarrativepotentialofisolatedcommunitiesbeingravagedbyhugemachinerytearinguptheearth,juxtaposedwiththepostmodernsocietiesithasgivenwayto,Ghoshsuggeststhattheoilindustryistoofragmented,toobrokendown,toomuchinneedofacentretobeplacedwithinadeterminedform,alongwiththefactthat‘thehistoryofoil[is]amatterofembarrassmentvergingontheunspeakable,thepornographic’(Ghosh,1992,p.29).The‘peripherallocation’(Macdonald,2017,p.293),whichisthesiteofthisoilencounter,makesforitsinvisibilityinliterarypro-ductions,asthesearesocietiesinwhichalmosteverybodyhasbeenaforeigneratonepoint,includingtheoneswhoowntheland.Asagenre,petrofictionmayencompassvariousfocisuchasexcessiveconsumption,environmentaldegradationandneo-imperialism,butoneofthemosttellingeffectsofoilconsumptionhasbeenthemigrationthatithasmadepossible,particularlytotheArabianGulf.Thesemigrantsaremostoftensubaltern,temporaryworkerswhohavebeeninvolvedintheproductionofoil,theassociatedwealthofwhichisinvestedintheinfrastructuraldevelopmentoftherichArabmonarchies.Theyremainnamelessandfaceless,astheyareeasilyreplaceableandhardlyevertalkedabout,exceptamongactivists,whorefertothemas‘stock’inmigrationparlance.Emergingworkonmigrationisstilllimitedtoeconomists,politicalscientistsandafewanthropologistswhoalmostalwaysviewthemashelplessvictimsofthestructuralinequalitiesgeneratedbytheoileconomy.Theindividualvoicesremainlargelyunheardastheyinhabitthelowestrungofmigrancyandholdnopoliti-calleverageintheirhostcountries,andverylittleintheircountriesoforigin.8WhilethesociologicalramificationsofmigrationinthecontextoftheArabianGulfhavebeenextensivelyexploredrecently,theirtransformationintoliteraturehasremainedscant.EvenintheyearsfollowingGhosh’spronouncement,theGulfexperiencehasbeenfairlymutedinitsliteraryrepresentationofthemigrant.AbdulrahmanMunif’sCitiesofSalt(1987[1987]),GhassanKanafani’sMenintheSun(1962[1999]),HodaBarakat’sHarithAlMiya(1998[2001]),HudaHamed’sShewhoCountstheStairs(2014)andSaudAlsanousi’sTheBambooStalk(2012[2015])areafewexamplesoffictionbyArabwritersoverthecourseofthelast40yearsthatmakeevenareferencetothelivesofthemigrantworkerswhoplaysuchanimportantroleinthebuildingandsustainingofthecitystatesintheArabianGulf.ThemorecommondiscourseamongGulfcitizensisthelossofidentityandculture,aswellaschangestotheirtraditionallifestylesasseenthroughtheircityscapes,oftenattributedtotheessentiallypowerlessmigrantworkerswhoareviewedaspollutinglocalculture.9GiventhatIndiansconstitutemorethan60%oftheworkersinthispartoftheworld,surprisinglysparseworkfocusesonthisexperience,reflectingagainontheintersectionalnatureofliterature.Withinthenation-statesthemselves,thefocusbytheprofessionalexpatriatecommunitytendstoleantowardart,sculptureandmultimedia,‘safer’choicestowritingthatwouldbelesslikelytoproblematizetheirstayincountriesknownforcensorship,andcarryanassociatedriskofdeportation.ThispaucityremainstrueevenintheSouthAsian–especiallyIndian–context,whetherinEnglishoranyoftheregionalIndianlanguages.AlthoughaplethoraofworkexistsonthewritingsoftheIndiandiasporaintheWest,accountsofthemigrantexperience,whetherhis-toricalorcontemporary,intheMiddleEastarevirtuallynon-existent.FromthetimeofSalmanSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6352HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRushdie’sMidnight’sChildren(1981),arangeofworkhascometobecelebratedfromamongwritersofIndianorigin,includingBharatiMukherjee,JhumpaLahiriandChitraDivakaruni.TheManBookerprize,ahallmarkofliteraryaccomplishmentinthenovel,hasbeenawardedtoArundhatiRoy,AravindAdigaandKiranDesai,amongIndianwriters.NotonlyhavealltheseauthorswritteninEnglish,theirnarrativesfocusontheIndianexperienceintheWest,whetherintheUnitedKingdom,theUnitedStatesorCanada.Thisexposesthelimitationsofliteraryawards,butalsospeakstootherconcomitantconcernsoflinguisticvisibility,thepub-licationopportunitiesforregionallanguagewriters,aswellasthematicconcernsthatremainacceptabletoaWestern-centricreadership.Theshifttowardhithertounexplorednarrativesofmarginalizedmigrants,however,hasbeengraduallyrising,primarilywiththeworksofGhoshhimself,whosecompellingworkinhisIbisTrilogyfocusesontheopiumtradebetweenIndiaandChina,aswellasIndianinden-turedworkersinMauritius.WhilethenarrativesofthesubalterncanbetracedasfarbackasPhyllisWheatlyandOlaudahEquianoandtherichhistoryofslavenarrativesintheUnitedStates,therehasalsobeenincreasinginterestinnarrativesofIndianindenturedlabourersacrosstheCaribbean,theNatalandFiji.Thenarrativesofindenturedwomenhavebeenapar-ticularpointoffocuswithintheframeworkofhome-makingstrategies,oralliteraturesandculturalidentity.10GaiutraBahadur’sCoolieWoman:TheOdysseyofIndenture(2013)wasoneofthefirstnarrativesofindenturedwomentogaininternationalrecognition;asaresult,autoethnographygainedcredenceasameansofgivingvoicetomarginaldiasporas.JanetNaidu’s(2013)verse:‘Isitonthegroundandlisten/Tothewavesagainandagain/Iimagineyouadorned–redandgoldbodice/Nosering,footring,andsilverbangle/Didyouboardtheboataloneatmidnight?’trulystandsasatributetotheinvisiblewomenthatcrossedtheblackwaters(kalapani)andmadeahomeinadistantland.Whetherbecauseofitsproximityintermsoftime(asmigrationinlargenumbersonlystartedafter1970),politicalcompulsions,orthetemporarynatureofthemigrantexperi-ence,narrativesonArabianGulfmigrantsarestillveryfew.Thus,whiletransnationalism,identityandhybridityremainimportantcomponentsofmigrationstudies,therehasyettobeacriticaltooltofocusonthesilencedGulfexperiencethatwouldspeakofthemorethan30millionworkerswhoworkedinthevarioussectorsoftheGulfeconomyoverthecourseofafewyears,onlytoreturnhomewhenworkcontractselapsed.Asiswidelyknown,almostallforeignworkersintheGulfareunderthekafalasystem,whichallowsfornationalstosponsorindividualstocomeandworkattheircompaniesorintheirhomes.Mostblue-collarworkersliveinspeciallyconstructedcampsawayfromthecity;theyareferriedtoandfromtheirworkplace(oftenaconstructionsite)andhavelimitedentertainmentoptions,orevenfreetime.Contactwiththeirhomesislimitedto(recentlyavailable)internetconnectionsandanemployer-sponsoredticketonceeverytwoorthreeyears.Jobsareoftenlostwithoutanynoticeandthenatureofthevisameansthatworkershavetoleaveassoonastheyarejobless,astheirvisasaretiedtotheirjobs.AllthisisafarcryfromthesuccessstoriesoftheIndiandiasporacelebratedintheWest,whoarealsooftendescribedasthemodelminorityintheUnitedStates.Farfromconcernsofidentity,retentionofcultureandpossibilitiesofhybriditythatareintegraltosuchnarratives,theGulfexperiencesarestoriesofsurvival,dignityandsmallvictories.Puttingadaughterbackhomeinschool,providingatapfordrinkingwaterinthehouse,evenbuildingasmallhouseafter30yearsofworkcountforvictoriesinthiscontext.Itisperhapsnowonderthatthesestoriesdonotholdattention,disconnectedastheyarefromareadershipwhoarelookingSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
64Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment53forcaptivatingnarrativeswithinmoreaspirationalsettings.ItisalsotruethatmostmigrantstotheArabianGulffromIndiaarefromthesouthernstatesofKeralaandAndhraPradesh.Theirwritings,ifany,areinMalayalamandTelugu,immediatelycuttingthemofffromtheEnglish(orHindi)dominatedreadership.Itisonlyintranslationthatawideraudienceisfound,andsubsequentdisseminationofsuchworkslargelydependonpublicationhouseinterests,accesstoliteraryfestivals,aswellasopportunitiesforparticipationincreativewritingworkshopsorotherliteraryroundtables.Intheirabsence,theglobalnarrativeofmigrationisleftuntoldandthevoicesofthesemigrantworkersaresilenced.AmplifyingtheemergingliteraryvoicesoftheGulfmigrantexperiencewouldhelptore-contextualizeandframethenarrativesofthediasporatobecomemoreinclusiveandnuanced,particularlyintheIndiancontext.PopularculturehasmoresuccessfullytackledissuesofmigrationinKerala,withfilmssuchasVaravelpu(1989),directedbySathyanAnthikadandGulf(2017),directedbySuneelKumarReddy,orinthemorepopularYouTubevideosbyMalayaliresidentsintheUnitedArabEmirates(McGinn,2019).Writtenaccountsarefewerandlessaccessibleowingtopub-licationcostsandthelanguagebarrier.ThefewworksinEnglishthatdealwiththeeverydaylivesofmigrantworkersincludeTemporaryPeoplebyDeepakUnnikrishnanandanEnglishtranslationfromMalayalamofGoatDaysbyBenyamin(2008[2012]).ThesenarrativesframetheconditionoflivingandworkingintheGulfasaseriesofnegotiations,ofcreatingliminalspaceswithintemporaryhomes,anexperiencethatisoftencouchedinterror,fearanddisap-pointment,pointingtoalternativewaysofapproachingmigrationasaliterarytrope.GoatDays(originallywritteninMalayalamasAadujeevithamandtranslatedintoEnglishbyJosephKoyippally)isbasedonatruenarrativetoldbythemaincharactertotheauthor.NajeebhasgivenhislifesavingstoanagentforanopportunitytoworkintheGulf–thedream(andinfact,expectation)ofeveryable-bodiedpersonintheIndianstateofKerala.HeandhisfriendarriveinRiyadhbutarepickedupby(asitlaterturnsout)thewrongsponsorwhotakesthembothtoworkasgoatherdsinadjoiningbutfarawayfarms.Najeebisatfirstconfusedanddisoriented.Heresists,denyingthepossibilitythatthisishislot.Veryearlyon,hetriestoescapehisplaceofworkbyconfidinginthedeliverymanwhorefusestoevenlookathim.Isolatedbylanguage,hehasnomeansofevenaskinghisarbabwhyheisthereandwhathisjobis.Heisthrowninwiththegoatsandgradually,negotiateshislifeasagoatherd.Hesleepsonthefloorintheswelteringheatandtakesthegoatstothedeserttograze,whilehehimselfisdeniedwatertodrink,muchlesstobathein.Hefindsthesmellsnauseatingandcanbarelyrecognizethebeardedmanwhohecametoreplace.Overtime,Najeebbeginstogetusedtohisisolatedlife,seeingnochanceforpersonalsalvation.Helearnstocompletethechoresgiventohimuntilachanceencounterallowsforthepossibilityofescape.Untilthen,heimmerseshimselfinthissurrealworld,suspendedintimeandspace.Theforeignnessofthisexilicspaceisunderlinedbyeverythingaroundhim–thelanguage,thephysicalalienationfromthegreeneryandbodiesofwaternativetohishome,aswellasbeingchargedwithajobheisill-equippedtodo.Hisfirstinstinctistorunawaybuthesoonrealizesthefutilityofescapefromanunforgivingdesertthatlooksalikefromeveryangle.Encounteringa‘scaryfigure’onhisfirstday,hesays‘Ishouldrunawaybeforethathappens.Whereto?Anywhere.How?However.Now,thismoment.…IfIrun,…howlongwillIrun?Whichway?’(p.62).Realizingthatescapeisnotapossibilityinthevastdesert,hebeginstolearntoworkwiththegoats,milkingthemandherdingandtendingtothem,untilhisassociaterunsaway,atwhichpointheiscompletelyalonewiththeherd.Soon,hebeginstoseethegoatsashisfamily,hischildren,hiswife.HeequatesapregnantgoatwithhiswifewhomhehadleftSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6554Handbookofcultureandglocalizationbehindandhetendsspeciallytothelittleonehehelpsbringtotheworld,naminghimNabeel.Aswinterapproaches,hesleepswiththeanimals,erasingthedifferencebetweentheanimalsandtheircarers:‘Ispendthewinterasasheepamongthesheep’(p.140),hesays.Oneday,eatingrawwheat,heacknowledgeshisaffinitywiththeanimalshetendsto:‘Bythen,Ihadindeedbecomeagoat’(p.150).Najeeb’sperplexity,horrorandsubsequentacceptanceofhisfateisnodiasporicangst.Itisadeep-rooted,visceralexperience,whichisnotevensymbolicinitspossibilities.Itisliterallythefateofthousandsofmigrantworkerswhoaretakentocountrieswheretheycannotspeakthelocallanguage,havenofreedomofmovementandfinally,nohope.Asenseoftheuncannyunderlinesthisexperience.Nowhereisthedepictionofdreadandcreepinghorrormoreevoc-ativethaninthevastemptydesertswheretheilliteratemigrantworkeristakentoworkwithnoaccesstoinformationandlittlehopeofescape,furtherburdenedbythelackofknowledgeofthelocallanguage.Theliminalityofdiasporalendsitselftothecreationofpersonal‘third’spaces,whicharenotalwaysspacesofhopeandpotential.Often,thesebecomeaparodyofthehopesandaspirationsthatinitiallyspurredmovementoverseas.Theuncannybecomesalensthroughwhichtoviewhome,asitbecomesahomewhichbecomesgraduallyfamiliar,butitisalwaysahometoescapefrom.Thisbreakdownintherelationbetweentheselfandhome,betweenattemptsatcreatingmeaningfulhomesandbeingtraumatizedinthatattemptistheconditionofthemigrant.Thesimultaneousandcontradictorycurrentsofbeingsettledandyetnot,becomeacontinuumwhichthediaspora,inthiscaseNajeeb,mustnegotiate.InNajeeb’sgradualwritingofhimselfintothestoryofthegoatshehasbeengiventoherd,aswellasthemasarainwhichtheyareherded,thereisanelementoftheuncanny,inthathomeisnowdefinedforhimasaspacebetweenrealityandimagination;itisatoncearoomaswellasafarm;SaudiArabiaaswellaseverywhereandnowhere.Overtime,theforeignhasnowbecomefamiliar,andinfactfamilial,bymakingafundamentalleapoftheimaginationandbecomingagoat.Bycreatingaspacethatishomeintheforeignlandandbyalmostlinkinghimselfwiththeenvironmentaroundhimandbecoming‘agoat’,thetransitionfromtherealtothegothiciscomplete.Thenewhomecanbeathirdspaceofmeaningandcomfort,butitcanalsobeamake-believeworldofsurrealfantasyandhorror.ItisahomewithwhichtheinhabitantsofUnnikrishnan’sTemporaryPeople(2017)wouldbefamiliar.ThiscollectionofshortstoriesrecreatesthegeographicalandsocialtemplateofaGulfstate,withitsinclusionofinkedoutsentences(reminiscentoflocalcensorship),andhalf-finishedstoriestodepicthalf-finishedlives.Berman,writingforTheLosAngelesReviewofBooksin2017,statesthat‘[i]tbothfitsneatlyintothecategoryofGlobalLiteratureandsharesmuchwithatraditionofimmigrantAmericanwritingthatgrappleswithinstitutionalracismandindividualalienation’.Ultimately,though,TemporaryPeopleisaboutasetofexperiencesthatisuniquetotheGulfandtoitssystemofmigrantlabour.Thepeculiarcontextofthestoriesinthiscollectionpointtotheuniversaldespair,frustrationandpainofthedisplaced,buthereitismoregroundedintherealitiesoftheexperienceofkafala,thestate-sponsoredformofrecruitmentparticulartotheGulf,whereeachworkerislinkedtoaspecificemployer.Thus,thereisnofreedomofmovementevenwithinthenarrowconfinesofthelabourcampsandnochancetoescape,asevenpassportsaretakenawaybytheiremployer.Thetitlepointstotemporality,bothintimeandspace,as,oncetheworkiscompleted,themigranthasnoplacetogobutbackhome:‘Oncethelastbrickislaid,theglassspotless,theelevatorsfunctional,theplumbingopera-tional,thelaborers,everysingleoneofthem,begintofade,beforedisappearingcompletely.Somebelievethemenbecomeghosts,hauntingthefacadestheyhelpedbuild’(Unnikrishnan,SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
66Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment552017,p.3).Witheach‘chabter’11revealinganothernumbingaspectofthisinvisibleexistence,interspersedwithArabicnumbersandsketches,the‘novel’emergesasamovingaswellasscathingtakeonmigrantconditions,withaveryspecificfocusonthispartoftheworld.Evenlanguagelosesitsscaffoldingrolefortheinhabitants,astheyareforcedtooperateinahostoflanguagesotherthantheirown:Thewordkelbfoundamangydogandsettledinthemutt’seye,puncturingitscornea.ThewordVellumplummetedintoalittlepuddle,whereitsanktothebottom,meetingthewordMaai.BothVellumandMaai,troubledatfirsttodiscovereachother,negotiatedtocohabitasroom-mates.(Unnikrishnan,2017,p.115)Differentpeopleinhabitthistemporaryworld,includingconstructionworkers,prostitutes,teachers,scientistsandpharmacists.Theyalsorepresentdifferentpartsoftheworld,‘Amreekun-retun’,‘Filipina’,andIndiansandPakistanis,andyet,theyallfacethesamefatetovaryingdegrees.Theirveryexistencehereisdeterminedbywhetherornottheyhaveajob,andforpeoplewhohaveinvestedmuchtobeabletocomeandworkhere,thepriceissilenceandacquiescencetotheextentpossible.Theirtemporalitycouldbefurthershortenedatthemerewhimofthebosses,oranysudden‘changeinrules’,suchasthechangeofretirementageinthesection‘Akbar:Exodus’.Thisisnottheworldofpossibilitiesandhope,butoneofuncertaintyanderasure,oftemporalityandinvisibility,whichisclosertoFreud’ssenseoftheuncannyandaKafkaequemonstrositythananypostcolonialhope.Unnikrishnaniscarefultoframehiscollectionasbeingmorethananaccountofvictimhood.HewouldlikeittobeseenasarepresentationofAbuDhabi,hischildhoodhomeandonetowhichheconstantlyreturns,asaformofnostalgiabutwithanawarenessthatthecityiscontinuallychanging.Thisisnotthedefaultattitudeofa‘Gulfie’,apersonwhohaslivedintheGulf,whothinksofitasaplaceoflivelihoodandlittleelse.ForUnnikrishnan,AbuDhabiisastorehouseofemotions,livedlives,‘surreal’inmanyways,butrealinothers.Ofthecityandthenation-state,hesays:‘Wedealwithsurrealismquitealotinourday-to-daylives,especiallywhenyou’rethinkingaboutwhatthefuturemightlooklikeintheUAE’(Unnikrishnan,2017).Yetitisrootedintherealityofeverydaylife,asNalinakshi,themotherinoneofthestories,shows.Nalinakshiisan80-year-oldwomanwhosesonisinDubai,apravasi.Sheisbeinginterviewedbyoneofthemanyresearcherslookingfor‘therealstory’;‘pravasi’,sheexplains,means‘you’veleftyournativeplace.Pravasimeansyou’llhaveregrets.You’llwantmoney,thenmoremoney’(Unnikrishnan,2017,p.185).Butmorethananything,shesays,pravasimeansabsence.Itistheabsenceofahome,ofcomfort,ofpassingtime,allthatgetslostinthepursuitofsupposedwealthwhichitselfiselusive.Akintoothermigrantwritings,thissenseoffutility,ofalosthomeandtheever-growingdistancebetweenhopesandrealityareevenmorebrutalintheGulfexperience.UnnikrishnanleftTheUnitedArabEmiratesin2001,aschildrenover18arenotallowedtostaythereundertheirparent’svisa.WritinginEnglish,herosetoprominenceoncehiscollectionwontheRestlessBooksPrizeforNewImmigrantWritingandhebecameanactiveparticipantinliteraryfestivalsandforumsonGulfstudies.Ontheotherhand,BenyaminwrotehisnovelGoatDaysinMalayalam,butthenovelwasimmediatelytranslatedintoEnglishandthentootherIndianlanguages,aswellasNepali.TheEnglishtranslationofhislaterworkontheBahraincoupin2011,JasmineDays(2014[2018]),waspublishedbyJuggernaut,anIndianpublicationhousebasedinDelhi.12ThetranslationofGoatDaysintoEnglishclearlycatapulteditsauthortoglobal,oratleastregional,fame,againassertingtheimportance,SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6756Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandlimitation,ofEnglishindepictingahistoricallymarginalexperience.BothGoatDaysandTemporaryPeoplehavegainedpopularityonlywhenplacedinaglocalIndian–Gulf–American(or–Western)context,whereithasbeenpossibletoapproachtheunlikelytaleofGulfmigrationaspartofaglobalexperience,butwithstarklydifferentoutcomes.UnlikethemanyothernarrativesoftheIndiandiaspora,thismigrantexperienceisnotliberatory,nordoesitsoutcomeconsistofagrandstatementofexpatriateangst.Ifanything,itunderlinesthepain,emptinessandeventually,thefutilityofthemigrantexperience.Infact,GoatDaysisbannedinSaudiArabiaandtheUnitedArabEmirates,althoughBenyaminisclearthatthenovelisareflectionofaparticularhumancondition,13furtherassertingtheglocalfocusofthiswork.Bothareexamplesofgloballiteratureproducedinatransnationalcontextandcirculatingwithinaglobalreadership;nevertheless,theyforceusto‘read’theconceptsofmigrationanddiasporadifferently.UsingveryspecificmotifsoftheGulfexperience,thesenovelspointtowaysinwhichnarrativesofmigrationgaintractionwhenseenthroughtheeyesofthekafalasystem,whichisnotreproducedinasimilarmanneranywhereelse.Thisis,infact,anillus-trationofRoudometof’s(2015a)definitionofglocalization‘astherefractionofglobalizationthroughthelocal’(p.399),asithighlightstheinterconnectivityofglobalnotionsofmigrationwithaveryparticularexperienceofit.Glocalreadingsprovideaperspectivetoatextthatisatoncefamiliarandforeign,andmeaningcreationwithinthesespacesallowsforamorenuancedreadingofatextbeyondhomogenizedglobalreadings.CONCLUSIONRoudometof(2016)warnsthatglocalizationshouldnotbeviewedasglocalism,withanactivistagenda,butasaninterdisciplinaryconceptthatallowsforcomplexsocialprocesses.Healsosuggeststhatglocalization‘ingeneralhighlightstheextenttowhichpeopleareseenasactiveandcreativeagentswhoconstructnewformsofauthenticityoutofthecommercialitemsthatareattheirdisposal’(p.140).Thisbottom-upapproachallowsforarangeofexplo-rationsofcreativeworkacrossdifferentgeographicalspaces,whilerecognizingthenetworkedinterplayofcriticalideas.Inliterarystudies,thismanifestsitselfinthemultiplewaysinwhichcreativeworksandtheoryinteractacrossthetime–spacecontinuum,goingbeyonddebatesofthecentreandperiphery,orevencreatingglobalhomogeneity.AsDamrosch(2008)suggests,worldliterature‘shouldunfoldthevariedprocessesandstrategiesthroughwhichwritershaveindividuallyandcollectivelyfurtheredthelongnegotiationbetweenlocalculturesandtheworldbeyondthem’(p.485).BothRoudometofandDamroschusethenotionofrefractiontosuggesthowthelocalandglobalinteract,challengingconventionalapproachesandcriticaltheories.14Newformsofproductionandconsumptionensurethatemergingworksareinstantlyavailabletoadiverseglobalaudience,butthisalsoraisesquestionsofequityandaccess,andultimatelyofrepresentation.Theroleofnewformsofconsumption,suchasliteraryfestivals(nowdigitalizedintheglobalpandemic),booksigningsandonlinebookclubsinfacilitatingglocalapproachestoglobaltextsisbeyondthescopeofthisstudy,buttheypointtowaysinwhichglocalizationasaliterarytoolcouldcontinuetoimpacttwenty-firstcenturynarratives.GivingvoicetovarioussubalternexperienceswithintheGlobalSouthisanimportantwaytolendcredencetoexperienceshithertomarginalizedandsilenced.Whilethecreativepoten-tialofthediasporareadsmigrationasapositiveexperience,the‘Other’migrantnarrativeschallengeouressentializednotionsofdiasporaandforceustoviewtheactofleavinghomeSandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
68Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment57asunsettlingandtraumatic.Thepedagogicalimplicationsofthisapproacharealsoimmenseandworthpursuing.Glocalizationcanthusbecomeadisruptivecriticaltoolthatenablesliteraturetopartakeofglobalcurrentsandmovements,whilefocusingonindividualvoices,contextsandnarratives.Thisinterrelationshipbetweentheglobalandthelocalcouldpointtowaysinwhichearlierdebatesoncentre–peripheryorthenatureofworldliteraturecouldbeapproachedinwaysthatnotonlyensurerepresentation,butalsoreflectthecomplexweavingofinfluencesandcross-currentsbetweenliteraryworks.NOTES1.Attemptstoidentifyanddefineglocalliteraturehavetobeframedawayfrommoretraditionalapproachessuchasintertextualityorliteraryadaptations,whichwerehistoricallymorecommon.Theglocalbenefitsfromaconsciouscirculationofideas,withtheglobalmergingintoalocalcontextandbeingre-createdintoanewentity.AsGutierrezsays,‘[g]localisationismostsignificantandcreativewhentheblendingofglobalsignsandlocalmeaningsilluminatestheexistenceofdif-ferencewithinsameness,andassuchenrichesbothdomains’(2014,p.348).Thisisquitedifferentfromliteraryadaptationsthatcanbeseenwithinandbetweenvariousculturesacrosshistory,suchastheBuddhistinfluencesintheworksofT.S.EliotandW.B.Yeats,thecontinuingadaptationsofShakespeare,aswellasfairytales,includingDisneyversions.Glocalizationsuggestsafarmoreconsciousawarenessofusingglobaltropesforlocalrepresentation.2.Infact,criticshavesuggestedthatliteraturedefinesanation,nottheotherwayaround.Saussy(2001)suggeststhatliteraturecreatesnationalismbeforeitstime,whileDamrosch(2013)suggeststhatworldliteratureisnottheoppositeofnationalliterature,butemergesfromit.3.‘Cosmopolitan’isusedhereinthepostcolonicalcontextofWesternization,‘aformofglobalcitizenship;amembershipinandidentificationwithaworldcommunitythattranscendslocality–whetherthatlocalitybetribe,culture,raceornation–andwhichrespectsdifferencesnonetheless’.SeeGo(2013).4.Infact,theBlackLivesMattermovement,whichbeganinApril2020intheUnitedStates,sawparallelmovementsinIndia,withactivistsandacademicsinvestigatingpolicebrutalityagainstreligiousandcasteminorities.Thispointstotheglocalnatureofactivismandsubsequently,toacademictheories.5.InJune2020,acasewasfiledinCaliforniaagainstCisco,theITcompany,forcastediscriminationagainstanemployee,acasewhichisseentohaverepercussionsacrosstheentireITindustryintheUnitedStates.TheglobalreachofaspecificallyIndiansocialsystemmakesforacompellingcasetostudythewaysinwhichglocalizationcouldhavenegativeeffectsoncommunitiesandindustries.Fordetails,seeSoundararajan(2020).6.SanyalexploresthewayinwhichBuddhismtravelledfromSouthernIndiatoIndonesia,Thailand,China,andothersouth-eastAsiankingdoms,onlytobeinterpretedindifferentwaysasitestab-lisheditselfintheselands.7.WhileRoudometof(2015b)doessuggestthatglocalizationshouldnotbeassociatedwithideasofhybridityandtransnationalism,linkingtheseglobalideastomarginalliteraturesallowsforsus-tainedglocalreadingsthatcentrehithertosilencedexperiencesandvoices.8.MostmigrantsfromIndiagoingovertoworkintheArabianGulfhaveanECNRstampontheirpassports;theymustundergoofficialchecksfromgovernmentalagencies,astheytendtobesemi-literateandvulnerabletofraudulentagenciesthatcandupethemintonon-existentjobs,leadingtotrafficking.9.ThisisparticularlytrueofdomesticworkerswhoareseeminglyindispensabletoaGulfhousehold,butalsoseenasathreattothelanguageandcultureofthechildrenwhoareseentobelearningpidginArabicfromthem.10.SeeMehta(2020)formoreinformationontheliteratureofindenturedwomen.11.UnnikrishnanusesthisArabpronunciationof‘chapter’inhisbook,anotherwayinwhichhemimicsandtransportstheArabGulfexperiencetohisfiction.SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
6958Handbookofcultureandglocalization12.ThemannerinwhichallthesenovelsarecatapultedintotheglobalplatformupontranslationintoEnglish,andwhenpublishedbyinternationallyestablishedoutfits,pointstootherissuesofrecog-nitionandvisibilitythatconcernwritersbeyondthereachofGlobalEnglishreaders.Thisisfurtherproblematizedwithissuessuchasaccesstoliteraryfestivals,digitallaunchesandothermodesofpublicity,whichoftenguaranteeEnglishauthorsbothaspaceandrecognition.13.BenyaminalsostatesthatheleftBahrainfollowingthepublicationofhisnextnovelJasmineDays(2014[2018]),knowingthathewouldnotbeabletostaythereaftersuchapoliticalnovel.14.Roudometof(2015a,p.399)saysthat‘glocalizationisglobalizationrefractedthroughthelocal’,whileDamrosch(2003,p.514)suggeststhat:Worldliteratureisthusalwaysasmuchaboutthehostculture’svaluesandneedsasitisaboutawork’ssourceculture;hence,itisadoublerefraction,onethatcanbedescribedthroughthefigureoftheellipse,withthesourceandhostculturesprovidingthetwofocithatgeneratetheellipticalspacewithinwhichaworklivesasworldliterature,connectedtobothcultures,circumscribedbyneitheralone.REFERENCESAlsanousi,S.(2012),TheBambooStalk,trans.byJ.Wright(2015),Doha,Qatar:BloomsburyQatarFoundationPublishing.Amuta,C.(1989),TheoryofAfricanLiterature:ImplicationsforPracticalCriticism(2017),London,UK:ZedBooks.Bahadur,G.(2013),CoolieWoman:TheOdysseyofIndenture,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Barakat,H.(1998),HarithAlMiya,trans.byM.Booth,TheTillerofWaters(2001),Cairo,Egypt:AmericanUniversityofCairoPress.Beck,U.(2006),CosmopolitanVision,Malden,MA:Polity.Benyamin(2008),GoatDays,trans.byJ.Koyippally(2012),London,UK:Penguin.Benyamin(2014),JasmineDays,trans.byS.Habib(2018),NewDelhi,India:JuggernautBooks.Berman,J.R.(2017),‘MigrantVernaculars:DeepakUnnikrishnan’s“TemporaryPeople”’,LosAngelesReviewofBooks,12April,accessed12July2020athttps://lareviewofbooks.org/article/migrant-vernaculars-deepak-unnikrishnans-temporary-people/.Bhaba,H.(2020),‘TheGovernanceoftheUnprepared:HomiBhabainConversationwithSanjoyK.Roy’,JaipurLiteratureFestival,accessed12July2020athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUbBBvSkSZs&t=3062s.Bryman,A.(2006),‘GlobalImplicationsofMcDonaldizationandDisneyization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),McDonaldization:TheReader,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress,pp.319–25.Dabashi,H.(2012),TheArabSpring:TheEndofPostcolonialism,London,UK:ZedBooks.Damrosch,D.(2003),‘Worldliterature,NationalContexts’,ModernPhilology,100(4),512–31.Damrosch,D.(2008),‘TowardaHistoryofWorldLiterature’,NewLiteraryHistory,39(3),481–95.Damrosch,D.(2013),‘GlobalComparatismandtheQuestionofLanguage’,PMLA,128(3),622–8.Doherty,B.(2014),‘TheCenterCannotHold:TheDevelopmentofWorldLiteratureAnthologies’,Alif:JournalofComparativePoetics,34,100–124.Eoyang,E.C.(2005),Two-wayMirrors:Cross-CulturalPerspectivesonGlocalization,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Farrell,H.andA.Newman(2020),‘WilltheCoronavirusEndGlobalizationasWeKnowit?’,ForeignAffairs,16March,accessed10July2020athttps://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2020-03-16/will-coronavirus-end-globalization-we-know-it.Fiedler,R.A.(2020),‘FromCorporationismtoCooperationism:ReversedGlobalization,CooperativePoliticsandExpandingOnlineCommunicationinPost-pandemictime’,SocietyRegister,4(3),161–8.Ghosh,A.(1992),‘Petrofiction’,NewRepublic,206(9),29–34.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2012),‘Glocalization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheWiley-BlackwellEncyclopediaofGlobalization,London,UK:BlackwellPublishing.Go,J.(2013),‘Fanon’sPostcolonialCosmopolitanism’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,16(2),208–25.SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
70Weavingliterarynarratives:worldliteratureanditsglocalmoment59Goswami,C.(2016),GlobalizationbeforeitsTime:TheGujaratiMerchantsfromKachchh,London,UK:Penguin.Govind,N.(2016),‘WhatDoesSanskritAestheticsOffertheContemporaryNovel?’,Samyukta:AJournalofGender&Culture,16(1),90–103.Gutierrez,A.K.(2014),‘AmericanSuperheroes,MangaCutenessandtheFilipinoChild:TheEmergenceofGlocalPhilippineComicsandPicturebooks’,JournalofGraphicNovelsandComics,5(3),344–60.Gutierrez,A.K.(2017),Mixed-Magic:Global-localDialoguesinFairyTalesforYoungReaders,Amsterdam,TheNetherlands:JohnBenjaminsPublishingCompany.Hamed,H.(2014),ShewhoCountstheStairs,Beirut,Lebanon:DarAl-Adab.Hampton,K.N.(2010),‘Internetuseandtheconcentrationofdisadvantage:Glocalizationandtheurbanunderclass’,AmericanBehavioralScientist,53(8),1111–32.Hassan,W.S.(2000),‘WorldLiteratureintheAgeofGlobalization:ReflectionsonanAnthology’,CollegeEnglish,63(1),38–47.Hogan,P.C.andL.Pandit(eds)(1995),LiteraryIndia:ComparativeStudiesinAesthetics,Colonialism,andCulture,Albany,NY:SUNYPress.hooks,b.(1990),‘MarginalityasaSiteofResistance’,inR.Ferguson,M.Gever,T.T.Minh-haandC.West(eds),OutThere:MarginalizationandContemporaryCultures,Cambridge,MAandLondon,England:MITPress.pp.341–43.Jenkins,H.(2006),Fans,Bloggers,andGamers:ExploringParticipatoryCulture,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Kanafani,G.(1962),MenintheSun,trans.byH.Kilpatrick(1999),Boulder,CO:LynneRienner.Khondker,H.H.(2013),‘Globalization,Glocalization,orGlobalStudies:What’sinaName?’Globalizations,10(4),527–31.Krishnaswamy,R.(2010),‘TowardWorldLiteraryKnowledges:TheoryintheAgeofGlobalization’,ComparativeLiterature,62(4),399–419.Langwald,S.(2011),‘TheSelfandtheCity:Narrating“Glocal”SpacesandIdentitiesinDionneBrand’sWhatWeAllLongFor’,ZeitschriftfürAnglistikundAmerikanistik,59(2),123–34.Lawall,S.(ed.)(2010),ReadingWorldLiterature:Theory,History,Practice,Austin,TX:UniversityofTexasPress.Lee,S.W.andC.Ducruet(2009),‘SpatialGlocalizationinAsia-PacificHubPortCities:AComparisonofHongKongandSingapore’,UrbanGeography,30(2),162–84.Livingston,R.E.(2001),‘GlocalKnowledges:AgencyandPlaceinLiteraryStudies’,PublicationsoftheModernLanguageAssociationofAmerica,116(1),145–57.Ma,N.(2016),TheAgeofSilver:TheRiseoftheNovelEastandWest,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Macdonald,G.(2017),‘“MonstrousTransformer”:PetrofictionandWorldLiterature’,JournalofPostcolonialWriting,53(3),289–302.Matar,N.(2000),Turks,Moors,andEnglishmenintheAgeofDiscovery,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.McGinn,J.(2019),‘StereotypingintheGulf:ComedyandNon-ResidentLifeintheUnitedArabEmirates’,LSEMiddleEastCentreBlog,9September,accessed28October2020athttps://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mec/2019/09/09/stereotyping-in-the-gulf-comedy-and-non-resident-indian-life-in-the-emirates/.Mehta,S.R.(2018),‘Introduction:FramingStudiesinGlocalization’,inS.R.Mehta(ed.),LanguageandLiteratureinaGlocalWorld,Singapore:Springer,pp.1–11.Mehta,S.R.(2020),‘FindingaVoice:LiteraryRepresentationsofIndenturedWomen’,inA.Pande(ed.),IndenturedandPost-IndenturedExperiencesofWomenintheIndianDiaspora,Singapore:Springer,pp.67–80.Mufti,A.R.(2016),ForgetEnglish!:OrientalismsandWorldLiteratures,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Munif,A.(1987),CitiesofSalt:ANovel,trans.byP.Theroux(1987),NewYork,NY:RandomHouseInc.Naidu,J.(2013),‘ADeeperOcean’,inJ.MahabirandM.Pirbhai(eds),CriticalPerspectivesonIndo-CaribbeanWomen’sLiterature,London,UK:Routledge,p.1.SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7160HandbookofcultureandglocalizationOduro-Frimpong,J.(2009),‘GlocalizationTrends:TheCaseofHiplifeMusicinContemporaryGhana’,InternationalJournalofCommunication,3,1085–1106.Rajan,R.(2020),‘Prof.RajanExaminesCovid19’sImpactontheGlobalEconomy’,UChicagoNews,17April,accessed10July2020athttps://news.uchicago.edu/story/prof-raghuram-rajan-examines-covid-19s-impact-global-economy.Rao,S.(2009),‘GlocalizationofIndianJournalism’,JournalismStudies,10(4),474–88.Rao,S.(2010),‘“IneedanIndiantouch”:GlocalizationandBollywoodfilms’,JournalofInternationalandInterculturalCommunication,3(1),1–19.Renda,G.(2005),‘TheOttomanEmpireandEurope:CulturalEncounters’,inE.İhsanoğlu(ed.),CulturalContactsinBuildingaUniversalCivilisation:IslamicContributions,Fatih,Turkey:IRCICA,pp.277–303.Ritzer,G.(2000),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Ritzer,G.andP.Dean(2015),Globalization:ABasicText,2ndedition,Hoboken,NJ:Wiley-Blackwell.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-SpaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Roberston(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.25–44.Robertson,R.(2012),‘GlobalisationorGlocalisation?’,TheJournalofInternationalCommunication,18(2),191–208.Robertson,R.(2014),‘RolandRobertson’,Globalizations,11(4),447–59.Roudometof,V.(2015a),‘TheorizingGlocalization:ThreeInterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Roudometof,V.(2015b),‘MappingtheGlocalTurn:LiteratureStreams,ScholarshipClusterandDebates’,Glocalism:JournalofCulture,PoliticsandInnovation,3,1–21.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Rushdie,S.(1981),Midnight’sChildren,NewYork,NY:RandomHouse.Rushdie,S.(1992),ImaginaryHomelands:EssaysandCriticism1981–1991,London,UK:Penguin.Sanyal,S.(2016),TheOceanofChurn:HowtheIndianOceanShapedHumanHistory,London,UK:Penguin.Saussy,H.(2001),GreatWallsofDiscourseandOtherAdventuresinCulturalChina,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Sharp,J.(2008),GeographiesofPostcolonialism,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Soundararajan,T.(2020),‘Opinion:ANewLawsuitShinesaLightonCasteDiscriminationintheU.S.andaroundtheWorld’,13July,accessed21July2020athttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/13/new-lawsuit-shines-light-caste-discrimination-us-around-world/.Spivak,G.(2020),‘TheLeftReflectsontheGlobalPandemic’,transformeurope,15May,accessed10July2020athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EseEPBQoVLE.UNDESA(2020),‘EveryoneIncluded:SocialImpactofCOVID-19’,accessed11July2020athttps://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/Everyone-included-covid-19.html.Unnikrishnan,D.(2017),TemporaryPeople,Brooklyn,NY:RestlessBooks.Wang,N.(2014),‘CosmopolitanismandtheInternationalizationofChineseliterature’,inA.DuranandH.Yuhan(eds),MoYaninContext:NobelLaureateandGlobalStoryteller,WestLafayette,IN:PurdueUniversityPress,pp.167–81.White,A.(2020),‘HowPandemicsShapeSociety’,TheHub,9April,accessed12July2020athttps://hub.jhu.edu/2020/04/09/alexandre-white-how-pandemics-shape-society/.Yaeger,P.(2007),‘Editor’sColumn:TheEndofPostcolonialTheory?ARoundtablewithSunilAgnani,FernandoCoronil,GauravDesai,MamadouDiouf,SimonGikandi,SusieTharu,andJenniferWenzel’,PMLA,122(3),633–51.SandhyaRaoMehta-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:13AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
724.Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal:philosophy’sdiversedebtsanddutiesBruceB.JanzCONCEPTSANDTHEIRPROVENANCE:PHILOSOPHYANDTHEGLOCALTheorizingarelativelyrecentconceptsuchastheglocalrequiresunderstandingthecloudofrelatedandadjacentconceptstoit,aswellasbeingclearonwhatroleitfillsthatwasnotalreadyfilledbysomethingelse.Furthermore,itrequiresbeingattentivetodisciplinaryhistories,sinceconceptsarenotjustintellectualobjectsbutproductsofmethodologies,epis-temologiesandpolitics.Anumberofexistingsourcesgivesomeofthisbackground.VictorRoudometof(2019),ZygmuntBauman(1998),RolandRobertson(1995)andothersfocusonitsrootsinsociology,geography,andrelatedareas.Thisbackgroundisimportantandusefulbecausethesewritersattemptinvariouswaystodefineanddifferentiateglocalismfromotherrelatedconcepts.Thisisataskthatphilosophersoftenundertake,butofcourseitisoftendonebythoseinareaswhereanewconceptoriginates.Whenitisdoneinthosespacesofthought,theanalysisoftenstartsfromtheassumptionsandmethodsofthearea,whichistobeexpected.Philosophersdonotstartfromanabstractobjectiveanalyticposition,assomemightthink–philosopherstoohavetheirhistories,commitmentsandmethodologies,andtheseinflectanalysisaswell.Foraconceptsuchastheglocal,thosecommitmentsandmethodologiescanbeausefulwayofthinkingthroughwhattheconceptaccomplisheswithindisciplinaryspaces,andwhatitmightaccomplishasitmovesfromonespacetoanother(formoreonthis,seeBal,2001).Asweconsiderhowphilosophyhasorcouldengagetheglocal,itisimportanttotakeastepbackbrieflyandunderstandhowphilosophyengagesconceptsingeneral.Theconceptoftheconceptisarguablytheprimaryobjectofanalysisandconsiderationforphilosophy,andthatgivesphilosophyadeepanddetailedhistorywithconcepts,butalsosomeblindspots.Philosophyconceptualizes,thatis,itengagesinthecreationandmanipulationofconcepts,andtheglocalisapossiblepointofentryintohowthatmighthappen.Itisraretoseethattermused,though;instead,weseetermssuchas‘world’or‘lifeworld’,whichhasthesenseoflivedexperienceinmeaningfulspaceandissometimesmediatedbyecumene,cosmosandglobe.Inaddition,wecanseethespaceofconceptualizationashappeningatedgesandborders,andsothespaceofthehybridandsyncreticspacecanbedeeplyphilosophicalaswell.Whenconceptsaretheobjectofconsideration,thereisatendencytofocusonwhatisfixedorunchangingandignoreanythingthatmightbeseenasincidentalorcontingent.AsfarbackasPlato,Westernphilosophyhasconsideredconceptstobeuniversals.Ifwewanttoknowabouttruthorbeauty,wethink,wearenotaskingaboutwhatsomepeopleatsometimeorinsomeplacethoughtaboutthesethings,butaboutthenatureoftheconceptitself.Thehard61BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7362Handbookofcultureandglocalizationworkofconcepts,then,istomovepastwhatmightseempersuasiveaboutconcepts,toreachwhatisreallytrueaboutthem.Thisis,ofcourse,anoversimplificationofthelifeofconcepts.Thereischangeovertime,butthegoalremainsthesame,whichistoarriveattruth.Ofcourse,therehavebeenanynumberofefforts,byphilosophersandothers,toquestionthispictureofconcepts.Theymightbeseenashistoricallysituatedandproduced(Marx),arationalizedproductofirrationalforcesandtensions(Freud),themanifestationandexerciseofpowerstructuresfrominnumerablepointstosolidifytheirownexistenceandadvantage(Foucaultandmanyothers),andsoforth.Butinthebackgroundformostphilosophers,theideathatconceptsareuniversalremainsinfluentialevenwhenrejectedorarguedagainst.Whyisthishistorysignificant?Becausetheconceptoftheglocal,andothersclusteredarounditandwhichstandascontrastingorcontextualizingconcepts(becauseconceptsdonotjustrefertofeaturesofaworld,butalsoexistintensionwithotherconcepts),isnotaconceptthatcomesoutofthephilosophicallexicon.Aswithanyconcept,philosophycansubjecttheglocaltoscrutinyandanalysis,butitfindsitmuchmoredifficulttoseetheglocalasinanywayrelevanttophilosophy’sowninternallydevelopedcatalogueofconcepts.Totheextentthatweseetheglocalasrelevanttoknowledge,forsomephilosophersatleastwehaveleftphilosophyandengagedwithsomeotherdiscipline–history,perhaps(intheformofhis-toricization),orpolitics(reducingphilosophytopower),orsociology(seeingphilosophyasafunctionofthesocialworldinwhichitexistsoroutofwhichitcame),orliterature(reducingphilosophytoitsformsoftextualization).Thisisbynomeansthefirsttimephilosophyhasbeeninthisposition.Forexample,philos-ophyhastheorizedplace,butrarelyhasdonethiswithitsownplace.Wecancertainlytellthestoryofthedevelopmentofphilosophyinspecifictimesandplaces,philosophersthink,andtheinfluencesthatmighthaveproducedparticularkindsofconversations,butphilosophyquaphilosophystillfocusesonconceptsthatareuniversal.Assuch,philosophyasadiscipline,atleastinitspurestsense,haslargelyremainedatarm’slengthfromregardingitsownplacesasphilosophicallyrelevanttoitsownactivity.Thestoryofphilosophy’sforgettingofplaceanditsrediscoveryisbrilliantlytoldbyEdwardCaseyinTheFateofPlace(Casey,1998).Andyet,thestoryismorecomplicatedthanthat,andinawaythathighlightswhytheglocalisimportant.Itisnotaconceptthatcomesoutofphilosophyitself.Itsprovenanceiselsewhere,anditexistswithinaclusterofconceptsmeanttogivehigh-leveldescriptionsandexplanationsofsocialphenomena.Wecantraceitsforebearconcepts,backthroughglobalizationandthelocal,toearlieraccountsofsocialformationandstabilityfoundinsociology,anthropology,politicalscience,andelsewhere.Thepointisthattheglocalhastheprovenanceofaconceptmeanttodescribeandexplainsocialphenomenainamannerthatpreviousconceptsmissed.Thisisnotthenormalmannerofoperationofphilosophers.Whilephilosophersmightstrivetodescribeandexplain,theyusuallymeansomethingdifferentbythatthansocialscientistsdo.Whilefocusingontheglocalcan,then,raisequestionsaboutphilosophy’sdebtstoitsownplaces,thephilosopher’stoolboxisalsousefultothinkthroughwhattheglocalmightmeanapartfromsimplytheorizingthetensionbetweenglobalnetworksandflowsandlocalprac-ticesandproducts,betweenspacesofpossibilityandplacesofmeaning,betweencosmopol-itanconversationsandnationalandethnicidentities.Theglocalisaspaceoftension;indeed,thepointatwhichthequestionoftheglocalcomesclosesttophilosophyispreciselyinthetensionitembodies.Thisissomethingphilosophyhaslongbeenfamiliarwith.Theuniversalisimportant,buthowdoesitmanifestinthehumanworld?That’sthediscussionofrealismvs.nominalisminBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
74Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal63theEuropeanMiddleAges.Howdoesfaithrelatetoreason?Whatconnectioncantheinfinitehavetothefinite,thewholetothepart,universaltoparticular,beingtobecoming,formtomatter,theeternaltothetemporal?Everytimeaphilosopherproposesastructureforunder-standingsomeaspectofreality,itisalmostguaranteedthatanopposingstructurehasbeengenerated,acounter-conceptcomesintobeingwhichstandsintensionwithit.OutofitwegetcreativetensionsevidentinfiguresasdiverseasPlotinus,Augustine,HildegardofBingen,Aquinas,Spinoza,Hume,Kant,Hegel,Marx,Kierkegaard,Nietzsche,Heidegger,Arendt,Derrida,IrigarayandDeleuze,tonamejustsome.Theglocalembodiesjustsuchaninternalcreativeconceptualtension,andthat,alongwithanydescriptiveorexplanatorypowerithas,makesitnotonlyofinteresttophilosophy,butalsopotentiallyabletospeaktophilosophyinitsownterms.Itshouldbeclearthatphilosophersrarelyusetheterm‘glocal’,buttheconceptitselfiswidelypresentinmanyactivitiesandmodalitiesofengagementphilosophyhaswiththeworld.ItistiedtotherenaissanceintheconceptofplaceandrelatedideasthatwehaveseeninEdwardCasey,JeffMalpas,JanetDonohoe,andotherswhoarebroadlyinthephenomenolog-icalandhermeneuticaltradition.Itisconnectedtore-evaluationsofcosmopolitanismsuchasthosewehaveseeninDerrida,andwaysithasbeenrecastinareassuchastheAfropolitan.Wecanseeitintheriseofinterestwithinphilosophyinculturalphilosophies,whichhavemovedfrombeingprimarilycomparativetoattendingtotheconditionsofconceptualproductioninspecificplaces.Thebestwaytounpackthesewouldbetoidentifyseveralmodalitiesofengagement(wemightthinkofthisasformsofquestioning)betweenphilosophyandglocalism.1.Thefirstwouldbephilosophy’snormalmodeofoperation,whichistosubjectaconcepttocriticalanalysis.Wecouldanalysetheglocaltotrytodetermineitsnatureandproperapplications.2.Thesecondmodalitywouldbetoaskaboutwaysinwhichphilosophyisimplicatedbyitsownplaces,itsownflowsandlocalities.3.Thethirdmodalitywouldbetoseephilosophyasoneoftheagentsofthatglocality,notsimplycreatedbymaterialandsocialforcesbutalsocontributingtothatcreation.4.Finally,thefourthmodalityofengagementiswhatIhaveelsewheretermed‘philosophy-in-place’,thatis,philosophyengagementoftheconceptswhichhavearisenfromplacesandbeenscaffoldedbythem,andthecreationandproductionofnewconceptsadequatetothoseplaces.Thisversionoftheglocalturnstheinherenttensionintheconceptintoacreativemoment,ratherthananexplanatorytooloraconceptinneedofanalysis.Thesefourmodalitieswillprovideanapproachtothinkingthroughsomeexamplesofhowphilosophymightberelevanttotheglocal,andhowtheglocalmightberelevanttophilosophy.MODALITYONE:PHILOSOPHYTHINKSTHEGLOCALAnalysingaconceptmeansunderstandingbothitscomposition(theintentionaldefinition),aswellasitsprovenanceandrelatedconcepts(itscontextualdefinition).Someoftheworkofconceptualanalysishasbeendonealready,atleastwithsomeoftheseconcepts,evenwhentheglocalitselfhasnotbeenforegrounded.InglisandRobertson(2011),forinstance,teaseoutsomeoftheconnectionsandtensionsbetweenthecosmopolitan,glo-BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7564Handbookofcultureandglocalizationbalizationandglobality.Roudometof(2019)connectstheglobal,thelocalandplace.Bauman(1998)mapstheglobalandthelocalontotheclassicdistinctionmadeinsociologybyTönniesbetweenGesellschaftandGemeinschaft.Francois(2015,pp.61–75)analysestheglocalinthecontextofeducationasoneofseveralthings:segmentedglobalintegration,localaccommoda-tion,partnership,open-mindedness,andseedforsustainability.Theconstellationofrelatedconceptstotheglocalisrichandvaried.Themostobviousonesarethetwooutofwhichthisportmanteauwasconstructed:theglobalandthelocal.Thelocalraisesfurtherquestions,aboutplace,home,people,heritage,tradition,andsoforth.Theglobal,likewise,raisesfurtherconnections,totheearth,theworld,theuniverse,thecosmo-politanandmondialization.Theserelatedtermsmatter.Theglobeisnotthesameastheworld.Aglobeisaspaceofinterconnections,nodesandpathways.Italsoconnotesatotality.Worldsarespacesofmeaning.Wecanthinkmeaningfullyabouttheworld(oreventheuniverse)ofHarryPotter,andbythatmeanthespaceinwhichmeaningfulactiontakesplace,wherewecanexpectcertainkindsofcharactersandrulesandhistories.Auniverse,atleastinfiction,amountstothesamething,andinsomemediafranchisesweeventalkaboutamultiverse(atermuseddifferentlyinliteraturethanincosmology),whichisaninteractionbetweenotherwisehermeticallysealedspacesofmeaning.Thecosmosofcosmopolitanism(atleastinthinkerssinceKant’s‘IdeaforaUniversalHistoryfromaCosmopolitanPerspective’and‘TowardsPerpetualPeace’–forbothessays,seeKant,1795[2006])isaspaceofinteractionandaffectatalevelthattranscendsthenationorthestate.Itsuggestsawayofconstitutingtheselfthatdoesnotreducetoethnicorracialties,andfurthersuggestsadeliberatelychosencommunitybasedonmoreuniversalorabstractprinciples.Theearthadmitslayersofmeaningandinteractionthatgowellbeyondthehuman.Toinvoketheearthistoappealtohumanembeddednessinanaturaldynamicorder.Finally,mondialization,atermassociatedwithDerridaandsomeotherFrenchthinkers,isaresponsetotheuseoftheglobalelsewhereinEurope.Itcomeswithagreatersenseofthesocialandhistoricalaspectoftheworld,andtendstosuggestanopen-endednessratherthanatotality(seeLi,2007).Ifwemovetothinkaboutthesetermsoutsideoftheirhumanformsofengagement,wefindanothersetofassociations.Wecanthinkabouttheliteralglobe,theearthonwhichwelive,andthecosmosasthephysicaluniverse.Philosophersofsciencehavebeenengaged,alongsidescientists,withthinkingthroughjustwhatthesethingsare.Atthemostspeculativereachesofcosmologicalphysics,wecanseecosmosprimarilyintermsoftheforcesthatoriginateandstructurereality.Inancientsources,cosmoshasmoretodowiththeuniverseasaunifiedorevenorganicwhole.So,‘cosmos’hasverydifferentsenses,dependingonwhetherweincludeorremovehumanengagement.Likewise,wecouldlookattheothertermsinasimilarlyambiguousfashion.Ifweremovehumanengagement,wecouldstillthinkabouttheinterrelationshipofthewholeandtheparts.Doingsowouldbringustowhatphilosopherscall‘mereology’,thestudyoftherelationshipbetweenwholesandparts.Returningtoformsofhumanengagement,asimilarsetofdistinctionscouldbemadewiththerelatedconceptstothelocal,suchasplace,location,homeorregion.Thelocalisaplaceincloserelationshiptooneselfandone’stasks.Itisnotalocation(thatis,apointonamap).Itmightwellbeaplace,butitisaparticularkindofplace.Itisnotjustaregion,ifbythatwemeanthekindofplacethathassignificanceonlytothosealreadyconnectedtoit.Andhomebringswithitotherconnotations,ofbelonging,in-habitation,familiarity,andsustainingcon-nectionsasmuchasoppressivesurveillanceandpressuretoconform,thatwemightnotwanttoentirelyconnecttothelocal.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
76Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal65So,therelativelyrecentcreationoftheconceptoftheglocalleveragessomeexistingrelatedconcepts.Theconceptalsofillsagapnotcurrentlyfilledbyotherconcepts.Globalization,forinstance,stronglyemphasizesflows,networks,connectionsandinterchange.Thestrengthofthisisthatitcanmodellarge-scaleinteractionsandcause–effectrelationships,anditcangiveastructuralaccountofincentives,actionsandotherphenomenaatbothalarge-scaleandagranularlevel.Whatitsacrificesisthehumanityinherentintheworld,asunderstoodintermsofthefreeandreflectiveactionofpeoplewithintheircommunities.Thisiswhatputtingthelocalbackintoplaywiththeglobalameliorates,anditdoessoinamannernotneededifthelarge-scaletermwewereusingwasworld,universeoreventhecosmosofcosmopolitanism.Theglocalplacesintensionastructuralaccountwithanexistentialone.Asarecentconcept,theglocalcomestomeanarangeofthingsdependingonthediscipli-narycontextandonthequestionsbeingaskedtowhichtheconceptisananswer.Ifwethinkaboutconceptsasperformingfunctionsoraccomplishingthings,furtherquestionsareraised.Whatdoestheconceptoftheglocalaccomplishindisciplinesotherthanphilosophy?Thisdiffersdependingonthediscipline.Forsomedisciplinesitisadescriptiveconcept,explicatingfeaturesoftheworld.Forothers,itisexplanatory.Therecanbeanormativesensetoitsuseaswell–itcanbeaconceptthatcomeswithasenseofdesirabilityorundesirability.Theglocalmightalsobeaspaceofthought,thatis,itmightnotdescribeapropertyofsomethingorastateofbeing,butaspaceinwhichpracticesandconceptscanbecreatedandsustained.Theglocalcanbeaboutidentity.Itcanbeabouttherecognitionthattherearestillbordersandplaceseveninaworldwheretherearealsoflowsandinteractions.Itcanbeabouttheuniqueplace-basedmanifestationsoflargertendenciesorforces.Ifphilosophythinksaboutplace,itmightthinkabouttheapplicationofthoughttospecificcircumstances.Perhapstheonethingthatphilosophycancontributetothisanalysisofconceptsaroundglocalizationistothinkaboutthetensionbetweenthecompositetermshere–theglobalandthelocal.Philosophyhasalonghistoryofthinkingabouthowconceptscanexistintension.Asalreadynoted,beingandbecoming,universalsandparticulars,existenceandessence,formandmatter,individualsandgroups–theseandmanymorehavebeenkeytophilosophicalcreativitysincethebeginning,inmanytraditions.Thewaysofapproachingthesetensionshavevaried.Inthecaseofthetensionbetweentheglobalandthelocal,wemightimaginethatthetensioncoversamorefoundationalstate.Wemighttrytotranscendit,thatis,wemightseeitasamomentinanevolutiontowardssomethinggreater.Wemighttakeonesideandregardtheotherasillusion.Orwemightseethetaskoflivingasholdingbothatthesametimeandnavigatingtheanxietyoftensiononamoment-by-momentbasis.Insteadofthinkingoftheglocalasaconceptthatservesasadescriptionoranexplanationofsomephenomenonintheworld,itcanbeaspaceinwhichcreativethoughtandaction,andtheemergenceofhumansubjectivitycanhappen.Whatwoulditmeantoliveasifboththeglobalandthelocalwerereal,andneitherwasreducibletotheother,neitherwasafunctionoftheother?Wehave,academicallyandculturally,beenenamouredatdifferenttimeswithboththeglobalandthelocal.Theglobalseemstoprovideanaccountfortheflowoflabourandcapital,butalsotheinfluenceofculture,imageandideaacrossspace.Thelocal,understoodinsomecasesastheregionalandinsomeassimplyplace,providesawayoftalkingaboutmaterialityandembodiment,andthecirculationofsignifiersthathappenatthatlevel.Onewaythatphilosophycanentertheconversation,inotherwords,istodowhatphiloso-phydoesbest,whichistoreflectontheontologyanddynamicsofconcepts.‘Ontology’hereincludesmetaphysics,butismeanttoemphasizenotjustourdescriptionsofthenatureofBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7766Handbookofcultureandglocalizationrealitybutalsothewaysthattheelementsofrealityrelatetoeachother.Wemightfindthattheglocalcomesclosetoothertheoreticalmodels,evensurprisingones.Wecould,forinstance,seeaversionoftheglocalinKierkegaard’sthought.Heresistedthedissipatinganduniver-salizingtendencyofHegel’sphilosophybyreassertingtheimportanceoftheindividual,andwhathedidcameveryclosetotheideathattheindividualbroughtforthformsofuniversalityinhisaction,andindoingsobecamefullyindividualatthesametime.Ifweseetheglocalinthoseterms,weseetheactionofindividualsandcommunitiesnotsimplyapplyingoradoptingmultinationalcorporatecultureandgivingitalocaltwist,butinsteadallowinganewformofindividualitytoemerge.Wehavesomethingmoreliketheradicallydiverseformsoflocalitythatcancomewhenpeopleusesocialmediaplatforms.Thoseplatformsmightseemlike(andmightclaimthat)theyconnecttheworldusingasinglecorporatetool,butinfacttheyareavectoractivatingahostofdifferentwaysofbeinglocal,andinfactallowingahostofemergentculturalformstoexist.This,then,isthefirstmodalityofphilosophy’sengagementwiththeglocal,anditisalreadyafruitfulone.Ifweseeglocalityasembeddedwithinthedisciplinaryquestionsinwhichitemerged,andalteredbythedisciplinesthatadoptit,wecanseethatphilosophy’sengagementcanbringanothertoolboxtothisconcept.MODALITYTWO:PHILOSOPHYSITSINPLACESThetitleofthissectionmightbefamiliartoscholarsofplace.WisdomSitsinPlacesisthetitleofabookbyKeithBasso(1996).Basso’slandmarkbookinvestigatesthesignificanceofplacewithinApacheculture.Morebroadly,though,heopensthedoortothepossibilitythatthoughtitselfisrootedinanddependsuponitsplace.Philosophy’shistoryofengagementwithplaceisrelativelyrecent.EdwardCasey,inhislandmarkbookTheFateofPlace,arguesthatphilosophyhadlostitsplaceasaconceptforhundredsofyears,andhadonlyfairlyrecentlystartedtorecoverit(Casey,1998,p.x).Ithadbeensubordinatedunderotherconceptssuchasspaceandtime.Heissurelycorrectaboutthis,butifplaceasaconceptwaslargelylost,evenmoreobscurewasthequestionofphilosophy’sownplaces.Isphilosophyglocal?Ifwecanrecognizethatphilosophyisagreatconversation,dotheplaceswheretheconversationoccursmatter?Tosomeextent,itdependsonhowwethinkaboutplace.Roudometof,followingRobertsonandWhite,pointsoutthatwecouldthinkoftheearthasasingleplace(Robertson,1992;Robertson&White,2007;Roudometof,2019,p.807).IhaveworkedwiththeconceptoffocallengthwhendescribingthenatureofAfricanphilosophy,whichissimilar.Ourconceptsrelyonthefocallengthofourconsideration.So,inAfricanphilosophy,therearesomequestionsthatmakesensetoaskofAfricaasawhole.TheymakesensebecauseAfricawasmarginalizedasawhole,andthereareconceptswithcurrencyelse-whereintheworld,havingtodowithraceandotherthings,whichhistoricallyhavetriedtosaysomethingaboutallAfricans.TophilosophizewithinAfrica,then,meansinparttorespondtoclaimsmadeaboutallofAfrica.But,ofcourse,Africaishighlydiverse,andtherearemanyquestionsthatdonotmakesensetoaskatthatfocallength.Somemakesenseataculturallevel,oranationalone,oratthelevelofaparticularschoolofthought.Place,inotherwords,canbethoughtofinalltheseways,fromawideorexpansivefocallengthtoanarrow,fineorcloseone.AndtheseinherewithinBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
78Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal67individualswhoaredoingthethinking,anddialoguethatishappeningataspecificlevel.Anindividualisalltheseplaces,butnotallatonce.Thereis,rather,afluidmovementinthoughtbetweenthequestionswhicharise,whichcontributetotheplaces.Roudometof’spoint(andinthishefollowsBrunoLatourand,again,Robertson),thatplacecouldbeatermweusefortheentireearth,orforspecificpartsofit,complicateshowwethinkoftheglocal,butitalsopresentsanopportunity.Ifplace’sreferencecanbeelastic,applyingtotheverysmallandlocalortheverylargeanddistant(asitsurelycan–wecancoherentlyspeakofourplaceasbeingonachairorontheearth),andallcaninhereinasingleperson’sthoughtandpractice,thenwemightthinkofplaceasanevent,inthesensewecanseeinDeleuzeandotherphilosophers.Thelocal,then,becomesthesiteoftheevent.Thelocalgivesplacemateriality,butalsorecognizesthemeaninginvolvedintheeventofplace.AspotdefinedbylongitudeandlatitudeinthemiddleoftheSaharaDesertisnotlocalunlessthereissomeonetheretomakeitalocality.Isitaplace?Perhapsnot(yet)forhumans,althoughthatwouldbetocentrehumancognitionandknowledgeproductionandminimizeanythingelse.Itverywellmightbeaplaceformigratinganimals,orindigenouslife,andtothatextentitcouldbecomeaneventofplaceforusaswell.Philosophy’sownplaces,andhencethepotentialityforglocalismtobeseenasaconceptwithcurrency,dependsonphilosophy’sabilitytoattendtoitsplaces.Thishasstartedtohappeninavarietyofways.Wehave,forinstance,therecognitionthatthewaywehavetoldthestoryofphilosophy’sdevelopmenthasdifferedinplacesaroundtheworld,andthatmatterstohowweconceivephilosophy.Forexample,attheUniversityofHildesheim,agroupofscholarsledbyProfessorDrRolfElberfeldhavebeencollectingintroductionstophilosophyandhistoriesofphilosophyinanylanguage,fromanyplace,atanytime(theKoselleck-Projekt,n.d.).Theythinkofthisasa‘historiographyofphilosophy’,andthephraseisapt,asitpointstotheideathatthecurrentsbetweenplaces,aswellastheactivatedandscaffoldedquestionswithinaplace,playamajorroleindefiningwhatistalkedaboutinphilosophyandhow.Similarly,abookbySwissphilosopherElmarHolenstein(2005)chartsouttheflowsandinfluencesofphilosophicalsystemsaroundtheworld.Holensteinwantedtodemonstratethat,contrarytothecommonnarrativephilosopherstellabouttheoriginanddevelopmentofphilosophyfromGreecethroughEuropetoAmerica,therewereinfluencesfromaroundtheworldthatcouldnotjustbesubsumedunderatriumphalistWesternstoryaboutphilosophy’sdevelopment.Ifwehaveahistoriographyofphilosophy,wecouldequallyseesociologiesofphilosophyandanthropologiesofphilosophy.ThefirstoftheseisbestrepresentedbythemajorvolumebyRandallCollins,TheSociologyofPhilosophies(Collins,1998).Collinstracesthepatternsofphilosophicalinfluenceandexchangeovertimeandculture.Philosophersarenotlonegeniuses,unaffectedbytherestoftheworld,noraretheysimplydialecticiansallsearchingforasingletruthfromtheirownlimitedpositions.Theyarepartofnetworks,rangingbacktoancienttimes.Thesenetworksprovidesomeofthematerialconditionsforcreativityinphilosophytooccur.Collinsisnotjustinterestedinthepatternsofinfluence,asphilosophicalideasanddebatesareengagedindifferentplaces.Heisinterestedinthenatureofthatengagement(Collins,2000).Notallflowsarethesame.Sometimesphilosophyproceedsbyimitation,sometimesbyopposition.Sometimesitisscaffoldedbypoliticalorreligiousinstitutions,sometimesbyaca-demicorotherculturalinstitutions.Sometimestherearerivalrieswithinschoolswhichdrivedispersion.Sometimestherearerivalriesbetweenindigenousandimportedideas,andsome-timesthereissyncretismorevenanoverlayofaforeignsystemonanindigenousone.InotherBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
7968Handbookofcultureandglocalizationwords,philosophyhasalwaysbeenengagedinglobalnetworksofexchangeandinfluence,andthesenetworkshavealwaysdependedonlocalizedsitesofconflictandcooperation.Thesearchfortheuniversal,ifthatiswhatphilosophydoes,isdeeplydependentonglocalization.KaiKresse’s‘anthropologyofphilosophy’projectislessaboutrepresentingglobalflows,andmoreaboutshowingphilosophyasrootedinplaceswhilestilllinkedtranslocallywithintraditionsandalongculturalmigrationroutes(foradescriptionoftheanthropologyofphiloso-phy,seeKresse,2007,pp.11–35).HisworkfocusesontheSwahilicoastinAfrica,anddetailsthewaysinwhichIslamicphilosophicalthoughtappearsinculturalplaces,bothhistoricallyandcurrently.Anthropology(andforthatmatter,alsosociology)haslongbeeninterestedinindigenousknowledgesystems,butthesewererarelythoughtofasphilosophicalinanythingbutaloosemanner.Aturnwasmadeinthemiddleofthetwentiethcenturytostartthinkingofatleastsomeindigenousknowledgeasphilosophy.Kresse’sworktakesthatastepfurther,torecognizeboththenetworksofconceptualexchangethroughoutdispersedculturesandlocalvariationsanddevelopmentsinthatknowledge.IfbothCollinsandKresseareengagedinaformofglocalityinphilosophy,CollinsleanstowardstheglobalwhileKresseleanstowardsthelocal.The‘GeographyofPhilosophy’project(GeographyofPhilosophy,n.d.)isdiverseenoughthatitcouldbeseentoemphasizebothpartsofthistension.Itdescribesitsgoalsasfollows:Thefirstistodramaticallyadvancewhatisknownabouttheextenttowhichthreefundamentalphilosophicalconcepts–knowledge,understandingandwisdom–aresharedacrossreligionsandcultures.Theseconcepts,whichloomlargeincontemporaryphilosophicalandreligiousdiscourse,playamajorroleinorganizingourthinkingaboutwhattobelieve,howtoconductinquiry,andhowtostructureourlives.Inordertoachievethisgoal,wehaveassembledreligiouslyandculturallydiverseinterdisciplinaryteamsofresearchersinmanyregionsaroundtheworld.OursecondgoalistobuildonthefoundationoftheseResearchTeamstocreateanew,multi-culturalresearchcommunityfocusedonstudyingimportantphilosophicalconceptsusingthetoolsandinsightsofawidevarietyofdisciplinesincludingphilosophy,anthropology,linguistics,psychology,neuroscience,andculturalstudies(GeographyofPhilosophy,n.d.).Theassumptionherecomesinpartfromtheempiricalphilosophymovement,whichstartsfromtheideathatempiricalresearchonphilosophicalconceptsisnotdownstreamfromtheabstractreflectiononthoseconcepts,butcanmakeevidentsomeimportantaspectsofthoseconcepts.Despitetheuseoftheterm‘geography’,thisprojectdoesnotforegroundgeogra-phyasadisciplineintheanalysisofphilosophy(notethatitisnotevenlistedasoneofthedisciplinescontributingtoolstotheprojectinthequotationabove).Instead,itstartsfromthepremisethatlocationmatterstophilosophicaldevelopment.Thesevariousengagementsofthesocialsciencesinphilosophyare,perhaps,anupdatedversionofwhatwasoncethoughtofascross-culturalphilosophyorcomparativephilosophy.Whatcameunderthosenamescouldseldombeseenasglocal–theprojectwasusuallytoseehowdifferentuniversalistconceptsfromdifferentculturescomparedwitheachother.MODALITYTHREE:PHILOSOPHYRESPONDSTOPLACESPhilosophy’sglocalitycanbequalitativelydifferentfromsimplyafocusonplace,orarecog-nitionofthepartthatplaceplaysintheproductionofconcepts.Ifwetakeplaceseriouslyasamodeofhumanexistence–wenecessarilyexistinplace,andcanonlyunderstandourselvesBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
80Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal69asemplacedbeings–weareledtothepartialityandevenprejudiceofhumanknowledge.Sociologistshavetalkedaboutthisin,amongotherplaces,Mannheim’ssociologyofknowl-edge(Mannheim,1952).Philosophershavealsoalwaysrecognizedthis,butinadifferentmanner–itisbuiltintothePlatonicdialectic,forinstance.Humanslosttouchwiththeuni-versalswhentheywerebornintophysicalform,andsoanyoneperson’sideasaboutthetruenatureofthingshastobedialecticallytestedandpurified,sothatwecanengagein‘unforget-ting’(Aletheia–oftentranslatedas‘truth’,butliterallya-Lethe,thereversalofwhathappensintheafterlifeaswegoovertheRiverLethe,whichbringsforgetfulnessandoblivion),therecognitionoftruth.Morerecently,though,andfarpastthetimethatitshouldhavehappened,philosophyhasstartedtocometotermswithitsownblindspots.Beinginalocationmeanshavingaperspec-tive,whichmeansseeingsomethingsandnotothers,seeinginsomewaysandnotothers.WecanseethisinNietzsche’sperspectivismandinDewey’spragmatism.Gadamerspeaksofprejudice,bywhichhemeansaperspectiverootedinourlimitedplaceintheworld.Butitisalsoclearthatphilosophershavegeneralizedonthoselimitedperspectives,andelevatedtheideasofarelativelysmallgroupofpeopletothestatusofuniversals.EvenGadamer,justmen-tioned,spokeofhermeneuticsasuniversal,whichisnottosaythatspecificinterpretationsareuniversal,butratherthattheactofinterpretationalongthelinesthathedescribesisuniversal(formoreonhermeneuticsanditsclaimstouniversality,seeJanz,2015,2017c).Dependingontheculture,thesmallgroupofpeoplewerethosewhoalsohadsocialpowerorprestige.IntheWest,thattendedtomeanelite,wealthy,whitemen.Therewasphilosophybywomen,andfromnon-Westerncultures,stretchingbacktothebeginningofrecordedhistory.ButthephilosophythatwaswrittenandcirculatedintheWestatleast,andarguablyelsewhereaswell,foregroundedasubsetofthinkers.Inmorerecentyears,therehasbeenaresurgenceandrediscoveryoftheworkdonebyotherlessrecognizedhistoricalfigures,andagreatamountofnewworkbythosefrommanygeographical,socialandculturalplaces,includingthosethathavehistoricallybeenmarginalizedandoppressed.Ifwetakethisasaversionoftheglocal,wecanseephilosophyasrepletewithit,atleastinitsmorerecentforms.Unlikephilosopherswhosimplylayclaimtobespeakingabouttheuniversal,thereisanimperativetosimultaneouslyrecognizephilosophy’saspirationtotheuniversalwhileattendingtoourrootednessinourworld.Thatworldmightberaciallydefined,ordefinedbygender,orindigeneity,orability/disabilityormarginalizedstatusofsomeotherkind.Theselocalitiesmattertophilosophy,notjusttosubjectivity.Thesearenotjustregionalformsofphilosophy,orsub-fields,orapplicationsofotherwiseuniversaltheoriestospecificgroupsorissues.Universalitydoesnotcomefirst,butemergesinthelocalexperienceofallthosewhophilosophize.Itshouldbenotedthatinthepreviousparagraphtheuniversalisintertwinedwiththeglobal,whichiswhatisintensionwiththelocaltoproducetheglocal.Butthefirstthingthatphilosophyhadtorecognizewasthatitwasglobal,thatis,thatithadflowsandnetworksandconnections.Itwasnotjustaboutabstractuniversals.Andthenitalsohadtorecognizeitslocalities.WehavealreadyseenthisintheanalysesCollins,Kresseandothershavedone.Workingouttheimplicationsofthis,though,ismoredifficult.Wecanseethisworkedoutatapracticallevelintherecentcreationofgroupsandprojectsdesignedtointroducetheplacesthatphilosophyisdoneandhasbeendone,whichhavenotbeenrecognized.TwoexampleswouldbetheHistoryofPhilosophyWithoutAnyGapspodcast,andtheMAP(MinoritiesandPhilosophy)chaptersthathavebeenformedonmoreBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
8170Handbookofcultureandglocalizationthan140campuses.Theseinitiatives,alongwithothers,re-askthequestionsofphilosophythroughthelensofspecificplacesandtheexperienceofthosewhoinhabitthem.AlternativenetworksofinfluencetothecanonicalonesusuallytaughtintheWesternacademyaretracedanddocumented.Theseeffortsscaffoldthetheoreticalwork,evenastheoreticalworkmakesitpossibleforthesepracticaleffortstohaveclarityandfocus.Ahostoffeministwork(indeed,thevastmajorityoffeministwork)seesphilosophyashavingaplace,alongwithnetworksofemer-genceandconnection.Sometimesthisisexplicit–standpointepistemology,forinstance,recognizesthatnotallplaces(understoodbothexperientiallyandintellectually)arecreatedequal,andthepositionofthosewhohavebeenmarginalizedcomewithlesspotentialforfalseconsciousnessandquestionableassumptionsabouttheworldthanthosewhohavebeenabletoassumeanabstractedperspective.Feministsarenottheonlyonestoemplacephilosophy.Wecanseeworkinpostcolonialthoughtasbothengagingintheglobalnetworksofthoughtwhilerecognizingitslocaldebtsandduties.Totakejusttwoexamples,wecanseeSylviaWynter’srethinkingofhumanisminthismanner.WynterisaCuban/JamaicantheoristwhotaughtatuniversitiesintheCaribbeanandtheUnitedStates.ShecombineshighlydiversefieldsincludingCaribbeanliterature,feminism,cognitivescience,Renaissancehistory,biology,andseveralothersinanattempttorethinkandrecoverthehistoryofhumanismfromitslargelywhiteandmaledominantnarrative.WhereasRenaissancehumanismpositedauniversalactor,thefigureofthehuman,whichwastheidealofrationalityandethicalaction,Wyntershows(andsheisnotthefirstbyanymeans)howthatidealjustinstantiatedaparticularwayofbeing,privilegingwhite,maleEuropeansoverallothers.Herrethinkingofhumanismdoesnotsimplyrejectit,butseesitasaforceofcreativity.Turningthehumanintoauniversalidealdraineditscreativeenergy,sheargues,andonlybyseeingthehumandiversely,ratherthanembodiedinanexemplar,cantheengineofculturalcreationberestarted.SpacedoesnotpermitustomaketheconnectionsthatWyntermightmakepossible,butsomeofthosecanalreadybeseeninworksuchasthatofKatherineMcKittrick(2015)andMinaKaravanta(2015),amongothers.AchilleMbembelikewisegivesapictureoftherootednessofhumanthoughtwithinahistoryandaworld,andworksthroughsomeoftheimplicationsofthat.Mbembe,whoteachesandresearchesattheWitsInstituteforSocialandEconomicResearchattheUniversityoftheWitwatersrandinSouthAfrica,isknownforhispenetratingandimportantanalysesofAfricanexistenceinthewakeofofficialcolonization.HehaswrittenonAfropolitanism,necropolitics,theAfricancity,andahostofothertopicswhichallhelptotheorizeAfricanexistence.InpublicationssuchasOnthePostcolony(Mbembe,2001)and‘AfricanModesofSelf-Writing’(Mbembe,2002),heworksoutthedifficultquestionofhowtothinkinaplaceandaboutaplace,whenthatplacehasbecomealienatedthroughhistoricalphenomenasuchasslavery,colonialismandapartheid.Philosophyisataskintheseconditions(italwaysisatask,butthatisespeciallyclearhere).SinceFanon,wehaverecognizedthattheconstitutionofthesubjectisimportantforthephilosopher’sabilitytoengageaplace.Mbembetakesthatastepfurther,inwhatIseeasanexcellentexampleofglocalisminphilosophy–thelocationofthoughtmatters,asdothehistorical,culturalandeconomiccontextsinwhichthatthoughthappens.OnecannotmerelyintrospectandinsodoingignoretheglobalconditionsofthoughtinAfrica;atthesametime,onecannotsimplyseeAfricanthoughtasaproductofglobalintellectualexchangewithoutalsoseeingthestruggleofthethinkertoengageinphilosophyinavexedplaceandtime.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
82Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal71Mbembe,withothers,considersoneglocalistfigure,thatoftheAfropolitan.Thecosmopol-itanisinflectedwithakindoflocality,thatoftheAfricanwhoisco-locatedin(mostlyurban)spacesaroundtheworld,equallyathomeinLagosandLondon,NairobiandNewYork.TaiyeSelasiin2005articulatedthisnewworldof‘notcitizens,butAfricans,oftheworld’(Selasi,2013,p.528),andMbembegaveaseminalversionofthisinapaperincludedinagallerycatalogue(Mbembe,2005).Cosmopolitanismwasaprecursortoglobalizationatthelevelofthesubjectandofdiscourse.Itwasthepersonnotboundbynationalboundaries,thecitizenoftheworld.Thisimpliedthemobilitymorecarefullyworkedoutlaterbyglobalizationtheorists.ThefigureoftheAfropolitanhasbeenmuchdebated,andplacedalongsideotherwaysofthinkingtheplaceoftheAfrican,suchasPan-AfricanismandUbuntu.Alloftheseareattemptstonavigatetheinherenttensionandanxietybetweentheglobalandthelocal.MODALITYFOUR:PHILOSOPHY’SDEBTSANDDUTIESTOPLACESThesemodalitiesarenotdialecticalmovestogreaterself-awarenessinphilosophy.Ifphiloso-phyisgoingtobeglocal,itmustbeabletoreflectonplace,andbereflectedonasplatial,andengagewithitsplaces.Themoveisnottogreaterabstraction,toatranscendentallevel,ortotheresolutionofcontradiction.Giventhattheglocalisnotaconceptnativetophilosophy,butimportedfromotherdisci-plines,itisworthaskingwhatmightphilosophyultimatelydotomaketheconceptitsown.MiekeBalhaswrittencompellinglyabout‘travelingconcepts’(Bal,2001)andthereconfigu-ration,sometimesviolence,thathappenswhenconceptsmovefromoneintellectualecosystemtoanother.Inthecaseoftheglocal,philosophersmustcomebacktotheinherenttensionintheconcept.Whatisittoidentifysomethingorsomespaceasglobalandlocal?Andwhatisittoseethetensionbetweenthetwoasacreativeorproductivespace,ratherthanjustaspaceofmutualcancelling,negationorsubsumptionofoneundertheother?Usedasanalyticconcepts,boththeglobalandthelocalseemtohaveaclearmeaninganduseasdefinedbytheacademicquestionsandmethodstheyarepartof.Itisworthnoting,though,thatinbothcasestherearemoresinisterapplicationsthatmighthaveechoesinanyuseweputtheseto.Aglobalist,amonganti-Semites,iscodeforJews,andinvokesanentireracistnarrativeaboutrootlessJewsinfiltratinggovernmentsandinstitutionsoftheworldinordertobringaboutsomesecretnefariousplanofsubjugationandcontrol.Thelocal,ontheotherhand,canhavetheconnotationofentitlementtoaplace,evenanexclusiveclaimenforcedinabelligerentway:thechantof‘Jewswillnotreplaceus’,the‘BlutundBoden’oftheNazis,andthepresumptionofentitlementthatcomeswithcallingthepoliceonBlackpeoplewhoaredoingnormalthingsinpublicspaces.Thisversionofthelocalhasanarrative,andself-appointednarrators.PuttingtogethertheglobalandthelocalundertheseconditionswouldsuggestapoliticalglobalismandafascistRomanticlocalismfarfromtheintentionsofthevastmajorityofacademicsusingtheseterms.Soiftheglocaldoesnotmeanthiswithindisciplinaryuses,butpotentiallybearsitsshadow,whatdoestheanxietyinthistensionsuggest?Thereare,Ibelieve,somewaystokeepthisshadowatbayandseetheglocalinacreativemanner.Thiswouldinvolvesomeoftheintui-tionswemighthaveaboutboththeglobalandthelocal,andtheemergenteffectproducedinBruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
8372Handbookofcultureandglocalizationthespaceoftheglocal.Ifourintuitionoftheglobalisthatofanetwork,wemightaskwhatwemeanbyanetwork,andwhatourimplicitmodelsfornetworksmightbe.Doweimaginethattheglobalactslikeacomputernetwork,wherethereareprotocols,servers,nodes,IPsandpacketsofinformationthatareroutedalongmultiplepathsandassembledonarequestingmachine?Ifnotthatmodel,whatmodeldowehaveofanetwork?Isitsomethinginformedbycontemporarysystemsresearch,inwhichtheremightbeautopoiesis,emergence,andsoforth?Inotherwords,dowethinkofnetworksinastaticmanner,orasemergentsetsofproperties,inthewaythatwehavecometothinkofothercomplexrecursivesystemssuchasthestockmarket,thegenome,evolutionandconsciousness?Similarlywiththelocal,dowehaveastaticversionofthat,orsomethingmoredynamic?Doesthelocalsuggestaversionofplacethatisrootedinmaterialityinawaythatresistschange?DoesourversionofthelocalfollowMicheldeCerteau’sdictumof‘spaceisaprac-ticedplace’(deCerteau,1980[1984],p.117),whichsuggestsasetofpotentialitiesbuiltuponafairlyconstantandreliablematerialstructurewethinkofasplace?Muchworkhasbeendonetounderminethatversionofplace,buttheimagepersistsnonetheless.Havingdynamicandemergentsensesofboththeglobalandthelocalmeansthattheglo-cal’senergydoesnotcomefromthetensionbetweentwoconstant,differentandclearlyiden-tifiedconditions.Itmeansthatthereisaborder,amembranebetweentwostates,anditexistsinallthingsatalltimes.Thereisnoglobalseparablefromtheactionsofindividuals(broadlyunderstood);thereisnolocalthatisnotreplicatedanditeratedacrossdifferentspaces.Theanxietyoftheglocalistheanxietyoflivinginthatspaceallthetime.Iamnotjustacitizenofmylocalplace,butalsoconnectedthroughmydeliberateinteractions,consciousanduncon-sciousexchangesandpurchases,andinvolvementinsocietywithotherentitiesaroundtheworld.Iamnotjustsomeonewithanidentitythatconnectsmegloballywithmanyothers,butthatisenactedallthetimewhereIam.Theglobalinstantiatesasthelocal,andthelocalplaysitselfoutasthemeandvariationacrossmultipleplaces.Ifphilosophyissomethingmorethanjustarmchairreflectiononconcepts,thatis,ifitscon-ceptshavedirectimplicationsforitsownmethod,thentheglocaltakesonanewsignificance.Elsewhere,Ihavespokenabout‘philosophy-in-place’(Janz,2009,2017a),theprocessofphilosophycreatingconceptsandattendingtoexistingconceptsthathavecurrencyinaplace,andwhichinflecthigher-levelormoreabstractversionsofconceptswithlocallysignificantandgloballynetworkedmeanings.Theglocal,inphilosophy,canbearecognitionthatplacemattersintheformationofconcepts.Conceptscomefromplaces,ormoreaccuratelyfromthequestionsweaskinplacesabouthowtoliveandhowtothink,asindividualsofallsorts(thatis,bothtraditionalindividualsandgroupsorclassesthatactasindividualsundersomeconditions).If,inphilosophy,wemovefromthefunctionthattheglocalhasinmostotherdisciplines,asanexplanationanddescription,wemightseeitasdefiningaspaceofengagementwiththeworld,acreativespace.Theanxietyoftheglocalistheanxietyofpotentiality,ofbeingrequiredtocreateinordertolivebothintheglobalandthelocal.Onecould,ofcourse,optforonesideortheother,seeoneselfasprimarilyglobal,inagrandconversationwithpeersaroundtheworld,orasprimarilylocal,engagedinpracticesrootedinplacesandhavingmeaningbasedontheirrepetition.Thereisacomfortineachofthesepositions,alesseningofanxiety.Wehaveidentities,eitherasglobalcitizensoraslocalones.Farmoredifficult,though,istherequirementofbeingbothoftheseatonce,withoutreducingonetotheother.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
84Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal73Ihavetriedtoworkoutsomeoftheseimplicationsfromseveralangles.InAfricanphilos-ophy,Ihavearguedthatphilosophyisneitherderivativeofothertraditionsorconfinedtotra-ditionalformsattheexpenseofthecontemporaryworld.Instead,AfricanphilosophyisasetofquestionsaskedinanAfricanplace(andthatisunderstoodatarangeoffocallengths,fromthelevelofthecontinent,itsinhabitantsanddiaspora,tothelevelofcountries,ethnicgroupsandschoolsofthought)abouthowtolivewell.Theanswersarescaffoldedinarangeofwaysatalocallevel,andsuccessfulanswersovertimebecomepartofAfricantradition.Theyarequestionedastheconditionsoftheirapplicabilitychange,buttheyarealwaysacreativespaceofengagementwithaplacethatresultsinanswersthatarenotlimitedonlytothatplace,butwhichhavesomelevelofapplicabilityelsewhere.AnotherangleIhaveexploredisthequestionofplaceitself.So,forexample,Ihavewrittenaboutvirtualplace,notjustasarepresentationofphysicalspacebutasaspaceofplay,whichenableshumancreativitytoflourishaswebringourexperienceofinhabitationintonetworkedenvironments(Janz,2018).Ihaveexploredthewaysinwhich,attheedgesofourexperienceofplace(inthiscase,theexperiencesofastronautswhileinorbit)wemayfindourselvesgraspingataconnectionbetweenconcretelivedexperienceandlargerquestionsofmeaning.Thisgraspingresultsinaweandwonder(Gallagheretal.,2015;Janz,2017b).Alltheseinves-tigations,inAfricanphilosophyandphenomenologymoregenerally,havebeendirectedatmuchthesamecreativeoutcomethatIhavedescribedhere.Theglocalcanstillfillagapinsocialscientificmethodologyasanaccountofaworldinwhichneitherafocusontheglobalorthelocalisenough.Thephilosopher’squestionmustbesomewhatdifferent,andperhapsofusetotheseotherdisciplines–whatdoesitmeantoliveglocallyashuman,posthuman,ahuman?Ifaconceptisananswertoaquestion,andifitopensupaspaceofthoughtwithintheframeworkofadisciplineorinaninterdisciplinaryspace,thenthisconceptmustbeseenasrespondingtodifferentimperativeswithinthosedifferentspaces.Conceptsbearfamilyresemblancesacrossthesespaces,butthedifferencesareimportant.Inthecaseoftheglocal,aconceptformedlargelyoutsideofphilosophy,itisclearthatallowingittotravelintophilosophybringsthepotentialityforanimportantspaceofthought.Wecomebacktotheevent,thespaceofcreationandtherenewalofthought.Wecanseeitinthephenomenologicaltradition,inconceptssuchasHeidegger’sEreignis(foragoodaccount,seeMalpas,2006)andinClaudeRomano’strilogyofbooksontheevent(Romano,2009,2014,2016).Wecanseeitinpost-phenomenologistssuchasAlainBadiou(2005)andDeleuze(1990).Thesedonotexplicitlytietheglocaltotheevent,oreven(inmostcases)place(althoughMalpasdoesmakeitacentralpartofhisanalysis),butfurtherworkonthewaysinwhichtheeventisaphilosophicalmomentofcreationand,atthesametime,philoso-phy’sversionoftheglocal,wouldbefruitful.REFERENCESBadiou,A.(2005),BeingandEvent,NewYork,NY:Continuum.Bal,M.(2001),TravelingConceptsintheHumanities:ARoughGuide,Toronto,Canada:UniversityofTorontoPress.Basso,K.(1996),WisdomSitsinPlaces:LandscapeandLanguageAmongtheWesternApache,Albuquerque,NM:UniversityofNewMexicoPress.Bauman,Z.(1998),‘OnGlocalization:OrGlobalizationforSome,LocalizationforSomeOthers’,ThesisEleven,54(1),37–49.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
8574HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCasey,E.(1998),TheFateofPlace,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Collins,R.(1998),TheSociologyofPhilosophies:AGlobalTheoryofIntellectualChange,Cambridge,MA:TheBelknapPressofHarvardUniversityPress.Collins,R.(2000),‘TheSociologyofPhilosophies:APrécis’,PhilosophyoftheSocialSciences,3(2),157–210.deCerteau,M.(1980),L’inventionduquotidien,Tome1:Artsdefaire,trans.byS.Rendall(1984),ThePracticeofEverydayLife,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Deleuze,G.(1990),TheLogicofSense,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Francois,E.J.(2015),BuildingGlobalEducationwithaLocalPerspective:AnIntroductiontoGlocalHigherEducation,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Gallagher,S.,JanzB.,ReinermanL.,BockelmanP.andJ.Trempler(2015),ANeurophenomenologyofAweandWonder:TowardsaNon-ReductionistCognitiveScience,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.GeographyofPhilosophy(n.d.),About,accessed23June2020athttps://www.geographyofphilosophy.com/.Holenstein,E.(2005),Philosophie-Atlas:OrteundWegedesDenkens,Zurich,Switzerland:Ammann.Inglis,D.andR.Robertson(2011),‘FromCosmostoGlobe:RelatingCosmopolitanism,GlobalizationandGlobality’,inM.RoviscoandM.Nowicka(eds),TheAshgateResearchCompaniontoCosmopolitanism,Farnham,UK:Ashgate,pp.295–311.Janz,B.(2009),PhilosophyinanAfricanPlace,Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks.Janz,B.(2015),‘HermeneuticsandInterculturalUnderstanding’,inJ.MalpasandH.-H.Gander(eds),TheRoutledgeCompaniontoHermeneutics,Abingdon-on-Thames,UK:Routledge,pp.474–85.Janz,B.(2017a),‘TheGeographyofAfricanPhilosophy’,inA.AfolayanandT.Falola(eds),ThePalgraveHandbookofAfricanPhilosophy,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.155–66.Janz,B.(2017b),‘UnprecedentedExperienceandLevinas’sHeideggerianIdolatryofPlace’,inJ.Donohoe(ed.),PhenomenologyandPlace,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield,pp.281–95.Janz,B.(ed.)(2017c),Place,SpaceandHermeneutics,Berlin/Heidelberg,Germany:Springer.Janz,B.(2018),‘VirtualPlaceandVirtualizedPlace’,inE.Champion(ed.),ThePhenomenologyofVirtualPlaces,Abingdon-on-Thames,UK:Routledge,pp.60–75.Kant,I.(1795),TowardPerpetualPeaceandOtherWritingsonPolitics,Peace,andHistory,trans.byD.L.Colclasure(2006),NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Karavanta,M.(2015),‘HumanTogether:IntotheInteriorofAuto/OntoPoeisis’,Symploke,23(1–2),153–71.Koselleck-Projekt(n.d.),‘GeschichtenderPhilosophieinglobalerPerspektive’,accessed23June2020athttps://www.uni-hildesheim.de/histories-of-philosophy/.Kresse,K.(2007),PhilosophisinginMombasa:Knowledge,IslamandIntellectualPracticeontheSwahiliCoast,Edinburgh,Scotland:EdinburghUniversityPress.Li,V.(2007),‘EllipticalInterruptionsor,WhyDerridaPrefersMondialisationtoGlobalization’,CR:TheNewCentennialReview,7(2),141–54.Malpas,J.(2006),Heidegger’sTopology:Being,Place,World,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.Mannheim,K.(1952),EssaysontheSociologyofKnowledge,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Mbembe,A.(2001),OnthePostcolony,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Mbembe,A.(2002),‘AfricanModesofSelf-Writing’,PublicCulture,14(1),239–73.Mbembe,A.(2005),‘Afropolitanism’,inS.Njami(ed.),AfricaRemix:ContemporaryArtofaContinent,Johannesburg,SouthAfrica:JohannesburgArtGallery,pp.26–9.McKittrick,K.(ed.)(2015),SylviaWynter:OnBeingHumanasPraxis,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-SpaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity’inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.Robertson,R.andK.E.White(2007),‘WhatisGlobalization?’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Oxford,UK:Blackwell,pp.54–66.Romano,C.(2009),EventandWorld,NewYork,NY:FordhamUniversityPress.Romano,C.(2014),EventandTime,NewYork,NY:FordhamUniversityPress.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
86Theuniversalandtheindividual,theglobalandthelocal75RomanoC.(2016),ThereIs:TheEventandtheFinitudeofAppearing,NewYork,NY:FordhamUniversityPress.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘RecoveringtheLocal:FromGlocalizationtoLocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–817.Selasi,T.(2013),‘Bye-ByeBarbar’,Callaloo,36(3),528–30.BruceB.Janz-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:15AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
875.LawandglocalizationSalvatoreMancusoINTRODUCTION‘Lawandglocalization’isarelativelynewthemeinlegalliterature.Thecurrentrelationbetweenlawandglocalizationhasbeentoucheduponveryseldombylegalscholars(DiMicco,2018;Ferrarese,2012).Thedebateamongsociologistsandsocialscientistsshowingacertaindifficultyinfindingashareddefinitionof‘glocalization’,togetherwithageneralizedapproachhighlyfocusedoneconomicsmighthavecontributedtothislimitedapproachtothethemeinlegaldoctrine.AsIhavebeenaskedtoaddressthistheme,coveringthestateoftheartinthisfieldandprovidingatthesametimeanewinterpretativeapproachand/oradiscussionofpossiblenewdirectionsforresearch,Ibelieveitisnecessarytopositionlawandglocalizationinthemoregeneraldiscourseaboutglocalization.Inordertodothis,Ithinkitisnecessarytofirstclarifyhowtheterm‘glocalization’shouldbeintended,anddifferentiatesuchaconceptfromotherconcepts–likehybridityordiffusion–gravitatingaroundit,butwhichdonotcoincidewithglocalization.Thisisespeciallythecaseifweconsiderthatsuchotherconceptshavealsobeenusedinlegalscholarshipwithmeaningsthatmightnotcoincidewiththoseusedinotherdisciplines.1Furthermore,itisnecessarytoconsiderthegeneralconceptof‘globalization’astakenforgrantedandIwillnotdealwithitandthedebatearoundthisdefinition,asthediscussionwouldotherwisegobeyondthefocusofthischapter,evenif–however–itisinevitabletotouchuponthegeneralconceptofglobalizationfromtimetotime.Theonlythingworthsayingatthisstageisthatglobalizationisnotlimitedtospecificareas:itincludespolitics,economy,lawandculturetoo(Reiner,2006).Afurtherclarificationisrequired:havingconsideredthethemeofthischapter,itwillbenecessarytoapproachalltheabove-mentionedconcepts–thatarenotlegalbynature–fromaperspectivethatmightbeusefulforlegaldiscourse.Thismeansthattheconceptsadoptedwilltendtothegeneralandmightnotfullycoincidewiththoseadoptedwithreferencetootherdisciplines.Inlinewiththeabove,thefollowingsectionofthischapterwillbededicatedtoframingsomeconceptsinawaythatcouldbeusefulforalegalperspective;next,thedifferencebetweenglobalizationandgrobalizationwillbebrieflydiscussedinordertoseehowthesetwoconceptsrelatewithlaw.Thetwosectionsthatfollowthisdiscussionwillbededicatedtolegalglocalismandlegalgrobalismrespectively,andsomeconclusiveremarkswillfinishthechapter.76SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
88Lawandglocalization77ASERIESOF(UNFORTUNATE?)DEFINITIONS:GLOCALIZATION,DIFFUSION,MIXITYANDHYBRIDITYGlocalizationisthekeyelementandthecommondenominatorofthecurrentvolume,whilediffusion,mixityandhybridityareallconceptsthathavebeenusedinthediscussionaboutglocalizationandinthedifferentapproachestoitsdefinition.Ashasbeennoted,‘althoughglocalisnotsimplyanotherwordforanyoftheaboveterms,itcanbeusedtodescribesomeofthesocialandculturalphenomenathatfallwithinthescopeoftheaboveterms’(Roudometof,2016).Insocialsciences,thediscourseonglocalizationisgroundedonaseriesofdefinitionsthatwealsofindinlegalsciences.Allthesenotionshaveengagedsociologists,socialscientistsandscholarsfromotherdisciplines.Forsomeofthem,thereisnotyetacommonlyagreedstatementofmeaning.However,thesamewordsmayhavedifferentconnotationswhenusedinlegalsciences.Asmentionedabove,theattempthereistocastaglanceoverthedifferentapproachestothoseconceptstoexcerptameaningthatcouldbeusefulforalegaldiscourse.GlocalizationTheword‘glocal’iswellknowntobeamergerbetweenglobalandlocalandistheresultofthefollowingobservations:thatlocalityisnotoverriddenbyglobalization;thattheuniversalandtheparticularcanandshouldbecombined(Khondker,2005;Robertson,1995);andthatglobalizationandglocalizationshouldbeconsideredasinterdependentprocesses(Khondker,1994).Thetermhasbeenincreasinglyusedacrossdifferentdisciplines.Theterm‘glocalization’cameaftertheword‘glocal’torepresentanewideathatdivergesfromglobalizationandwhosemeaningisyetdebatedamongscholars.Manyauthorshaveengagedinprovidingadefinitionofglocalization,mainlytakingintoconsiderationthecreationofproductsorservicesintendedfortheglobalmarket,butadaptedtosuitthelocalcultures.Itisobviouslyimpossible–andevenuseless–totrytocitethemall.Instead,itismorevaluabletorefertothoseauthorswhosedefinitionofglocalizationseemscloserandmoreappropriatetoapossiblelegalapproachtothetheme,withouttakingaposi-tiononthecorrectnessofanyoftheotherviews.Inhisworkonglocalization,VictorRoudometofshowsdifferentdefinitionsofglocaliza-tionwhosecommondenominatoristheconnectionbetweentheglobalandthelocallevelsand–which–asmentionedearlier–focusontheuseofglocalizationinthefieldsofeconom-icsandbusiness(Roudometof,2016).Thedifferencebetweenglocal–aspatialdimensionbetweentheglobalandthelocal–andglocalization–theintegrationintoasingleideaoftheprocessesofglobalizationandlocalization–isthestartingpointfromwhichhemovesinordertoindividuateaconceptofglocalization(Roudometof,2016).Throughhisanalysis,hegetstothedefinitionofglocalizationas‘globalizationrefractedthroughthelocal’,havingconsideredthatthelocaldimensionisnotannulledordemolishedbyglobalization,but–onthecontrary–itdeterminesthefinalresultoftheinteractionbetweenthetwo.Thevariationsproducedbysuchinteractionareindefinite,andeachresultisanexampleofglocality,definedas‘experi-encingthegloballocallyorthroughlocallenses’,inotherwords,ablendoftheglobalwiththelocal(Roudometof,2016).SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
8978HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRoudometofalsoidentifiestheglobalinthespacedimensionwheretheglobalandthelocalmeet.ThisspatialdimensionismergedwiththeoutcomeoftheinteractionmentionedabovebyBirnhacktocreatetheconceptofglocalization(Birnhack,2006,2014).NottoofarfromRoudometof’sviewisRitzer’sapproach.Heidentifiesglocalizationas‘theinterpene-trationoftheglobalandthelocal,resultinginuniqueoutcomesindifferentgeographicareas’(Ritzer,2003).AccordingtoRobertson,incorporationoflocalityintoglobalizationproducesglocalization,whichcanmaterializeinmanydifferentways(Robertson,1995).AlsoworthmentioningisFerrarese’sview:forher,glocalizationindicatesadynamictypeofglobaliza-tion,whichmovestowardsafusionoftheglobalandthelocal:inotherterms,theelementsofalocalcharacteralsotakeonaglobalrelevance,while,inparallel,elementsofaglobalnaturealsotakeonalocalrelevance(Ferrarese,2006).Allthesedefinitions–aswellasthosenotmentionedhere–revolvearoundtheinterpen-etrationbetweentheglobalandthelocalandareusefulforourpurposes.Inthisrespect,wemightthereforeconsiderglocalizationasglobalizationfilteredthroughthelocalsituation,asituationwhereglobalandlocalelementsarecombinedtoproducedifferentoutcomesaccordingtotherelevantlocalreality.DiffusionIngeneral,diffusionisconsideredamechanismthatmakescertainthespreadofworldculture(Roudometof,2016).AccordingtoNederveenPieterse,aconsiderablepartoftheevolutionofhumanculturecanbeseenasexchanges,diffusion,andsoon,wherecrossbreeding,borrow-ingandadjustmentstothelocalneedsandsimilarphenomenaareverycommon(NederveenPieterse,2004).Sociologicalstudiesfocusmoreontheconditionsofexportandimportofideasandthechannelsofdiffusion,withparticularreferencetosocialmovementsandthediffusionofinnovationswithinandbetweensocialorganizations(Twining,2005a).Thelinkbetweendiffusionandglocalizationliesinthefactthatglocalizationinvolvesdiffusionandfusionofideas,andnotasimpleimitation(Khondker,2005).Whatconnectsthemainbodyofsocialscienceliteraturewiththestudyofdiffusionoflawisthattheyarebothrelatedtothespreadandcommunicationofideas(Rogers,2003),aswhenwestudydiffusionoflaw,wearealsotalkingaboutthecommunicationofideas(Twining,2005a).Inthelegalfield,diffusionisseenasawidespread,continuingoccurrenceratherthanaseriesofsingle,exceptionalevents(Glenn,2003),andcanbedefinedastheprocessesbywhichlegalordersandtraditionsareinfluencedbyotherlegalordersandtraditions(Twining,2005a).Inthelasttwodecades,interestinthediffusionoflawhasbecomemoreexplicit,bothintermsofscholarlyattentionandwithreferencetothedifferentprojectsoflegalunificationorharmonization(Twining,2005b).ThediscussionbroughtWilliamTwiningtofixaseriesofkeypoints(Twining,2005b),amongwhichitisworthmentioningthefollowing:1.Relationsbetweenexportersandimportersarenotnecessarilybipolar,involvingonlyoneexporterandoneimporter.Thesourcesofareceptionareoftendiverse.2.Diffusionmaytakeplacebetweenmanykindsoflegalordersatandacrossdifferentgeo-graphicallevels,notjusthorizontallybetweenmunicipallegalsystems.3.Thepathwaysofdiffusionmaybecomplexandindirect,andinfluencesmaybereciprocal.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
90Lawandglocalization794.Diffusionmaytakeplacethroughinformalinteractionwithoutinvolvingformaladoptionorenactment.5.Legalrulesandconceptsarenottheonly,oreventhemain,objectsofdiffusion.6.Diffusionoflawofteninvolvesmovementfromanimperialorotherpowerfulcentrestoacolonial,dependentorlessdevelopedperiphery.Buttherearealsootherpatterns.7.Theideathattransplantsretaintheiridentitywithoutsignificantchangeiswidelyrecog-nizedtobeoutmoded.Diffusionoflawmaterializesintwofundamentalconceptsofcomparativelaw:thecirculationoflegalmodelsandthatoflegaltransplants.Bothconceptshavebeen(andarestill)consid-erablydebatedbyscholars.Despitebeingtwofacesofthesamecoin,sociologicaldiscourseondiffusionandlegaldiscussionaboutthecirculationoflegalmodelsandlegaltransplantsgenerallypayscarceattentiontoeachother(Farranetal.,2015;Twining,2005a).Withoutplungingdeeplyintothedebatesrelatedtotheseimportantissuesincomparativelaw,wewilltrytooutlinetheessentialfeaturesofbothconceptstothenconnectthemwiththeglocalizationdiscourse.Theexpression‘legalmodel’referstothewayofconceivinglaw,itsfunctionsandaimsaccordingtothecharacterizingelementscommontothelegalsystemsbelongingtothatgivenmodel,sothatthediversityoflegalsystemsisreducedtounityaccordingtosomefundamentaltypesexpressedbythelegalmodels:‘legallyspeaking,modelsrepresentforlegalsystemswhat,fromthegeographicpointofview,continentsrepresentforthecountries’(Costantinesco,2003;seealsoGeslin,2016).Identifyinglegalmodelsallowsustocircumventthediversityandmultiplicityoflegalsystemsbygroupingthemaccordingtothemodelstowhichtheybelong.Eachmodelhasitsownnature,meaningandobjective,differentfromtheothers;modelsofferthepossibilitytounderstandwhycertainlegalsystemsaregroupedwithsomeanddifferfromothers(Costantinesco,2003;Sacco&Rossi,2019).Thediscourseaboutthecirculationoflegalmodelsanalysesthereasons,aswellastheframeworkandways,throughwhicheachmodelexpandsitsinfluence(Agostini,1990).Circulationoflegalmodels–andthereforetheirimitation–isachievedbytwopossibleavenues:impositionandprestige.Thestrengthofagivenculturebringswithittheimpositionofitsrelatedmodels(notonlylegal):colonizationoffersaneasyexampleofthisphenomenon.Prestigerelatestothefamethatagivenmodelbuildsupovertime(forexample,ItalyandFrancehavebuiltupprestigewithreferencetofashionandfood),whichbringsotherrealitiestoimitatethatprestigiousmodel,totryachievethesameoutcome.Normally,circulationwillmovefromoneprestigiousmodeltoanother(Sacco,1992;Zajtay,1957,1975).Morerecently,theabove-mentionedavenuestocirculationhavetendedtomerge:wenotice,forexample,caseswheretheargumentofprestige–thatoftenimpliesthatofefficiency–isusedtodisguisetheimpositionofagivenmodel.2Takinglegaltransplantsintoconsideration,itshallbenotedthatadefinitionamongthescholarswhodealwiththissubjectishardtofind.Onesuitabledefinitionisthatlegaltrans-plantsareawayofcreatinglegalnormsas‘abodyoflaworindividuallegalrulethatwascopiedfromalaworrulealreadyinforceinanothercountry,ratherthandevelopedbythelocallegalcommunity’(Kanda&Milhaupt,2003).Suchdefinitiondoesnotnarrowthefieldtostatelaw,butincludesthepossibilitytomakereferencetoothernormativeordersasthesourceoftheruletobetransplanted.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9180HandbookofcultureandglocalizationThescholarlydebateonlegaltransplantsstartedinthe1970swiththefamouspublicationonthesubjectbyAlanWatson(Watson,1993[1974]).ThediscussionhasrangedfromtheinitialextremeoptimismofWatson(basedontheassumptionthattherearehugesimilaritiesbetweenlegalsystemsaroundtheworld,thatimitationisthedeterminingfactorofthesesimilarities,andthatmostlawexistswithoutanyspecificconnectiontothelocalsocial,economicandculturalconditions)forwhomtransplantingisextremelycommon,themostfertilesourceofdevelopment,andsociallyeasybecause‘legalrulesarenotpeculiarlydevisedforaparticularsocietyinwhichtheynowoperate’(Watson,1993[1974]),sothat‘[l]egaltransplantsarealiveandwellastheywereinthetimeofHammurabi’(Watson,2000),totheextremelyscepticalpositionofPierreLegrand,forwhomlegaltransplantsaresimplyimpossible(Legrand,1997).Withreferencetothischapter,castingaglanceonthesephenomenahasmerelyadefini-tionalpurposeandadiscussiononlegaltransplantswouldbebeyonditsscope,sowewillnotenterintotheongoingdebateonwhylegaltransplantshaveveryoftenbeenconsideredasunsuccessful,northeconditionsunderwhichwecanmeasurethe‘success’oflegalreformsbasedontheimportationorimpositionofforeignmodels(Graziadei,2019;Mancuso,2009;Twining2005a).However,circulationoflegalmodelsandlegaltransplantsproduceachangeinthereceivingsystem(s)thatwillnecessarilydeterminevariationsinthepre-existinglegalsituation.Howmustwelookatthisphenomenon?BorrowingAppadurai’stheoryof‘-scapes’thatfocusesonthecreationofdifferentdimensions(ethnoscapes,technoscapes,financescapes,mediascapesandideoscapes)asaresultofwhathecalls‘globalculturalflows’(Appadurai,1996),wecanidentifyas‘lawscapes’thoselegalsituationsarisingfromthecirculationof‘legalflows’(Lupoi,2001)andtheinteractionofthedifferentlegalrealitiespresentinagivensystem,whichobviouslyincludesthecirculationanddiffusionofdiverselegalmodelsand/oristheresultoflegaltransplants.MixitySociologistsandsocialscientistshaveuseddifferentterms(mélange,creolization,métissage,mestizaje,syncretism,transcultural)(Dessì,2019;NederveenPieterse,1995;Roudometof,2016)toexpress–indifferentfields,timesandspaces–aconceptthat,ingeneral,canbedescribedastheresultofcross-culturalexchanges,thespreadingofmulti-ethnicandmulti-centricpatterns,andasortof‘globalculturalosmosisandinterplay’(NederveenPieterse,2004).Inthelegalfield,theterms‘mixity’or‘mixed’areveryfamiliartocomparativelawyers,especiallywithreferencetoso-called‘mixedjurisdictions’.Comparativelawyersknowexactlywhatisintendedbymixedjurisdictions,despitethelackofacommonlyaccepteddefi-nition(DuPlessis,2019).Thisisbecausepositionsaboutmixedjurisdictionsrangebetweenamorerestrictedapproachthatidentifiesasmixedthoselegalsystemswherestatelawiscomposedofelementsbelongingtoboththecontinentalandthecommonlawlegaltraditions(Palmer,2012),andawiderviewthatconsidersmixedallthosejurisdictionswheretwoormorenormativeordersarepresentatthesametime(Fathally&Mariani,2008).3Theideathatalllegalsystemspresentacertaindegreeofmixityhasbeenembracedbyseveralcomparativelawscholars(Donlanetal.,2012;Örücü,2008).EsinÖrücüdistinguishesbetween‘covertmixes’,legalsystemsthatnotappeartobemixed,and‘overtmixes’,referringtolegalsystemswhosemixityisclear.Thecovertmixesareinturnsubdividedinto‘compounds’,whichdifferSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
92Lawandglocalization81accordingtothewayinwhichthese‘unofficial’mixesareformed,whiletheovertmixesaresubdividedintogroupsthatinclude‘simple’and‘complex’mixes:simplemixesblendalimitednumberofelementsatasubstantivelevel,whileinthecomplexmixes,thenumberofelementsismuchgreater,andtheyareconsideredas‘legalhybrids’(Örücü,2008).Withoutgoingfurtherintothescholarlydebateabout‘howmixedmustamixedjurisdictionbe’(Castellucci,2008)andtowhichextentlegalhybridsaredifferentfromlegalpluralism,itisnecessarytodeterminewhatconstitutesmixityinthelegalfield.Focusingonstatelaw,whichisthecoreelementinrelationtoothersocialsciencesingeneral,wecandefineasmixedthoserealitieswheretheofficialstatelawistheresultofthepresence–attheofficiallevel–oftwoormorelegaltraditions(Glenn,2009).HybridityHybridityis‘aslippery,ambiguousterm,atonceliteralandmetaphorical,descriptiveandexplanatory’(Burke,2009).Hybridizationhasbeendefinedas‘thewaysinwhichformsbecomeseparatedfromexistingpracticesandrecombineinnewformswithnewpractices’(Rowe&Schelling,1991),or‘themakingofaglobalcultureasaglobalmélange’(NederveenPieterse,1995).ThedifferencebetweenglocalityandhybridityhasbeenunderlinedbyRoudometof,whoconsidershybridityaconceptbroaderthanthatofglocality,ashybridityidentifies‘theresultoftwoculturalstreamsfusingwitheachother’whoseoriginisnotspec-ified,whileglocality‘necessitatesthepresenceoftwostreams,onewhichneedstobelocal’(Roudometof,2016;seealsoKhondker,2005).Ifhybriditygenerallyconcernsthemixtureofculturalphenomenathatareconsideredasdifferentandseparate,and–consequently–hybridizationreferstoatransculturalprocess,ultimatelytheprocessofhybridizationshowshowdifferencesarerelativeandemphasizesthesimilarities.Hybridities,consideredastheresultsofsuchprocessesoffusion,aredifferenti-atedaccordingtothecomponentsinthemélange(NederveenPieterse,1995).Insocialsciences,hybridityhasbeenusedasasynonymofmixity,ortoidentifytheresultofmixing(NederveenPieterse,1995),aphenomenonthatmaydeterminetheformationofnewthirdculturesorasimplemixofthosecombined(Roudometof,2016).Inlegalstudies,theword‘hybridity’wasalsooriginallyusedassynonymofmixityandthisideacanbefoundintheapproachthatlooksatmixedjurisdictionsasthethirdlegalfamily,alegalculturewherecivilandcommonlawaremixed(Palmer,2012).Onlyinmorerecenttimeshasitbeenusedtodescribedifferentandmorecomplexphenomena.Transposingthelatterconceptionofhybridityintolegalstudies,wecouldsaythatthesimplemixofcombinedculturescoincideswiththetraditionalideaofmixedjurisdictions,whilelegalfluxesresultinginanew,distinct‘lawscape’canberegardedasexamplesoflegalhybridity(Donlan,2010).Legalhybridity,then,includes–butisnotlimitedto–thestudyofmixedjurisdictions,asitdealswithinteractionsbetweenandcombinationsofstatelawandnon-statenorms,coveringnormativeandlegalordersofdifferenttypeswithdifferentprinciplesandpractices:itreferstocasesofnormativecomplexity(Donlan,2015).‘Hybridformationsconstitutedbytheinterpenetrationofdiverselogicsmanifestthem-selvesinhybridsitesandspaces’(NederveenPieterse,1995).Thisisverytrueasfaraslawisconcerned.Avividexampleofhybriditythatrelates(also)tothelegalfieldandfitsperfectlyintheabovestatementisthatofSpecialEconomicZones(SEZs),areaslocatedwithinthenationalbordersofacountryinwhichbusinessandtradelawsaredifferentfromtherestoftheSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9382Handbookofcultureandglocalizationcountrytoattractforeigndirectinvestments.Thesedifferencestypicallyencompassinvesting,taxation,trading,quotas,customsandlabourregulations;additionally,companiesmaybeofferedtaxholidays,where,uponestablishingthemselvesinazone,theyaregrantedaperiodoflowertaxation(WorldBankGroup,2017).Wenotetheexistenceofhybridareasalsoininternationalcommerciallaw–forexample,lexmercatoriaandinternationalsales(UNIDROITprinciples)–arbitration,intellectualprop-erty,and,moregenerally,inallthoseexampleswherethereisanamalgamofdifferentsystemsofnormativity.GLOCALIZATIONANDGROBALIZATIONThediscussionaboutglocalizationhasbroughtscholarstoaddanothertermtothediscourse,thatof‘grobalization’,torefertowhatarecalled‘growthimperatives[pushing]organizationsandnationstoexpandgloballyandtoimposethemselvesonthelocal’(Ritzer,2004.Foracri-tiqueofRitzer’sapproach,seeRoudometof,2016;seealsoVizureanu,2013).Inparticular,grobalizationfocusesontheimperialisticambitionsofnations,corporations,organizations,andotherentitiesandtheirdesire–indeed,theirneed–toimposethemselvesonvariousgeographicareas.Theirmaininterestisinseeingtheirpower,influenceand(insomecases)profitsgrow...throughouttheworld.(Ritzer,2004)Grobalizationisseenasacompanionprocesstoglocalization,bothunderthebroaderheadingofglobalization.Itrepresentsamoremodern,imperialisticandhomogenizingperspective(Ryan,2017).Amongthecasesmostexaminedinsociologicalstudiestherearesomeregardingmul-tinationals,likeMcDonaldization(Ritzer,2011),Wal-Martization(Matusitz,2014),uptotheIKEAtheoryoflegaltransfer(Frankenberg,2013).VeryinterestingintermsoftheimplicationstheyhaveonthelegalsectorareAmericanization(alsowidelystudiedbysocialscientists)andChineseexpansion,particularly(butnotonly)inAfrica.Theuseoftheword‘Americanization’conveysdifferentconnotationsifusedintheUScontextoroutofit,thefirstbeingunrelatedtogrobalization.WithintheUnitedStates,AmericanizationreferstothelatenineteenthtoearlytwentiethcenturymovementbywhichimmigrantsbecamenaturalizedandassimilatedintomainstreamAmericancustomsandvalues(Aronovici,1920).Themovementfailedasitultimatelysufferedfromvaguedefinitionsofwhat‘Americanization’meant,besideslearningthelanguage,beingloyaltotheUnitedStates,andacceptingtherepublicanformofgovernment(Miller,1998).OutsidetheUSborders,thetermisinsteadusedtodefinetheinfluenceoftheUnitedStatesonthecultureofothercountries.However,inrecenttimes,Americanizationisincreasinglybeingusedasanearsynonymfortwoopposingconceptionsofglobalization:onereferringtothetrendofworldhomogenization,theothertothehybridizationandpluralityofworldcultures(Mele,2017).Ingeneral,however,AmericanizationcanbelinkedtothedominantinfluencethattheUnitedStateshasontheworldtoday(Ryan,2017).Thetermindicatesthetrendinnon-USsocietiesofadoptingtheculturalandbehaviouralmodelsoftheUS;meanwhile,sociologicalresearchis,ontheonehand,engagedinexaminingthefactorsthatinfluencetheextenttowhichaparticularcountryadoptselementsofAmericanculture(Craigetal.,2009)and,onSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
94Lawandglocalization83theother,inunderstandingthereasonsforandtheextenttowhichlocalelementscoexistwiththeimportedAmericanmodel(Shimemura,2002).Goingclosertosituationsconnectedtolaw,itcanbenotedhowresearchandhigheredu-cationtransformedgraduallytotheAmericanstandard:thistransformationismostclearlyrevealedbythechangeoflanguageusedinresearchfromthenationallanguagetoEnglish;theregularlaunchingofcoursesanddegreesdesignedaccordingtoAmericanmodels(intermsofteachingmethodologyandcontent)andtaughtintheEnglishlanguage;andfinally,thedecisiontoadopttheAmericanstandardinresearch.4AccordingtoRitzer,Americanizationoperatesautomatically,withoutbeingarrestedbyopposingphenomena,likeconcurrentprocesses(Ritzer,2004).However,morerecentlywehavebeguntofaceasimilar–andcompeting–situation,whereChinaisassumingtheleadingposition.TheemergenceandrapidriseofChinaasakeyplayerinAfricahasbeenrealizedusingapproachesthatareinclearcontrasttothoseofEuropeandtheUnitedStates.Chinahaspro-poseditselfasapost-colonialactorandactivelysoughtclosertieswithAfricanstatesonthisbasis,therebygainingtheirsupportonadifferentdevelopmentmodeltothatofEuropeandtheUnitedStates.ChinaistodaytheleadingactorinmostAfricanstatesandplaysapromi-nentroleindifferentsectorsofthesestates;theChineseinfluenceispresentineveryAfricancountrywithwhichChinahasrelations,regardlessofwhetherornotthecountryisrichinresources.ChinesecooperationwithAfricanstatestendstofocusoneconomicgrowth,tradeandinvestment;Chinapaysasmuchattentiontofundingcountries’infrastructure,asitdoestoexploitingtheirnaturalresources.ThewidespreadChinesepresenceinAfrica–withanewmodelofcooperationthatoperatestothedetrimentofthoseofEuropeandtheUnitedStates–clearlyshowsChina’simperialisticambitions,whicharealsoservedthroughtheactionsofitsstate-ownedcorporations,organizations,andotherentitiesinAfricathatsupportthegrowthofChinesepower,influenceandprofitsthroughouttheAfricancontinent(seeGrimm,2014ontheChinesepresenceinAfrica;andseeMancuso,2012forthelegalimplicationsofChina–Africarelations).TheBeltandRoadInitiativecanbeconsideredanother(andmoreambitious)exampleofgrobalizationwhereChinaplaystheleadingrole.Theinitiativeisacomprehensiveprojectoftransregional,multi-layeredconnectivityaimedatdevelopingthegrowthpotentialoftheEurasianandAfricancontinents.Officiallylaunchedin2013astheflagshipforeignpolicyprojectofXiJinping’sadministration,theBeltandRoadInitiativehasrapidlyemergedasapervasiveresearchthemeglobally,atrendwhichitselfreflectsthescholarlyinterestonChina’sgrowingpower(Andornino,2017).ItisgenerallyconsideredasChina’snewdeterminationandcapacitytopursueanalternativepathofalliances–beyondthescopeofWashington’sinfluence–toshifttheinternationalsystemawayfromitsunipolarconfigura-tionandenableChinatoreturntowhatitsleadersconsideritsproperplaceintheglobalorder.Thus,theBeltandRoadInitiativehasbecometheinstrumentbywhichtheChinesegovern-mentactivelyseekstoprojectanewimageandestablishanewpositionforChinawithintheinternationalorder(Pu,2017)bypromotingitsindustrialandfinancialpoweracrosstheworld(Barbieri&Miranda,2018)throughthedevelopmentofaformofconnectiveleadershipthatpursuestheintegrationoftheexistinginternationalorder,ratherthanunderminingitthroughcounter-hegemonicinstitutions(Tian,2010).WiththeBeltandRoadInitiative,‘Chinaispursuingatotallydifferentstrategy,basedonawin-windiplomacyandaimedatdevelopingSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9584Handbookofcultureandglocalizationnewmodelsofregionalandinter-regionalintegrationandeconomiccooperation’(Barbieri&Miranda,2018).Indeed,Chinahasanestablished‘counter-hegemonicforeignpolicyorientation’(Leverett&Wu,2016),purportingmultipolarismasaworthiersystem,sinceitinvolveslessconcentra-tionofpower.However,whereastheideathatChinaisstilladevelopingcountryandshould,therefore,nottakealeadershiproleinglobalaffairsisstillpresentinthedomesticpoliticaldiscourse(Pu,2017),externally,Chinahasrepeatedlyshownitscommitmenttoincreaseitscontributiontotheworldorder.Inthisscenario,theBeltandRoadInitiativehasbecometheflagshipoftheChinese‘visionofglobalgovernance’(Andornino,2017),thatinvolvestheestablishmentofadedicatedinstitutionalmechanismforcooperationwiththecountriesinvolved(Vangeli,2017).LEGALGLOCALISMTakingasastartingpointthat‘glocalizationtobemeaningfulmustincludeatleastonecom-ponentthataddressesthelocalculture,systemofvaluesandpracticesandsoon’(Khondker,2005),wecanturntoconsideringthisphenomenonintheareaoflaw.Studiesontheinteractionbetweenlawandglocalizationappearfromtimetotimeinapatchymanner,asitseemsthatthereisnot,yet,aresearchpath,normuchscholarlywritingdedicatedtothistheme.Havingdescribedaboveglocalizationasaprocessof‘globalizationfilteredthroughthelocalsituation,asituationwhereglobalandlocalelementsarecombinedtoproducedifferentoutcomesaccordingtotherelevantlocalreality’,itmayeasilybedeductedthatthemainelementofglocalizationisthecombinationofglobalandlocal(Ferrarese,2006).Conversely,glocalismidentifiesthechangesgeneratedbyglobalizationwhenmeetingthelocaldimension,changeswhichhaveresultedinapermanentintertwiningoftheglobalandthelocaldimen-sions.Here,afewexamplesoflegalsituationswhereglocalism–thatis,changesdeterminedbytheencounterofglobalizationwiththelocaldimension–canbedetectedintheareaoflawwillbeillustrated.Indeed,lawtooisaffectedbytherevivaloflocalistinstancesthatresistthegeneraltrendtohavelegalinstrumentsdetachedfromtheterritorialdimensioninfavourofsupranationalortransnationalnormativeapproaches.Thesenormativeapproachescanmaterializeinnormativeinstrumentspreparedatthegloballevelthatneedtobeenactedlocallyorbythecirculationofinstitutionsofcontractualorigintobeadaptedtothecontextwheretheyshallbeapplied.Therefore,legalglocalismtakesshapewhenalegalinstrumentconceivedatagloballevelisappliedineachlocalrealitythroughthefilterofcompliancewiththelocallegalsystem.Suchafiltercanbepreventive,throughthelaw(constitution,laws,codes,generalprinciplesoflaw),orsubsequent,throughthecourtsortheenforcementofarbitralawards.Itfollowsthatthefusingofglobalandlocalcanproduceanindefinitenumberofnewcombinationsandinteractionsoftenflowingintonewhybridsproducingunpredictablechangesintheresultinglawscapes.Followingthisreasoning,weobservehowglocalizationhaslongbeenpresentinthelegalfield,detectableinthosesituationswhereasupranational,transnationalorinternationallegalinstrumentneedsalocalregulationtobeinserted–orinanycaseapplied–inagivenjurisdiction.Examplesinthisrespectarecountless,frominternationalconventions(saleofSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
96Lawandglocalization85goods,enforcementofarbitralawardsandsoon)totheenforcementofEuropeandirectives,tothedifferentsoftlawinstrumentsthathavebeenappliedcontractuallyorjurisdictionallyindifferentplaces(UNIDROITprinciples,lexmercatoria,andsoon).Alltheseinsertionshaveproduceddifferentconsequencesindifferentjurisdictions,andtheresulting‘lawscapes’arecharacterizedbythelocalpeculiarities.Moregenerally,globalizationhasledtoacrisisoflegaltransplantsastraditionallyintended(thetransplantofspecificlegalmodelsandnormsfromonejurisdictiontoanother),theobjectofwhichhasshiftedtomoregeneralandvaguenotions(Ajani,2003).Moreover,eventhesevaguenotionsaresubjecttophenomenaofglocalization:oneexampleistheconceptoftheruleoflaw–aglobalandsupposedlymonolithicconcept–whichinpracticeisindeedmodi-fiedandadaptedaccordingtothecontextinwhichitisintendedtooperate(Castellucci,2007;seeTiffert,2018,withreferencetoChina,andMancuso,2020,withreferencetoAfrica).Notably,suchashifttomoregeneralandvaguenotionsisfacilitatedbytheintrinsiccharac-teristicofthesupranationaland–evenmoreso–transnationalrules,thatofbeingcompletelydecontextualized,detachedfromanyterritoriallink,extremelyfluidandeasilymouldableinthelocalcontext(Mancuso,2018).Clearlythischaracteristicrendersglocalizationandhybrid-izationofnormativeinstrumentsveryeasy,sincethegeneralandrigidpathsofnormativeproductioncanbeeasilybypassedinfavourofmoreflexibleandmanageableprocesses.Here,theprocessofcombinationwiththelocalelementsdoesnotnecessarilygothroughthenormalchannels(law,jurisprudence),astheinteractionwithlocalrealityisdriventhroughdailypractice,thussensiblyreducingthepossibilityforthelocalto(atleastofficially)influencetheglobal(Ferrarese,2006;Mancuso,2018).Legalglocalismcanbealsodetectedinthosephenomenawherelawsoriginallyconceivedatnationallevelaresubjecttovariousamendmentstoalignthemwithinternationalstandardsandpolicies(Narayan,2019).Theexamplesherearenumerous,especiallywithregardstothevariouschangesChinahadtomaketoitslocalnormstoadaptthemtotheWTOstandardsandrequirements,aswellasthechangesproducedinthedomesticlegalsystemofEUcountriestoadaptthemtoEUrequirements.GROBALIZATIONINTHELEGALFIELDIntheprevioussection,weidentifiedgrobalizationastheprocessthroughwhichnations,corporations,organizationsandotherentitiespursuetheirimperialisticambitions.Legalgro-balism(orgrobalizationthroughthelaw)isarealityinthepresenttimeandseveralexamplescanbementionedinthisrespect.OneoftheclearestexamplesrelatestoChineselegaldiplomacy.Legaldiplomacyisakindofdiplomaticactivitythatisbasedonthecontent,useandapproachtolaw.Itaimsatinstill-inglegalconceptsindiplomaticactivities,sothatdiplomaticissuesanddisputes,aswellasforeignaffairsaredealtwithandsolvedusinglegalavenues.Itcoversnotonlytraditional,butalsopublicandpeople-to-peoplediplomacy(He,2017).TheChineselegaldiplomacyprogrammeistheresultofthenewroletakenbyChinaintheinternationalarenaandisbasedontheChineseapproachtotheruleoflaw(Castellucci,2007;Tiffert,2018).Practically,theChinesewaytoconductlegaldiplomacyisbasedoncontinuousexchangesondomesticlawsandoninternationallaw.Suchexchangesaremadethroughacademicconferencesandsemi-nars;bysendingChinesestudentsandscholarsabroadtobetterunderstandforeignlawsandSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9786HandbookofcultureandglocalizationinternationallawandbyinvitingforeignerstolearnmoreaboutChineselawsandregulations;bysupportingmutualvisitsandinspectionsofjudges,procurators,lawyers,policemenandlegalworkerstoexchangeviewsondifferentlegalissuesandenhancecoordination;andbyprovidinglegalassistanceinvariousformswiththeaimofspreadingChineselegalculture.TheideaisthatChinacanexerciseamoreextensiveanddeeperinfluenceonothernationsbyexportingitslegalthoughtandexperienceinpractisingtheruleoflaw,whilemaintainingfullrespectforthesovereigntyandculturesofothernations(Zhang&Gu,2013).Throughlegaldiplomacy,ChinaultimatelywantstoputforwarditslegalcultureandthepromotionoflegalexchangesbetweenChinaandtherestoftheworld,wheretheChinesewayofpractisingtheruleoflawisconsideredanalternativetothatoftheWest.AnotherprimeexampleoflegalgrobalismliesinthecaseofAmericanand(lessso)Britishlawfirmsexpandingworldwide.Thisisanambivalentphenomenon.Itcanbeconsideredanexampleoflegalglocalism,asthelawfirmsneedtoadapttothelocalcontexttooperateinagivenjurisdictionbyhiringlocallawyers,openinglocalofficesorbuyinglocallawfirmstobefullypresentinagivenjurisdiction(Silver,DeBruinPhelan&Rabinowitz,2009)Inotherwords:U.S.firmsaregoinglocalthroughlocallawyerswhobringexpertiseinhardandsoftlaw,includingimportantconnectionstolocalculture,regulators,businessandthestate,whileatthesametimethefirmsaremaintainingconnectionthroughthepresenceofU.S.-educatedlawyerstotheiruniversal–theU.S.[–]approachtopractice,encompassingbothanentrepreneurialapproachtopracticeandproblem-solvingapproachaswellasattentiontotheethicalconstraintsonfirmsandtheirlawyers.(Silver,VanZandt&DeBruinPhelan,2008)Theyarealsoadopting–wherenecessary–localnormsandpracticesinordertoadapttolocalcircumstances.ButtheforeignexpansionofAmericanlawfirmsis,atthesametime,aclearexampleoflegalgrobalism.Indeed,expansionisaninstrumentforlawfirmstogainpowerpositionsinthelegalenvironmentandcontrolthemarketofmedium-andhigh-profileclients.Italsoservestodisseminate(oftenhelpedbymultinationalcompanies,whicharetheirclients)worldnorms,contractualclauses,practices,productsandservices.Theeffectofsuchdisseminationisthatlocalpracticesandnormsaresuperseded,and–ultimately–thecommonlawmodelisempowered,withtheconsequenthybridizationandlossofthecharac-terizingelementsoftheothers(Ferrarese,2006;Mancuso,2018).Anglo-Americanlawfirms’activitiesinlocalcontextsaregroundedontheimportanceandlegitimacyoftheAmericanorEnglishwayoforganizinglawfirmsanddeliveringlegalservices(Faulconbridgeetal.,2008).Ultimately,grobalizationthroughtheexpansionofAmericanlawfirmsbecomesevidentifweconsiderthattheyhavegoneglobalthroughanexportingmodel–suchasthediffusionparadigmofgrowth–inwhichtheyprimarilyservehome-countryclientsbyapplyingUSlawininternationalcontextsinorderto‘pushforwardU.S.interests’(Morgan&Quack,2006).Grobalizationalsohappensinthefieldofhighereducationasuniversityqualificationsinlawaremoreandmorerecognizedandacceptedacrossforeignjurisdictions.LawstudentsaspiretohaveLLMsandPhDsfromprestigiousinstitutions,especiallyfromtheUSandEngland.Thisbecauseitisnowimportanttointernationalizetheeducationalexperienceoflawstudentstopreparethemfornewwaysofapproachingprofessionallegalpracticeathomeandabroadandtobepartoftheabove-mentionedgloballawfirms.Internationalizationbecomesanintrinsicpartofteaching,anduniversitiescompetewitheachothertooffercoursesanddegreesintheEnglishlanguagetosupportthistrend.StudentsaresentabroadwhereanotherSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
98Lawandglocalization87legalsystemisatwork,tostudyandliveinsideitandpreferenceisnotedfortheUSandtheUK(Hiscock,2014).Ontheotherside,prestigiousuniversitiesfromthesamecountriesopenforeigncampusestobringtheirstudies–andconsequentlytheirteachingandlearningmodels,teachingmaterials,andsyllabi–tothosecountriesthatareconsideredstrategicfordifferentreasons:theyneedtoadapttothelocalrequirementstobeapprovedasteachinginstitutions,butwhenthishappenstheythenbringtheirmodels,methodologiesandconceptstothosecountries(CatáBacker&Stancil,2012;McCabe,2001;Shahjahan&Morgan,2016).Ifwewanttolookearlier,legalreformsthatfollowedstructuraladjustmentprogrammescanbeconsideredsomeofthefirstexamplesoflegalgrobalization.Thosestructuraladjust-mentprogrammes–andthelegalreformsconnectedtothem–werepreparedbyinternationalfinancialinstitutionsasasortofready-madepackagetobeenforcedlocallywiththebareminimumnecessaryintermsofadaptationtothelocalcontext(Chesterman,2002;Heidhues&Obare,2011;ToddPeters,2004).Ultimately,theseprogrammesbecameaninstrumentforinternationalfinancialinstitutionsattheworldleveltogetpowerandplayacentralroleindevelopmentprogrammes.CONCLUSIONThecombinedeffectoflegalglocalismandgrobalismsubvertstheclassicapproachtonormativeordersbasedonthestatemonopolyofthelawandtheirhierarchicorder,andper-fectlyrepresentsthechangeswefacetodayaboutthesameconceptoflawinpresenttimes.Territorialityhasentailedasolidcharacteristicoflegalsystems,whichhasmadevariouslegalhierarchieseasilydetectable;butwithapresenceinthelawscapeofcountlessmixesbetweenglobalandlocalelements,legalsystemsbegantolosetheirfundamentalcharacteristicsduetothisdialecticaldimensiondeterminingincreasinglynebuloushierarchicalstructures.The(Western)juristisusedtoconsideringthelaw-makingprocessasawayofexpressingthesovereigntyofthestate,asovereigntythatisexercisedonacertainpartoftheearth’ssurface,theterritory,whichmeasuresthescopeofexpansionofsovereignty–bothpoliticalandlegal–ofthestate.Lawthusassumesaspatialdimensionthatcorrespondstothatofthestate.Iflawwithalegislativematrixisalawwithaterritorialdimension,limitedbynationalborders,withtheadventofglobalization,lawtendstoloseitsterritorialconnotationtotakeonnewformsdictatedbydifferenttypesofrelationsandlegalinstrumentsinvolvingdifferentplacesandsubjectsintheglobalspace,untilitbecomes‘geo-law’.Legalspacesthusbecomevariableandnolongercoincidewiththestateterritory,insteadrelyingondailypracticetodeterminethefieldofapplicationofthesinglenormativeorder(Bussani,2010;Ferrarese,2012).Withtheadventofglobalizationandtheriseoftheeconomyonaglobalbasisandthetoolsmadeavailablebythenetwork–allelementsthatknownoboundaries(indeedtheyrejectthem),havenoplacesofbelonging,canspreadandtakerooteverywhere–theconceptofafixedanddeterminedspacedematerializes.Boundariesarecrossedinasoftway,withoutaffectingtheterritorialboundaries,butsuch‘trespasses’aresoregularandrelevantastorede-signtheworldeconomic,politicalandlegalcoordinates(Mancuso,2018).Legalglocalismandgrobalismplaydifferentrolesinthiscomplicatedscenery.Legalglo-calismcanbeconsideredasanattempttomitigatetheabove-mentioneddisruptiveeffectofglobalizationonthelaw.MovingfromtheacknowledgementthatglobalizationisinevitableSalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
9988Handbookofcultureandglocalizationalsointhelegalfield,andthattheprocessofdematerializationoflegalboundariesisdeprivingterritorialstatesofaconsiderablepartoftheirrolewithreferencetothelaw(statesstillmanagetopreserveacentralroleinlegalmattersconcerningpublicadministration,crimes,personalstatus,familyandinheritance),throughglocalism,thestatecantrytosaveitspositionintheprocessoflegaldevelopmenttoday.Indeed,statestrytocarveoutaroleforthemselvesinthegloballybasedlaw-makingprocessthroughattemptstothereininsertlocalconnotations.Thisisinordertoallowforacontextualizationofthefinalproductinthelocallegalreality.Legalgrobalismcanbeconsideredasthereversesideofthecoin.Thisisthetoolusedbythemostpowerfulstatestooccupytherolethatthestatemanagestoget(orkeep)notonlywithintheirgeographicboundaries,butalsobyinvadingotherjurisdictions.Thesepowerrelation-shipsareplayednotonlywithinthemorelimitedfieldofthelawbyusingtheprestigeofthelegalsystem,theyarealsopartofawidergameinvolvingeconomicandpoliticaldimensions,sothatlawhasbecomeakeygeopoliticaltool.Itisnotforeseeablethattheabovetensionsandinteractionswilldiminish–orevenend–inthenearfuture.Onthecontrary,itlookslikethetrendis,atleastfornow,onanupwardtrajectory.Thefactisthatlawtodayisnotonlyamirrortosociety,butalsototheeconomyandservesboth.Onlyaproperbalanceamongtheelementsinvolvedwouldpreventalltheseinteractionshavingeffectsmoredisruptivethanthosethathavealreadytakenplace.NOTES1.Oneexampleistheuseoftheconceptsof‘hybridity’and‘diffusion’inthelegalscholarshipinDonlan(2015).2.AneasyexampleinthisrespectisthecirculationoftheUSlegalmodelvehiculatedthroughthechannelofitsefficiencyandimposedthroughconsultantsandeconomicaidgrantedtolessdevel-opedcountriesthataccepttoadoptit.Onthisphenomenon,seemoreinBussani(2010).3.ThedifferentviewpointsaboutmixedjurisdictionsaresummarizedinPalmer(2008).4.FortheEuropeanexample,seeBorghansandCörvers(2010).REFERENCESAgostini,E.(1990),‘Lacirculationdesmodèlesjuridiques’,Revueinternationalededroitcomparé,42(2),461–7.Ajani,G.(2003),‘Navigatoriegiuristi.Apropositodeltrapiantodinozionivaghe’,inV.Bertorello(ed.),Iocomparo,tucompari,eglicompara:checosa,come,perché?,Milan,Italy:Giuffrè,pp.3–19.Andornino,G.B.(2017),‘TheBeltandRoadInitiativeinChina’sEmergingGrandStrategyofConnectiveLeadership’,China&WorldEconomy,25(5),4–22.Appadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Aronovici,C.(1920),‘Americanization:ItsMeaningandFunction’,AmericanJournalofSociology,25(6),695–730.Barbieri,G.andA.Miranda(2018),‘OneBeltOneRoad:UnderstandingChina’sActivisminContemporaryWorld.DoestheFlapofaButterfly’sWingsinChinaSetOffaTornadoinEurope(UKIncluded)?’,TheCardozoElectronicLawBulletin,xxx,1–29.Birnhack,M.(2006),‘GlobalCopyright,LocalSpeech’,CardozoArts&EntertainmentLawJournal,24,491–547.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
100Lawandglocalization89Birnhack,M.(2014),‘InformationalServices:GoingOnline,Global,andLocalAgain:TheElectronicSilkRoad:HowtheWebBindstheWorldTogetherinCommerce’,AmericanJournalofInternationalLaw,108,562–8.Borghans,L.andF.Cörvers(2010),‘TheAmericanizationofEuropeanHigherEducationandResearch’,inC.T.Clotfelter(ed.),AmericanUniversitiesinaGlobalMarket,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress,pp.231–67.Burke,P.(2009),CulturalHybridity,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Bussani,M.(2010),Ildirittodell’occidente,Turin,Italy:Einaudi.Castellucci,I.(2007),‘RuleofLawwithChineseCharacteristics’,AnnualSurveyofInternational&ComparativeLaw,13(1),35–58.Castellucci,I.(2008),‘HowMixedMustaMixedSystemBe?’,ElectronicJournalofComparativeLaw,12(1),accessed23March2020athttps://www.ejcl.org/121/art121-4.pdf.CatáBacker,L.andB.Stancil(2012),‘BeyondColonization-GlobalizationandtheEstablishmentofProgramsofU.S.LegalEducationAbroadbyIndigenousInstitutions’,DrexelLawReview,5,317–70.Chesterman,S.(2002),‘WalkingSoftlyinAfghanistan:TheFutureofUNState-Building’,Survival,44(3),37–46.Costantinesco,L.J.(2003),Lascienzadeidiritticomparati,Turin,Italy:Giappichelli.Craig,C.S.,Douglas,S.P.andA.Bennett(2009),‘ContextualandCulturalFactorsUnderlyingAmericanization’,InternationalMarketingReview,26(1),90–109.Dessì,U.(2019),Religionieglobalizzazione.Un’introduzione,Rome,Italy:Carocci.DiMicco,D.(2018),Regolarelaglobalizzazione,Milan,Italy:Giuffrè.Donlan,S.P.(2010),‘ComparativeLawandHybridLegalTraditions.AnIntroduction’,inE.CashRitaine,S.P.DonlanandM.Sychold(eds),ComparativeLawandHybridLegalTraditions,Zurich,Switzerland:Schulthess,pp.9–18.Donlan,S.P.(2015),‘ToHybridityandBeyond:ReflectionsonLegalandNormativeComplexity’,inV.V.Palmer,M.Y.MattarandA.Koppel(eds),MixedLegalSystems,EastandWest,Farnham,UK:Ashgate,pp.17–32.Donlan,S.P.,Andò,B.andD.E.Zammit(2012),‘“AHappyUnion?”Malta’sLegalHybridity’,TulaneEuropeanandCivilLawForum,27,165–208.DuPlessis,J.(2019),‘ComparativeLawandtheStudyofMixedLegalSystems’,inM.ReimannandR.Zimmermann(eds),TheOxfordHandbookofComparativeLaw,2ndedition,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.474–501.Farran,S.,Gallen,J.,Hendry,J.andC.Rautenbach(2015),TheDiffusionofLaw,London,UK:Ashgate.Fathally,J.andN.Mariani(2008),WorldLegalSystems,2ndedition,accessed23March2020athttp://www.juriglobe.ca.Faulconbridge,J.R.,Beaverstock,J.V.,Muzio,D.andP.J.Taylor(2008),‘GlobalLawFirms:GlobalizationandOrganizationalSpacesofCross-BorderLegalWork’,NorthwesternJournalofInternationalLaw&Business,28,455–88.Ferrarese,M.R.(2006),Dirittosconfinato,Rome-Bari,Italy:Laterza.Ferrarese,M.R.(2012),Primalezionedidirittoglobale,Rome-Bari,Italy:Laterza.Frankenberg,G.(ed.)(2013),OrderfromTransfer.ComparativeConstitutionalDesignandLegalCulture,Cheltenham,UKandNorthampton,MA:EdwardElgarPublishing.Geslin,A.(2016),‘Lacirculationdesmodèlesnormatifsoulapenséejuridiquedumouvement’,inP.BourguesandC.Montagne(eds),Lacirculationdesmodèlesnormatifs,Grenoble,France:PUG.Glenn,H.P.(2003),‘TheNationalistHeritage’,inP.LegrandandR.Munday(eds),ComparativeLegalStudies:TraditionsandTransitions,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.76–99.Glenn,H.P.(2009),‘AConceptofLegalTradition’,Queen’sLawJournal,34,427.Graziadei,M.(2019),‘ComparativeLaw,Transplants,andReceptions’,inM.ReimannandR.Zimmermann(eds),TheOxfordHandbookofComparativeLaw,2ndedition,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.441–73.Grimm,S.(2014),‘China–AfricaCooperation:promises,practiceandprospects’,JournalofContemporaryChina,23(90),993–1011.He,Z.(2017),‘LegalDiplomacyandthePossibleApproachofChina’,inN.Chitty,L.JiandG.D.Rawnsley(eds),TheRoutledgeHandbookofSoftPower,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.166–76.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
10190HandbookofcultureandglocalizationHeidhues,F.andG.Obare(2011),‘LessonsfromStructuralAdjustmentProgrammesandtheirEffectsinAfrica’,QuarterlyJournalofInternationalAgriculture,50(1),55–64.Hiscock,M.E.(2014),‘Global,LocalandGlocalSchools:TheRoleofComparativeLawandtheImpactofGlobalisation’,China–EULawJournal,3(1–2),13–21.Kanda,H.andC.J.Milhaupt(2003),‘Re-examiningLegalTransplants:TheDirector’sFiduciaryDutyinJapaneseCorporateLaw’,AmericanJournalofComparativeLaw,51,887–901.Khondker,H.H.(1994),GlobalizationTheory:ACriticalAnalysis,workingpaper,Singapore:NationalUniversityofSingapore,DepartmentofSociology.Khondker,H.H.(2005),‘GlobalisationtoGlocalisation:AConceptualExploration’,IntellectualDiscourse,13(2),181–99.Legrand,P.(1997),‘TheImpossibilityofLegalTransplants’,MaastrichtJournalofEuropeanandComparativeLaw,4,111–24.Leverett,F.andB.Wu(2016),‘TheNewSilkRoadandChina’sEvolvingGrandStrategy’,TheChinaJournal,77,110–32.Lupoi,M.(2001),SistemiGiuridiciComparati.TracciadiunCorso,Naples,Italy:EdizioniScientificheItaliane.Mancuso,S.(2009),‘LegalTransplantsandEconomicDevelopment:CommonLawvs.CivilLaw?’,inP.CardinalandJ.CostaOliveira(eds),OneCountry,TwoSystems,ThreeLegalOrders.PerspectivesofEvolution.EssaysonMacau’sAutonomyaftertheResumptionofSovereigntybyChina,Heidelberg,Germany:Springer,pp.75–89.Mancuso,S.(2012),‘ChinainAfricaandtheLaw’,AnnualSurveyofInternational&ComparativeLaw,18(1),243–61.Mancuso,S.(2018),Liquiditàecomparazione,Pisa,Italy:PaciniGiuridica.Mancuso,S.(2021),‘RuleofLawwithAfricanCharacteristics’,inM.Ndulo(ed.),AfricanLaw:AHandbook,NewYork,NY:Routledge,278–290.Matusitz,J.(2014),‘Grobalization:AnAnalysisoftheWal-MartizationoftheWorld’,JournalofInternationalFood&AgribusinessMarketing,26(4),298–315.McCabe,L.T.(2001),‘GlobalizationandInternationalization:TheImpactonEducationAbroadPrograms’,JournalofStudiesinInternationalEducation,5(2),138–45.Mele,V.(2017),‘Americanization’,inB.S.Turner(ed.),TheWiley-BlackwellEncyclopediaofSocialTheory,London,UK:JohnWiley&Sons.Miller,J.J.(1998),TheUnmakingofAmericans:HowMulticulturalismHasUnderminedAmerica’sAssimilationEthic,NewYork,NY:TheFreePress.Morgan,G.andS.Quack(2006),‘GlobalNetworksorGlobalFirms?TheOrganizationalImplicationsoftheInternationalizationofLawFirms’,inA.Ferner,J.QuintanillaandC.SánchezRunde(eds),Multinationals,InstitutionsandtheConstructionsofTransnationalPractices:ConvergenceandDiversityintheGlobalEconomy,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.213–38.Narayan,S.(2019),‘Anti-MoneyLaunderingLawinIndia:A“Glocalization”Model’,StatuteLawReview,40(3),224–35.NederveenPieterse,J.(1995),‘GlobalizationasHybridization’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.45–68.NederveenPieterse,J.(2004),GlobalizationandCulture,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Örücü,E.(2008),‘WhatisaMixedLegalSystem:ExclusionorExpansion?’,ElectronicJournalofComparativeLaw,12(1),accessed23March2020athttp://www.ejcl.org/121/art121-15.pdf.Palmer,V.V.(2008),‘TwoRivalTheoriesofMixedLegalSystems’,ElectronicJournalofComparativeLaw,12(1),accessed23March2020athttp://www.ejcl.org/121/art121-16.pdf.Palmer,V.V.(2012),MixedJurisdictionsWorldwide:TheThirdLegalFamily,2ndedition,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Pu,X.(2017),‘ControversialIdentityofaRisingChina’,TheChineseJournalofInternationalPolitics,10(2),130–49.Reiner,A.(2006),‘Alcuneriflessionisullanozioneesuglieffettidellaglobalizzazione’,inC.AmatoandG.Ponzanelli(eds),Globallawvs.locallaw.Problemidellaglobalizzazionegiuridica,XVIIColloquiobiennaledell’AIDC,Brescia,12-14maggio2005,Turin,Italy:Giappichelli,pp.3–9.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘RethinkingGlobalization:Glocalization/GrobalizationandSomething/Nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
102Lawandglocalization91Ritzer,G.(2004),TheGlobalizationofNothing,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Ritzer,G.(2011),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety6,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.Rogers,E.M.(2003),DiffusionofInnovations,5thedition,NewYork,NY:FreePress.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization.ACriticalIntroduction,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Rowe,W.andV.Schelling(1991),MemoryandModernity:PopularCultureinLatinAmerica,London,UK:Verso.Ryan,J.M.(2017),‘Grobalization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellEncyclopediaofSociology,London,UK:JohnWiley&Sons.Sacco,R.(1992),‘Circolazioneemutazionedeimodelligiuridici’,Digestodisc.priv.sez.civ.,2,Turin,Italy:UTET,pp.365–70.Sacco,R.andP.Rossi(2019),Introduzionealdirittocomparato,Turin,Italy:UTET.Shahjahan,R.A.andC.Morgan(2016),‘GlobalCompetition,Coloniality,andtheGeopoliticsofKnowledgeinHigherEducation’,BritishJournalofSociologyofEducation,37(1),92–109.Shimemura,Y.(2002),‘Globalizationvs.Americanization:IstheWorldBeingAmericanizedbytheDominanceofAmericanCulture?’,ComparativeCivilizationsReview,47(47),80–91.Silver,C.,DeBruinPhelan,N.andM.Rabinowitz(2009),‘BetweenDiffusionandDistinctivenessinGlobalization:U.S.LawFirmsGoGlocal’,TheGeorgetownJournalofLegalEthics,22,1431–71.Silver,C.,VanZandt,D.andN.DeBruinPhelan(2008),‘GlobalizationandtheBusinessofLaw:LessonsforLegalEducation’,NorthwesternJournalofInternationalLaw&Business,28,399–414.Tian,J.D.(2010),‘InternationalOrderandGlobalLeadership’,inS.F.Krishna-Hensel(ed.),OrderandDisorderintheInternationalSystem,Burlington,VT:Ashgate,pp.79–96.Tiffert,G.(2018),‘SocialistRuleofLawwithChineseCharacteristics’,inH.Fu,J.Gillespie,P.NicholsonandW.Partlett(eds),SocialistLawinSocialistEastAsia,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.72–96.ToddPeters,R.(2004),InSearchoftheGoodLife:TheEthicsofGlobalization,NewYork,NYandLondon,UK:Continuum.Twining,W.(2005a),‘SocialScienceandDiffusionofLaw’,JournalofLawandSociety,32(2),203–40.Twining,W.(2005b),‘DiffusionofLaw:AGlobalPerspective’,JournalofLegalPluralismandUnofficialLaw,49,1–45.Vangeli,A.(2017),‘China’sEngagementwiththeSixteenCountriesofCentral,EastandSoutheastEuropeundertheBeltandRoadInitiative’,China&WorldEconomy,25(5),101–24.Vizureanu,V.(2013),‘SomeRemarksConcerningtheConceptofGlocalization’,PublicReason,5(1),69–86.Watson,A.(1993),LegalTransplants:AnApproachtoComparativeLaw,2ndedition,Athens,GA:TheUniversityofGeorgiaPress.Watson,A.(2000),‘LegalTransplantsandEuropeanPrivateLaw’,ElectronicJournalofComparativeLaw,4(4),accessed24March2020athttps://www.ejcl.org/44/art44-2.html.WorldBankGroup(2017),SpecialEconomicZones:AnOperationalReviewofTheirImpacts,Washington,DC:TheWorldBankGroupaccessed24March2020athttps://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29054.Zajtay,I.(1957),‘Laréceptiondesdroitsétrangersetledroitcomparé’,Revueinternationalededroitcomparé,9(4),686–713.Zajtay,I.(1975),‘ReceptionofForeignLawsandUnificationofLaw’,LouisianaLawReview,35,1117–25.Zhang,W.andZ.Gu(2013),‘China’sLawDiplomacy:TheoryandPractice’,accessed7April2020athttp://en.siis.org.cn/Research/EnInfo/1612.SalvatoreMancuso-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:17AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
1036.Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonartNikosPapastergiadisINTRODUCTIONOneofthestrongestcriticismsagainstcosmopolitanismisthatitisjustanotherversionofEurocentricuniversalism(Appiah,2006,pp.137–53;Fine,2011).Thesurveyofcosmopol-itanismusuallybeginswiththeStoicsinAncientGreece,touchesonSaintPaul’spromotionofChristianfellowshipintheHouseofGod,connectswiththeideasofhumanisminWesternEuropeandculminatesintheEnlightenmentphilosophyofKant.DerridawasbornintheFrenchcolonyofAlgeria,describedhimselfasEuropeanamongotherthings(Derrida,1992),buthealsoconfessedtobeingboundtothemasterparadigmsofKant(Derrida,1999).HabermaswasequallyreverentialtowardsKantandsoughttoovercomehisshortcomingsbyproposingthatliberaldemocracyshouldserveastheuniversalframeworkforconflictresolu-tion(Habermas,1997).FromtheGlobalSouth,therearethecriticsthatdeploytheconceptofthedecolonialtodecouplecosmopolitanismfromKant’sracisthierarchiesanduniversalismingeneral.Isitpossibletoimaginecosmopolitanismwithoutimposingasingularstandardforgovernance,amodelofsubjectivitythatisenmeshedwiththevaluesofWesternhumanism,oranepistemicframeworkthatconformstotheEuropeanEnlightenment’svisionofmodernity,secularismandrationality?Thismultiprongedquestionspringsfromthedichotomybetweenuniversalismandpar-ticularism.Inthecontemporarycontextithasgainedurgencyasithasbeenstudiedthroughthelensofglobalization.Therhetoricofglobalizationhaspromisedaflatworld.Asysteminwhichproductionisorganizedintoregularunits,methodsarestandardizedandexchangesystemscalibrateprecisevalues.However,thegapsandtensionsbetweenpromiseandrealityarelegion.Atthelocallevelthereisawidespectrumofresponses:fromconformityandappropriationtoadaptationandresistance.Theflowisnotalwaysunidirectional.Thelocalisalsoshapingtheglobal.Differentiationratherthanstandardizationisthedominantdynamic.Itisthusmoreaccuratetoasserthybridizationasboththeconstitutivedriverandconsequentialfeatureofglobalization(Papastergiadis,2000,2012;Tomlinson,1999).‘Glocal’isanimpor-tantsociologicaltermthataddressesthisinterplaybetweenglobalforcesandlocalcircum-stances(Robertson,1995).Itspeakstoboththeindividual’scapacitytocriticallyreflectontheirpositionintheworld,andtheprocessesthroughwhichasocietyengageswiththeworld.Inthischapter,IwillexaminetheglobalturnincontemporaryartfromtheperspectiveoftheSouth.Thechapterwillexplorethecritiqueofuniversalismthathasbeenbroughttolightbyscholarsandartistsadvocatingadecolonialagenda.Theideaof‘globalart’isitselfasymptomoftheambivalencetowardsaunifiedculturalmatrix(Belting,2013;Elkins,2006;Turner,2016).Ifartisameanstocommunewiththeworld,thennoartistcanwishfortheirarttobeconfinedtoastateofimpermeableisolation.However,everyartistalsoworkswiththeassumptionthattheculturefromwhichtheyworkis92NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
104Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart93agroundforuniversalclaimsandthemeansforcosmicconnectedness.Thedecolonialcritiquehasgivenspecialemphasistotheapproachfromwhichaconversationoncultureispossible.TheyhaverejectedthecentralizedversionbywhichaEurocentricdefinitionofcultureisele-vatedasthetrunkfromwhichallotherculturemustderivedirectionandnutrition.Onthecon-trary,tobeaparticipantinglobalculture,theremustbeapriorrecognitionthateachcultureisanequalpartner,andthatknowledgeisnotaderivativeofacentralsource,butconstitutedfromitsspecificculturalsetting.Advancesincommunicativetechnologieshaveonlyaccentu-atedthetensionbetweentheglobalandthelocal.Aglobalizedworldisonlyoperativetotheextentthatdifferentpeopleacrosstheworldcanfollowtheprompts,codesandproceduresonmediatedplatforms.Symbolicawarenesshastakenanelevatedroleincontemporarysociety.Artistshavebeenquicktograsptheirpowerinthisworldofsymbolicdependencyandvisualsaturation.Inshort,artistswanttheirarttobebothglobalandlocal.Theparadoxicalcontextofglocalartpresentsaprofoundchallengefortheorists.ThearthistorianMarshaMeskimmonhasbeentrackingthesecomplexartistictrajectoriesthatrangefrom:representingthecosmopolitanizationofeverydaylife;engagementinhospitablerelations;therepurposingofthegenericsymbolsandglobalplatformsformediatizationofeverydaylife;andtheformationoftransnationalnetworks.Shehasnotedtheemergenceofacosmopolitanimaginary.However,shehasalsoconcludedthatthereisalagbetweenthecosmopolitanpracticesandtheattendantconceptualpost-nationalcategoriesthathaveappearedinthe‘globalturn’inarthistory.Thelatterhasnotfullycapturedtheformer(Meskimmon,2020,p.5).HansBelting(2013)hasalsoobservedthattheglobalturninarthasresultedinneitherahomogenizationofartpractices,northeconsolidationoftheEurocentriccanon.Onthecontrary,hehasnotedthat,justasglobalizationhasstimulatedsocio-economicpolarizationandgeo-politicalfragmentation,theartworldhassplinteredintonewartworlds.Contemporaryartisnowdistributedthroughmultipleinstitutionalchannels,seenthroughprismaticperspectivesandorganizedinpolycentricstructures.Inthiscontext,thechallengeistoreinventthewaydifferencesareregisteredandunderstood.Inthesenewartworlds,thechallengeisnotjusttoreconfigurethehierarchyofgreatartists,butalsotorelatetomultipleworldviewsthatcomefromdifferentcultures.Whatarethetermsofengagement,principlesofexchangeandcriteriaforjudgement?Theconceptoftheglocalprovidesanimportantstepinrecognizingthatculturalvalueisnotdeterminedfromthetop.Itisanimportantpedagogictooltozeroinonthespecifics(Marshall,2009,p.88).Italsoprovidesabifocallensforseeingwiderrelations(Felix-Jager,2020,p.58).However,itisequallyapparentthattheconceptoftheglocaldoesnotoperateinaneutralfield.Glocalshouldalsobeusedtoexaminethenewstructuresofdominationthatarisefromtheinterplaybetweentheglobalandthelocal.Theglocalizationofartworldshasnotmeantdemocratizationintheworldofart.Theroleofarttakesevengreatersignificancewhenweconsiderthefunctionofvisualmediaintheneolib-eralterrainofconnectivityandcompetition.TothisendIturntoexplorethepossibilityofre-imaginingcosmopolitanismafterthedecolonialcritiqueofuniversalismandglobalization.PRECURSORSFROMTHEGLOBALSOUTHIbeginthischapterbyinvokingatruism:nomatterhowliberatingandbeautifulanideais,itwillnotbereceivedopen-heartedlyunlessitisdevelopedwiththepeoplewhoareexpectedtoembraceit.TherevolutionaryAntonioGramsciwasalerttothisrule.HefirmlybelievedthatNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
10594HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMarx’stheoryofsocialismwasessentialtoliberatethepeoplesoftheworld.However,hewasalsofromthe‘backward’peasant-basedsocietyofSardinia,andheknewthatifheadoptedMarx’sderisivetonestowardsrurallife,hewouldonlyprovokeresistance.Justbeforehisarrestin1926,Gramscicomposednotesforanessayentitled‘TheSouthernQuestion’.Inithesketchedouttheviewthatrevolutionarychangeisnotsimplyamatterofimposinguniversalsolutions.ItrequiredrespectfortheculturalknowledgeandthebuildingofconsensusbetweentheindustrialworkersofthenorthandthepeasantryinthesouthofItaly(Gramsci,1994).Gramsci’scritiqueofuniversalismandtheneedforconsensushasbeeninfluentialthrough-outtheworldand,inparticular,itopenedpathsforre-thinkingthelegaciesofthecolonialmindsetandtheimportanceofdecolonizingtheimagination.AfricanwriterssuchasWoleSoyinkaandNgugiWaThiongowereattheforefrontofassertingthevitalityoflocalcul-turalknowledgeandunshacklingtheirartisticendeavoursfromEurocentricmodels.NativeAmericanauthorGeraldVizenorreferredtothistaskasamatterof‘survivance’–thepracticeofthrivingandsurvivingbyunwindingourselvesfromthewhitewordswehavebecome(Vizenor,1999).InIndia,agroupofhistoriansandphilosophersformedtheSubalternStudiesgroup,andextendedGramsci’sideasthatlinkedpoliticalresistancewithculturalautonomy(Guha,1998).ThebroadercritiqueofuniversalismisbeyondmypurviewbutitisimportanttoregisterthatthereceptionofcosmopolitanismisframedbyitsstandingintheEuropeanarena.CosmopolitanismwasentangledintheEuropeancolonialadventures.Therearetwomajorheadingsunderwhichthecritiqueofcolonialismhasbeendeveloped:postcolonialanddecolonial.Whilethereisconsiderabledebateabouttheirdifferentintellectualgenealogies,myconcernisnottoinsistontheirdifferencesoroverstatethethematicoverlaps.Mybeliefisthatbothheadingsarerespondingtotheimportanceofarticulatingaworldviewfromaspecificculturalvantagepoint,andtheneedtodevelopepistemicframeworksthroughdialogue.Therecognitionofthevalidityofmultipleviewpointsandadialogicalapproacharecentraltobothdecolonialandpostcolonialperspectives.Forthepurposesofthischapter,Iwillfocusonthetheoreticalpropositionsandartisticpracticesthathavebeenlinkedtothedecolonialinordertoteaseoutafutureforcosmopolitanismafterthecritiqueofuniversalism.InthesameyearasGramscipreparedhisnotes,theUruguayanpainterPedroFigarireturnedtoMontevideofromParisandargued,inhisinfluentialessay‘RegionalAutonomy’(1924[2004]),thatSouthAmericanartistsmustwrestlefreefromthedominationofEuropeaninfluencesandforgestylesthatarespecifictotheirowncontexts.Oneyearearlier(1923),thePeruvianjournalistJoseCarlosMariategui,whohailedfromamiddle-classfamilyandhadbeenraisedbyanIndianwoman,returnedfromathree-yearstintinEurope.Duringthisperiod,hemettheanarcho-syndicalistphilosopherGeorgeSorelinParisandlivedinItalylongenoughtowitnesstheriseofMussolini.Uponhisreturn,hepioneeredtheuseofMarxistmethodstounderstandthesocialdivisionsinSouthAmerica.However,healsoarguedthatsocialismcouldnotflourishbysimplymechanicallyimposingaEuropeanmodel.Onthecon-trary,hearguedthatrevolutionarythoughtneededtoconsidertheconditionsoftheIndigenousandincorporatethelocaldemandsinSouthAmerica.MariateguidistinguishedhimselffromhisMarxistcolleagues,whowerefixatedontheproletariansasthesoleagentsofrevolutionarychange,inhisrefusaltoconflate‘Indians’withpeasants.ThinkingoftheworldfromtheperspectiveoftheGlobalSouthwasstartingtoturnthereceivedideasoftheEnlightenmentontheirhead.In1943,theartistJoaquinTorresGarciaproducedapaintingthatreversedtheperspectiveoftheworld:the‘AmericaInvertida’.1IndonesianartistHeriDonocreatedahybridfiguretoembodythelinkbetweenthecelestialNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
106Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart95SouthernCrossandtheterrestrialin‘Untitled’(2012).An‘antipodean’perspectivewasalsoissuedinthepost-warperiodacrossOceania(Smith,1945;Wedde,1995).DrawinginspirationfromthisSouthernperspective,theartistIanNorthcreated‘Seasons,Australia,Kongouro’(1987).Northcombinedchromogenicphotographyandacrylicpainttodepictthetalismanicanimalasifitwereahybridcreature–mousemixedupwithfox–andconveyedthestunningforceoflightthatmakesthehorizonshimmer,ashejuxtaposedthecolonialwiththemodernvisionsofthelandscape.Fromthe1970sonwards,artisticdirectorsthathadbeencommissionedtodevelopcutting-edgebiennalesinSydney(NickWaterlooin1979),Havana(GerardoMosquerain1984),Istanbul(VasifKortunin1992),Johannesburg(OkwuiEnwezorin1997),andGwangju(CharlesEscheandHouHanruin2002)foundacommonvoicewhentheydeclaredthatnoglobalsurveycoulddojusticetocontemporaryartunlessitaddressedartfromevery-whereandalsore-evaluatedthestatusofIndigenousanddiasporicartists.Duringthisperiodtherewasbothacritiqueoftheethnicbiasesintheinstitutionsofartandtheformationofnewfieldsofassociation.Artistswereformingconnectionsacrossphysicaldistancesandculturaldifferencesonthebasisofsharedvaluesandthroughextensivefriendshipnetworks.Curatorsalsoacknowledgedthatthespacesoffriendshipintheartworldnotonlyservedassupportivebonds,butalsospursforcollaboration,andopenednewSouth-Southorientations(Butt,2016;Condorelli,2013;Papastergiadis,2020).Arthistoriansproposedthecategoryofglobalartasaheadingforaddressingthemultipleworldsintheartworld(Belting&Buddensieg,2009).Therewasaseismicchangeintheartworld.Itnotonlyinvolvedtheincorporationofartists,criticsandcuratorsfromnon-Westernbackgrounds,butthebeginningsofashiftinconceptualframeworks.TherewasrecognitionthatIndigenousartcouldbebothcontemporaryandalsoexpressiveofcosmicconnectedness.Hybridartpracticesthatemergedfromdiasporiccon-textswerealsoidentifiedasexpressiveofacosmopolitanaestheticratherthanbeingseenaseitherfracturedversionsofnationalidentityortheflotsamandjetsamofglobalization.Anewpolycentricvisionofartwasemerging.Thisshiftinthefieldsofartisticandcuratorialpracticecoincidedwiththeemergenceofnewtheoreticaljournals,conferencesandpublicationsthatchallengedthedominanceoftheEuro-Americanaxis(Papastergiadis,2017).Inparallel,theideaoftheSouthasacriticalcat-egorywasalsoadoptedtorefertonewgeo-politicalalliancesthatcoulddisaggregatepowerfromthetraditionalblocsintheGlobalNorth(NederveenPieterse,2013).ThecommonrefraininthesedeclarationsincludedapolemicagainsttheculturalhierarchiesoftheNorththatmarginalizedtheculturesoftheSouth,areactionagainstthenarcissisticnationalismoflocalelites,aswellasadiscomfortwithboththemodernperspectivesthatseveredcosmo-logicallinksandthenormativediscoursesthattruncatedthehumansensorium.TheSouthwasnotjustageo-politicaldesignatortoeithercaptureawidersphereofartisticreferences,ormaptheculturalproductionfromthemarginsoftheWesternandNorthernhemispheres,itwasalsoproposedasanewaestheticcategoryandaperspectivethatcouldopennewformsofgeo-culturalunderstanding(Mosquera,2010,2020;Mosquera&Papastergiadis,2015).CriticsfromtheSouthhavebeenattheforefrontofdecolonizingtheimaginationandwithcausticinsighttheyoftennotedhowtheEurocentriccosmopolitanaperturewasshapedbyanarrowandslantedprovincialism.Kant’sfoundingmodelmayhavebeenengineeredwitheleganceandprecision,butitwasalsobasedonfatalflawsandignorantstereotypes.Newconceptssuchasthe‘glocal’andthe‘decolonial’havebeendeployedtoaddressthecomplexnexusbetweenplace-basedpracticesandabstractedprocesses.CentraltotheconceptNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
10796Handbookofcultureandglocalizationoftheglocalisacritiquethatquestionsboththehomogenizingforceofglobalizationsandtheexclusivistfantasiesofthelocal(Robertson,1995).Ithasbeenusedtotrackthecunningtacticsofresistance,thenovelmeansforadaptation,butithasalsobeenframedinarestric-tivefield(deDuve,2009).Theconceptoftheglocalhasbeensharpenedtoalsodebunkthebinarybetweenthedynamismofglobalflowsandthesubordinateroleoffixedlocalsettings.Roudometofhasarguedforamoresymbioticunderstandingoftheinterplaybetweentheglobalandthelocal,and,inparticularhehasunderlinedthefailureofnormativecosmopoli-tanism‘togivethelocalitsdue’attention(Roudometof,2019,p.804).Theconceptofthedecolonialwasalsoconceivedinacontextthatismarkedbyaprofoundambivalencetowardstheconceptofcosmopolitanism.Theoristswhodevelopeditacknowl-edgedthefundamentalroleofculturaldiversityandheterogeneity,butdidnotrejecttheideaofuniversalfellowshipandcosmicconnectedness.However,theiraimwasnottosubstitutetheoldEurocentricvisionofcosmopolitanismthatwasformedinthecolonialerawithanewunifieddecolonialcosmopolitanism.Nouniversalalternativewaseverproposed.THEDECOLONIALTheconceptofthedecolonialwasfirstusedin1991bythePeruviansociologistAnibalQuijano(2010).ItwasdevelopedtoaddressthespecificitiesofLatinAmerica:theprofoundsenseofdespairattheruinsofthepoliticallandscapeandthedesiretofindhopethroughculturalrenewal.Thedecolonialagendadidnotcomefromtheeuphoriathatmarkedtheendofcolonialruleandtheemergenceofnationaldemocracies.Itdoesnotbearthetuneofamovementthatismarchingtowardspoliticalemancipationandsocialjustice.Onthecon-trary,itislocatedinacontextofweakeningofprogressiveglobalmovementsandtheresur-genceofneo-nationalistandneoliberalideologies.Sincethe1990s,therehasbeenthepainfulaccountingofthefailuresofdecolonizationintheSouth.Oncetheoldcolonialaxesbegantobedismantled,itbecameevidentthattheywerealsoquicklybeingreconfiguredtosuitnewglobalpowerrelations.Ineffect,thematrixofpowerwasconcentratedinelitesthatrealignedthe‘internalcolonialism’withapolycentricnetworkofglobaldependencies.Forinstance,itisundeniablethatthroughoutSouthAmerica,farfromanywideningofsocio-economicjustice,therehasbeenacatastrophicfailuretoeliminatecorruptionandexploitation.Societieshavebecomeevenmorepolarizedandthespreadofauthoritarianregimeshasreversedmanyofthedemocraticgainsthatwereestablishedduringtheperiodofrevolutionaryemancipation(Stokke&Törnquist,2013).Inthiscontext,Quijano(2010)proposedadecolonialturnincriticalthinkingandculturalpolitics.QuijanowasnotIndigenous.HisfamilyderivedfromSpanishsettlersandCreoledescendants.HisessaywasthefirstinLatinAmericatoexpoundonthelinksbetweencolo-niality,modernityandrationality.Itdistinguishedtheconceptualframeworkthatconstructedtheknowledgeofcolonialityfromtherepressiveoperativemechanismofcolonialism.Histhe-orizationofthemindsetofcolonialityprovidedtheintellectualbasethatinspiredtheworkofimportantculturaltheoristssuchasCatherineWalsh,WalterMignolo,EduardoMendietaandthecollectiveofartists,curatorsandwritersthatformedagroupcalledDecolonialAestheSis.WiththeexceptionofCatherineWalsh–DirectorofLatinAmericanCulturalStudiesatUniversidadAndinaSimonBolivarinQuito,Ecuador–theotherleadingscholars,suchasArgentinianWalterMignoloandColombian-bornEduardoMendieta,arebasedintheUSA.NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
108Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart97ThebroadaimofthedecolonialturnwastodelinkculturalvaluationandrationalcapacityfromtheEurocentricandcolonialmindset,affirmtheIndigenousanddiasporiccontextfromwhichcultureisproducedintheSouth,andthenestablishaframeworkthroughwhichculturescouldenterintoequaldialoguewitheachother.Itsoughttovalidateboththelocalperspectivesaswellasthecapacitiestoparticipatewithothersinthewidestpossibleplanetaryspheresofconnection.Quijanodefinedanagendathatproceededthroughaseriesofdoublemovements.Hebothdissectedtheapparatusbywhichthecolonialorderwasestablishedandalsocritiquedthestigmaticconsequencesofthisperspective.HeproposedtheneedtoextricateknowledgefromthebinariesthatstructuredEurocentricmentalities,andreclaimedthecosmicvisionofIndigenousculture.Heacknowledgedtheconstitutiveandirreducibleroleofdifferenceinculturalproductionbutalsomaintainedtheneedforawiderperspectiveoncross-culturalexchange.Inshort,theaimwastoextricatethecosmosoftheSouthfromthecolonialorder,whilealsoexcavatingtheculturalworldviewsthathadbeenmarginalizedbycolonialismandultimatelyengaginginadialoguewiththediasporicanddominantculturesofthecontempo-raryworld.AttheforefrontofQuijano’sdeploymentofthedecolonialwasacritiqueoftherelation-shipbetweenpowerandtheimagination.Hearguedthatthecolonizationoftheimaginationoperatedontwolevels.First,itdevaluedandblockedtheautonomousproductionofculturalknowledgeinthecolonies.Second,itselectivelyluredtheaspirantsfromthecoloniesintoanevaluativesysteminwhichtheywereperpetuallynegativelymarkedaccordingtothebinaryofotherness,lackandbelatedness.Thisregulativemechanismhadtheeffectofbothstigmatizingandrepressingtheprocessesforculturalproductioninthecolonies.However,thisevaluativeprocesswasalsounderpinnedbyasystemofrationalitythatconstructedthecategoryoftheOtherasanobjectandnotasasubjectforhistoricalchange.IttherebynotonlydeprecatedthestatusoftheOtherbutalsoblockedanyformofequalityamongsttheparticipantsinculturalinteraction.AccordingtoQuijano,thisstigmaticevaluationofothercultureswasthedirectconsequenceofthebinarydivisionsthatstructuredtheEurocentricmindset.Thisbinaryelevatedthecol-onizerasmodernanddynamic,asitrelegatedthecolonizedasprimitiveandstatic.ItwasacognitiveperspectivethatwasfoundedontheprinciplethatEuropewasboththeoriginandsingulardriverofhumancivilization.Otherculturesneednotbeaddressedasequalsbecausetheywereperceivedasbeingstuckinadarkandstaticversionofthepast.Thecolonialworld-viewpresupposedthattheEurocentricmindwasthepinnacleofcivilization.Itclaimedthatfromitsownself-appointed,enlightenedposition,itcouldsurveythediversityoftheworld’scultures,establishaverticalhierarchy,andselectaspirantsintoitsowncompetitiverewardsystem.Thismindsetwasnotonlyderisiveinthatitobjectifiedanddiscreditedthewidertruthclaimsthatwereproducedinothercultures,butinthatitwasalsoaconvenientleverforgainingasenseofsuperiorityandimposingitsownrulesovertherestoftheworld.Undoingthebinarythatsupportedthismindsetrequiredare-thinkingofthewaycultureandidentitywasdefined.Atthecentreofboththesetaskswasalsoare-evaluationofthestatusofdifference.Thedecolonialturnwasnotaloneinthisexercise.ItgalvanizedsupportnotonlyfromtheSouthbutalsocriticalperspectivesformedintheNorth.ThefeministphilosopherJudithButlerarguedthattheideaoftheuniversalneededtoberestagedasanencounterwithdifference.Sheclaimedthatuniversalityonlyoperatesthroughthe‘performativecontradic-tion’oftranslationinacosmopolitancontext(2002,p.49).ThepoliticalphilosopherEtienneBalibar(2012)endorsedthecentralityoftheroleoftranslationwhenhenotedthatcultureisNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
10998Handbookofcultureandglocalizationconstitutedbytheconstantnegotiationwithgaps.TheGermansociologistUlrichBeck(2006)wentsofarastoinsistthattheonlywaytoovercometheblinkeredperspectiveofthenationstateandtogettogripswiththedynamicfeaturesofcontemporarylifewasbyfollowingthroughwithamethodologicalcosmopolitanism.GilesDeleuzeandFelixGuattari(1996)soughttoreclaimthecreativeinterplaybetweenchaosandcosmosinordertorebuildmodernphilosophy.Theseadvancesinthefeministcritiqueofuniversalism–departuresfromtheEurocentricmodelsofcosmopolitanismandpostmodernmeditationsonculturalcreativity–providedvaluableconceptualunderpinningsandusefulreferencepointsforthedecolonialcritiqueofidentityandculture.Quijano’sdissectionofsovereignidentityandimperiouscultureinthecolonialmindsetwasalsoakeysourceforawiderangeofscholarsandartists.InthemanifestoproducedbyDecolonialAestheSis,thecollectivealsocommencedfromthenegativeconstructionofidentityintheEurocentriccolonialorderandsetouttoavoidthepitfallsofneo-nationalistandglobalistdiscourseastheyassertedtheideaof‘transnationalidentities-in-politics’(MoarquechFerrera-Balanquet&Rojas-Sotelo,2013).LikeQuijano,thecollectivesoughttounshackletheideaofidentityfrombeinglockedintoasingularposition.However,theyalsowantedtodissociateitfromglobaldiscoursesthatpromotedthechoiceofpluralidentitiesasifthesewerechoicesforconsumption.Incontrasttotheessentialistandglobalistaccountsofidentity,theyaimedtodirectattentiontotheinterplayofdifferentculturalforcesandtowidentheframethroughwhichsubjectivityisdeveloped.Thistaskofre-thinkingidentitythroughpracticesoftransnationalpoliticalsolidarityandtheformationofintimatelinksacrossdistanceswasacommonfeatureincontemporaryart.TinitinWuliahascreatedinstallationsthatmapandextendfriendshipnetworks.In‘1001MartianHomes’(2017),sheexploredtheideaofconnectionstodifferentplacesbyhighlight-ingthatbelongingisalsogainedfromadistantviewpoint.TaniaBruguera,aCubanartistwhohasbeeninspiredbytheIndigenouspeople’sresistanceagainstSpanishcolonialism,createdperformancestoprotestagainstoppression,openedanartschoolinHavana,andlaunchedthe‘ImmigrantMovementInternational’(2012)projectattheUNinNewYork.FrancisAlÿs,aBelgian-bornbutlong-timeresidentofMexico,recruited500volunteers,issuedeachwithashovelandinstructedthemtomoveasandduneonestepatatimeinhisproject,‘WhenFaithMovesMountains’(2002).In‘Bridge/Puente’(2006),hetriedtolinktheislandsbetweenFloridaandCubabyaskingthefishermentojointheirboatstogether.EmilyJacir,aPalestinianartistwhoalsoholdsaUSpassport,asked30Palestinianslivinginthediaspora:‘IfIcoulddoanythingforyou,anywhereinPalestine,whatwoulditbe?’,(‘Wherewecomefrom’,2001-2003).Fromtheseprojects,wewitnesstheartisticeffortstoinitiategesturesofsolidarityevenwhentheoddsareagainsteffectivepoliticaltransformation,andalsoarela-tionalperspectivewithplacethatfallsneitherintotheessentialismofnationalismnorthepromiscuityofglobalism.AsimilarreframingofculturewasalsoevidentinanumberofaccountsbyscholarssuchasWalterMignolo(2018)andEduardoMendieta(2009).TheystressedthattheculturesintheSouthneedtonotonlybevalidatedbytheirownterms,butalsorecognizedaspartnersinworldwideconversationonknowledge.Atthecoreofthisdoubleclaimonculturewasthere-evaluationofthestatusofdifferencethathadalreadyoccurredinfeministandpostmoderntheory.Thisconvergenceofcriticalthoughtallowedforarenewedapproachtounderstandinginterculturalcommunicationonthebasisthatallsubjectsareequalepistemicpartners,ration-alityshouldnotbepremisedontheobjectificationoftheOther,andthatdialogueneededtoNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
110Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart99bedelinkedfromverticalhierarchies.ThisenabledQuijanoandotherstousetheconceptofthedecolonialtoexposethewaysinwhichtheEurocentricmindsethadproducedatotallyfictiveanduntenablegrasponculturalreality.Theyarguedthatithadfailedtorecognizethatdifferencewasnotaproblemthatneededtobeeliminatedinthetyrannicalviceofsameness.Onthecontrary,differencewasbothavitalstimulusforculturalinnovationandanirreduciblefeatureofallcultures.Hence,thedecolonialperspectiveonculturerecasttheroleofdifferenceasaproductiveforceinthefieldofculturalproduction.AsQuijanonoted,inallculturesthereisa‘cosmicvision’(2010,p.31).Thepointisnottoidentifyasingulartruthclaimofthecosmos,buttoacknowledgethatthehistoricaldiversityandheterogeneityoftruthclaimsispartoftheconditionofculturalreality.Asaresult,thedecolonialviewpointisoutwardratherthandownward.Itadoptsahorizontaloutlookthatseeksconnectionsacrossacademicdisciplines,artisticpractices,andactivistcausesthatspanthesanctityofhumanlifeandthepriorityoftheplanet.Theaimhasbeentoproduceanawarenessofthe‘integralrelationandinterdependenceamongstalllivingorganisms(inwhichhumansareonlyapart)withtheterritoryorlandandthecosmos’(Mignolo&Walsh,2018,p.1).Ultimately,consideringthecosmosfromtheGlobalSouthandtheintimationsofadeco-lonialmindsetisnotjustageographyexerciseorahistorylesson.Itrequiresaphilosophicalrethinkingoftherelationshipbetweenuniversalismanddiversity.Theuniversalisnotdis-cernedonceandforallfromasingularposition.Thereisrecognitionthatinasphericalworldeachculturehasthecapacitytodefineitselfasthecentreoftheworld.Withthispositioningcomesthearticulationofuniversalclaims.However,afterthereflexivetwistofthedecolonial,thepointisnottocompeteforsovereignauthority,buttoopenanewdialoguewherethecallforculturaluniversalismmustcoexistinaworldofculturaldiversity.Themixtureisnowseeninsuchvitaltermsthatneologismssuchas‘pluriversal’and‘diversality’framethediscussionsofcosmopolitanismandtheSouth(Mignolo,2000,p.744).Ratherthanpromotinganewfixedpointforseeingtheworld,theyarguethatunderstandingcanonlyproceedfrominterconnect-ingmultipleperspectives.Insteadofassumingalinearaccountofhistoricaldevelopment,theyprefertodrawtogethermultipletrajectorieswithinopen-endednetworksofexchange.Awareofthearroganceinauthoritariantop-downviewpoints,theypromotethediversityofbottom-upexpressions.Inshort,theyarguethatuniversalmodelsthatwereoncedevelopedthroughunilateralandmonologicalstructures,havenowbeendisplacedbyapluriversalper-spectivethatenablestransversal,relationalanddialogicalmodes.DECOLONIZINGKANTIANCOSMOPOLITANISMTheepistemicshiftsproposedundertheheadingofthedecolonialturnarestarkwhenyoucomparethemwithKant’sEnlightenmentperspectiveontheroleofphilosophyanditsdestinywithcosmopolitanism.Kantarguedthatthephilosopher,asholderandmakerofframeworksformoralreasoning,wouldbethekeyforceintherealizationofajustsociety.Thedecolonialperspectivetakesanoppositeapproach.Itassumesthatcultureisthegroundfromwhichknowledgeisproduced.WhiledecolonialscholarsengageinpolemicalslursagainstEurocentricphilosophicalprioritiesandareatpainstodistinguishthemselvesfromotherideologicalperspectives,thisshouldnotdistractusfromthemorepenetratingclaimthatknowledgeemergesfromthegroundofculture.ThisisaprofounddeparturethatconfinedNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
111100HandbookofcultureandglocalizationphilosophicalworktoanexegesisandextensionoftheWesterncanon.ItisalsoadeterminedefforttoidentifythesignificanceofthecolonialmentalityandtheemergenceofuniversalismintheWesternimaginary.Followingonistherestrainingeffectofthemodernistparadigm.Withtheincreasedfocusonethicsandmoralreasoningtherewasalsoaseparationfromartis-ticandscientificeffortstounderstandthecosmosandallofcreation.KantseparatedhimselffromthecosmosthatwascentraltoAncientGreekphilosophyandnootherphilosopherhasstitcheditback.Thecutwiththecosmosissonormalizedinthemodernmindsetthatitisnolongerevennoticed.However,artistsfromtheGlobalSouthanddecolonialtheoryalikesuggestthatthecosmosisnotthatremovedfromus.Forinstance,theIranianartistHosseinValamaneshwhowaswelcomedintothePapunyacommunityincentralAustraliadescribedthiskeyeventintheirculturalcalendar:Theceremonywasconductedinaplacewithgreatviewsofthehorizon,awayfromthecamp.Itwentonforthreetofournightsandallthecommunitywasinvolved,men,women,oldandyoung.Theystartedasthesunwassetting.Theaudienceparticipatedbysingingandhittingstickstogetherorthumpingtheirthighs.Infrontofthegatheringsweretwolargefiresandaclearingforastagewithawallmadeofbranchesandleaves.Behindthisweredancerswhocameoutinsmallgroupsthump-ingtheredearthwiththeirfeetandmakingacloudofdust.Thesinginggotlouderanddrystickswerethrownintothefireforextralight.Onthefirstfewnightsthedancerscontinueduntilmidnightbutonthefinalnightthereweremorepeoplegatheredandasenseofanticipationandexcitementwasintheair.Liketheothernightsthesinginganddancingbeganaroundsunsetbutdidnotstopatmidnightandcontinuedwithmorevigouruntiltherewasahintoflightinthesky.Thedancinginfrontofthewallhadstoppedbutsingingcontinuedandwefeltattentionturningtowardstheeastalthoughtherewasnothingtobeseen.Afterawhilewecouldseetwosmallspotsshimmeringonthehorizon.Thesingingbecamelouderandwerealizedthetwospotsweretwomendancingandslowlycomingtowardsus.Theymusthavestartedtheirdancealongwayawayandastheycamecloserwecouldseethemclearer.Theyhadtallheaddressesonandtheirpaintedbodieswerecoveredinsweat.Thenwewitnessedtheriseofthetwomorningstarsfromthespotwheretheyhadstarteddancing.(Valamanesh,2011,p.13)InArnhemLandonthenorthofAustralia,theYolngupeoplehavealonghistoryofexchangewithMacassantradersfromAsia.Duringthecolonialperiodtheyalsoengagedintradewiththemissionariesfortheirprizedbarkpaintings.Beforetheuseofbark,paintingwasusedtomanifestimagesonthebodythatwouldenunciateaperson’scomingintotheworldastheholderofaworldview.Therewasthesimultaneousdemonstrationoflinkswithancestralfigures,theestablishmentofamatrixofsocialinter-relationshipsthroughavisualmoietynetwork,andtheauthorizationofacreationstory.Thewhirlingperformanceofthebodyandthevortexofimagessummonsarighttospacethatbeginsonthegroundbutextendstothecosmos.Thestatusoftheimageisthusnotanabstractdepictionbutanembodieddecla-rationofahapticspace/timeconnectionthatfusespastandpresent.Inthiscontinuum,theagencyoftheartistisdirectedtobothadopttraditionalsymbolsbutalsoadaptthemtotheircircumstances.InthewordsofJohnMawurndjul:‘ThewayIpaintismyownideafrommyownwayofthinking.Ichangedthelawmyself.Wearenewpeople…Iamchemistman,myself’(Mawurndjul,2004,pp.136–7).Thepastisnotjustametaphorformakingmeaninginthepresentandtheenergyofapaintingisnotconfinedtothedepictionofmatterinmotion(Sutton,1988,p.70).Thepointofgoingoutintotheworldwasatoddswiththemodernistmanifestoesthatrequiredeitheraclearancebyblastingawaytradition,orahallowedspaceforembalmingremnants.Theimageswereilluminations,conveyingthe‘glowingnessofthefire’,orthe‘smokinessaroundthetree’,therebymanifestingtheauraticqualityofeverydaythingsNikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
112Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart101(Turner,2007,p.111).Artonthebody,andthenartthatwasmadeonbarkandcanvas,wereallatoncetheconstellationofspatio-temporal,socialandcosmicrelationships.2ForKant,thecosmoswastoovasttocomeintotheframeofinvestigation.Itcouldnotbeseenasanentitythatanyconceptcouldwrapitselfaroundit.Itwastoobigforcontempla-tion.Cosmopolitanismwasbroughttogroundandtiedtomoralframeworksandjuridicalfoundations.Inthewidestsense,cosmopolitanismwasopentoKantasaprojectthattheEnlightenmentwouldbringforth.Cosmopolitanismwasnottobeobservedineverydaycul-turalactivitiesbutaheadingtowardswhichpoliticalformationsandmoralconductcouldaim.Thetoposofcosmopolitanismwasdelinkedfromcosmosandphysisandboundtonomosandanthropos.Theelevationofanthropos–asboththeabstractfigureofhumancreativity,andthematerialbodythatissituatedinamatrixofpower–hasbeenthesupremeprojectofmodernity.Ithashighlightedhumanagencyinordertosetitfreefromtheall-determiningforceofthedivineorpre-existingsocialdivisions.Thisphilosophicalmodel,whichhadarationalandemancipatoryapproachatitscore,wasnottotallyunhingedfromthetranscendental.ThecontemporaryBelgianarthistorianThierrydeDuvehasalsoclungtoaversionofKantiantranscendentalism.Forinstance,heappreciatesthatthecontextofartbiennalesisneithersubordinatetolocalcustoms,norcontrolledbyglobalalignments.Thebiennaleisthereforeapotentialspaceofglocalexperimentationandcombattingthehegemonicagenda.However,deDuvealsoinsiststhatglocalcontextsarerestrictive–theydonotconstituteaestheticevents.IntheKantianmodel,theaestheticeventisamovementfromtheparticulartotheuniversal.Glocaleventsare,fordeDuve,novelspacesformixture,buthealsodeclaresthattheyfailto‘bridgethehiatusbetweentheempiricalandthetranscendent’(deDuve,2009,p.52).Kant’sghoststillhauntsthecontemporaryartworld.Fromthedecolonialperspective,theroleofthephilosopherisnottoimposeabstractandidealcategoriesontotheculturalcontext.MignolowasborninArgentinaandgrewupinanItalianimmigrantfamilyoffarmlabourers.ForMignolo,educationwasapathwayoutofhardshipandtowardsself-creation.HerecountsthedisappointmentheexperiencedtowardshiseliteMarxistpeersforwhomeducationwasagiven–abasisfordetachedabstractionandpoliticalmanoeuvring(Mignolo,2018,p.8).Philosophymustbeginwiththecontingenciesandtheuniversalitiesarticulatedinspecificculturalrealities.Thedecolonialturndoesnotseektosubstituteonemasterabstractionwithanother.Byexposingthewilfulignoranceofthecolonizer,itdoesnotpermittherevengeofthecolonized.Itisnotincompetitiontooutperformthe‘imperialdesires’thatareembeddedinEurocentricmethodologies(Mignolo&Escobar,2010,p.2).AccordingtoMignolo,inordertodisaggregatethenexusbetweencolonialism,modernityandrationality,onemustembarkonaprocessthathecalled‘epistemicdisobedience’(Mignolo,2014).3Hehasstressedthatagenuinecross-culturaldialoguecannotbeginunlessthereisacorrectionofthedominantepistemologicalframework.ThisisnotonlyanacknowledgementofthesubstantivedebttootherculturesbutalsoanawarenessoftheblindspotthatisintrinsictotheEurocentricperspective.Ifcultureistakenastheground,nottheobjecttobeshapedbyphilosophicaldeliberation,thenthisopensaneworientationtowardspoliticaltransformation,andexposesaparadoxintheheartofuniversalism.Itpointsoutthatliberationfromthecolonialmatrixproceedsfromthegroundofculture.Asitrevealstheincommensurabilitybetweendifferentculturalsystemsandtheineluctableforcewithineachculturalworldview,ittakesustowardsapluriversalworldorder.Theglocalanddecolonialperspectivesarebothplacedependentandworld-making.Theyidentifytheincommensurabilitybetweendifferentculturalsystemsandtheneedforrelation-NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
113102Handbookofcultureandglocalizationalitybetweenthem.Thiswideningoftheepistemicframeworksisnecessaryifwearetodis-aggregatetheabusiveorderofthecolonialmindsetandopenthewayfornotonlyaground-upperspectiveoninterculturalexchange,butalsothereclamationofthecosmologicalwaysofliving,thinkingandsensingthathadbeendemonizedbythecolonialsystem.Toliberatetheimaginationandbreakwiththecolonialregimes,adecolonialturnmustproduceadouble-sidedculturalcartography–bothrecoveringasensoriumofhabituatedknowledgethathadbeenpre-viouslyoccludedandalsore-inventingthechannelsforcross-culturaldialogue.Thesestorieswillneveradduptoaseamlessnarrativeofglobalintegration,norconfirmthenationalistfantasyofsplendidisolation.Atpresent,thediscourseisstrongerinitsnegativedistinctions.Theneedfordelinkingfromthecolonialmatrixofpowerisclearandstrident.ThetrajectoryforrelinkingwithPachamama(motherearth)ismorevagueandinchoate(Mignolo,2018,p.10).However,theprocessofknottingtogetherthefragmentsfromIndigenousanddiasporicnetworkswillnecessarilydemandthatwereachforanepistemicframe–onethatisformedby‘cosmogenicagency’,aswellascapableofholdingtogether‘thecontingenciesofcirculatoryflowsofthoughtmodels’andthe‘materialitiesofliberation’(Ginwala,2015).NOTES1.Oneoftheearliestandmostcomprehensivemapsoftheworld(1154)producedbythegreatArabgeographeral-Idrisi(1100–1166)inSicilyalsopositionedtheSouthernHemisphereatthetopofthepageandtheNorthern,atthebottom.2.NigelLendonhasoutlinedthecomplexperspectivesinthepictorialspaceofbodypaintingsandbarkpaintingsandtherepresentationoftheYolngucosmology.Whileitiscommontoseetheseworksasbeingpaintedonahorizontalplace,healsonotesthatthetopographicalfiguresandgrounddesignsaredepictedasifseenfromabove.Thiscombinationofplanarandaerialperspectivesenvelopstheviewerina‘symbolicspacethatisequivalenttothecentreoftheuniverse’(Lendon,1997,p.28).3.Tobesummonedtodisobeyremindsusthattheconditionofsubordinationisnotover.Hence,theinvocationto‘epistemicdisobedience’risksreinstatingtheauthorityoftheradix,andreinscribingahomogenizedviewoftheNorth(Petersen,2015).Whilethedecolonialmanifestostrikesasuit-ablydefianttoneandsynthesizescomplexargumentsonthetransversalformationsofpoliticsandsubjectivity,itsayslittleabouttheneedfordemocratizationandcallsforfurtherattentiontothenarrativesthatcanmakesenseofthecomplexlifeworldsfromtheSouth.Similarly,thereisariskofexaggerationintheefforttorecentrethecolonialstreamintothenarrativesoncivilizationandmodernization.ThereisnodoubtthatcolonialismwasoneofthedriversofthetransformationoftheNorth.However,thetransformationsintheNortharenotentirelyexplainedbycompoundingcolonialityandmodernity.ToprioritizecolonialityinthedevelopmentofmodernitywouldignoreanddisplaceotherforcesofchangethatsweptthroughtheNorth.Forinstance,theriseofmodernityinEnglandcannotbeexplainedbycolonialismalone.PriortoandalongsideEnglishcolonialism,therewasthebrutalandviolentprocessofdepeasantizationinEngland.Theexploitationofinten-sifiedagriculturalregimesandtherapidprocessofurbanizationintheindustrialNorthofEnglandwerealsokeyfactorsinthe‘exceptionalism’oftheEnglishempire.TheEnglishhadlongdonetoitsownpeople–displacement,exploitationanddeculturation–whattheythenpursuedwithevenmorerecklessabandoninthecolonies.REFERENCESAppiah,K.A.(2006),Cosmopolitanism:EthicsinaWorldofStrangers,NewYork,NY:W.W.Norton&Company.NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
114Cosmosfromtheglobalsouth:fromglocaltodecolonialperspectivesonart103Balibar,E.(2012),‘CitizenshipoftheWorldRevisited’,inG.Delanty(ed.),RoutledgeHandbookofCosmopolitanismStudies,Abingdon,UK:Routledge,pp.291–301.Beck,U.(2006),CosmopolitanVision,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Belting,H.(2013),TheGlobalContemporaryandtheRiseofNewArtWorlds,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.Belting,H.andA.Buddensieg(eds)(2009),TheGlobalArtWorld:Audiences,MarketsandMuseums,Ostfildern,Germany:HatjeCantz.Butler,J.(2002),‘UniversalityinCulture’,inM.Nussbaum(ed.),ForLoveofCountry?,Boston,MA:BeaconPress,pp.45–52.Butt,Z.(2016),‘PracticingFriendship:RespectingTimeasaCurator,’inU.M.BauerandB.Oetker(eds),SouthEastAsiaSpacesoftheCuratorial,Berlin,Germany:SternbergPress,pp.207–213.Condorelli,C.(2013),‘TooClosetoSee:NotesonFriendship,AConversationwithJohanFrederikHartle,’inS.HebertandA.SzefereKarlsen(eds),Self-Organised,London,UK:OpenEditions,pp.62–73.deDuve,T.(2009),‘TheGlocalandtheSinguniversal:ReflectionsonArtandCultureintheGlobalWorld’,Open‘TheArt-biennaleasaGlobalPhenomenon:StrategiesinNeo-PoliticalTimes’,16,Amsterdam,TheNetherlands:NAIPublishers,pp.681–8.Deleuze,G.andF.Guattari(1996),WhatisPhilosophy?,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Derrida,J.(1992),TheOtherHeading,Bloomington,IN:IndianaUniversityPress.Derrida,J.(1999),AdieutoEmmanuelLevinas,Stanford,CT:StanfordUniversityPress.Elkins,J.(2006),IsArtHistoryGlobal?,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Felix-Jager,S.(2020),ArtTheoryforaGlobalPluralisticAge,NewYork,NY:Palgrave.Figari,P.(1924),‘RegionalAutonomy’,reprintedinP.Frank(ed.)(2004),ReadingsinLatinAmericanModernArt,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Fine,R.(2011),‘EnlightenmentCosmopolitanism:WesternorUniversal?’,inD.AdamsandG.Tihanov(eds),EnlightenmentCosmopolitanism,London,UK:Legenda,pp.153–69.Ginwala,N.(2015),‘MapsThatDon’tBelong’,Ibraaz,26February,accessed10July2019athttp://www.ibraaz.org/essays/120.Gramsci,A.(1994),Pre-PrisonWritings,trans.byV.Cox,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Guha,R.(1998),DominancewithoutHegemony,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Habermas,J.(1997),‘Kant’sIdeaofPerpetualPeace,withtheBenefitofTwoHundredYears’Hindsight’,inJ.BohmanandM.Lutz-Bachmann(eds),PerpetualPeace:EssaysonKant’sCosmopolitanIdeal,Cambridge,MA:MITPress,pp.113–53.Lendon,N.(1997),‘ANarrativeinPaint’,inW.CaruanaandN.Lendon(eds),ThePaintersoftheWagilagSistersStory1937-1997,Canberra,Australia:NationalGalleryofAustralia,pp.14–29.Marshall,J.(2009),‘GlobalizationandContemporaryArt’,inE.Delacruz(ed.)Globalization,ArtandEducation,London,UK:Routledge,pp.88–96.Mawurndjul,J.(2004),‘IamChemistMan,Myself’,inH.Perkins(ed.),CrossingCountry:TheAlchemyofWesternArnhemLandArt,Sydney,Australia:ArtGalleryofNewSouthWales,pp.134–9.Mendieta,E.(2009),‘FromImperialtoDialogicalCosmopolitanism’,Ethics&GlobalPolitics,2(3),241–58.Meskimmon,M.(2020),TransnationalFeminisms,TransversalPoliticsandArt,Abingdon,UK:Routledge.Mignolo,W.(2000),‘TheManyFacesofCosmo-Polis:BorderThinkingandCriticalCosmopolitanism’,PublicCulture,12(3),721–48.Mignolo,W.(2014),‘TheNorthoftheSouthandtheWestoftheEast’,Ibraaz,accessed12July2015athttp://www.ibraaz.org/essays/108.Mignolo,W.(2018),‘ThinkingandEngagingwiththeDecolonial:AConversationBetweenWalterD.MignoloandWandaNanibush’,Afterall,45,Spring/Summer.Mignolo,W.andA.Escobar(eds)(2010),GlobalizationandtheDecolonialOption,Abingdon,UK:Routledge.Mignolo,W.andC.Walsh(2018),OnDecoloniality:Concepts,Analytics,Praxis,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
115104HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMoarquechFerrera-Balanquet,R.andM.Rojas-Sotelo(2013),‘DecolonialAestheSisatthe11thHavanaBiennial’,SocialText,15July,accessed2March2016atwww.socialtextjournal.org/periscope_article/decolonial-aesthesis-at-the-11th-havana-biennial.Mosquera,G.(2010),CaminarconelDiablo.Textossobrearte,internacionalizaciónyculturas,Madrid,Spain:ExitPublicaciones.Mosquera,G.(2020),ArtfromLatinAmericaandotherGlobalPulses,Madrid,Spain:Catedra.Mosquera,G.andN.Papastergiadis(eds)(2015),TheGeo-PoliticsofContemporaryArt,Bogota,Colombia:Errata.NederveenPieterse,J.(2013),‘WhatisGlobalStudies?’,Globalizations,10(4),accessed1October2016athttps://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2013.806746.Papastergiadis,N.(2000),TheTurbulenceofMigration,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Papastergiadis,N.(2012),CosmopolitanismandCulture,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Papastergiadis,N.(2017),‘TheEndoftheGlobalSouthandtheCultureoftheSouth’,ThesisEleven,142(11),69–90.Papastergiadis,N.(2020),OnArt&Friendship,Melbourne,Australia:Surpllus.Petersen,A.R.(2015),‘GlobalArtHistory:AViewfromtheNorth,’JournalofAesthetics&Culture,7(1).Quijano,A.(2010),‘ColonialityandModernity/Rationality’,inW.MignoloandA.Escobar(eds)(2010),GlobalizationandtheDecolonialOption,Abingdon,UK:Routledge,pp.22–32.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-SpaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘RecoveringtheLocal:FromGlocalizationtoLocalization’,CurrentSociologyReview,67(6),801–17.Smith,B.(1945),Place,TasteandTradition:AStudyofAustralianArtsince1788,Sydney,Australia:UreSmith.Stokke,K.andO.Törnquist(2013),DemocratizationintheGlobalSouth:TheImportanceofTransformativePolitics,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Sutton,P.(1988),Dreamings:TheArtofAboriginalAustralia,Melbourne,Australia:Penguin.Tomlinson,J.(1999),GlobalizationandCulture,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Turner,C.(2016),TheGlobalWorkofArt:WorldFairs,BiennalesandtheAestheticsofExperience,Chicago,IL:ChicagoUniversityPress.Turner,D.(2007),‘ImagesofTranscendence:TheArtoftheWarnindilyakwa’,inH.Perkins(ed.),OneSunOneMoon:AboriginalArtinAustralia,Sydney,Australia:ArtGalleryofNewSouthWales.Valamanesh,H.(2011),OutofNothingness,Adelaide,Australia:WakefieldPress.Vizenor,G.(1999),ManifestManners,Lincoln,NE:NebraskaUniversityPress.Wedde,I.(1995),HowtoBeNowhere:EssaysandTexts,1971-1994,Wellington,NewZealand:VictoriaUniversityPress.NikosPapastergiadis-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:19AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
1167.FoodandglocalizationFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStanoANOVERVIEWOFFOOD,GLOBALIZATIONANDGLOCALIZATIONSinceancienttimes,long-distancetradehasenabledthespreadofbothstaplefoodsandluxuryproducts,suchaswine,tea,coffee,rice,spicesanddriedfish(Nützenadel&Trentmann,2008).Colonialexpansionfurtherenlargedfoodmarkets,linkingdistantplacesandculturesoftheworld,untiltheso-calledcontemporary‘globalization’,inwhichthemultiplemodesofinteractionoftheeconomic,political,socialandculturalspheres‘affectfood-relatedmatters,and…thelatterinturncometoaffecttheformer,inaseriesofongoingdialecticalrelationscharacterizedbytheconstantgenerationofformsofcomplexity’(Inglis&Gimlin,2009,p.9).Suchprocessesdonotmerelyinvolvefoodproducts,butalso–andespecially–practices(ofpreparationandconsumption),habits,rites,systemsofvalorization,aswellasimagesofone’sself(thatistosay,theconstructionoflocalandnationalidentities,andself-understandingofsocialandculturalgroups)andofothers(forexample,migrants,ethniccommunitiesandtravellers).1Andtheyarefrequentlymarkedbyunevennessandincompleteness,astheyentailchangingcultural,socialandeconomichierarchies,whichconstantlyredefinetheboundariesbetweengroupsandnations,identitiesandalterities(Geyer&Paulmann,2001,p.6).Thus,whilesomescholarshaveemphasizedthehomogenizationresultingfromtheprocessoffoodglobalization(see,inparticular,Ritzer,1993,2003,2004),2othershaveinsteadstressedthehugeheterogeneity(Poulain,2002)andhybridity(Appadurai,1990)originatingfromit,especiallyasaresultofaprocessofconfrontationoftheglobaldimensionwithlocal-izedfoodstylesand,conversely,ofwaysoflivinglocalliveswithandthroughglobalimagery:TheexoticfruitnowroutinelyavailableonsupermarketshelvesmaybeusedcasuallytoenhanceatraditionalEnglishfruitsalad–acarelesscosmopolitanisminvokedthroughignoranceorchoice.Alternatively,thesefruitsmaybecarefullyselectedanddeliberatelyemployed,torecreateauthentic‘local’tastesathome,bythefoodgourmet,thenewimmigrantorthepoliticallyexiled.Theglobali-zationoffoodisnot,therefore,justamatterofthemovementoffoodstuffsbetweennations;norisitsimplytheamalgamationoraccommodationofcuisines.Itisacomplexinterplayofmeaningsandintentionswhichindividualsemploysubjectivelytomakestatementsaboutwhotheyare,andwhereandhowtheirSelvesaretobelocatedintheworld.(James,1994[1996,p.92])Furthermore,asJean-LoupAmselle(2001)interestinglyremarks,allsocietiesarecrossbredevenwithinthemselves:buildingonJamesClifford’s(1997)conceptoftravelingculturesandthestudiescarriedoutbyUlfHannerz(1987,1992)andÉdouardGlissant(1990[1997])ontheideaofcreolization,theFrenchanthropologiststronglycriticizesaconceptionofglobalizationasacollisionamongpreviouslypureandintactelements,insteaddefiningitastheencounteramongalreadyhybridizedandheterogeneoussystems,whichreliespreciselyonthecon-frontationbetweentheglobalandthelocaldimension.Inglocalizedsocieties,therefore,‘theblurringofglobalandlocaldistinctionscausesestablishedmeaningsandauthenticitiestobe105FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
117106Handbookofcultureandglocalizationnolongerbroadlydefinedbutratherexpressedthroughmyriadinterpretations’(Matejowsky,2007,p.37).Aswewillshowinthefollowing,foodisparticularlysusceptibletothisprocessof‘blur-ring’,andcanthereforeplayacrucialroleinunderstandingitsfunctioningmechanismsandeffectsofmeaning.THEORETICALBACKGROUNDAstheaboveoverviewsuggests,investigatingglocalizationinthefoodrealmnecessarilyimpliesconsideringthelinksbetweensigns,texts,discoursesandpracticesconcerningthefooduniverse,ontheonehand,andtheprocessesofconstructionandformsofexpressionofculturalidentity–or,rather,identities–andalterity–or,rather,alterities–ontheother.Withinthewiderangeofpossibleapproachestodealwithsuchissues,wewouldliketoadopthereasemioticperspective,specificallyfocusingontheprocessesofsignificationandidentificationassociatedwiththem.Whilestartingtofocusonfoodlaterthanotherdisciplinessuchassociologyoranthropology,semioticshasinfactprovedessentialinprovidinginsightsonthepracticesofidentity-(andalterity-)makingassociatedwithitandtheprocessesoftrans-lationbetweendifferentfoodsystemsandcodes(see,inparticular,Greco,2016;Marrone,2016;Stano,2015,2016;Stano&Boutaud,2015).However,acomprehensivesemioticapproachtofoodglocalizationisstilllacking,withonlyafewandlimitedattempts(see,inparticular,Sedda,2016;Stano,2020).Thischapterthereforeexpresslyaimstocontributetofillingthisgap,drawingonexistingattempts,aswellasonrelevantinterdisciplinaryliterature,todescribehowglocalityworksinthefoodrealm(andbeyondit)andwhatitseffectsareonthelevelofsignificationprocesses.UNDERSTANDINGGLOCALIZATION:THELESSONOFTHECOLUMBIANEXCHANGEInordertobetterevaluatesomeoftheprocessesthattiethephenomenonofglocalization3tofood,itisworthconsideringaspecificexampleinrecenthistory:thediscoveryoftheAmericas,and,withit,theso-called‘Columbianexchange’(Crosby,1972).Eventhoughotherexamplescouldcertainlybebeneficiallyconsideredhere,theColumbianexchangeisparticularlyinterestingfordifferentreasons.First,itrepresentsthemomentwhen‘transportandcommunicationsystemsbridgedspatialdistanceandwhenworldwidemassmigrationchangedsocietiesandcultures,fosteringaworldofunprecedentedglobalexchangeofgoods,servicesandpeople’(Nützenadel&Trentmann,2008,p.5).Second,butnolessimportantly,suchdynamicswenthandinhandwithprocessesofimperialexpansionandmigrationandnewsystemsofdistributionandconsumptionoffood,whichalsoresultedintensionsandmovementsofresistance,reshapingsocialandethnicidentities,andemphasizingtherelationbetweentheglobalandthelocalscale.AdoptingsuchaperspectivenecessarilyimpliesfocusingprimarilyontheEuropeancontext.However,inthefinalpartofthepaper,wewillgeneralizetheresultsofsuchananalysis,alsorelatingthemtocontemporaryandtrans-nationalfoodspheres.4Infact,ononeside,thisexamplewillallowustounderstandthesignificanceofglocalizationasanongoingFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
118Foodandglocalization107andmultilayeredprocessofinterculturalandintersemiotictranslation,5concurrentlyinvolving‘national’,‘religious’,‘ethnic’,‘class’andothersemiospheres,aswellasasymmetricalrela-tionsofpower.Ontheotherside,itwillhelpusdrawacomparisonwithtoday’sprocessesofglocalization,withthecomplexeffortsofnon-Europeanandnon-Westernsocietiestoredis-covertheirancienttraditionsandreinventEuropeanfoods,dishes,andculinarytechniques,whilebringingupquestionsanddebatesaboutauthenticity,hybridity,power,decolonizationandsoforth.Moregenerally,thetensionbetweenpastandpresentfoodglocalizationwillallowustohighlightthesenseoftheconsumptionoffood–andsomeemerginganddominat-ingpracticesthatareinherenttoit–incontemporarysocieties.ExclusionFirst,andinageneralsense,wecantalkofaprocessofexclusion:notallspeciesofplantsandanimalslivingintheAmericaswereimmediatelyimportedtoEurope.Thismeansthatoftheoveralldifferencecharacterizingtheirfoodsphere(s),onlyapartwasselectedand‘trans-lated’towardEurope.IfwereadaptafittingexpressionbyBateson(1977),wemaysaythatonlyapartofdifferencewasutilizedtoproduceanoveldifference,whiletheremainingpartfellwithinthesphereofwhatbecamesemioticallyinexistent(Lotman,1984[2005]).Thisdiscardedorunperceiveddifferencemayberegardedasanuntranslatablepartoftheinitialsystem,whichremainsnonethelessabletospurfurtherinnovationsandtranslations–asprovedbyourunceasing‘discoveries’ofnewingredientsfromsuchculinarycultures.PurificationSecond,theimportofcultivatedspeciesdidnotcorrespondtotheawarenessofthefactthattheimportedplants(andanimals)werealreadytheresultofaremarkablylongculturalworkofselection,cross-fertilizationandcross-breedingoperatedbytheindigenouscultures,nortothetransferofthetechniques,habits,mannersandbeliefsthatwerenormallyassociatedwiththesetypesoffood.Theuniversesofbeliefandknowledge,thestructuresofeverydaylifeandthestructuresofpower,incorporatedinfood,initsproductionandinitsconsumption,wereinfactneutralizedbymeansofanon-neutralsociosemioticprocess.Suchaprocesswascertainlyenabledbyadiffusedignorancederivingfromculturaldistance,aswellasbytheimpossibil-ity,forthelargemajorityofEuropeans,tohaveadirectcontactwiththelifeandcuisineoftheAmericas.Moreover,anasymmetricalpowerrelation,mainlyduetotheEuropeanthirstfordomination,or,attheveryleast,claimtosuperiority,certainlyplayedacrucialroleinsuchprocesses.Inanycase,theneedto‘purify’whatbelongedtotheOther(whichwasgenerallyconceivedas‘savage’and‘heathen’),beforemakingitone’sownemerged.Anemblematiccaseinthissenseisthatofpellagra,anillnesscausedbytheconsumptionofcorn,whichcouldhavebeenavoidedbyteachingfarmerstoaddasmallamountoflimeoralkalinevegetableashesduringthecookingprocess,likeMesoamericanwomendid.TheWesternprocessof‘purification’ofcorn,infact,resultedinthelackofnecessaryknowledgetopreventthedisease,eventhoughsuchknowledgewaswidespreadinthecontextofitsorigin.Whetherthisprocessofpurification,whichwewillconsiderinmoredetailbelow,dependedonconscioussocioculturaldynamics,orratheronmoreprofoundandunperceivedstructuraldynamics,isstillanopenquestion.FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
119108HandbookofcultureandglocalizationNaturalizationasUniversalizationTheabove-discussedmechanismsdescribeacomplexculturalprocessofre-naturalizationoffood,thatistosay,aprocessthat,asstatedabove,‘purifies’food,atleastwithintheperceptionofthosewhoappropriateit,fromthesocialandculturalrelationsthatitembodies.InthecaseoftheColumbianexchange,variousfoodsweredetachedfromthelife-worldsofwhichtheywerewitnessesandactiveproducers,andthenreducedtotheconditionofmaterialandnaturalelementsavailablefornovelculturalformations.Here,theeffectofnaturalizationmergeswithamechanismofuniversalization.Theimportedfoodsandplantsbelongedtonoone.Theywereconsidered‘natural’elements,availabletoalltypesofknowledgereadytomanipulatethem.Inthissense,theirglocality,whichwasinherenttothemasculturalobjects,andwhichwaspropelledbytheunfoldingprocessofexchange,wasineffectannihilated.Inotherterms,somethingthatwasalreadyglocal,sinceitwasproducedandmademean-ingfulbyaseriesofcomplextranslationprocessesinherenttothehistoryandculturesoftheAmericas,wasmadefurtherglocalbyanewprocessoftranslationtowardEurope.Itthuslostallitsconnectionstohumanhistoryandspecificsemiospheres,travelingtowardnewculturesandbecomingpartofaprocessoftranslationandrelatednessbetweendifferentworlds.Itbecamea‘global’element–belongingtoeveryoneandatthesametimetonoone–availabletoavarietyof‘localities’readytoappropriateit.Suchadeprivationofglocalityalsopromotesafurtherredefinitionof‘globality’.AsitwastheEuropeans–carriersofnewwaysoftrading,aswellasofauniversalizingandcivilizingmission–whomadetheAmericanfoodsbecome‘global’,atwofoldmovementofglobali-zationcanbeidentified,involvingapositionofsemio-politicaldominance:whatisglobaliswhatwascirculatedbytheEuropeans,whatpassedthroughtheirnetworksofexchange,thatis,whattheydefinedpracticallyandsymbolically‘global’.Inthissense,itisinterestingtonotethatsuchaprocessof‘productionofnaturalness’givesrisetovariousstrategiesofappro-priation,or‘domestication’,ofnewnessandotherness.Thesestrategiesarepreciselywhatallowsrecognizingthe‘alterity’incorporatedbyfood–eventhoughthisisalwaysdistortedoratleastonlypartiallyrecognized,sinceitoperatesfromwithinthetargetfoodsphere(s).ProcessesofIncorporationTheprocessofculturalincorporationdiscussedabovedoesnotunfoldinthesamemannerandtimeforallfoodsatplayintheColumbianexchange.AsJean-LouisFlandrinwrote:Themoststrikinghistoricalfactoftheearlymodernperiod(1400–1800)—namely,theEuropeanconquestoftheSevenSeasandthesubsequentintegrationoftheothercontinentsintoEurope’scommercialnetwork—hadanimpactontheEuropeandietthathascontinuedtothepresentday.Notuntilthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturiesdidthetomato,potato,corn(maize),andotherAmericancropstransformEuropeanagricultureandcooking.Nevertheless,whileittookthreecenturiesforthesenewcropstobefullyassimilated(andthenonlyasaresultofagradualdeteriorationinthepopulardiet),otherexoticcropsenteredtheEuropeandietmuchmorequickly.Thepimientowasacceptedinsomecountries,forexample,whiletheturkeywasadoptedalmosteverywhere;threenewbeverages—coffee,tea,andchocolate—soonaccountedforasubstantialportionofglobaltrade;andsugar,whichhadlongbeenknowninEurope,begantobeproducedinvastlygreaterquantitiesunderEuropeancontrol.(Flandrin,1996[1999,p.313])FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
120Foodandglocalization109Theprocessoftranslationandincorporationofsuchelements,alongwiththerelativesyncre-tismandthenew‘indigenization’ofthesefoods,occurredwithdifferentrhythms,formsandvalorizations.Inotherwords,theinsertionofnewfoodsinthetargetfoodspheresisbasedondiversesemioticstrategies.Letusfocus,forinstance,ontheprocessthatbringsfoodsfromforeignnesstofamiliarity,andfromalteritytoidentification,orrather,totheabilityofnewconsumerstoidentifywiththemasiftheyweretheirown.6Firstofall,itisessentialtopointoutanevident,yetveryimportantconsideration.Inanyalimentarymechanismoftranslation,thefirstbordertocrossisthatbetweenfoodandnon-food.Aparadigmaticexampleinthissenseisthetomato,whichwasusedforalongtimeasanornamentalplant,beforebeingrecognizedandconsumedasaproperfood.Theplantwasinitiallyincorporatedintoeverydaylifeandaestheticallyvalorized,butnotasafoodsub-stance.7Andevenwhenitbecameacommonproduct,itwasintheformofasauce,8replacingMedievalEuropeansoupsorothertypesofsauces.Inotherwords,tobe‘incorporated’intotheEuropeanfoodsphere–thatis,topassfrombeingperceivedfromanother’stoone’sown–thetomatohadtocutacrossdiversesemioticborders:the‘ornament’(non-one’sown),the‘salad’(non-other’s),andthe‘sauce’(one’sown).Untilitfinallybecameanelementofcontinuityandculturalidentification(asprovedbytheemblematiccaseofMediterraneancuisine)intheEuropeancontext.Otherfoods,suchaspotatoesandcorn,wereimmediatelyadmittedintothefoodsphere,butasnourishmentforanimals.ThesewerethereforealsocaseswhereAmericanfoodsenteredtheEuropeanculturalspace,butmaintainedatraitof‘foreignness’,bymeansofaconnectiontothenon-human(thatis,animal)sphere,whileinthecaseofthetomato,itwaswiththenon-edible(thatis,ornamental)sphere.StructuresItisinterestingtonotethatseveralexamplesshowtheworkingsofahistorical-structuraldevicemadeofacomplexandparadoxicalplayofdiscontinuitiesandcontinuities,discord-ancesandcoherence.Toevaluatethescopeofthisdevice,itisworthconsideringtheprocessofincorporationoftheturkeyintoEuropeancuisine.Thiscaseisemblematic,asFlandrinnotes,becauseitdemonstratesthatthereisnoaprioriinflexibilitytoalimentarychangeortothereceptionoffood:TheslowrateatwhichAmericanfoodsweregenerallyadoptedistypicaloftheprocessofculinarychangeinearlymodernsociety.Yetsomespeciesgainedacceptancemuchmorequicklythanothers,ormorequicklyincertainregionsthaninothers.Indeed,theturkeycaughtonwithamazingspeed.(Flandrin,1996[1999,p.321])Whydidthetomatoneed300years,whiletheturkeytookonlyafewdecadestobecomeanestablishedpresenceonEuropeandiningtables?Theturkeywasacceptedalmostfromthemomentitarrivedbecauseallsortsoflargebirdswerealreadyservedonaristocratictables,includingsomethatweconsiderinedible,suchascormorant,stork,heron,crane,swan,andpeacock.Hencetherewasnoproblemwithintroducingtheturkey,whichwaslarge,decorative,andtastyintheopinionofsatisfiedconsumersboththenandnow.(Flandrin,1996[1999,pp.321–22])FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
121110HandbookofcultureandglocalizationInotherwords,theturkeywasreadilyintroducedintheEuropeanfoodspheresinceitsplacewasalreadyenvisagedwithintheEuropeanculinarysystem–muchmore,orinamuchmoreevidentway,thanthatofthetomato.Thus,itcouldmovedirectlyfrombeingtheother’stoone’sown,withoutpassingthroughtheintermediatestagesofincorporation.Infact,ontheperceptualandalsocognitivelevel,itwasalreadyrecognizableaspartofthestructuresofthetargetfoodsphereandits(bothimplicitandexplicit)ethno-taxonomiesoftaste.Theincreasesofpace–oreventhesyncopations–intherhythmofincorporationarebasedonthistypeoftranslation,whichinnovatesthefoodsystemsbyenteringitsstructuresandoccupyingalreadyattestedcategoricalpositions,eithergustativeorcognitive–thatistosay,tiedtoculinaryflavoursortypesofknowledge–withinthem.Relevantexamplesinthissenseincludechilipepper,whicheasilyreplacedthemoreexpensiveblackpepper;Americanbeans,whichreadilysupplantedthetypesofbeansconsumedinEuropeuptothatmoment;andcorn,whichwasrapidlyadoptedbythosewhoformerlyconsumedmillet.Thishighlightsthecrucialroleplayedbyfoodintheincreasinglyrapidinterpenetrationbetweensemiospheres,thatis,thecreationofaglocalensembleofglocalities.Morespecifi-cally,suchaprocessseemstobeenabledbytheabilityofsomefoodstoinnovateanddeeplytransformalimentarypracticesbybecomingpartoftheprofoundstructuresofthelanguageofthefoodspherestheyinnovate.PracticesFurtherproof,yetareversedone,oftheabove-describeddynamicsistheslowandlaboriousincorporationofthepotatointheEuropeancontext.Potatoeshadtoovercomeaseriesofsemioticthresholdsthatareevenmorecomplexthantheoneswedescribedinthecaseofthetomato.Unliketheturkey,thepotatodidnothaveaEuropeantrailblazerfavouringitspositioningwithinthelocalfoodsphere,neitherfromtheculinaryandbotanicalpointofviewnorfromthepointofviewoffigurativeappearanceortaste.Notonlywasitnewbothatthecognitiveandgustativelevel,itwasalsounattractive,andthefactthatitgrewundergroundfacilitateditsincorporationofnegativevalues.Wecancompareitsreceptiontothatofthetopinambur,whichlookslikeapotatobuttasteslikeanartichoke,resultinginaneasierandwideracceptancebyEuropeanaristocracy.Bycontrast,potatoeswerefirstadoptedtonourishanimals,stressingtheirforeignness.Afterinitialresistance(seePoulain,2002),theirothernesswasacceptedintothenewsemiosphere,butstillinaconditionofmarkedperipheralityanddistance.Thisconditiondidnotimprovemuchwhenthepotatobecame,duetoitsaffordabil-ity,firstasourceofnourishmentforconvicts,soldiersandthesick,andlaterafoodforthelowerclassesand,moregenerally,forsubjugatedorextremelypoorpeople(suchasinthecaseoftheBritishintroductionofthepotatoinIreland).Thepassagetothenon-one’sown(prisoners,inparticular,atthetimewereregardedasbeingsatthelimitofhumanity)andtothenon-other’s(foodforthelowerclassesandforsubjugatedorpoorpeople),ratherthanfoster-inganapproachtoappropriation–thatis,toanappropriativeidentification–createdaseriesofde-valorizingcorrelationsthatprojectedonfood.Suchcorrelationswereinturnalwaysrelatedtoandreinforcedbypopularnarratives,moreorlessgroundedondemonstrateddata,whichattributednegativequalitiestofooditself.Asinasortoflabyrinth,thepassagesleadingtowardthepotato’sexitfromsocialexclusionresolvedinablindalley.AnotherdifficultywasthefailureoftheattempttoestablishtheequivalencebetweenpotatoesandbreadsetforthbyAugustineParmentierandothersinthelateeighteenthcentury.BymeansofthemediationofFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
122Foodandglocalization111medical-pharmaceuticalknowledge,andpromptedbytheconditionsofimplosionofthelocalfoodsystem(thatis,warandfamine),Parmentiersuggestedreplacingbreadwithpotatoes,positingadefactoequivalencebetweenthesetwoelementsinanextremeattemptthatulti-matelyfailed9totransformthepotatointoanobjectthatwasone’sown,thatistosay,familiar,andthereforeincorporable.ItwasonlyinthenineteenthcenturythatthepotatowaseffectivelyintegratedintotheEuropeanpopulardiet,bymeansofaseriesofrelatedchangesthataffectedtheprevalentculinarysystemandpractices:thedemographicgrowth;theaffordabilityoffood;therecog-nitionofitsnutritionalvalues;andtheemergenceofnewrecipesandnarratives.Toprovideanexampleofaprocesstranslationthatmadethepotato‘appropriable’,wecouldmention,atleastintheItalianfoodsphere,itsuseinthepreparationofgnocchi:onlyinthismanner,afterhaving‘disguised’itself,didthepotatogainfullaccesstodiningtables.DiscoursesOneofthewaysoffoodincorporationthatgraduallyemergedandbecameincreasinglyrele-vantinthemodernagewaspassingthroughthemediumofscientific–medicalatfirst,nutri-tionalafterward–discourse,whichwaspopularizedinparticularbymeansofrecipebooks.AnemblematiccaseistheItalianrecipebookbyPellegrinoArtusiin1891,whichhasthesignificanttitleofLaScienzaincucinael’Artedimangiarebene(ScienceintheKitchenandtheArtofEatingWell):Itisaculinaryphilosophy…reduced,ontheonehand,tothephysiologicalorder,accordingtothereigningpositivisticcanons;and,ontheotherhand,totheeconomicalorder,followinganuncon-sciousidealthatArtusitranslatesintoasystemofrecipesmirroringapolitical-economicalsystem,thestructureofthesocietyofhistimeandthemythofthebourgeoisorder.(Camporesi,1970,p.XXIII,ourtranslation)Thishighlightsafurthernuanceofthetranslativeprocessofalimentation,andalsopointstoanotherstrategyofappropriationofthefoodsimportedfromtheAmericas.First,itcorrobo-ratesthatfoodtranslationsoperateatthecrossroadsofmultiplefiltersoftranslation,thatistosay,ofseverallanguagesthat,alltogether,shapetheglobalityofthetargetculture.10Second,itenablesustoreconsiderthestrategiesofappropriationofthefoodscomingfromtheAmericas,identifyingafurthertypology.Infact,thereferencehereistofoods,andinparticulartobev-erages,thatpenetratedratherrapidlyintotheEuropeanfoodspherebybeingsemanticizedasmedicaments.Thatistosay,theywerevalorizedassubstanceswithhealing,therapeuticandenergizingproperties(seeHuetzdeLemps,1996[1999]).Fromcoffeeuptochocolate,theacceptanceofseveralproductsintothefoodspherepassedthroughtheirpositioningwithinthespacesof‘medicines’and‘magicsubstances’.Thisisthecase,forinstance,ofaromas,whichweresoldin‘aromatist’sshops’,suchasthatofModica(theSiciliancapitalofchocolatesincetheseventeenthcentury),where:ontheshelvestherewerepackagesofzincandalumpowderandcamphor,‘quicksilver’,cumin,yellowandwhiteamber,‘Jamaicanrum’,andalsofinechocolate,whichbackthenwasfedtopeoplesufferingfrom‘exhaustion’orasa‘reinvigorating’substancetonewlywedsaftertheirweddingnight.(Bolzoni,2014,ourtranslation)FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
123112HandbookofcultureandglocalizationThissceneimmediatelyrecallsthechocolateshopfromthe2000filmChocolat,whichpointstotheAztecoriginsofthisfoodtohighlightitsshamanic-catharticpoweranditscapabilitytooverwhelmthequiet(andoverlydisciplined)livesofthereligiouscitizensofasmallFrenchtown.Suchdynamicsreflectatwofoldandalmostparadoxicaldevice,whichneutralizesandatthesametimesynthesizestheconflictbetweenone’sownandtheother’s.Ononelevel,thesubstanceisneutralized:itbecomesnon-other’sandnon-one’sown.Thismeansthatitisnolongeroutlying,asitislegitimizedbythe(presumed)medical-pharmacologicalknowledge,butitisnotentirelyfamiliaryet.Itremainssomethingtobeusedonspecialoccasionsandforcertainpurposes,exactlybecauseitisamedicinewhoseeffectsonecannotfullycontrol(andsometimesisnotevencompletelyawareof).Onanotherlevel,itbecomesbothone’sownandtheother’s,whichmakesits‘magical’aspectemerge.Arrivingfromelsewhere,foodiscapableofreconcilingopposites.Itscathartic-therapeuticforceresidespreciselyinthatonecanandmustappropriatesomethingwhichisbyallmeansanother’s,and,assuch,carriesunknownandmysteriouspowers,throughestablishedmodesandrites.NamingTheentireprocessofincorporation,withthevariousadaptivestrategiesoutlinedabove,isaccompaniedbyalinguisticworkofdenomination,whichisoftenanactualre-nomination,asortof‘baptismofplants’(Guigoni,2009,p.122).Infact,theveryfixingofthename,whichattimesmayrequiremultipleyears,canbeseenasafurtherformofsanctionofthecompletedprocess.Letusconsidertwointerestingcaseswhichmayhelpusfurtherreflectontherelationbetweenfoodandglocality–thatistosay,onthewayinwhichfoods,eventhroughtheirnames,translateandbetray(inthesenseofdistorting,butalsoofunintentionallygivingaglimpseof)thecrossingofworlds,whichtheythemselvesare.Thetypologiesofdesignationidentifiedbyvariousscholars,iftakenonamoregenerallevel,seemtotracethetripartitedivisionofthefunctionsofculture(functional,aestheticandmythical)discussedbyAlgirdasJulienGreimasinDel’imperfection(1987).Infact,thenamesofimportedfoodsaresometimescalquesoftheoriginaldenominationsusedintheAmericas:mahizturnedintomais(Italianfor‘corn’),tomatlbecametomato(inEnglish)ortamata(inSardinian),xocolatlwastranslatedintomultiplesimilarphoneticforms,unawareofthesemanticmatrixthatintheAzteclanguagemeant‘bitterwater’.Inothercases,onthecontrary,thenamewasgeneratedthroughiconicrecognitionsgenerallyassuminganaestheticvalue:tomatlfirstbecameinItalianpomod’amore(literally,‘loveapple’)andthenpomod’oro(‘goldenapple’),withalinguisticvalorizationevidentlylinkedtotheornamentalfunctionoftheproductwediscussedabove.Lastly,thereareentireseriesofnewnamesthatincorporatedtheirplacesoforigin,geographicdistanceorexoticalterity:thenopalli,forinstance,becameficodindia(‘pricklypear’)inItalianandfigumoriska(‘figofthemoors’)inSardinian,whilethewueh-xōlō-tlwasnamedturkey(fromTurkey)inEnglishandkalekut(fromKalkota,India)inGerman–andsoonandsoforth,withanoverflowofpopularreferencesindifferentculturalbackgrounds.Now,theinterestingthingisthatthethirdtypeofdesignation,whichexplicitlyincorpo-ratesalterity,andthusseemstovalorizeitmoreopenly,infactbetraysitmorethoroughly:asmuchasthecross-referencesmaybemotivatedwithrespecttotheroutesortotheactorsFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
124Foodandglocalization113ofcommerce,ortotheconfusionbetweenIndiaandtheIndies(thatis,theAmericas),thesenamesgenerallyendupbuildinganentirelyimaginarygeography,whichistotallyinternaltotheEuropeansemiosphereandreflectsitsconceptionsoftheOther.Asifinaplayofmirrorsfromwhichitseemsimpossibletoescape,Europeansusedtheexpression‘grainofTurkey’forcorn,whiletheTurkishcalledit‘grainoftheRum’,thatistosay,ofthe‘Westerners’,orofthe‘ChristiansoftheWest’.Inbothcases,theindigenousMesoamericanswereexcluded.Therefore,doestherealanddevastatingOthernessoftheNewWorlddisappearovertheEuropeanhorizon?Notatall.Intruth,theapparentlyfunctionalplayofloanwords,withnoclamour,andinanon-explicitmanner,enablesalteritytobetranslated,albeitimperfectly,withinthetargetsemiospheres.Itistherethatitdepositsitself,leavingatrace–justlikeafruitthat,onceopened,canbetracedbacktoitsroots,tellingthestoryofalongjourneyoftranslation.Itshouldberememberedherethatbothdesignationsplaythe‘gameofglocality’.ButtheexplicitdesignationsrenderaglocalitythatisalreadyinternaltotheEuropeanimaginary,withitsalreadyknown‘Other(s)’and‘elsewhere’.Thedesignationsthat,withaloanword,translatetheoriginalnames,distortingthem,createanewspaceforapreviouslyunknownalterity–withaparadoxicaleffect:alterityentersthetargetsemiosphere,butisalsoforgotten.Itmustbeforgotten.Itwouldbeusefultofurtherreflectuponthis–aswewillinthefollowingsection–butnotbeforenotingthatthereisonefeaturethatbothcasesshare:theyarealways‘imperfect’translations.CONTEMPORARYFOODSPHERES:WHICHGLOCALIZATION?Fromnaturalizingpurificationstounexpectedtranslations,isthehistoryoftheColumbianexchangeperhapsthehistoryofanunconsciousglocalization?Or,possibly,isitthehistoryofa‘silent’one?Orratherthatofanambivalentone,almostasifsplitbetweentheexigenciesofanincorporationthattendstoautomatism,andtothenon-reflected,andtheexigenciesofamemoryofalteritywhich,ifoneknowshowtoseeitandwheretolookforit,lingersandmakesitselfvisible?AndissuchadynamicrelevantonlytotheColumbianexchange?Ordoesitconcernanyotherformoffoodglocalization,orevenglocalizationingeneral?Answeringtoallthesequestionsliesoutsidethescopeofthischapterandwouldrequirefurtheranalysisofthedynamicsconsideredinthesepages.However,theelementsoutlinedaboveallowustodrawsomerelevantconclusions,whichwillalsohelpusshednewlightonglocalizationincontemporaryfoodspheres.(Un)translatabilityFirst,atheoreticalcorrespondencebetweenthehistoryoffoodandthehistoryoftranslationcanbeidentified.Wecaninfactsaythattranslationshavealwaysoccurred.Yet,settingspo-radiccasesormomentsaside,and,forthemost,confinedtoélitemilieus,itisonlyinrecentcenturiesthattranslationhasemergedinmassconsciousnessasapracticeandasacentralconceptforcommunicationandeverydaylife(Lotman,1993[2009];Sedda,2015).Onlyinthetwentiethcenturywastranslationthematizedasanautonomousfieldofstudy,valorizingitssocialandpolitical,inadditiontoitscultural,significance.Henceaquestionarises:didthisprocessof‘invisibility’oftranslation(andoftranslators)ingeneralalsoweighonthespecificFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
125114Handbookofcultureandglocalizationfieldof‘foodtranslation’,whichispractisedyetunspoken–or,moreprecisely,practisedexactlybecauseitisgenerallyunrecognized(Stano,2015,pp.218–24)?AsLatoursaid,‘themoreweforbidourselvestoconceiveofhybrids,themorepossibletheinterbreedingbecomes’(1991,p.32,ourtranslation).SuchisthepeculiarityandparadoxofWesternmodernity.Ithasenabledtheproliferationoftranslations–orbetter,oftranslationsoftranslationsoftransla-tions,andsoon–exactlybecauseitdismissedsuchatranslativedynamic,ordeemedittobeinexistent.Thesubsequentquestion,then,iswhetherthecontemporaryawarenessoftransla-tionmechanisms,thatis,itsexplicitandreflexivevalorization,makesit,onthecontrary–andinafurtherparadox–evenmoredifficultandthereforelesspractised.Thiswouldmeanthatwearealltoosensitivetotranslationtopractiseitlight-heartedly,toembarkwithcarelessnessupontherisksofbetrayingthealterities–theother’sbutalsoourown–whichtranslationnecessarilycarrieswithitself.Thefollowingsectionsaimtoshedlightonsuchquestions,alsorelatingtocrucialissuesconcerningtheglocalcontemporarinessoffood.LocavorismandCulturalAppropriationInitsinitialsense,glocalismmeantbothanadaptationofglobalitytolocalconditionsandconstraints(Robertson,1995;Robertson&White,2004)anda‘returntothelocal’,thatis,aredressofthelocalontheglobal.11Emerginginthelate1980s,thislattertendencyfoundanalimentaryequivalentinideassuchas‘SlowFood’,‘Farm-to-Table’(inItalyalsocalledchilometrozeroliterally,‘ZeroKilometre’)andotherformsof‘locavorism’asareactionagainstthedominant‘McDonaldization’(Ritzer,1993)oftheworld.Theseideologies,whichcertainlysharethemeritofplacingseveraldistortionsofglobalizedfoodconsumptionunderscrutiny,maystillinadvertentlygenerateasenseofrefusaloffoodalterity.AccordingtoMassimoLeone(2016),forinstance,thepracticalmotivation–wherebythevalueoftheexoticcuriosityisnotcommensuratewiththeenvironmentalpriceconnectedtoit–andthemythicalmotivation–wherebythatwhichisnearbyandone’sownisnecessarilytastierandmoregenuine–mayinadvertentlygenerateabeneficialandnoncritical‘localistic’closure.Furthermore,theseideologiescanresultinchauvinisticdiscoursesfoundedonasimplerejec-tionofalterity–whosefooddiversityisstilloneofthemoreevidentandsensibleaspects.Theverydemonizationoftransnationaltradeexchangealsotendstounderestimatethefactthat,ifpractisedinconditionsofequality,thelattercanbeapowerfulvectorofpeace,diplomacyandknowledgeoftheother.EvenwithoutreachingtheextremeconsequencesproposedbyLeone,thesetendencies,whichunite‘globalawareness’and‘alimentarylocalism’,seemtoinvertthemoderndynamicofpractisingtranslationprocesseswithoutrecognizingthem.Here,foodtranslations,resultingfromaconsciousact,wouldcertainlybeslowerandmorecontrolled(the‘other’sfood’,forexample,wouldbebesteatenin‘otherplaces’)–whereasinpractice,oneshouldprivilegeone’sownproducts(possiblyinaccordancewiththeirseasonality).Asonemayobserve,itisnotamatterofprohibitingfoodtranslation,butratherofregulatingit.Yet,asthesemioticsofcultureexplains,allthingswhoserulesaredefinedacquiresocialexistence,butaredeprivedofdynamism.Translationthereforeemergesas‘pure’and‘exceptional’,aprocessthatcanbepractisedalmostexclusivelyby‘experts’:thegreatchefs.Infact,chefshavebeenincreasinglyseenas‘culturalintermediaries’(Ceccarini,2011),playingacrucialroleinspreadingfoodproductsandpractices,bothatthelocal(InwoodetFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
126Foodandglocalization115al.,2009;Jordan,2007)andtheglobalscale(Fung,2007;Locher,2003;Pilcher,2008).Andnotwithoutcriticism.Letusconsider,forinstance,theso-called‘Novo-Andeancuisine’(cocinanovoandina),thatistosay,theculinarystylethatemergedinPeruattheendofthetwentiethcenturywiththeaimofre-creatingthecookingcustomsofthepre-Hispanicpastandre-discoveringauthenticlocalingredientsandrecipes(PerúTravel,n.d.).Astheemphasisweputontheprefixesinthepreviousdefinitionofsuchacookingstyleshows,itdoesnotsimplymeanrecoveringapasttradition,butrather‘re-creating’it–or,touseafamousexpressionintroducedbyHobsbawmandRanger(1983),‘(re-)inventing’it.Suchare-discoveryorinven-tionisbasedonaprocessoftranslationbothatthetemporallevel,withthere-interpretationofancientelementsandpracticesinamodernkey,andatthespatiallevel,withingredients,techniquesandaestheticsderivingfromotherfoodspheres(andespeciallyfromtheEuropeangastronomicuniverse,wheremostNovo-Andeanchefshavetrainedthemselves)comingintoplay.12ThisclearlyrecallstheprocessesdescribedabovewhendealingwiththeColumbianexchange:theNovo-Andeancuisinere-naturalizespre-Hispanicproducts,makingthembecome‘global’elementsthatcanbeappropriatedbyare-invented‘locality’thatinturnfiltersthemthroughtheaestheticandgustativelensofWesternhautecuisineand‘gastromania’(seeMarrone,2014).Infact,themovementhasencounteredcriticismandconcernfrommanyexpertsandscholars(see,forinstance,García,2013),withitsmainrepresentatives(suchasthefamouschefGastónAcurio)beingaccusedofinfringingtheintellectualpropertyofindigenouspeoplesandexploitingtheirpracticesandknowledge,makingthemfadeintothebackgroundoftheirown‘culinarydiscoveries’.AuthenticityThetendencyoutlinedinthepreviousparagraphentersinambivalentconsonancewithanotherone.Weliveinatimeinwhichfoodalterityisnotonly‘silent’,butalsopositivelyvalorized.Ifthelargemetropolisesoftheglobeareworld-cities,glocalcities(seeSedda,2021),itisalsobecausetheirlandscapesaresaturatedwithrestaurantsthatrepresenteverycornerandpeopleoftheEarth.And,alongwiththem,theyaresaturatedwitheveryflavour,orcombinationofflavours,theplanetcanoffer.‘Ethnic’restaurantsallaroundtheworldarethevisiblefaceofthepresenceofmultipleotherswhohavecomefromdifferentplaces,bringingwiththemtheirculinaryandeatingpractices.Thesepracticesemanate,withtheiraromas,frommigrants’kitchens13andenterpublicspaces,providing‘locals’withtheopportunityofanexoticjourneyoftasterightdowntheirstreet,14butnotwithoutparadoxicaleffects.Thesearchforauthenticityisemblematicinthissense:consumerslookforauthenticIndianfood,authenticItalianfood,authenticJapanesefood,andsoon,tosuchanextentthatthepresenceofincoherentelementsorformsoftradition-blendingareoftenperceivedandexperiencedinanegativeway,asa‘betrayal’oftheauthenticitythattheyarelookingfor(andwhichtheyimaginetobeeating).Infact,AlanWarde(2000),included‘authentication’–seekingauthenticreplicationofdishesfromforeigncuisines–inhisdescriptionofthefourbasicattitudestowardsethnicfoodandtheirdiffusion:15whentheethnicfoodmarketgrows,thereisalwaysanichefor‘authentic’food.Inthissense,thepresence–orbetter,creation–andcirculationof‘symbolsofauthenticity’(Grazian,2003)isveryimportant.Authenticity,therefore,isanidealizedrepresentationofreality,thatistosay,aneffectofsense,a‘networkofcommodifiedsigns,socialrelations,andmeanings’(Grazian,2003,p.17).Theconsumer,inotherwords,seemstowanttocompensatefortheimpossibilityoftravellingtotheplaceFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
127116Handbookofcultureandglocalizationwhereauthenticitymanifestsitself‘naturally’.Asonemayobserve,glocalizationisactualizedhereinthetastingofalterity,yetnotastheminglingofalterities.Nothingpreventssuchanoperationoftasting(andtesting)fromactingasthetrailblazeroftheminglingofthenewtastewithfamiliarones.Yetitseemsineffecttopushatendencythatmakesthevalueofalteritysoevidentthatitmakesitdifficulttoplaywith,almostasthoughonefeelsanxiousaboutbetrayingapresumed‘essence’.Theexampleofpizzaisemblematicinthissense.‘Neapolitan’pizzeriaspurportingtobe‘authentic’proliferateinmajorcitiesallaroundtheworld,asaresultofaprocessofherita-gizationandauthenticationthathasmadetheso-calledpizzanapoletanabecomethe‘origi-nal’versionofpizzaparexcellence–despitethehighnumberoftypologiesthathavebeenproducedandconsumedhistoricallythroughoutItalyandelsewhereandtherelativelyrecentoriginoftheNeapolitanmodel,atleastintheformthatiscelebratedtoday.16Anumberofservicesofferinglocaladaptationsofsuchafoodalsoexist,withmanybearingonlyacasualresemblancetotheItalian‘original’.Letusconsider,forinstance,thepopularHawaiianpizza,toppedwithtomatosauce,cheese,hamandcannedpineapple:aCanadiancreation,despitethegeographicalreferenceinitsname,whichinfactreferstothebrandofpineappleusedbyitsCanadian-bornGreekinventorSamPanopoulos.OrtheincrediblenumberofAmericanvar-iations,suchasthewell-knownChicago-stylepizza,featuringathickmoistcrustformedupthesidesofadeep-dishpanandsauce,addedatopcheeseandtoppings,ortheCalifornia-stylepizza,distinguishedbytheuseofnon-traditionaltoppings,suchaspeanutsauce,beansprouts,shavedcarrots,orchickenandbarbecuesauce.Butitisnotjustabouttheingredientsused:CarolHelstosky(2008)describedtheAmericanizationofpizzaintermsofadistinctionbetween‘handcrafted’and‘standardized’pizza.WhilethepizzaoriginatedinNaplesisanartisanalproductgarnishedwithafewfreshingredientsandbakedinwood-burningovensbyexpertpizzaiolos,thevariationsthatemergedthroughoutAmericatendtobebigslicedpizzasmadeusingindustrialtechniques,heavilygarnishedandbakedinpansandasteeloveninpizzachainrestaurants.Aparticularcase,then,isthatofJapanizedpizza:afterWarWorldII,thefirstrestaurantsservingstandardizedpizzawereopenedinTokyoforAmericansandafewwealthyJapanese.TheAmerican-stylepizzathenspreadmorewidelyintothelocalfoodsphere,becomingavail-abletoaverageJapaneseconsumersinthe1970s,whenpizzachainsandfamilyrestaurantsarrivedinJapan(Doi,1992).Thispavedthewayforlocalformsofimprovisationanddomesti-cation,whichfurtherincreasedtheprocessofglocalizationofpizzathathadtakenplaceintheUnitedStates.The1990s,however,markedareturnto‘authenticity’,makingthepopularityofNeapolitanpizzagrowoversuchlocaladaptations:notjusttheingredients,butalsothepracticesofpreparationandconsumptionofthetypicalhandcraftedpizzabecamepopularalloverJapan,alsoresultinginanumberofJapanesechefsmovingtoItalytogainorimproveartisanalexpertiseandknowledgeaboutItaliancuisineinordertoopen‘authentic’Neapolitanpizzeriasontheirreturn.However,newformsofglocalization,alsoincluding‘transabroadglocalization’,17wereroundthecorner(Tobin,1992).Specifictoppingssuchaswasabimay-onnaiseorslicesofdaikonweresoonintroducedtomeetthelocaltaste;similarly,thedough,aswellastheshapeandthewayofcookingweremodified,leadingtothecreationof‘anewandsolelyJapaneseinvention’(Ceccarini,2011,p.36)–the‘Japanesepizza’.Theso-calledmochipizza(餅ピザ)isemblematicinthissense:beingaspecifictypeoffryingpanpizza(フライパンピザ),itgenerallyhasanovalshape,requireslittletonoleaveningprocess,andcanbeeasilycookedusingafryingpan,amicrowave,atoaster,agrilloreventhecookwareusedFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
128Foodandglocalization117tomaketraditionaldishessuchasyakisoba.Asregardstheingredientsused,thedifferencesfromtheItalianmodelarealsoevident:mochipizzafeaturesacrustmadeofcakesofpoundedglutinousriceinsteadofwheatdough,ketchupinsteadoftomatosauce,seaweedinsteadofbasilandtofuinsteadofmozzarella.Moreover,thetimesandwaysofitsconsumptionarepeculiar:oftenverysmall(withadiameteroflessthan15centimetres),itisusuallyeatenasasnackorsidedish(つまみ,tsumami),ratherthanasamain.AlthoughresemblingaWesternpizzainsomerespects,inothers,itisdefinitelyadifferentfoodproductandisinfactgenerallydescribedasacaseofmodokiryōri(もどき料理),or‘pseudocuisine’(Ceccarini,2011),asitevidentlybreakstheidealizedimageofsuchafoodandthecollectiveimaginaryresultingfromitsauthenticationprocess.ContemporaryRe-naturalizationsandHiddenSynthesesInadditiontotheabove,itshouldbenotedthat,muchlikeintheColumbianexchange,aprocessofre-naturalizationanduniversalizationhastakenplaceincontemporaryglocalizedfoodspheres:‘ethnicfood’,forinstance,istheresultofaseriesofadaptations–fromtheuseofproduceavailablelocallytothemultiplemulti-ethnichandsworkinginthekitchensandthedomesticationofforeignflavourstolocaltaste,uptothecreationof‘national’cuisinesthroughthegeneralizationofthosewhichinone’shomecountrywouldbeonlypartiallytranslatablelocalvariations.Glocalityreproducesitselfsubtly,inadvertently,penetratingly,thusgivingbirthtonovelsyntheses,whichovertimecanbecome‘familiar’options.Thecaseofpizzaisemblematicinthissensetoo:itwasonlyaroundthe1790stothe1810sthattomatoesfoundtheirwaytoitstop,asaresultoftheprocessesofincorporationandadaptationwedescribedabove;mozzarellacheesewasintroducedinthe1850s,andbasilinthe1870s,whilethepizzagarnishedwiththeseingredientsacquiredaspecificname(‘Margherita’)onlyin1889,pavingthewayforthe‘ideal-typical’shapeandsetofingredientsthatbecamefamouseverywhereasaresultofamulti-layeredprocessofcontaminationandadaptation,withinwhichItalianmassmigrationtotheUnitedStatesinthe1880sto1920splayedacrucialrole(see,inparticular,Choate,2008;LaCecla,2007).Thesedynamicsareevenmoreevidentinthecaseof‘fusioncuisine’,whichhasbeenincreasinglypractisedandpraisedoverrecentdecades.Ifwelookatitsdefinition,wecanreadthatitisacookingstylecombiningingredientsandtechniquesfromdifferentfoodspheresinordertocreate‘new’and‘original’dishes,whichareatthesametimenotascribabletoanyparticularone.Creatingnewformsthroughtheeliminationofpre-existingelements,andtryingtoconcealthetracesofthisprocess,fusioncuisineseemstofavouruniqueness.Eventhoughatraceissometimesleftinthedenominationofplates(forexample,‘tacopizza’or‘makiacevichado’)orcookingstyles(forexample,‘Tex-Mex’or‘Indian-Chinese’cuisine),amechanismoflieorillusion(seeGreimas&Courtés,1979)isneverthelessusuallyatplay.Foodsarede-composedinunitaryconstituents,allowingthereplacementofthelatterwithelementspertainingtootherfoodspheres,providedthatthegeneralstructuralconfigurationofthefoodremainsunaltered.Thus,forinstance,thefinaldishseemssushi,orseemspizzabutitisnot.Thenegotiationofthesenseoffoodbetweenandacrossdifferentfoodspherestendstobereducedtosimplestructuralmodels,disregardingtheessentialsynestheticnatureoftheeatingexperienceandthecomplexityoftranslationprocesses.18Continuitythusreplacesdiscontinuity,andconjunctionsupplantsdisjunction,reducingthepolyphonicmultiplicityoftheculinarytraditionsattheoriginsofthe‘fusioneddish’toahierarchizedstructure,whereFranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
129118Handbookofcultureandglocalizationtranslationprocessestendtobeconcealedunderthis‘lie’or‘illusion’–eventhoughtheyareostentatiouslypraisedintheverydefinitionofsuchacookingstyle.Thismechanismseemstorecallthecaseoftheturkey,sinceitplayspreciselyonalreadyattestedstructuresandcategori-calpositions,thusallowingsubstitutionsandinnovationsthatmakeforeignfoodspassdirectlyfrombeinganother’stobeone’sown.Moreover,itshouldberememberedthattraditionsthemselves(inthefooddomainaswellasingeneralterms)cannotandshouldnotbeconceivedaspermanentessentialqualitiesofspecificphysicalplacesorpeople,butshouldratherbeunderstoodashistoricalandculturaloutcomesofcomplexcontinuousprocessesofhybridizationwithothercultures(andtastes),thatistosay,ofanunceasingandmultilayeredprocessoftranslationinvolvingvariousiden-titiesandalterities.Suchaprocesstendstoremainunperceived–or,atleast,tendstofadeintothebackground–especiallyinthefooduniverse:asLaCecla(1997)andotherscholarsremindus,foodrepresentsaneasilycrossablefrontier,aspacewheretheincommensurabilityofculturesgiveswaytoapartialencounterandcomparison,allowingalteritytoassumetheformofa‘palatable’andeasilyincorporableexperience.ACONCLUDINGREMARKTheconsiderationspresentedinthischapterpointtoaparticularandhighlyrelevantconse-quenceofglocalization.Theemergenceofglocalsolutionsactsnotonlyonthetargetfood-sphere,butalsoonthatoforigin,producingknock-oneffectsinthedefinitionoftheculinarycanonofagivencommunityandontheimageofone’sselfthatthelatterprojectswithinandatthesametimeoutsideofitsworld.Evenwhatispresentedas‘authentic’and‘local’isinfacttheresultofaninternallooksomehowimitatingtheexternallookwhose‘taste’ithastomatch.Andwhatisthis,ifnotevidentconfirmationthatglobalityandlocalitymutuallyconditionandgivemeaningtoeachother,inarelationalviewofspaceandscales,whichunceasinglytranslatestheoneintotheother,andviceversa?Or,evenmoreradically,evidencethatboththe‘global’andthe‘local’areeffectsofsensethatstandoutfrom–andtosomeextentagainst–anetofglocalrelations?NOTES1.See,inparticular,Montanari(2006).2.Inthisregard,itisparticularlyinterestingtorecalltheideasof‘McDonaldization’(Ritzer,1993)–theprocessofstandardizationandhomogenizationofvariousaspectsofcultures,includingfoodbutnotonly,asaresultofglobalization–andof‘grobalization’–atermderivingfrom‘growth’and‘globalization’,alsointroducedbyRitzer(2003;seealsoRitzer,2004)asacounterpartofglocali-zation,namely‘theimperialisticambitionsofnations,corporations,organizations,andthelikeandtheirdesire,indeedneed,toimposethemselvesonvariousgeographicareas’(Ritzer,2004,p.73).3.Forourgeneralpointofviewonglocalization,seeSedda(2004,2014).4.Theterm‘foodsphere’,introducedin2015byStano,isusedheretoreferencetheconceptofthe‘alimentarysemiosphere’,stressingtheinherentlyculturalandsemioticnatureofthefoodsystem,alongthelinesofLotman’stheory(1984[2005]).5.Onthedynamicsandtheroleofsemio-culturaltranslation,seeLotman(1984[2005]).Wedevel-opedourpointofviewonthematterinSedda(2012).6.Thisexercisewillbetterassistusinfocusingontheimplicationoftherelation,pastandpresent,betweenfoodandglocalization.FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
130Foodandglocalization1197.Despiteafewattemptstointroduceitinthedietofthattime(forinstance,asoneoftheingredientsofsalads),itwasnotconceivedasaproperfoodinthecollectiveperceptionandpractice,sometimesevenbeingconsideredpoisonous.8.Onthedistinctionbetweensalsadipomodoro(‘tomatosauce’)andsugodipomodoro(‘tomatogravy’),seeCamporesi(1970,p.XXXVII).9.OntheEuropeanresistancetotheintroductionofthepotato,especiallyinrelationtobreadandbread-making,seeinparticularPoulain(2002).10.InArtusi’swork,thesemultiplelanguagesare:scientificdiscourse,bourgeoisideology,culinarytextsandpracticalexperimentsinregionalcuisines.Thelistisnon-exhaustiveandmaybeexpandedtobecomeevenmoreheterogeneous.11.SeeManderandGoldsmith(1996).Ontherelationbetweenglobalization,agricultureandtheresist-ancemovement,see,forexample,McMichael(2007).12.Forfurtherdetails,seeStano(2021).13.Respondingtotheirnewexperiencesinforeigncountries,migrantsgenerateallsortsofpersonaladaptationsoffoodcodes,whichmayresultinmodificationsofthecodesthemselves(Greco,2016):newingredientsareintroduced,whileothersareeliminatedorconcealed;whensubstitutionsarenotdeemedpossible,newspeciescanbeinsertedintheagricultureand/orlivestockofthefood-spherewheremigrantsfindthemselves;andnewpracticescanbecombinedwithtraditionalones,innovatingboththepreparationandtheconsumptionoffood.14.AparallelyetdistinctdiscourseshouldbedevelopedinrelationtofoodaspresentedbyTVpro-grammesand,moregenerally,massmediaandnewmedia.Asaresultofcontemporary‘gastroma-nia’(Marrone,2014),mediadiscourseshavebecomeincreasinglyimportantinthefooduniverse,investingsubstancesandpracticeswithmultiplemeaningsandvaluesthatinturnhaveanimpactonourexperienceofthem.15.Thescholar’sanalysis,whichfocusesonEngland,alsoincludesthreeaspectsthatarerelevanttothepointsdiscussedabove:‘preservation’,thatis,therejectionofanythingthatisnottraditionalandtherevalorizationoflocalfood;‘naturalization’,thatis,theadjustmentofrecipesinawaythatunknowntastesaremadefamiliar;and‘improvisation’,thatis,the‘restyling’ofothers’foodwaysandsystems.16.ForfurtherdetailsonthehistoryoftheNeapolitanpizza,seeinparticularCapatti(2001).17.Ceccarini(2011)introducedtheexpressiontostressthefactthattheprocessofdomesticationstartsabroad,thankstothetransnationalflowofpeoplebetweenthesendingandthereceivingcountry.18.Foradetailedanalysisofspecificcasestudiesandfurtherreflectionsonthistopic,seeStano(2016).REFERENCESAmselle,J.-L.(2001),Branchements:anthropologiedel’universalitédescultures,Paris,France:Flammarion.Appadurai,A.(1990),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,Theory,CultureandSociety,7,295–310.Bateson,G.(1977),StepstoanEcologyofMind,SanFrancisco,CA:ChandlerPublishingCompany.Bolzoni,A.(2014),‘UnacioccolataconSciascia’,LaRepubblica,28February,48–9.Camporesi,P.(1970),‘Introduzione’,inP.Artusi(ed.),Lascienzaincucinael’Artedimangiarbene,Torino,Italy:Einaudi,pp.IX–LXXXVI.Capatti,A.(2001),‘Lapizza:Quandlecasse-croutedesmisérablespasseàtable’,Autrement,206,52–63.Ceccarini,R.(2011),PizzaandPizzaChefsinJapan:ACaseofCulinaryGlobalization,Leiden,TheNetherlandsandBoston,MA:Brill.Choate,M.(2008),EmigrantNation:TheMakingofItalyAbroad,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Clifford,J.(1997),Routes:TravelandTranslationintheLateTwentiethCentury,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
131120HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCrosby,A.W.(1972),TheColumbianExchange:BiologicalandCulturalConsequencesof1492,Westport,CT:Greenwood.Doi,T.(1992),‘AninsidelookatJapanesefoodservice’,CornellHotel&RestaurantAdministrationQuarterly,33(6),73–83.Flandrin,J.-L.(1996),‘Lestempsmodernes’,inHistoiredel’alimentation,reprintedinJ.-L.FlandrinandM.Montanari(eds)(1999),‘Introduction.Theearlymodernperiod’,inFood:ACulinaryHistoryfromAntiquitytothePresent,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress,pp.313–34.Fung,L.Y.C.(2007),‘Authenticityandprofessionalisminrestaurantkitchens’,inS.C.H.CheungandT.Chee-Beng(eds),FoodandfoodwaysinAsia:Resource,traditionandcooking,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.143–56.García,M.E.(2013),‘Thetasteofconquest:Colonialism,cosmopolitics,andthedarksideofPeru’sgastronomicboom’,TheJournalofLatinAmericanandCaribbeanAnthropology,18(3),505–524.Geyer,M.H.andJ.Paulmann(2001),‘Introduction:Themechanicsofinternationalism’,inM.H.GeyerandJ.Paulmann(eds),TheMechanicsofInternationalism:Culture,Society,andPoliticsfromthe1840stotheFirstWorldWar,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.1–25.Glissant,E.(1990),PoétiquedelaRelation(PoétiqueIII),trans.byB.Wing(1997),PoeticsofRelation,AnnArbor,MI,USA:UniversityofMichiganPress.Grazian,D.(2003),BlueChicago:TheSearchforAuthenticityinUrbanBluesClubs,Chicago,ILandLondon,UK:TheUniversityofChicagoPress.Greco,S.(2016),‘Thesemioticsofmigrants’food:Betweencodesandexperience’,Semiotica,211,59–80.Greimas,A.J.(1987),Del’imperfection,Paris,France:ÉditionsPierreFanlac.Greimas,A.J.andJ.Courtés(1979),Sémiotique:Dictionnaireraisonnédelathéoriedulangage,Paris,France:Hachette.Guigoni,A.(2009),Allascopertadell’AmericainSardegna:Vegetaliamericaninell’alimentazionesarda,Cagliari,Italy:AM&DEdizioni.Hannerz,U.(1987),‘Theworldincreolization’,Africa,57(4),546–59.Hannerz,U.(1992),CulturalComplexity:StudiesintheSocialOrganizationofMeaning,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Helstosky,C.(2008),Pizza:AGlobalHistory,London,UK:ReaktionBooks.Hobsbawm,E.andT.Ranger(1983),TheInventionofTradition,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.HuetzdeLemps,Alain(1996),‘Boissonscolonialsetessordusucre’,inHistoiredel’alimentation,reprintedinJ.-L.FlandrinandM.Montanari(eds)(1999),‘Colonialbeveragesandtheconsumptionofsugar’,inFood:ACulinaryHistoryfromAntiquitytothePresent,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress,pp.343–51.Inglis,D.andD.Gimlin(eds)(2009),TheGlobalizationofFood,Oxford,UK:BergPublishers.Inwood,S.M.,SharpJ.S.,MooreR.H.andD.H.Stinner(2009),‘Restaurants,chefsandlocalfoods:Insightsdrawnfromadiffusionofinnovationframework’,AgricultureandHumanValues,26(3),177–91.James,A.(1994),‘Cuisinerleslivres.Identitésglobalesoulocalesdanslesculturesalimentaires?’,reprintedinDavidHowes(ed.)(1996),‘Cookingthebooks:Globalandlocalidentitiesinfoodcul-tures’,inCross-culturalConsumption:GlobalMarkets,LocalRealities,London,UK,andNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.77–92.Jordan,J.A.(2007),‘Theheirloomtomatoasculturalobject:Investigatingtasteandspace’,SociologiaRuralis,47(1),20–41.LaCecla,F.(1997),Ilmalinteso,Roma–Bari,Italy:Laterza.LaCecla,F.(2007),PastaandPizza,Chicago,IL:PricklyParadigmPress.Latour,B.(1991),Nousn’avonsjamaisétémodernes,Paris,France:ÉditionsLaDécouverte.Leone,M.(2016),‘Critiqueoftheculinaryreason’,Semiotica,211,165–86.Locher,J.L.(2003),‘Cuisineandglobalization:Homogeneity,heterogeneityandbeyond’,inR.RobertsonandK.E.White(eds),Globalization:CriticalConceptsinSociology,Volume6,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.243–60.Lotman,J.M.(1984),‘Osemiosfere’,Trudypoznakovymsistemam,17,5–23,trans.byW.Clark(2005),‘Onthesemiosphere’,SignSystemStudies,33(1),205–229.FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
132Foodandglocalization121Lotman,J.M.(1993),Kul’turaivzry,trans.byW.Clark(2009),CultureandExplosion:Semiotics,CommunicationandCognition,Berlin,GermanyandNewYork,NY:MoutondeGruyter.Mander,J.andE.Goldsmith(eds)(1996),TheCaseAgainsttheGlobalEconomy:AndforaTurntowardtheLocal,SanFrancisco,CA:SierraClubBooks.Marrone,G.(2014),Gastromania,Milano,Italy:Bompiani.Marrone,G.(2016),Semioticadelgusto.Linguaggidellacucina,delcibo,dellatavola,Milano-Udine,Italy:Mimesis.Matejowsky,T.(2007),‘SPAMandFast-food“Glocalization”inthePhilippines’,Food,Culture&Society,10(1),23–41.McMichael,P.(2007),‘Globalizationandtheagrarianworld’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Oxford,UK:Blackwell,pp.216–38.Montanari,M.(2006),FoodisCulture,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Nützenadel,A.andF.Trentmann(2008),FoodandGlobalization:Consumption,MarketsandPoliticsintheModernWorld,Oxford,UK:Berg.PerúTravel(n.d.),Cocinanovoandina,accessed9September2020athttps://www.peru.travel/gastronomia/es/cocina-peruana/cocina-novoandina.html.Pilcher,J.(2008),‘TheglobalizationofMexicancuisine’,HistoryCompass,6(2),529–51.Poulain,J.-P.(2002),Sociologiesdel’alimentation.Lesmangeursetl’espacesocialalimentaire,Paris,France:PUF.Ritzer,G.(1993),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety:AnInvestigationintotheChangingCharacterofContemporarySocialLife,NewburyPark,CA:PineForgePress.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Ritzer,G.(2004),TheGlobalizationofNothing,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.Robertson,R.andK.E.White(2004),‘Laglocalizzazionerivisitataerielaborata’,inF.Sedda(ed.),Glocal.Sulpresenteavenire,Roma,Italy:Sossella,pp.13–41.Sedda,F.(ed.)(2004),Glocal.Sulpresenteavenire,Rome,Italy:Sossella.Sedda,F.(2012),Imperfettetraduzioni.Semiopoliticadelleculture,Rome,Italy:NuovaCultura.Sedda,F.(2014),‘Formsoftheworld:Rootes,histories,andhorizonsoftheglocal’,inR.Robertson(ed.),EuropeanGlocalazioninGlobalContext,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.35–61.Sedda,F.(2015),‘Semioticsofculture(s).Basicquestionsandconcepts’,inP.Trifonas(ed.),InternationalHandbookofSemiotics,Berlin,Germany:Springer,pp.675–96.Sedda,F.(2016),‘Glocalandfood:Onalimentarytranslation’,Semiotica,211,105–25.Sedda,F.(2021),‘Glocalcities.Spacesandsubjectivitiesincontemporaryworld’,HumanBeing:ImageandEssence.HumanitarianAspects,1(45),33–55.Stano,S.(2015),EatingtheOther.TranslationsoftheCulinaryCode,Newcastle-upon-Tyne,UK:CambridgeScholarsPublishing.Stano,S.(2016),‘Lostintranslation:Food,identityandotherness’,Semiotica,211,81–104.Stano,S.(2020),‘Glocalisedfoodscapes:Theself,theotherandthefrontier’,Glocalism,3,1–24.Stano,S.(2021),‘Ciudades,migracionesygastronomíasemergentes:delamateriaalimentariaalosprocesosdesignificación’,inSemióticadelaciudad:prácticas,imaginariosynarrativas,Lima,Peru:FondoEditorialdelaUniversidaddeLima,pp.29–53.Stano,S.andJ.-J.Boutaud(2015),‘L’alimentationentreidentitéetalterité:LeSoietl’Autresousdif-férentsrégimes’,Lexia,19–20,99–115.Tobin,J.(1992),‘AJapanese-FrenchrestaurantinHawaii’,inJ.Tobin(ed.),Re-madeinJapan:EverydayLifeandConsumerTasteinaChangingSociety,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,pp.159–75.Warde,A.(2000),‘Eatingglobally:Culturalflowsandthespreadofethnicrestaurants’,inD.Kalb,M.vanderLand,R.Staring,B.vanSteenbergenandN.Wilterdink(eds),TheEndsofGlobalization:BringingSocietyBackIn,Oxford,UK:Rowman&Littlefield,297–314.FranciscuSeddaandSimonaStano-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:20AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
1338.GlocalizationandtourismexperiencesJoelleSoulardandNoelB.SalazarINTRODUCTION:FROMGLOBALIZATIONTOGLOCALIZATION–GLOCALIZEDTOURISMEXPERIENCESThischapterisorganizedintofoursectionsthatexploredifferentfacetsofglocalization:(1)asaculturalapproach,(2)asatooltomitigatecrisesintourismexperiences,(3)asabusinessapproachtodevelopsuccessfultourismexperiences,and(4)asanimpetusfortransformativetourismexperiences.Theintroductionexplorestheoriginsofglocalizationandestablishestheconceptofglocal-izedtourismexperiences.Theterm‘globalization’isdefinedbyThoumrungrojeandTansuhaj(2007,p.43)as‘theprocessofincreasingsocialandculturalinter-connectedness,politicalinterdependence,andeconomic,financialandmarketintegrations’.Globalizationistheorizedasoccurringbecauseoffastercommunication(Huntington,2000),technologicaldiscoveries(Levitt,1993;Wellman,2001),andimprovedmodesoftransportation(Levitt,1993).Whileglobalizationiscommonlyacknowledgedasconnectedwithincreasedinterconnectedness,therearediffering,andsometimesdrasticallyopposing,interpretationsofitsprocessesandoutcomes(Douglas&Wind,1987;Kacowicz,1999;NederveenPieterse,2019).Thosedif-ferencesarerootedinthefactthatglobalizationisalternativelyperceivedasahomogeneous,antagonistic,orcontinuousprocess(NederveenPieterse,2019).Inthehomogeneousview,theconceptofglobalizationisdescribedasaone-wayculturalinfluencewheretheworld’sculturesarebecomingincreasinglywesternized,whichresultsinalossofculturaldiversity(Kennyetal.,2013;Khondker,2004).Globalizationisalsoconcep-tualizedasanantagonisticforcethatgeneratesculturalclashesandtensions(Bantimaroudis,2015).Criticsofthehomogeneousandantagonisticviewssuggestthatthoseviewsaretoonarrowbecausetheyreduceglobalizationtoadescriptionofitsnegativeaspects(Kacowicz,1999;Kearney,1995;Robertson,1990,1992).Inanearlyreflectiononglobalization,Robertson(1995)suggeststhatglobalizationisratheracontinuousprocessbecausetherearealwaysflowsofculturalinteractionsandadaptationsoccurringacrosstheglobe.Healsocommentsthatglobalizationistoofrequentlydescribedasanoutsideforcethatisdestroyinglocalcultures(Robertson,1995).Whiletheprocessofglobalizationcertainlygeneratestensionsandconflicts,italsoencour-agesindividualstotravel,experiencedifferentcultures,andbeengagedinmeaningfulinter-actionswithdestinationresidentsbyincreasingglobalawarenessoftourismsites(Edensor,2004;Ritzer,2003).Globalizationalsooffersdestinationresidentstheopportunitytoexpandtheirsocialnetworksandinteractwiththeworldwithoutbeinglimitedbygeographicalbound-aries(Giulianotti&Robertson,2007;Wellman,2001).Toaddressthesemorecomprehensiveviewsofworldexchanges,Robertsoncoinedtheterm‘glocalization’toreflectthattheworldisconstantlybeingremodelledviaatwo-wayinteractionbetweenglobalandlocalculturalexchanges.Globalizationalwaystakesplaceinsomelocality,whileatthesametimelocalities,asparticularplaces,areproducedindiscoursesofglobalization(Salazar,2005,2006).Thus,123JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
134124Handbookofcultureandglocalizationglocalizationsuggeststhatequalattentionshouldbegiventoglobalizationandlocalizationastheybothexistinacomplex,two-waytraffic.Itisafittingtermfortheintertwinedprocesseswherebynewboundariesarecreatedbetweenlocalandglobalorders,andbothgainstrength.Withtheabovedefinitioninmind,glocalizationappearstobeacentralmechanismintourism(Salazar,2005,2006).Inhisground-breakingwork,Robertson(1995)clearlyempha-sizesastronglinkbetweentourismandglocalization.Forhim,tourismrepresents‘themostclear-cutexample’ofglocalizationinour‘contemporaryworld’becausetourism‘involvestheconstructionofincreasinglydifferentiatedcustomers(and)theinventionofcustomers’traditions’(p.28).Whereas,initsoriginalmicromarketingmeaning,theglocalizationconceptreferredtotailoringglobalproductstoparticularlocalcircumstances,inthecaseoftourismserviceproviders,itinvolvestailoringlocal(ized)products(representationsandenactmentsofnaturalandculturalheritage)tochangingglobalaudiences(internationaltouristscomingfromvariouspartsoftheworldandwithdifferentpreferences).Thishappensbyrepackagingalreadyglocalpeoplesandplacesas‘local’.Tourismis,byitsverynature,glocalizedbecauseitinvolvestheconstantinteractionandadaptationofcultures(Czarniawska-Joerges,2002;Matusitz,2010).Whenreflectingontheglocalizationoftourism,Salazar(2012)mentionsthat‘tourismismuchmorethanamereeconomicactivity;itisacomplexanddynamicphe-nomenon,presentinvirtuallyeverycorneroftheworldandaffectingpeopleinmultipleways’(p.17).Thus,glocalizationoffersarelevantconceptuallenstopushthereflectionfurtherandtoinvestigatesocialandculturalexchangesoccurringintourism(Salazar,2016b,2018;Salazaretal.,2018).Thecurrentchapterdefinestheconceptofglocalizationwithinthefieldoftourismanddiscussesglocalizationstrategiesthatcanbeputinplacebytourismpractitioners.GLOCALIZATIONASACULTURALAPPROACHTOTOURISMEXPERIENCESWhenexploringglocalizationanditsrelationtotourism,itiscrucialtodifferentiatebetweenglocalizationasananalyticallensanditssetofresultingstrategies(Alharahsheh&Pius,2019).Asaconceptualframework,glocalizationisdefinedbyTalaatandFarag(2014,p.66)asfocusingon‘themixingofglobalandlocalinfluencestoproducenew,hybridculturalforms’.Thankstothisinterplaybetweenglobalandlocal,theanalyticallensofglocalizationoffersaparticularlypertinentbackgroundtoinvestigatetourismtopicsrelatedtocultureandsocialempowerment,suchasfosteringcross-culturalunderstanding,encouragingculturalrevitalization,designingmeaningfulencountersbetweentouristsanddestinationresidents,andpromotingtheimplementationofsociallyresponsiblebusinesspractices(Bom,2012;Presuttietal.,2015;Tresidder,2015).Whenconsideringtourismchallenges,theconceptofglocalizationisfrontandcentrebecauseitdirectlyrelatestohowindividualsdevelopasenseofplaceandbelonging(Salazar,2010,2016a,2016b).Forexample,Salazar(2016a)explainsthatUNESCO’sconceptual-izationof‘worldheritage’ishighlysubjective,becauseitreliesonlocal–to–globalpoliticalprocessesthatinfluencethesenseofplaceoflocalstakeholders.Onaninternationallevel,theWorldHeritageCommitteehasthepowertoselectwhichsitesareofoutstandinguniversalvalue.However,theWorldHeritageListisalsoimpactedbynationalpolitics,becausestategovernmentsaretheonesdecidingwhichsitesarepushedforwardandbenefitfromhavingapplicationsbeingsubmittedtoUNESCO(Salazar,2016a).InacasestudyconductedinJava,JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
135Glocalizationandtourismexperiences125Indonesia,Salazar(2016b)detailshowtensioneruptedsurroundingtheofficialnamegiventoatemple.UNESCOliststheIndonesiantemplecomplexunderthenamePrambananTempleCompoundsbuttheresidentsrecognizethissiteasCandiLoroJonggrang.Accordingtolocalbeliefs,thesiteisnamedLoroJonggrangbecauseofalegendwhereaJavaneseprincessistransformedintooneofthethousandstatuespresentinthetemple.Theactofhavingaglobalentity,suchasUNESCO,renamingalocalJavanesetempleisevocativeofcolonialismandillustratesculturalaswellaspoliticaltensionsthatarisewithinthelocal–to–globalnexus.Further,theanalyticallensofglocalizationisusefultoinvestigateculturaltensionsregardingwhichelementsofthelocalculturecanbeselectedassymbolstobeshowcasedtointernationaltourists.Asanexample,delaBarreandBrouder(2013)conductananalysisoffoodtourismadvertisementsintheYukonTerritoryofCanada,whichrevealsculturalappropriationandcommodification.Thestudiedadvertisementsdepictinternationaltouristsmeetingwithnativetribes,experiencingthewilderness,andeatinglocalfoods.Whiletheadvertisementshighlightthebenefitsofeatinglocalproducts,embarrassingfactsarewithheldfrominternationaltourists.AlthoughtheYukontribesarepresentedastourismassets,tribemembersremainexcludedfromdirectlybenefitingeconomicallyfromthepresenceoftourists.Indeed,Yukontribesareforbiddenfromsellinggametorestaurantsanddonothaveaccesstosufficienttrainingtobecometourismentrepreneurs.AnotherexampleisTeoandLi(2003),whointerviewedresidentsabouttheirperceptionsofthehistoricalHawParVillainSingapore,whichstandsasanemblemofglocalizedarchitecture.ThestructurewasbuiltfollowingtraditionalChinesearchitectureandcontainsagardenwithathousandstatuesthatillustrateChineselegends,mythsandfolktales.Inthiscasestudy,themunicipalityofSingaporehadannounceditsintentiontodemolishHawParVillaandreplaceitwithamall.Thisannounce-mentledtoabacklashfromresidentswhoperceivedthisbuildingtobeanintegralpartoftheirculture.TheirdiscontentpushedthemunicipalitytocancelthemallprojectandtransformHawParVillaintoamuseuminstead.Anotherfacetoftheanalyticallensofglocalizationanditsconnectiontotheconceptofsenseofplaceconcernstourismendeavourssuchascommunity-basedtourism(Salazar,2012;Trau,2012).Localintermediariesplayaninstrumentalroleinglocalizingtourism.Wheninvestigat-ingcommunity-basedculturaltourisminTanzania,Salazar(2012)explainsthattourguidesareonthefrontlineoftheglocalizationprocess,whichoffersopportunitiesforcross-culturalunderstanding,butalsofacestheriskofOthering.Duringthestudy,oneofthetourguidesfromtheMeruethnicgroupoffersabiasedviewofaMaasaivillagetoagroupofinternationaltouristswhopossesslittleknowledgeofthelocalculturalcontext.Thisincidentillustratesthelimitationofcommunity-basedtourismwhereinternationaltourists,whoarenotfamiliarwiththelocalculture(s),relyheavilyonthetourguide’sdiscoursetomakesenseofthelocalcontext.Similarly,Trau(2012)stressesthattheglocalizationprocessofcommunity-basedtourismprogrammesneedstobeanalysedwithnuance.Hisinvestigationofacommunity-ledtourguideprogrammeinVanuaturevealsthatcommunitymemberstakeonasubtleglocaliza-tionapproachthatbalancescapitalismprincipleswithcommunalvalues.InVanuatuculture,one’ssuccessisdeterminedbyone’sabilitytocontributetotheoverallwellbeingofthecommunity.Thisconceptualizationledtourguidestotakeonacommunity-centricapproachovermaximizingprofits:theyhiredasmanycommunitymembersaspossibletomakesuretheeconomicbenefitsderivedfromthetourstrickleddowntothecommunity.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
136126HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGLOCALIZATIONASATOOLTOMITIGATECRISESINTOURISMEXPERIENCESPioneeringstudiesonglocalizationandtourismsuggestthatimplementingglocalizationstrategiesisnotnecessarilyanaturalprocessfortourismbusinessesandthattheimportanceofculturaladaptionisoftenlearnedinthewakeofbusinessfailures(Kruczek,2011;Matusitz,2010,2011).AclassicexampleistheWaltDisneyCompany(Disney)thatlearnedthehardwaytheimportanceoftheglocalizationprocesswhenopeningitsfirstthemeparksinEuropeandAsia(Matusitz,2010,2011).TheearlyyearsoftheHongKongandParisDisneylandparksweremarkedbyvisitordissatisfactionandconsequentfinanciallossduetothecom-pany’sinabilitytounderstandandmatchthedemandsofthesenewmarkets(Kruczek,2011;Matusitz,2010,2011).Toavoidfurtherloss,Disneychangeditsapproachandimplementedglocalizationstrategiesinitsnewthemeparks(Choi,2012;Fung&Lee,2009).Thecurrentsectioninvestigatestherelevanceofglocalizationstrategiesfortourismpractitionersintermsofstafftraining,experiencedesign,marketing,publicrelations,aswellasnetworkingandcooperation.Pushingthereflectionfurther,Salazar(2005,p.631)addsthatglocalizationisparticularlylikelytooccurinareaswhere‘internationaltouristsmeetlocalmanufacturers,retailers,andservicesprovidedintheproductionandsaleofglocalizedgoodsandservices’.Theconceptofglocalizationisrelevanttotourismwhenconsideringthatthelastdecadehasseenadra-maticincreaseintheamountofinternationaltravelthathasmultipliedtheopportunitiesforcross-culturalinteractions(Glusac,2020).AccordingtotheWorldBank,thenumberofinternationalvisitorsworldwiderosefrom950millionin2008to1.4billionin2018(WorldBankGroup,2019).EvenconsideringthehaltcausedbyCOVID-19,glocalizationiscrucialindevelopingtourismexperiencesthatfacilitaterecovery,whileencouragingafocusonqualityandsociallyresponsibletourismpractices(Ali,2020).Anytypeofcrisisputstourismorganizationsunderpressuretodeliverinnovativetourismexperiencesthatwillallowthemtogainacompetitiveedge,whiletakingintoaccounttheculturaldifferencesofthetouristsandtheneedtopreservethewellbeingofdestinationresidents(Konu,2015;Ooi&Munar,2013).Glocalizationoffersaparticularlyinterestinganalyticalgroundfortourism:itfocusesoncombiningculturalelementstoofferacomprehensiveviewandinvestigateimportantandunprecedentedchallenges(Wassler&Kuteynikova,2020).Someofthepredominantchal-lengesthattourismfacesincludetheneedtoimplementcrisisrecoverystrategies,managethethreatofglobalwarming,anddealwithresurgencesofpoliticaltensionsandculturaldegradationsthatnecessitateachangeinthewaythattouristsconsumeservicesandinteractwithdestinationresidents(Higgins-Desbiolles,2020;Smith,2017).Tourismcanbenefitfromadeeperunderstandingofhowstrategiesofglocalizationcanbeappliedtoofferpossiblesolutionsforthesecurrentchallengesanddesigntravelexperiencesthatleadtocross-culturalunderstanding,tolerance,andmeaningfulencountersbetweentouristsanddestinationresi-dents(Soulardetal.,2019).Anothercharacteristicofglocalizationstrategiesisthattheycanbeusedtofacilitatethecreationofnetworksandcooperationatboththelocalandinternationallevels.Ritzer(2003)evensuggeststhataformofconsumptionemergesthankstoglocalizationinwhichlocalresidentscanbeempowered.Forinstance,manyinternationalcorporations,suchasUberandAirbnb,introducebuyerstosellersdirectlyviaonlineapps.Airbnb,inparticular,isblurringthelinebetweenlocalandglobalbymakingiteasierfordestinationresidentstohosttouristsJoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
137Glocalizationandtourismexperiences127(Ritzer&Jurgenson,2010).However,legislatorshaveraisedquestionsastowhetherthesenewglocalplatformsareablessingoracursefordestinations(Guttentag,2015).OpponentssuggestthatAirbnbisanunfaircompetitorbecausetherentersarenotsubjecttothesamestrictregulationsandtaxationashotels(Jefferson-Jones,2014).Incontrast,proponentsarguethatthisnewformofglocalizationofferslocalresidentstheopportunityforadditionalsourcesofincome(Sundararajan,2014).Theyalsopointoutthattouristsareabletoexperienceadesti-nationinanewwaybylivinglikelocals,interactingwithforeignneighbours,andstayinginlesstouristicareas(Guttentag,2015).Airbnbevenbuildsitsmarketingcampaignaroundtheslogan‘BelongAnywhere’(Sundararajan,2014,p.3).Glocalizedtourismservicesarebasedonthetourists’desiretofeelincludedandexperienceadestinationmoreauthentically.Thisdesireforauthenticityispartofageneralshiftwhereglocalizationstrategiesredefinethewaytravelexperiencesaredesignedatthedestination(Soulardetal.,2019).Therefore,theneedtore-conceptualizetourismencountersiswhereglocalizationstrategiescomeintoplay(Tresidder,2015).Thenextsectionfurtherinvestigatestheopportunitiesofferedbyglocalizationstrategieswithinthetourismfield.GLOCALIZATIONASABUSINESSAPPROACHTODEVELOPSUCCESSFULTOURISMEXPERIENCESTourismbusinessesthatarefamiliarwithglocalizationcandesignrelevantsolutionstoimple-mentculturalcodesthatallowthemtoswiftlyenteranewnichemarketandgainacompetitiveadvantage(Harvey&Griffith,2007).AlharahshehandPius(2019)defineglocalizationstrat-egiesasbusinessactivitiesthattourismpractitionersuse:...tofurtherunderstandforeignmarketsandhowtomakecertainminorormajoramendmentstotheoriginalofferingwithintheparentmarkettoadapttothelocaltrendsandpreferencesleadingtofurtherdevelopmentandenhancementofthebusinessvalueofferedforthecustomeraswellasthecreationofcompetitiveadvantagewiththeconsiderationoflocalandglobalplayerscompetinginaparticularmarket.(Alharahsheh&Pius,2019,p.84)Glocalizationstrategiescoveravastarrayofadaptationpracticesthatarerelatedtostafftraining,experiencedesign,marketing,andpublicrelations(Alharahsheh&Pius,2019).Theycanthusbeappliedbytourismpractitionerstofosterloyaltyintouristsbyprovidingculturallyauthentictravelexperiences,aswellastodeveloppositiverelationshipswithdestinationresi-dentsbymeshingelementsofthelocalcultureintotheirmanagerialstrategies.Glocalizationstrategiesrelatingtostafftrainingdealwiththestaff’sabilitiestoidentifyelementsofthelocalculturethatarelikelytobeofinteresttotourists(Presuttietal.,2015;Salazar,2006).Salazar(2006)offersanin-depthanalysisofthegamutofglocalizationstrat-egiesusedataTanzanianschooltotrainlocalguidestoidentifywhichelementsofthelocalculturearelikelytobeofinteresttotourists.ExamplesincludewatchingdocumentariesandanalysingmarketingmaterialsthataremadeforaWesternaudience,soastorecognizeimage-riesthatalignwithtouristexpectations.IdentifyingthelatterisalsoattheheartofthetrainingimplementedbythehotelmanagersofHotelPapadopoli–MGalleryinVenice(Presuttietal.,2015).Thisluxuryhotelsetsitselfapartfromcompetitorsthankstodedicatedtrainingsessionswhereemployeesareaskedtoidentifyuniquetravelexperiencesthatwouldimmersethetouristsintothelocalculture(Presuttietal.,2015).Oncetheseexperiencesareidentified,theyJoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
138128Handbookofcultureandglocalizationarecompiledintheformofamapthatdiscloseshiddenspots,off-the-beaten-pathitineraries,andotherauthenticexperiencesthattouristscanbookduringtheirstay.Inaccordancewiththeobjectiveofbringinglocalexperiencestointernationaltourists,thismapistranslatedintoseverallanguages.ButwhattrulysetsHotelPapadopoliapartisthatoneoftherecruitmentrequirementsistobepassionateaboutsharingthelocalculturewithtouristsviastorytelling,suchas‘anecdotes,[or]short,interesting,oramusingstoriesaboutarealpersonorevent’,toprovidememorabletravelexperiencesandhighlevelofsatisfaction(Presuttietal.,2015,p.142).Inadditiontotrainingstaff,glocalizationstrategiesinvolvingexperiencedesignarecentraltotourism.Glocalizedexperiencedesigncoversculturaladaptationsrelatedtoarchitecturalelementsandserviceencounters.InthecaseofHongKongDisneyland,theearlydaysoftheparkweremarkedbypoorarchitecturaldecisionsthatimpacteditssocialfunction(Matusitz,2010,2011).Forexample,onefrequentcomplaintfromtouristsconcernedthescarcityoftablesinthefoodcourt.DisneyhadfailedtorealizethatChinesetouriststendedtospendlongereatinglunchcomparedwiththeaverageAmericantourist(Matusitz,2011).Toeliminateconsiderablequeuesandimprovetouristsatisfaction,Disneyhiredfengshuiexpertswhonotonlyproposedincreasingseatingoptions,butalsoofferedextremelyvaluablerecommendationstoadaptthedesignofthehotelsandrestaurantssoastoappealtoChinesetourists(Groves,2011).Inadditiontoadjustingdesign,DisneyusedglocalizationstrategiestoimproveserviceencountersbyincludingChinesesymbols(Fung&Lee,2009;Matusitz,2011).Attheopeningofthepark,oneculturalobstaclewasthatChinesetouristswerenotfamiliarwithDisneycharacters(Matusitz,2011).Tocounterthisproblem,thefriendlymousewasgivenamakeoverthatincludedtraditionalChineseclothes.Learningfrompastfailures,DisneyappliedglocalizationstrategiesfromthestartwhenopeningShanghaiDisneylandanddevelopedshowsthatmixedelementsoftraditionalChinesetheatrewithBroadwayproduc-tions(MacDonald,2019).Onceaproducthasbeenadaptedtothelocalculture,Japutraetal.(2019)suggestthatthenextstepistocreateanemotionalconnectionbetweentouristsandtheglocalizedproducts.However,thisprocesscanbecomplexbecausetouristscanattributedifferentmeaningstothesamebrand(Covaetal.,2007).Inotherwords,tourismbusinessesmustjuggletheneedtoadapttolocalculturewiththeneedtomaintainthecoreidentityoftheirbrand(Kobayashi,2012).Anothersetofglocalizationstrategiesdealswithpublicrelations(Lehmberg&Hicks,2018;Tresidder,2015).Morespecifically,glocalizationstrategiescomeinhandyfortourismorganizationsandbusinessesthataretryingtorecoverfromacrisis(Lehmberg&Hicks,2018).Intheiranalysisoftheglocalizationofapologyinafirm’sdiscourse,LehmbergandHicks(2018)recommendtourismbusinessesbeproactiveandimplementaglocalizedframe-workthatisspecificallyadjustedforculturalspecificitiesandoutlineshowanapologyshouldbeshared(forexample,toneofvoiceanddegreeofcontrition)andbywhom(forexample,spokespersonand/ortop-levelmanager).Afteraservicefailure,destinationresidentsinterpretanapologyfromglobaltourismbusinessesdifferentlybasedontheirculturalexpectations.Forexample,LehmbergandHicks(2018)explainthatanapologyisconsidered‘anactofself-denigrationandsubmission’inJapaneseculture,whileinWesterncountriesanapologytendstobeassociatedwiththeconceptsofguiltandblame.Glocalizedpublicrelationsarealsocrucialfortourismbusinessestogetthewordoutabouttheuniquenessoftheirexperienceofferings,aswellastogainacompetitiveedge(Tresidder,2015).Inhiscasestudyabouttheworld-renownedNomainDenmark,Tresidder(2015)JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
139Glocalizationandtourismexperiences129explainshowtherestaurantdevelopedaninventivepublicrelationsstrategybasedontheglocalizedconceptof‘terroir’.Nomareceivesinternationalaccoladesforitsuniquecuisine,whichdemonstratesthattherestaurantmanagerscanpleaseaverydiverseinternationalaudi-ence,whileatthesametimedeeplyrootingtheircuisinewithinthegeographicalarea.Thisconceptofterroirstronglylinksthecuisinewiththelocalcharacteristicsofsoil,weather,andculturalcookingtraditions.Nomabasesitsglocalizedpublicrelationsstrategiesoncommu-nicatingaboutemployeeactivitiessuchasforagingforingredientsinthesurroundingDanishfieldsandforests;menuvariationsthatarebasedontheseasonalityoftheproduce;andrecipesthatareinspiredbyDanishculinarytraditions.Hence,glocalizedstrategiesforpublicrelationsarecrucialfortourismbusinessesandorganizationstosuccessfullycommunicatewithglobaltouristsaboutthelocalityofthegoodsandservices,whilemaintainingacongruentcommu-nicationmessage.Inassociationwithpublicrelations,tourismpractitionersoftenneedtoimplementglocalizedmarketingstrategiestopromotetheirtourismexperiencestobothdomesticandinternationaltourists(O’Connor&Shaik,2013).Forexample,airlines,hotels,andinternationalrestaurantsneedtoglocalizetheirwebsitessothatthepictures,texts,languageidioms,modesofpayment,andevencolourschemesmatchtheculturalpreferencesandtasteofthedomesticmarketinwhichthebrandisimplemented(O’Connor,2011;O’Connor&Shaik,2013;Vizcaíno,2011).BuildingontheworkofO’Connor(2011),SimiandMatusitz(2017)analysethesuccessfulglocalizationofSubwayrestaurantsinIndia.Oneofthecompany’sfirstmoveswastocreatenewsandwichrecipeswithoutbeeftorespectthetraditionsofHinduismandJainism.Thankstotheseadaptations,salesincreasedexponentiallyacrossIndia.Internationalcorporationsthatuseglocalizationstrategiesinthismannercanrespectlocaltraditions,whileatthesametimeexpandingtheirdomesticshareofthemarket.Hence,tourismbusinessescanimplementglocalizationstrategiesinordertoadapttothoseshiftingdemandsandgainsupportfromdestinationresidents(Soulardetal.,2019).However,suchadaptationstoshiftingtourismdemandsrequireanin-depthknowledgeoflocalcustomsandsymbols(Salazar,2005).Thenextsectionexploresthoseadaptationsbyinvestigatingtheconnectionsbetweentheconceptsofglocalizationandtransformativetourism.GLOCALIZATIONASANIMPETUSFORTRANSFORMATIVETOURISMEXPERIENCESThepotentialofglocalizationstrategiesforincreasedcross-culturalunderstandingalsoechoestheanalyticalframeworkoftransformativetourism(Sheldon,2020).Transformativetourismaimsatencouragingtouriststoself-reflect,developcross-culturalunderstanding,becomemoreenvironmentallyandsociallyresponsible,andadoptpositivechangesinthewaytheypurchasetravelexperiences(Pung,Gnoth,&DelChiappa2020).Theendgoaloftransform-ativetourismistoeducatetourists,encouragethemtovalueculturaldiversity,andbecomeagentsofchangeintheircommunity(Reisinger,2013,2015).Bothglocalizationmechanismsandtransformativetourismaimtotacklecontemporarychallengessuchaspandemics,climatechangeandsocialtensions.Indeed,glocalizationmechanismsandtransformativetourismsupporttouristsinbecomingmoreopentoothercultures,instilculturalinteractions,andencouragebothtouristsanddestinationresidentstoenjoythelocalfood,music,architecture,JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
140130Handbookofcultureandglocalizationart,andhandicraft(Hwangetal.,2018;Kjeldgaard&Askegaard,2006;Lee,2010;Soylu&Er,2016;Thompson&Arsel,2004).Withinthetourismfield,transformativetourismpushesthereflectiononglocalizationstrat-egiesfurtherinthesensethatbothtourismpractitionersandtouristsareencouragedtoreflectontheirinteractionswithdestinationresidents,rethinkthewaytheytravel,thinkabouthowtheirownupbringinghashadaninfluenceonthewaytheyseeothercultures,becomemoreopentootherworldviews,developaglobalawarenessbybeingimmersedintothelocalculturewhileatthedestination,andmaketravelchoicesthatarerespectfulofthelocalculture(s)andaresociallyempoweringfordestinationresidents(Coghlan&Weiler,2018;Decropetal.,2018;Presuttietal.,2015).Thus,bothtransformativetourismandglocalizationstrategiesrec-ognizethatlocalcultureshavethepowertoinfluenceculturalexchangesandthewaytouristsmakesenseoftheirtravelexperiences(Reisinger,2015).Moreprecisely,glocalizationofferstwoanalyticaltenetsthatarevaluablewheninvesti-gatingsolutionsfortourismchallengesandimpetusforchange:(1)tourismpractitionerscanfostertheloyaltyoftouristsbyprovidingculturallyauthentictourismexperiences,and(2)theycandeveloppositiverelationshipswithdestinationresidentsbymeshingelementsofthelocalcultureintotheirmanagerialstrategies(Soulard&McGehee,2017).Underthefirstglocalizationtenet,tourguidesactasculturalbrokerswhofacethechallengeofmaintainingasenseofculturalauthenticity,whileatthesametimeadaptingelementsoflocalculturetofitthedemandsoftourists(Salazar,2005).Tourguidesarecrucialglocalizationagentsbecausetheyactasdirectintermediariesbetweencultures,helptouriststounderstandculturaldiffer-ences,sharetheirhistorical/social/culturalknowledgewithtourists,adapttheirdiscoursetotheculturalspecificitiesoftourists,andoffertouristsopportunitiestoengageinmeaningfulinteractionswithdestinationresidentsthroughtheirmediatorskillsandsocialnetworks.Forexample,Salazar(2006)remindsusthatatourguide’slivelihoodoftendependsonthetourists’satisfactionwiththetour.Consequently,theguidesarelikelytoadaptthetourtofittouristdemands.Whatatourguidedecidestoomitorsharewiththegroupcaninflu-encehowtouristsperceivealocalculture(Wijeratneetal.,2014).InastudyconductedinIndonesia,Salazar(2005)observesthattourguidesonlytaketouriststoareasthatmatchtheirexpectationsofruralityandtraditionalism.Thesetourguidesevenrefrainfromwearingmoderntypesofclothingandusingtheirmobilephones.Buildingonthispioneeringanalysisofthetourguides’glocalizeddiscourse,Salazar–inaseriesofstudies–alsodescribeshowtourguidesavoidsensitiveissues,suchaspoverty,exclusion,andwar(Salazar,2006,2010,2012).Expandingonthesefindings,Wijeratneetal.(2014)conductastudyabouttourguidesinAustralia.Theyfindthattourguidesavoidtalkingabouthuntinginvasivespecieswhentouristsexpressstronganti-huntingviews.Hence,achallengefortourguidesistoaltertheirdiscoursetomatchwhattheybelievearethetourists’preconceivedideasandexpectationsaboutthedestination’sculture(Salazar,2016a).Althoughtherearechallengesposedbythedesiretomatchtouristexpectationsofthelocalculture,Mohamedetal.(2014)suggestthattheglocalizationofthediscoursebetweentourguidesandresidentscanalsoleadtopositiveoutcomes.Bybecomingentrepreneurs,Salazar(2005)findsthattourguidesearnhigherincomes,improvetheirlivingsituation,andevendevelopaninternationalnetworkoftourismprofessionals.Ontheothersideoftherelationship,attendingaguidedtourgeneratesapositivelearningexperiencefortouristswhentourguidesareperceivedtoshareatruthfuldiscourse(Mohamedetal.,2014).Similarly,PoudelandNyaupane(2013)revealthattouristswhotakepartinsustainableguidedtoursJoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
141Glocalizationandtourismexperiences131inNepalaremorelikelytobuylocalgoods,supportthecommunity’seconomy,andbehaverespectfullytowardthelocalculture.Thus,authenticglocalizedexperiencescanleadtouristsdownatransformativepathwheretheyareabletoself-reflect,bemoretolerant,anddevelopacross-culturalunderstanding(Pung&DelChiappa,2020).Therearealsoindicationsthatwhentourguidesunderstandthetransformativepowertheyhaveontourists,theycometovaluetheirglocalizedabilitytoconnecttouristswiththedestination’sculture,aswellasthesignificanceoftheirworktopreservebothlocalandotherecologicalresources(Soulardetal.,2019;Walker&Weiler,2017).InastudyconductedonatrainingprogrammefortourguidesinTonga,WalkerandWeiler(2017)suggestthattourguidesfeelempoweredwhentheyunderstandthattheyhavetheabilitytotransformthetour-ists’perspectivesontheimportanceofpreservingwhalesbothlocallyandelsewhere.Buildingonthiswork,Soulardetal.(2019)findthatperceivedtransformationhelpstourguidessupportandimplementglocalizationstrategies.Forexample,tourguidesfeelmotivatedwhentheyreceivelettersfrompastclientswhosharehowthetripchangedtheirperspectiveonthedestination’sculture.Suchencouragementmotivatestourguidestoimplementglocalizationstrategiestoconnectwiththecultureoftourists.Forexample,thetourguidescouldreadandwatchnewsfromthetourists’countryofresidencetounderstandhowthedestination’scultureisdepictedthereandadapttheirdiscoursetofacilitatetourists’understandingofthelocalculture.Thus,tourguidesbenefitfromseeingthetransformativeimpactsthattheirglocalizeddiscourseishavingontourists.Glocalizeddiscoursehasasignificantimpactontouristsandiscrucialinfacilitatingtrans-formativetourismmoments(Sheldon,2020).Byusingglocalizationstrategies,localtourguidescreateopportunitiesfortouriststoexperienceauthentic,meaningful,andprolongedinteractionswithdestinationresidents(Walker&Moscardo,2016).Wheninvestigatingtourguideskills,WalkerandMoscardo(2016)suggestthatglocalizationstrategiesarecrucialtofacilitatecross-culturalunderstandingintourists.Forexample,beingabletopersonallyrelatewiththetourists’culture,makethemfeelateaseandcomfortabletointeractwithdestinationresidents,andencouragethemtogooutoftheircomfortzoneandexperiencethelocalcultureontheirown(Walker&Moscardo,2016).Furthermore,tourguidesactasculturalmediatorsthankstotheirabilitytoadapttothepersonalandgroupdynamicintermsofhumour,learningpreferencesandexpectations,andgroupcohesion(Bosetal.,2015;Magee&Gilmore,2015;Walter,2016).Inparticular,humour–whichisnuancedandrequirescomplexglocalizedskillsfromtourguides–canbeusedtodiffusetensesituations,suchaswhendiscussingpoverty,inequality,andculturaltensions(Soulardetal.,2019).Intheirfieldexperiment,PabelandPearce(2016)findthatwhenhumourisusedappropriatelyintourguidediscourse,itcanleadtoincreasedfeelingsofcomfort,attention,aswellasadecreaseinanxietyandstressintourists.Groupcohesionequallyreliesonatourguide’sglocalizedabilitytofostermeaningfulconnectionsbetweentouriststhatcomefromdifferentsocialbackgroundsandcultures.Glocalizationstrategiesarealsocrucialtodeveloptransformativetravelmomentsthatencouragetouriststoself-reflectandofferprolongedandmeaningfulinteractionswithdestina-tionresidents(Coghlan&Gooch,2011;Knollenbergetal.,2014).Whenobservingthetrans-formativepowerofvolunteertourism,CoghlanandGooch(2011)mentionthatglocalizedactivitiesarecrucialtofosterself-reflectionandengagementintourists.Forexample,touristsanddestinationresidentscantakepartinagardeningprojecttogetherwherebothgroupshavetheopportunitytolearnfromeachotherandsharetheirownhorticulturalknowledgeJoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
142132Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandexperience.Further,Knollenbergetal.(2014)suggestthattransformativetouristsexpecttouroperatorstopossesssoundglocalizationstrategiesthathelpthemmeaningfullyconnectwithdestinationresidents.Intheirstudy,interviewedtransformativetouristsmentionthattheyexpecttohaveaccesstoglocalizedactivities,suchasattendingatrainingsessionabouttheculturaldosanddon’tsatthedestination.Thereareindicationsthattransformativetouristsarethenapplyingtheglocalizedskillslearnedduringtheirtriptotheirownworkenvironment,bybecomingmorecognizantofothercultures,fosteringaculturallyinclusiveworkenvironment,andadaptingtheircommunicationmessagesacrossdifferentcultures(Coghlan&Weiler,2018).Thetransformativetourists’eagernesstolearnglocalizedskillsistranslatedintothetransformativetourismpractitioners’desiretodevelopsociallyresponsiblepartnershipswithlocalbusinessesatthedestinationthatofferopportunitiesformeaningfulinteractions(Soulard&McGehee,2017).Thedesireforsociallyresponsiblepartnershipsisanchoredinthesecondtenetofglocal-ization,namelyfortourismpractitionerstodeveloppositiverelationshipswithdestinationresidentsbymeshingelementsofthelocalcultureintothetourismpractitioners’managerialstrategies(Sheldon,2020).Gainingsupportfromdestinationresidentsisimportantfortrans-formativetourismorganizations,becausetheirabilitytoofferauthentictravelexperiencesreliesontheirsuccessfulpartnershipswithlocalresidents(Pung,Yung,Khoo-Lattimore,&DelChiappa,2020).Forexample,Decropetal.(2018)suggestthatglocalizationisattheheartofthe‘couchsurfing’experience,wherebydestinationresidentshosttouristsontheircouch.Thewholesuccessofcouchsurfingreliesonthehostactingasaglocalizedagentwhohelpsinternationaltouristsconnecttothelocalculturebysharingadviceaboutplacestosee,cookinglocalmeals,andeventakingtouristsonimpromptudiscoverytoursaroundthecity.Thesestudiessuggestthatthereareopportunitiesfortourismpractitionerstouseglocalizationstrategiestodeveloptransformativeprogrammesthatdirectlybenefitdestinationresidents.Whentakingonacommunitydevelopmentapproach,glocalizationstrategiescanempowerdestinationresidentswithanewformofentrepreneurshipthatallowsthemtodevelopanemotionalconnectionwithtouriststhroughtransformativetourismexperiences(Cawleyetal.,2002).DuringtheirstudyonruralIrishtourism,Cawleyetal.(2002)interviewedentre-preneurstolearnaboutthesuccessesandfailuresofglocalizedprogrammes.OnesuccessfulventureistheHiddenIrelandprogrammethathelpsownersofhistoricalcastlestoadoptglo-calizationstrategiessuchaspartneringwithlocalfoodproducerstopromotelocalcuisinetotourists,whileatthesametimesupportinglocalfarmersthroughsellingfarmproducts.Theseownersopentheirhomestohostdinnersandinteractwithtouristsfromaroundtheglobe.WithHiddenIreland,touristsbenefitfromglocalizedtourismbecausetheygettoexperiencetheculturefirst-hand,livelikelocals,andinteractwithresidentsinlessformalsettings.Additionally,KjeldgaardandAskegaard(2006)findthatglocalizationmechanismscanhaveapositiveimpactoncross-communityprojectsbecausetheydecreasetheimportanceofnationalbordersinfavourofthedevelopmentoflocalregions.Ramutsindela(2004)proposesthattheconceptofcross-borderparks–wherebyseveralcountriescometogethertopreserveauniqueareaofbiodiversitybyusingaglocalizedsetofregulations–embodiesthisdescrip-tionofglocalization.Forexample,LimpopoParkwasfoundedbythreecountries:Zimbabwe,Mozambique,andSouthAfrica(Ramutsindela,2004).Byworkinginthistransnationalpark,rangerscanbettermanagethewildlifebecauseaglocalizedsetofregulationsappliesacrossbordersandfacilitatesthefreemovementofanimals.Oneexampleconcernsregulationsrelatedtomovinganimalsbetweenthethreeparticipatingcountries.PriortothecreationofJoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
143Glocalizationandtourismexperiences133LimpopoPark,theSouthAfricansectionhadtoomanyelephantsconcentratedinonearea,whileZimbabweandMozambiquehadsufficientlandtowelcomethem,buteffortstoremedythesituationwereblockedbyalackofcross-borderagreements.Aftertheparkwascreated,rangerscouldavoidredtape,easilycrosstheborder,andmovetheanimalsbetweenanyofthethreecountries.Thus,therangerscouldspreadtheelephantpopulationacrossawiderareaandpreservethefragileecologicalequilibriumbetweenthespeciesinthepark.Therefore,theendgoalsoftransformativetourismcanbefacilitatedthroughtheuseofthesetwoglocalizationtenets,andfosterpositivechangesinthewaytravelexperiencesaredesignedandimplementedatdestinations(Salazar,2018;Soulardetal.,2019).CONCLUSIONThischapterrevealsthemultitudeofconnectionsbetweentourismandglocalizationconceptsandprocesses.Findingsfromthetourismfieldonglocalizationstrategiescanbeexpandedtootherresearchareas.Forexample,studiesconductedatinternationalhotelsandresortsshowthatglobalfirmscanbenefitfromtakingaglocalizedapproachbyconsideringthesocialandculturalelementsfromthecountrieswheretheywouldliketoextendtheirofferings.Thechaptersuggeststhatglobalfirmscangainsupportfromlocalresidentsbybeingculturallyinclusive,adjustingtheirinternalpoliciesandtraining,offeringleadershipprogrammestolocalemployees,developinginitiativesandcommunitypartnershipssothatcommunityresi-dentsfinanciallybenefitfromthepresenceofglobalfirmsintheircommunity,andfosteringcross-culturalunderstandingamongtheiremployeesandcustomers.Glocalizationstrategiesarealsocentralingainingcustomerloyalty,andthelessonslearnedbytourismbusinessescaneasilybetransposedtootherfields.Glocalizationofferskeyper-spectivesforbusinessestoculturallyadapttheirtourismexperienceswhenenteringanewmarket.Glocalizationprovidesaframeworkforbusinessestoestablishculturalconnectionsbetweentheirglobalbrandandtheculture(s)ofthetargetmarket.Glocalizationisalsovitaltomanagecustomerexpectationsandcreatehighlypersonalizedexperiences.Intermsofmar-keting,glocalizationcanhelpbusinessestodevelopcongruentstorytellinganduselocalizeddiscoursethatbothappealtocustomers.Whiletheglocalizationconceptprovidesuswithanattention-grabbinganalyticalperspec-tivetostudytheintertwiningofglobalizationandlocalization(andthein-betweenlevelsofregionalizationandnationalization),itdoesnotprovideuswithadecisivetheoryexplainingthehumanmechanicsbehindtheseprocesses.However,glocalizationdoesofferausefulana-lyticallenstoreflectonthecomplexityofculturalexchangesandtheimpact,bothpositiveandnegative,thattourismandotherbusinessescanhaveontheiremployees,surroundingcommu-nity,naturalenvironment,andcustomers.Thankstoitsfocusonthelocal-to-globalnexus,theconceptofglocalizationisattheheartofongoingchallengesregardingsocialempowerment,cross-culturalunderstanding,fairtrade,andclimatechange.REFERENCESAlharahsheh,H.H.andA.Pius(2019),‘CreatingBusinessValueandCompetitiveAdvantageThroughGlocalization’,inV.Nadda,S.Bilan,M.AzaandD.Mulindwa(eds),NeoliberalismintheTourismandHospitalitySector,Hershey,PA:IGIGlobal,pp.83–8.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
144134HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAli,A.(2020),‘Covid-19,Globalization&Glocalization’,ColomboTelegraph,16March,accessed5October2020athttps://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/covid-19-globalization-glocalization/Bantimaroudis,P.(2015),‘AMediatedAssessmentofSamuelHuntington’s“ClashofCivilizations”:TheCulturalFramingHypothesis’,InternationalJournalofMedia&CulturalPolitics,11,73–85.Bom,A.K.(2012),‘WhenHeritageTourismgoesGlocal–TheLittleMermaidinShanghai’,JournalofHeritageTourism,7,341–57.Bos,L.,McCabe,S.andS.Johnson(2015),‘LearningNevergoesonHoliday:AnExplorationofSocialTourismasaContextforExperientialLearning’,CurrentIssuesinTourism,18,859–75.Cawley,M.,Gaffey,S.andD.A.Gillmor(2002),‘LocalizationandGlobalReachinRuralTourism:IrishEvidence’,TouristStudies,2,63–86.Choi,K.(2012),‘DisneyficationandLocalisation:TheCulturalGlobalisationProcessofHongKongDisneyland’,UrbanStudies,49,383–97.Coghlan,A.andM.Gooch(2011),‘ApplyingaTransformativeLearningFrameworktoVolunteerTourism’,JournalofSustainableTourism,19,713–28.Coghlan,A.andB.Weiler(2018),‘ExaminingTransformativeProcessesinVolunteerTourism’,CurrentIssuesinTourism,21,567–82.Cova,B.,Pace,S.andD.J.Park(2007),‘GlobalBrandCommunitiesacrossBorders:TheWarhammerCase’,InternationalMarketingReview,24(3),313–29.Czarniawska-Joerges,B.(2002),ATaleofThreeCities:OrtheGlocalizationofCityManagement,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.delaBarre,S.andP.Brouder(2013),‘ConsumingStories:PlacingfoodintheArcticTourismExperience’,JournalofHeritageTourism,8(2–3),213–23.Decrop,A.,DelChiappa,G.,Mallargé,J.andP.Zidda(2018),‘“Couchsurfinghasmademeabetterpersonandtheworldabetterplace”:TheTransformativePowerofCollaborativeTourismExperiences’,JournalofTravel&TourismMarketing,35(1),1–16.Douglas,S.P.andY.Wind(1987),‘TheMythofGlobalization’,ColumbiaJournalofWorldBusiness,22,19–29.Edensor,T.(2004),‘ReconstitutingtheTajMahal:TouristFlowsandGlocalization’,inM.ShellerandJ.Urry(eds),TourismMobilities,London,UK:Routledge,pp.115–28Fung,A.andM.Lee(2009),‘LocalizingaGlobalAmusementPark:HongKongDisneyland’,Continuum,23(2),197–208.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2007),‘FormsofGlocalization:GlobalizationandtheMigrationStrategiesofScottishFootballFansinNorthAmerica’,Sociology,41,133–152.Glusac,E.(2020),‘HowWillCovid-19AffectFutureTravelBehavior?ATravelCrisisExpertExplains’,TheNewYorkTimes,15April,accessed5July2020athttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/15/travel/q-and-a-coronavirus-travel.html.Groves,D.(2011),‘HongKongDisneyland’,inK.MerlockJacksonandM.I.West(eds),DisneylandandCulture:EssaysontheParksandTheirInfluence,Jefferson,NC:McFarland&CompanyInc.,pp.138–48.Guttentag,D.(2015),‘Airbnb:DisruptiveInnovationandtheRiseofanInformalTourismAccommodationSector’,CurrentIssuesinTourism,18,1192–217.Harvey,M.G.andD.A.Griffith(2007),‘TheRoleofGlobalization,TimeAcceleration,andVirtualGlobalTeamsinFosteringSuccessfulGlobalProductLaunches’,JournalofProductInnovationManagement,24(5),486–501.Higgins-Desbiolles,F.(2020),‘SocialisingTourismforSocialandEcologicalJusticeafterCOVID-19’,TourismGeographies,22(3)1–14.Huntington,S.P.(2000),‘TheClashofCivilizations?’,inC.LockhartandL.Crothers(eds),CultureandPolitics,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.99–118.Hwang,J.,Kim,S.S.,Choe,J.Y.J.andC.-H.Chung(2018),‘ExplorationoftheSuccessfulGlocalizationofEthnicFood:ACaseofKoreanFood’,InternationalJournalofContemporaryHospitalityManagement,30(12),3656–76.Japutra,A.,Nguyen,B.andT.Melewar(2019),‘AFrameworkofBrandStrategyandthe“Glocalization”Approach:TheCaseofIndonesia’,inM.Khosrow-PourandtheInformationResourcesManagementAssociation(eds),BrandCultureandIdentity:Concepts,Methodologies,Tools,andApplications,Hershey:PA,IGIglobal,pp.340–64.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
145Glocalizationandtourismexperiences135Jefferson-Jones,J.(2014),‘AirbnbandtheHousingSegmentoftheModernSharingEconomy:AreShort-termRentalRestrictionsanUnconstitutionalTaking?’,HastingsConstitutionalLawQuarterly,42,557.Kacowicz,A.M.(1999),‘Regionalization,Globalization,andNationalism:Convergent,Divergent,orOverlapping?’Alternatives,24,527–56.Kearney,M.(1995),‘TheLocalandtheGlobal:TheAnthropologyofGlobalizationandTransnationalism’,AnnualReviewofAnthropology,24,547–65.Kenny,S.,Fanany,I.andS.Rahayu(2013),‘CommunityDevelopmentinIndonesia:WesternizationorDoingittheirWay?’,CommunityDevelopmentJournal,48,280–97.Khondker,H.H.(2004),‘GlocalizationasGlobalization:EvolutionofaSociologicalConcept’,Bangladeshe-JournalofSociology,1,1–9.Kjeldgaard,D.andS.Askegaard(2006),‘TheGlocalizationofYouthCulture:TheGlobalYouthSegmentasStructuresofCommonDifference’,JournalofConsumerResearch,33,231–47.Knollenberg,W.,Mcgehee,N.G.,Boley,B.B.andD.Clemmons(2014),‘Motivation-basedTransformativeLearningandPotentialVolunteerTourists:FacilitatingmoreSustainableOutcomes’,JournalofSustainableTourism,22,922–41.Kobayashi,K.(2012),‘CorporateNationalismandGlocalizationofNikeAdvertisingin“Asia”:ProductionandRepresentationPracticesofCulturalIntermediaries’,SociologyofSportJournal,29(1),42–61.Konu,H.(2015),‘DevelopingaForest-basedWellbeingTourismProductTogetherwithCustomers–AnEthnographicApproach’,TourismManagement,49,1–16.Kruczek,Z.(2011),‘AmusementParksasFlagshipTouristAttractions.DevelopmentandGlobalization’,EconomicReviewofTourism,FacultyofEconomics,MatejBelaUniversity,3/2011.Lee,J.S.(2010),‘GlocalizingKeepin’ItReal:SouthKoreanHip-HopPlayas’,inM.Terkourafi(ed.),TheLanguagesofGlobalHipHop,NewYork,NY:ContinuumInternationalPublishingGroup,pp.139–62.Lehmberg,D.andJ.Hicks(2018),‘A“Glocalization”ApproachtotheInternationalizingofCrisisCommunication’,BusinessHorizons,61,357–66.Levitt,T.(1993),‘TheGlobalizationofMarkets’,inR.Z.AliberandR.W.Click(eds),ReadingsinInternationalBusiness:ADecisionApproach,Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress,pp.249–65.MacDonald,L.(2019),‘RisingintheEast:DisneyRehearsesChineseConsumersataGlocalizedShanghaiDisneyland’,inJ.A.Kokai,andT.Robson(eds),PerformanceandtheDisneyThemeParkExperience,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.127–48.Magee,R.andA.Gilmore(2015),‘HeritageSiteManagement:FromDarkTourismtoTransformativeServiceExperience?’,TheServiceIndustriesJournal,35,898–917.Matusitz,J.(2010),‘DisneylandParis:aCaseAnalysisDemonstratinghowGlocalizationWorks’,JournalofStrategicMarketing,18,223–37.Matusitz,J.(2011),‘Disney’sSuccessfulAdaptationinHongKong:AGlocalizationPerspective’,AsiaPacificJournalofManagement,28,667–81.Mohamed,M.N.E.-Z.H.,Noor,S.M.,Jaafar,M.andR.Mohamed(2014),‘CreatingMindfulTouristsatHeritageSitesthroughTourGuide’sInterpretation:ACaseofGeorgetownWorldHeritageSites’,GSTFJournalonMedia&Communications(JMC),1(2).NederveenPieterse,J.(2019),GlobalizationandCulture:GlobalMélange,London,UK:Rowman&Littlefield.O’Connor,P.(2011),‘AssessingtheGlobalE-readinessofHotelChainWebsites’,InformationTechnology&Tourism,13,365–76.O’Connor,P.andZ.A.Shaik,(2013),‘MeasuringtheGlobalReadinessofAirlineWebsites:AretheySpeakingtheWorld’sLanguages?’,inZ.XiangandI.Tussyadiah(eds),InformationandCommunicationTechnologiesinTourism2014,Cham,Switzerland:Springer,pp.609–20.Ooi,C.-S.andA.M.Munar(2013),‘DigitalSocialConstructionofaTouristSite:GroundZero’,A.M.Munar,S.GyimóthyandL.Cai(eds),TourismSocialMedia:TransformationsinIdentity,CommunityandCulture,Bingley,UK:EmeraldGroupPublishingLimited,pp.159–75.Pabel,A.andP.L.Pearce(2016),‘Tourists’ResponsestoHumour’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,57,190–205.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
146136HandbookofcultureandglocalizationPoudel,S.andG.P.Nyaupane(2013),‘TheRoleofInterpretativeTourGuidinginSustainableDestinationManagement:AComparisonbetweenGuidedandNonguidedTourists’,JournalofTravelResearch,52,659–72.Presutti,M.,Holt,S.andA.A.Camillo(2015),‘TheGlocalizationofInternationalFirms:AnEmpiricalInvestigationintheHospitalitySector’,inA.Camillo(ed.),GlobalEnterpriseManagement,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.135–51.Pung,J.M.andG.DelChiappa(2020),‘AnExploratoryandQualitativeStudyontheMeaningofTransformativeTourismanditsFacilitatorsandInhibitors’,EuropeanJournalofTourismResearch,24,1–21.Pung,J.M.,Gnoth,J.andG.DelChiappa(2020),‘TouristTransformation:TowardsaConceptualModel’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,81,102885.Pung,J.M.,Yung,R.,Khoo-Lattimore,C.andG.DelChiappa(2020),‘TransformativeTravelExperiencesandGender:ADoubleDuoethnographyApproach’,CurrentIssuesinTourism,23(5),538–58.Ramutsindela,M.(2004),‘GlocalisationandNatureConservationStrategiesin21st‐CenturySouthernAfrica’,Tijdschriftvooreconomischeensocialegeografie,95,61–72.Reisinger,Y.(ed.)(2013),TransformationalTourism:TouristPerspectives,Oxfordshire,UKandBoston,MA:CABI.Reisinger,Y.(ed.)(2015),TransformationalTourism:HostPerspectives,Oxfordshire,UKandBoston,MA:CABI.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘RethinkingGlobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandSomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21,193–209.Ritzer,G.andN.Jurgenson(2010),‘Production,Consumption,Prosumption:TheNatureofCapitalismintheAgeoftheDigital“Prosumer”’,JournalofConsumerCulture,10,13–36.Robertson,R.(1990),‘MappingtheGlobalCondition:GlobalizationastheCentralConcept’,Theory,Culture&Society,7,15–30.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,Volume16,London,UK:SagePublications.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-SpaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.25–44.Salazar,N.B.(2005),‘TourismandGlocalization“Local”TourGuiding’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,32,628–46.Salazar,N.B.(2006),‘TouristifyingTanzania:LocalGuides,GlobalDiscourse’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,33,833–52.Salazar,N.B.(2010),‘StudyingLocal-to-GlobalTourismDynamicsthroughGlocalEthnography’,inC.M.Hall(ed.),FieldworkinTourism:Methods,IssuesandReflections,London,UK:Routledge,pp.177–87.Salazar,N.B.(2012),‘Community-basedCulturalTourism:Issues,ThreatsandOpportunities’,JournalofSustainableTourism,20,9–22.Salazar,N.B.(2016a),‘TheLocal-to-GlobalDynamicsofWorldHeritageInterpretation’,inM.Gravari-Barbas,L.BourdeauandM.Robinson(eds),WorldHeritage,TourismandIdentity:InscriptionandCo-production,Ashgate,UK:Routledge,pp.121–30.Salazar,N.B.(2016b),‘OneList,aWorldofDifference?’,inC.BrumannandD.Berliner(eds),WorldHeritageontheGround:EthnographicPerspectives,NewYork,NYandOxford,UK:BerghahnBooks,pp.147–70.Salazar,N.B.(2018),MomentousMobilities:AnthropologicalMusingsontheMeaningsofTravel,Volume4,NewYork,NYandOxford,UK:BerghahnBooks.Salazar,N.B.,Barrett,J.H.,Robertson,R.,Roudometof,V.andS.Sherratt(2018),‘InterdisciplinaryPerspectivesonGlocalization’,ArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge,33(1),11–32.Sheldon,P.J.(2020),‘DesigningTourismExperiencesforInnerTransformation’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,83,102935.Simi,D.andJ.Matusitz(2017),‘GlocalizationofSubwayinIndia:HowaUSGianthasAdaptedintheAsianSubcontinent’,JournalofAsianandAfricanStudies,52,573–85.Smith,J.(2017),TransformingTravel:RealisingthePotentialofSustainableTourism,Oxfordshire,UKandBoston,MA:CABI.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
147Glocalizationandtourismexperiences137Soulard,J.andN.McGehee(2017),‘GlocalizationManagementStrategiesofNGOsEngagedinTransformativeTourism’,paperpresentedatthe2017TTRAAnnualInternationalConferenceTTRA,QuebecCity,Quebec,Canada.Soulard,J.,McGeheeN.andM.Stern(2019),‘TransformativeTourismOrganizationsandGlocalization’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,76,91–104.Soylu,Y.andÖ.Er(2016),‘OntheHornsofGlocalization:ACaseStudyintheNeedlecraftIndustry–CoatsTurkey’,CraftResearch,7,263–74.Sundararajan,A.(2014),‘WhatAirbnbGetsaboutCulturethatUberDoesn’t’,HarvardBusinessReview,27November,accessed5October2020athttps://hbr.org/2014/11/what-airbnb-gets-about-culture-that-uber-doesnt.Talaat,N.andS.B.Farag(2014),‘TheImpactofTourismontheCulturalIdentityattheAgeofGlobalizationEgyptianPerspective’,JournalofAssociationofArabUniversitiesforTourismandHospitality,11,65–75.Teo,P.andL.H.Li(2003),‘GlobalandLocalInteractionsinTourism’,AnnalsofTourismResearch,30(2),287–306.Thompson,C.J.andZ.Arsel(2004),‘TheStarbucksBrandscapeandConsumers’(Anticorporate)ExperiencesofGlocalization’,JournalofConsumerResearch,31,631–42.Thoumrungroje,A.andP.Tansuhaj(2007),‘GlobalizationEffectsandFirmPerformance’,JournalofInternationalBusinessResearch,6,43–58.Trau,A.M.(2012),‘BeyondPro-PoorTourism:(Re)InterpretingTourism-BasedApproachestoPovertyAlleviationinVanuatu’,TourismPlanning&Development,9,149–64.Tresidder,R.(2015),‘EatingAnts:UnderstandingtheTerroirRestaurantasaFormofDestinationTourism’,JournalofTourismandCulturalChange,13,344–60.Vizcaíno,M.J.G.(2011),‘Code-breaking/Code-making:ANewLanguageApproachinAdvertising’,JournalofPragmatics,43,2095–109.Walker,K.andG.Moscardo,(2016),‘MovingBeyondSenseofPlacetoCareofPlace:TheRoleofIndigenousValuesandInterpretationinPromotingTransformativeChangeinTourists’PlaceImagesandPersonalValues’,JournalofSustainableTourism,24,1243–61.Walker,K.andB.Weiler(2017),‘ANewModelforGuideTrainingandTransformativeOutcomes:ACaseStudyinSustainableMarine-wildlifeEcotourism’,JournalofEcotourism,16,269–90.Walter,P.G.(2016),‘CatalystsforTransformativeLearninginCommunity-basedEcotourism’,CurrentIssuesinTourism,19,1356–71.Wassler,P.andM.Kuteynikova(2020),‘LivingTravelVulnerability:APhenomenologicalStudy’,TourismManagement,76,103967.Wellman,B.(2001),‘LittleBoxes,Glocalization,andNetworkedIndividualism’,paperpresentedatthe2ndKyotoWorkshoponDigitalCities,Berlin,Germany:Springer,pp.10–25.Wijeratne,A.J.,vanDijk,P.A.,Kirk-BrownA.andL.Frost(2014),‘RulesofEngagement:TheRoleofEmotionalDisplayRulesinDeliveringConservationInterpretationinaZoo-basedTourismContext’,TourismManagement,42,149–56.WorldBankGroup(2019),‘InternationalTourism,NumberofArrivals’,accessed5July2020athttps://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.ARVL.JoelleSoulardandNoelB.Salazar-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:22AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
1489.GlocalizationandthereligiousfieldUgoDessìINTRODUCTIONThedynamicsofglocalizationaspartoftheglobalizationofculturealsohaveimportantimpli-cationsinthefieldofreligion.ItisnotincidentalthatreligionplayedasignificantroleeveninRobertson’searliestattemptstoarticulatetheveryideaofglocalization.Forexample,inhisarticle‘GlobalizationandSocietalModernization:ANoteonJapanandJapaneseReligion’,firstpublishedin1987andlaterrepublishedinslightlyrevisedformasachapterofhisseminalmonographGlobalization,RobertsonexploreshowJapan’smodalityofglobalinvolvementthroughtheselectiveadaptationofexternalideasisconditionedbyspecificfeaturesrelatedtothereligioussphere(inclinationtowardsyncretism,institutionalizedpolytheism,andempha-sisonpurification).1Withinthecontextofthestudyofreligion,thepracticalandconceptualissueoftheproductionoflocalitieshasbeeninvestigatedinthelastfewdecadesfromvariousperspectives,includingnotonlyglocalizationbutalsohybridization,creolizationandbrico-lage.Whileacknowledgingthesignificantoverlappingoftheseconcepts,themainfocusofthischapterwillbeonthoseapproachesthathaveexplicitlyaddressedtheglocalizationofreligion.Inaddition,itwillconsiderasrelevanttothedebatethosecontributionsthathaveself-reflexivelyandmeaningfullyexploredthehybridization(orcreolization/bricolage)ofreligionasaprocessnecessarilyrequiringtheinterplayofboth‘global’and‘local’factors.Basedonthisflexibleapproach,thediscussioninthischapterwillencompassarelativelywiderangeofperspectivesthathavefocusedonthecreativeadoptionanduseofglobalresourcesbyreligiousactorsatthelocallevel.Aswellasgivinganoverviewofthedebate(adebatethathasmostlybeenintheEnglishlanguage),inthefollowingsectionsIwilldiscusssomeofthemajorproblemsinthestudyofreligionandglocalization,andsuggestpossiblenewdirectionsforresearchinthisfield.MAPPINGTHEFIELD:GLOCALIZATIONINTHESTUDYOFRELIGIONSOneofthefirstmentionsofglocalizationinthefieldofreligionwasmadebyDavidLyoninthelate1990s.TakinghiscuefromtheTorontoBlessing,aphenomenonofreligiousrevivalwhichoriginatedin1994atTorontoInternationalAirport,heclaimsthatglocalization‘flows’and‘sacriscapes’providethebasicconceptualframeworkforthediscussionofreligionwithinglobalization.LyonshowshisproximitytoRobertson’sscholarship(whichheexplicitlymen-tions)byemphasizingthatflowsandsacriscapesarefilteredbyspecificlocalconditionsandculturalpatterns,thusmakingpossibleasortof‘relocalization’ofglobalization(Lyon,1998;comparewithLyon,2000).Ataroundthesametime,PeterBeyeraddressedglocalizationagainstthebackdropofhispioneeringtheoryofreligionandglobalization.Consistentwithhissystemicapproach,Beyerhasfocusedontheworldwidelocalappropriationoffunctional138UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
149Glocalizationandthereligiousfield139differentiationandthewayinwhichthishaspromptedthereconstructionoflocalreligioustraditionsaftertheWestern/Christianmodel.Throughthisprocessofglocalizationor‘plu-ralization’,hemaintains,‘religionsdonotjustrespondtoaglobalizingcontext’butrather‘emergeasapartofthatprocess’(Beyer,2007;compareBeyer,2003,2009).Inthissense,BeyeragreeswithRobertsonthat‘globalizationisalwaysalsoglocalization’(Beyer,2007).GlocalizationwasalsoamongtheconceptualtoolsusedbyManuelVásquezandMarieMarquardt(2000)toanalysetheShepherdsofChristMinistries’attempttoestablishamonopolyovertheorthodoxinterpretationoftheRainbowMadonnainFlorida(aMarianapparitiondatingto1996)basedonthevisionsofalocallaydevotee.Bydoingso,VásquezandMarquardtargue,theShepherdsofChristwereusingaflexiblepastoralstrategyattentivetolocaldevotionaltraditionstoimplementtheNewEvangelizationcampaignlaunchedbyPopeJohnPaulIIin1983,whichrepresenteda‘callforunityanduniversality’inthefaceofadvancingEvangelicalProtestantism.Throughsuchuseoflocalresources,then,theRomanCatholicChurchhasbeenabletoboth‘embody’itselfin,and‘impress’itselfuponthelocal,whichkeepsits‘locality’butisreframedaspartoftheoverarchingnarrativeoftheVatican.IntheirbookGlobalizingtheSacred,VásquezandMarquardt(2003,pp.65–91)haveexploredsimilardynamics–forexample,withafocusontheCatholicBasilicaofOurLadyofSanJuandelValleinTexas–andotheraspectsoftheglocalizationofreligion,suchasthoseunderlyingProyectoLuz(ProjectLight),anevangelizationcampaignundertakenin1990inGuatemalabytheUS-basedChristianBroadcastingNetwork(CBN).Althoughthismassivecampaignwasaimedtopromotea‘gospelofhealthandwealth’basedonneoliberalcapitalismanda‘domin-iontheology’centredontheUnitedStates,VásquezandMarquardtshowthatitssuccesswasmostlydependentonthetailoringofProyectoLuz’smessagestoalocalaudiencewiththeuseofindigenouscontentandfamiliarformats.Similarly,RescatadosdelInfierno(RescuedfromHell)–ahugelypopulartelenovela–allowedviewerstoactasselectiveconsumersandreshapetheirownidentitiesdrawingfromglobalsources,ratherthanpassivelyacceptingCBN’scultural-imperialistnarrative.2Todate,themostarticulateattempttoapplyglocalizationtothestudyofChristianityhasbeenmadebyRoudometofwithinthecontextofhisbroaderengagementwithglobalizationtheory.WhileexplicitlymentioningEasternOrthodoxChristianityasaformofglocalrelig-iosityalsoinhisearlierproduction(Agadjanian&Roudometof,2005;Roudometof,2008),hefurtherdevelopsatheoryof‘multipleglocalizations’withreferencetothistradition(Roudometof,2013,2014a,2014b,2018a).ForRoudometof,theorizingreligionandglobali-zationrequiresnotonlyamoveawayfromWesternmodernizationasaframeofreferenceandtheacknowledgmentofalongueduréeglobalizationwithhistoricalwaves,butalsoanin-depthfocusontheunderlyinginteractionsbetweentheglobalandthelocal.Inthisconnec-tion,hedistinguishesfourmainmodalitiesofinterpenetrationbetween(religious/Christian)universalismand(local)particularismoperatingbothsynchronicallyanddiachronicallywithinthisprocess.Thefirstis‘vernacularization’,throughwhichreligiousuniversalismisblendedwithspecificlanguages,irrespectiveofethnicmembership.Althoughthismodalityofglocalization,likeallothers,isnotnecessarilyconfinedtoaspecificperiod,Roudometofsuggeststhatitisespeciallyapparentintheearlycenturies,withtheadoptionofChristianityastheRomanEmpire’sofficialreligionandinitsdiversifiedvernacularizationinthetwopartsoftheMediterraneanwiththeemergenceofOrthodoxChristianity,aswellasinSoutheasternEuropeduringOttomanrule.Thesecondglocalizationis‘indigenization’,throughwhichreli-giousuniversalismisblendedwithaparticularethnicity.ForRoudometof,thisistheformofUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
150140Handbookofcultureandglocalizationglocalizationthat,togetherwithvernacularization,mostconsistentlycharacterizesOrthodoxChristianityintheearlymodernperiod.Inthisconnection,hearguesthatindigenizationhasastrongerelectiveaffinitywithOrthodoxChristianitythanwithRomanCatholicismforvariousreasons,suchasitsdecentralizedadministrationandthefactthatGreekwasneverseenasasacredlanguage.Thethirdglocalization,‘nationalization’,differsfromtheprevioustwointhat‘thenationservesasthefoundationforthereligiousinstitutions’claimtolegitimacy’.Roudometofnotesthat,althoughthisglocalizationbroadlycorrespondstotheadoptionofthenation-stateform,thishasnotoccurredhomogeneouslywithintheOrthodoxpartofEurope,wherenationstatesinSoutheasternEuropesuccessfullyadopteditinthenineteenthcenturydifferentlyfromtheRussianEmpire.ThelastglocalizationillustratedbyRoudometofis‘transnationalization’,whichisaconsequenceoftheglobalemergenceofnationstates.Forthoseresidinginahoststate,heobserves,religiousuniversalismcanbecomethemainframeofreference,butinmanycases,national/ethnicparticularismremainscentral.Roudometofalsonotesthat,amongOrthodoxgroups,onlythoseresultingfrominternationalmigration(andnotthosewithaminoritystatusinSoutheasternandEasternEurope)fitwiththedefini-tionof‘transnational’usedinscientificliterature(Roudometof,2014a,pp.159–67).Roudometofhasalsoguesteditedaspecialissuecalled‘GlocalReligions’inthejournalReligions(printededitionpublishedinRoudometof,2018b),whichincludedcontributionsonHinduism(Manian&Bullock,2016),JapaneseBuddhism(Dessì,2017b),neo-Mayanity(Farahmand,2016),religionintheRomanEmpire(vanAlten,2017),andChristianity(Andaya,2017;Brand,2016;Guglielmi,2018;Suh,2015;Tiaynen-Qadir,2017).WhereastwoofthearticlesonChristianityinthisspecialissuefocusontheOrthodoxtradition,theremainingthreefocusinsteadonthetensionbetweenglobalandlocalformsofreligionamongAmericanEvangelicalsindifferenthistoricalperiods(fromtheearlycolonialtotheconstitu-tionalphase)(Brand,2016);onhowthenotionof‘Christiansocialresponsibility’hasbeeninterpreted(‘glocalized’)bydifferentgenerationsofNeo-EvangelicalsinSouthKorea(Suh,2015);andonthemissionaryactivitiesofvariousChristiantraditionsinSoutheastAsiaintheearlymodernperiod,whichledtocomplexnegotiationsandoccasionally(asinthecaseofRomanCatholicisminthePhilippines)tothesuccessfultranslationoftheChristiansymbolicuniverseintoa‘familiarculturalidiom’(Andaya,2017).Amorerecentadditiontothelitera-tureontheglocalizationofChristianityinAsiaisanarticlebyJonathanJames(2020)ontheCalvaryTempleinAndhraPradesh,whichreferstosomeinnovationsandadaptationswithinthisIndianmegachurch.AsforthefieldofJudaism,thisinterpretiveframeworkhasbeenthusfarlargelyoverlooked,anexceptionbeingMartaTopel’s(2017)researchonBrazilianJewishcommunities,whereacursoryreferenceismadetotheglocalizationofOrthodoxJudaism,asindicatedbythecontentoflectures/courses,thepresenceofOrthodoxrabbisinJewishsecularschools,andasortof‘intra-Jewishfaithnomadism’.SeveralscholarshavetriedtooperationalizetheconceptofglocalizationwithinthecontextofIslambyfocusingmainlyonitspoliticaldimension.Inthisconnection,onemaythinkofNimrodLuz’s(2014)researchonthepromotionoftheHaramal-SharifbytheIslamicMovementinIsrael,which,throughthe‘mystification’ofthesite(thatis,theemphasisonitssignificanceforPalestiniansandMuslimsworldwide,pairedbythedenialofanyJewishheritage)ismilitantly‘glocalizing’itwiththeaimofweakeningitsnationaldimensionandstrengtheninginsteadtheglobalandlocalones.AnotherrecentexampleisJeffreyHaynes’(2019)attempttoillustratehowglocalization–understoodastheinterplayoftwodistinctivetypesoffear,thatis,thatof‘globally-orientatedIslamistterrorism’andthatof‘theeffectsofUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
151Glocalizationandthereligiousfield141massMuslimemigrationonlocalcommunities’–hastheeffectofreinforcingIslamophobiaandcanthusexplaintherecentelectoralsuccessesofright-wingpoliticiansintheUnitedStatesandEurope.AmorethoroughengagementwiththethemeofglocalizationcanbeseeninEmmanuelKaragiannis’(2018)TheNewPoliticalIslam.Inthisrecentmonograph,KaragiannisdistinguishesthreegenerationsinthedevelopmentofpoliticalIslam,thatis,Islamistnationalists,globalistsandcommunitarians,andarguesthatthelatter(the‘newpoliti-calIslam’)haveoperatedinthelasttwodecadesas‘glocalizersofuniversalideasandnorms’.ThisthirdgenerationofhighlyheterogeneousandadaptiveIslamistsincludesactivists,politiciansandmilitants,andischaracterizedbyitsuseofspecific‘masterframes’tomobi-lizesupportandfacilitatethelocaladoptionofglobalideas.Inthisconnection,KaragiannisidentifiesthreemasterframesutilizedbythenewpoliticalIslam:humanrights,democracyandjustice.Throughthehumanrightsframe,whichhasbeenadoptedespeciallysincethe9/11attacksandtheriseofIslamophobiabymanynonviolentgroups,includingthetransnationalHizbut-Tahrir,theestablishmentofthecaliphateispresentedas‘arightworthfightingfor’andas‘afutureguarantorofrights’.TheadoptionoftheglobalideaandframeofdemocracybyIslamicpartiesandgroupshasresultedinformsofhybridIslamisminwhich,asshownbyexamplessuchasal-NourinEgyptandtheReformFrontinTunisia,participationintheelectoralprocessgoeshandinhandwithacommitmenttotheSharia.Andlastly,theframerevolvingaroundthegenericideaofjustice,whichKaragiannisshowstobepopularespeciallyamonginsurgent/terroristgroups,hasbeenutilizedinthecontextofbothShiaandSunniIslamtogainlegitimacybystirringfeelingsofanger/revengeandjustifyingviolentaction‘asajustice-seekingquestsanctionedbySharia’(Karagiannis,2018,pp.3–24,180–2).TheglocalizationofAsianreligionsisanotherareaofinterestinthisfieldofstudies.Inthelasttenyears,IhaveaddressedthistopicinvariouspublicationsrelatedtoJapanesereligions.OneoftheaimsofmybookJapaneseReligionsandGlobalizationandotherearlycontributionswastoillustratehowglobalizationproducesavarietyoflocalinterpretationsintheJapanesereligiousfield(bothathomeandoverseas).TakingmycuefromRobertsonandothers’work,Idistinguishedbetweentwomainwaysofshapingnewreligiousidentitiesdependingontheweightofglobaland‘native’sources,exploredhowthediscourseonhumanrightshasbeenglocalizedbyShin,ZenandPureLandBuddhismthroughaself-reflectiononthehisabetsuburaku(discriminated-against‘hamlet’people),andsuggestedthatShintoandJapaneseBuddhism’sconcernforecologycanbeunderlainbyselectivereadingsofthetraditionaimedtoattuneittotrendsinglobalsociety.Here,Ialsotestedthehypothesisthatglocalizationisnotnecessarilydisentangledfromanoveremphasisonparticularism,byshowingthattheadoptionofthethemeof‘lostcontinents’bythenewreligiousmovementKōfukunoKagakuisfunctionaltotheclaimofthesuperiorityofJapanesecultureoverothercultures(Dessì,2013a,pp.40–64;comparewithDessì,2011,2012).Inmorerecentcontri-butions,andespeciallyinmybookTheGlobalRepositioningofJapaneseReligions(2017a),IdevelopedmyperspectiveonglocalizationwithintheframeworkofanintegratedapproachtoJapanesereligionsunderglobalization.Basedonaworkingdefinitionofreligionas‘asocialsystemthatcontrolstheaccessofindividualstospecificworldly/other-worldlygoodsthroughtheauthorityofasuper-empiricalagency’,3Iarguedthat‘glocalization’and‘chauvinisticglocalization’areamongthemodalitiesof‘globalrepositioning’availabletoJapanesereli-gionswhentheirauthoritystructureis‘relativized’(inotherwords,putintoquestionanddestabilized)bytheglobalculturalnetwork.Thatis,myqualitativeresearchdemonstratedthatunderglobalization,theincreasingpressureuponJapanesereligionsbyspecificglobalUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
152142Handbookofcultureandglocalizationideas(whichcan,forexample,relativizetheconstellationofgoodsmediatedbyreligion)maypromptnotonlytherejectionofsuchideasor(morerarely)theirpassiveacceptance,butalsotheircreativeadoption(glocalization)andtheirstrategicuseforthepromotionofculturalchauvinism(chauvinisticglocalization).Suchprocessesareespeciallyevidentintwoofthecasestudiesillustratedinthisbook,whichindicatethattheglocalizationofreligionimpliestheintegration(or,attheveryleast,thejuxtaposition)ofexternalideas/practicesintoreligion’sauthoritystructure.ThefirstisthegreeningofreligioninJapan,whichshowshow,sincethe1990s,JapaneseBuddhism,Shintoandnewreligiousmovementshaveincorporatedthesecularideasofenvironmentalprotectionandsustainabilityintotheconstellationofgoodsthattheyoffertotheirfollowersbymakingthemresonatewithtraditionalideas,andhowthisprocessofglocalizationcanberelatedtoformsofeco-nationalism.TheothercasestudyillustratesinsteadhowvariousmeditationaltechniquesavailableintheglobalculturalnetworkhavebeenadoptedbyHawaiianShinBuddhistpriestsandlayfollowerstoreshapetheirownstyleofBuddhistpractice(whichtraditionallydiscardsmeditation),andhowthisglocalizationcanbemeaningfullyintertwinedwithpowerissues(Dessì,2017a,pp.67–150;comparewithDessì,2013b,2014a,2017b).OthercontributionsdealingwiththethemeofJapanesereligionsandglocalizationhavebeenincludedin‘NewResearchonJapaneseReligionsunderGlobalization’aspecialissueoftheJournalofReligioninJapan,guesteditedbyGalenAmstutzandmyself(Amstutz&Dessì,2014).Amongthese,besidesmyanalysisofRisshōKōseikai’sglocalizationandothertypesofglobalization(Dessì,2014b),onefindsadetailedstudyofSōkaGakkai’sadaptationinCuba,includingtheexploitationofJoséMartí’slegacyandtheimpactofalternativespiritualitiesascatalystsforglocalization(RodriguezPlasencia,2014);anexplorationofShinBuddhisminaBraziliantemple,wherethedemandforself-cultivationpracticescomingfrompractitionersinfluencedbynewspiritualitieshasledtotheincorporationofmeditation(Matsue,2014);andanexaminationofhowthetraditionalJapanesetōrōnagashi(lanternfloating)ritualhasbeenglocalizedbyShinnyō-eninHawaiiasasuccessfulfestivalthroughstrategiessuchastheadoptionoftheAmericanMemorialDaydateandtheinclusionoflocalculturalelements(Montrose,2014).GlocalizationhasbeenrarelydiscussedinthestudyofChineseandCentral-Asianreli-gions.BesidesacursoryreferencetoglocalizationinDavidPalmer’s(2014)researchonthetransnationalitinerariesofspiritualtouristsonthesacredmountainofHuashan(Daoism),thisthemeistoucheduponbyLionelObadia(2012),whoemphasizestheimportanceofprocessesof‘reterritorialisation’inanarticleonTibetanBuddhisminFrance.TheglocalizationofHinduismhasapparentlyattractedmoreinterest,asisshownbysomearticlespublishedinthelastdecade.WithintheIndiancontext,attentionhasbeenpaidtotheonlinedarshanandotherpracticesattheJagannathTempleinPuri(Orissa)asexamplesofthe‘universalisationoftheparticular’(Scheifinger,2009),andto‘glocalyoga’asthere-appropriationofthispracticeinitsplaceoforiginthroughfieldworkconductedamongpractitionersinChennaiandHyderabad(Askegaard&Eckhardt,2012).AnotherrecentcontributionhasfocusedontheInternationalSocietyforKrishnaConsciousness(ISKON)inFinlandasacasestudyofglocal/hybridreligiouscommunitiesofferingresourcestonative-bornFinnstorethinktheirFinnishandEuropeanidentity,andtoIndianimmigrantstorenegotiatetheboundariesbetweenthenewsocio-religiouscontextandtheirIndianheritage(Zeller,2016).AdeeperengagementwiththethemeofglocalizationcanbeseeninSabitaManianandBradBullock’s(2016)explorationofafuneraryritualperformedinSt.LuciabyIndo-Caribbeans(Lucian-Indians),UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
153Glocalizationandthereligiousfield143thedescendantsofindenturedlabourerswhoarrivedfromEastIndiafromthesecondhalfofthenineteenthcenturytothebeginningofthetwentiethcentury.Theirethnographicanalysisofthis‘Indianfuneralfeast’,whichcustomarilytakesplaceafteraChristianburial,revealsthesurvivalofHinduelementsthathavebeenblendedwithlocalculture,asshownforexamplebythesimplifiedliturgy,theadaptationsofIndianfood,andtheuseoftraditionallampsandwaxcandles.BasedonRoudometof’stypology,thetwoscholarsinterprettheseprocessesofglocalizationasindigenizationandtransnationalization.ItisalsoworthmentioningsomeresearchthathasfocusedontheglocaldimensionofotheraspectsofLatin-Americanspirituality.VernacularreligionintheCaribbeanhasbeenanalysedbyRaquelRomberg(2005)inherstudyofPuertoRicanbrujería(witch-healing),withinwhichsheidentifiesfourmainglocallayers:thefirstemergingfromtheencounterofSpanishCatholiccolonialruleandaprogressivelycreolizedlocalculture;thesecondbroughtaboutbythecreoleelite’sadoptionofKardecisminthemid-nineteenthcenturyasacounter-hegemonicmove;thethird,whichresultedfromthemodernizationoftheislandfollowingtheUSinva-sionin1898;andthelastglocallayer,whichcanbetracedbacktotheeconomicboomofthe1960s,characterizedbytheadditiontobrujeríaofaconsumeristelementandthediscoveryofheritage.Theglocalimplicationsofneo-MayanityhavebeenexploredbyManéliFarahmand(2016),whohasobservedhowtherevitalizationofthe‘Mayan’categorymayfollowdif-ferenttrajectoriesinGuatemalaandMexico,duetodifferentglobalinfluencesandvaryingdegreesofpoliticization.Lastly,faithhealingasaformofglocalspiritualityinBrazilhasbeenanalysedbyCristinaRocha.Inherpreviousmonograph,Rocha(2006,pp.3,127–52)hadexploredhow‘globalflowsacquirelocalforms’throughtheconceptofcreolizationbasedonAppadurai’stheoryof‘-scapes’,withattentiontotheroleplayedbyimaginationintheconstructionofafashionableBrazilianZenasanumbrellaconcept.InherbookJohnofGod,sheanalysestheactivitiesofthiswell-knownBrazilianfaithhealer(and,asof2019,convictedsexoffender)andhismovement,whoseuniverseofbeliefhasbeeninformedbysourcesasdiverseasCatholicism,KardecismandUmbanda.WhereasRocha’smainaimistoshowthatthegrowthofJohnofGod’smovementpartakesinthesubjectiveturnoflatemodernitybyoffering‘aradicalexperienceofthesacred’,‘hope’inthefaceofbiomedicine’sshortcomings,anda‘senseofcommunity’toitsfollowers,sheusestheconceptofglocalizationtoexplorethetensionbetweenhomogenizationandheterogenizationinitsglobalization.ForRocha,thisdimensionisespeciallyapparentintheworkoflocalstaffersandforeigntourguidesactingas‘culturaltranslators’,whoreframeand‘glocalize’JohnofGod’slocaldiscourse/practicesbyrelatingthemtoelementsofglobalculture(forexample,ideasabouthealing,self-transforma-tionandthespiritualworldderivedfromtheNewAgemovement)alreadyinternalizedbyforeignaudiences,thusfacilitatingtheiracceptance(Rocha,2017,pp.5–9,151–2).MAPPINGTHEFIELD:USEOFALTERNATIVECONCEPTSScholarsofreligiontryingtoexplaintheproductionoflocalitywithinthecontextofglobali-zationhavenotalwaysreliedontheconceptofglocalization.Tobesure,someofthemhaveoperatedindialoguewiththeinterpretiveframeworkoriginallyintroducedbyRobertsonwhileusingdifferenttermstoexpresstheglobal–localnexus.Stillothershaveresortedtoalternativeconceptualtoolstoexploreasimilarrangeofdynamics.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
154144HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAsfortheformerstreamofscholarship,alreadyin1990theJapanesesociologistNobutakaInouewaselaboratingontheglobalizationofreligionindiscussionwithRobertsonandcoinedtheterm‘neo-syncretism’todescribetheintentionalappropriationandcombinationofselectedelementsfromotherreligionswithinglobalization,whichhelaterdevelopedintotheconceptof‘hyper-religions’(Inoue,1990;comparewithInoue,2007).TheechoofthemespreviouslydiscussedbyRobertsonisalsofoundintheresearchonEvangelicalChristianityinNorthAmericabyGeorgeVanPeltCampbell,whosemodeldistinguishesfourpossibleresponsesofferedbytraditiontotherelativizationpromotedbyglobalization:‘closed’,‘open’,‘reinvention’and‘exitresponses’.Someofthese‘responsestorelativization’presentclearanalogieswiththephenomenonofglocalization,suchasonesubtypeofhisopenresponses,the‘opennesstorethinkingtheoriginaltraditions’,whichforCampbellisexemplified,amongothers,bythemodernistimpulseinProtestantismemergingduringthefundamentalist–modernistcontroversy(1870–1925).Again,theinterplayoftheglobalandthelocalisapparentinthethreesubtypesofCampbell’sreinventionresponses(whichhelikenstoHobsbawmandRanger’s‘inventionoftradition’4),including‘reinventionbyselection’(asinthecaseofAmericanfundamentalism),‘reinventionbydeletion’(forexample,theMormons’prohibitionofpolygamy),and‘reinventionbyaddition’(forexample,theuseofMarxistideasbyLiberationTheology)(Campbell,2005,pp.83–9).AnotherexampleofscholarshipbroadlyoperatingwithinthecontextofRobertson’sframeworkisAsonzehUkah’s(2008,pp.313–46)researchontheRedeemedChristianChurchofGod(RCCG),whichfocuses,amongotherthings,onthewaythisNigerian(andtransnational)Pentecostalgroup‘localizes’itspracticesandinstitutionsthroughstrategiessuchastheconstructionofprayercampsassacredsitesandtheselectiverevitalizationofsomeculturalpractices.Anotherstreamofscholarshiphasexploreddynamicsoverlappingwiththeglocalizationofreligionfromdifferentinterpretiveperspectives.Amongthese,itisworthmentioningseveralscholarswhohaveelaboratedontheideaof‘culturalhybridization’.AnearlyinstanceofthisapproachisPeterMandaville’sresearchontransnationalMuslimpolitics,wheretheNorthAmericanscholarexplorestheeffectsofglobalizationonconceptionsoftheumma,asaresultofthewidespreaduseofinformationtechnologyandtheMuslimdiaspora.ForMandaville,whoelaboratesonideasdevelopedbyawiderangeofscholarsincludingHomiBhabhaandNederveenPieterse,theseprocessesareleadingtoaprogressiveerosionoftraditionalreligiousauthorityandfacilitatingtheemergenceofnewhybridforms.Thisisshown,forexample,bythediscussionsandrethinkingwithinsectorsofIslamofdoctrinalconceptssuchasdaral-islam(landofIslam)anddaral-harb(landofwar),aswellasofthegenderimplicationsofsourcesonearlyIslamwithreferencetoideasofgenderequalitycirculatingworldwide(Mandaville,2001,pp.137–42).AnotherexampleoftheapplicationoftheideaofculturalhybridityisprovidedbyMichaelHill’s(2010)workontheNewAgeAndeanreligion.ThroughhisethnographicresearchintheCuscoregionofPeru,HillhasillustratedhowbrotherhoodsofurbanmestizoshavestrategicallyadoptedelementsfromCatholicismandglobalNewAgespirituality(forexample,themythofthecontinentofMu)toreconstructanationalnarrativebypassingthecolonialperiodandlinkingthemdirectlytotheAndesasarepositoryofancientwisdom.Religiouschangeunderconditionsofglobalizationhasbeenapproachedmoreorlessexplicitlyasaformofculturalhybridizationbysomeotherscholars,suchasDanielMurrayandJamesMiller(2013)intheiranalysisoftheDaoistSocietyofBrazil,JosephLoss(2010)inhisresearchontheJewish-IsraeliadoptionofBuddhism,andAlbertWuaku(2013)inhisaccountofAfricanHinduism.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
155Glocalizationandthereligiousfield145Withinthegeneraldiscourseonculturalhybridity,theglobal–localinterplayhasalsobeenthematizedbyTulasiSrinivasinherinvestigationofthetransnationalSathyaSaimovement.SrinivashasexploredthetwoaspectsofdeterritorializationandreterritorializationinherentintheglobalizationofSathyaSaithroughthelensof‘culturaltranslation’asaprocessinclud-ingfourstages:‘culturalawarenessanddisembedding’,‘codificationanduniversalization’,‘latchingandmatching’and‘contextualizationandre-embedding’.Thefirsttwostagesrefertothewayculturalformsaremadeportableandexportable(forexample,bydisembeddingSaiBaba’ssacredfigurefromhislocalreligiouscultureandconnectingittodivinitiesfromotherreligions),whilethelasttworefertotheoverseastransmissionofavarietyofculturalformsrelatedtothismovement,withattentiontotheirpotential‘tomatchcertaindesiresorneedsinthehostsociety’andtoopenthewaytothecreationofnewhybrids(Srinivas,2010,pp.331–8).Srinivas’approachhasbeencriticizedbyVéroniqueAltglasforassumingthatsocialactors’appropriationofreligiousresourcesis‘free’and‘unproblematic’,aswellasforherneglectofSaiBaba’sculturalnationalism.Moregenerally,Altglashaslamentedthatissuesofpowerandpoliticsareoftenoverlooked(whileagencyisoveremphasized)inanalysesofcontemporary‘bricolage’,theinterpretiveframework(originallyconceptualizedbyClaudeLévi-StraussandRogerBastide)thatsheadoptstoexploretheshapingoflocalreli-giousidentitieswithinaglobalizingcontext.Byfocusingonneo-HindumovementsandtheKabbalahCentreinEuropeandAmerica,theFrenchscholarhasarguedthattheappropriationofthesereligiousresourcesisactuallyconditionedbythepreliminarydetachmentfromtheirethnicaspectsoperatedbygurusandleaders(implyingthereinterpretationofcoredoctrinesandthedownplayormodificationofspecificpractices)andaprocessof‘domestication’,throughwhichpractitionerscometoseesuchexoticculturalelementsasnon-religiousanduniversalformsof‘spirituality’(Altglas,2014,pp.324–30).GLOCALIZATIONINTHEOLOGYANDNORMATIVEDISCOURSESGlocalizationhasalsobeenusedwithinthecontextofnormativereligiousdiscoursesespe-ciallybyChristiantheologians.ThetermhasbeenadoptedinChristiantheologysincethepublicationofRobertSchreiter’s(1997)TheNewCatholicity,inwhichtheRomanCatholictheologiandiscussedthefragmentationofglobaltheologicalflows,identifiedantiglobalism,ethnificationandprimitivismasthreemaindefensivestrategiesusedtostronglyreassertthelocalwithintheglobal,andproposeda‘newcatholicity’thatfullyacknowledgesthevalueofbothinterculturalcommunicationandlocalcultures.Schreiter’sworkhasprovidedtheframeworkforfurtherdiscussionsonChristianityandglobalizationamongbothCatholicandProtestanttheologians,someofwhichhavespecificallyfocusedonglocalization.ExamplesofthisinterestarethecontributionsbyWilliamStorrar(2004),whohasenvisionedapathforpublictheologybetweenthetwoextremesof‘incommensurablelocaltheologies’and‘imperialistgrandtheologicalnarratives’inherentintheparticular–universaltension;andClivePearson(2007),whohaswelcomedStorrar’sapproachwhilecautioningagainsthishiddenassumptionthatthetaskofdevelopinga‘glocalpublictheology’involvesequalpart-ners,thusoverlookingtherealityoftheologicalperipheries.Inanarticlepublishedataroundthesametime,PeterTzeMingNg(2007)hasemphasizedtheimportanceofglocalizationtoenhancethedialecticalrelationshipbetweenChristianityandChineseculturewithreferenceUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
156146HandbookofcultureandglocalizationtothepioneeringworkofFrancisWei,thefirstChristianpresidentofHuazhongUniversityinWuhan.Inamorerecentcontribution,VolkerKüster(2016;comparewithHutchinson,2018)hasarguedthatglobalizationbringsaboutadeeptransformationofliberationandinculturationtheologies–fromrootingtodeterritorialization,frommono-culturalitytohybridity,andfromcommunitytomultiplebelonging–andageneralshiftfromcontextualizationtoglocalization,whichheillustratesthroughtheexamplesofAfricanandAsiantheologians.Attheintersectionofglocalizationandmissionarywork,theSouthernBaptistGaryFujino(2010)hasaddressedthethemeofmultipleshiftingglocalidentitiesinTokyoandelaboratedonitsmissiologicalimplications,providingaseriesofpracticalinstructionsforministriesfacingthechallengeofreachingpeople‘intermsofwhotheyare’,whichrangefrombeingproactivetopreachinginagroupsetting.ThethemeofmissionandglocalizationistakenupinTheChurchGoingGlocal,avolumefeaturingtheproceedingsofaninternationalsymposiumheldattheFjellhaugInternationalUniversityCollegeinOslo(NorwegianLutheranMission).Here,theglocalizationofChristianityischaracterizedinavarietyofways,includingthegenericreferencetoits‘beingglobalandlocalatthesametime’,thetaskoffacing‘theincreasingimpactofglobalisationonlocalcommunities’,thefactthat‘Christianfaithisalwaysreceivedlocally’andthat‘everythingisunderstoodfrombelow’,aswellas–withreferencetotheworkoftheReformedChurchtheologianCharlesVanEngen(2006)–theneedtobe‘activesimultaneouslyinglobalandlocalmission’(Engelsvikenetal.,2011,pp.vii,68,83,176).TherelevanceoftheglocalinmissionarystrategyisalsohighlightedbyGeorgePirwothAtido(2017;comparewithAudi,2016)inhisreflectionsontheFraternitéÉvangéliquedePentecôteenAfriqueauCongo(FEPACO),whoserevitalizationandgrowtharealsoattributedtotheprocessofglocalization(combininga‘microperspective’witha‘macroperspective’)allow-ingtheinclusionofAfricanvaluesandspiritualityandthuspromotinganindigenoustheology.Therearealsosomeindicationsoftheuseofglocalizationwithinnormativediscoursesinotherreligioustraditions.WithinBuddhism,TetsuoMaruyama(2008)hascontrasted‘glocalized’(thatis,adaptedtoJapan)Buddhism,whichhecharacterizesastraditionallyorientedtowardharmony,andthe‘anthropocentric’worldviewofWesternrationalism,whileShu-HsienLiu(2011)hasapproachedthisconceptfromaNeo-Confucianperspectivebyelaboratingonthetraditionalideaofliyifenshu(oneprinciple,manymanifestations).PROBLEMSINTHESTUDYOFRELIGIONANDGLOCALIZATIONWhereasonecanhardlydojusticetothecomplexityofthesediscussionsonreligionandglocalizationwithinthelimitsimposedbyahandbookchapter,itisnonethelesspossibletoidentifysomemainpatternsandproblematicsinthisfieldofstudies.Attheverygenerallevel,itisapparentthattheissueofglocalreligionhasbeenaddressedinvariousdisciplines,includingsociology,anthropologyandthestudyofreligions.While‘glocalization’/‘glocal’isquitepopularterminologyamongsociologistsgivenRobertson’sinfluence,itsuseasacon-ceptualtoolhasalsomadeinroadsinotherfields,notablywithintheinterdisciplinarystudyofreligions(orreligiousstudies).Despiteasomewhatresidualtendencyto‘Western-centrism’especiallyinthefieldofthesociologyofreligions(forexample,acertainemphasisonmodernityandthechoiceofresearchtopics),onecanseethatthestudyofglocalreligionasawholetakesveryseriouslytheindicationsemergingfrompostcolonialstudiesandvariousothercontributions–forexample,ColinCampbell’s(2007)studyontheEasternizationoftheUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
157Glocalizationandthereligiousfield147West–concerningthebidirectionalityofglobalculturalflows.Thatis,irrespectiveofthedis-ciplinaryperspective,thevastmajorityofstudiesontheglocalizationofreligionseeit,ratherthanasan‘export’patternorprocessoriginatedintheWest,asatrulyglobalandmulticentricphenomenon.Althoughacertaindivisionoflabourbetweenmacroobservationsfromthesoci-ologyofreligionandmicroobservationsfromtheanthropologyofreligioncanstillbeseen,thisislessandlessso,almostgivingtheimpressionthatthefieldofstudyonglocalreligionsisacquiringasortofdistinctiveidentity.Thisoverviewofthestateoftheartshowsthattheglocalizationofreligionhasbeenapproachedfromvariousangles,suchasreligious‘micro-marketing’,historicaladaptationofreligiousuniversalitytolocalcultures,indigenization,politicalstrategy,ecologicaldiscourse,creativeincorporationofNewAgeelements,andreinventionoftradition.Itisapparentthat,despitetheincreasingnumberofcontributionsanddiversifiedapproaches(amongwhichareglocalizationandhybridization),someareasandtraditionshavebeenemphasizedmorethanothers,oneofthemostoverlookedbeingreligioninAfrica.Onecannotbutnoticethatsomethematicareas,too,suchastheglocalizationofreligionwithreferencetogenderissues,havereceivedscarceattentiondespitetheirpotentialrelevance(foraninitialattempt,seeChubin,2020).Anotherimportantaspectisthepartialoverlappingofthefieldofstudiesonglocalreligionwiththatontransnationalreligion,whichfollowsdirectlyfromthedependenceofglocalizationprocessesonglobalreligiousflows,althoughthisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthatallglocalreligionsneedtobetransnational:asclearlyemergesfromtheliteratureavailable,religionscanalsoglocalize‘athome’.Itisalsoapparentthatsynchronicperspectiveshaveoftenbeenprivileged,althoughthiscanbelargelyexplainedbythefactthatglocalizationprocessesarebecomingmoreintenseanddetectablewiththeacceleratedglobalizationofthelastfewdecades.Thisdoesnotdetractfromtherelevanceofhistoricalapproachestoreligiousglocalization,atleastifonetakesseri-ouslyalongueduréeviewofglobalization.Inthisconnection,onepotentialissueisthereduc-tionofwhateverkindofreligiouschangeinhistorytothecategoryofglocalization,whichwouldendupweakeningitsheuristicvalueasatoolfortheanalysisofthespecificinterplaybetweentheuniversalandtheparticular.However,suchmethodologicalcautionisalreadyexercisedinpublishedresearchadoptingadiachronicapproach(Andaya,2017;Romberg,2005;Roudometof,2013,2014a,2014b,2018a;comparewithCampbell,2005),andfurther-more,theapplicationoftheglocalizationframeworktothestudyofreligioushistoryishighlycompatiblewiththe‘entangled-history’perspectiveanditsfocusontransnationalityandinterconnectedness(comparewithBauck&Maier,2015).Anotherissueistheoperationalizationoftheconceptofglocalization,whichisstillchar-acterizedbysomedegreeofopacity.Thisisperhapsnotunrelatedtoalingeringtendencytoobjectifythetwoelementsintheglocalizationcoupleaslocations(withthesubordinationofthelocaltotheglobal)ortoframethemasantinomianterms.Althoughthereishardlyanyconsensusinthedefinitionoftheglobalandthelocalinthecontemporarydebate,itmightatleastbesuggestedthatamorenuanced(andmoreconsistentwithRobertson’sinitialfor-mulation)approachwouldfocusonthemasprocessesand‘interpretiveframes’,ratherthan‘thingsinthemselves’(comparewithGibson-Graham,2002).Fromanotherperspective,ithasbeensuggestedthatthelocalcanbecharacterizedintermsof‘place’,thatis,‘spacefilledwithmeaningsandobjectivesbyhumanexperiencesinthisparticularspace’(Roudometof,2019).Perhapsevenmoreimportantly,thereistheneedforamoreguardedattitudetowardanycharacterizationoftheglocal,similarlytowhathasbeenobservedinthecaseofhybridity,UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
158148Handbookofcultureandglocalizationasasortofneutral‘dialogiccarnival’(comparewithKrishnaswamy,2002).ThatglocalizationisintertwinedwithpowerissueshasalreadybeenclearlystatedinRobertson’sinitialanalyses,whichestablishedameaningfullinkbetweentheuniversal–particulardialectic,thephenom-enonofculturalnationalism,andthesearchforfundamentals(Robertson,1995;comparewithRobertson,2018).Morerecently,Roudometofhasinsistedonthispointbasedonhisunderstandingofglocalizationasarefractionofglobalization’swavesandhasdefinedpoweras‘theabilitytoinitiateorresistwavesofglobalization’.Morespecifically,hehasmappedpowerrelationswithinlocal–globalinteractionsintermsof(1)theabilityofa‘locale’orentity‘tooriginatewavesconsistentlyandpersistentlyacrosstheworldstage’,withthespecificationthatthisisakindofdiffusepowernotnecessarilyrestingwiththeWest;(2)itsability‘tobewaveresistant’and‘insulateitselffromwavesandoutsideinfluences’(thatis,its‘thickness’),whichcanenabletheselectiveappropriationofexternalsources;and(3)itsability‘tomodifyoralterthewavesthatpassthroughit’,thatis,theabilitytoaltertheelementsofglobalculturethathavebeenselected(Roudometof,2016,pp.73–4).Tobesure,theglocalization–powernexushasalsobeenthematizedinsomeoftheresearchreviewedintheprevioussections,startingfromVásquezandMarquardt’s(2000,2003)remarksontherelationshipbetweenthephenomenonoftheRainbowMadonnainFloridaandtheVatican’sNewEvangelizationcam-paign,aswellasontheintentionaltailoringofreligiousmessagesinCBN’sProyectoLuz.Thepowerimplicationsoftheglocalarealsoevident,forexample,inRomberg’s(2005)analysisofbrujería,oneofwhoselayersisclearlydefinedbytheincorporationofKardeceanspiritismbythecreoleeliteasapartoftheiranti-Spanishandpro-independenceagenda;inCampbell’s(2005)discussionofreinventionresponsesasinstancesofthestrategic‘inventionoftradition’;inRocha’s(2006,pp.149–51)argumentthattheadoptionandcreolizationofZeninBrazilisinscribedinageographyofpowerwithinwhichacriticalroleisplayedbyOrientalistideasandthequestforprestigeandcosmopolitancapital;inHill’s(2010)observationthattheemer-genceofNewAgeAndeanhybridreligiosityisunderlainontheonehandbytheidealizationoftheIncaheritageaimedatrewritingglobalizationwithAndeanlocalityatthecentre,andontheotherhandbytheessentializationofQuechuaculture/languageandtheexclusionofotherpopulationsfromthisnewglobalnarrative;andinAltglas’s(2014,pp.324–30)insistencethat,althoughbricolagetypicallyrevolvesaroundthedesireforself-realization,itdoesnotimplytheplayfulemancipationfromsocialnorms,butrathertheinternalizationof‘thestrongdemandsforautonomyandflexibilitymadeuponindividualsinadvancedindustrialsocieties’.Inmyownwork,Ihaveemphasizedtheinterplayofglocalizationandpowersincethepub-licationofmypreliminaryanalysisofglocalreligiousenvironmentalisminJapanandKōfukunoKagaku’sadoptionofTheosophicalthemes,bothofwhichhavebeenusedtopromotethesuperiorityofEasternculture(Dessì,2012).Basedonthis,Ilaterintroducedthedistinctionbetweentwomaintypesofglocalformations,thatis,‘glocalization’and‘chauvinisticglo-calization’,which,however,bynomeansimplythatpowerrelationsaremanifestonlyinthelatter.Rather,mycontributiontotheclarificationofthisaspectisafourfoldtypologythatrelatescloselythesearch-for-powerfactorwithinglocalizationtomygeneraltheoryofglobalrepositioningrevolvingaroundtheconceptofreligiousauthority:(1)the‘concernforinsti-tutionalstrength’,whichmayrefertotheeconomicdomain(forexample,religion’sfinancialbasis)orpolicy(forexample,institutionalexpansion,riskmanagement);(2)the‘preservation/consolidationofreligiouslegitimation’byinstitutionsandindividuals,whichinvolvescom-petitionwithotherreligiousandsocialsystemsovertheclaimtoregulateaccesstospecificgoods;(3)the‘pursuitofexternallegitimation’byinstitutionsandindividuals,whichaimstoUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
159Glocalizationandthereligiousfield149strengthenthestructureoflegitimationthroughadditionalsourcesofauthoritysuchasspecificideas,practicesorideologies(forexample,culturalnationalism,‘up-to-datedness’);and(4)the‘searchforindividualempowerment’,whichimpliesthereshapingofthestructureoflegitimationtosecureaccesstospecificgoods.Asanticipatedabove,withinthisinterpretivescheme,chauvinisticglocalizationappliesonlytothosecasesinwhichexternallegitimationispursuedbyresortingtoculturalnationalism(Dessì,2017a,pp.170–7).Inthisconnection,oneofthepossibletasksistoascertaintheextenttowhichthisandotherapproachestothepowerrelationsinscribedinglocalreligionsarecompatiblewith,orcanprovideanalternativeto,mainstreamtheoriesofpowersuchasBourdieu’s(1991,1997)ontheformsofcapital,which,howeversophisticated,donotseemtoattributesufficientagencytoordinarypractitionersandtendtoreducereligiouscapitaltosymboliccapitalanddomination.DEVELOPINGTRENDSANDFUTUREDIRECTIONSMydistinctionofthetwomaintypesofglocalizationillustratedaboveispartofabroaderscholarlyattempttoaddtheoreticaldepthtothestudyofreligiousglocalization,whichrepre-sentsoneofthemajorchallengesforresearchinthisfield.OnemaythinkofRoudometof’s(2014a,pp.159–67)typologicaldistinctionoffourmaintypesofglocalization(vernaculari-zation,indigenization,nationalizationandtransnationalization)toindicatethedifferentwaysinwhichChristianuniversalisminteractswithlocalparticularism.AnothercontributioninthisdirectionhasbeenprovidedbyKaragiannis(2018,pp.21–3)withhisfocusontheframingprocessunderlyingtheglocalizationofIslam,whichbuildsonDavidSnowandRobertBenford’s(1988)worktoillustratehowasetofcognitiveschemata(masterframes)revolvingaroundhumanrights,democracyandjusticearereappropriatedintothelocalcontext,thusbringingaboutthelocaladaptionofglobalideas.Inaddition,Srinivas(2010,pp.331–8),thoughwithinthedifferentinterpretiveframeworkofhybridityandculturaltranslation,hasshedmorelightontheproductionofreligiouslocalitiesbydistinguishingfourdyadicpairs(culturalawarenessanddisembedding,codificationanduniversalization,latchingandmatching,andcontextualizationandre-embedding)tracingthetrajectoryofculturalformsandideologiesfromtheprocessthroughwhichtheyaremadeportable,tooneconferringuntothemnewmeaningsthusmakingthemsuitabletothecultureofreception.Srinivas’notesonre-embeddingalsopointtoanotherpotentialdirectionforthestudyofreligiousglocalization.Thatis,shearguesthatimportedculturalforms‘canstrikeaconcord-ance’inthenewcontextandappealtosuchnostalgiatoembedthemselvesmoreeffectively.Althoughsuchdynamicscanberelatedtopowerissues,totheextent,forexample,thatimportedculturalforms‘matchcertaindesiresorneedsinthehostsociety’,theymorebroadlyrefertowhatSrinivasdescribesasa‘culturalresonance’broughtaboutbytheimportedformsinthenewcontext(Srinivas,2010,pp.337–8).Thecentralquestionhereconcernswhyspe-cificculturalelementscirculatinginglobalculturecanbeperceivedbylocalreligiousplayersasmorefamiliarorrelevantthanothers,andhowthiscanaffecttheprocessofglocalization.Thisaspecthasbeenoccasionallythematizedinsomepreviousresearchbutiscertainlyinneedoffurtherattention.ItemergesinThomasCsordas’s(2009,p.5)discussiononthe‘trans-posability’and‘portability’ofglobalideasthatmakethemmorepromptlyassimilatedbylocalcultures;and,tomentionanotherexample,inRuthMarshall-Fratani’s(2001)reflectionsontheaffinitybetweenNigerianreligiouscultureandPentecostalismasabattleagainstthedevil.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
160150HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMydiscussiononthe‘perceptionofresonances’isanattempttocontributetothisareaofinquiryinthestudyofglocalreligionsthathasremainedthusfarlargelyunexplored.Infact,thisfactorplaysameaningfulroleintheglocalizationofJapanesereligions,asisemblemati-callyshownbythewayinwhichglobalideasonecology(environmentalprotectionandsus-tainability)aremadetoresonatebylocalreligiousplayerswithtraditionalideas(forexample,interdependence,‘nature’astheabodeofthekami)(Dessì2017a,pp.89–90).Altglas(2010;comparewithRobbins,2003)iscertainlyrightinobserving(withreferencetoglobalPentecostalism)thatanoveremphasisonaffinitiescanleadtooverlooking‘discoursesandritualsofdisjunctioninvolvingruptureanddiscontinuitieswithlocalcultures’.However,whatisatstakehereisnotmerelyan‘anthropologyofcontinuity’,butratherthedevelopmentoftheoreticalperspectivesnotonlyon(theperceptionof)affinitiesbutmoregenerallyonthefactorsconstrainingorfacilitatingtheglocalizationofreligion.ThisiswhatIhavesuggestedbyincludingtheperceptionofresonancesamongawidersetoffactorsunderlyingtheglo-calizationofreligion,togetherwiththesearchforpowerandglobalconsciousness.Broadlyreferringtothegrowingawarenessoftheworldas‘oneplace’illustratedbyRobertsonandothers(Robertson,1992,pp.8–9;comparewith,forexample,Appadurai,1996;Hannerz,1996),thelatterfactorhadalreadyemergedinresearchtouchingupontheglocalizationofreli-gion,suchasMandaville’s(2001,p.187)analysisofthereimaginationoftheumma,whichheseesasaprocess‘leadingMuslimstowardsgreater“globality”’,thatis,‘anewconsciousnessoftheworldasasinglespace’,andinRocha’s(2006,pp.127–52)emphasisontheroleofglobalmediascapesintheconstructionoftheBrazilianimaginaryofZen.InthecontextofthegreeningofreligioninJapan,globalconsciousnessisevidentinthegrowingunderstandingoftheenvironmentalcrisisasaglobalproblemandtheuseofagloballymindedlanguage(Dessì,2017a,pp.87–9).Oneofthepossibletasksforfurtherresearchwouldbethecomprehensiveexplorationoftheseandotherincentivesandconstraintsunderlyingtheprocessofreligiousglocalization(withtheaimtoexplainbothsuccessfulandfailedglocalizations),theirinterplaywithtypologiesandmodesofglocalization,aswellastheirmutualinteractions.Indicationsonhowtopursuethisavenueofresearchalsocomefromvariousdisciplines.Forthestudyofculturalresonanceswiththeglobalizedcontext,onepromisingleadcouldbetheapplicationofJosephRoach’s(1996)‘processesofsurrogation’,asalreadysuggestedbySrinivas(2013),aswellasSigneHowell’s(1995)conceptof‘lacunae’,whichaddressestheissueofhowtheconfrontationwithunknownaspectsofglobalculturecanmakemanifest‘openings’inlocalcultures.Asforglobalconsciousness,aninterestingstartingpointcouldbePaulJamesandManfredSteger’s(2016)discussiononthefourlevelsofsocialmeaningcharacterizedbyincreasinggeneralityandrelatedtotheissueofglobalconsciousness(ideas,ideologies,imaginariesandontologies),orBarrieAxford’s(2016)reflectionsontherelationshipofglobalconsciousnesswithemotionalresponsesnotnecessarilyaimedatsocialcooperation.Stillanotherpotentialareaofinquiryinthisfieldofstudiesishowtorelateglocalizationtootherdimensionsofreligions’globalization.WehaveseenthatscholarssuchasRobertsonandBeyerhaveusedglocalizationasasynonymofglobalization,andindeed,itshouldbeacknowledgedthatiftheglobalandthelocalareprocesses,‘globalizationatwork’canonlybeseeninthecountlesspracticesandinteractionsthat,atanygivenmoment,constitutetheverytissueofglobalsociety.Inthisbroadersense,awiderangeofphenomenaofglobalreligiouschangecanbeclassifiedunderthecategoryofglocalization.Andyetthetaskofachievingmoreconceptualclarityonprocessesofreligiousglocalizationmakesapparentlyinevitabletwoconcurrentmoves,thatis,reclaimingglocalizationasan‘analyticallyautonomousUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
161Glocalizationandthereligiousfield151concept’(Roudometof,2016,p.62),anddistinguishingbetweenglocalization(forexample,asthecreativeadoptionofspecificglobalideas)andotherdimensionsoftheglobalizationofreligion,suchasthoserelatedtointeractionsbetweenreligions,andtointeractionsbetweenreligionandsocialsystemswithaglobalscope(forexample,theeconomyandscience).Whetherthisisaccomplishedbyexploringtheeffectsofdifferentformsofrelativizationonreligiousindividualsandinstitutionsaswellastheirinterplay,asIhaveproposedinmywork(Dessì,2017a),orbydevelopingalternativeconceptualframeworks,itcanhardlybedonethroughaconflationofthelevelsofanalysis,whichwouldleaveunansweredthequestionof‘whatcauseswhat’intheglobalizationofreligion.Sucharangeofpotentialavenuesassociatedwiththeglocalizationofreligionstronglysuggeststhatresearchinthisfieldwouldbenefitfromapproachesincreasinglyopentobothinterdisciplinarityandmultidisciplinarity.Moreover,theverynatureoftheobjectofstudyshouldinvitethedevelopmentofcomparativeresearchagendas,whicharehoweverquiterare(comparewithDessì,2019).Thisis,afterall,rathersurprising,nottheleastconsideringthepointrecentlyandaptlyemphasizedbyRobertson(2018)that‘withinthegazeofglocaliza-tion,comparisonenablesustoconsideritemstobecomparedascloselyinterrelated’,andthat‘aglocalapproachenablesustoavoidregardingsocietiesas“islands”’.NOTES1.Robertson(1987;comparewithRobertson,1992,pp.85–96).Robertson’sfocusonJapanisnotrandom,ashehimselfacknowledgesthatglocalizationismodelledontheJapaneseworddochakuka(indigenization),whichhadbecomepopularin1980sbusinessjargontoindicatemicro-marketing(Robertson,1995).Incidentally,thereareindicationsthatdochakukawasusedinJapanasearlyasthe1960swithinthecontextofdiscussionsonthe‘indigenization’ofChristianity(comparewithAriga,1963).2.VásquezandMarquardt(2003,pp.197–222).ForanotheruseoftheconceptofglocalizationinthestudyofChristianityinLatinAmerica,seeBurity(2014),whorelatesthisconcepttotheissueofcosmopolitanism.3.Dessì(2017a,pp.30–31;comparewithChaves,1994andWeber,1922[1978]).HereIdistinguishfivepartstothereligioussystem:(1)theworldly/other-worldlygoodsmediatedbyreligion;(2)thesuper-empiricalagencythroughwhichaccesstothesegoodsisgrantedordenied;(3)thestructureoflegitimationthroughwhichthenexusbetweenthesuper-empiricalagencyandthesegoodsisnarrated/performed;(4)religiousprofessionals,whogenerally(butnotnecessarily)managethestructureoflegitimation;and(5)ordinarypractitioners,whocanachievevaryingdegreesofauton-omyfromreligiousprofessionals.4.Aparallelbetweenglocalizationasthe‘inventionoflocality’andHobsbawmandRanger’s(1983)‘inventionoftradition’hadalreadybeensuggestedbyRobertson(1995).REFERENCESAgadjanian,A.andV.Roudometof(2005),‘EasternOrthodoxyinaglobalage:Preliminaryconsidera-tions’,inV.Roudometof,A.AgadjanianandJ.Pankhurst(eds),EasternOrthodoxyinaGlobalAge:TraditionFacestheTwenty-FirstCentury,WalnutCreek,CA:AltaMiraPress,pp.1–26.Altglas,V.(2010),‘Globalizationandreligion:Anoverview’,inV.Altglas(ed.),ReligionandGlobalization:CriticalConceptsinSocialStudies,Vol.1,London,UK:Routledge,pp.1–17.Altglas,V.(2014),FromYogatoKabbalah:ReligiousExoticismandtheLogicsofBricolage,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
162152HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAmstutz,G.andU.Dessì(eds)(2014),‘NewresearchonJapanesereligionsunderglobalization’,JournalofReligioninJapan,Specialissue,3(2–3),Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill.Andaya,B.W.(2017),‘GlocalizationandthemarketingofChristianityinearlymodernSoutheastAsia’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,8(1),7.Appadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Ariga,T.(1963),‘Theproblemofindigenization’,JapaneseReligions,3(1),40–50.Askegaard,S.andG.M.Eckhardt(2012),‘Glocalyoga:Re-appropriationintheIndianconsumption-scape’,MarketingTheory,12(1),45–60.Atido,G.P.(2017),‘ChurchrevitalizationinCongo:Missiologicalinsightsfromonechurch’seffortsatglocalization’,InternationalBulletinofMissionResearch,41(4),326–34.Audi,M.(2016),‘WorldChristianityincrisis:Glocalization,re-transmission,andBokoHaram’schallengetoNigerianBaptists(2000–2012)’,PhDdissertation,SouthwesternBaptistTheologicalSeminary.Axford,B.(2016),‘Connectivityandconsciousness:Howglobalitiesareconstitutedthroughcommu-nicationflows’,inR.RobertsonandD.Buhari-Gulmez(eds),GlobalCulture:ConsciousnessandConnectivity,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.41–53.Bauck,S.andT.Maier(2015),‘Entangledhistory’,InterAmericanWiki:Terms-Concepts-CriticalPerspectives,accessed16August2020atwww.uni-bielefeld.de/cias/wiki/e_Entangled_History.html.Beyer,P.(2003),‘De-centringreligioussingularity:TheglobalizationofChristianityasacaseinpoint’,Numen,50(4),357–86.Beyer,P.(2007),‘Globalizationandglocalisation’,inJ.A.BeckfordandN.J.DemerathIII(eds),TheSageHandbookoftheSociologyofReligion,London,UK:Sage,pp.98–117.Beyer,P.(2009),‘Glocalizationofreligions:Pluralauthenticitiesatthecentresandatthemargins’,inM.Dressler,R.GeavesandG.Klinkhammer(eds),SufisinWesternSociety:GlobalNetworkingandLocality,London,UK:Routledge,pp.13–25.Bourdieu,P.(1991),‘Genesisandstructureofthereligiousfield’,ComparativeSocialResearch,13(1),1–44.Bourdieu,P.(1997),‘Theformsofcapital’,inA.H.Halsey,H.Lauder,P.BrownandA.S.Wells(eds),Education,Culture,Economy,Society,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.46–58.Brand,S.(2016),‘“ThisisourJerusalem”:EarlyAmericanEvangelicallocalizationsoftheHebraicRepublic’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,7(1),4.Burity,J.A.(2014),‘LatinAmericanPentecostalismandecumenicalalterglobalismascasesofago-nisticcosmopolitanism’,inM.RoviscoandS.Kim(eds),Cosmopolitanism,ReligionandthePublicSphere,London,UK:Routledge,pp.68–84.Campbell,C.(2007),TheEasternizationoftheWest:AThematicAccountofCulturalChangeintheModernEra,Boulder,COandLondon,UK:ParadigmPublishers.Campbell,G.V.P.(2005),EverythingYouThinkSeemsWrong:GlobalizationandtheRelativizingofTradition,Lanham,MD:UniversityPressofAmerica.Chaves,M.(1994),‘Secularizationasdecliningreligiousauthority’,SocialForces,72(3),749–74.Chubin,F.(2020),‘Glocalizingwomen’sempowerment:FeministcontestationandNGOactivisminIran’,JournalofContemporaryEthnography,49(6),1–30.Csordas,T.J.(2009),‘Introduction:Modalitiesoftransnationaltranscendence’,inT.J.Csordas(ed.),TransnationalTranscendence:EssaysonReligionandGlobalization,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,pp.1–30.Dessì,U.(2011),‘Japanesereligions,inclusivism,andtheglobalcontext’,JapaneseReligions,36(1–2),83–99.Dessì,U.(2012),‘Religion,hybridforms,andculturalchauvinisminJapan’,JournalofReligioninJapan,1(2),168–87.Dessì,U.(2013a),JapaneseReligionsandGlobalization,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Dessì,U.(2013b),‘“GreeningDharma”:ContemporaryJapaneseBuddhismandecology’,JournalfortheStudyofReligion,NatureandCulture,7(3),334–55.Dessì,U.(2014a),‘Religiouschangeasglocalization:ThecaseofShinBuddhisminHonolulu’,inL.KalmansonandJ.M.Shields(eds),BuddhistResponsestoGlobalization,Lanham,MD:LexingtonPress,pp.33–50.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
163Glocalizationandthereligiousfield153Dessì,U.(2014b),‘RisshōKōseikaiwithinglobalization:Amultidimensionalapproach’,JournalofReligioninJapan,‘NewResearchonJapaneseReligionsunderGlobalization’Specialissue,3(2–3),121–40.Dessì,U.(2017a),TheGlobalRepositioningofJapaneseReligions:AnIntegratedApproach,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Dessì,U.(2017b),‘JapaneseBuddhism,relativization,andglocalization’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,8(1),12.Dessì,U.(2019),Religionieglobalizzazione.Un’introduzione,Rome,Italy:Caroccieditore.Engelsviken,T.,LundebyE.andD.Solheim(eds)(2011),TheChurchGoingGlocal:MissionandGlobalisation,Oxford,UK:RegnumBooksInternational.Farahmand,M.(2016),‘Glocalizationandtransnationalizationin(neo)-Mayanizationprocesses:EthnographiccasestudiesfromMexicoandGuatemala’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,7(2),17.Fujino,G.(2010),‘“Glocal”Japaneseself-identity:AmissiologicalperspectiveonparadigmaticshiftsinurbanTokyo’,InternationalJournalofFrontierMissiology,27(4),171–82.Gibson-Graham,J.K.(2002),‘Beyondglobalvs.local:Economicpoliticsoutsidethebinaryframe’,inA.HerodandM.W.Wright(eds),GeographiesofPower,Oxford,UK:Blackwell,pp.25–60.Guglielmi,M.(2018),‘GlobalizationandOrthodoxChristianity:Aglocalperspective’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,9(7),216.Hannerz,U.(1996),TransnationalConnections:Culture,People,Places,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Haynes,J.(2019),‘FromHuntingtontoTrump:Twenty-fiveyearsofthe“clashofcivilizations”’,TheReviewofFaith&InternationalAffairs,17(1),11–23.Hill,M.D.(2010),‘Myth,globalization,andmestizajeinNewAgeAndeanreligion:Theinticchurin-cuna(childrenoftheSun)ofUrubamba,Peru’,Ethnohistory,57(2),263–89.Hobsbawm,E.andT.Ranger(eds)(1983),TheInventionofTradition,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Howell,S.(1995),‘Whoseknowledgeandwhosepower?Anewperspectiveonculturaldiffusion’,inR.Fardon(ed.),Counterworks:ManagingtheDiversityofKnowledge,London,UK:Routledge,pp.164–81.Hutchinson,M.P.(2018),‘Glocalizedandindigenizedtheologiesinthetwentiethcentury’,inM.P.Hutchinson(ed.),TheOxfordHistoryofProtestantDissentingTraditions,VolumeV:TheTwentiethCentury:ThemesandVariationsinaGlobalContext,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.258–95.Inoue,N.(1990),‘GurōbarukakaramitakindaiNihonshūkyō’,TokyoDaigakushūkyōgakunenpō,6(1),1–18.Inoue,N.(2007),‘Globalizationandreligion:ThecasesofJapanandKorea’,inP.BeyerandL.Beaman(eds),Religion,Globalization,andCulture,Leiden,TheNetherlandsandBoston,MA:Brill,pp.453–71.James,J.D.(2020),‘Global,“glocal”andlocaldynamicsinCalvaryTemple:India’sfastestgrowingmegachurch’,inS.Hunt(ed.),HandbookofMegachurches,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill,pp.302–322.James,P.andM.Steger(2016),‘Globalizationandglobalconsciousness:Levelsofconnectivity’,inR.RobertsonandD.Buhari-Gulmez(eds),GlobalCulture:ConsciousnessandConnectivity,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.21–39.Karagiannis,E.(2018),TheNewPoliticalIslam:HumanRights,Democracy,andJustice,Philadelphia,PA:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.Krishnaswamy,R.(2002),‘Thecriticismofcultureandthecultureofcriticism:Attheintersectionofpostcolonialismandglobalizationtheory’,Diacritics,32(2),106–126.Küster,V.(2016),‘Fromcontextualizationtoglocalization:Interculturaltheologyandpostcolonialcritique’,Exchange,45(3),203–226.Liu,S.(2011),‘ReflectionsonglocalizationfromaNeo-Confucianperspective’,JournalofChinesePhilosophy,38(1),105–117.Loss,J.(2010),‘Buddha-DhammainIsrael:Explicitnon-religiousandimplicitnon-secularlocalizationofreligion’,NovaReligio,13(4),84–105.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
164154HandbookofcultureandglocalizationLuz,N.(2014),‘Theglocalizationofal-Haramal-Sharif:Designingmemory,mystifyingplace’,inI.Weismann,M.SedgwickandU.Mårtensson(eds),IslamicMythsandMemories:MediatorsofGlobalization,London,UK:Routledge,pp.99–119.Lyon,D.(1998),‘Wheelswithinwheels:Glocalizationandcontemporaryreligion’,inM.HutchinsonandO.U.Kalu(eds),AGlobalFaith:EssaysonEvangelicalismandGlobalization,Sydney,Australia:CentrefortheStudyofAustralianChristianity,pp.47–68.Lyon,D.(2000),JesusinDisneyland:ReligioninPostmodernTimes,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Mandaville,P.G.(2001),TransnationalMuslimPolitics:ReimaginingtheUmma,London,UK:Routledge.Manian,S.andB.Bullock(2016),‘SensingHinduism:Lucian-Indianfuneral“feast”asglocalizedritual’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,7(1),8.Marshall-Fratani,R.(2001),‘MediatingtheglobalandlocalinNigerianPentecostalism’,inA.CortenandR.Marshall-Fratani(eds),BetweenBabelandPentecost:TransnationalPentecostalisminAfricaandLatinAmerica,London,UK:C.Hurst&Co,pp.80–105.Maruyama,T.(2008),‘TowardtheuniversalethicsandvaluesintheAgeofGlobalization:Withref-erencetoJapanesereligionscomparedtomodernrationalism’,PoliticsandReligion,2(2),165–80.Matsue,R.Y.(2014),‘TheglocalizationprocessofShinBuddhisminBrasilia’,JournalofReligioninJapan,‘NewResearchonJapaneseReligionsunderGlobalization’Specialissue,3(2–3),226–46.Montrose,V.R.(2014),‘Floatingprayer:Localization,globalization,andtraditionintheShinnyō-enHawaiilanternfloating’,JournalofReligioninJapan,‘NewResearchonJapaneseReligionsunderGlobalization’Specialissue,3(2–3),177–97.Murray,D.M.andJ.Miller(2013),‘TheDaoistSocietyofBrazilandtheglobalizationofOrthodoxUnityDaoism’,JournalofDaoistStudies,6(1),93–114.Ng,P.T.M.(2007),‘“Glocalization”asakeytotheinterplaybetweenChristianityandAsiancultures:ThevisionofFrancisWeiinearlytwentiethcenturyChina’,InternationalJournalofPublicTheology,1(1),101–111.Obadia,L.(2012),‘Localiseddeterritorialisation?ThecaseoftheglocalisationofTibetanBuddhisminFranceandworldwide’,InternationalSocialScienceJournal,63(209–210),185–95.Palmer,D.A.(2014),‘Transnationalsacralizations:WhenDaoistmonksmeetglobalspiritualtourists’,Ethnos:JournalofAnthropology,79(2),169–92.Pearson,C.(2007),‘Thequestforaglocalpublictheology’,InternationalJournalofPublicTheology,1(2),151–72.Roach,J.R.(1996),CitiesoftheDead:Circum-AtlanticPerformance,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Robbins,J.(2003),‘OntheparadoxesofglobalPentecostalismandtheperilsofcontinuitythinking’,Religion,33(3),221–31.Robertson,R.(1987),‘Globalizationandsocietalmodernization:AnoteonJapanandJapanesereligion’,SociologicalAnalysis,47(S),35–42.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.Robertson,R.(2018),‘Glocalization’,inH.Callan(ed.),ThelnternationalEncyclopediaofAnthropology,London,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.Rocha,C.(2006),ZeninBrazil:TheQuestforCosmopolitanModernity,Honolulu,Hawaii:UniversityofHawai’iPress.Rocha,C.(2017),JohnofGod:TheGlobalizationofBrazilianFaithHealing,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.RodriguezPlasencia,G.(2014),‘SōkaGakkaiinCuba:Buildinga“spiritualbridge”tolocalparticu-larism,the“mysticEast”andtheworld’,JournalofReligioninJapan,‘NewResearchonJapaneseReligionsunderGlobalization’Specialissue,3(2–3),198–225.Romberg,R.(2005),‘Glocalspirituality:ConsumerismandheritageinaPuertoRicoAfro-Latin-folkreligion’,inF.W.KnightandT.Martinez-Vergne(eds),ContemporaryCaribbeanCulturesandSocietiesinaGlobalContext,ChapelHill,NC:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,pp.131–55.Roudometof,V.(2008),‘Greek-Orthodoxy,territorialityandglobality:Religiousresponsesandinstitu-tionaldisputes’,SociologyofReligion,69(1),67–91.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
165Glocalizationandthereligiousfield155Roudometof,V.(2013),‘TheglocalisationsofEasternOrthodoxChristianity’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,16(2),226–45.Roudometof,V.(2014a),GlobalizationandOrthodoxChristianity:TheTransformationsofaReligiousTradition,London,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2014b),‘OrthodoxChristianityandglobalization’,inL.N.Leustean(ed.),EasternChristianitiesandPoliticsintheTwenty-FirstCentury,London,UK:Routledge,pp.776–94.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2018a),‘OrthodoxChristianityandtheState:Therelevanceofglobalization’,ReviewofEcumenicalStudiesSibiu,10(2),212–29.Roudometof,V.(ed.)(2018b),‘Glocalreligions’,Religions,Specialissue,Basel,Switzerland:MDPI.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–817.Scheifinger,H.(2009),‘TheJagannathTempleandonlinedarshan’,JournalofContemporaryReligion,24(3),277–90.Schreiter,R.J.(1997),TheNewCatholicity:TheologybetweentheGlobalandtheLocal,Maryknoll,NY:OrbisBooks.Snow,D.A.andR.D.Benford(1988),‘Ideology,frameresonance,andparticipantmobilization’,InternationalSocialMovementResearch,1(1),197–217.Srinivas,T.(2010),WingedFaith:RethinkingGlobalizationandReligiousPluralismthroughtheSathyaSaiMovement,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Srinivas,T.(2013),‘Towardsculturaltranslation:RethinkingthedynamicsofreligiouspluralismandglobalisationthroughtheSathyaSaimovement’,inR.W.Hefner,J.Hutchinson,S.MelsandC.Timmerman(eds),ReligionsinMovement:TheLocalandtheGlobalinContemporaryFaithTraditions,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.230–45.Storrar,W.F.(2004),‘Wherethelocalandtheglobalmeet:DuncanForrester’sglocalpublictheologyandScottishpoliticalcontext’,inW.F.StorrarandA.R.Morton(eds),PublicTheologyforthe21stCentury,London,UKandNewYork,NY:T&TClark,pp.405–30.Suh,M.-S.(2015),‘Glocalizationof“Christiansocialresponsibility”:ThecontestedlegacyoftheLausanneMovementamongNeo-EvangelicalsinSouthKorea’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,6(4),1391.Tiaynen-Qadir,T.(2017),‘Glocalreligionandfeelingathome:EthnographyofartistryinFinnishOrthodoxliturgy’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,8(2),23.Topel,M.F.(2017),‘BrazilianJewishcommunities:Globalizationandglocalization’,inC.M.deCastroandA.Dawson(eds),Religion,Migration,andMobility:TheBrazilianExperience,London,UK:Routledge,pp.57–71.Ukah,A.(2008),ANewParadigmofPentecostalPower:AStudyoftheRedeemedChristianChurchofGodinNigeria,Trenton,NJ:AfricaWorldPress.vanAlten,D.C.D.(2017),‘GlocalizationandreligiouscommunicationintheRomanempire:Twocasestudiestoreconsiderthelocalandtheglobalinreligiousmaterialculture’,Religions,‘GlocalReligions’Specialissue,8(8),140.VanEngen,C.E.(2006),‘TheGlocalChurch:LocalityandCatholicityinaglobalizingworld’,inC.OttandH.A.Netland(eds),GlobalizingTheology:BeliefandPracticeinanEraofWorldChristianity,GrandRapids,MI:BakerAcademic,pp.157–79.Vásquez,M.A.andM.F.Marquardt(2000),‘GlobalizingtheRainbowMadonna:Oldtimereligioninthepresentage’,Theory,Culture&Society,17(4),119–43.Vásquez,M.A.andM.F.Marquardt(2003),GlobalizingtheSacred:ReligionacrosstheAmericas,NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversityPress.Weber,M.(1922),EconomyandSociety:AnOutlineofInterpretiveSociology(1978),Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Wuaku,A.K.(2013),HinduGodsinWestAfrica:GhanaianDevoteesofShivaandKrishna,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill.Zeller,B.E.(2016),‘OnefootinHelsinki,onefootinMayapur:ISKCONFinlandasaglocalEuropeanreligion’,JournalofReligioninEurope,9(1),66–90.UgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:24AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
16610.Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism:casestudiesofHongKongandTaiwanYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChaoandJiaLingINTRODUCTIONGlocalizationinUrbanStudieshighlightsthaturbanismisacontingentprocess,whichismediatedbyglobalideologiesandpractices.Wearguethat,inthiscontext,glocalizationshouldbesensitivetothelocale-specificnorms,institutionsandpracticesthatactasanimportantimpetustothetrajectoryofglobalmovement.Theglobal–localnexusiskeytounderstandingthevariousoutcomesofglocalization,whichultimatelyimpactwhatwecall‘variegatedurbanism’.Inthischapter,weexaminetwodifferentscenariosofglocalizationinpromotingage-friendlycities(AFCs)inAsiancontexts,specificallythroughcasestudiesofHongKongandTaiwan.ThetwoinstitutionalframeworksofimplementingAFCssuggestthattheactualembodimentofglocalizedpolicyinitiativesisinfluencedbyhybridforces,includingtheglobaldiscoursesandpath-dependentcharacteristicsinthepolicymakingparadigmatthelocallevel.‘Policymobility’isessentialtotheglobal–localnexus:policymobilityfromtheWorldHealthOrganization(WHO)iseffectedinTaiwanthroughstrongleadershipbycitymayors,whereasinHongKong,non-governmentalorganizations(NGOs),universitiesandcharitiesplayanimportantrolethroughstronggrassrootsinitiatives.Throughthecasestudies,wediscusstheadvantagesandbarriers,aswellastheimplicationsforpolicymakingintheeraofglocalization.Theremainderofthechapterconsistsoffiveparts.Inthefirstofthese,theconceptandcontentsofglobalizationarecriticallyreviewed,withparticularreferencetotheglobal–localinterplayandtheprocessofreterritorializationintheseeminglynetworkedworldofglobali-zation.Thenextsectionmovestoamorefocusedoverviewofglocalizationandthecity.Inthesectionafter,withparticularfocusonpolicymobility,wearguethaturbancontextsareessentialinthenewglobal–localnexus,astheyembodyhowvariouspracticesandnormsatthegloballevelarefledgedwithlocalcharacteristics,institutionsandwaysofdoing.Inthenextsection,researchmethodsarediscussedandtwocasestudiesarepresentedsoastoexaminehowtheinternationalage-friendlymovementhasbeenintroducedandispractisedintwotigereconomies,thatis,HongKongandTaiwan.Thesubsequentsectionexplorespolicymakingintheeraofglocalizationandemphasizesthesignificanceofurbancontextsinglocalizationstudies.Thefinalsectionconcludeswithananalysisoftheglobal–localnexusinUrbanStudies.156YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
167Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism157GLOBALIZATION,GLOCALIZATIONANDURBANSTUDIESGlobalizationdepictsagrowingnetworkoftradeandforeigninvestment.Thescaleofeco-nomicactivitieshasexpandedinlinewiththeinternationaldivisionoflabourandtheinterna-tionalizationoffirms.Simultaneously,globalizationhasintroducedaprocessofgeographicalconcentration,reifiedasthecoming-into-beingoflocalityandclustersthathaveastrategicimportanceintheglobaleconomy(Dicken,2015).Marshall(2013)providedaframeworktoanalyseflexibleproductionandclusteringofspecializedindustries,inparticularlocalities,againstthebackgroundofglobalization.Whenproductionbecomescustomizedandflexible,aclusterisveryadaptivetotheneedsofclientsandtoachangingproductionenvironment.Theconcentrationcancontrolthetransactioncostintheintermediateprocessofproduction,savingproductioncostsandreducinguncertaintiesincustomer–supplierrelations.Asaresult,globalizationintensifiestherigidityoflocalpractices,thelocalenvironmentandconditionsforglobalproduction.Forexample,ahistoryofindustrialactivities,thepresenceofcentresofinnovation,assistancefromlocalgovernment,andconsensusbetweenworkersandmanagementareallbasicrequirementsforthefunctioningofaclusterengagedinflexi-bleproduction(Amin&Thrift,1992;Harrison,2007).Localityisimportanttofacilitatethecreationofalabourpool,thedevelopmentofatailor-madeinstitutionalenvironment,andthegenerationoflocalknowledgeforthesakeofinnovation.Globalizationisparadoxicallyportrayedasbothboundaryandboundless(Shaw,2003).Ontheonehand,globalizationinvolvestheconstructionofanewunitofboundlessconnection.Forexample,peoplearoundtheworldconsumegeneralizedgoodsmadeavailablebyinterna-tionalretailingindustries.Ontheotherhand,globalizationincursasystematicfragmentationofpre-existingunits.Thisfurthergivesrisetotheconstructionofunitsbehindnewpolitical,institutionalorculturalbarriers(Robertson,2014;Robertson&White,2007).Forinstance,peoplecarrytheirlocalizedpracticesandnegotiatetheirwaythroughthetrailsofglobalmigration,formingtheirownenclavesocietiesinhostnations(Chambers,1994).Intheareaofculturaltourism,exoticizedlocalculturesarereproducedforglobalconsumptioninthemeparksandtouristsites,thusunderminingtheoriginallocalities(Tanetal.,2001).Globalizationthereforeentailsageographicalprocess,bestexpressedintermsofthedialecticofdeterritorializationandreterritorialization(Heldetal.,2000;Scholte,2005).Accordingly,oldformsofterritorialattachmentsaredecoupled,andnewonesareforged.Inthislineofthinking,globalizationbringssomethingmorethanthemerejuxtapositionorinterplayandinterpenetrationofthelocalandtheglobal.Itinvolvesrelationshipsamongthesubnational(orlocal),thenational,andthesupranational(orglobal).Thisinterpretationfeaturesprominentlyintheworkofseveralgeographers(Brenner,2017;Swyngedouw,1997,2004;Swyngedouw&Baeten,2001;Swyngedouw&Kaika,2005).Forexample,Brenner(2009)arguesthatcapitalismhasalwaysoperatedatdifferentspatialscales,fromthelocaltotheglobal.Scalarpoliticsisnotonlyaboutdecentralizationandderegulation,butalsotheformulationofnewregulatoryenvironmentsatdifferentlocations.Inparticular,thepost-1989restructuringofcapitalisminvolvedamorecomplexspatiality;themultiplespatialscalesaremutuallyconstitutiveandnothierarchical.Thisdoesnotmeanthatglobalandlocalaresimplydissolvedintooneanother;rather,explanationofonerequiresanaccountoftheother.Thelocal–globalproblematicisenshrinedinCastells’s(2009,2010a,2010b)trilogyontheriseofthe‘networksociety’.AccordingtoCastells,theAgeofInformation,whichrevolvesaroundinformationcommunicationtechnology(ICT),isanewepochmarkedbytheYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
168158Handbookofcultureandglocalizationprevalenceofnetworks.Thesenetworksleadtodelocalizedpracticesandinformationflows–rangingfromvideo-conferencingtoemails.Theresultingnewformsofinterconnectivitybindactorstoeachotherwithoutrequiringphysicalco-presence.Thesenewnetworkscreatea‘spaceofflows’thatrestructuresurbancontextsaroundtheglobe.ForCastells,theemergenceofthespaceofflowssignifiesahistoricalwatershedandourentranceintoanewera.Barber(2013)remindsusthatthis‘newglobalspaceofflowsisprofoundlyurban’.Theurbancontextiswherethe‘glocal’isintenselyrevealedandreflected.TheclashbetweenflowsandplacesisacentralleitmotifofCastells’s(2009,2010a,2010b)trilogy.Resistancetothespaceofflowsarisesintheformofcommunitiesorientedaroundplaces.Thosedislocatedorexcludedbythenetworksociety(suchasunneededlabour)naturallygravitatetosuchidentitiesofcommunalresistance–orarerelegatedtothem–as‘electronicnetworksatlarge...tendtoreinforcethecosmopolitanismofthenewprofessionalandmanagerialclasses,livingsymbolicallyinaglobalframeofreference,unlikethoseofthepopulationinanycountry’(Castells,2010b,p.364).Castells(2009)highlightstheextenttowhichglobalizationcreatesbothidentitymovementsthatarehighlyparticularisticinnatureandorientationyetembeddedwithinglobality(suchastheZapatistarevoltinMexico),aswellas‘blackholes’orzonesexcludedfromaccesstothe‘informationsuperhighway’oftheglobalage.Theseareas,Castellsargues,arenotemptyspots;theyarenotoutsideglobality.Castells’sanalysisoffersastarkjuxtapositionbetweentheglobal‘spaceofflows’andthelocal‘spaceofplaces’,butnoresolutionofthebinaryglobal–localopposition.Inthediscussionoftheglobal–localbinary,critiquesofglobalizationanditsfocusontheglobalscalehaveresultedintheemergenceoftheconceptof‘glocalization’tohighlighttheimportanceoflocalcontext.TheconceptsofglobalizationandlocalizationwerefirstcombinedintoglocalizationbymarketingexpertsinJapanasabusinessstrategy(Lyu&McCarthy,2015).Glocalizationemphasizesthataglobalproductwillhavegreaterpoten-tialandthusbemoresuccessfulifitisadaptedforeachlocalitywhereitistobemarketedandsold.Thismeansinternationalproductsneedtobeadaptedtotheparticulareconomic,political,culturalandtechnologicalrequirementsandtastesofeachtargetmarket.Inrecentyears,glocalizationhasbecomeacentralconceptinthebroaderdiscussionofglobalization(Brenner,1998;Robertson,1992;Robertson&White,2007;Roudometof,2015,2016,2019;Swyngedouw,1997).Robertson(1992),whointroducedtheconceptofglocalizationintothefieldofsocialsciences,positedthatglocalizationmeanstheparticularizationofuniversalismandtheuniver-salizationofparticularism,inwhichtheglobal–localinterplayisemphasized.Inthisinterplay,theglobalinterpenetratesthelocal,andtheprocessofpenetrationisdeeplyrootedinrichlocalcontexts.Thelocalisneverquite‘pure’oroutsidetheglobal.Thelocalisconstructed,inpart,inresponsetoandthroughtheinfluencesoftheglobal(Courchene,1995).Inotherwords,‘globalizationisnotsimplydissolvinglocallifeworldsintheirtraditionallocalstructuresandsettings,butisinteractingwiththeminasortoflocalizationor“glocalization”’(Schuerkens,2003,p.2).Assuch,intheprocessofglocalization,theglobalandthelocalshapetheendstate(Roudometof,2016).Whentheimpactofglobalizationpenetratesandreshapeslocales,theprocessradiatesaspectrumofdifferencesandheterogeneity.Simply,glocalizationmeansglobal-localization(Swyngedouw,1997).Theconceptoffersavaluablerefinementoverglobalizationinhighlightinghowtheeffectsofthelatterarenotdisconnectedfromthelocalcontext,butareinfactinfluencedbyit(Swyngedouw,1997).Drawingthefocusbeyondthetraditionaltop-downglobalizationprocess(oftenassociatedYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
169Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism159withforeigndirectinvestmentfromtransnationalcorporations),theconceptofglocalizationincorporatestheimportanceoflocalcontext,inordertoprovideamorecomprehensive,dynamicandinteractiveunderstandingofthelocal–globalnexusinabottom-upway(Lyu&McCarthy,2015).Glocalhasbeenanimportantterminthecross-orinter-disciplinaryareaofUrbanStudies,encompassingcontributionsfromgeography,sociology,urbanplanningandrelatedfields.‘Glocal’(orcloselyrelatedformulations)hasbeenwidelydiscussedasacentralterminthestudyoftwenty-firstcenturyurbanlife(Barber,2013;Brenner,1998,2017;Flusty,2004;Lin&Ke,2010;Sassen,2004,2008,2011;Swyngedouw,1997,2004;Swyngedouw&Baeten,2001).Forexample,Smith(2001)contemplatesglocalizationasatermthatdescribestheexistingrealityofcontemporarytransnationalurbanism.Flusty(2004,pp.58–9)alsoattemptstoexpressasimilarnotionbydifferentiatingbetweenthe‘topheavyverticalcircuit’ofsocialintegrationandthe‘lateralcircuitofglobalformation’involvingthe‘hyper-extendingprac-ticesofeverydaylife’.Therefore,inUrbanStudies,acarefulexaminationoftheglobal–localnexus,ortheprocessofglocalization,isverymuchneeded.GLOCALIZATIONANDTHECITYSwyngedouw(2004)isinfavourofreplacingthenotionofglobalizationwiththatofglocal-ization.Forhim,theinvocationofglobalizationisjustarhetoricaldevicethatobfuscates,marginalizesandsilencessocio-spatialstrugglesoverthereconfigurationofspatialscales.Glocalization,incontrast,isrealandreferstoadualprocess.Ontheonehand,institutionalandregulatoryarrangementsshiftfromthenationalscalebothupwardtosupranationalorglobalscales,anddownwardtothescaleoftheindividualortolocal,urbanorregionalconfigura-tions.Ontheotherhand,economicactivitiesandinter-firmnetworksbecomebothlocalized,orregionalized,andtransnational.Thescalesofeconomicnetworksandinstitutionalarrange-mentsarerecastinwaysthatalterthegeometryofsocialpower.Asaresult,glocalizationisnotsimplytheresurgenceoflocalism.Glocalizationarticu-lateshowlocalpractices,normsandinstitutionsserveasacounter-trendtothehegemonicinfluenceofglobalization(Ritzer,2000,2003).Localityisnotsimplyapassiverecipientofglobalizednorms,ideologiesandpractices;itcanmediatetheimpactsofglobalizationbystra-tegicallyselectingthemostappropriateorganizationalstructuresandpractices,andprovidingcustomizedregulatoryandsocialenvironments(Macleod&Goodwin,1999).Thelocalispresentintheorizingaboutglobalization(Roudometof,2019).Localityrepresentstheneedsofheterogenizationinthecourseofculturalhomogenization(Alexander,2006;Featherstone,1995;Ritzer,2000;Ulrichetal.,2003).Thoselocallyembeddedvaluesandpracticesbecomeparticularlyimportantandhelpfulinrejectinghomogenization.Thisreframingoflocalityanditspowersandvaluesnecessitatesanengagementwiththe‘politicsofscale’throughwhichpeoplecanresistthedichotomybetweencapitalistde-andre-territorialization.Contentiouspolitics–suchasriots(Auyero,2001)orsocialmovements(Urkidi,2010)–coalescearoundcontestsoverthepoliticsofscale;localprotests,althoughgreatlyinfluencedbythedynamicsofglobalcapitalism,arenotisolatedfromlocalities;rather,theyaretheresultofingeniouscombinationsofthetwo.InthecontextofCittaslow,basedinSpain,ServonandPink(2015)examinetheglocalSlowFoodMovement,whichopposesthefastrateofgrowthandproductionfrequentlyemphasizedinglobalization.ThemovementYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
170160Handbookofcultureandglocalizationrepresentsanefforttodevelopalternativestrategiesforcontemporaryurbandevelopment–neithersimplyembracingnortotallyresistingglobalizationandthecompetitivebehaviourassociatedwithit.Rather,theglocalmovementtakeselementsoftheseprocesses,suchastechnologyandbranding,andusesthemtoachieveothergoals,suchaslocalsustainabilityandwell-being.AsCastells(2016,p.240)argues,‘intheageofglobalization,localgovernmentsemergeasflexibleinstitutionalactors,abletorelateatthesametimetolocalcitizensandtoglobalflowsofpowerandmoney’.Theseviewspushurbanpolicymakerstolookbeyondgrowth-orientedvaluesastheycrafttheircities’futures.Inaddition,thesuccessofcitieshingesonthedegreetowhichtheybecomeembeddedininstitutionalnetworksofpowerandtheirlocalelitessuccessfullyforgegrowthcoalitions.SwyngedouwandBaeten(2001)examineBrussels,thecapitaloftheEuropeanUnion,wheretensofthousandsofpeopleareemployedatEUagenciesandinstitutions,therebycreatingconsiderablepotentialforthecity’sgrowth.However,thisdoesnoteffectivelytranslateintobetterprospectsforthecity,theregion,orthecountry.Thenewglocalelitesmightrefusetopartakeinlocalinstitutionalorpoliticalnetworks,astheircommitmenttoplaceisstymiedbytheirglobalstrategiesandaspirations.Althoughthescalarapproachtoglocalizationcanoffertoolsforinterrogatingurbanstrat-egiesandpoliticsofscale,italsoraisesimportantquestionsaboutspace.Spacecanbeinter-pretedquitedifferentlydependingonwhetheritisseenasabsoluteorrelative.Absolutespaceisontologicallygiven–thatis,itexistsindependentofthewayitisperceived.Incontrast,relativespacereferstospaceasitisperceivedbyhumans.Itdoesnotcorrespondtoafixedunitandisnotmeasurable;rather,itisthehumans’‘senseofspace’thatmatters(Relph,1997).Thelocalismoreaboutrelativespace.Globalizationisnotethereal;itisdeeplyrootedatthelocallevel(Eade,1997;Eade&Rumford,2018).The‘lureofthelocal’(Lippard,1997)registerspowerfullyasoneofthemostcommonreferencestothenotionofthelocal,namely,thenotionofa‘localplace’.Massey’s(2005)remarkontheimportanceof‘localplace’pointstotherenewedsignificanceofplacefortwenty-firstcenturygloballife.Thesereflectionspointtoaneedinglocalizationresearchtodrawattentiontotheimportanceof‘locality’inplace,whichalsoactivelyreactstoglobality.Forexample,citizens’‘senseofplace’denotestheexperiential,emotionalandaestheticfeelingofaparticularlocation–endowedwithuniquemeaningsandvalues.Assuch,animportantaspectofglocalizationinUrbanStudiesistomakesenseofcontextuallyspecificnorms,culturesandwaysofdoinginthemidstofglobalization.Bythinkingofthelocalasaplace,localizationarticulatesaprocessofplace-making,whichinturnhelpstodifferentiatethelocalfromthoseconceptsrelevanttoglobalization(Roudometof,2019).Forexample,conceptssuchas‘culturalimperialism’(theimposi-tionbyonedominantcultureontoanothernon-dominantculture)(Kim&Shin,2010),‘Americanization’(theinfluenceofAmericancultureandbusinessonothercountriesoutsidetheUS)(O’Byrne&Hensby,2011),and‘grobalization’(anotionthatfocusesoneconomicgrowthintheprocessofglobalization)(Ritzer,2012)allrequireon-sitepracticesandsocialnetworksoflocalactorsandgroups.Thisisbecauselocallivesaredeterminedbyaffiliations,affectionsandobligationsthatareconstructedaroundtheplace.Mostpeoplelivelocallivesthatarelargelydependentontheco-presenceofplaceandtime,andinterpersonalsociability(Perkins&Thorns,2012).Localityhasbecomeanimportantscalethatrespondstoaninternationally-orientedpolicyframework.Thelocalhorizonsofeconomiccooperation,institutionalcoordinationandpolit-icalmobilizationhavebecomeessentialforeffectinggloballyorientedpolicymakinganditsYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
171Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism161embodiment.Inpolicymaking,localagentsandtheirfunctionalstructuresdeterminehowinternationalpoliciesaresituatedandtransformed,whicharealsoimportanttopolicyeffec-tiveness(Sunetal.,2017).THEGLOBAL–LOCALNEXUSANDTHESTRATEGICIMPORTANCEOFURBANCONTEXTSTherisingsignificanceoflocalityhasnotbeenaspontaneousprocess.Asanewspatialscaleinglobal–localdialectics,ithasrequiredpoliticaldrivers.Intheanalysisofscale,Jones(1997)andBrenner(2004)putforward‘statespatialselectivity’,highlightingthatthestatestrategi-callycreatesanewscalarascendantbyreinventinggovernanceandinstitutionalarrangementatthelocallevel.Glocalizationfromtheperspectiveofscalarpoliticsisageo-politicalprocess,wherebypoliticalactionandeconomicrestructuringtriggertherescalingoflocalitiesintermsoftheirfunctionalimportance(Roudometof,2015;Swyngedouw,1997,2004).Theriseoflocalityisinlinewithcrisis-copingstrategiesofthestateatdifferenttimes.Forexample,tocopewiththeFordistcrisis,thelocusofcapitalaccumulationchangedfromlargeindustrialregions(forexample,Detroit)tostrategiccityregions(suchasNewYork,LondonandParis).Cityregionsandmetropolitanareasbecametheprivilegedarenainwhichtoachievethedevelopmentagendaunderpost-Fordism,suchasgrowthandterritorialcom-petitiveness(Klink,2013;Paganoni,2012;Tickell&Peck,1992).Thiswasachievedthroughurbanplanning,policymaking,theinventionofnewgovernance,andaconstantprocessofdecentralization,whichmadelocalstatesproactiveandpresentedthestrategicimportanceofurbancontexts(Sun&Chan,2017).Assaid,thescalarapproachfromapurespatialperspectivemayfailtocapturetheparticu-larityoflocalspacepresentedbyvariegatedurbanism.Againstthecontextsofglocalizationandneoliberalism,analysisofpolicymobilityneedstoconsidertheurbancontexts:notonlythefunctionalimportanceofthestate(orlocalstate)insteeringlocalpolicyinitiativesbutalsotheinvolvementofnon-stateactorsasaresultofprivatizationandmarketization(Peck,2004).Localpolicymakingbearsastrongcharacteristicofflexibility,bywhichthedirectinterventionofthestatehasbeenreplacedbytheemergenceofnewregulatorynormsandpractices;thatis,ahybridmodeofurbangovernancethatincludesdevolution,interventionandnegotiation(Pierre,1998;Swyngedouw&Baeten,2001).Thisgivesrisetovariegatedurbangovernanceinpromptingdevelopmentandrespondingtothoseglobalchallenges.Seenfromtheseperspectives,centraltoglocalizationishowstructuralcoherencecouldbeformedatthelocallevelconsideringnotonlytheinstitutionaldesignandactualinstitutionaloutcomesbutalsothefunctionalmechanismsamongactors/agents,policynetworks,andthestrategiesmediatedinbetween.Horizontally,policymakinginvolvesvariousactorsthatmaynotbelongtoaformalstateinstitution.Vertically,policymakingismorethan‘fromglobaltolocal’,butaglobal–localnexus.Theglobalpolicy‘models’havethenormativepowertoinformpolicymakinginotherlocations.Similarly,localpolicymakingnotonlyechoesbutalsoinformsthetrajectoryoftheglobalpolicymovement.Whileglobalizationhasexpandedthescopeandinfluenceofurbanpolicyformation,citieshavebecomeakeysiteforlocalinterpretationofglobalknowledge,withvariegatedmani-festationsofeconomicactivities,politicalstrategies,spatialdevelopmentpatternsandsociallandscapes.ThepolicymobilityfromglobaltolocalisinfluencedbyglobalknowledgeandYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
172162Handbookofcultureandglocalizationpractices,andisalsodependentonlocalpoliticalagendasandinstitutions(McCann,2011;McCann&Ward,2012;Peck&Theodore,2010).Localagentsandtheirfunctionalstruc-turearekeyelementsintermsofhowglobalpoliciesaresituatedandtransformedinurbancontexts.AGE-FRIENDLYPOLICYMAKINGINHONGKONGANDCHIAYI:TWOCASESTUDIESTheMethodThisstudyendeavourstoconductaninstitutionalanalysisonthelocalizationofaglobalsocialpolicy,thatis,theage-friendlycity(AFC)initiativepromotedbyWHO,fromaglocalizationperspective.Knowledgeandpracticesfromtheglobeareadaptedtolocalitiesforsolvingplace-specificpolicyissues.Howaredifferentlocalpolicyframeworkseffectedthroughthestrategicparticipationoflocalactorsandaspecificstructural‘solution’?Toexplorethisques-tion,HongKongandChiayiCityinTaiwanwereselectedastwocasestudies.AcomparativestudyofTaiwanandHongKongprovidesanewlensthroughwhichtounderstandglocalizationintermsofsocialpolicydevelopmentandsocialregulation.Collectionofempiricaldatainvolvedsemi-structuredinterviewswithlocalgovernmentofficials,academics,andNGOrepresentativeswhoparticipatedineitherthelaunchofAFCprojectsorthebaselineassessmentofage-friendliness.Theinterviewsrevolvedaroundques-tionsabouthowAFC-relatedpoliciesandinitiativeswereinitiated,withparticularreferencetotheparticipatingactors,strategies,priorityissues,andhowthelocalinstitutionalframeworkalignedwithWHO’sglobalvision.ProjectmanagersandcoordinatorsinbothcitieswereinterviewedtoobtaintheirvisionsandexpectationsonAFCs.Inaddition,weanalysedarangeofdocumentarymaterialsfromlocalauthorities,NGOsandsteeringcommittees,aswellasfeaturereportsandlocalactionplans.TheGlobalAge-FriendlyCity(AFC)InitiativeTheWorldHealthOrganization(WHO)isaleadingagencyinimplementingglobaleffortsfordiseasecontrolandactiveageing.Theconceptofage-friendlinessderivesfromasetofpolicyandadvocacyinitiativesthatweredevelopedinthe1990sand2000s.‘Activeageing’wasproposedasatermduringtheEuropeanNations’YearofOlderPeoplein1999,whichwasfurtherelaboratedbyWHO(2002,p.12)as‘continuingparticipationinsocial,economic,cultural,spiritual,andcivicaffairs,notjusttheabilitytobephysicallyactiveortoparticipateinthelabourforce’.Centraltoactiveageingistheenvironment,whichconsistsofasetofspatialscalesrangingfromtheimmediateenvironment,theneighbourhood,theecologicalenvironmentandthemacro-environment.Theconceptwasfurtherelaboratedwithparticularreferencetourbancontexts.Thisisbecauseurbanizationhasbecomeasignificanttrendacrosstheworld,giventhatmorethanhalfoftheglobalpopulationcanbefoundincities.In2006,WHOinitiatedthe‘GlobalAge-friendlyCity’projectanddevelopedauniversalAFCchecklistapplicabletodifferentcontexts.Thechecklistincludeseightdomains,includ-ingoutdoorspacesandbuildings,transportation,housing,socialparticipation,respectandsocialinclusion,civicparticipationandinformation,communitysupport,andhealthservicesYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
173Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism163(WHO,2007).Theoverallobjectiveistoenableagoodstandardoflivingforcitizensofallagesandcapacities.Topromotearea-basedAFCinitiatives,WHOlaunchedtheGlobalNetworkofAge-friendlyCitiesin2010.ThenetworkaimstoconnectparticipatingcitiestoWHOsoastofacilitatetheexchangeofinformationandbestpractices.Inthisway,aninterna-tionalpolicynetworkisnurturedwhereinWHOcanprovidetechnicalguidanceandtrainingtofacilitatelocalimplementation.Participatingcitiesneedtofollowafour-stagecycle:planning(foranage-friendlycommunity),implementation,evaluationandimprovement(WHO,2009).TheAFCmovementspellsoutsomeuniversalstrategiesforassessmentandprogrammeimplementation,whichcanalsoinformfuturepolicyinitiatives.Inaddition,WHOandtheparticipatingcitiesareconnectedthroughthenetwork’scross-nationalpolicyframework.HongKong:AGrassrootsModeofPolicyMobilityIn2008,theHongKongCouncilofSocialService(HKCSS)–aterritory-wideNGO–initi-atedtheAFCmovementinHongKong.AsteeringcommitteewassetuptodevelopanAFCprogrammewithparticipantsfrommemberNGOs,districtcouncilsandcommunities.Underthesteeringcommittee,theNGOswereresponsibleformobilizingtheirownnetworksandresourcesandmakingdistrict-specificAFCprogrammes.HKCSSprovidedgeneralAFCprojectguidancetotheNGOsandfacilitatedtheexchangeofinformationandbestpractices.Thedeliveryphase,however,revealedcertainshortcom-ings,primarilyinthatsomeprogrammesseemedtoincludeonlyasmallproportionofolderpeople,whoweremembersoftheNGOs.Thenarrowscopeemergedasareflectionofthelimitedresources.Forexample,someAFCprogrammesweredevelopedonlyforfrailpeople.NGOs,whoplayanessentialroleinprovidingsocialservicesviathesubsidiesandfundingtheyreceivefromthegovernmentfordailyoperationsandprogrammedelivery,wereengagedinacompetitionamongstthemselvestoaccessthegovernmentresourcesandsupport.ManyNGOsthushadtoconsiderfiscalausterityinprogrammedelivery.Intheimplementationphaseoftheprogramme,thepartnershipsbetweenNGOsanddis-trictcouncilswerecrucial,asthelatterareresponsibleforimprovingcommunityspacesandfacilities.NGOsoccasionallyhadtolobbydistrictcouncilstoensurespecificproposalswerefunded.Thereweremanyconcernsfromdistrictcouncils,forexamplearoundbudgetandleadership(thatis,whowouldleadtheproject).Sometimes,districtcouncilmembersutilizedtheirinvolvementintheprogrammeasawaytogathervotesinlocalelections.Therewasalsotheriskofinconsistencyinpolicydeliveryiforiginaldistrictcouncilmemberssteppeddownintheprogrammeperiod.Thesamepoliciesandinitiativesmightnotbecarriedforwardbythesuccessor.In2009,scholarsanddoctors,mostlyworkingonthefrontlineofgerontologyandgeriatrics,launchedanewprogrammewithaparticularphilosophythatcelebratedtheelderly,specifi-callytheir‘never-endingzest’.InitiativesunderthisprogrammewerebasedonarepackagingofapreviouslyfundedprojectbytheJockeyClub(JC)charity.Theprogrammeaimedtochangethenegativeperceptionstowardsolderpeopleandproposedwaysthatseniorcitizenscouldreconnectwithsociety.In2014,JCpartneredwithHongKong’sfourgerontologyresearchinstitutesandformallykick-startedanewAFCprojectinHongKong,followingtheguidanceprovidedbyWHO.Atthedistrictlevel,avarietyofstakeholderswereinvolvedinthepromotionofAFCprogrammes,includingNGOs,districtcouncils,universitiesandcharities.Programmeimple-YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
174164Handbookofcultureandglocalizationmentationrevealedanorganizationalmosaic.Astheinvolvementofdistrictcouncilsisimpor-tanttolocalpolicyimplementation,competitionbetweenNGOsandcharitiesinthesearchfordistrictpartnerswasinevitable.DrivenbytheJCanduniversities,theAFCmovementwasfinallyincorporatedinthe2016PolicyAddress.ThisisthefirstAFCcourseofactionannouncedbytheChiefExecutiveofHongKongsoastogenerateanintegratedvisionatthestrategiclevelwithprioritizedareasforaction.TheChiefExecutivepledgedtoimprovethebuiltenvironmentandelderlyfacilitiesthroughacross-sectorcollaboration(ChiefExecutiveoftheHKSAR,2016).Inresponsetothis,districtsacrossHongKongwereurgedtoparticipateintheGlobalAFCNetwork,andtheSocialWelfareDepartmentofHongKongwouldprovidemoneyforeachdistrictinpreparation.Ittookalmosttenyearsfromgrassrootsgovernancetoatop-downgovernmentactionplantopromoteAFCinitiativesinHongKong.ChiayiCity:AFCasaLocalStateProjectChiayiwasthefirstTaiwanesecitytopromoteAFCswhenthemovementwasformallylaunchedin2010.Localgovernmenttooktheleadingroleinthisinitiative.Themayorformedacounsellingteamwhosememberscamefromalocaluniversity,NGOsandthecommunity.Theaimwastoconductabaselinesurveytoassesstheage-friendlinessoflocalcommunitiesandpromotecommunityoutreach.Basedontheassessment,keyAFCdomainswereidentified,includingsafety,supportforolderpersons,andaccessibilityofcarefacilitiesandresources.Accordingly,itwasdeterminedthatageinginplaceneedstoconsiderthesocio-spatialfeaturesofthebuiltenvironment,withparticularreferencetothedevelopmentofanenablingenvironmentaddressingsafety,conven-ience,dailyneeds,accessibility,andcomfortableliving.ThesekeyfactorswereincorporatedintothelocalAFCchecklist,encompassing110indicatorsundervariousdomains.Apartfromtheassessment,anumberofawareness-raisingcampaignswereorganizedwithaviewtoeducatingandgainingthesupportofthegeneralpublic.MostcampaignsweredeliveredincollaborationwithlocalNGOs,ledbythelocalgovernment.Withtheinputofthecounsellingteam,localAFCpracticeswereabletobebenchmarkedagainstWHO’sglobalpractices,andChiayiofficiallysubmittedtheapplicationtojointheAFCNetworkinJune2011.Apartfromtheleadershipbymunicipalgovernment,collaborativepartnershipswereformedinaninstitutionalizedstructure(thatis,byestablishingasteeringcommittee)withthemayor,governmentofficials,representativesfromministries,professionals,NGOsandthepublic.Thisstructurehelpedexpandthepolicynetworkhorizontallybyincludingbothstateandnon-stateactors.Vertically,withtheinvolvementofmayorsandministries,policyimplementationbecamemoreeffective,withbettercoordinationandmonitoring.Thesteeringcommittee,establishedin2011undertheleadershipofthemayor,deputymayor,andthedirectorofthePlanningDepartment,wasresponsibleformaking,implementingandmoni-toringthelong-termAFCschemeandpolicies,whichalsorequiredalotofcoordinationwithotherstakeholders.Toaddresscommunityawarenessandcapacity-building,aseriesofpublicconsultationsandcommunityworkshopswereorganizedondifferentaspectsoftheAFCdomains.Thesteeringcommitteehasthreelevelsofhierarchy(Figure10.1).Themayorsanddeputymayorsareresponsibleforsettingupgoalsandactionplans,aswellasprovidingsupportandleadershiptospecificworkinggroups.Underthecommittee,therearespecificworkinggroupsledbyindividualdepartments.TheyareresponsibleforformulatingimplementationYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
175Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism165guidelinesandpromotionstrategies,aswellasmonitoringtheprogressofadhocgroups.Thelatterparticipateinworkinggroupmeetingstosetadetailedcourseofactionandintegrateinputfromotherstakeholders.Ineachmeeting,stakeholdersfromnon-governmentalsectors,academicsandthegeneralpublicareinvolvedtoensureawideengagementandwinpublicsupport.Theseworkinggroupsareentrepreneurialandinnovative,withanaimofmobilizingresourcesfromsocietyandpromotingacommonobjective:buildingage-friendlycities.Figure10.1Thethree-layerpolicymakingframeworkinChiayiCityAsanalternativeplatformtothelinearframeworkofpolicymakingadministeredbylocalgov-ernment,face-to-facedialogueconsolidatesthecommitmenttotheexistingpolicyframeworkandhelpsgeneratecommonobjectivesunderthegoalssetbythesteeringcommittee.WhenAFCpoliciesmovedfromglobaltolocal,thiscollaborativegovernancewasconducivetogenerating‘smallwins’(Ansell&Gash,2008),astheoverallpolicyoutcomeswereachievedunderplannedstages.Over20communitieshavevolunteeredtopromoteage-friendlyprojectssince2014.Chiayihasalsobeenrankedasthemostliveablecityforolderpersonsaccordingtoa2015follow-upsurveybythecentralgovernment.FollowingthesuccessfulexperienceofChiayi,anothereightcountiesandcitiessubmittedapplicationstothenetworkinlate2011,givingTaiwanthehighestparticipationrateintheworld.JustfiveyearsintotheinceptionoftheAFCagenda,tremendousattentionwasgarneredfromministriesanddepartmentsacrossgovernmentlevels.Forinstance,theNationalSpatialPlan2016announcedthatcreatingaresilientageingsocietywasakeyelementinfacingthechallengeofclimatechange.Meanwhile,provisionoffacilitiesforolderpersonswasidentifiedasapriorityintheurbanplanningreviewprocess.Thus,theconceptofAFCswasincorporatedintothestrategicdevelopmentplan.UNDERSTANDINGGLOCALIZATIONINPOLICYMAKINGThefunctioningofglocalizationisdeterminedbystakeholders,strategiesandtheinstitutionalstructurethatconnectsstakeholderswiththeirdesignatedpolicyoutcomes.AlthoughAFCshavebecomeapartoftheglobalpolicyagenda,theembeddednessofthemovementinHongYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
176166HandbookofcultureandglocalizationKongandTaiwanrevealstwocontrastingmodesandpractices.TheHongKongcasereflectsagrassrootsmodewherebypromotionandimplementationarefacilitatedbyNGOs,charities,districtcouncilsanduniversities.Chiayi,incontrast,reflectsathree-levelpolicyframeworkwithhierarchicalcoordinationbetweenthesteeringcommitteeandadhocgroups,aswellashorizontalexchangebetweentheministryandnon-stateactors.ThetwodifferentinstitutionalframeworksofimplementingAFCssuggestpath-dependentcharacteristicsinthepolicymakingparadigm;inotherwords,theactualembodimentofglocal-izedpolicyinitiativescarriesthelegacyofpreviousmodesandpractices.SocialpolicymakinginTaiwanisimprintedonitstraditionofbeinga‘corporatistwelfarestate’.Consequently,thegovernmenthasanobligationtosupportgrowthandsimultaneouslyencouragesolidarityamongitscitizens(Hill&Hwang,2005).Explicitgoalsweresetbythehighestlevelofgov-ernmentofficialsinpromotingTaiwan’sAFCs,includinganationalvisionarounditsageingsociety.InthecaseofChiayi,thecentralgovernmentwasresponsibleforframingthemeaningofAFCandsettingupthenationalvision.Inresponsetothiscall,thecity’sgovernmentcoordinateddifferentgovernmentdepartmentsandworkedcloselywiththenon-governmentsector,includingthelocaluniversityandNGOs.Keylocalofficials,suchasmayorsanddeputymayors,tookaleadingroleinsettingthepolicyagendaandensuringenforcement.Inaddition,thesteeringcommitteeconductedbroadersocialoutreachthroughbuildingpartnershipsatdifferentstages,forexampleduringthegeneralframeworksetup,projectimplementationandfeedbackcollection.Theleadershipfromthetopgovernmentofficialsstrengthenedtheinsti-tutionalguaranteeforcross-sectorcollaborationandalinearmodeofpolicyimplementation.Incontrast,policymakinginHongKongisinfluencedbyalaissez-faireideology(Wong,2012).Governmentinterventiontendstobeweakinmanyaspectsofsocio-economicdevel-opment.Forexample,thesocialwelfaresysteminHongKongaimstoprovideonlyaminimalsafetynet.ThegovernmentprovidesprojectfundingtoNGOswithaviewtoencouraginghealthycompetitiontoenhancebothcostsavingsandserviceprovisionefficiency.Hence,thedeliveryofpoliciesthatsupportolderpersonshashistoricallybeenthedomainofNGOs.Assuch,NGOsandcharitableorganizationshadbeenimplementinginitiativestopromoteage-friendliness,evenbeforesuchinitiativeswereformallyannouncedinthe2016PolicyAddress.NGOs’connectionswithdistrictcouncilmemberswereessentialtopromotedistrict-basedAFCprogrammes.Thereweresomeproblemsrelatedtothismode,suchasalackofcoordi-nationamongdifferentdistricts.Assuch,fragmentationisonebarriertoachievingintegratedpolicyoutcomes.Competitionamongdifferentsocialorganizationswasinevitable,thushinderingtheinceptionofacomprehensiveAFCactionplan.Theenterprisemodeofpolicyimplementationneededtoconsiderpublicity,costandeffect,whichmayhavebeenthereasonthatthepolicywaseffectiveforasmallergroupofbeneficiaries.Moreover,thegovernmentdidnotparticipatedirectlyinthepromotionofage-friendlypoliciesbutallocatedmoneytodistrictcouncils.NGOsandcharitieshadtolobbydistrictcouncilmembersforfinancialsupportandapproval.Inbothcases,membershipoftheGlobalAFCNetworkwasafactorinaligningthelocalAFCwithaninternationalpolicyregime.Thetwolocalitiesrepresentedtwoscenariosintermsofhowtheglobal–localnexuscanbeembodied,whichmeansthelocalimplementationoftheglobalAFCmovementiscontingentondifferentparticipatingactorsandtheirstrategies.Althoughglocalizationpushesforwardvariouspolicyexercisesatlocalities,differentstrate-YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
177Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism167giesareusedtopushlocalinitiativesupwards,indifferentways,tointerpretandexercisetheoriginalpolicyideologyintheglobalarena.CONCLUSIONSInthischapter,weprovideanoverviewofglobalization/glocalizationinUrbanStudiesandcallforamorefocuseddiscussiononembodiedglocalizationbymakingsenseofcontextuallyspecificinstitutions,cultures,regulatorynormsandon-sitepracticesthatarereassembledatthelocallevelforproducinglocalityandglobality.InUrbanStudies,glocalizationaccentuatestheimportanceofurbancontextsincreatingorpresentinglocalityandgaininginternationalinfluence.Wethereforehighlightthestrategicimportanceoftheurbancontextintheanalysisoftheglobal–localnexusintheglocalizationagenda,bynarrowingourhorizondowntopolicymakingissues.Glocalizationisassociatedwithamixedandconstantprocessofdeterritorializationandreterritorialization(Swyngedouw,1997,2004),whereasglobalizationintensifieslocalitybuilding.Theconcentrationofproductiveelementsandfavourableinstitutionsinselectedclus-tersandlocationsisconducivetofacilitatinggrowthandcompetitiveness.Global-localization,thatis,glocalization,characterizesthegeographyofconcentratedsocioeconomicactivitiesbehindseeminglyexpandingnetworksoftradeandpartnerships.Citiesorcityregionsbecomeimportantarenasforparticipatinginglobalproductionchainsandinternationalcompetitive-ness.Wearguethatglocalizationisageo-politicalprocess.Cities,asanewspatialscale,donothappenspontaneously,butareareflectionofstatespatialselectivity.Thenationalandlocalstatesplayanimportantroleinthelocality-buildingprocessbyinterpretinginternationalnormsandpracticesandadaptingthemtolocalurbancontexts.Simultaneously,variousnon-stateactorsareinvolvedinpromotingpolicymakingandgov-ernance.Localityisnotapassiverecipient,butactivelyremakesthepolicytrajectoryofthoseglobally-orientedideologiesandpractices.Centraltotheglobal–localnexusishowstructuralcoherencecanbeformedatalocaleconsideringnotonlytheinstitutionaldesignacrosstheglobebutalsothedynamicsoflocalactors/agents,institutions,culturesandsocialpractices.BycomparingHongKongandChiayi,wehighlightthedynamicinteractionsbetweenglobalknowledgeandlocalpracticesinpromotingpolicymobilityandembeddedness,whichgiverisetovariegatedage-friendlyurbanism.Theconnectionbetweenlocalactionsandthepre-vailinginternationalhegemonicagendaiscontingentonlocalregulatoryframeworksandthepath-dependentcharacteristicsinpolicymakingparadigms.TheTaiwancaserevealsaformalizedinstitutionalsettingledbytopgovernmentofficialswhoareresponsibleforpolicymobilizationandeffectiveness.TheHongKongcaserevealsacounter-scenario–ledbyNGOsandcharities,theinvolvementofgovernmentisrestrictedtoprovidingfinancialsupportwherenecessary.Whilethetop-downinitiativesaregoodforefficiency,theymayneglectopportunitiesforsocialinnovationfromothersocietalmembers.Meanwhile,thegrassrootsmodecreatescompetitionandfragmentation,butisalsolessresource-drivenandmorecost-effective.Thecasestudiesrevealthattheoutcomesofaparticularpolicyregimerelyagreatdealonlocalconditions.Policymakingshouldbesensitivetolocalcontexts,localknowledgeand,moreimportantly,theparticularlocalgovernancemodeformobilizationandcollectivelearning.Althoughtheroleofgovernmentisimportant,civilsocietyandhighereducationYiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
178168Handbookofcultureandglocalizationinstitutionscantakeaproactiveroleinpushinginternationalpolicydownwards.Collaborativegovernancebetweenthestateandassociatedstakeholdersisthekeytogeneratingpolicyout-comesforthebestinterestsforallstakeholders.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSTheprojectisfundedbytheHongKongPolytechnicUniversity.WeareverygratefultotheconstructivecommentsfromProfessorVictorRoudometof.ThankyoutoCUHKJockeyClubInstituteofAgeingforitsstrongsupport.REFERENCESAlexander,J.C.(2006),TheMeaningsofSociallife:ACulturalSociology,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Amin,A.andN.Thrift(1992),‘Neo‐Marshalliannodesinglobalnetworks’,InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch,16(4),571–87.Ansell,C.andA.Gash(2008),‘Collaborativegovernanceintheoryandpractice’,JournalofPublicAdministrationResearchandTheory,18(4),543–71.Auyero,J.(2001),‘Glocalriots’,InternationalSociology,16(1),33–53.Barber,B.(2013),IfMayorsRuledtheWorld.DysfunctionalNations,RisingCities,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Brenner,N.(1998),‘Globalcities,glocalstates:GlobalcityformationandstateterritorialrestructuringincontemporaryEurope’,ReviewofInternationalPoliticalEconomy,5(1),1–37.Brenner,N.(2004),‘UrbangovernanceandtheproductionofnewstatespacesinwesternEurope,1960–2000’,ReviewofInternationalPoliticalEconomy,11(3),447–88.Brenner,N.(2009),‘UrbangovernanceandtheproductionofnewstatespacesinWesternEurope,1960–2000’,inB.Arts,A.LagendijkandH.J.vanHoutum(eds),TheDisorientedState:ShiftsinGovernmentality,TerritorialityandGovernance,Dordrecht,Germany:Springer,pp.41–77.Brenner,N.(2017),‘Beyondstate-centrism?Space,territoriality,andgeographicalscaleinglobalizationstudies’,inC.Philo(ed.),TheoryandMethods:CriticalEssaysinHumanGeography,pp.313–36.Castells,M.(2009),TheRiseoftheNetworkSociety,Oxford,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.Castells,M.(2010a),EndofMillennium,Oxford,UK:Wiley-Blackwell.Castells,M.(2010b),ThePowerofIdentity,Malden,MA:Wiley-Blackwell.Castells,M.(2016),‘Spaceofflows,spaceofplaces:Materialsforatheoryofurbanismintheinforma-tionage’,inR.LeGatesandF.Stout(eds),TheCityReader,Abingdon,UK:Routledge,pp.263–74.Chambers,I.(1994),Migrancy,Culture,Identity,London,UK:Routledge.ChiefExecutiveoftheHKSAR(2016),The2016PolicyAddress:InnovatefortheEconomy,ImproveLivelihood,FosterHarmony,ShareProsperity,HongKong:GovernmentLogisticsDepartment.Courchene,T.J.(1995),‘Glocalization:Theregional/internationalinterface’,CanadianJournalofRegionalScience,18(1),1–20.Dicken,P.(2015),GlobalShift:MappingtheChangingContoursoftheWorldEconomy,NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.Eade,J.(1997),LivingtheGlobalCity:GlobalizationasaLocalProcess,London,UK:Routledge.Eade,J.andC.Rumford(2018),Re-livingtheGlobalCity:Global/localProcesses,London,UK:Routledge.Featherstone,M.(1995),UndoingCulture:Globalization,PostmoderismandIdentity,London,UK:Sage.Flusty,S.(2004),De-Coca-colonization:MakingtheGlobefromtheInsideOut,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Harrison,B.(2007),‘Industrialdistricts:Oldwineinnewbottles?’,RegionalStudies,26(5),469–83.YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
179Glocalization,thecityandvariegatedage-friendlyurbanism169Held,D.,McGrew,A.,Goldblatt,D.andJ.Perraton(2000),‘Globaltransformations:Politics,eco-nomicsandculture’,inC.PiersonandS.Tormey(eds),PoliticsattheEdge,London,UK:Springer,pp.14–28.Hill,M.andY.-s.Hwang(2005),‘Taiwan:Whatkindofsocialpolicyregime?’,inA.WalkerandC.-kWong(eds),EastAsianWelfareRegimesinTransition:FromConfucianismtoGlobalisation,Bristol,UK:PolicyPress,pp.145–64.Jones,M.R.(1997),‘Spatialselectivityofthestate?Theregulationistenigmaandlocalstrugglesovereconomicgovernance’,EnvironmentandPlanningA,29(5),831–64.Kim,P.H.andH.Shin(2010),‘Thebirthof“Rok”:Culturalimperialism,nationalism,andtheglocal-izationofrockmusicinSouthKorea,1964-1975’,Positions:EastAsianCulturalCritique,18(1),199–230.Klink,J.(2013),‘Developmentregimes,scalesandstatespatialrestructuring:ChangeandcontinuityintheproductionofurbanspaceinmetropolitanRiodeJaneiro,Brazil’,InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch,37(4),1168–87.Lin,S.andX.Ke(2010),‘ChineseglocalizationastudyofintergenerationalresidenceinurbanChina’,JournalofConsumerMarketing,27(7),638–44.Lippard,L.R.(1997),TheLureoftheLocal:SensesofPlaceinaMulticenteredSociety,NewYork,NY:NewPress.Lyu,L.andL.McCarthy(2015),‘“Logalization”:Local–globalprocessesandtheShilingleatherindus-trialdistrictinGuangzhou,China’,AsianGeographer,32(1),37–57.Macleod,G.andM.Goodwin(1999),‘Space,scaleandstatestrategy:Rethinkingurbanandregionalgovernance’,ProgressinHumanGeography,23(4),503–527.Marshall,A.(2013),PrinciplesofEconomics,Basingstoke,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Massey,D.(2005),ForSpace,London,UK:Sage.McCann,E.(2011),‘Urbanpolicymobilitiesandglobalcircuitsofknowledge:Towardaresearchagenda’,AnnalsoftheAssociationofAmericanGeographers,101(1),107–130.McCann,E.andK.Ward(2012),‘Policyassemblages,mobilitiesandmutations:Towardamultidisci-plinaryconversation’,PoliticalStudiesReview,10(3),325–32.O’Byrne,D.J.andA.Hensby(2011),TheorizingGlobalStudies,Basingstoke,UK:RedGlobePress.Paganoni,M.C.(2012),‘Citybrandingandsocialinclusionintheglocalcity’,Mobilities,7(1),13–31.Peck,J.(2004),‘Geographyandpublicpolicy:Constructionsofneoliberalism’,ProgressinHumanGeography,28(3),392–405.Peck,J.andN.Theodore(2010),‘Mobilizingpolicy:Models,methods,andmutations’,Geoforum,41(2),169–74.Perkins,H.andD.C.Thorns(2012),Place,IdentityandEverydayLifeinaGlobalizingWorld,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Pierre,J.(1998),‘Public-privatepartnershipsandurbangovernance:Introduction’,inJ.Pierre(ed.),PartnershipsinUrbanGovernance:EuropeanandAmericanExperiences,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillanUK,pp.1–10.Relph,E.(1997),‘Senseofplace’,inS.Hanson(ed.),TenGeographicIdeasthatChangedtheWorld,NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversityPress,pp.205–226.Ritzer,G.(2000),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Ritzer,G.(2012),‘Grobalization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheWiley-BlackwellEncyclopediaofGlobalization,Malden,UK:Wiley-Blackwell,pp.1–3.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(2014),‘Situatingglocalization:Arelativelyautobiographicalintervention’,inG.S.Drori(ed.),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,p.25–36.Robertson,R.andK.E.White(2007),‘Whatisglobalization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Oxford,UK:Blackwell,pp.54–66.Roudometof,V.(2015),‘Theglocalandglobalstudies’,Globalizations,12(5),774–87.Roudometof,V.(2016),‘Theorizingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
180170HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRoudometof,V.(2019),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–817.Sassen,S.(2004),‘Localactorsinglobalpolitics’,CurrentSociology,52(4),649–70.Sassen,S.(2008),Territory,Authority,Rights:FromMedievaltoGlobalAssemblages,Woodstock,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Sassen,S.(2011),‘TheAmericasgoglocal’,AmericasQuarterly,5(2),88–94.Scholte,J.A.(2005),Globalization:ACriticalIntroduction,NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Schuerkens,U.(2003),GlobalForcesandLocalLife-worlds:SocialTransformations,London,UK:Sage.Servon,L.J.andS.Pink(2015),‘Cittaslow:GoingglocalinSpain’,JournalofUrbanAffairs,37(3),327–40.Shaw,M.(2003),‘Thestateofglobalization:Towardsatheoryofstatetransformation’,inB.Neil,J.BobandJ.Martin(eds),State/Space:AReader,Malden,UK:Blackwell,pp.115–30.Smith,M.P.(2001),TransnationalUrbanism:LocatingGlobalization,Malden,UK:Blackwell.Sun,Y.andR.C.Chan(2017),‘Planningdiscourses,localstatecommitment,andthemakingofanewstatespace(NSS)forChina:EvidencefromregionalstrategicdevelopmentplansinthePearlRiverDelta’,UrbanStudies,54(14),3281–98.Sun,Y.,Chao,T.-Y.,Woo,J.,andD.W.H.Au(2017),‘Aninstitutionalperspectiveof“Glocalization”intwoAsiantigers:The“Structure−Agent−Strategy”ofbuildinganage-friendlycity’,HabitatInternational,59,101–109.Swyngedouw,E.(1997),‘Neitherglobalnorlocal:“Glocalization”andthepoliticsofscale’,inC.Kevin(ed.),SpaceofGlobalization:ReassertingthePoweroftheLocal,NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress,pp.115–36.Swyngedouw,E.(2004),‘Globalisationor“glocalisation”?Networks,territoriesandrescaling’,CambridgeReviewofInternationalAffairs,17(1),25–48.Swyngedouw,E.andG.Baeten(2001),‘Scalingthecity:Thepoliticaleconomyof“glocal”develop-ment–Brussels’conundrum’,EuropeanPlanningStudies,9(7),827–49.Swyngedouw,E.andM.Kaika(2005),‘Theproductionof“glocal”urbanmodernities:Exploringthecracksinthemirror’,Géographie,Économie,Société,7(2),155–76.Tan,C.B.,Yang,H.andS.C.Cheung(2001),Tourism,AnthropologyandChina:InMemoryofProfessorWangZhusheng,Bangkok,China:WhiteLotusPress.Tickell,A.andJ.A.Peck(1992),‘Accumulation,regulationandthegeographiesofpost-Fordism:Missinglinksinregulationistresearch’,ProgressinHumanGeography,16(2),190–218.Ulrich,B.,Natan,S.andW.Rainer(2003),GlobalAmerica?:TheCulturalConsequencesofGlobalization,Liverpool,UK:LiverpoolUniversityPress.Urkidi,L.(2010),‘Aglocalenvironmentalmovementagainstgoldmining:Pascua–LamainChile’,EcologicalEconomics,70(2),219–27.WHO(2002),ActiveAgeing:APolicyFramework,accessed23September2021athttp://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/67215/WHO_NMH_NPH_02.8.pdf;jsessionid=7528E4E1DEFEC69EE0E20B4C08BB6D2F?sequence=1.WHO(2007),GlobalAge-FriendlyCities:AGuide,Geneva,Switzerland:WHOPress.WHO(2009),TheGlobalNetworkofAge-friendlyCitiesandCommunities,accessed23September2021athttps://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1170753/retrieve.Wong,H.(2012),‘ChangesinsocialpolicyinHongKongsince1997:Oldwineinnewbottles?’,inW.-m.Lam,P.L.-t.LuiandW.W.-h.Wong(eds),ContemporaryHongKongPoliticsandGovernment,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress,pp.277–96.YiSun,Tzu-YuanStessaChao,andJiaLing-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:26AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
18111.Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometryGemaVaronaMartínezINTRODUCTIONDespitethewidespreaduseofthetermincriminology,itisnottotallycorrecttoaffirmthatweliveinaglobalizedworld.Whenusingtheadjective‘globalized’,weseemtoforgettherele-vanceoftheinterconnectionswithlocaldimensions.Bywayofintroductiontothischapter,letustaketheexampleofthe2020COVID-19pandemictotrytoextractsomeglocalcriminaljusticeconsiderations.Thispandemic–originallyalocalChinesehealthproblem–becameaglobalissuewithabigimpactonstateandlocalcriminalpolicies,amongothers(Skolnik,2020).Theimpositionofadministrativeandcriminalsanctionstodetertheviolationofpre-cautionaryhealthmeasureshasbeenacommonruleinallcountries,thoughwithsignificantvariationsinregulationandimplementation(Rivera,2020).Additionally,oneofthenumerousimpactsofconfinementwasadecreaseinstreetcrimeandanincreaseincybercrime(Naidoo,2020;Okereafor&Adebola,2020).Incertaincases,evenwhencybercrimewascommittedbytransnationalcriminalorganizations,itaffectedmanyindividualcitizensorinstitutionsatthelocallevel.Laterinthepandemic,forthesakeofimprovingprecautionaryhealthmeasuresduringtheso-calledde-scalingphase,internationalcorporationsthatdesignandownappsandsocialnetworksworkedtogetherandsoldtheirtechnologicalproductstonationalandstatepoliceagenciesinordertodigitallycontrolpopulationmovement.InthecaseoftheEuropeanUnion,thishadtobecarriedoutinawaythatwouldavoidpotentialcivilandcriminalviola-tionsofdataprotectionandprivacy,whichtheEuropeanandnationalagencieshadtoguaran-teeandcontrol(Reyes&Casco,2020).Finally,notwithstandingtheimpactofthepandemiconinternationaltravelandcommerce,voiceshavebeenheardabouttheunstoppablenatureofglobalizationalsointermsofcriminaljustice.Theaboveexampleintendstoillustratethewayrealityisexperiencedregardlessofhowitmightbedescribedbysocialsciences.Evenifwearenotstillabletoproperlyexplaintheoverlappingcharacterofglobalizationandlocalizationprocesses,wearedefinitelylivinginaworldthatcanbemoreadequatelydescribedandanalysedinmanyaspectsnotasglobalized,butratherasglocalized.Withthisgeneralobjectiveinmind,weaimtoaddglocalizedperspec-tivestothecurrentdebateonglobalizationandcrimewiththisconceptualcontribution(Aas,2013;Hobbs,1998;Hobbs&Dunnighan,1998;Larsen&Smandych,2008;vanHellemont&Densley,2019).Inordertopursuethisobjective,wewillstartbyacknowledgingthepotentialinaccuracyandinherentcontradictionsoftheterm‘glocalization’appliedtocrimeandvictimizationingeneral.Basedonacriticalvictimologystandpoint(Walklate,1990)andconsideringper-spectivescomingfromcultural,greenandsoutherncriminology,wewilltrytooffercomple-mentaryexplanationsonthewaytheoverlappingofglobalizationandlocalizationprocessesoccursanditsimpactsondifferentdimensions.Theseideaswillbedevelopedinfourmain171GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
182172Handbookofcultureandglocalizationsectionsinthechapter.First,theconceptofglocalizationanditsuseincriminologywillbedefined.Next,wewillintroducetheideaofcrimeandvictimizationaspolycentriccascadeproblemswithinacontextofsuper-diversity,wherenationalandinternationalcriminaljusticecanbeanalysedusingchronotopesasatheoreticaltool.Wewillthenreinterpretandrelatethosenotionswiththeaimofextractingkeyelementsfortheanalysisoftheacademicunder-standingofinternational,transnationalandglobalcrimes.Afterreviewingtheirlimitationsintermsofhumanrights,wewillproposetheneedforabetterunderstandingoftheinterrelationbetweenmicro-andmacro-victimizationbyincorporatingaglocalizedvision.Finally,wewilldrawsomeconclusionsandimplicationsoftheconceptofglocalizationforcriminology.GLOCALIZATIONANDCRIMINOLOGY:APPLYINGCHRONOTOPESOFLAWTOPOLYCENTRICANDCASCADEPROBLEMSINACONTEXTOFSUPER-DIVERSITYGlocalizationisaninnovativeconceptusedtodescribethelinksbetweenglobalandlocalprocesses.Asexplainedinthisbook,itsnuancesdifferfromthoseofthetermglobalization.AccordingtotheOxfordDictionary,globalizationrefersto‘thefactthatdifferentculturesandeconomicsystemsaroundtheworldarebecomingconnectedandsimilartoeachotherbecauseoftheinfluenceoflargemultinationalcompaniesandofimprovedcommunication’,whileglocalizationmeans‘thefactofadaptingproductsorservicesthatareavailableallovertheworldtomakethemsuitableforlocalneeds’.Moregenerally,againfollowingtheOxfordDictionary,callingsomething‘glocal’meansthatitholdsfeaturesorrelatestofactorsthatarebothlocalandglobal.Thetermglocalizationwasoriginallyusedinthecontextofthelocaladaptationoffarmingtechniques(Robertson,1994).Robertson(1997)thenwentontoproposeadefinitionofglocalizationasasimultaneousco-presenceofuniversalizingandparticularizingtendencies.Someyearslater,Roudometof(2016)defined‘glocality’aslivinginaglobalworldthatcanonlybeexperiencedlocallyorthroughlocallenses(Yeetal.,2020).However,notmanycriminologistshaveenteredintodetailonthemeaningofglocalizationanditspotentialuseincriminologicalresearch.Forthepurposesofthischapter,wecanrecallMaureenCain’s(2001)statementaffirmingthatthesekindsofglobalandlocalprocessesarenotreallytransnationalorinternational,usuallytheobjectofcriminologicalenquiry.Onthecontrary,theycanbedefinedas‘processesembeddedinanddependentuponchangesatboth“ends”oftherelationship,orperhapsateachnodeinthecomplexweb,sothatwhatisnowlinkedisineachcasedifferentinternallyfromwhatwastherebefore’(Cain,2001,p.34).Specifically,Cainreferstothecommonalitiesoftheillegalglobalcapitalexpressedinunequalpowerrelationshipsoccurringindifferentterritoriesofitsinfluence.Consequently,criminologycouldstudytheeffectsonthosedifferentspaces,includingthevoicesofallthoseaffected,bothforthepurposeofassessingtheproblemandforproposinginterventions.Thus,acriminologicalvisionofglocalizationisnotabouttakingmultipleperspectives,but‘amatterofrecognisingobjectivelydifferentinterests,andnegotiatingawaythroughthembythenormalprocessesof(hopefully)peacefulpolitics’(Cain,2001,p.34).Toidentifythoseconflictinginterests,wewouldliketointroducefivedifferentconceptsastheoreticaltoolstobeappliedinthefollowingsectionsofthischapter:‘variable-geometry’,‘polycentricproblems’(Polanyi,1951),‘cascadephenomena’(Braithwaite,2019),GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
183Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry173‘super-diversity’(Vertovec,2019)and‘chronotopesoflaw’(Valverde,2015).Theyarepar-ticularlyfittingtothiswork,astheyallcomefromtheglobalsouthortaketheglobalsouthintoaccount.Ourhypothesisisthatcrimeandvictimizationarepolycentricandcascadeproblemsthathavetobeanalysedbeyondavariable-geometryapproachinordertobeunderstoodwithinthetenetsofsuper-diversityandchronotopesoflaw.Weshouldstartbyarguingthatthenotionofvariable-geometryglobalization(Martínez-Bascuñán,2020,p.11)isinsufficienttograspthecomplexityofaglocalizedreality(EuropeanForumforUrbanSecurity,n.d.).Theterm‘variable-geometry’comesfromthemathematicalfield,althoughitiscommonlyusedintheEuropeanUnionlegalvocabulary(EUR-Lex,n.d.),todescribetheso-calledEurope‘àlacarte’orthemethodofadifferentiatedintegrationinthisUniontoresolveirreconcilabledifferencesbyallowingoptingoutfromcertainEuropeanUniondecisions.ThisidearecallsCain’s(2001)understandingofcomplex-ityreflectedinconflictinginterestsatdifferentlevelsandinthedebateonthepossibilityofreconcilingtheminanon-abusiveway.However,thetermvariable-geometryrestrictsitselftothatmulti-perspectivevisionwithoutofferingclearguidanceonhowtointegratethem.Itisnotjustaquestionofscalaraspectssothatdecisionscanbeframedatmultipleandconflictingscales,perhapsinthesenseproposedbyCotton(2018)whenhetalksofa‘scalarparity’inrelationtogreencriminology.Bycontrast,anddespitetheinherentdifficultiesforitsstudy(Varona,2015),realityinvolvesamoreinter-scalarentanglement.Inviewofthis,wecontendthatthenotionsofsuper-diversity,comingfromthefieldofethnicstudies,andofchronotopes,derivedfromurbansociologyoflaw,constitutebettertheoreticalframeworksforglobalizationandcrime.AsVertovec(2007)explains,super-diversityshouldbeunderstoodnotjustasaconceptforaglobalcontext,butratherasinvolvingsocialcomplexitiesandintersectionalitiesinmultidimensionalshiftsinmigrationpatterns(Meissner&Vertovec,2015)or,wecouldadd,inotherdifferentsocialprocessessuchascrimeandvictimization.Theuseofsuper-diversityasatheoreticaltoolallowsustoidentifypatterns,andatthesametime,toanalysetheamalga-matedimpactofdiverseelements.Super-diversityrecognizesthe‘compositeeffectsofsocialcategories’(Vertovec,2019,p.134),incommonwiththenotionsofintersectionality(Boiraetal.,2015;Brysk,2018;Crenshaw,1991;Henne&Troshynski,2013;Potter,2015;Thayer,2010).AlthoughVertovecwarnsusofthepotentialmisuseoftheconceptofsuper-diversity,wetakeupthechallengehereofusingittorelateglobalizationandcrimebyraisingawarenessandofferingwaysoflookingatitscontradictoryunderstandingincriminalpolicyandsociety.Furthermore,withtheadditionoftheelementoftemporality,thetheoreticaltoolofsuper-diversitycansupplementMarianaValverde’suseofthenotionofchronotopesoflaw(2015).Theelementoftemporalityinthestudyofcrimeisofutmostimportanceduetotherelativityofcrimeandvictimizationintermsoftimeandspace(Fattah,2020).Beyondscaleshiftsintheuseoflegalconcepts,drawingfromtheRussianliterarycriticMikhailBakhtin,Valverdedefinesachronotopeasacombinationoftimeandspace,jurisdictionandaffect,generatingdifferentpossibilitiesofsovereignty.Thus,wecantalkofintertwinedspatiotempo-ralitiesunderstoodinacontextofsuper-diversity,beyondterritories,inordertostudyhowthelawgeneratescategoriesofexclusionforcertainindividualsandsegmentsofthepopulation(Kotiswaran,2015).Followingabriefexplanationofthetheoreticaltoolsofsuper-diversityandchronotopes,wewanttoapplythemtotheunderstandingofinternationalandtransnationalcrimesandvictim-ization,definedhereaspolycentricandcascadeproblemsinthetermsusedbytheprominentGemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
184174HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAustraliancriminologist,JohnBraithwaite(1999,2019).Infact,evenifoutsidethepurposeofthischapter,thosetermscanberelatedtoBraithwaite’srestorativejusticetheorizationasanalternativetothemainstreamcriminaljusticesystemattheinternationalandnationallevels.Restorativejusticecanbeseenasaglocalizedenterprisetoo(Tauri,2014).QuotingPolanyi’sunderstandingofpolycentricproblems(1951,pp.174–84),becausecrimecanbesodefined,Braithwaite(1999,p.53)explainshowitrequires‘reconciliationofcomplexinteractingconsequencesofmultidimensionalphenomena’thatarepoorlyresolvedinthejudicialmodelbasedondichotomiclegaldecisions(guilty/notguilty).Atthesametime,Braithwaite(2019)understandscrimeasacascadephenomenon.Drawingfromthedataofthe‘PeacebuildingCompared’projectinSouthAsia,hearguesthat:‘wartendstocascadeacrossspaceandtimetofurtherwar,crimetofurthercrime,wartocrime,andcrimetowar’(p.1).AsBraithwaitealsoexaminescrimepreventionthroughacascadelens,wecanfollowhisperspectivetoconsidervictimizationincascadetoo.Moreover,heaffirms:‘Seeingcrimethroughthecascadelensopensupfertilewaysofimaginingmacrocriminology.Self-efficacyandcollectiveefficacyarehypothesisedascatalystsofcrimepreventioncascadesinsuchamacrocriminology’(Braithwaite,2019,p.1).Inanycase,whenusingthislens,Karstedt(2020,p.7)recommendsthatwedonot‘losesightofconditionsanddeeplyembeddedinsti-tutionalrelationsexogenoustoanytypeofcascadephenomenon’.TRAVELLINGIDEAS:WHEREFROM,WHERETO,ANDWHEN.SOUTHERNANDCULTURALCRIMINOLOGIESItisimportanttoconsiderhowandinwhatdirectionideas,policiesandtheoriesoncrimeingeneral,andcrimeandglobalizationinparticular,havetravelledbetweentheglobalsouthtotheglobalnorth(Carringtonetal.,2020).Anassessmentofthisquestioncanbemadefromtwocomplementarystandpointsofrelevanceforthenotionofglocalization:southerncrimi-nologyandculturalcriminology.SouthernandDecolonialCriminologySoutherncriminologyposesstrongcriticismtothecolonizationoftheglobalcriminologicaldebatebytheAnglo-Saxonacademyandpolicymakers(Carringtonetal.,2016;Hoggetal.,2017).Notwithstandingsomenotableexceptions,theglobalcriminologicalknowledgethatwecangraspthroughinternationalcongresses,journalsandinternationalhandbooksoncriminologyandglobalizationaremainlyproducedfromaspecificcultural,linguisticandgeographicalperspective.Moststudiesonglobalizationandcrime,andoninternationalandtransnationalcrimes(Mitsilegasetal.,2019),havebeencarriedoutintheglobalnorth,wherethosenotionsemerged.Thisfieldofstudiesdrawsfrominternationalcongressesandscientificsocieties,aswellasfromthepoliciesandactivitiesofinternationalgovernmentalandacademicinstitutionsdevelopedoverthelasttwocenturies(Varona&delaCuesta,2019).Forexample,atthebeginningofthenineteenthcentury,therewasagrowinginterestincomparingpenitentiarysystems,withaviewtoreform.Thisinterestisillustrated,forinstance,inthejourneysmadebyGustavedeBeaumontandAlexisdeTocqueville(1833)fromFrancetotheUnitedStatestovisittheAuburnpenitentiarysystem.Someyearslater,thefirstInternationalCongressGemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
185Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry175onprisonstookplaceinFrankfurtin1846.Thus,wecantalkofthechronotopeofprisonasacategoryforselectiveexclusionintimeandspace.Inthisregard,in1872,attheInternationalPenitentiaryCongressinLondon,thefollowingquestionwasposedtoallthedelegates(Varona&delaCuesta,2019):‘Asamatteroffact,doyourprisonersingeneralleavetheprisonbetterorworsethantheyenteredit?’Anotherconceptthatcanalsobeanalysedasachronotopewasdiscussedinthatsamecongress:civilization.Thecongresswasdescribedas‘agatheringofexpertsfromnearlyeverycivilizednation...Twenty-twostateswereofficiallyrepresented’(Pears,1872,p.xiv).Backthen,anyideaofdiversitywassimplydiscardedinthesamewaythattoday’sideasofsuper-diversity,aswewillmentioninthefollowingsection,arealsobeingdiscardedintheanalysisofinternationalandtransnationalcrimes.Inrelationtothoseaspects,southerncriminologyisoneofthemostrelevanttendenciesincurrentcriminologystudies(Moosavi,2019;Travers,2017).Southerncriminologyisanexpressionoftheso-calledsoutherntheory(Connell,2007;Santos,2018)withanemphasisonhybriditytodecentrethelaw’sauthoritativespeech,aswellastheimbalancesinglobalsocialscience(Hoggetal.,2017).Howmanyinfluentialarticlesincriminologyhaveactu-allybeenwrittenbyauthorsoutsideofAnglo-Saxonacademia?Canweattributethelownumberstoadifferentlevelofcriminologydevelopmentinothercountries,whentheirmostprominentcriminologists,with‘internationalcareers’,haveparticipatedincoursesofferedbyAnglo-Saxonacademies?Arenon-Anglophoneauthors’worksontheirowncountriesactuallyworsefromascientificpointofviewthanthoseofothers,intermsofobjectiveandcontextualizedacademicstandards?CanreviewersuseprimarysourcesnottranslatedintoEnglish,andreadinthelanguageofthecountrytheseauthorscomefromandarewritingaboutintheirarticles?Arethecriteriatojudgescientificskillstrulynon-discriminatoryforreasonsofresources,countryoforiginandlanguage?Whydotheaccreditationagenciesfromnon-Anglo-Saxoncountriespromotean‘internationalization’thatisnotgloballyfair?InmanySpanishcampuses,wearesometimesundertheimpressionthat,despitehavingacommonsharedlanguagewithLatinAmericancountries,allianceswithAnglo-SaxonuniversitiestendtoberegardedasmorevaluablethanthosewithLatinAmericanones,evenincaseswhenthefieldworkistobecarriedoutinLatinAmerica.ThefactisthatmanyLatinAmerican,AfricanandAsianuniversities,countriesingeneralinthesouth,aremereconsumersofcriminologicalknowledgethatisnotequallyproduced,accessedordistributed.Inawaythisisaperfectbusinessmodel(orsocialcontrolbyco-option),inwhichtheunequallytreatedareneededtobuyandusetheproductwhile,atthesametime,researchershaveinternalizedwithoutprotesttheendlessandcostlyraceforcitationsinasysteminwhichmostofthemwillneverbeequallyaccepted.Thebureaucraticethosinacademiaispresenteverywhere,butintheglobalsouthorperipheralcountries,treat-mentdisparityintheaccessandproductionofknowledgeaddstothis.AsHoggetal.(2017)clearlyexplain:‘Intellectualengagementinandwiththemetropolewouldbeconductedonnorthernterms,withinnortherntheoreticalframeworksanddebates,inwhichintellectualswererequiredtoestrangethemselvesfromtheirownsocieties’(p.4).Thisisparticularlyimportantforsocialscience,asweshouldalwaysbeawareofanirreduciblebiasintermsofraisingthecorrectquestions,usingadequatemethodologiesandgettingthebestanswers.Thiscannotbeachievedunlessweallowforbroaderquestioningofthebasicassumptionsfromwhichwebuildthemainstreamtheoriesandresearchthathavebeengeneralizedtobeappliedineverycountry.Toacertainextent,thisdebateremindsusofthatoncriminologyandothersocialandnaturalsciencesregardingtheexclusionofwomen;GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
186176Handbookofcultureandglocalizationthatis,thecriticismthatcriminologystudiesarecarriedoutmainlybymenandresearchedmainlyonmalepopulations.However,thiscriticalviewismoreprofoundintermsofsocialinjustice,becauseitstronglyderivesfromacolonialpastwheretraditionally,incriminology,certainethnicandculturalgroupsareseenasmoredeviantorill-adaptedthanothersandkeepbeingmorecontrolled.Itisherethataparallelcanbedrawnbetweenthenotionofsoutherncriminologyandcriminologythatispostcolonial(Cunneen,1999,2011;Grosfoguel,2011;Santos,2010),anticolonial(Agozino,1993;Kitossa,2012)anddecolonial(Boonzaier,2019;Deckert&Tauri,2019).AccordingtoHoggetal.(2017,p.5),postcolonialcriminologyseemstobemoreoppositionalandless‘redemptive’thansoutherncriminology.Fortheseauthors,thiscouldinvolveariskofreductionismbecausequestionsofintersectionalityandpowerrelationsbeyondgeographiesmightbeoverlooked.However,theseoppositionalstandpointscanalsoilluminateraceanddiscriminationissuespertainingto(1)‘crimmigration’(Bosworthetal.,2018);(2)theuseofpolicebrutalityagainstcertaincommunities,astheGeorgeFloydcaseinJune2020hasshownglocally(Diallo&Shattuck,2020);or(3)thedisparitiesintheuseofprisonandcriminalcontrolingeneral(Sudbury,2005).Althoughthisdisparityhasalwaysexisted,thekeydifferencenowadaysisthelevelofindignation,forthemomentatleast,thatitprovokeslocallyduetotheglobalaudiencecreatedbysocialmedia,andtheconsequentsocialpressureupongovernmentsandpoliticiansaccusedofracism(Bosworthetal.,2018).CulturalCriminologyTogetherwithsoutherncriminology,culturalcriminology(Ferrell&Sanders,1995)isagoodcriticalstandpointwithwhichtoapproachtheglocalizationofcrimeandvictimization.Likesoutherncriminology,althoughitalsocomesfromtheAnglo-Saxonworld,ithasattractedmuchinterestfromcriminologyintheglobalsouth.Culturalcriminologyunderstandscrimeandcrimecontrolasculturalproductsthroughmostlyethnographicresearch.Forexample,culturalcriminologycanexplaintheglobalfascinationandconsumptionofmediaandfictionalseriesandliteratureoncrimecomingfromtheUS,aswellasseriesontransnationalorganizedcrimerelatedtodrugs.Likewise,itcanexplain,despitecultural,languageandjuridicaldiversities,howthecontentoftheseculturalproducts(narratives,imagesandemotions)canbeunderstoodindifferentcountriestothepointofhavinganeffectonthesocialrepresentationormythsrelatedtocrime(vanHellemont&Densley,2019)andvictimizationinthosecountries,includingtheglamourizationofinternationalcrimessuchasgenocide(Demaria&Violi,2019;Wieringa,2014).Furthermore,culturalcriminologyallowsfortheinterpretationofglobalchangesinthisspherewiththeentranceofbestsellerbooksortelevisionseriesoncrimecomingfromothercountriesbeyondtheUS,andparticularlyfromtheNordiccountries(Hedberg,2017;Membrives,2013).Inanycase,culturalcriminologytranscendscomparativecriminology(Mannheim,1965;Nelken,2009;Sheptycki&Wardak,2005)andthestudyoflegaltransplantsincriminaljustice,toaspiretoamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofcriminaljusticeasaculturalsystemofmultipleandcontradictorypractices.Inthisregard,andinrelationtothenotionofsuper-diversity,culturalcriminologiesmightdealwiththenotionofhypertextuality(Nelson,1981)asaconnectionofinformativefactorsormeaning-makingelements.Inthissense,thephilosopherByung-ChulHan(2018)re-interpretshyperculturalityasavoidinglinearauthor-itarianthoughttounderstandthelinkageofelementsinlifeandthepresenceoftheothers’GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
187Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry177voicesinus,evenifinanunconsciousorrepressiveway,asshowninglocalizeddiscrimina-torypracticesofsocialcontrolobservedintheregulationofinternationalandtransnationalcrimes.GLOBALIZATIONVOCABULARIESINCRIMINALJUSTICE:INTERNATIONALANDTRANSNATIONALCRIMESFROMTHESTANDPOINTOFGREENCRIMINOLOGYInthissection,wewilldealwiththepossibilitiesofgoverningsuper-diversitythroughtransna-tionalandinternationalcrime,analysedaschronotopesorlegalcategoriesofpowerimplyingdiversespacesandtemporalities(Sardar&Sweeney,2016).Manystudiesonglobalizationandcrimearefocusedoninternationalandtransnationalcrimes,althoughthesetwocategoriesareofteninsufficientlydefinedbecausetheyareonlybasedonclassicalterritorialscales,disregardingotherimportantonessuchastechnology,interdependenceortemporality.Inthatway,theconceptsofinternationalandtransnationalcrimesarechronotopesthat,undertheircurrentconception,forgetimportantindividualandsocialdamages(Bowling,2011;LiñaresandFouquet,2020),failtopreventfurtherdamageandaremostlyusedassymbolic–some-timespunitive–law.Forthesereasons,theselegalcategoriestendtodisregardthepolycentricandcascadenatureofthevictimizationobservedinaworlddefinedbysuper-diversity,andnotjustvariablegeometries.Thechallengeliesinthefactthatinternationalandtransnationalcrimesareaboveallcommittedbyasymbiosisofcorporations,statesand/orothercriminalorganizations(Sergi&Lavorgna,2016;Tombs&Whyte,2019)and,inmostcases,wecantalkofabuseofpower(Beiras,2014;Cohen,2001)withinaglobalandnationalcriminaljusticesystemthathasbeencreatedreplicatingthestatesystemsinrelationtothecontrolofindividuals.RotheandFriedrichs(2014)refertoglobalizationcrimes,committedmainlybyinterna-tionalfinancialinstitutions,whichcausedevastatingharm,particularlyfortheglobalsouth,andwhichoccurinaglocalizedcontext(Ruggiero,2013).Moreover,incontrasttotheweightofmultinationalcorporations,statesandtransnationalcriminalorganizations,internationalinstitutionsdonotseemtoplayabigroleinworldgovernance.Thus,despitetheprocessofglobalizationandtheexpansionoflocaladministrativesanctioningandprivatesecurity(Eick,2006;MacLeod,2015),intermsofpenalgovernance,wecannoteventalkofanetworkorofhybridity(Castells,1996)between(nationalorlocal)governmentalandintergovernmentalorinternationalorganizations.Thisispartlysobecausetheiuspuniendi,orstaterightandpowertopunish,keepsbeingatthecoreofthestatesovereignty.Yet,atthesametime,moreandmoreprivateinternationalsecuritycompaniesplayamajorroleandarebeinghiredbystatesandcompaniestoguaranteethesecurityofcertainplacesandpopulations,intimesofbothpeaceandwar(Walklate&McGarry,2015).InternationalandTransnationalCrimesAfterthejuridificationofinternationalcrimes(genocide,crimesagainsthumanity,crimesofwarandaggression)orcrimesagainsttheinternationalcommunitypost-WorldWarII,duetomacropoliticalissues,manyyearswouldpassuntilthecreationoftheInternationalCriminalCourtinTheHaguein1998.Thisalsohappenedwiththeimplementationofotheradhocinter-GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
188178Handbookofcultureandglocalizationnationalcriminalcourts,somenamedhybridormixedcriminalcourts,createdaspost-conflictjusticewherethenotionoftransitionaljusticecanbeexaminedasachronotopeoflawaswell(Varona&delaCuesta,2019).Inallthesecourts,wecanappreciateanentanglementofdif-ferentpoliticsandpolicies,andinterlegalityofjudicialandnon-judicialmechanisms(Varona,2017)with,atthesametime,commoncriticismsregardingtheneglectofsomevictims’inter-est(Wemmers&deBrouwer,2011).Regardingtransnationalcrimes(Reichel&Albanese,2013),thesehavebeendefinedasoffenceswhoseinception,preventionand/ordirectorindirecteffectsinvolvedmorethanonecountry.Historically,atleastduringthetwentiethcentury,theinternationalagreementonthedefinitionofcertaintransnationalcrimes,suchasdrugtrafficking(Kassab&Rosen,2019),wasreachedfasterthantheagreementonaconventionforaninternationalcriminalcourt.TheUnitedNationsbeganusingtheconceptoftransnationalcrime,organizedorotherwise,inthemid-1970s.Decadeslater,thePalermoConventionagainstTransnationalOrganizedCrimewasapprovedin2000andwasfurthersupplementedbythreeprotocols:theProtocoltoPrevent,Suppress,andPunishTraffickinginPersons,EspeciallyWomenandChildren;theProtocolagainsttheSmugglingofMigrantsbyLand,Sea,andAir;andtheProtocolagainsttheIllicitManufacturingofandTraffickinginFirearms,theirPartsandComponents,andAmmunition(Varona&delaCuesta,2019).RegionalinstitutionssuchastheCouncilofEuropeandtheEuropeanUnion,particularlyaftertheMaastrichtTreatyin1992,alsogovernpenalissuesoncorruption,financialcrime,terrorism(Wade&Maljevic,2009),cyber-attacksandcrimesagainsttheenvironment,amongothers(Phillimoreetal.,2017).Again,transnationalcrime,regulatedbyinternational,Europeanandotherintergovernmen-talinstitutions,canbestudiedasachronotopeoflawwherespaceorterritorialityisconsideredmuchmorerelevantthantemporalityforcrimeswhereaslowviolence,evenanintergen-erationalone,exists,likethecaseofcrimesagainsttheenvironment.Inadditiontothis,thereseemstobealackofinterestinthelocalimplicationsoftheinternationalregulationoforganizedcrime,suchashumantrafficking(Meyers,2016),andasideliningofsuper-diversityconditionsintermsofculturalandsocioeconomicconditions.Anothercategorythatcanbereadasachronotopeoflawinthisrealmisthenotionofuniversaljurisdiction(Bassiouni,2001),whichcanbeappliedtobothinternationalandtrans-nationalcrimesbynationalcourts.Universaljurisdictionmeansanexceptiontothestrongterritorialityprincipleinthecriminaljusticesystem(DelVecchio,2006).Inthisregard,thelocaltensionsatplayinmacro-politicscouldaccountforthefactthatuniversaljurisdictionisappliedinsometypesofenvisagedcrimeoverothers,andhasbeenrestrictedincountriessuchasSpain(Chinchón,2015).InsightsfromGreenCriminologyViano(2010)hasclassifiedtherelationshipsbetweenglobalizationandcrimeaspositive,neg-ativeandpreventative.Healsoappealsforcriminologiststoreviewtheirresearchmodelstotakeintoaccountthechangesproducedbyglobalization,questioningtheclassicaldefinitionsofcrimetoincorporateotherintellectualtraditionsoncrimesofglobalization,structuralvio-lenceandthecritiqueofneo-liberalism,‘whichemphasizethecontingentinfluenceofsocialharminpeople’slifechoices’(Viano,2010,p.63).Thelatterconsiderationscanberelatedtogreencriminology(Konradetal.,2020;Lynch,2019;Ozymyetal.,2020;Stoett,2019;Wainwright&Mann,2018;White,2008),wherecul-GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
189Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry179turalandsoutherncriminologiesalsomerged.Ingreencriminology,goingbeyondthenotionofcrime(asmuchindividualandsocialsufferingisnotcriminalized),harmisunderstoodascriminalizedandnon-criminalized,individualandcollectivebehavioursdamagingorputtingatrisktheecosystemsandtheexistenceofhumanandnon-humanbeings(Hillyard&Tombs,2017;Pemberton,2016).Itbringsawarenessofhumanfragility,responsibilityandinterde-pendence,andembracessocialandecologicaljusticetofacetheintergenerational,collective,global,local,dynamicandhiddenconsequencesofharminghumanandnon-humanbeings.Forexample,greencriminologyquestionstheexclusionoftheso-calledecocidesoutsidethejurisdictionoftheInternationalCriminalCourt(Gray,1996),aswellasthegeneraldefinitionofcrimethatdisregardsslowandriskyviolencethathastakenplacethroughtheyears.FINDINGTHEGLOCALIZEDTHREADOFMICRO,MESO,ANDMACROVICTIMIZATIONMatthews(2020)talksofadepillarizationofthecriminaljusticesystem.DepartingfromFoucault’s(1975)statementonthebirthofthemoderncriminaljusticesystemoutofanunequalredistributionofillegalitiesduringtheEnlightenment,hereferstothecurrenterosionasa‘triangulatedrelationshipbetweentheprison,thepolice,andthe“criminaljustice”’(Matthews,2020,para.4;seealsoPeaseandIgnatans,2016),particularlywiththeemergenceofnewmodalitiesofcrimesuchascybercrime(Aas,2007;Kohmetal.,2020),environmentalcrime,andterrorism(Eick,2006;Mattsson,2019;Ruigrok&vanAtteveldt,2007;Turner,2014).Thesecanbedefinedasglocalizedcrimesastheyareregulatedinternationallyandinvolvecrossingbordersorspacesbutaremanifestedlocally,inintricateindividualandcol-lectiveexperiencesofmultipledimensions.Bycontrast,politicalandeconomicabusesofpoweracrossbordershavelargelybeenforgottenintheagendasofbothnationalandinternationalcriminology(Varona&delaCuesta,2019).Overall,wecanseethatmanyinternationalandtransnationalcrimesarenotconsideredatallinnationalagendas,andhardlyininternationalones.However,adequateanswerstothem,likeclimatechangeasecocide(Ostrom,2012),areofutmostrelevanceinordertoguaranteesocial,economicandecologicaljusticeandsurvival.Thereisaneedtomovefromthereificationofspacetowardsapublicunderstandingofglocalitytorevisethetensionsbetweenglobalstructuresandnetworksandcommunityunderstandingofrisk,harmandjustice(Zahara,2018).Inordertohighlighttheintertwinedcharacterofcrimeingeneral,andinternationalandtransnationalcrimeinparticular,wecanproposeachangeoffocustowardsvictimizationasglocalizedprocessesofsufferinganunjustharmthatareunequallydistributed.Tothisaim,weshouldenvisionthenotionofvictiminacriticalway(Walklate,1990),thatis,inanon-essentialist,non-antagonist,non-individualist(vanDijk,2009)andnon-pathologicalnotionofvictims.Thischangeoffocusincriminologicalresearchmighthelptowardsacrim-inologyofsocialjusticeandhumanrightswhichisawareofglocalizedvictimization(Fattah,2020)whereglocalizedrelationshipsbetween‘victims’and‘offenders’canbeexamined,andatthesametimetheclassicalnotionofcrimewithinelementsprovidedbytheframeworksofsouthern,culturalandgreencriminologies,amongothers,isquestioned(Blausteinetal.,2018).GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
190180HandbookofcultureandglocalizationBycomplementingthenotionofvictimizationwithotherglocalizedinsights,wemightfindthethreadbetweenmicro,mesoandmacrotextures(Hopkins&Wallerstein,1982)intheconceptofvulnerabilityandinterdependencebymergingindividualandsocialdimensionsofsuffering,avoidingself-sufficiencyorlackofsocialandpoliticalaccountability.DISCUSSIONThischapterhasofferedaconceptualviewofsomedimensionsofglocalizationprocesseswithincriminaljusticesystems.Ithasdonesobyinterpretingthenotionsofsuper-diversityandchronotopesastheoreticaltoolstogenerateabetteranalysisofcrimedefinedasapolycen-tricandcascadesocialproblem,inparticularinternationalandtransnationalcrimes,withtheirglocalizeddimensionsbeyondamulti-scalesorvariablegeometriesoflawandinstitutions.Evenifconceivedasatheoreticalexploratorypaper,linkingdifferentideascomingfromdifferentfieldsofstudiescanprovidesomeframeworksforfutureresearchonglocalization,crimeandvictimization,mainlybyintegratingperspectivescomingfromsouthern,culturalandgreencriminologies.Weneedmoredynamicandheterogenicmodelstoexplaincurrentprocessesofglobalandmacrovictimization.Despitetheglobalcharacterofthesocialproblemswearefacing,wecontinuetodiscusscriminologywithterms,theoriesandresearchthatarenotglobal,butquiteethnocentricandlocal,regardlessofitsglobalattractionininternationalscientificeventsandproducts.HavingEnglishasaninternationallanguagetocommunicategloballyisagreatachievement,butweshouldbeawareoftheimplicationsandconsequencesofitshegemonicuse.Adoptingglocalizedlensescouldpartiallycorrectthisbiasorlimitations.Havingopenaccessscientificjournalswithtrulyinternationaleditorialboards,scientificcommitteesandreviewerswhocanguaranteebilingualpublicationor,atleast,languageassistanceforEnglisheditingcouldhelp.Also,wehavetocontinuetoresearchthenumberofnon-Anglo-Americanscholarswhoarewritingonsouthern,culturalandgreencriminologyissuessothattheseandothercrimi-nologicalperspectivesdonotbecomearenewedformofdominantcriminologywithoutanysignificantimpactonthelivesofthoseaffectedandontheunequalstructuresproducingthiskindofknowledgedamage.Weshouldalsoappreciatethecategoryoftransnationalandinternationalcrimesfortheircontributiontohumanrights,butacriticalstandpointisneededinordertoexposeissuespre-sentedasglobal,whentheyareinfactparochialorprivateinterestsproducingandsustainingasymmetriesofpowerembeddedindifferentcultures,structuresandsubjectivities.Weneednewtheoreticaltoolstotackleongoingquestionsofjusticeandharm(O’Malley,2020)inaglocalizedworld.Aglocalizedvisionofcrimeandvictimizationmeansusingframeworksandtheoreticalconceptstounderstandtheinterrelatedcharacterofspaceandtimeininterdependentdimensions.Furthermore,itcanexpandhumanrightsbyadoptingacriticalviewonsomeexpressionsofglobalizationforbeinginthemselvesharmfultohumanandnon-humanbeings,aswellastoecosystems.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
191Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry181REFERENCESAas,K.F.(2007),‘Beyond“thedesertofthereal”:Crimecontrolinavirtual(ised)reality’inY.Jewkes(ed.),CrimeOnline,London,UK:Routledge,pp.160–77.Aas,K.F.(2013),GlobalizationandCrime,London,UK:SagePublications.Agozino,B.(1993),Counter-ColonialCriminology:ACritiqueofImperialistReason,London,UK:PlutoPress.Bassiouni,M.C.(2001),‘Universaljurisdictionforinternationalcrimes:Historicalperspectivesandcontemporarypractice’,VirginiaJournalofInternationalLaw,42(1),81–162.Beiras,I.R.(ed.)(2014),DelitosdelosEstadosdelosmercadosydañosocial.DebatesdeCriminologíacríticaySociologíajurídico-penal,Barcelona,Spain:Anthropos.Blaustein,J.,Pino,N.W.,Fitz-Gibbon,K.andR.White(2018),‘CriminologyandtheUNsustainabledevelopmentgoals:Theneedforsupportandcritique’,TheBritishJournalofCriminology,58(4),767–86.Boira,S.,Marcuello-Servós,C.,Otero,L.,SanzBarbero,B.andC.Vives-Cases(2015),‘Femicidioyfeminicidio:Unanálisisdelasaportacionesenclaveiberoamericana’,Comunitania:revistainternac-ionaldetrabajosocialycienciassociales,10,27–46.Boonzaier,F.(2019),‘Researchingsexwork:Doingdecolonial,intersectionalnarrativeanalysis’,inJ.Fleetwood,L.Presser,S.SandbergandT.Ugelvik(eds),TheEmeraldHandbookofNarrativeCriminology,Bingley,UK:EmeraldPublishing,pp.467–92.Bosworth,M.,Parmar,A.andY.Vázquez(eds)(2018),Race,CriminalJustice,andMigrationControl:EnforcingtheBoundariesofBelonging,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Bowling,B.(2011),‘Transnationalcriminologyandtheglobalizationofharmproduction’,inM.BosworthandC.Hoyle(eds),WhatisCriminology?,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.361–79.Braithwaite,J.(1999),‘Restorativejustice:Assessingoptimisticandpessimisticaccounts’,CrimeandJustice,25,1–127.Braithwaite,J.(2019),‘Crimeasacascadephenomenon’,InternationalJournalofComparativeandAppliedCriminalJustice,accessed25June2020atdoi:10.1080/01924036.2019.1675180.Brysk,A.(2018),TheStruggleforFreedomfromFear:ContestingViolenceagainstWomenattheFrontiersofGlobalization,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.Cain,M.(2001),‘Internationalcrimeandglobalisation’,TheCenterforCrimeandJusticeStudies,46(2),34–5.Carrington,K.,Guala,N.,Puyol,M.V.andM.Sozzo(2020),‘Howwomen’spolicestationsempowerwomen,widenaccesstojusticeandpreventgenderviolence’,InternationalJournalforCrime,JusticeandSocialDemocracy,9(1),42–67.Carrington,K.,Hogg,R.andM.Sozzo(2016),‘Southerncriminology’,TheBritishJournalofCriminology,56(1),1–20.Castells,M.(1996),TheInformationAge:Economy,SocietyandCulture,Volume1:TheRiseoftheNetworkSociety,Oxford,UK:Blackwell.Chinchón,J.(2015),‘Pasado,presentey¿futuro?delaJusticiaUniversal’,RevistaDireitoUFMS,1(1),27–37.Cohen,S.(2001),StatesofDenial:KnowingaboutAtrocitiesandSuffering,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Connell,R.(2007),SouthernTheory:TheGlobalDynamicsofKnowledgeintheSocialScience,Sydney,Australia:Allen&Unwin.Cotton,M.(2018),‘Environmentaljusticeasscalarparity:Lessonsfromnuclearwastemanagement’,SocialJusticeResearch,31,238–59.Crenshaw,K.(1991),‘Mappingthemargins:Intersectionality,identitypolitics,andviolenceagainstwomenofcolor’,StanfordLawReview,43(6),1241–99.Cunneen,C.(1999),‘Criminology,genocideandtheforcedremovalofIndigenouschildrenfromtheirfamilies’,Australian&NewZealandJournalofCriminology,32(2),124–38.Cunneen,C.(2011),‘Postcolonialperspectivesforcriminology’inM.BosworthandC.Hoyle(eds),WhatisCriminology?,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.249–66.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
192182HandbookofcultureandglocalizationDeBeaumont,G.andA.DeTocqueville(1833),OnthePenitentiarySystemintheUnitedStates:AnditsApplicationinFrance;withanAppendixonPenalColonies,andalso,StatisticalNotes.Philadelphia,PA:Carey,Lea&Blanchard.Deckert,A.andJ.Tauri(2019),‘Editorial’,DecolonizationofCriminologyandJustice,1(1),1–4.DelVecchio,A.(2006),‘Globalizationanditseffectoninternationalcourtsandtribunals’,TheLaw&PracticeofInternationalCourtsandTribunals,5(1),1–11.Demaria,C.andP.Violi(2019),‘Theactofdocumenting:JoshuaOppenheimer’sTheActofKilling’,Media,War&Conflict,7–17.Diallo,K.andJ.Shattuck(2020),‘GeorgeFloydandthehistoryofpolicebrutalityinAmerica’,1June,accessed25June2020athttps://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/01/opinion/george-floyd-history-police-brutality-america/.Eick,V.(2006),‘Preventiveurbandiscipline:Rent-a-copsandneoliberalglocalizationinGermany’,SocialJustice,33(3),66–84.EUR-Lex(n.d.),Variable-geometryEurope,accessed25June2020athttps://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/variable_geometry_europe.html.EuropeanForumforUrbanSecurity(n.d.),accessed25June2020athttps://efus.eu/es/.Fattah,E.A.(2020),CriminologyToday.ACriticalAssessment,TorrazzaPiemonte,Italy:AmazonItalia.Ferrell,J.andC.R.Sanders(1995),CulturalCriminology,Boston,MA:NortheasternUniversityPress.Foucault,M.(1975),Surveilleretpunir,Paris,France:ÉditionsGallimard.Gray,M.A.(1996),‘Theinternationalcrimeofecocide’,CaliforniaWesternInternationalLawJournal,26,215–71.Grosfoguel,R.(2011),‘Ladescolonizacióndelconocimiento:diálogocríticoentrelavisióndescolonialdeFrantzFanonylasociologíadescolonialdeBoaventuradeSousaSantos’inFormas-Otras:Saber,nombrar,narrar,hacer,Barcelona,Spain:CIDOB,pp.97–108.Han,B-C.(2018),Hiperculturalidad,Barcelona,Spain:Herder.Hedberg,A.(2017),‘Theknifeinthelemon:Nordicnoirandtheglocalizationofcrimefiction’,inL.Nielsson,D.DamroschandT.D’haen(eds),CrimeFictionasWorldLiterature,NewYork,NY:Bloomsbury,pp.13–22.Henne,K.andE.Troshynski(2013),‘Mappingthemarginsofintersectionality:Criminologicalpossibil-itiesinatransnationalworld’,TheoreticalCriminology,17,455–73.Hillyard,P.andS.Tombs(2017),‘Socialharmandzemiology’,inA.Liebling,S.MarunaandL.McAra(eds),OxfordHandbookofCriminology,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.284–305.Hobbs,D.(1998),‘Goingdowntheglocal:Thelocalcontextoforganisedcrime’,TheHowardJournalofCriminalJustice,37(4),407–22.Hobbs,D.andC.Dunnighan(1998),‘Glocalorganisedcrime:Contextandpretext’,inV.Ruggiero,N.SouthandI.Taylor(eds),TheNewEuropeanCriminology:CrimeandSocialOrderinEurope,London,UK:Routledge,pp.289–302.Hogg,R.,Scott,J.andM.Sozzo(2017),‘Specialedition:Southerncriminologyguesteditors’introduc-tion’,InternationalJournalforCrime,JusticeandSocialDemocracy,6(1),1–7.Hopkins,T.K.andI.Wallerstein(1982),World-SystemsAnalysis:TheoryandMethodology,London,UK:SagePublications.Karstedt,S.(2020),‘Onwake-upcallsandmetaphors:CommentonBraithwaite“crimeasacascadephenomenon”’,InternationalJournalofComparativeandAppliedCriminalJustice,accessed25June2020atdoi:10.1080/01924036.2020.1737955.Kassab,H.S.andJ.D.Rosen(2019),‘Generaltrendsindrugtraffickingandorganizedcrimeonaglobalscale’,inH.S.KassabandJ.D.Rosen,IllicitMarkets,OrganizedCrime,andGlobalSecurity,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.87–109.Kitossa,T.(2012),‘Criminologyandcolonialism:CountercolonialcriminologyandtheCanadiancontext’,TheJournalofPanAfricanStudies,4(10),204–26.Kohm,S.,Walby,K.,Gorkoff,K.andK.Maier(2020),‘Introduction:Digitizingjustice’,TheAnnualReviewofInterdisciplinaryJusticeResearch,9,3–15.Konrad,A.C.,Turatti,L.,Flores,C.R.andO.Konrad(2020),‘Systematicreviewstudy:Acompar-ativeanalysisofthestateoftheartofgreencriminology’,InternationalJournalofSocialScienceStudies,8,1.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
193Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry183Kotiswaran,P.(2015),‘Valverde’schronotopesoflaw:Reflectionsonanagendaforsocio-legalstudies’,FeministLegalStudies,23(3),353–9.Larsen,N.andR.Smandych(eds)(2008),GlobalCriminologyandCriminalJustice:CurrentIssuesandPerspectives,Peterborough,UK:BroadviewPress.Liñares,D.C.andD.B.Fouquet(2020),‘Delincuenciasocioeconómicaydañosocial.Perspectivaspolítico-criminalesparauncontextoposcrisis’,EstudiosPenalesyCriminológicos,40,45–111.Lynch,M.J.(2019),‘Greencriminologyandenvironmentalcrime:Criminologythatmattersintheageofglobalecologicalcollapse’,JournalofWhiteCollarandCorporateCrime,accessed25June2020atdoi:2631309X19876930.MacLeod,S.(2015),‘Privatesecuritycompaniesandsharedresponsibility:Theturntomultistakeholderstandard-settingandmonitoringthroughself-regulation-“Plus”’,NetherlandsInternationalLawReview,62(1),119–40.Mannheim,H.(1965),ComparativeCriminology:Volumeone,London,UK:Routledge&KeganPaul.Martínez-Bascuñán,M.(2020),‘Globalizacióndegeometríavariable’,ElPaís,17May,p.11.Matthews,R.(2020),‘Newtimes,newcrimes:Notesonthedepillarizationofthecriminaljusticesystem’,CriticalCriminology,28,309–26.Mattsson,C.(2019),‘Policingviolentextremism:HowtheglobalwaronterrormeanderedintolocalmunicipalpoliciesinSweden’,SageOpen,9(1),accessed25June2020atdoi:2158244019837462.Meissner,F.andS.Vertovec(2015),‘Comparingsuper-diversity’,EthnicandRacialStudies,38(4),541–55.Membrives,E.P.(2013),‘Crímenescondenominacióndeorígen.Glocalizaciónenlanovelapolicíacanórdicafemenina’,Signa,22,549–67.Meyers,D.T.(2016),Victims’StoriesandtheAdvancementofHumanRights,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.Mitsilegas,V.,Hufnagel,S.andA.Moiseienko(eds)(2019),ResearchHandbookonTransnationalCrime,Cheltenham,UK:EdwardElgarPublishing.Moosavi,L.(2019),‘Afriendlycritiqueof“Asiancriminology”and“Southerncriminology”’,TheBritishJournalofCriminology,59(2),257–75.Naidoo,R.(2020),‘Amulti-levelinfluencemodelofCOVID-19themedcybercrime’,EuropeanJournalofInformationSystems,29,1–16.NelkenD.(2009),‘Comparativecriminaljustice:Beyondethnocentrismandrelativism’,EuropeanJournalofCriminology,6(4),291–311.Nelson,T.(1981),LiteraryMachines,Swarthmore,PA:Self-published.O’Malley,P.(2020),‘Justicewithoutcrimeandpunishment?Security,harmandcompensationinaliberalworld’,inP.CarlenandL.AyresFrança(eds),JusticeAlternatives,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.60–72.Okereafor,K.andO.Adebola(2020),‘Tacklingthecybersecurityimpactsofthecoronavirusoutbreakasachallengetointernetsafety’,InternationalJournalinIT&Engineering,8(2),1–14.Ostrom,E.(2012),‘Nestedexternalitiesandpolycentricinstitutions:Mustwewaitforglobalsolutionstoclimatechangebeforetakingactionsatotherscales?’,EconomicTheory,49(2),353–69.Ozymy,J.,Jarrell,M.L.andE.A.Bradshaw(2020),‘Howcriminologistscanhelpvictimsofgreencrimesthroughscholarshipandactivism’inN.SouthandA.Brisman(eds),RoutledgeInternationalHandbookofGreenCriminology,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.150–64.Pears,E.(ed.)(1872),PrisonsandReformatoriesatHomeandAbroad:BeingtheTransactionsoftheInternationalPenitentiaryCongressheldinLondonJuly3-13,1872;includingofficialdocuments,discussionsandpaperspresentedtothecongress.London,UK:Longmans,GreenandComp.Pease,K.andD.Ignatans(2016),‘Theglobalcrimedropandchangesinthedistributionofvictimiza-tion’,CrimeScience,5(1),11.Pemberton,S.A.(2016),HarmfulSocieties:UnderstandingSocialHarm,Bristol,UK:PolicyPress.Phillimore,J.,Sigona,N.andK.Tonkiss(2017),‘Introduction:Superdiversity,policyandgovernanceinEurope’,Policy&Politics,45(4),487–91.Polanyi,M.(1951),TheLogicofLiberty,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Potter,H.(2015),IntersectionalityandCriminology:DisruptingandRevolutionizingStudiesofCrime,NewYork,NY:Routledge.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
194184HandbookofcultureandglocalizationReichel,P.andJ.Albanese(eds)(2013),HandbookofTransnationalCrimeandJustice,London,UK:SagePublications.Reyes,L.G.andA.R.Casco(2020),‘Contrastes:Byun-ChulHanySlavojZizekylosescenariosdelapostpandemia’,Innovare:Revistadecienciaytecnología,9(1),46–50.Rivera,I.(ed.)(2020),Pandemia.Derechoshumanos,sistemapenalycontrolsocial(entiemposdecoronavirus),Valencia,Spain:TirantloBlanch.Robertson,R.(1994),‘Globalisationorglocalisation?’,JournalofInternationalCommunication,1(1),33–52.Robertson,R.(1997),‘Commentsonthe“globaltriad”and“glocalization”’,paperpresentedattheGlobalizationandIndigenousCultureConference,KokugakuinUniversity,Japan.Rothe,D.andD.O.Friedrichs(2014),CrimesofGlobalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2016),‘Theorizingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Ruggiero,V.(2013),TheCrimesoftheEconomy:ACriminologicalAnalysisofEconomicThought,London,UK:Routledge.Ruigrok,N.andW.vanAtteveldt(2007),‘Globalanglingwithalocalangle:HowUS,British,andDutchnewspapersframeglobalandlocalterroristattacks’,TheInternationalJournalofPress/Politics,12(1),68–90.Santos,B.deS.(2010),Epistemologiasdelsur,MexicoCity,Mexico:SigloXXI.Santos,B.deS.(2018),TheEndoftheCognitiveEmpire:TheComingofAgeofEpistemologiesoftheSouth,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Sardar,Z.andJ.A.Sweeney(2016),‘Thethreetomorrowsofpostnormaltimes’,Futures,75,1–13.Sergi,A.andA.Lavorgna(eds)(2016),‘Ndrangheta:TheGlocalDimensionsofthemostPowerfulItalianMafia,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Sheptycki,J.andA.Wardak(eds)(2005),TransnationalandComparativeCriminology,London,UK:Glasshouse.Skolnik,T.(2020),‘Criminallawduring(andafter)COVID-19’,ManitobaLawJournal,accessed25June2020athttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3599021.Stoett,P.J.(2019),GlobalEcopolitics:Crisis,Governance,andJustice,Toronto,ON:UniversityofTorontoPress.Sudbury,J.(2005),GlobalLockdown:Race,GenderandthePrison-IndustrialComplex,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Tauri,J.M.(2014),‘AnIndigenouscommentaryontheglobalisationofrestorativejustice’,BritishJournalofCommunityJustice,12(2),35–55.Thayer,M.(2010),MakingTransnationalFeminism,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Tombs,S.andD.Whyte(2019),‘Theshiftingimaginariesofcorporatecrime’,JournalofWhiteCollarandCorporateCrime,1(1).Travers,M.(2017),‘Theideaofasoutherncriminology’,InternationalJournalofComparativeandAppliedCriminalJustice,43(1),1–12.Turner,J.A.(2014),‘Glocalisation:Al-Qaedaanditsconstituents’,inJ.A.Turner(ed.),ReligiousIdeologyandtheRootsoftheGlobalJihad.SalafiJihadismandInternationalOrder,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.123–39.Valverde,M.(2015),ChronotopesofLaw:Jurisdiction,ScaleandGovernance,NewYork,NY:Routledge.vanDijk,J.(2009),‘Freethevictim:Acritiqueofthewesternconceptionofvictimhood’,InternationalReviewofVictimology,16(1),1–33.vanHellemont,E.andJ.A.Densley(2019),‘Gangglocalization:Howtheglobalmediascapecreatesandshapeslocalgangrealities’,Crime,Media,Culture:AnInternationalJournal,15(1),169–89.Varona,G.(2015),Escalasdepolíticacriminal.Introducciónatravésdelalecturacrítica,Bilbao,Spain:UPV/EHU.Varona,G.(2017),‘Elpapeldelasvíctimasrespectodelosmecanismosutilizadosenlajusticiatransi-cional’,inA.GilandE.Maculan(eds),Lainfluenciadelasvíctimaseneltratamientojurídicodelaviolenciacolectiva,Madrid,Spain:Dykinson,pp.145–83.Varona,G.andJ.L.delaCuesta(2019),‘Internationalcriminology:Concept,history,developments,andinstitutions’inOxfordResearchEncyclopediaofCriminologyandCriminalJustice,pp.1–29.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
195Glocalizationandcrime:notjustaquestionofvariablegeometry185Vertovec,S.(2007),‘Super-diversityanditsimplications’,EthnicandRacialStudies,30(6),1024–54.Vertovec,S.(2019),‘Talkingaroundsuper-diversity’,EthnicandRacialStudies,42(1),125–39.Viano,E.C.(2010),‘Globalization,transnationalcrimeandstatepower:Theneedforanewcriminol-ogy’,RivistadiCriminologia,VittimologiaeSicurezza,3(1),63–85.Wade,M.andA.Maljevic(eds)(2009),AWaronTerror?:TheEuropeanStanceonaNewThreat,ChangingLawsandHumanRightsImplications,NewYork,NY:SpringerScience&BusinessMedia.Wainwright,J.andG.Mann(2018),ClimateLeviathan:Apoliticaltheoryofourplanetaryfuture,London,UK:VersoBooks.Walklate,S.(1990),‘Researchingvictimsofcrime:Criticalvictimology’,SocialJustice,17(3(41)),25–42.Walklate,S.andR.McGarry(eds)(2015),CriminologyandWar:TransgressingtheBorders,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Wemmers,J.A.andA.M.deBrouwer(2011),‘Globalizationandvictims’rightsattheinternationalcriminalcourt’inR.LetschertandJ.vanDijk(eds),TheNewFacesofVictimhood,Dordrecht,TheNetherlands:Springer,pp.279–300.White,R.(2008),CrimesagainstNature:EnvironmentalCriminologyandEcologicalJustice,Cullompton,UK:Willan.Wieringa,S.E.(2014),‘Persistingsilence:Sexualslander,massmurder,andtheactofkilling’,AsianJournalofWomen’sStudies,20(3),50–76.Ye,M.,Lu,W.,Flanagan,R.andK.W.Chau(2020),‘Corporatesocialresponsibility“glocaliza-tion”:Evidencefromtheinternationalconstructionbusiness’,CorporateSocialResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement,27(2),655–69.Zahara,A.(2018),‘Againstriskperception:Thedeficitmodelandpublicunderstandingsofrisk’,DiscardStudies.SocialStudiesofWaste,Pollution&Externalities,10January,accessed25June2020athttp://www.discardstudies.com.GemaVaronaMartínez-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:28AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
19612.Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplicationsJean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamseyandNowfalSamkariINTRODUCTIONThischapteraimstoprovideasynthesisoftheoriesandresearchonglocaleducation,aswellasitsimplicationsforthelearnersoftomorrow,publicpolicy,leadership,curricula,assessmentandorganizationalclimate.Globalizationhasinfluencededucationinitsquestformarketization,linguisticimperialismandglobalstandardizationtobirthglobaleducation.Further,globaleducationhadalsorelativelyembracedtheunderstandingthatsomepolitical,social,environmentalandeconomicchallengesexistacrosstheglobe.However,theglobalstandardizationthatisattheheartofglobalizationattimesfallsshortofaccountingforthediversityoflocalcontextsthatneedtobepartoftheequation.Glocalizationhasemergedasaremedytohelplocalizeglobalization,inthespiritoftheslogan,‘thinkglobally,actlocally’(Jean-Francois,2015;Robertson,1995;Roudometof,2015).AsRobertson(1995,p.31)asserts:‘Contemporaryconceptionsoflocalityarelargelyproducedinsomethinglikeglobalterms’.Inotherwords,toparaphraseRoudometof(2015),glocalizationisaformofglobalization,butwithitsownformofanalyticalautonomy.Further,Jean-Francois(2015)hassharedsomefacetsofglocalization,encompassingglobality,localness,multistakeholderness,segmentedinclusivenessandhybridization.Similartothewayglobalizationhasinfluencededucationtofacilitatetheemergenceofglobaleducation,glocalizationhasengenderedglocaleducation.Inanutshell,glocaleducationinvolvestheintegrationofthelocalandtheglobalintoeducationalleadership,policy,curricula,andinstructionalpractices.Asindicatedearlier,thischapterwilldiscussglocaleducationthroughitstheoriesandresearch,andtheirimplications.THEORIESANDRESEARCHThecurrentliteratureonglocaleducationisconnectedtoglocaleducationalleadership,glocalcurriculaandpedagogies,glocalcitizenshipandcompetence,andglocalsustainabilityeducation.GlocalEducationalLeadershipThescholarshiponglocaleducationalleadershipisarticulatedaroundaglocalizationofeducationalleadershipthroughanintegrationofglobalandlocaldynamics(Robertson,1995;Scholte,2005).BrooksandNormore(2010)developedasynthesisrootedinaglocalperspec-tiveforeducationalleadership,andadvocatedfortheglocalizationofeducationalleadership186Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
197Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications187development.Theyarguedthat‘agreaterunderstandingofglocalizationisrelevanttothepreparationandpracticeofcontemporaryeducationalleaders’(Brooks&Normore,2010,p.53).BrooksandNormore(2010)alsoassertedthatglocalleadershipeducationisessentialinordertodevelopeducationalleaderswhoarerelevanttotwenty-firstcenturyschools.Theysuggestnineglocalliteraciesthateducationalleadersshouldfostertoenhancetheirpracticesandfacilitatemeaningfuleducationalexperiencesforstudents.Theseare‘politicalliteracy,economicliteracy,culturalliteracy,moralliteracy,pedagogicalliteracy,informationliteracy,organizationalliteracy,spiritualandreligiousliteracy,andtemporalliteracy’(Brooks&Normore,2010,pp.53–4).Bottery(2006)explainsthatleadershipreadinessrequiresanunderstandingofglobalcon-textsandtheirinfluenceonalocalcontext.Inotherwords,theauthoradvocatesforleaderstodevelopaglocalunderstanding.SuchglocalunderstandingisimportantifaleaderwantstonavigatethroughwhatSpring(2015,p.1)called‘worldwidenetworks,processes,andinstitutionsaffectinglocaleducationalpracticesandpolicies’.Aglocalunderstandingcanbefosteredbyaglocalizationofeducationalleadershipdevelopment,aspreviouslymentioned.Infact,Fernandes(2019)exploredtheinfluenceofglocalizationoneducationalleadershipintheAsiaPacificregion,andconcludedbystating,‘effectiveleadershipdevelopmentprogramsmustgivedueconsiderationtotheimportanceofdevelopingglocalliteraciesoftheireduca-tionalleaderssothattheycandealwithvariouscomplexitiesfacedbytheirschoolswithintheAsiaPacificregion’(p.27).Furthermore,Jean-Francois(2018)providedatechnology-basedglocalperspectiveforteachingindoctoralleadershipprogrammes.Suchaglocalperspective–rootedinanawarenessoftransnationalrealities,thesocialcontextofglocalidentity,aswellastechnology–canbeinstrumentalinfosteringglocalliteraciesforeducationalleaders.GlocalCurriculaandPedagogiesThestrandofglocaleducationscholarshipconnectedtoglocalcurriculaandpedagogiesfocusesontheinternationalizationofcurriculaandinstructionalpracticesinwaysthataccountforlocalandglobalprocesses(Jean-Francois,2015;Johnetal.,2017;Mannionetal.,2011;Patel,2017;Patel&Lynch,2013).AccordingtoJohnetal.(2017,p.32),aglocalcurriculumsequencesteaching-learningexperiencessothatthestudentscandeveloptheknowledge,skills,andmindsetstolearnfromoneanotherandtoproduceknowledgetogetheraboutthecausesofandsolutionstosustainabilityproblemsacrossdifferentgeographicalandculturalcontexts.Jean-Francois(2015)advisedtheutilizationofglocallyinformedpedagogythroughthedefinitionofparacontextualityandmetaidentity,theoperationalizationofmultipurposeful-ness,theassessmentandintegrationoftransworldiness,theempowermentofintersectionalsynergiesthroughtransculturalintegration,thecreationandfacilitationofalternativespaces,andtheassessmentandevaluationoflocallyvaluedoutcomes.Glocallyinformedpedagogyisbasicallyacurriculumdevelopmentapproachforglocaleducation,whichcan,inturn,informglocalpedagogies.AccordingtoPatelandLynch(2013,p.223),‘glocalizedlearningandteachingreferstothecurricularconsiderationandpedagogicalframingoflocalandglobalcommunityconnectednessinrelationtosocialresponsibility,justiceandsustainability’.AsJohnetal.(2017)explained,theglobalcanbemergedwiththelocaltofosterlocallearningandengagement,incombinationwithglobalcommunication,collaborationandknowledgeJean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
198188Handbookofcultureandglocalizationproduction.Mannion(2015)arguedinfavourofglocalpedagogiespartlyduetotherisksassociatedwitheducationforglobalcitizenship.Forexample,Mannion(2015)explainedhowglobalcitizenshipeducationoreducationforglobalcitizenshiprisksoveremphasizingtheglobalattheexpenseofthelocal;failstounderstandtheglobal–localconnectionbeyondabinaryway;andfostersethnocentrismandneocolonialismthroughatransmissiveapproach.Mannion(2015)wentontoexplainhowglocalpedagogiesmighthelpavoidsuchrisks,par-ticularlybystayingintouchwiththelocalwhilerespondingtotransnationalforces,andbydevelopingunderstandingregardingtheinterconnectionbetweenthelocalsettings,concernsandpracticeswiththeextralocalones.Severalotherstudieshaveshowntheapplicationofglocalpedagogiesinscienceteaching(Tippinsetal.,2014),languageteaching(Joseph&Ramani,2012),andonlinelearning(Swanson,2011),andvariousotherdisciplines.GlocalCitizenshipandCompetenceGlocaleducationliteraturehasalsoputemphasisonglocalcitizenshipandcompetence.Glocalcitizenshipeducationisviewedthroughthelensofalocalizationofglobalcitizenshipeducation(Mannionetal.,2011;Tichnor-Wagner,2017).Infact,Skladetal.(2016)arguedthattheeffectivenessofglobalcitizenshipeducationdependsonwhetheritisglocalcitizen-shipeducation,whichisanunderstandingthatlocalactionsarerequiredtoconfrontglobalchallengesandviceversa.Mannion(2015)cautionedaboutthebinaryglobalcitizen–localcitizenapproachandsuggestedthatglocalcitizenshipbettercapturesthecomplexityoftheglobal–localdynamics,aswellastheglobalandlocalextraforces.Therehasbeenagreatdealofinterestinglocalcompetencebypolicymakers,employersandcommunitiesatlarge(Eckel,2017;Gichiru,2016,Puukka,2017;Shahabudin,2017;Skladetal.,2016).Interesthasalsobeenexpressedinglobalcompetence(BoixMansilla&Jackson,2011)andinterculturalcompetence(Matherly&Nolting,2007;Rexeisenetal.,2008).TheNationalEducationAssociation’sEducationPolicyandPracticeDepartmentdefinesglobalcompetenceas:theacquisitionofin-depthknowledgeandunderstandingofinternationalissues,anappreciationofandabilitytolearnandworkwithpeoplefromdiverselinguisticandculturalbackgrounds,profi-ciencyinforeignlanguage(s),andskillstofunctionproductivelyinaninterdependentworldcom-munity.(NationalEducationAssociation’sEducationPolicyandPracticeDepartment,2010,p.1)Aspreviouslyindicated,glocalcompetenceistheadaptationoradjustmentofglobalcom-petenceinlocalcontextsorenvironments(Jean-Francois,2015).Therealityisthatintercon-nectionsintheworldexistbecauseofthemultitudeoflocalcontextsandenvironmentsthatdevelopconsensustodirectlyorindirectlyshareglobalpractices,theories,frameworks,ideas,normsandbehaviourpatterns.However,theretendstobeadifferenceorgapbetweenwhatareconsideredglobalpracticesandthenormsandbehaviourpatternsthatexistinsomelocalenvi-ronments.Glocalcompetenceshouldenableanindividualtosuccessfullyreconcilethisgapbetweentheglobalandthelocal.Skladetal.(2016)assertthat‘thereistheneedtoincreaseawarenessofthedialecticsbetweentheglobalandthelocal’(p.323),andsuggestthe‘GoingGlocal’programme,whichisbased‘onthenotionofglocalization,theobservationthatallglobalchangestartswithlocalaction,andtherecognitionthatthereisalwaysanunderlyingconnectionbetweenlocalandglobalprocesses’(p.327).Skladetal.(2016)goontoassertthatsomeoftheoutcomesofglocalcompetenceinclude,butarenotlimitedto,‘open-mindedJean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
199Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications189attitudestoculturaldifferences,betterunderstandingofothersocietiesandothersocialper-spectives,increasedabilitytocriticallyassessglobaljusticeproblems,andadeeperapprecia-tionoftheinteractionsbetweenthelocalandgloballevelsofsocialpractices’(p.337).Glocalcompetenceenablesanindividualtoadaptglobalcompetenciesinvariouslocalcontextsorenvironments.Mathew(2016)explainsthatglocalcompetencehelpspeopleunderstandtheinterconnectednessoftheworldbyexaminingpatternsinvariouslocal(national)contexts,andviceversa.Assuch,glocallycompetentgraduateswillbe‘nationallycompetitiveandgloballyrelevant’(Shahabudin,2017,p.301).GlocalSustainabilityEducationWithrespecttoglocalsustainabilityeducation,thescholarshipemphasizescurriculaandteaching–learningpracticesregardingtheglobalandlocalnatureofsustainabilityandsus-tainabledevelopment(Jean-Francois,2017;Puukka,2017).Jean-Francois(2017)suggestsareframingofthecurriculumforthetwenty-firstcentury‘withtheaimofeducatingaglocalcitizenrythatnurtures,protectsandconservestheplanetforfuturegenerations’(p.197).Hefurtherproposesacurriculumforsustainabilityeducationthatshouldshiftfrom:1.‘globalcitizenry’(thatis,membershiptoaglobalplanetarycitizenry)to‘glocalcitizenry’(thatis,membershiptoaglocalplanetarycitizenry);2.‘globalcompetence’(thatis,awareness,knowledge,skillsandattitudesregardingglobalissues)to‘glocalcompetence’(thatis,knowledge,skills,attitudesandunderstandingofglobalissuesandchallengesinalocalizedperspective);3.‘globalleadership’(thatis,leadershipforglobalpurposes)to‘glocalleadership’(thatis,leadershipforglocalpurposes);4.‘employability’(thatis,producinggraduatesforthelabourmarket)to‘sustainableliving’(thatis,producinggraduatestoworkandenjoyaqualitylifeinasustainablecommunity);and5.‘classroom’(thatis,aphysicallocationwherelearnersreceiveinstruction,trainingoredu-cationfromteachers)to‘class-space’(thatis,anyvirtualorphysicalspacewherelearnersacquireknowledgeandskillsordevelopattitudesorunderstanding,eitherbythemselvesorwiththesupportofteachers,instructorsormentors(Jean-Francois,2017,p.197).AsPatelandLynch(2013,p.223)assert,‘glocalandglocalizationrefertothemergerofglobalandlocalperspectivesonthesocio-economicandpoliticalimpactofallphenomenathataffectslocalandglobalcommunities’.Theliteratureonglocalsustainabilityeducationalsoincludesframeworksthatcanhelpgeneratefindingstosupportcurriculumandinstructionalpractices.Forexample,Johnetal.(2017)developedamodeloftransnationalcollaborationsforsustainability,whichcombinesdigitalliteraciesandlocalengagementtofosterglocallearningandimpact.Further,Jean-Francois(2020)suggestsaquadrangulationalcomparisonframeworktoinvestigateglocalsustainabilityissues,challenges,policiesorpractices,whichcanbeausefulanalyticaltoolforscholarsinglocalsustainabilityeducation.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
200190HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGLOCALEDUCATIONANDTHELEARNEROFTOMORROWInanagewheretheterm‘globalization’isinwidespreaduseinmultipleprofessionaldomains,itcansometimesbeconfusingtoseetheterm‘glocalization’asanindependentconceptinsteadofatypo.AsarticulatedbyJean-Francois(2015,p.73):‘Glocalsymbiosisistheintan-giblemechanismthatcementsthemeldingbetweentheglobalandthelocal,withinthespiritofthephrases:Thinkglobally,actlocally;andthinklocally,actglobally’.Itisnecessarytodistinguishtheconceptof‘global’fromthatof‘glocal’.Jean-Francoiselaborates,glocalisinherentlyaconceptpertainingtoacollaborativeorapartnershipframework,mindset,ortermsofreference,betweenanoutsider(withaglobalperspective,expertise,agenda,scope,orinter-ests),andaninsider(withalocalperspective,expertise,agenda,scope,orinterests...(Jean-Francois,2015,p.73)Awarenessofan‘outsiderperspective’andhesitationtoengagewithunknownfactorsmayvaryfromregiontoregion.Thismayhavevariousrootcauses,suchashowoutsidershaveinteractedandengagedwith(oroverlookedordisengagedfrom)insidershistorically.AsFloraetal.(2016,p.168)putit:‘Whenbondingishighandbridgingislow,communitiesresistchange’.Putanotherway,withoutinter-grouptrust,thereisnocooperationorcollaboration.Theconceptofapartnershipcannotexist.Thisimpactsallareasofeducation,including,butnotlimitedto,thelearnersoftomorrow,aswellascurriculumdevelopmentandassessment.So,whoarethelearnersoftomorrow?KhambayatandMajumdar(2010)wroteanarticle–‘PreparingTeachersofTodayfortheLearnersofTomorrow’–gearedtowardsustainabledevelopmentofeducationsystemswiththefutureinmind.Theyarguedthat,inthemovementtowardaknowledge-basedeconomy(p.9),itisclearthat‘theknowledgeeconomydemand[s]higherorderthinking(HOT)skills...[whichinvolve]thelearningofcomplexjudgmentalskillssuchascriticalthinkingandproblemsolving’(p.10).Theseauthorsassertedthatacom-munity’sglocalsustainabilitycanbeharbouredthroughHOTskillssuchas‘publicawareness,education,andtraining’(p.10).Thenotionofmakingprogresstowardasustainablecommu-nitycanbeconnectedwiththelearnersoftomorrow.Thelearnersoftomorrowmustbepreparedthroughglocalmeanstobestengageintheinterconnectedandtransnationalglocalcommunitiesthataredeveloping.KhambayatandMajumdar(2010)alsopositedthatthe‘informationrevolution’(p.11)requiresstudentstocollaborateandcommunicateeffectivelyacrossadiversetechnologicalspectrumalongsidemoretraditionalformsofprofessionalinteraction.Tomorrow’slearnersmustreceivecommu-nicationaswell.Forinstance,theymustbeawareofglobalissuesaswellaslocalcontextsandbeself-drivenlifelonglearners(p.11).Thelearnersoftomorrowareexpectedtoengageandthriveinaglocalcontext;inturn,theyexpecttoday’seducationalleaderstopreparethemforsuchafuture.BrooksandNormore(2010)speakofwaysinwhicheducationalleadersmustbevisionariesinordertosuccessfullyleadschools,andstudents,intothefuture.Theseauthorsdiscussthelimitationsofcurrentbenchmarkingprocesses,suchasstrategicplanning,andsuggestthateducationalleadersaimingtopreparethelearnersoftomorrowshouldlooktowarddynamicformsofinformation.Forinstance,theyinsistthat‘longitudinaldata’(Brooks&Normore,2010,p.71)yieldsclearerandmoreaccurateinformationthanstrategicplanning.Viewingtheeducationalsystemasacollaborativeandengagingprofessionalsphereisasteptoexercisingthebenefitsofframingtheschoolinanopensystemcontext.ThesameauthorsfurtheradviseJean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
201Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications191educationalleadersto‘[integratestrategicplanning]withotherlongitudinaldatatopromoteconnectedleadershipviaafuturetrendframework’(p.72).Tohelpwiththisprocess,Marx(2006)createdafigureentitled,‘Sixteentrends...thatwillprofoundlyaffectU.S.educationandthewholeofsociety’(p.6).Thesetrendsincludevarioustypesofdata.Forinstance:‘Forthefirsttimeinhistory,theoldwilloutnumbertheyoung.(Note:Thisagingtrendgenerallyappliestodevelopednations.Inunderdevelopednations,justtheoppositeistrue:theyoungwillsubstantiallyoutnumbertheold.)’(p.71).Thetrendsalsoconcernalternativeformsofcapital.Forexample,‘[s]ocialandintellectualcapitalwillbecomeeconomicdrivers,intensifyingcompetitionforwell-educatedpeople’(p.71)andinterconnectedcollaborationefforts,saying,‘[c]ommonopportunitiesandthreatswillintensifyaworldwidedemandforplanetarysecurity’(p.71).Ifthese16factorsarerelevanttoeducationalleaders,theyarecertainlyessentialtokeepinmindforthelearnerswhowillbeleadingafterthem.GLOCALEDUCATIONANDPUBLICPOLICYGlocaleducationandpublicpolicycanjointlyaddresssomeofthemostchallengingandpressingissuesfacedbyeducationalleaders,teachersandlearnersacrosstheworld.Thebroadrangeofissuesinclude:planningandimplementationofeducationprogrammesduringanepidemicoraregional/globalpandemic;helpingstudentsinrural,low-incomeorotherwisedisadvantagedareastoaccessqualityeducation;educatingstudentsinarmed-conflictareasorrefugeecamps;andbridgingthetechnologydividetohelpstudentsbenefitfromthelearningopportunitiesofferedbyaccesstoinformationandcommunicationtechnology(ICT).Policymakerstendtofocusoninitiativesthatdevelopglobalcompetence.AccordingtotheProgrammeforInternationalStudentAssessment(PISA),globalcompetenceisthe‘capacitytoexaminelocal,globalandinterculturalissues,tounderstandandappreciatetheperspectivesandworldviewsofothers,toengageinopen,appropriateandeffectiveinteractionswithpeoplefromdifferentcultures,andtoactforcollectivewell-beingandsustainabledevelopment’(paragraph1).Globalcompetenceemphasizestheacquisitionofknowledge,values,attitudesandskillsabouttheworld(PISA,2018).However,today’sglobalchallengesareequallylocalchallenges,butinspecificways,meaningthatsomeglobalframeworksmaynotnecessarilybeadequatetohelpaddresssuchissuesorchallenges.Therefore,whilepolicyinitiativesshouldaimforthedevelopmentofglobalcompetencies,itisequallyimportanttoaccountforglocalsymbiosisbyrecognizinglocaldifferences,reassessingbothlocalandglobalimplications,andreconcilingtheglobalwiththelocal.Inotherwords,glocaleducationchallengespublicpolicystakeholderstoaimforglocalcompetencies.Jean-Francois(2015)definesglocalcompetenceas‘theknowledge,skills,comprehension,andattitudesacquiredthroughtheinterwoven[sic]ofpreviousglobalabilitieswiththecuriosity,personalinteractionsandimmersioninaspecificsociety’(p.148).Glocalcompetenceispoisedasanalternative(ormaybecomplement)toglobalcompetence,becauseglobalcompetenceisanabstractconcept,lackinganabilitytotestsuchcompetenciesinaspecificlocalcontextthatinvolvesculturaldifferencesandpotentialforinterculturalmisunderstandings.Educationpolicymakersshouldbeawareofthat.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
202192HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGLOCALEDUCATIONANDLEADERSHIPGlocaleducationcarriessignificantandmeaningfulimplicationsforleadership,especiallyeducationalleadership.Aspreviouslyarticulated,BrooksandNormore(2010)providenineliteraciesthateducationalleadersshoulddevelopintheglocalera:political,economic,cultural,moral,pedagogical,informational,organizational,spiritualandreligious,andtem-poral.Theseallcarryimportantelementsthatcanhelpeducationalleadersdevelopglocalleadershipskillsorabilities.AccordingtoJean-Francois(2015),glocalleadershiprefersto‘anapproachtoinfluencetheperception,motivation,andbehaviorofpeopletowardglocalpurposesbasedonanunderstandingofculturaldimensionsamongsocietiesintheworldandafocusonculture-specificwaysofnurturingfollowership’(p.207).Themultipleidentitiesthatconstitutethemake-upofworkplaces,organizationsorinstitutionscarrycountlessoppor-tunitiesforinterculturalmisunderstandings.However,glocalleadershipskillsorabilitiescanhelpinterpretinterculturalmisunderstandingsasmissedopportunities,andtranslatethemintoassetstofosterglocalcompetence.AsBrooksandNormore(2010)argue,glocalleadership‘demandsthateducationalleadersdevelopnewskills,andbroadentheirunderstandingofthewaylocalandglobalforcesareenmeshedinanincreasinglysophisticatedmanner’(p.74).Inotherwords,itisnotenoughtodevelopgloballeadershipskillsthroughthemasteryofglobaltrendsandabroadunderstandingofstandardizedwaystodealwithaglobalworkforceorenvironment.Yes,thatisimportant.However,anabilitytolocalizegloballeadershipskillsisequallyimportant.AsTichnor-Wagner(2017)mentions,‘[c]aringfortheworldanditspeoplebeginsathome...tounderstandtheworldandtakeactiontoimproveglobalconditions,peopleneedafirmgroundingintheirownidentityandlocalcontext’(p.70).Inotherwords,itisnotenoughtobeagloballeader;itisbettertostrivetobeaglocalone.GLOCALEDUCATIONANDCURRICULATheMerriam-Websterdictionarydefinesa‘curriculum’as‘thecoursesofferedbyanedu-cationalinstitution’or‘asetofcoursesconstitutinganareaofspecialization’.Forinstance,learnersmaycreateindividualcurriculafortheircourses(forexample,History11orVirtualGameDesignasanindependent‘areaofspecialization’),insteadofadheringtoacurriculumthatisastrictlylarge-scaledepartmentaldecision.TheoristssuchasDewey(2013)andMarzanoetal.(1988)haveprovidedfoundationalandinfluentialinsightsintocurriculumdesignanddevelopment.Theliteraturesurroundingglobalcurriculumdevelopmenthasexpandedinrecentyears(Banks,2006;Brooks&Normore,2010;Caena,2014;Chaetal.,2017;Hicks,2003;Ibrahim,2005;Johnetal.,2017;Myers,2006;Noddings,2005;Weber,2007).However,theconceptofaglocalcurriculumisrelativelynew:Aglocalcurriculumsequencesteaching-learningexperiencessothatthestudentscandeveloptheknowledge,skills,andmindsetstolearnfromoneanotherandtoproduceknowledgetogetheraboutthecausesofandsolutionstosustainabilityproblemsacrossdifferentgeographicalandculturalcontexts.(Johnetal.,2017,p.32)PatelandLynch(2013)advocateforglocalframeworksineducationduetothethreatsandobstaclesintheongoing‘internationalizationofcurriculumdiscourse’(p.226).PatelandJean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
203Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications193Lynch(2013)andWelikala(2011)describehegemonictendenciesandthedeficitapproachofinternationalizationasamethodofprioritizingand‘uphold[ing]thedominantcultures’ideol-ogyandutiliz[ing]thestereotypicalbehaviorsoflessdominant(i.e.,minority)cultures’(Patel&Lynch,2013,p.226).ThismindsetframeswhatPatelandLynchcall‘strategichegemonicagendas’(2013,p.226)thatdegrademinoritycultures.Welikala(2011)suggeststhat,‘thelocallearnersneedtobemorecosmopolitan,opentoalternativeworldviewsandrecognizeunfamiliarasanotherfamiliar’(p.18).AccordingtoPatelandLynch(2013),Inthisway,thesocialmoresofthedominantculturesbecomethenormagainstwhichthevaluesandattributesofotherculturesarejudged.Thestereotypicalbehaviorsoflessdominantculturesareusedtojudgethemasinadequate,inefficient,andincompetentallowingthesestereotypestobecomethebasisofassumptionsmadeabouttheirculturalpractices.(Patel&Lynch,2013,p.226)Shiftingeducationalassessmentdialoguetobeviewedthroughaglocallenswillassistinallowingeducationalstakeholdersto‘mov[e]beyondculturalrelativism’(p.226)andengageinanenlightened,‘heuristicdimensionofglocalization’(p.227).Withallofthevariablesthatsurroundglocalcurriculumdevelopment,suchastheoneslistedabove,itiseasytogetlostinthedetailsofglocalcurriculumdesign.Instructingviaaglocalcurriculumlendsitselftoacollaborativesustainabilityoflocalandglobalcommunities(Johnetal.,2017).Trippestad(2016)notonlyacknowledgesthatglocalcurriculumstrategiesshouldbewidelyusedintheeducationalprofession,butalsodiscussesthesocialjusticecomponentofglocaleducationalteacheragency,describingthelocalteacherasfollows:Aglocaleducationalteacheragencyandphilosophymustbebuiltuponrespectfortheindividualandthelocal,withanunderstandingandrespectofthehistory,politicalandculturalinstitutionofacountryorstate,while,atthesametime,realisingacommonuniversalunderstanding,interconnect-ednessandhumanisticpotentialofglobalization.(Trippestad,2016,p.20)Assuch,thisconceptmustalsobegivenspaceintheteacher’scurriculum.Harth(2010)assertsthat:‘Technologicaladvancesincommunications,transportation,andinformationprocessinghavedeepenedandbroadenedconnectionsonmultiplelevels,localthroughglobal,thickeningthewebsofinteractivitythatbindustoeachothereconomically,politically,mili-tarily,socially,culturally,environmentally,andethically’(para.4).Astheaforementionedauthors,amongothers,note,thelandscapeofeducationandthedefinitionofskillsneededintheworkplaceevolveandreorientthemselvestothechanginglandscapeofprofessionalopportunitiesinglobalizingcountries.Sriraman(2011)statedthat‘inkeepingwiththeneologism“glocal”,thecommunityof21stcenturyreadersofthejournalcanbethoughtofasglocavores(asopposedtolocavores),sincewereadilyconsumeideasthatspawnallaroundtheworld’(p.403).Theconsumptionoftheglocalinterdependentlife-stylesintransnationallocalregionsimpliesthenecessityforglocalcurriculumdevelopmenttopersistandprogress.Assuch,educators,educationalleadersandeducationalstakeholdersmustcontinuetoexploretheimplicationsofglocaleducationforthelearnersoftomorrow.Understandingandapplyingtheseimplicationsshouldguideeducationalleadersandteachersastheydeveloptransnational,national,regional,localandclassroom-basedcurriculumstand-ardstoencouragethewidespread,glocalpreparationoftheirstudents.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
204194HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGLOCALEDUCATIONANDASSESSMENTShaftelandShaftel(2007)emphasizetheneedtodefine‘evaluation’asafoundationalconcepttounderstandtypesofeducationalassessment,morespecificallyas‘a“systematicinvestiga-tionintotheworthormeritofanobject”(JCSEE1994,p.3)’(ascitedinShaftel&Shaftel,2007,p.216).Whileitmaybeeasytodefinetheterm,itislessclearhowdifferentregionsoftheworldshouldimplementthedefinitionandmanifesttheirownvisionsofthenotionofsystematicinvestigation.Nonetheless,itseemsthattherearetwowidelyacceptedtypesofevaluationofsuchanendeavour:formativeandsummative.Todistinguishthetwo,formativeevaluationisanongoingmeasureofstudentunderstandingand‘takesplaceduringeducationalactivitiesandservestoguidetheselectionofinstructionalmethodsandcurricularmaterialstoenhancelearningorfillgapsinknowledge’(p.217),whereassummativeevaluationiscumu-lative.Thistypeofevaluation‘occursattheendofalearningunitandpresentsconclusionsaboutastudent’slearning’(p.217).Educationalassessment,therefore,isa‘broaderconceptofevaluation...[and]canbeformativeorsummativedependingoncontextandpurpose’(p.218).AccordingtoBocketal.(1982,p.14):Educationalassessmentwasbornofadesiretoestimateattainmentinculturallyoreducationallydefinedgroups,withresultsdetailedenoughtobeuseful,butatcostslowenoughtobepractical.Thesuccessesenjoyedtodateareduelargelytoadvancesinsurveymethodology,mostnotablytheintro-ductionofmultiple-matrixsamplingtheory.Itisnowpossibletoobtainsufficientlypreciseestimatesofattainmentoverabroadrangeofskillswithminimalexpendituresofeducationalresources.Evenwiththeevolutionofeducationalassessmenttechniques,thereappearstobe‘ahistoryoffailureamongnewinnovations.Itisoftendifficulttotakeanewapproach,particularlyinthefieldofassessment,andscaleituptointernationalorgloballevel’(Griffin&Care,2014,p.14).Putanotherway,thereisnoone-size-fits-allmethodforeducationalassessment.Intermsofglocaleducation,itmaybeinthebestinterestofeducationalorganizationstobeassessedinaglocalframeofmind.Intheirtext,ChangingEducationalAssessment:InternationalPerspectivesandTrends,Torranceetal.(2012)affirmthateducationalassessmentis,ofcourse,awell-establishedconcept.Theauthorsarticulatethat,[n]otonlydowehavetheconventionalquestionsofwhoistobeassessed,where,when,how,andforwhatpurposeinanyparticularcontext;wemustalsoexaminehowtheanswerstothesequestionsdifferfromonenationalcontexttoanother,tosuggestwhythisshouldbesoandtoconsidertheeffectsandimplicationsofsuchdifferences.(Torranceetal.,2012,p.7)Assuch,itisclearthatglocaleducationimpactsassessmentindesignandintentionbecauseitfocusesonthelocalcontextwithinthelensofnationalandglobalparadigms.Furthermore,Torranceetal.(2012)describetwofundamental‘levelsofanalysis:(i)theindividualstudentand(ii)thesocialgroup’(p.13)ofeducationalassessment.Eachoftheselevelsservedifferentroles–andcomewithdifferentadvantagesanddisadvantages–inmeasuringtheconnectionbetweenthebrainandconsciousness(p.11)forthebenefitofthesocietyororganizationinwhichtheassessmentisimplemented.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
205Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications195Owingtotheemergingtrendsineducationalassessment,glocaleducationpracticesfurtherperpetuatetheneedtoexplorethetwogoalsTorranceetal.(2012)setoutforeducationalassessment:‘(1)assessingmorecomplexsamplesofbehaviourand(2)makingmorerealisticapproximationstothatactualbehaviourduringthetestingprocess’(p.26).Hence,thereiscontinuedcausetoperpetuatebothformativeandsummativeassessmentforms,withpossibleinclinationstowardmorelongitudinalformsofformativeassessment.Torranceetal.(2012)alsomentionacurrenttrend‘towardsdirectassessmentofskills—thatis,closerapproxi-mationsinassessmenttotheskillsweareactuallyattemptingtomeasure(invalidityterms,approximatingtheultimateratherthanintermediatecriteria)’(p.24).Inunderstandingthesethreeelements–theglocalcontextofeducationalorganizations,theeffectofglocaleducationoncurriculumdesign,andthelearnersoftomorrow–educationalresearchersandstakeholderscanapplyglocaleducationconstructstoenhanceeducationalassessmentgoalsandmethodsaswell.Thecurrentpushtowardcreatinglifelonglearnersoftomorrowwhoareabletocriticallythinkandsynthesizeinformationinnewwaysalsourgeseducationalassessmenttrendstoevolvepastevenwhatthecurrentliteratureprovides.GLOCALEDUCATIONANDORGANIZATIONALCLIMATEIsaksenandEkvall(2007)defineorganizationalclimateastheongoingpatternsofbehaviour,attitudesandfeelingsthatcharacterizelifeinanorganization.Itisimportanttonotethatorganizationalclimatedoesnotexistinavacuum.Itislinkedtoalargerexternalenvironment,becauseanorganizationisbasicallyamicroversionofasociety,whichincludesindividualsandtheirbehaviours,rulesandregulationsdrivingthedecision-makingprocess,andasetofgoalsandobjectivesthatmembersstrivetoachievethroughactionsandstrategies.Theassessmentoforganizationalclimatetendstobedonethroughsurveysthataccountforworkenvironmentandpsychologicalfactorssuchasleadershipandorganizationalsupport,coop-erationandeffectiveness,workload,androleclarity.Severalstudiesfoundthatasupportiveorganizationalclimateenhancesthesatisfactionandcommitmentofemployees(Luthansetal.,2008;Mahal,2009).Thisimpliesthatanunderstandingoforganizationalclimatecanbeben-eficialtoaddressthechallengesfacedbyanorganization,includinganeducationalinstitution.Manyeducationalinstitutionsinvolveanorganizationalclimatethatincludesdiverseinternalandexternalstakeholders.Someexternalstakeholdersmayexistbecauseofpartnershipsestablishedormaintainedwiththecommunitieswhereaneducationalinstitutionislocatedordoingbusiness.Suchpartnershipcanbelocalorglobalorboth.Therefore,glocaleducationcaninformworkenvironmentsandpsychologicalfactorsrelatedtoorganizationalclimate.Forexample,institutionscanuseaglocalframeworktoinformaclimatesurveybyexploringhowlocalandglobalforcesandfactorsaffectorganizationalclimateandorganizationalculture.Findingsresultingfromsuchasurveycanhelpformulatestrategiesthatnurtureanorgani-zationalclimate,whichcaninturnfosterhealthyinteractionsacrossculturalboundariesinintentionalwaysthataccountforboththeglobalandthelocal.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
206196HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCONCLUSIONGlobaleducationcansoundveryattractiveformanyeducationalleaders,teachersandstu-dents.Forsome,however,itcansoundmorelikeanabstractconcept,especiallyiftheycannotconnectitwiththeirdailyexperiences.Similarly,itisverydifficultforsomeeducationalleaders,teachersorstudentstounderstandhowtheirdecisionsandbehavioursaffecttherestoftheworld.Thus,manypeopleadvocateforcurriculathatfocusexclusivelyonthelocalcontextandneeds,asopposedtoglobaleducation,whichrisksfocusingontheglobalandneglectinglocalrealities.Whileitisimportanttoacknowledgethatitissimplistictolookonlyatglobaleducationorlocallyorientededucation,suchanapproachneverthelessispartofthemindsetofmanyeducationalstakeholdersinvariouspartsoftheworld,includingindustrializedanddevelopingcountries.Glocalization,whichgavebirthtoglocaleducation,providesatheoret-icalframeworkandinspiresconceptualframeworksthathelpreconcilelocalandglobalper-spectivesregardingissuesandopportunitiesthatconcernpeoplelivinginlocalcommunitiesacrosstheglobe.Glocaleducationaimstofosterglocalcompetence,whichistheabilitytobegloballymindedandlocallysensitive.Glocalcompetenceisrootedinthevariouslocalcon-texts(suchas,ecosystems,systems,institutions,frameworks,policy,curricula,programmes,research,trends,practices,teaching,leadershipandworldviews)acrosstheworld.Itinvolvesglocaltargets(suchasleaders,entrepreneurs,educators,students,graduates,professionals,serviceproviders,individuals,communitiesandinstitutions)whohavetonavigatesimultane-ouslythroughagloballyinterconnectedworldandongoinglocalinteractions.Glocalcompe-tenceisnurturedthroughglocallevers(suchas,globalliteracy,sustainabilityliteracy,localliteracy,digitalliteracy,criticalthinking,interculturalengagement,interculturalself-efficacyandlanguagecommunication)thathelpreshapethemindsetandworldviewofglocaltargets.Glocalleversenableglocaltargetstomasterglocalsymbiosisortheabilitytorecognize,reassessandreconciletheglobalwiththelocal.Suchglocalsymbiosishasthepotentialtofosterglocalcompetencies(suchas,awareness,knowledge,skills,understanding,attitudeandaction).Glocalcompetenciesthusallowindividualstointerpretorreconcileglobaltrendsandframeworksindistinctnationalorlocalcontexts.REFERENCESBanks,J.A.(2006),DiversityandCitizenshipEducation:GlobalPerspectives,Indianapolis,IN:Jossey-Bass.Bock,R.D.,Mislevy,R.andC.Woodson(1982),‘Thenextstageineducationalassessment’,EducationalResearcher,11(3),4–16.BoixMansilla,V.andA.Jackson(2011),EducatingforGlobalCompetence:PreparingOurYouthtoEngagetheWorld,NewYork,NY:AsiaSociety.Bottery,M.(2006),‘Educationalleadersinaglobalizingworld:Anewsetofpriorities?’,SchoolLeadershipandManagement,26(1),5–22.Brooks,J.S.andA.H.Normore(2010),‘Educationalleadershipandglobalization:Literacyforaglocalperspective’,EducationalPolicy,24(1),52–82.Caena,F.(2014),‘ComparativeglocalperspectivesonEuropeanteachereducation’,EuropeanJournalofTeacherEducation,37(1),106–22.Cha,C.B.,K.M.Tezanos,O.M.Peros,M.Y.Ng,J.D.Ribeiro,M.K.NockandJ.C.Franklin(2017).‘Accountingfordiversityinsuicideresearch:SamplingandsamplereportingpracticesintheUnitedStates’,SuicideandLife-ThreateningBehavior.Advancedonlinepublication.https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12344Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
207Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications197Dewey,J.(2013),TheSchoolandSociety:TheChildandTheCurriculum,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Eckel,P.D.(2017),‘Institutionalgovernanceforasharedglocalengagementmission’,HigherEducationintheWorld6(HEIW6),accessedon15January2020athttps://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/453.Fernandes,V.(2019),‘GlocalizingeducationalleadershipdevelopmentintheAsiaPacificregion’,inV.FernandesandP.W.K.Chan(eds),AsiaPacificEducation:Leadership,GovernanceandAdministration(Leadership,Schools,andChange),Charlotte,NC:InformationAgePublishing,pp.15–29.Flora,C.B.,Flora,J.L.andS.P.Gasteyer(2016),RuralCommunities:LegacyandChange,Boulder,CO:WestviewPress.Gichiru,W.(2016),‘Reflectionsonbuilding“glocal”competenceamongpre-serviceandin-serviceteachers’,FIRE:ForumforInternationalResearchinEducation,3(1),41–55.GriffinP.andE.Care(2014),AssessmentandTeachingof21stcenturyskills:MethodsandApproach,TheNetherlands:Springer.Harth,(2010),‘Goingglocal’,NationalAssociationofIndependentSchools.Accessed6January2020athttps://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/fall-2010/going-glocal/.Hicks,D.(2003),‘Thirtyyearsofglobaleducation:Areminderofkeyprinciplesandprecedents’,EducationalReview,55(3),265–75.Ibrahim,T.(2005),‘Globalcitizenshipeducation:Mainstreamingthecurriculum?’,CambridgeJournalofEducation,35(2),177–94.Isaksen,S.G.andG.Ekvall(2007),AssessingtheContextforChange:ATechnicalManualfortheSituationalOutlookQuestionnaire,OrchardPark,NY:TheCreativeProblemSolvingGroup.Jean-Francois,E.(2015),BuildingGlobalEducationwithaLocalPerspective:AnIntroductiontoGlocalHigherEducation,NewYork:NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Jean-Francois,E.(2017),‘Preparingglocalcitizenry:Implicationsforthecurriculum’,inF.X.Grau,J.Goddard,B.L.Hall,E.HazelkornandR.Tandon(eds),HigherEducationintheWorld6.TowardsaSociallyResponsibleUniversity:BalancingtheGlobalandtheLocal,Barcelona:GUNi,pp.194–209.Jean-Francois,E.(2018),‘Atechnology-basedglocalperspectiveforteachingindoctoraleducationalleadershipprograms’,inL.HyattandS.Allen(eds),AdvancingDoctoralLeadershipEducationThroughTechnology,Cheltenham,UK:EdwardElgarPublishing.Jean-Francois,E.(2020),‘Quadrangulationalcomparisonforsustainabilitystudies’,JournalofGlobalResearchinEducationandSocialScience,14(1),33–41.John,B.,Caniglia,G.,Bellina,L.,Lang,D.J.andM.Laubichler(2017),TheGlocalCurriculum:APracticalGuidetoTeachingandLearninginanInterconnectedWorld,Baden-Baden,Germany:CriticalAestheticPublishing.Joseph,M.andE.Ramani(2012),‘“Glocalization”:Goingbeyondthedichotomyofglobalversuslocalthroughadditivemultilingualism’,InternationalMultilingualResearchJournal,6(1),22–34.Khambayat,R.P.andS.Majumdar(2010),‘Preparingteachersoftodayforthelearnersoftomorrow’,JournalofEngineering,ScienceandManagementEducation,2,9–16.Luthans,F.,Norman,S.M.,Avolio,B.J.andJ.B.Avey(2008),‘Themediatingroleofpsychologicalcapitalinthesupportiveorganizationalclimate–employeeperformancerelationship’,JournalofOrganizationalBehavior,29,219–38.Mahal,P.K.(2009),‘Organisationalcultureandorganisationalclimateasadeterminantofmotivation’,TheIUPJournalofManagement,8(10),38–51.Mannion,G.(2015),‘Towardsglocalpedagogies:Somerisksassociatedwitheducationforglobalcit-izenshipandhowglocalpedagogiesmightavoidthem’,inJ.Friedman,V.Haverkate,B.Oomen,E.ParkandM.Sklad(eds)GoingGlocalinHigherEducation:TheTheory,TeachingandMeasurementofGlobalCitizenship,Middelburg,theNetherlands:UniversityCollegeRoosevelt,pp.19–34.Mannion,G.,Biesta,G.J.J.,Priestley,M.andH.Ross(2011),‘Theglobaldimensionineducationandeducationforglobalcitizenship:genealogyandcritique’,Globalisation,SocietiesandEducation,9(3–4),443–56.Marx,G.(2006),‘Usingtrenddatatocreateasuccessfulfutureforourstudents,ourschools,andourcommunities’,ERSSpectrum,24(1),4–8.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
208198HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMarzano,R.J.,Brandt,R.S.,Hughes,C.S.,Jones,B.F.,Pressein,S.C.andC.Suhor(1988),DimensionsofThinking:AFrameworkforCurriculumandInstruction,Alexandria,VA:AssociationforSupervisionandCurriculumDevelopment,accessed15January2020athttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED294222.pdf.Matherly,C.andW.Nolting(2007),‘Fall,wheretonext?Careerpathways’,AbroadView,10(1),38–9.Mathew,S.(2016),‘Usingdigitalparticipatoryresearchtofosterglocalcompetence:Constructingmultimediaprojectsasaformofglobalandciviccitizenship’,accessed15January2020athttp://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/tl_fac/8.Myers,J.P.(2006),‘Rethinkingthesocialstudiescurriculuminthecontextofglobalization:EducationforglobalcitizenshipintheUS’,Theory&ResearchinSocialEducation,34(3),370–94.NationalEducationAssociation,EducationPolicyandPracticeDepartment(2010),GlobalCompetenceisa21stCenturyImperative,accessed15January2020athttp://globalocityeducation.weebly.com/uploads/5/7/6/6/57667575/nea_global_competence11.pdf.Noddings,N.(ed.)(2005),EducatingCitizensforGlobalAwareness,NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Patel,F.(2017),‘Deconstructinginternationalization:Advocatingglocalizationininternationalhighereducation’,JournalofInternationalandGlobalStudies,8(2),64–82.Patel,F.andH.Lynch(2013),‘Glocalizationasanalternativetointernationalizationinhighereducation:Embeddingpositiveglocallearningperspectives’,InternationalJournalofTeachingandLearninginHigherEducation,25(2),223–30.ProgrammeforInternationalStudentAssessment(PISA)(2018),PISA2018GlobalCompetence,accessed15January2020athttps://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2018-global-competence.htm.Puukka,J.(2017),‘Localengagement:Balancingneedsatglobal,nationalandlocallevel’,inF.X.Grau,J.Goddard,B.L.Hall,E.Hazelkorn,andR.Tandon(eds),HigherEducationintheWorldreport6.TowardsaSociallyResponsibleUniversity:BalancingtheGlobalandtheLocal,Barcelona:GUNi,pp.145–64.Rexeisen,R.J.,AndersonP.H.,LawtonL.andA.C.Hubbard(2008),‘Studyabroadandinterculturaldevelopment:Alongitudinalstudy’,Frontiers:TheInterdisciplinaryJournalofStudyAbroad,17(1),1–20.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublication,pp.23–44.Roudometof,V.(2015),‘Theorizingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Scholte,J.A.(2005),Globalization:ACriticalIntroduction,Basingstoke,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.ShaftelJ.andT.L.Shaftel(2007),‘EducationalassessmentandtheAACSB’,IssuesinAccountingEducation,22(2),215–32.Shahabudin,M.O.(2017),’Inequality,ethnicity,andsocialcohesion’,WIDERWorkingPaperNo.2017/204,Helsinki,Finland:UnitedNationsUniversityWorldInstituteforDevelopmentEconomicsResearch.Sklad,M.,Friedman,J.,ParkE.andB.Oomen(2016),‘“Goingglocal”:AqualitativeandquantitativeanalysisofglobalcitizenshipataDutchliberalartsandsciencescollege’,HigherEducation,72,323–40.Spring,J.(2015),GlobalizationofEducation:AnIntroduction,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Sriraman,B.(2011),‘Editorial:“Glocal”,“glocavores”:Goodgadgetry?’,TheMathematicsEnthusiast,8(3),401–4.Swanson,D.(2011),‘Parallaxesandparadoxesofglobalcitizenship:Criticalreflectionsandpossibilitiesofpraxisin/throughaninternationalonlinecourse’,inL.Schulz,A.A.AbdiandG.H.Richardson(eds),GlobalCitizenshipEducationinPostsecondaryInstitutions:Theories,Practices,Policies,NewYork,NY:PeterLang,pp.120–39.Tichnor-Wagner,A.(2017),‘Inspiringglocalcitizens’,EducationalLeadership,75(3),69–73.Tippins,D.,Rudolph,H.andS.Dubois(2014),‘Culturally-relevantpedagogy’,inR.Gunstone(ed.),EncyclopediaofScienceEducation,Dordrecht,Netherlands:Springer,pp.1–4.Torrance,H.,Murphy,R.,Broadfoot,P.andtheBritishComparativeandInternationalEducationSociety(2012),ChangingEducationalAssessment:InternationalPerspectivesandTrends,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
209Glocaleducation:theories,researchandimplications199Trippestad,T.A.(2016),‘Theglocalteacher:Theparadoxagencyofteachinginaglocalisedworld’,PolicyFuturesinEducation,14(1),9–23.Weber,E.(2007),‘Globalization,“glocal”development,andteachers’work:Aresearchagenda’,ReviewofEducationalResearch,77(3),279–309.Welikala,T.(2011),‘Rethinkinginternationalhighereducationcurriculum:Mappingtheresearchland-scape’,Universitas,21,1–39.Jean-FrancoisEmmanuel,ClaireRamsey,andNowfalSamkari-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:31AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
21013.GlocalsportsHabibulHaqueKhondkerINTRODUCTIONGlocalsportsistheoutcomeoftheprocessesofglocalization,whichinturnmaybeunder-stoodasadeeperformofthesocial,economicandculturalprocessesgenerallyknownasglo-balization.Inbroachingthesubjectofglocalizationofsports,weneedtoproceedasfollows:first,aftersomepreliminarydiscussionsoftheconceptofglocalizationasusedinthischapter,wediscusstheusefulnessoftheconcepttounderstandcultureassuch,andsports,oneofthemostvisiblepartsoftheculture,inparticular.Thenwetrytoframethediscussionofpopularcultureinlightofglocalization;onceweestablishthatthediscourseofpopularcultureisbetterilluminatedbytheconceptofglocalization,weventureintothemaintopicofthischapter,glocalsports,anoutcomeofglocalizationinsports.Andhereweproposeashiftfromtheglo-balizationofsportstotheglocalizationofsports,notbydriftingaway,butbydivingdeeper.Atrajectorycanbeproposed,startingwiththeideathatsportsisintrinsictothehumanexperience.ThisfollowsfromtheargumentofJohanHuizinga(1938[1950]),aDutchhisto-rianandsociologist,whosepostulationof‘homoludens’,thehumansportsman(andwoman)providesafoundationalbase.ForHuizinga,playcomesevenbeforeculture.Playispartofeveryculture,forwhichonecanturntoepicssuchasMahabharataortoanthropologicalsources.Sportsorplayarenotonlyintrinsictohumanexperience,asanintegralpartofhumanculture,butcanalsobefoundeveninelementaryformsinsocietiesacrosstheworld.‘Sportsareahumanuniversal,appearingineveryculture,past,andpresent’,wroteAllenGuttmann,ashealsomadeasimplebutconvincingseparationbetweenworkandplay:‘Peopleworkbecausetheyhaveto;theyplaybecausetheywantto’(Guttmann,2004,p.1).Theevolutionofsportsreflectsthesociological–particularlytheWeberian–rationalizationprocess,fromspontaneoustocompetitiveandprofessionaleventsthatareguidedbyrules,proceduresandformalorganizations.Processesofequality,specialization,bureaucratization,rationalization,quantificationandobsessionwithrecordscharacterizethedevelopmentofsports(Guttmann,2004,p.5).Thischapterpresentsabroad,historicaloverviewoftheglocalizationofsportstoprovideanecessarycontextforthephenomenonofglocalsportswithspecialattentiontofootball(soccer)andcricket,twowidelypopulargames.Thecentralargumentofthischapteristhatsportsinthefirstquarterofthetwenty-firstcenturycanbebestunderstoodintermsoftheconceptualframeofglocalization.Theglocalizationofsportsasaframeworkwillhelpusunderstandseveralsportsandsportingeventstoday.Sportsthusprovideawindowtoexaminesocialtransformation,movingfromlocaltonational,thentoglobal,toarriveatglocal.Inthenextsection,toframethediscussionofglocalizationandsports,weprovideageneraloverviewofthetheoreticalperspectives,followedbysectionsaboutspecificexamplesoftheglocalizationofcricketandbasketballinChina.Wedevotemoreattentiontotheglocalizationoffootball(soccer),atrulyglobalizedgame.Intheconclusions,weindicatesomepotentialtrajectoriesoffutureresearch.200HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
211Glocalsports201GLOBALIZATIONANDGLOCALIZATIONASCENTRALRESEARCHAGENDASINTHESOCIOLOGYOFSPORT:THEORETICALANDCONCEPTUALISSUESThediscussionofglocalsportsiscontingentonasharperunderstandingofthetheoreticalandconceptualissuesthatforegroundthesubject.Theconceptsof‘global’and‘glocal’arethemostrelevantasafoundationforintroducingthesubjectofglocalsports.Aplethoraofdefinitionsandperspectivesonglobalizationexist.OnedefinitionofglobalizationofferedbyRolandRobertson,apioneerinthefield,canhelpclarifyourunderstandingoftheconcept.ForRobertson(1992,p.8),globalization‘refersbothtothecompressionoftheworldandtheintensificationofconsciousnessoftheworldasawhole’.Inotherwords,globalizationischaracterizedbyincreasingglobalconnectivityorinterconnectedness,aswellasintersec-tionality.RobertsondrawsonMarshallMcLuhan’sideaofaglobalvillage(McLuhan,1964),whichisthedirectresultofglobalcommunication.Asthetechnologyofcommunicationswasrevolutionizedbytheuseoftheinternetandsatellites,thepossibilityofatrulygloballycon-nectedsocietyemerged.ManuelCastellsadvancedtheideaofthenetworksociety(1996)asthedefiningfeatureofmodernity,withimplicationsforbothindividualsandsociety.Theideaofanetworksocietyaddedtoanotherdimensionofglobalizationthroughglobalinterconnec-tivitymediatedbydigitalcommunication.AndthecontributionsofStephenCastlesandotherscholarsofglobalmigration(Castlesetal.,2013;Manning,2005)addedempiricalevidenceofglobalizationwherenationalborderswerecriss-crossedbypeopleatgreaterfrequencyandintensity.Growingdiscussionsofglobalpopularculture,suchas‘Coca-Colaization’or‘Coca-Colonization’(Pendergrast,1993)andMcDonaldization(Ritzer,2000)addednewmeaningandsignificancetoglobalization,inadditiontothetraditionalandwell-traversednotionofeconomicglobalizationofproductionandconsumptionmediatedbylong-distancetrade.Bothculturalandeconomicglobalizationhavealonggenealogy(Frank,1998;Gills&Thompson,2006;Gunn,2003;Khondker,2021;NederveenPieterse,2012;Wallerstein,1974).Globalizationofpopularculturewas,incomparison,morerecent;adiscoursethatwasaidedbyincreasedconnectivity,thankstoglobalmedia.Forexample,Bartelson’sthreeconceptsofglobalization–transference,transformationandtranscendence–capturetheveryessenceofglobalizationbothinitsbreadthanddepth(Bartelson,2000).Globalization–asexemplifiedinthewritingsofArjunAppadurai–focusesonthefluidityanddisjunctureofculturalflowsoffivetypes:‘(a)ethnoscapes,(b)mediascapes,(c)technos-capes,(d)financescapes,and(e)ideoscapes’(Appadurai,1996,p.33).Suchconceptualizationofglobalizationhelpssituatesportintheintersectionalityofthevarious‘-scapes’.Itisevenpossibletoadd‘sportscape’toAppadurai’slist,givenitsdominanceincontemporaryculture.Appaduraialsodweltontheprocessesofindigenization,whichisbothaprecursorandcomplementarytotheconceptualizationofglocalizationasintroducedbyRolandRobertson(1992,1995).Asseveralwriterseithercelebratedordreadedthepossibilityofhomogenizationofeconomicsystems,politiesandcultures,otherswereadvancingtheideaofindigenizationasaresponsetotheall-embracinghomogenizationprocess.Globalinteractionsledtotensionsbetweenhomogenizationandheterogenization.Theconceptofglocalizationcapturestheprocessesofheterogenization,negatingthefearofaflattened,homogenizedworld.Globalitymaybeviewedastheculturalconditionandconsequenceofglobalization.Globalizationistheprocess–andthe‘processoftheprocesses’(Turner&Khondker,2010);globalityistheoutcome.Asastrongerformofglobalityemergesthroughthegreater–andlonger–reachofHabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
212202Handbookofcultureandglocalizationmigrationandinterconnectivity,peoplebecomeincreasinglyreflexiveabouttheworldperse(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009).Glocalizationhasbeenvariouslydefinedastheconceptualintersectionalityoftheglobalandthelocal.Asconcepts,bothglobalandlocalneedtobedisaggregatedbeforetheycanbebroughttointegrateintotheconceptofglocalization.Theconceptofglocalizationwasintro-ducedinthe1990sbyRolandRobertsontoprovidedepthtotheconceptofglobalization.ThetermglobalizationinsociologicalliteraturehadalsobeenintroducedbyRolandRobertsonintheearly1980s.Robertsonsoughttounderstandtheculturalimplicationofcapitalism,amacro,globalprocessontheground:‘Globalcapitalismbothpromotesandisconditionedbyculturalhomogeneityandculturalheterogeneity.Theproductionandconsolidationofdifferenceandvarietyisanessentialingredientofcontemporarycapitalism’(Robertson,1992,p.173).Thisaccountedforthemicro-marketingstrategiesofcapitalism.Intourism,oneofthelargestindustriesintheworld,localeplaysakeyrole.Touristswhoprefertoseeand‘consume’exoticandauthenticplaceswouldbeloathtotravelifeveryplacewasthesame.Theauthenticityoforiginalculturalformsorarchitecturalworkcanbepreservedbut,insomecases,practicessuchasdanceormusichavetobeconstructedtoappeasethetouristgazeandtosafeguardthisparticularconsumerindustry.QuotingMacCannell(1989),Robertsonassertsthatapseudo-reconstructionof‘authenticotherness’isageneralfeatureofthecontemporaryphaseoftheglobalizationofculture(Robertson,1992,p.173).Globalizationrelativizesallparticularisms,forcingexponentsofspecificbeliefsoridentitiestoconfrontandtorespondtoother,particularisticideas,identitiesandsocialprocessesacrosstheuniversaldomain.Thus,whileuniversalismandparticularismmayappearascategoricalantinomies,theyareinterdependent,fusedinaglobe-wideinterpenetrativenexus(Robertson1992,p.102).AsRoudometof(2016)putsit,theinterpenetrationofthelocalandtheglobalgoesbeyondthebinaryofthelocalandtheglobal.InthewordsofGiulianottiandRobertson,‘[g]localizationcriticallytranscendsthebanalbinaryoppositionsassociatedwithglobalization,andsoregis-tersthesocietalco-presenceofsamenessanddifference,andtheintensifiedinterpenetrationofthelocalandtheglobal,theuniversalandtheparticular,andhomogeneityandheterogeneity’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2007,p.168).FollowingRobertson’slead,DavidAndrewsandAndrewGraingermadeadistinctionbetweenorganicandstrategicglocalization,whichisparticularlyusefulinthediscussionofsportsculture.Organicsportingglocalizationrefersto:theprocesswherebyeitherglobalizedorinternationalizedsportspracticesbecomeincorporatedintolocal(communal,regional,butprimarilynational)sportingculturesandexperiencedasauthenticornatural(henceorganic)signsofculturalcollectivity…Strategicsportingglocalizationisamorerecentphenomenonderivedfromchangesinthespatialannihilation,organizationandimaginationoflatecapitalism.(Andrews&Grainger,2007,p.482)Roudometof(2014,2016)highlightsculturalglocalizationascoexistingwithhistoricalforcesofglobalization.GLOCALIZATIONOFCULTUREANDPOPULARCULTUREThediscussiononglobalizationofculturebeganwithacriticalappraisaloftheimpactofforeign,imperialculturesonlocalcultures;assuch,thediscoursehasbeenmiredinpoliticalHabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
213Glocalsports203andideologicalcontroversies.Whatmaybedescribedasglobalizedculturehasoftenbeenviewedasculturalimperialismbypost-colonialintellectuals.Themainweaknessofthecul-turalimperialismthesisisthatitignoresordeniestheautonomyandagencyoflocalcultures,traditionsandnations.Itbecomesmostvisibleandalmostpalpableinthecontextofsports.NooneinArgentinaandBrazilwouldsneeratfootballasanimperialgame;inSouthAsia,eventhemostvirulentcriticsofimperialismwouldnotdenouncecricketasanimperialistimposition.AndyetfootballinArgentina,likecricketinIndia,thoughcolonialinorigin,isnowpartofthefabricofnationalidentity.Cultureshavealwaysbeenporous;whilesomeelementsofcultureremainresilient,othersareamenabletochangethatisviewedastangibleanduseful.Necessityisnotonlythemotherofinvention,itisalsothemotherofadaptation.Cultureschangeasaresultofhistoricalcontingencies.Inthetwenty-firstcenturyworld,thereareseveralexamplesofnation-statesthatembody,protectandsupportnationalcultures;theyshowagreatdealofpragmatisminadaptingelementsofglobalculturewithoutunnecessarydebatesovertheallegedforeignnessofthoseculturalelements.Forexample,nationshaveadaptedtothespreadoftechnologyorbestpracticesinbusinessoradministrationthroughoutuniversities,governmentsandsports,withoutbeingsqueamishabouttheirforeignorigins.Singapore’sadoptionofEnglishaslinguafrancaprovidesanexample.Tuningintoagloballanguagewasdeemedanappropriatestrategyfordoingbusinesswithaglobalizedworld.Singapore’spragmaticpolicyofretainingEnglishasthelinguafrancatointegratewiththeglobaleconomy,alongwithalegalistic,bureaucraticpolity,paidoffineconomicsuccessandagooddealofadmirationforcreatingarule-basedpoliticalsystem.Acertainamountofpoliticalengineeringandinnovationtookplaceinthepoliticalsystem,whichmaybeviewedasstrategicglocalization.Theglocaloutcomewasanilliberaldemocracy,anopenmarketeconomy,andanemergingopenculture.IncontrasttoSingapore,Malaysiaerredtowardsresistancetoglobalculturetoprotectlocaltraditions.Singapore,oneofthemostglobalizedplacesaccordingtoForeignPolicy’sGlobalizationIndex(2007,2009),hasbeenwatchfulinensuringthatcertainaspectsofpopularcultureandindependentcivilsocietyorganizationsremainoffshore;thiswasespeciallythecaseduringitsformativeyears.Theauthoritiespro-motedwhattheycalled‘civicsociety’tofillthespaceofanautonomousandvociferouscivilsocietyduringaperiodofrapideconomicandeducationalglobalization.Singaporeremainsaparadigmofsuccessfulglobalizationandplannedglocalization(Khondker,2019).Evenconcerningsports,Singaporehasshowninterestinselectedgameswhereithasacomparativeadvantage,forexample,focusingonswimmingandtabletennisratherthanfootballorfieldhockey.Ontheotherhand,thePeople’sRepublicofChina,apowerhouseofvariousathletics,hassetitsmindtofootball.Theglocalperspectiveispredicatedonviewingglobalizationnotasagargantuanforceobliteratingeverythinginitspath,butratherasprovidingagencytothelocalconditionsinabsorbingandadaptingglobalculturalinnovations,broadlyconceived,tolocalconditions.Asomewhatparallelprocesswasalsoobservedinthepastwhenmodernizingelitesinmanydevelopingsocietiesmadeaconsciouschoiceofselectiveborrowingsamidheateddebatesbetweenprogressivemodernistsandconservativetraditionalists.Uponcloserexamination,itwasrevealedthattheso-calledtraditionalistswerealsotosomeextentconstructedbytheearliermodernistwaves.Acaseinpointisgenderrelationsinpublic.IntheIndiansubconti-nent,someoftheso-called‘traditional’or‘conservative’valuesowetheirorigintoEnglishlawsinstitutedbythecolonialrulersinspiredbyVictorianmorality.SowhatappearedtobetraditionalIndianvaluesatfirstblushwereVictorianmoralvaluesdressedupintheclothHabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
214204Handbookofcultureandglocalizationoftraditionalism.IndiahasbeentouchedbyValentine’sDayfever,inwhich(heterosexual)loversholdhands,gotoparks,exchangegifts,andsometimesshowtheirmutualaffectioninpublic.These‘foreign’activitiesofteninfuriateconservativeHindus,whosepresenceinIndianpoliticsismorevisibletodaythanitwastwodecadesago.Thesegroupsoftenintimi-date,beatupandchaseawaytheloversfrompublicplacesinthenameofpreservingtradition.Therearealsoinstancesofco-emergenceofsimilarvaluesacrosscultures.ItisthesameHindunationalistgroupsthat,whileremainingvigilanttopreservelocaltraditions,alsotookanactiveinterestinthepoliticsofdistantlandssuchastheUnitedStates,expressingtheirsupportforthecandidacyofDonaldTrumpbyorganizingaspecialpuja(areligiousrite)in2016toensurehiselectoralsuccess(Doshi,2016).Thetranscendenceoflocalspacetoalargerglobalspaceisafeatureofglobalizationaswellasglocalization(Khondker,2019).Giddens(1990,p.96)definesglobalizationessentiallyas‘actionatdistance’.Intheglobalage,suchactionisatwo-wayprocess,withnofixed,predetermineddirection.Food,musicandmoviesareimportantcomponentsofpopularculture(asdiscussedinthisvolume)andprovideinstancesforunderstandingtheprocessesofglobalizationandglocaliza-tion.RobertsonputforththeexampleofCNNandHollywood,whichtrytolocalizecultures(sometimesbadly)totheextentthattheyessentializethem.Buttherearealsoplentyofexam-plesinwhichmusicthrivesbecauseofglocalizationandglobalization.Inculinaryculture,weseefusionfood,butalsohowinternationalfoodchainsaccommodatelocalculture,ifofteninasymbolicratherthanasubstantialway.ThehalalcertificationofWestern(mostlyAmerican)fast-foodrestaurantsinSingaporeorvegetarianburgersinMcDonald’sinIndiaareexamples.McDonald’sisagoodexampleofbothglobalizationandglocalization.TheBigMacwasinventedinPittsburgh,Pennsylvania,becausesteelmillworkerswerenotsatisfiedwiththesizeoftherestaurant’sregularburgers.Similarly,theFilet-o-FishwasaddedtothemenuafterafranchiseeinCincinnati,Ohio,foundthatCatholiccustomerswerenotpatronizingMcDonald’sonFridaysbecausetheywereavoidingmeatproductsperreligiouscustom(Crothers,2010,p.131).ThespreadofMcDonald’sinAsiabeganwithJapan,wherethefirstoutletopenedin1971,andithassincebecomeapartofJapaneseculture.ThesubtleimpactofMcDonald’sonHongKongculturewasexploredbyWatson(1997).InSingapore,McDonald’sbecameafavouritereadingcornerforstudiousSingaporeanstudents.InMalaysiaduringRamadan,McDonald’sbecomesareligiousspace,albeitmomentarily,becauseitisapopularplaceforyoungMalaysianstobreaktheirday-longfastbyeatingBigMacsandotherfare.Fast-foodculturehasnowbecomeglocalized,impactinglocalfoodhabitsandtransforminglocalculture.Globalfast-foodchainshavealsobecomemajorsponsorsofsports.GLOCALIZATIONOFSPORTSANDGAMESEvenacursoryscanofthesportingworldwouldimmediatelyrevealsomeinterestingandcommonfeatures.First,variousformsofsports–rangingfromfootball(soccer),cricket,tennis,tabletennis,golf,trackandfield,volleyballandbasketball–havebecomeaspectsofglobalculture.Severalgameshaveclaimedthestatusoftheglobalgame.Claimssuchas‘WorldSeries’forthebaseballcompetitionintheUnitedStatesarenothingmorethanapub-licityploy,aninventedtradition,consideringveryfewcountriesareawareofthegame.AllmajorsportsplayedbyNorthAmericansareoftheirowninvention–baseball,basketballandAmericanfootball(Guha,2016).Americanbasketball–asrepresentedintheannualcham-HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
215Glocalsports205pionshipundertheNationalBasketballAssociation(NBA)–hasnowbecomeglobalized,withafootholdinChina,theworld’smostpopulouscountryandthelargestmarketforsportsparaphernalia.AspartofUS–Chinarapprochementmediatedbyculturaldiplomacy,theWashingtonBulletsvisitedChinain1979andplayedagainsttheBayiRockets.In1986,theNBAfinalswerebroadcastbyCCTV,aChineseofficialtelevisionchannelandon8June1994,CCTVlive-broadcastedtheNBAfinalsforthefirsttime.In1992,theDreamTeam,ledbyMichaelJordan,furtherheightenedthepopularityoftheNBAinChina.TofacilitateNBAoperationsinChina,thefirstNBAoverseasheadquarterswasfoundedinHongKongin1992(Zhouetal.,2017).BasketballhasalonghistoryinChinasincetheYoungMen’sChristianAssociationinTianjinintroducedthegametoChinainthelate1890s,whichrapidlybecameanationalpastimeinold-regimeChina.FollowingtheestablishmentofthePeople’sRepublicofChina,basketballcontinuedtobethemostpopularsportandanationwidegameattheelite,schoolandcommunitycompetitionlevels(Huang,2013).Inthe1990s,ChinesemediagraduallyincreasedNBAcoverage,wideningthelatter’spresenceinChinesemarkets.By1996,CCTVwaslivebroadcastingNBAregulargames,playoffs,finalsandtheAll-StarGames(Huang,2013).Inthesameyear,theChineseBasketballAssociationstartedtheprocessofprofession-alizationandmaintainedfrequentcommunicationwiththeNBAtolearnitsadvancedman-agementsystem(Huang&Hong,2015,quotedinZhouetal.,2017).In2002,YaoMingwasdraftedbytheHoustonRockets,initiatingthegoldeneraofNBAinChina(Zhouetal.,2017).Thehistoryofmodernsporthasbeenoneofmovementfromlocaltoregional,national,andthenglobal,disseminatedmostlybycolonialism,whichhasbeenadrivingforcebehindthedisseminationofmodernsportsaroundtheworld,reflectingandreinforcingthepolitical,eco-nomicandculturaldynamicsofliberalandneo-liberalimperialism(Nauright&Zipp,2018).However,theadaptationortheindigenizationoftheglobalsportdoesnotalwaystakeplaceunproblematically.InAfghanistanundertheTalibanrulein2000,whenafootball(soccer)matchwasinprogresswithavisitingteamfromPakistan,theTalibanpoliceshowedupandbeatthePakistaniplayers(whoweremale),notsomuchforplayingfootball,butforplayingthegamewearingshortsinfullviewofthespectators(McCarthy,2000).Thiswas,surely,anextreme–andperhapsexceptional–caseoflocalculture(asinterpretedbytheclerics)over-ridingglobalculture.TheTalibaninterpretedwearingshortsasaviolationofIslamicsartorialnorms.Inotherwords,auniversalgamecanbeadopted,butithastobeadaptedfollowingthelocalculturalnormsasinterpretedbythepoliticalauthority.Thiswasacaseofunmitigatedlocalization,andnotglocalization.Similarly,inseveralMuslim-majoritycountries,whethergirlscanplayfootballorparticipateinswimmingeventswearingswimmingcostumesremainsasourceofcontroversy.Theburkinihasthusappearedasasartorialcompromise.Thisraisestheissueofpoliticalpowerattheheartofglocalization.Intherealworld,culturaltransactionsorinterpenetrationstakeplacewithinlargerpolitico-economiccontexts.Theupshot,inthiscase,isnottorejectfootballorswimming,whichsomecountrieshavedone,buttoaccepttheglobalspreadofsports,whilealsotailoringthemtoaccommodatelocalnorms.Whenthedecisionsaremadebyasmall–butpowerful–layerofclerics,thereisonesetofoutcomes;whenthereisalargerspaceforpublicdiscussion,theoutcomesaredifferent.Afghanistaninthepost-Talibaneraleanedtowardscricket,agamebornintherefugeecampsinPakistan(Deb,2019).HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
216206HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCaughtupinColdWarpoliticsforoverfourdecades,Afghanistanhadbeenravagedbywarsandviolencefromwithinandoutside.Asthewarsreceded,Afghanistanenjoyedarevivalofsports–rangingfromcrickettomartialarts.Itwasonlyin2001thatAfghanistanwasadmittedintotheworldcricketbody.By2018,itbecamethetwelfthnationtojointheexclusivegroupofTest-playingnations,andinshort-formatcricketitsstarsbecameinternationallyknownandmadetheirwaytotherichestcrickettournament,theIndianPremierLeague(Muzaffar,2019).AstheAfghanistancricketteambegantoperformintheinternationalarena,theTalibanbegantoshowmoretoleranceforcricket.Unlikefootball,cricketisplayedinlongsleevesandtrousers,whichdonotoffendthesensibilitiesoftheconservatives.Insomecases,evenTalibanfighterswerefoundtobegivingtheirKalashnikovssomerestandplayingmakeshiftcricket(Reuters,n.d.).Cricket,withitsglobalspreadthroughcolonialconnections,isnowalsoseenoutsideoftheCommonwealthsphereincountriessuchastheNetherlands,theUnitedArabEmiratesandAfghanistan.Thechangeintheformatofthegametoaccommodateshorterperiods,suchaslimited-overgames,maybeseenasanexampleof‘temporalglocalization’,tomakecricketsuitthechangingtimesandlocalesacrosshigh-pacedmodernsocieties.Inbecomingaglobalgame,ratherthanaprojectionofimperialculture,cricketbecamedisembeddedfromitspostcolonialmoorings.Asmentioned,crickethasbeenintroducedintheNetherlandsandtheUnitedArabEmirates,aswellasChina–inthelattertwocasesunderstatepatronage.Cricket,astepinthedevelopmentofcosmopolitanglobalculture,alsoprovidesabridgebetweenglobalandlocal:‘Atonelevel,cricketisaboutnationalismandethnicpride,atanotherlevel,itisalsoametaphorforglobalization’(Khondker,2010,p.155).Withthegrowingpopularity,mediatizationandcelebrationofshort-formatcommercializedcricket,ithasbecomeaglocalsport(Khondker&Robertson,2018).ThehighlycorporatizedIndianPremierLeague(IPL)attractstopcricketplayersfromacrosstheworldtoplayforlocalclubs:‘TheglobalizationofcricketiscommonlythoughttobeexemplifiedbytheIPL:Twenty20asanemblemofthemediatization,commercialization,andIndianizationofthegame’(Rumford&Wagg,2010,p.11).TheIPLisaspectacleofconsumerismandshowbiz–somecricketteamsareownedbyBollywoodcelebrities.Thespectaclehasnotonlyintroducedanewgameformat,butalsoaddedasideshowofcheerlead-ersoftenoriginatingfromEasternEuropeancountries.Thecommentators,drawnfrommostlyEnglish-speakingareasoftheCommonwealth,aregarbedintraditionalIndiandresstoaddtothespectacle.ThemusicplayedfortheentertainmentoftheaudienceandplayersincludesbothpopularIndiansongsandinternationalhits.IndiahasbecometheMeccaofglocalizedcricket.WhenitwasintroducedinIndiainthemid-nineteenthcentury,cricketwasapreserveoftheupperclassdominatedbytheParseeelitesandthelocalnawabsoftheprincelystates(Majumdar,2006,p.928).Inthepost-independenceperiod,mostcricketerswererichnawabs,suchasNawabofPataudi,IftikharAli,anOxford-educatedIndiancricketerwhowasselectedfortheEnglishteamduringitstourofAustraliain1932.Later,hebecamethecaptainoftheIndiancricketteam(Mortimer,2013,p.140).Inpost-independenceIndia,manycricketershadtohaveanindependentsourceofincome.TheStateBankofIndia,forexample,wasamajoremployeroftalentedcricketplayers(Appadurai,1996,p.105).Overtheyears,crickethasopenedpathwaysforsocialmobility.SeveralIndianplayersinrecentdecadeshavecomefromhumblebackgrounds.Theirnon-eliteupbringingwasnotahindrancetotheirfindingaplaceinthecharmedworldofcricket,providedtheyhadtherequiredtalent:HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
217Glocalsports207IndianteststarssuchasEknathSolkar,who‘changedscoreboardsatPJHinduGymkhana,wherehisfatherwasaheadgroundsman,andsharedadingy,one-roomquarterbehindthegroundswithfiveothersiblingsandhisparents’(Pandya,2005).YusufandIrfanPathanwerebrotherswhoalsocamefromarelativelyhumblebackground.TheygrewupinamosqueinHyderabadwheretheirfatherwastheimam(NewWorldEncyclopedia,n.d.).In2017,anotherlocalplayerfromHyderabad,MohammedSiraj,whosefatherisanautorickshawdriver,wasboughtbyhishometeamforUS$389,642,thirteentimesthebasepriceofRs200,000(approx-imatelyUS$30,000)(Pavan,2017).Commercializedcricketthuscreatedcareeropportunitiesformanyplayers.Someplayersrosefromahumblebackgroundtoalifeoftheupper-middleclass.Othersrosefromamodestmiddle-classbackgroundtoelitestatus.BoiraMajumdar(2006,p.929)identifiedHarbhajanSingh,ZaheerKhan,VirenderSehwagandMohammadKaifashailingfromamiddle-classbackground.However,IPLprovidedanopportunityforastoundingeconomicmobilityinaveryshortperiod.ManyyoungcricketersintheSouthAsiansubcontinentlooktocricketasameansforeconomicmobilityandthetransformationoftheirfortune.TheCricketWorldCupisnowviewedinvariouspartsoftheworldwherethereisapres-enceofSouthAsiansbecause,inSouthAsia,thenewhomeofcricket,thegameistrulypopular.Itisnolongeragameoftheeliteandhasgenuinemassappeal.FROMGLOBALIZATIONTOGLOCALIZATIONOFFOOTBALLGiulianottiandRobertsonarguedthatfootball:maybeunderstoodasametric,amirror,amotor,andametaphorofglobalization…Asametric,footballmaybeusedtomeasuretransnational,political,andsocialconnectivity.…Asamirror,footballisusedbydifferentpeoplesasagloballooking-glass,asameansofimaginingandreflectingupontheirappearance,status,andidentity,withchangingtransnationalaudiences.Asamotor,foot-ballmaybeunderstoodasacceleratingparticularglobaltransformations(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009,p.18).Thepointis,sportisnotjustapassivetoolorphenomenonofglobalization;itcanbeanactiveforceintheveryprocessofglobalization.However,theonlygamethatistrulyglobalinpopularity,andalsoasagamethatpeopleplay,isfootball.FootballwashistoricallyaEuropeangame,havingbeenborninBritain;overtheyears,itmadeitstransitionquietlyfromagameoflordsandnoblementooneofthemasses.TheglobalizationoffootballalsostemmedfromBritain:astheformerroseasanimperialpowerspreadingitseconomictentaclearoundtheworld,sodidfootball.ModernfootballemergedinGreatBritainasasocialandculturalcounterpartofindustri-alizationinthenineteenthcentury.AsindustrializationspreadtotherestofEurope,sodidfootball(Koller&Brandle,2002,p.8).Inthissense,thespreadoffootballwastheexpansionofalocalgametofirstanational,andthenaregional,andnowaglobalgame.Thehistoryoffootballisandremainsfundamentallyahistoryofsocialinclusionandexclusion,ahistoryofthestruggleoftheunderprivilegedformaterialwell-being,andahistoryaswellofthemaximizationofprofitsbycleverbusinessmenandanonymousmarketingfirms.Insum,itisanimportantpartofsocialandeconomichistory(Koller&Brandle,2002,p.6).HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
218208HandbookofcultureandglocalizationThetransitionoffootballfromanelite,boardingschoolgametoagameplayedbyandforthemassesinBritainisofsociologicalsignificance.Intheearlytwentiethcentury,footballincorporatedtheparticipationofnon-Europeansoci-eties,particularlySouthAmericannations,withtheemergingglobalizationprocess.Footballbecamepartofglobalconsciousnessaswewillseebelow,forexample,withArgentinianfoot-ballheroesbecomingglobaliconsandbeingworshippedinIndia.Thefootball–globalizationnexusisoneofthemostfascinatingaspectsofeverydayformsofglobalization,whichhigh-lightsthecompressionoftheworld(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009).ThefirstfootballclubinArgentinawasestablishedin1867inBuenosAires,whichhadalargeBritishcontingent.ThefoundersofBuenosAiresFCwereWilliamHeraldandthebrothersThomasandJamesHogg.ThedrivingforceinArgentinianfootballwastheScot,AlexanderWatsonHutton,headoftheEnglishHighSchoolinBuenosAires.HefoundedtheArgentineAssociationFootballLeaguein1893(Koller&Brandle,2002,p.38).Thelastdecadeofthenineteenthcenturywascrucialfortheglobalizationofsports.Robertson,indiscussingthephasesofglobalization,identifiesthelatenineteenthcenturyaspartoftheincipientphase.ThemodernOlympicGamescoincidewiththatphase,havingstartedin1896.In1894,theFédérationInternationaledeFootballAssociation(FIFA)wasestablished,whichplayedamajorroleinthetransformationofassociationfootballintoaglobalgame.In1908,footballwasincludedintheOlympicGamesandbecameknownaroundtheworld.WhenFIFAintroducedtheWorldCupin1930,theboundariesoffootballextendedbeyondEuropeandSouthAmerica,andnewpartsoftheworldbegantopartakeinthisgame.AccordingtoDietschy:Itwasnotaneasytasksincetheymetwithresistance,obstruction,andcontestation.TheyhadtorevisetheirEurocentricwayofthinkingandbewillingtonegotiate.Farfrombeingamereimperialistprocess,thepathtoworldfootballconsistedofaseriesofexactingexchangesandmutualmisunder-standings,especiallywiththeSouthAmericanassociations.ItisnotclearthatFIFAofficialsalwaysunderstoodthedemandsofthedevelopingfootballworldbuttheywereoftenabletonegotiateandadapttheirdiscoursestowardsnon-Europeannationalassociationsandcontinentalconfederations.Bydoingso,theyhelpedtocreate,ifnotanequalfootballworld,atleastaninternationalworldspace.(Dietschy,2013)Inthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury,televisionplayedakeyroleintheglobalizationoffootball.The1954WorldCupthattookplaceinSwitzerlandwasthefirsttobetelevised.In1970,theWorldCupwasbroadcastincolourandby1978,morethan100countrieswerereceivingpicturesofthetournament.The1994WorldCupintheUSAhadacumulativetelevisionaudienceofmorethan30billion;thejointJapanandSouthKorea2002WorldCupfedlivepicturesofthecompetitiontoasmanyas213countriesallovertheworld,evenmorethanthememberstatesoftheUN(whichwere191atthetime,now193).The1966WorldCupdeservestoberegardedasthekeymomentintheprocessofglobalizationoffootball,aswellasthemostimportantturningpointinlinkingtelevisionandtheFIFAWorldCup.Inthisregard,thereareatleastthreeaspectsthathavetobehighlightedandexaminedindetail:thecontractandeverythingrelatedtothedirectinvolvementoftelevisionauthoritiesintheorganizationofthetournament;thetechnicalproductionoftheWorldCupbroadcast,especiallyasfarasnewtechnologiesareconcerned;andtheaudienceandnewpatternsofconsumption(Chisari,2006,p.43).HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
219Glocalsports209China,theworld’smostpopulousnation,hasrealizeditsambitionofbecomingasportinggiantacrossmajorcompetitions.Astherecipientofthehighestnumberofmedalsindiversecategories,ithasparticularlyexcelledattheOlympics.Chinahasalsolaunchedamassivefootballprogrammetoearnitsplaceinthecomityofnations.Recognizingfootballasthemostglobalofgames,Chinesepolicymakersmadeitanelementinthenation’s‘comprehensiverejuvenation’programme:In2014,forinstance,whenXiJinpingexplainedtodelegatesoftheNationalPeople’sCongresshowimportantdreaminganddesireareinachievinggoals,hegavefootballasanexample:ItisthesameasinChinesefootball.Ifyoudonothavethisdream,andyoudon’tthinkaboutit,thenyoucannevergetthere.Itwillonlybecomepossibleifyouwishfor[it].(Gündoğan&Sonntag,2018,p.108)Infootball,however,ChinalanguishesinthebottomquarterofFIFAmen’sfootballrankingsandstood82ndinearly2015.TheChinesewomen’snationalteamhasbeenmoresuccessful,butitiseasytostatethatChinaunderperformsinfootball.ChinahasbecomegroundzeroforglobalfootballbusinessandtheChinesegovernmenthasnowprioritizedfootballdevelopmentastheprimegoalforsportsdevelopmentwithinChina.InMarch2015,ChinesePresidentXiJinpingannouncedanewpolicyforfootballwiththreeclearlystatedlong-termaims:qualifyingfortheMen’sFIFAWorldCupfinals,hostingtheWorldCup,andwinningtheMen’sFIFAWorldCup.Chinalaunchedamassivefootballtrainingschoolwith48soccerfields.‘GroomingthenextRonaldoorMessihasbecomeanationalprojectinChina,wherethecountry’sNo.1fan,PresidentXiJinping,isbentontransformingthecountryintoagreatsoccerpower’(Buckley,2017).SportsinChinahasbecomebigbusiness.EstimatesoftheexactvalueoftheChinesesportsindustryrangedbetween$145and$500billionby2018.TheChinesegovernmentisaimingforthesportsindustryinChinatoreach$800billioninvalueor1%ofGDP.WiththeWinterOlympicGamescomingtoBeijingin2022,andtherisingtideoffootball,theopportunitiesareunlimitedforinvestmentinfootballandothersports(Nauright&Zipp,2018).Inthepresentphaseofglobalizationofsports,playersandsportspersonalitieshavebeenhighlymobile.Therearethreepatternsofplayermigration:Firstly,whileasmallminorityofeliteplayersseemstobemovingthroughtightlymanagedglobalvalue-addedchains,themajorityofplayersmovesthroughmigrationchannelswhicharemuchmoreporousandtwo-directionalthanpreviouslydocumentedintheliterature.Thesemigratorychannelsdonotonlyconsistofflowsfrom(semi-)peripheralcountriestothecoreleagues,butalsoincludereversemigrationfromcorecountriestothe(semi-)periphery,mobilityamongthecoreleagues,transfersamongneighboring(semi-)peripheralcountries,andplayermobilitybetweenmoregeo-graphicallydistant(semi-)peripheralcountries.(Velema,2018,p.707)Duetosuchmigratorypatterns,KoreanfootballstarLeeKang-inplaysforValenciaCFintheSpanishLeague,andMohamedSalah,anEgyptianfootballstar,playsforLiverpoolinthePremierLeague.AnincreasingnumberofplayersfromtheGlobalSoutharenowplayingfortheteamsinthecoreeconomies.ThecommercializationofglobalfootballhasledtoashifttotheGlobalSouth:Simplyput,manyofthestandardNorth–Southpatternsofagency,powerandwealthwouldseemtobeinvertedintheworldfootballsystemontheeveofcommercialization,andthecommercialtrans-formationitselfwaseffectedinlargepartthroughSouthernpoliticalandeconomicagencyexplicitlyHabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
220210HandbookofcultureandglocalizationintendedtochallengetheprevailingEurocentrismandNortherndominanceofworldfootball.(Brewer,2019,p.411)Perspectivesontheglobalizationoffootballhavevariedfromtheso-calledculturalimperi-alistviewofsportasadiffusionofaglobalmonoculturetothecounterpointofreversingthedirectionofinfluence.Usingpoloasanexample,Parrish(2018)hasshownthattheglobalflowsinsportarenotunidirectional.ThediffusionofpolofromCentralAsiatoEuropeandtheAmericasisoneexampleofamultidirectionalflowofglobalcultureinvolvingmultiplegeographicregions.Anotherexampleisjudo,whichhasmadeitswayintoWesternsocietieshavingoriginatedinJapan(Ueda,2017).‘Sportscape’,intheveinofAppadurai’svarious‘-scapes’,hasbecomeadefiningfeatureofglobalization.Formsofsportshavemigratedovercenturiesfromculturetocultureand,inrecentdecades,themigrationofsportingstarsandathletesaddednewfeaturesofglobalization.Atonelevel,themigrationillustratestheintersectionalityofglobalizationandglocalization,sincethefansoflocalsuperstarshavingmadeitbigintheglobalfieldlinkthelocalwiththeglobal;atanotherlevel,theglocalizationoffootballisbestmanifestedinthespreadoffandomandthelocalcelebrationoftheglobalgameandthesuperstarsofvarioussports.AsFoerstated,‘[o]fcourse,soccerisn’tthesameasBachorBuddhism.Butitismoredeeplyfeltthanreligion,andjustasmuchapartofthecommunity’sfabric,arepositoryoftraditions’(Foer,2006,p.14).Whenitcomestoappropriationofaglobalgamesuchasfootball,sayinIran,itmeshesintothelocalculturalpoliticsrenderingthelocalentitiesevenmorepowerful.FootballinIran,despitetheinitialmisgivingsofthetheocraticrulers,wasusedasatoolforandasymbolofmodernizationtotheextentthatitwaspromotedbythehighestelitesofthestate(Foer,2006,pp.349–50).Failingtostemitspopularity,themullahsinIranco-optedfootball(Foer,2006,p.356).ConsiderthefactthatfansoftheArgentinianandBraziliannationalfootballteamsinBangladesh–itselfanoviceininternationalfootball–hoistedtheflagsofthosecountriesontheirrooftopsduringthe2010WorldCuptoshowtheirsupport.Thephenomenabecamesowidespreadthatthegovernmenthadtointerveneandtrytoconvincepeopletolowertheflagsofothercountriesandraisetheirowninstead.InBangladesh,twoneighbouringvillageswhowerefansoftherivalBrazilandArgentinateamsclashedonthestreetafteroneteamlost.Thepolicehadtofireblankvolleystoquelltheriot(Nelson,2010).Inthemid-1990s,aprotestrallytookplaceinanortherndistrictofBangladeshaftertheArgentinianstrikerDiegoMaradonawasbannedforsubstanceuse.Again,in2014,clashesbetweenrivalBrazilandArgentinafansturneddeadlyinBangladesh(Allchin,2014).In2018,duringtheWorldCup,rivalfansofLionelMessiandNeymarclashedviolently(HindustanTimes,2018).InKolkata,India,severalfanswereinjuredafteraviolentclashbetweenrivalBrazilandArgentinafans.Atanotherevent,15BangladeshimenwerefinedforcelebratingthebirthdayofLionelMessiinDhakaduringtheCOVID-19crisis(AFP,2020).Alltheabovestoriesbringhomeonepoint,thatis,theglobalizationofculture–especially,sports–hasmadegeographyirrelevant.Conceptssuchasdeterritorializationanddisembed-dingareofparticularrelevancehere.Footballclubs–andtheirsymbolicpresences–arenotonlyubiquitous,theyalsodrawlargecrowds.Thentherearefootballteamsandplayerswhogatherfandomsinvariouspartsoftheworld;fansnotonlyenjoythegamesbutdeveloployaltyforthesakeofloyalty.Insomeinstances,suchloyaltyturnsbrandsprofitablebywayofmerchandisingandthemarketingofitsicons.Sportsnowhastwointerwovensides–enter-HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
221Glocalsports211tainmentandbusiness.Footballhasbecomebigbusiness.Butthisisnotsonew;‘thelogicofcapitalism,whichisprofit-makingbyvariousmeanswaspartofworldfootballacrossmuchofthe20thcentury’(Murray,1996,p.159).AccordingtoFIFA,3.572billionpeople(abouthalftheworldpopulationatthetime)watchedthe2018FIFAWorldCupthattookplaceinRussia(FIFA,2018).Footballhastrulybecomeaglobalgameasithascreatedaglobalaudience,viewershipandfandomthatcross-cutsgeographicalboundaries.Sports-relatedparaphernaliaareproductsofculturalglobaliza-tionaswellaseconomicglobalizationwherebrandsassociatedwithfavouritefootballteamssellmerchandiseofallsorts.Assuch,itispossibletohavefansofLionelMessiinBangladesh,whoarededicatedenoughtoincurfinanciallossesintheformoffinesforbreakingCOVID-19safetymeasures.InKualaLumpur,thefandomofEnglishPremierLeagueteams,suchasLiverpoolorManchesterUnited,isnownormal:forexample,AllRedsMalaysia:LiverpoolSupportersClubofMalaysiaisvisibleindowntownKualaLumpur.On24August2020,about500MalaysianfanspaidtributetoLiverpoolFC–anEnglishteam–tocelebratetheteam’shistoricPremierLeaguevictoryinaspecialvideosponsoredbyCarlsberg,abeercompany.TheMalaysianfanssangtheclub’santhem‘You’llNeverWalkAlone’(Hassandarvish,2020).AnotherEnglishPremierLeagueclub,AstonVilla,nowhasmorefollowersinChinathaninitshomecountrythroughtheuseofmultimediaandnewmediaplatforms(Nauright&Zipp,2018).ForGiddens(1990),globalizationisactionatdistance,whichcanbeviewedasadistantrelationship.Theaboveevents,inthatsense,wereexamplesofglobalization.Yetallthesephenomenacanbebestdescribedastheglocalizationofsport.RobertGiulianottiandRolandRobertsonhavemadeasignificantcontributiontothediscussionontheglocalizationoffoot-ball.Footballis‘theglobalgame’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004,p.546).Andfootballisalsoaglocalgame,providingaconceptualbridgebetweenglobalandlocal.‘Universalizationofparticularism’entailsculturalrelativism,which‘turnstheglobalgameintothe“glocalgame”’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004,p.547).GlobalsportshavenowcomehomeincitiessuchasJakarta,BangkokandKualaLumpur,andevenintheremotestvillagesofIndonesia,thankstosatellite-linkedtelevisionandbroadband-enabledinternet.LivestreamshavebroughtsportingeventssuchastheCricketWorldCuptoviewersinChinaorAmerica;countrieswherecricketisnotbigbutareneverthe-lesshometocricket-lovingcommunitiesfromSouthAsia.InAbuDhabiinthefirstdecadeofthetwenty-firstcentury,theCricketWorldCup,ortheEnglishPremierLeaguechampionshiporUEFAEuropeanChampionshipwouldbeavailableonlyinbarsandhigh-endrestaurantsforexpatriatefans.Justtenyearsorsolater,cricket-lovingexpatriatescangotowatchamajorcricketingeventinalocalstadiumasmajorcricketingeventsregularlytakeplaceintheUAE.Glocalsportshasevolvedfromglobalsports,whereteamsfromIndiacometotheUAEastheydidforhalftheseasonin2014whenanationalelectionmadethearrangementofIPLdifficulttotheextentthatthetournamenthadtotakeplaceinthesafetyofUAEandSouthAfrica.In2020,againbecauseoftheCOVID-19pandemicinIndia,theIPLtournamentwasshiftedtotheUAE,wherethemulti-million-dollareventtookplaceinemptystadiafortheentertainmentoftheviewerswhoremainedathome.ThepopularityofcricketinSouthAsiaandthepopular-ityoffootballworldwideprovideanopportunitytoexaminetheshiftsofculturalglobalizationthatareatoncehomogenizingandheterogenizing,illustratingthedynamicsofglocalization.Glocalsports,whethercricketorfootball,istheconsequenceofglocalizationasmuchasglobalization,ormoretruly,theintersectionofglocalizationandglobalization.HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
222212HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCONCLUSIONSTheemergenceofglocalsportshasbeenmadevisiblebytheshiftsinthetrajectoriesofglobalization.Inthetwenty-firstcentury,globalizationhasbecomemultipolar(NederveenPieterse,2018).Yet,whetheritisfootball,cricket,badmintonorgolf,theglobaldiffusionofsportshasbeenintegratedintolocalculturessometimesspontaneouslybytheagenciesoflocalpeopleontheground,orcivilsociety,andonsomeotheroccasions,bythestates,toimprovethesoftpowerofnationsglobally.ThepromotionofgolfforwomeninSaudiArabiabyhostingprofessionalfemalegolftournamentsisacaseinpoint(Minthe,2020).Furthermore,football,whichhasalsobeenimmenselypopularintheGulfcountries,hasnowreachedthewomenofSaudiArabia;inearly2020,thecountryhadannounced:thecreationofitsfirstwomen’sfootballleague,justtwoyearsafterfemalespectatorswereallowedintofootballmatchesaroundthecountry.TheleaguewaslaunchedinFebruarybuthasbeendelayedbytheCOVID-19pandemic.Nonetheless,itmarksanothersignificantmilestoneintherapiddevel-opmentofwomen’ssportintheKingdom.(Gillen,2020)Progressivetransformationingenderrolescaninitiatechangeinthecultureofasociety,aschangesinthesportingculturecanalsohelptransformtraditionalnormsrelatedtogenderroles.Glocalsportsisthusbothtransformingandtransformedbyglobalandlocalforces.Glocalresistanceandaccommodation,withtheirintendedandunintendedconsequences,arebothworthyofattentionfortheirrolesinshapingglocalsportsasmuchasglocalculture.Whilewriterswhouseapolitical-economyframeworkbroadlyrecognizetheimpactofglobalcapitalistforcesonthedistantlocalcommunity,thisimpacthastobeseenintermsofdegreesofintensity.AvillagerinaremotevillageinUgandaorNepalcanbesaidtohavetakenpartintheglobalpoliticaleconomyasaconsumerofaglobalproduct;however,beyondconsumptionoftheindustrialcommodity,hehasverylittletodowiththeglobalizedeconomy,unlessheisinvolvedintheproductionofacommoditythatissoldintheglobalmarket;hence,hisrelationshipcouldbedefinedaspassivecomparedwithavillagewomaninKenyaorBangladesh,who,bybuyinganinternet-enabledmobilephone,isactivelyinvolvedinaglobaltechnology-mediatedtransactionwithsomeonefromthesamevillageworkinginaglobalmetropole,say,DubaiorSingapore,asaconstructionworker.Theintensityoftheimpactoftheglobalizationprocessisvariedandsuchnuanceshaveimplicationsforthetransformationofsociety.However,asaconsumerofglobalsportsmediatedbytheglobalmedia,thevil-lagersarealsopassiveparticipants,which,intheirlocalculturalcontext,becomesaglocalconsumptionexperience.Movingforward,itwouldbeusefultodedicatemoreattentionnotjusttotheeconomicandfinancialimpactofglocalsports,butalsotoexaminethenuancesoftheimpactonlocalculture,especiallyingenderrelations.Glocalsportshasalreadyimpactedgenderrelations,leadingtowomen’sempowermentinseveralIslamiccountries.InSaudiArabia,until2018,womenwerenotallowedtogotothestadiumtowatchtheirfavouriteteamsplay.Suchrestric-tionsaregivingwaytowomen’sparticipationinvarioussportingevents.InJanuary2018,forthefirsttime,Saudiwomenwereallowedtogotothestadiumtowatchafootballmatch(Duerden,2018).Inlate2019,womenwereallowedtoattendfootballmatches–anationalcraze–inIranafterahiatusoffourdecades(Panja,2019).Glocalsportstranscendmereconsumptionandpromoteparticipationinsportingeventsthatwereonceglobalanddistant.TheadoptionofglobalsportsandrepurposingthemasglocalHabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
223Glocalsports213eitherdeliberatelyorthroughgradualadaptationnotonlybecomesanintegralpartoflocalculture,butitalsomarkstheimpactinnon-sportingaspectsoflocalandnationalculture.Emergenceofaglocalcultureportendsbetterunderstandingamongpeopleandculturesacrossthenationsoftheworld.REFERENCESAFP(2020),‘BangladeshmenfinedforMessibirthdaypartyduringpandemiclockdown’,TimesofIndia,25June,accessed6September2020athttps://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/football/top-stories/bangladesh-men-fined-for-messi-birthday-party-during-pandemic-lockdown/articleshow/76624869.cms.Allchin,J.(2014),‘You’llneverguesswheresomeofthemostfanaticalfansoftheArgentinaandBrazilsoccerteamscanbefound’,TIME,19June,accessed3October2020athttps://time.com/2898794/world-cup-soccer-football-bangladesh-argentina-brazil/.Andrews,D.andA.Grainger(2007),‘Sportandglobalization’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Malden,MA:BlackwellPublishing,pp.478–97.Appadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Bartelson,J.(2000),‘Threeconceptsofglobalization’,InternationalSociology,15(2),180–96.Brewer,B.D.(2019),‘ThecommercialtransformationofworldfootballandtheNorth–Southdivide:Aglobalvaluechainanalysis’,InternationalReviewfortheSociologyofSport,54(4),410–30.Buckley,C.(2017),‘PresidentXi’sgreatChinesesoccerdream’,TheNewYorkTimes,4January,accessed20September2020athttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/world/asia/china-soccer-xi-jinping.html.Castells,M.(1996),TheRiseoftheNetworkSociety,Oxford,UK:Blackwell.Castles,S.,deHaas,H.andM.J.Miller(2013),TheAgeofMigration,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Chisari,F.(2006),‘Whenfootballwentglobal:Televisingthe1966WorldCup’,HistoricalSocialResearch/HistorischeSozialforschung,31,(1)(115),FootballHistory:InternationalPerspectives/Fußball-Geschichte:InternationalePerspektiven,42–54.Crothers,L.(2010),GlobalizationandAmericanPopularCulture,Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield.Deb,A.(2019),‘Ateamrosefromrefugeecampstoturnthetables:TheAfghantale’,TheQuint,23June,accessed15October2020athttps://www.thequint.com/sports/world-cup/cricket-world-cup-afghanistan-team-profile-history.Dietschy,P.(2013),‘Makingfootballglobal?FIFA,Europe,andthenon-Europeanfootballworld,1912–74’,JournalofGlobalHistory,8(2),279–98.Doshi,V.(2016),‘“He’sourhero”:HindunationalistsrallyforDonaldTrumpinIndia’,TheGuardian,13May,accessed20October2020athttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/13/donald-trump-india-hindu-supporters-new-delhi.Duerden,J.(2018),‘“Ican’tdescribemyfeelings”–Saudiwomenfinallyallowedintogame’,TheGuardian,11January,accessed12April2021athttps://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jan/11/saudi-arabia-women-professional-stadium-fan-al-hilal.FIFA(2018),‘Morethanhalftheworldwatchedrecord-breaking2018WorldCup’,FIFA.com,21December,accessed21September2020athttps://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/more-than-half-the-world-watched-record-breaking-2018-world-cup.Foer,F.(2006),HowSoccerExplainstheWorld:AnUnlikelyTheoryofGlobalization,NewYork,NY:HarperPerennial.ForeignPolicy(2007),‘TheGlobalizationIndex2007’,accessed10December2020athttps://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/12/the-globalization-index-2007/.ForeignPolicy(2009),‘MeasuringGlobalization:Ranking’,accessed10December2020https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/29/measuring-globalization-rankings/.Frank,A.G.(1998),ReORIENT:GlobalEconomyintheAsianAge,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Giddens,A.(1990),TheConsequencesofModernity,Cambridge,UK:Polity.HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
224214HandbookofcultureandglocalizationGillen,N.(2020),‘SaudiArabiahasseenthevalueofwomen’ssport–buttowhatend?’,insidethegames,14November,accessed10December2020athttps://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1100779/saudi-arabia-interest-in-womens-sport.Gills,B.K.andW.R.Thompson(eds)(2006),GlobalizationandGlobalHistory,London,UK:Routledge.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2004),‘Theglobalizationoffootball:Astudyintheglocalizationofthe“seriouslife”’,BritishJournalofSociology,55(4),545–68.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2007),‘Recoveringthesocial:Globalization,footballandtransnation-alism’,GlobalNetworks,7(2),144–86.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2009),GlobalizationandFootball,London,UK:SageGuha,R.(ed.)(2016),ThePicadorBookofCricket,Kindleedition,London,UK:Macmillan.Gündoğan,I.andA.Sonntag(2018),‘ChinesefootballintheeraofXiJinping:Whatdosupportersthink?’,JournalofCurrentChineseAffairs,47(1),103–41.Gunn,G.C.(2003),FirstGlobalization:TheEurasianExchange,1500-1800,Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield.Guttmann,A.(2004),Sports:TheFirstFiveMillennia,Amherst,MA:UniversityofMassachusettsPress.Hassandarvish,M.(2020),‘CarlsbergMalaysia,localLiverpoolFCfansco-createanthemictributetothePremierLeaguechampions’MalayMail,24August,accessed10December2020athttps://www.malaymail.com/news/life/2020/08/24/carlsberg-malaysia-local-liverpool-fc-fans-co-create-anthemic-tribute-to-th/1896671.HindustanTimes(2018),‘RivalfollowersofLionelMessiandNeymarfoughtwithmachetes’,13June,accessed15October2020athttps://www.hindustantimes.com/football/fifa-world-cup-2018-life-and-death-rivalry-turns-violent-in-bangladesh/story-ebbMNgdTmIfs0R8SKDMNVK.html.Huang,F.H.(2013),‘Glocalisationofsport:TheNBA’sdiffusioninChina’,InternationalJournaloftheHistoryofSport,30(3),267–84.Huizinga,J.(1938),HomoLudens:AStudyofthePlayElementinCulture,(1950),Boston,MA:BeaconPress.Khondker,H.H.(2010),‘Globalization,cricket,andnationalbelonging’,inC.RumfordandS.Wagg(eds),CricketandGlobalization,NewcastleuponTyne,UK:CambridgeScholars,pp.152–71.Khondker,H.H.(2019),‘Glocalization’,inM.Juergensmeyer,M.Stegar,S.SassenandV.Faessel(eds),OxfordHandbookofGlobalStudies,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.93–111.Khondker,H.H.(2021),‘Eurasianglobalization:Pastandpresent’,Globalizations,18(1),707–19.Khondker,H.H.andR.Robertson(2018),‘Glocalization,consumptionandcricket:TheIndianPremierLeague’,JournalofConsumerCulture,18(2),279–97.Koller,C.andF.Brandle(2002),Goal:ACulturalandSocialHistoryofModernFootball,Washington,DC:TheCatholicUniversityofAmerica.MacCannell,D.(1989),TheTourist:ANewTheoryoftheLeisureClass,NewYork,NY:SchockenBooks.Majumdar,B.(2006),‘CricketinIndia:Representativeplayingfieldstoarestrictivepreserve’,TheInternationalJournaloftheHistoryofSport,23(6),927–59.Manning,P.(2005),MigrationinWorldHistory,London,UK:Routledge.McCarthy,R.(2000),‘Talibansendofffootballersinshorts’,TheGuardian,18July,accessed1November2020athttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jul/18/rorymccarthy.McLuhan,M.(1964),UnderstandingMedia,London,UK:Routledge.Minthe,C.(2020),‘SaudiArabia’sfirsteverprofessionalfemalegolftournamentishere’,Vogue,12November,accessed10April2021athttps://en.vogue.me/beauty/body/saudi-arabia-professional-female-golf-tournament/.Mortimer,G.(2013),AHistoryofCricketin100Objects,London,UK:Serpent’sTail.Murray,B.(1996),TheWorld’sGame:AHistoryofSoccer,Urbana,IL:UniversityofIllinoisPress.Muzaffar,M.(2019),‘Afghanistan’sstunningnewsuccessstory:Sports’,OZY,24June,accessed10November2020athttps://www.ozy.com/around-the-world/afghanistans-stunning-new-success-story-sports/95049/.Nauright,J.andS.Zipp(2018),‘Thecomplexworldofglobalsport’,SportinSociety,21(8),1113–19.HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
225Glocalsports215NederveenPieterse,J.(2012),‘Periodizingglobalization:Historiesofglobalization’,NewGlobalStudies,6(2),1–25.NederveenPieterse,J.(2018),MultipolarGlobalization,Abingdon,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Nelson,D.(2010),‘FanaticalBrazilandArgentinafootballfansclash–inBangladesh’,TheTelegraph,23May,accessed10December2020athttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/bangladesh/7756547/Fanatical-Brazil-and-Argentina-football-fans-clash-in-Bangladesh.htmlNewWorldEncyclopedia(n.d.),‘IrfanPathan’,NewWorldEncyclopedia,accessed10August2020athttp://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Irfan_Pathan.Pandya,H.(2005),‘EknathSolkar’,TheGuardian,14September,accessed12October2020athttps://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/sep/14/obituaries.india.Panja,T.(2019),‘Iranianwomenallowedtoattendsoccergameforfirsttimesince1981’,TheNewYorkTimes,October10,accessed12April2021athttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/10/sports/soccer/iran-women.html.Parrish,C.(2018),‘Origin,diffusion,anddevelopmentofpolo:Aneasttowestculturalflow’,SportinSociety,21(8),1158–69.Pavan,P.(2017),‘IPL2017:Hyderabadautodriver’ssonMohammedSirajboughtbySunrisersHyderabadforRs2.6crore’,MumbaiMirror,20February,accessed12August2020athttp://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/sport/cricket/ipl-2017-hyderabad-auto-drivers-son-mohammed-siraj-bought-by-sunrisers-hyderabad-for-rs-2-6-crore/articleshow/57257562.cms.Pendergrast,M.(1993),‘Viewpoints;AbriefhistoryofCoca-Colonization’,NewYorkTimes,August15.Reuters(n.d.),‘SwappingKalashnikovsforbatandpads:Afghancricket,Talibanandpeace’,TRTWorld,accessed10November2020athttps://www.trtworld.com/asia/swapping-kalashnikovs-for-bat-and-pads-afghan-cricket-taliban-and-peace-25472.Ritzer,G.(2000),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity–heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernity,London,UK:Sage.Roudometof,V.(2014),‘Nationalism,globalization,andglocalization’,ThesisEleven,122(1),18–33.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Rumford,C.andS.Wagg(2010),‘Introduction:Cricketandglobalization’,inC.RumfordandS.Wagg(eds),CricketandGlobalization,NewcastleuponTyne,UK:CambridgeScholars,pp.1–15.Turner,B.S.andH.H.Khondker(2010),GlobalizationEastandWest,London,UK:Sage.Ueda,Y.(2017),‘Politicaleconomyandjudo:TheglobalizationofatraditionalJapanesesport’,SportinSociety,20(12),1852–60.Velema,T.A.(2018),‘Agameofsnakesandladders:Playermigratorytrajectoriesintheglobalfootballlabormarket’,InternationalReviewfortheSociologyofSport,53(6),706–725.Wallerstein,I.M.(1974),TheModernWorld-System,NewYork,NY:AcademicPress.Watson,J.(ed.)(1997),GoldenArchesEast:McDonald’sinEastAsia,Stanford,CT:StanfordUniversityPress.Zhou,L.,WangJ.J.,ChenX.,Lei,C.,Zhang,J.J.andX.Meng(2017),‘ThedevelopmentofNBAinChina:Aglocalizationperspective’,InternationalJournalofSportsMarketing&Sponsorship,18(1),81–94.HabibulHaqueKhondker-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:33AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
22614.DigitalglocalizationBarrieAxfordINTRODUCTIONItisnotnecessarytoabstractglocalprocessesfromthebroaderwarpofwhatinfluencesglobalconstitutiontorecognize,asdoesHabibulKhondker,thata‘nuancedandthusdense,understandingofglobalizationisglocalizationitself’(2004,2019,p.93;emphasisadded).Inotherwords,wecanbettercomprehendthevagariesofglobalization,identifyworld-makingpractices,andmapemergentglobalitiesthroughknowledgeofthewaysinwhichlocal–globalrelationsarecrystalizedthroughrefraction;withglobalrefractedthroughlocal.1Thusarerevealed‘thewaysinwhichtheverycreationoflocalitiesisastandardcomponentofglo-balization’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2006,p.134;Robertson,2018).Notalways,ofcourse,butinlargemeasure.Thisisalreadyalongwayfromseeingglobalizationasaprocessinwhichpeoplesandtheirculturesaredoomedtoannihilationor,lessdraconian,wherelocalidentitiesandculturalcommunitiesareroutinelybesetanddamagedbyglobalconstraints.Ofcourse,itleavesthosepossibilitiesopen.Instead,theblanketideaofconstraintscommutestoanunderstandingthatindigenesandnational/localculturesexist‘inaglobalframework,bothself-consciouslydrawingonglobalizedstrategiesofrightsandidentity,aswellasbeingobjectivelysituatedthroughinternationallegalframeworks’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009,p.28;Kearney,1995).Couchedthus,theideaofglocalization,‘capturestheinterpenetrationofthelocalandtheglobal’(Khondker,2019,p.97).Ofcourse,itmaybethattheimpactandlong-termeffectsoftheCOVID-19pandemicwillconfoundmuchscholarshiponglobal–localrelations,includingwhatiscanvassedhere.Butthatisastorystilltobetold.Inwhatfollows,Iwanttoaddresssomeofthesecomplexitiesthroughaparticularanalyticalandempiricallens–thatofdigitalization,thedisplacementofanaloguetechnologiesbydigitaltechnologies,alongwiththesocial,culturalandpsychologicalconsequencesofthatshift–andhowthisexemplifiestheinterpenetrationofthelocalandglobal.Farfrombeingacatalogueof‘mereconnections’,globalprocess–andthusglobalconstitution–hasalwaysbeenablendofconnectivity,consciousnessandinstitutionalization(Axford,2013,2018).Iprivilegetheinter-netasprovidingahighlytopical,nottosayseminal,purchaseontheconvergentpropertiesofglobalizationtodayandonthecapacityofsubjectstoconjureorrefurbishdiverse(g)localimaginaries.Istartbylookingatsomekeyfeaturesofglocalization,andhowitistheorized,toestablishtherangeofpossibleengagements,andtounderlinethecontingencyofthepro-cessesintrain(Steger&James,2019).Asacaseinpoint,thecurrentresurgenceofmilitantlocalismraisesquestionsaboutwhetherlocalimaginarieswillendupasglocalbecausesomeaccommodationwithglobalconstraintsisinevitable.Ithenexploredigitalizationasafacetofcurrentmediatization,castingthelatterasameta-theoryofglobalizationtoday(Axford,2018;Waisbord,2013).Glocalitynowappearsasacharacteristic,thoughnotexclusive,outcomeofglobal–localinteractionorprocessofmutualconstitutioninthedialecticofsamenessanddifferencethatpatternsallsociallife.2Inthisscenario,theinternet,andspecificallyWeb3.0(the‘semantic217BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
227218HandbookofcultureandglocalizationWeb’,whichisbothinteractiveandactor/algorithm-driven),isaclearexampleofdigitalglo-calization(Roudometof,2016).EvenwhenspeakingabouttheWeb’spreviousphase,danahboydopined,[g]localizedstructuresandnetworksarethebackboneofWeb2.0.Ratherthanconceptualizingtheworldingeographicalterms,itisnownecessarytouseanetworkedmodeltounderstandtheinterre-lationsbetweenpeopleandculture,tothinkaboutlocalizingintermsofsocialstructuresnotintermsoflocation.(boyd2005,p.181)Subsequentdevelopmentsintechnologyhaveacceleratedthistrend,eventhoughtherehasbeenmuchtalkofadigital‘greatconvergence’tocharacterizethecurrentphaseofglobaliza-tion(Baldwin,2016).TheageofBigDataandthehyper-interactiveInternetofThingsprovideatemplateforournetworkedworlds.Twoempiricaldomainsarechosentoexemplifythewaysinwhichdigitalglocalizationworkswithandagainstthegrainofglobalconvergence.Thereare,ofcourse,manysuchdomains,buthereIfocusonresurgentpopulism,apoliticalstrainusuallydeemedantitheticaltoglobalization,butwhichhasembracedthe‘logicofconnectiveaction’tochallengethekineticstructuresofusualpolitics(Bennett&Segerberg,2012).3Soasnottoimplythat‘algo-rithmicpopulism’andlocalistessentialismhavecorneredthemarketinthisrespect,Iadverttosomeinstanceswhereoppositiontoglobalizationisundeniably,evendeliberately,glocalistortransglocalist,bothintemperamentandstrategy,exemplifyingfeaturesofthe‘newmobili-zation’spokenofbyYtzakBenkler(2006;onalgorithmicpopulism,seeMaly,2019).OccupyWallStreetisonesuchinstance;ExtinctionRebellion,theZapatistasinChiapas,BlackLivesMatter,MeTooandtheMENAuprisingsof2011areothers.Onthefaceofit,populistopposi-tioncleavestoadifferent,andaltogetherdiscrete,constructionofplace,andofthelocal.Soisitglocalistorlocalist–orboth?Andiflocalist,needitsubscribetoadefensiveandabsolutiststrainoflocalism;anangryprovincialism?Whiletheseareimportantquestions,forthemostpart,theyfalloutsidethescopeofthischapter.Inquiteanothermode,Ithenexaminethedigitalmediatizationofsportasaglocalphenom-enon,withparticularreferencetocricket.Thispartofthechapterunderlinestheembraceof‘new’mediatechnologiesandformatsinanexoticstrainofeverydaylife,andinglobalcul-turaleconomy,throughtheuseofdigitalTV,smartphones,apps,email,searchengines,blogs,andsocialnetworkingsites.Inthismilieu,aswellasinothers,alldevicesandplatformsaremorethanameansofcommunicationandsourcesofinformation.Theyareinvestmentsincul-turallysanctionedlifestylechoices;thestuffofamediatizedandglocalizedculturaleconomy.AndtheirroutineusemayalsopointtotheemergenceofanewsocietaltropeintheguiseofwhatBarryWellmancalls‘networkedindividualism’,underliningthepossibilitythatdigitalconnectioncansubventavarietyofidentities(Wellmanetal.,2003).Itisimportanttoaddthatnoneoftheillustrationsusedcanbetakenas‘representative’ofsomewideruniverseofengagements.Inotherwords,theyaremoreindicativethanseminal;buttheytellarichstory.GLOCALIZATION:THEBONESOFSTRUCTURATIONWecanagreethat‘globalizationandglocalizationareentangledintheempiricalworld’(Khondker,2019,p.107).Sothecoreofthematterhereistoidentifytheprocesses,accommo-dationsandrupturesinvolvedinproducing,reproducingandsometimesalteringlocalcontextsBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
228Digitalglocalization219andlocalsubjectsinaglobalizingworld.Glocalitiesaretheproductofworld-makingpracticeswhichinvolveintensificationinworldwide(communicative)connectivityontheonehandand(mostly)reflexiveglobalconsciousnessonthepartof(localandmostlysituated)actorsontheother(Robertson,1992).Theprocessofglocalizationhighlightsbothresilienceinlocalwaysofdoingthingsandthescopeforchangingthem.Inotherwords,glocalizationalwaysimpliesmixing.Itunderscoresthemutabilityandnegotiabilityofreputedlyinexorableuniversalcon-straintsorsecularconvergence.Atthesametime,theverynotionofglocalizationremindsusthatlocalsexistinaglobalframeworkwhere,amongotherthings,they‘self-consciouslydrawonglobalizedstrategies’tosubventandlegitimatetheirsenseofdifference(Phipps,2009,p.28).Whilethedynamicofglocalizationassumesadegreeofflexibilityinthemeshoflocalandglobal,localization(andcertainlylocalism)impartsamoreessentialistfeelthatvalorizes‘place’and‘identity’,sometimesinbrutalistorrealistform(Roudometof,2018).Thesedis-tinctionswillbeimportantwhenweconsiderthewaysinwhichvariousglocalizationprojects,asGiulianottiandRobertson(2006)haveit,actuallycomportwithdigitalmedia.Takenintheround,theseissuesdelineateoneofthemostintenselydebatedthemesinthestudyofglobalization,namelythe‘analyticalandempiricaldegreesoffreedomthatmaybediscernedinhowlocalculturesandlocalactorsengagewith“theglobal”’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009,p.31).Inthisdebate,theusualbinarydistinctions,evenantinomies,ofuniversalandparticularandlocalandglobalareofteninvoked.Buttoreiterate,formuchglobalscholarship,thedefaultpositiontodayisthat‘anyparticularexperience,identityorsocialprocessisonlycomprehensiblewithreferencetouniversalphenomena’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2009,p.32).The‘globalwidenexus’oftheparticularandtheuniversalproducescomplexinterrelationships,andthesearemostlyglocalincast.Apartfromhintingthatglocalidentitiesmaypresenta‘thicker’ontologythantheideaofdigital–andothertypesof–con-nectivityoftenallows,thisformulationisalsoquizzicalofDilipMenon’sgnomicobservationthatthe‘localismerelyasitewithinwhichmultiplevisionsoftheworldintersect’(Menon,2020).Let’stakeanobviouspointfirst.Thelocal,howeverconstrued,iswhereimplied,potentialorimmanentglobalhomogeneitygetsarticulatedwiththevernacular,bothactuallyandmet-aphorically.Theoutcomemaybenewculturalhybridsorsyncreticformsandthesearelikelytobeglocal,withtheemergentpropertiesofthatcondition(Giulianotti&Robertson,2006;Raz,1999;Roudometof,2016).Rarelydosuchencountersproducepristine‘local’outcomes–wherethatdisportsasamoreholisticanduncompromisedontology–andthisdespitetheintentofavidlocalists,includingpopulists.Whiletheexistenceofglocalizationprojectsseverelymodifiesanysensethatglobalizationisanabstractandtotalizingprocess,italsoqualifiesequallystarklocalistsolutionstothepressuresofglobalconvergence,inpractice,ifnotinpolemicandideology.Atthesametime,theenduringcurrencyofthelocalpointstotheimportanceofsocialandterritorialplaceinsocialtheory,inpoliticalpracticeandinidentityformation.‘[G]localizationshowshowindividualsandlocalculturesmaycriticallyabsorb,adaptorresist“global”phenomena’,thusdemonstratingthatglobalization’sontologyreliesonpro-cessesofglocalization.And,asweknow,theformationofbothmutableemergentglocalitiesandruttedlocalitiestakesplacenotonlythroughconnection,butthrough‘micro-social’incursionsandrupturesasagentsadopttacticsthatmakesenseoftheworldinwhichtheylive,andeitherendorseorcombatwhattheyseethere(Hulme,2015,p.31).Wealsoknowthatglobalizationisachallengetotheveryideaofboundaries,butsocial–andparticularlyBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
229220Handbookofcultureandglocalizationcommunicative–practicestiedtoitscomplexandcontradictoryrolesallowactorstorefurbishorreinventtheideaoflocalityorcommunity,sometimestiedtoactualplaces.Neverimmaculate,thenationalandthelocalarenowroutinelydisrupted,thoughnevercompletelydebilitated,bythespeedanddensityofconnectivepractices;notablydigitaliza-tion.Nationalpopulismisabacklashagainstperceivedunbridledglobalizationofthiskind,butalsoagainstthemessier,thougharguablymorelikely,prospectoftheglocalizationofonceorwould-beimmaculateenclaves(Axford,2020).Inaddition,theapparentlyborderlesslogicofinternettechnologiesisroutinelyconfrontedbynationalattemptsat‘internetsovereignty’,aconceptfirstcoinedbytheChinesein2010,andthistooistypicalofthecontradictorydynamicsofthecurrentphaseofglobalization.Putin’sRussiaandXiJinping’sChinaareintheforefrontofprotectionistandilliberallawsandpolicydesignedtoputboundariesaroundaccesstoanduseoftheinternetandcurtailinternaldissent.IntheChinesecase,suchmeas-uresarealsopartofitssponsorshipofanalternativemodelofinternetgovernance;indeed,ofglobality,andofnon-Westernroutestoit.Allofwhichalsocountermandsthepresumedsingle‘logic’ofconvergenceandtheonce-easyassumptionthatglobalizationmeansWesternizationorAmericanization.Whereistheagencyinsuchencounters?Globalities,glocalitiesandlocalitiesareobviouslymadethroughtheintercourseofagencyandstructures,butcanglocalizationalsotakeplace‘behindthebacks’ofagentsratherthanasaresultofstrategicintent(Ritzer,2004)?Digitalconnectivitymayprovidearoutinemeansofproducingsuchanoutcome,butinanyassess-mentitisaswelltosteerclearoftechnologicaldeterminism.Bycontrast,localismseemsfullofstrategicintent,aswellassomebluster,basedonthepremise–atleastwherepopulismisconcerned–thatthereisanontologicalandmoraldividebetweenglobalandlocalthatmustbepoliced.Inthisgestalt,glocalizationis,atbest,animpureprocessofintermingling;localism–inbothinclusiveandexclusionaryforms–ismoreauthentic,evenessentialist.Sowhatdoesglocalizationlooklike?Intheirstudyoffootballandglobalization,RichardGiulianottiandRolandRobertson(2006)employthehelpful,andnowwidelyused,analyt-icalschemethatidentifiesfourcategoriesofculturalglocalization.Thesearerelativization,wheresocialactorstrytopreservetheirculturalinstitutions,practicesandmeaningswithinanewenvironment,underpinningdifferentiation.Thereisalsoaccommodation,sometimescalledindigenization,whereactorstakeupthepractices,institutionsandmeaningsassociatedwithothersocieties,apragmaticadjustmentmadetomaintainkeyelementsofthepriorlocalculture.Hybridization,whichoccurswheresocialactorssynthesizelocalandotherculturalphenomenatoproducedistinctive,hybridculturalpractices,institutionsandmeanings,andfinally,transformation,wheresocialactorscometofavourandenactthepractices,institutionsormeaningsassociatedwithothercultures.Inthiscase,‘transformationmayprocurefreshculturalformsor,moreextremely,theabandonmentofthelocalcultureinfavourofalternativeand/orhegemonicculturalforms’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2006,p.135).Ifglobalizationimpliesculturalconvergence,andanti-globalismprescribessocialdifferentiationandevenpolarization,thenglocalizationimplieshybridityor,inthedigitallynetworkedworld,atomi-zation,asidefromthecasualtake-upofcollectivepersonaefoundonsocialnetworkingsites.Theconceptofculturalhybridizationidentifiesthemixingofculturesaffectedbyglobali-zationandthecreationofnew,sometimesunique,hybridculturesthatcannotbedesignatedeitherlocalorglobal(Globalizations,2007;Kraidy,2005).Asweshallsee,thesenuancesplayvariablywhendiscussingdigitalconnectivity.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
230Digitalglocalization221Hybridizationisthedefaultpositionofglobalizationoptimistsandforthosewhowanttousetheconceptasawayofunderstandingthecomplexandcontradictoryfacetsofculturalglobalization.Anditisquiteeasytodepictculturalglobalizationashybridization,andthusastheculturalstructureofglobality.Onesuchaccountsaysthatglobalizationis‘structuralhybridizationortheemergenceofnew,mixedformsofsocialcooperationandculturalhybrid-ization,orthedevelopmentoftranslocalmélangecultures’(NederveenPieterse,2003,p.46).Othersdiscounttheideathatidentityconstructioncaneverbeapostmodernpick-and-mixprocess,andthisdespitethesensethatbespokeworldscanbecreatedandsustainedonlinethroughtargetedconnectionstoself-defined‘audiences’,andalsothroughphaticritualssuchas‘friending’and‘liking’.Experiencingnewandoldworldsisincreasinglypossiblethroughvirtualrealityplatformsanddevices.Thesecanbeasinclusiveorexclusiveastasteallows.Therearemanyformsofhybridizationandtheyallchallengeboundaries,whetherlocalorcivilizational,phenomenalorimagined.Hybridizationalsorunsagainstthegrainofhegemonicprojects,includingthekindofmorediffuseglobalconvergenceimpliedinGeorgeRitzer’s(2012)McDonaldizationthesis.Inhybridcultures,culturalsyncretism,ratherthanculturalsynchronization,ismodalandinthisregardtherearemanyexemplars.JanNederveenPietersementionsEast–Westfusioncultures,theLatinAmericanideaofthe‘mestizo’,ofin-betweenidentitiesandculturesfoundincreolecommunities,andthe‘melange’culturesofglobalcities.Eventheill-definednotionof‘Europeanization’,untilBrexitandCOVID-19muchinvogueasaprescriptionforEurope-making,canbeseenasaformoftrans-glocalandhybridimaginary.Thesheercreativityofculturalhybridformationisatransformativesocialdynamic,althoughweshouldnotassumethatpriortothisformofglocalization,discretecul-turalenclavesexistedeverywhere.Soglocalizationisamodalfeatureofallglobalsystems.AsVictorRoudometof(2018,p.3)says,itreplacesthecrudebinaryoflocalandglobalandittendstorelationshipsthataresymbioticorcomplementary.Foranti-globalizers,includingpopulists,itisatbestanambivalentsolutiontothethreatsposedbyglobalnetworksandflows–bothphenomenalanddigital–tolocalintegrity.Ambivalent,becausethelogicof,orsystemicdynamicexpressedthrough,processesofglocalizationmayservetosuccourthelocalinsomemeasure,butcanalsoconfoundlocalism.Atthesametime,hybridizationisevidenceoftheindigenizationofprocessesthatareoftenpresentedasmovingtotheirownlogic.Allofwhichcountermandsboththe‘culturallogicofglobalization’narrative,whereinattemptstoprotectthelocalmeanrunningagainstthetideofhistory,andenergeticlocalistargumentstotheeffectthatlocalismisnotonlyviable,buttheseminalcounterpointto(market)globalization(Roudometof,2018).THEMEDIATIZATIONANDDIGITALIZATIONOFGLOCALIZATIONLet’sconsiderthemakingofglocal–andsometimesglobalandlocal–worldsthroughdigital-ization.First,weneedtoconsiderthebroaderanddeepereconomicandculturalimplicationsboundupintheconceptofmediatization,throughthecreationofdigitalculturesthathavebecome‘continuous,ubiquitousandglobal’(Sandywell,2011,p.14).Therealburdenofthisobservation,andperhapsthemostchallenging,isthatdigitalmediaare‘nolongerintermediar-iesbetweensignificantsocialagents,nolongerchannelsandconduitsofmeaning,rathertheytransmuteintogenerativesocialapparatuses,machinesthatproducethesocial’(Sandywell,BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
231222Handbookofcultureandglocalization2011,pp.14–15).Theanalyticalweightofmediatizationasanorganizingconceptliesmainlyinthefocusitprovidesonhow,orwhether,communicationsmediapermeate,influenceordeterminewidercultureandsociety.Withonlyahintofequivocationitcanbeunderstoodastheprocessesthroughwhichdifferentcommunicationsmediaplayanincreasingpartintheframingandconstitutionofeverydayexperiencesandwidercultural,economicandpoliticalscripts(Castells,1996;Hepp,2015;Hjarvard,2008).Withoutgivingwaytotechnologicaldeterminism,itmightbesaidthatnewcommunicationtechnologiesframehowweengagewiththemandeachotherbypromotingandembodyingthevalueofspeed,immediacy,modalinteractivityandbespokeconsumptionasculturalaesthetics(Castells,1996).Thesearestillstrongclaimsand,appliedtothesocialandculturalrolesofmediaingeneralanddigitalmediainparticular,theytriggerimportantquestionsabouthowcultureismediated,abouttheparticularmediationofpoliticsandsportasculture,andaboutthepotencyofdif-ferentkindsofagencyinvolvedintheprocess.Inthismeldofcomplexissues,aFoucauldianstancewouldbetoarguethatmediatechnologies,ifnotallformsofmediation,have‘noessence’oratmostan‘essencethatwasfabricatedinapiecemealfashionfromalienform’andthroughpractice(Foucault,1977,p.142).Asthecritiqueofmedia-centrismadvises,suchsen-timentsundoubtedlyqualifythetemptationtoturnattributesofmediaintoalogicthatsimplyspillsoverintothetransformationofculturalformsandpractices,includinghowbordersareeroded,identitiesareshapedandconsumerpreferencesformed.Thedigitalrevolutionincommunicationisthelatestphaseinsuchdevelopments,buttherearepreviouswaves,mostrecentlythatadvertedbyJeanBaudrillardwho,inthe1970s,talkedabouttheemergingsocietyofthesign(Baudrillard,1975).Hepresentedthisvisionasanewstageofhistoryandanovelrealmofexperience,duetotheproliferationof(newkindsof)mediaandthesheerspeedofcommunication.Baudrillardsawthesechangesasashiftfrommodernity–characterizedastheproductionof‘things’–topostmodernity,displayingaradicalsemiurgyandtheproductionofsigns.Today,allpolitics,andmuchofsociallife,isconductedwithintheframeofdigitalmedia.Andasweknow,framingallowsactorstosim-plifyandmanagetheirenvironmentsby‘encodingobjects,situations,events,experiencesandsequencesofaction’(Snow&Benford,1992,p.207).Digitaltechnologiesaredesignedforaborderlessworldbecause,asBarrySandywell(2011,p.15)argues,‘theimagesoflife,natureandrelationshipstheypromulgatetendtotakeauniversalform’.TheyaretheacmeofwhatManfredStegerdescribesas‘disembodiedglobalization’(2019,p.4).AscouchedbySteger,thisfeatureoftwenty-firstcenturyglobali-zationentailsthe‘mobilityofintangiblethingsandprocessesacrossborders,includingideas,words,images,meanings,knowledge,sounds,electronictexts,softwareprogramsandnovelcyber-assetssuchasblockchain-encodedcryptocurrencies’.Yetthereareotherworldsstilltobefoundintheruttednessofplacesandingroundedidentities,aswellasintheiraccommoda-tionwiththosetantalizingglobalscapesascoinedbyArjunAppadurai(1996).WhileTanyaLewiswritespersuasivelyofthegrowingubiquityof‘digitalfoodscapes’(2019,p.571),conceitssuchas‘slow’foodandthenowfashionableresistancetoanycosmopolitanappropri-ationofculture,suggestthecontinuing‘thickness’or‘authenticity’ofhabitsrootedinplace.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
232Digitalglocalization223DIGITALGLOCALIZATIONINPRACTICE(MAYBE)Pathological(G)localism?Therelationshipbetweenglobalizationandpopulismisitselfanechoofatropefamiliartostudentsofglobalization;theantinomyofsamenessanddifferenceplayedoutasanelementaldialecticofglobalandlocal.Thisdialecticisapparentinbothroutineandnon-threateningways–intheday-to-dayengagementsbetweenlocalandsituatedsubjectsandglobalnetworksandflows–aswellasinmorevisceralencountersseen,forexample,inArjunAppadurai’s(2006)‘geographiesofanger’.Inthelatter,strangersaretreatedwithsuspicion,disdainandevenviolencewhentheyalightintheguiseofterrorists,orwould-beterrorists,someformsofmigrantlabour,andrefugees.Differenceisoftenjustificationenoughforsuspicion,notembrace.Onthefaceofit,populism–andcertainlynationalpopulism–istheantithesisofglobali-zation.Itisasanguineous,but‘essentiallymoral’,appealtoandevocationofmilitantandpristinedifferencecouchedasresistanceby‘thepeople’tothewilfulandwantondestructionoftheparticular,thelocalandtheidiosyncraticbyremoteanduncaringelites,indifferenteconomicforces,andahostofmalign,oropportunistic,others(Eatwell&Goodwin,2018;Friedman,2018;Mudde,2004).Indifferentpopulistdiscourses,thestrategiclocationandpeculiarqualitiesoftheelitesinquestionwillvary.Therallyingcryof‘thepeople’,employedasastickwithwhichtobeatopponents,isalsohighlychargedwhenusedinpopulistrhetoric,notleastbecauseitisconceptuallyimpreciseandnormativelyladenwhenusedindifferentpoliticalidioms.Inoneofthemanyparadoxesofthepopulistcredo–ifsuchexists–itsadvo-catesappealtotheinclusive,evenuniversal,subjectof‘thepeople’,butareselectiveaboutconferringmembership,orarecavalieraboutactualnumbers;theyfavourthosewithnotion-ally‘authentic’claimstoaparticularbirthrightandtheheirstobespoke,albeitimagined,histories.Sometimes,‘thepeople’isconjuredasarhetoricaldevicetojustifyactionsandtodemeanopposingviews.Inglobalizedlate–orevenpost–modernity,populismlubricatesdiscontentthroughamediatizedanddigitalizedpolitics.Lightonitsfeet,itisErnestoLaclau’squintessential‘emptysignifier’regardlessofany‘left’or‘right’provenance(2005).Critically,digitalmedi-atizationspeedsup,circulatesandre-contextualizesmainlylocal,andsometimespersonal,grievancesintoglobalscriptsormanifestos;makingpopulismalmostrhizomaticinthesensedescribedbyDeleuzeandGuattari(1984).Rhizomaticentitiescomprisemultiplehubsandnodes,eachofwhichretainsaseparateidentitywhilebeinginterconnected.Activistsandapologistsalikeenvisionandexperiencetheglobalvariouslythroughtheirlocalengagementwithflowsofculturalproduct,images,rhetoric,diseaseandinformationthatareincreasinglydisconnectedfromtheirplaceoforigin.ThisisafeatureofwhatPeggyLevitt(2016,p.144)calls‘circulationculture’.Butthisapparentdisjunctiondoesnotdilutepopulism’sessentialistappealtomillionsofrootedsubjects.Forpopulism,thedisjunctionbetweentherelativizing‘logic’oftheinternet,withitsborderlesscredo,andtheabsolutisttoneofthelocalistmessagesdisseminatedthroughit,looksparadoxical,butthathasnotinhibitedtheemergenceofapoliticsthatsubsistsonboth.Mediascapeschannelthenarrativesthroughwhichsuchimaginedworldsareconstructed.Theseimaginedworldsare‘chimerical,aestheticandfantasticobjects’;appositetermswhendescribingthepoliticsandperformativestyleofDonaldTrumpintheUSA,JairBolsonaroBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
233224HandbookofcultureandglocalizationinBrazilandViktorOrbáninHungary,tonamebutthreepopulist‘strongmen’(Appadurai,1996,p.77;Latour,2016).Thepoliticssoconjuredtends,inHelenMargetts’swords,to‘chaoticpluralism’,andischaracterizedbydiversityandheterogeneity,bynon-linearityandbyhighinterconnectivity(Margettsetal.,2016,p.14).Atitsmostconceptuallyembracing,thiswholeargumentisanevocationofcomplexitymodelsofsocialconstitution,seenintheincreasingubiquityofdisorderedsystemsandfluididentities,aswellasinreactionstothemfrommoreembeddedactorsandstructures(Urry,2003).Atasomewhatlowerlevelofconceptualgenerality,itconformstoBenjaminMoffitt’sargumentthat,aswellasbeingasymptomofmodernity’scrisis–partofthefalteringofmarketglobalization–populismactuallyperformsit,increasinglythroughonlineplatforms(Moffitt,2014;Nabers,2016).Theperformancemotifispartofamodalaestheticizationofpoliticsandofeverydaylife,becauseofthesaturationofeventhemostroutineexperiencebyaconstantandrapidflowofsigns,imagesand,nowadays,byallmannerofdigitaltext.Likemanycontemporarycriticsofmediainfluence,JeanBaudrillardwasatbestambivalentabouttheeffectsofsuchdevelopments(1983;seealsoMorozov,2011;Žižek,1998).Indeed,hearguedthatbothsetsofchangesfragmentthedominant‘truths’ofthemoderneraandemphasizethecontingentqualityoflifeandlifechoices.Inthismilieu,‘post-truth’politicsisamodus,ratherthan(just)adevianttacticalweaponinthearmouryofpersuasivetechniques.ManuelCastells’searlypronouncementsontheprocesswereattunedtotheideathat,ifdigitalmediahavebecometheprivilegedspaceofpolitics–andmaybetheforcinggroundfora‘postmodern’variant–inaperiodstillcharacterizedbytheformsandvaluesofpoliti-calmodernity,thescopefordisruption,andnolittleangst,remainslarge.Ontheupside,heapplaudedthepotentialforanewandmodularpoliticstoemerge,includingthepromisetocrossorignorebordersinsearchofsupport,democraticgainandcommonunderstanding.Healsoidentifiedtheroleofinformationtechnologyinspawningandsustaininginnovativeformsofgrassrootsmovement.Hismorerecentanthemto‘networksofoutrageandhope’(Castells,2012)exploresthewaysinwhichinformationtechnologiesallowpreviouslyinvisibleconstit-uenciesofhithertounlooked-for‘activists’toregistertheirpresence.Andallwithoutregardforthearchitecturesofusual,organizedandbrokeredpolitics,andthetrammelsofstrongiden-tification(seealsoBennett&Segerberg,2012;Bimber&Davis,2003;Chadwick&Howard,2009;Margettsetal.,2016).Inthenewspacesofpolitics,theuseofinformationtechnologybycitizensandconsumersmaywellconfoundthemobilizationofbiasfoundinanybrokeredpolitics,anditsadvocatescertainlyclaimthatthisisso.ItwastheclaimofTrump’ssuccessfulcampaignin2016anditisthestock-in-tradeofmanypopulistleaderswhorailagainstthestatusquo,assertingthat‘main-streammedia’rendersthemvoiceless.Atthesametime,thischallengetotheonto-politicalcertaintiesandnormsofusualpolitics,begetsitsowncritique.Andinthatcritique,thetemperofapoliticsframedbymediaisoftendismissedasimmanently‘anti-political’,whetherintheBaudrillardiansense,orthroughdamagetothecanonsoftheliberalterritorialistparadigm,theetiquetteofrepresentativedemocracyandtheaccommodativetemperofpluralisticpoliticaldiscourse(Axford&Huggins,1997;Balandier,1992).Theappealofadigitallymediatizedpoliticstoday,especiallywherepopulistsandtheirsupportersareconcernedis,inlargepart,duetothisuntutoredquality,andtoitsverycontingency.Bothworktoexploittheplasticityofopinionformationinuncertaintimes.Digitalmedia,especiallysocialmedia,areboththemediumofexpressionandpartoftheontologyofcurrentpopulisms.Insum,digitalmediati-BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
234Digitalglocalization225zationisthefluidthatlubricatesconnectionsbetweenthesystemicandthesubjective(Couldry&Hepp,2013).Itisacontested,butpotent,summaryofkeyprocessesandameta-theoryofsocialchange.Trump,whetherskeweredoradornedbythelegend‘thefirstpostmodernpresident’,certainlyunderstandsthepowerofpoliticsasaestheticsandembracesitsdigitalmodality.Thekeypointisthatthisisnotjustatactic,oranadroitmanipulationofcircumstancesandtechnology,althoughitisthosethingsaswell.IfTrumpisaperformer,itisbecausemedia-tizedpoliticsis,inlargemeasure,aperformance.Thisislessapolemicalattribution,stilllessaninsult,thanareflectiononwhatpoliticshasbecome–saturatedbymediaandthe‘giddyproliferation’ofdigitalcommunications(Vattimo,1992,p.14).SoBenMoffittisquiterighttoinsistthatpopulismisapoliticalstyle,comprising‘repertoiresofembodied,symbolicallymediatedperformancemadetoaudiencesthatareusedtonavigatethefieldsofpowerthatcomprisethepolitical,stretchingfromthedomainofgovernmenttoeverydaylife’(Moffitt,2014,p.38).Theideaofperformanceiskeytothisformulationand,usedpejoratively,leadstoclaimsthatpoliticsisnomorethanaspectacle,afieldwhereliesarejust‘alternativefacts’,asTrump’sadviserKellyanneConwaymemorablyattested.Andthecriticalnarrativearoundtheuseofsocialmediaasatoolofpoliticalpersuasionaddstothesensethatitnurturesamalevolentanti-politics;onethathasbeenlabelledalgorithmicpopulism.Inthisscenario,algorithmstakeonanalmostagentialquality(Maly,2019).Thethesis,simplyput,isthattheinformationusersreceiveonlinehasbeenfiltered–personalized–byalgorithmstodeliveronlybespokemessages;onesthatreinforcefamiliarorsympatheticworldviews(Cadwalladr,2017;GagainJr,2016;Pariser,2012;Pasquale,2015;Sunstein,2017).Separatedfromopin-ionswithwhichtheymightdisagree,moreandmorecitizensandconsumersaresaidtoliveinaninsulatedworld;albeitoneofinformationplenty.Buttheaccesstheyenjoydoesnotdisposethemtounderstandingortolerance;stilllessacosmopolitanoutlook.Inarecentforaymuchinthisvein,CassSunsteincataloguesthewaysinwhichthenormsofbrokeredconflictandthepoliticsofaccommodationinapluralistdemocracyare(hesays)beingviolatedintheonlineworld.Hearguesthat,insteadoftoleranceandmutualcomprehension,socialmediapromotesmutualincomprehension,socialfragmentationandintoleranceofothers(Pariser,2012;Sunstein2017).Iftrue,howdamagingisthisfordemocracy?Ofacertaintyitchallengesreceivedwisdomthatindependent,authoritativesourcescan,andperhapsshould,setthetemperofdebateandcuratethepoliticalagenda;assumptionsimplicitinthefoundingmythsofdemocraticelitism.Butsuchachangestillmightbeseenasdemocratizinginitsownrightor,morecontentiously,popularizing,andthisincludesformsoflocalism.Regardlessofintent,theemergenceof‘thin’networksandproteanidentitiessaidtobecharacteristicoftheinteractiveWebisdiscommodingforanypoliticsconfiguredbynotionsofboundedspace,ontologicalthickness,andmaybearegardfortruthwhenmakingclaimspublicly.Andinthecaseofthelatter,theagencyofdifferentaudienceshastobeweighedinanyassessmentofinfluence.Noseriousresearchon‘audiences’thesedays,startsfromtheassumptionthattheyaremererecipientsofrhetoric,andeasilygulled(Liebes&Curran,2016).Unliketheoldhypodermicmodelofmediainfluence,theideaofthe‘audience’hasmorphedintooneofparticipantsinincreasinglybespokenetworks;agents,ratherthanpassiveconsumersofcontent.Moffitt(2014)pointstotheperformativecharacterofpopulism;includinghowithas‘per-formed’,andthustriggered,thecrisisofcontemporarypoliticsforwhichitisusuallyslatedasBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
235226Handbookofcultureandglocalizationanangryresponse.Heexplainshowtheperformanceofcrisisenablespopulistactorstopit‘thepeople’,andthelocalimaginary,againstallmannerof‘other’.Bycontrollingthescriptinthisway,populistleadersareabletosimplifytheterrainofpoliticaldebateandadvocateheadlinesolutionsandthevirtuesofstrongleadership.Wellandgood;thatseemsentirelyplausible.However,anumberofquestionsintrude.First,presumablyallpoliticalinterestsemploysocialconstructionismaspartofascript-buildingexercisewhennarratingaparticularversionofreality.Whysingleoutpopulisminthisregard?Andwhyarerivalconstructionsoftenlesssuccessful?Second,isperformingacrisisinthesenseofconjuringadiscourseaboutit,asuf-ficientoronlyanecessarycomponentofpopulistsuccesswithselectedaudiences?Third,andrelated,howmuchshould‘experiencing’orperceivingacrisisonthepartofaudiencesalsocountintheequationofpopulistsuccessorfailure?InMoffitt’saccount,thereisthesensethattheaudienceforperformanceislargelytabularasa,innocentofpresumptionandinactiveuntilmobilized.Butcanthatalwaysbethecase?Allthatsaid,hisisanuancedandinsightfulaccountofhowpopulism‘propagates’crisis.Asheconcludes,byaddressingthe‘performa-tiverepertoires,practicesofmediationandroleofspectacle...wearebetterequippedtounder-standthephenomenoninthefuture,andtodiscernmoreclearlyitsincreasinglyimportantpositioninthecontemporarypoliticallandscape’(Moffitt,2014,p.211).Theideaofalgorithmicpopulismisalsointriguinginthisregard,notjustbecauseitsug-gestsacomputationalagencyonlypartlyreliantonhumanactors,andthusonperformance,butbecauseitchimeswithotherfeaturesofcontemporarypoliticsthathavecontributedtoamoredisaggregatedandsometimefebrileclimateofexchangeanddebate.Thesetrendsarequickenedbytheimplied‘logic’ofconnectiveactionspokenofbystudentsofinternetpolitics(Bennett&Segerberg,2012;Margettsetal.,2016).Butthenotionofaconnective‘logic’atworkdoesnotassumeakindofmedia-orinternet-centrism.Rather,mobilizationisonlypossiblewhentheassumedgivensofpoliticalidentificationarealreadyindisrepair.Atsuchapass,thesocialaffordancessuppliedbywhatBarryWellmancalls‘networkedindivid-ualism’contributetoashiftingofculturalboundaries,awayfrom‘thick’solidariestoanewtropeforsociety(Wellman&Haythornthwaite,2002).Ifthisislocalorglocal,ratherthanjustatomized,itmaystillseemaworldawayfromthemorevisceral,orjust‘thicker’,alignmentsusuallyassociatedwithnotionssuchas‘local’,or‘community’.Networkedindividualismhasinternetuseinapositivefeedbackloopwiththeshiftfrom‘solidary,local,hierarchicalgroupsandtowardsfragmented,partial,heavily-communicatingsocialnetworks’(Wellmanetal.,2003).Forpopulists,thislookslikeaparadox,whereinevocationoftheworldtheyhavelostiscarriedthroughtheverymediathathavebeendissolvingthepsychologicalboundariesofthelocalimaginary,oreroding‘traditionalplaceswithinaculture’,butitmaynotbeexperiencedassuch(Rabinow,1993,p.67).Onefinalpoint:onthematterofthebalanceoftruthandliesinpoliticaldiscourses,whatpeopleacceptastruthdependsprettymuchonwhoseauthoritytheyarewillingtotrust.Inaclimatewheretrustisalreadydamagedso,inevitably,areconceptionsoftruthandfalsity(Malik,2020).Wemaynotlikeit,butitisundeniablyso.Andthereisalwaysthemoreupliftingpossibilitythatnetworkedindividualismmaynotimplyanykindofsocialpathology;amodaldeconstructionoftheinclusive‘we’,becauseinternetgatheringscanbeatropeforcollectiveconsciousnesswhentheymanifestasvirtualgatheringswhereindividualsmusterandyetstillperformeverydayactsofsubjectivitysuchas‘tweeting’or‘following’.Butcancollectiveconsciousnesssubsistintechnologicalandculturalenvironmentsthatprivilegetheexpressionofpersonalnarrativesandvernacularexpe-rience?Critically,inBarryWellman’scorpus,socialmediaisnotanotherworld,alienandBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
236Digitalglocalization227damagingtotheuser’severydaylife,butanopportunitytopromotenewformsofindividualityandsocialityintheincreasinglyblendedexistenceoftheinternetuser.Couchingthematterinthiswaytendstothebenign,especiallywhensetagainstthecoarserrealityofDonaldTrump’sattemptstopersuadevotersonline,wheremeaningissocasuallysetadriftfromfact.Butthewiderintimationofseminalchangeisclear.AndherewecandefertoIcoMaly(2019),whosaysthatpopulismintheageofdigitalizationhasfundamentallychangedpoliticaldiscoursesanditself.Thus,[c]itizensandhumanandnon-humanactivistsallco-constructthemessageofthepopulistandtheresistancetoit.Algorithmicactivismhasbecomeakeyingredientintheconstructionofthe‘voiceofthepeople’.Activistsfororagainst‘populists’areengagedinanendlessalgorithmicallyshapedbattletoco-constructthe‘voiceofthepeople’.Itisnotsomuchthatpopulistsaretechnicallymoreadroitthantheirpoliticalrivals,asthat,indigitalguise,populismismoreatonewiththeculturalandtechnologicalcurrentsabroadinthisperiodoftransformation.AccordingtoMaly,populismisa‘digitallymediatedcommu-nicativerelationbetweendifferenthumanandnon-humanalgorithmicactors’(Maly,2019;Gerbaudo,2016).Inthisdigitallymediatizedworld,socialmediaenablesleadersandpoliti-cianstocuratetheirownvoiceandmessage,althoughonlywithintheformatsofthemediumtheyadopt(Axford,2001,2018).Asnoted,thesemediaofferspecificaffordancesthroughwhichtheynotonlyshapethediscourse,‘butplayapartintheconstructionordestruction,aswellasthedistributionofthepopulistvoice’(Maly,2019;Mazzoleni&Bracciale,2018).Theproblemforpopulistleaders,evensuccessfulones,iswhattodowithpubliccynicismoncetheyharnessit;howtopickuptheemotionalslackandfashionasustainableplatformthatgoesbeyondlocalistandnationalistrhetoric,anti-governmentalism,thinlydisguisedracism,andfundamentalistanthems.Onlywhenthatquestionisanswered,canweassesswhetherthecurrentspateofpopulismsisthewaveofthefuture,yesterday’sfad,orhistory’s‘emptysignifier’parexcellence.TheDigitalizationandGlocalizationofSportTelevisionwas,andtosomeextentremains,theprimarymediumofconsumptionforsportandentertainment.Butbythe1980s,the‘primitivemodeofrepresentation’thatUmbertoEcoplay-fullylabelled‘paleo-television’,wasgivingwaytothemoretechnicallyinnovativeandadroit,heavilymarketedandaudience-centredstyleofrepresentationthathecalled‘neo-television’(Eco,1983,p.19).In2008,areportfromTheEconomistnewspapernotedthatthereweremoreandmoreopportunitiesforpeopletofollowsportsoncomputersandsmartphones,notleastviathethenin-vogueBlackberry(TheEconomist,2008;seealsoNationMasterSports,2010),andtoaugmentthatexperiencethroughvarioussocialmedia.Inthesameyear,SkyMobileTVwasalreadyavailableasanapponAppleiPhone,iPodTouchandiPad,whilevideo-streamingsitessuchastheBBC’siPlayer,Hulu,YouTubeandFacebookwereallrecordingsignificantgrowthinthenumbersofvideoswatched;ofcourse,notallforsport.Thesametrendwasobservedforsportsavailableonmobilephones(forexample,WorldTVPC.com).Blogstooproliferated,exemplifiedbycricket’sLeft-ArmChinaman,KingCricketandLineandLength.OnthethenrelativelynewsocialphenomenonofTwitter,sportshashtagsstartedtoappear.Theseplatformsbegantofacilitateglobalconversationsamongfans(see,forexample,@cricketNDTV).BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
237228HandbookofcultureandglocalizationByandlarge,thesetrendshavesincebeenintensifiedduetotheadmittedlystillpatchyglobal‘switchover’fromanaloguetodigitaltelevision(DTV)andthegrowingmodalityof‘download’and‘streaming’culturesinmanypartsoftheworld.Forexample,theconsumptionofNetflixentertainmentserviceshasboomed(boostedbythelockdownmentalityimposedduringtheCOVID-19pandemic),alongwithservicesbyproviderssuchasAmazonPrime,HuluandHBO.Oflate,theappealofpodcastsasamediumfortheconsumptionofnews,criticalcommentaryandlifestyleguidancehasgoneintooverdrive,promotingcontentthatismuchmorevariedthanthefareofferedbytheBigTechcompanies.Insports,live-streamingservicesprovidedbyApple,Amazon,Netflix,FacebookandESPNhaveusurpedthepriv-ilegedmarketpositionoccupiedbytraditionalbroadcasters.Butthisisadynamicmilieu,andevennewerplayershavestartedtopopulatethestage.Forexample,DAZN(DaZone)launchedin2016,startingoffinJapan,Germany,AustriaandSwitzerland,beforeaddingItaly,CanadaandtheUStoitsroster,transmittingmorethan20millionhoursoflivecontentfrom300sportscompetitions.Theserviceineachcountrydiffersaccordingtolocalprefer-encesandtherightsthatitcanacquire.InItaly,thefocusisonSerieAfootball,whereasintheUSitiswhatForbesMagazine(8August2018)called‘combatsports’.In2018,DAZNreacheda$1billionagreementwithMatchroomBoxingtobroadcastatleast32showsintheUS.Thisisdigitalglocalizationofsorts,albeitdrivenpragmatically,byopportunityandthepromiseofaccesstolocalmarkets,ratherthanbysomeprescriptionforaglocalizedworld.Inasimilarcommercialvein,NikemountedaglocalizedcampaigninIndiabasedaroundaTVandYouTubeadvertisementaimedattheempowermentofwomen,amotifmuchinevidenceoflate.Calledthe‘DaDaDing’ad,afterthemusicthataccompaniedit,themessagewasaglocalblendofstrategic(global)intentandsensitivitytolocalconditions,includingthepowerfulnarrativeoffemaleempowermentasachallengetothetyrannyofgendernorms,mostobviouslyinsport.Anditisimportanttounderlinefurthertheextenttowhichcoverageofandaccesstosportshasoutstrippedtheageofpaleotelevisionandcreatednewmedia-tropicenvironmentsfortheenjoymentofgames.Digitalizationpermitsinteractiveaudienceparticipation.ThisisaffordedviaDTV,butincreasinglybywayofintegratednetworkboxesandserversthatarenowabletodistributevideoandinternetservicesthroughoutthehome.Theproliferationofmobiledevicesintheshapeofsmartphonesandtabletsfurtherenhancesconsumerfreedom.Inthistechnicalmilieu,withtheemphasisonbespokeand‘ondemand’consumption,theglobalizationofsportasentertainmentcommodityhasproceededapace.Marketsforsportingproductsarebecomingevermoreglobal,asWesternbusinessesandpeakworldsportsassociationstargetthenewlyaffluentindevelopingcountries.Asearlyas2010,YouTubeannounceditsfirstbigsportingdealtobroadcastIndianPremierLeague(IPL)cricketmatchesliveintheUK,adealwhichbroughtintoquestionthevalueofBritishTVbroadcastrights(Sweney,2010)andwasanotherpalpableincrementintheemergenceofapost-televisionculturaleconomy.Significantly,thedealinvolvedeverycountryoutsidetheUS,andthetwo-yearcontractgavetheGoogle-ownedYouTubetheexclusiverightstostreamIPLmatchesonline,withthetwocompaniessharingrevenuefromsponsorshipandadvertising.IntheUK,broadcastrightshadbeenheldbytheSetantaSportsChannel,which,inturn,wassoldtoESPNin2009.WhilemuchofthissmackedofthefurtherGoogle-izationofworldculture,andmightevenlooklikeavariantofwhatGeorgeRitzer(2012)disparagesas‘grobalization’,anumberofdevelopingeconomies–notablyIndiaforcricket–havecreatedstrongsportsbusinessesoftheirown.Moreover,thetaleofinternationalcricketanditsemergenceasaglobalandglob-BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
238Digitalglocalization229allymarketedsporthasnotfollowedthepathofothertransnationalsportsandsportingevents,whicharedominatedbydevelopedcountries.Thischangecanbeseenasaparadigmshiftfortheprospectiveshapeandbalanceofinterestsinthepost-Westernglobaleconomy(Arrighi,2007;Gupta,2004;Rumford&Wagg,2010).Morethananyothersport,cricketisagameinwhichnon-Westerncountriesaremajorplayers;sometimesonthefield.Instead,asArvindGuptanoted18yearsago,theirdominationliesinshapingtheeconomicsandpoliticsofthegameandexpandingitsculturalreach(Gupta,2004).Whileatypicalofinternationalsportingeneral,thisisnotasaberrantasitmightappear,andcouldbemoreintunewitheconomictrendsinaglocalizedworld,wheretheriseofChinaandIndiaaseconomicpowersmaynotintimateanothershiftinhegemonyandanewhegemoniccycle,butadifferentkindof‘worldmarket’ormulti-polaritycharacterizedbygreaterlevelsofequalityamongglobalregions(Arrighi,2007;Axford,2013).Ofcourse,thisdynamicisstillbeingplayedout.Whiletheseinstancesoflocalpowershouldnotbeinterpretedasasimpleinversionofthedomination–resistancemotifofglobalization,theydostandasevidenceoftheglocalcastofbothprocessesandoutcomes.Astothis,asRichardGiulianotti(2016,p.129)says,‘(g)localizationprocessesarecentraltothemakingofglobalsport,andglobalsportisitselfakeydriverofprocessesofglobalization’.AndasHabibulKhondkerandRolandRobertson(2018,n.p.)relate,the‘intersectionofglobaleconomicforcesandthelocalculturethatcelebratescrickethascreatedaglocalspaceforitsperformance’.Shiftsintheworldbalanceofpowerincricketasamarketableandmediatizedcommodityhaveoccurredbecauseofprocesseswhichareproperlyunderstoodasaformofglocalization.Thesearetheriseoftransnationalcommunitiesandnetworks,includingdiasporas,whichcansupportteamsacrossfrontiers,thespreadoftechnologythatprovidesreal-timecoverageofthesport,andthedeclineofthesportinitshomeland–England–therebyallowingalternativecentresofpowertoemerge(Ghosh,2005).Critically,Twenty20cricket,borninEnglandin2003asamarketingploytorevivetheflaggingdomesticcountygame,nowowesitsappealtoitsenthusiastictake-upbySouth-AsianaudiencesfollowingthefirstWorldTwenty20CupinSouthAfricain2007.Indeed,thesuccessofthebusinessmodelstillreliesonthemillionsofmainlyIndiantelevisionviewerswhowatchtheIPLfranchisesdobattle.AdealforanewTwenty20competitionannouncedintheUKintheearlyspringof2017wasafurtheriterationoftheattempttoglamorizethesportandextenditsappeal.Insuchendeavour,thebusinessstrategiesofthecultureandcommunicationindustriesarevitalinspreadingtheglobalculturalscriptofthemarket(Lash&Urry,1994).Theforceoftheseobservationsisunassailable,anditwouldbeeasythentodrawinferencesaboutthekindofculturalconsequencesthattheglobalizationandmediatizationofcricketmightentail.Butunlikeotherculturalcommoditiespackagedasglobalbrands,whichmanycommentatorsassumemustemptythemoflocalcontent,meaningandstatus,cricketassportandbranddoesnotconform(Ritzer,2004).WhileTwenty20cricketmaybeabusinessformulaoffensivetothesensibilitiesofmanycricketpurists,itscommercialsuccess–includ-ingitsabilitytoattractcelebrityplayersfromaroundtheworldtothevariousIndianfranchises–nowmarksIndiaastheworldcricketingsuperpower.AsAustralianhistorianofcricketGideonHaighonceremarked,‘Itisnolongercorrecttospeakofthe“globalisation”ofcricket,wefacethe“Indianisation”ofcricket,wherenothingIndiaresistswilloccur,andeverythingitapprovesofwillprevail’(Haigh,2010,p.6).Italsostandsasaparadigmforthecultureofspeed–fastcricketdeliveredtodispersedaudiencesinrealtimebyeverfastermedia–andBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
239230Handbookofcultureandglocalizationhowthisappealstotheaestheticsensibilitiesofaudiencesforwhomchoice,immediacyandspectaclearekeyculturalrequisitesandconsumption‘must-haves’.InthematterofTwenty20cricket,theenterprisemustbeseenasavehicletailoredforconsumptionbyamediatizedandincreasinglybrandedglobalbusiness.Thisisabusinessthatfreesconsumersfromtheperceivedtrammelsoflimitedchoice,culturalnostalgia(sincetheteamsaremadeupofmobilesportingcosmopolitansorculturalentrepreneurs)and,insomerespects,nationalidiosyncrasies,toachieveanearlyperfectmodelofeffectivedemand.Inotherwords,thesporttravelsasculturallylight.Overthepastcoupleofdecades,globalmarketsforsportmoregenerallyhaveemerged,and,inthesemarkets,newmediahaveplayedaseminalroleinthecommodificationandaestheticizationofsport,throughmarketing,branding,digitalinnovationandeverhigherproductionvalues.Suchdevelopmentshavetobeseenasaglobalphenomenon,butcontinuetobeinflectedbylocalconstraintsintheguiseofpatternsofstate(de)regulationandthetemperoflocal‘culturalgovernance’(Horne,2015).Twenty20isanexemplarofculturalchangeinasportthathasrunthegamutfromcolonialsymbolwitharcaneand,formany,un-teachable,rules,toaspectacleaimedatlayaudiencesandglobalmarkets.Thisshifthasinvolvedchangestoitsgoverninglawsandregulations,itsuseoftechnologicaladvancesincommunication,socialmediasavvyandthechangingmake-upandcharacterofitsfansandaudiences.AsRogerCalloissays,itisclearthatthegamesthatculturesplayand,critically,howtheyplaythem,reflecttheculturesthemselvesandhowtheyarerepresentedthroughdifferentmedia(Callois,1961;Orgad,2012).Atvar-iancewithitsownhistory,structureandculture,inthepasttwodecadescrickethasrapidlyadaptedtotechnologicaladvancesandeconomicexigenciesand,intheshapeofTwenty20,hasbecomeasymboloftheglocal,connectedandoftencosmopolitanculturesthatfollowthegame.CONCLUSIONIhavediscussedtwosalientandlivelyissue-areasthatdemonstratetheimbricationofdigitaltechnologyandsocial,economicandpoliticallifeinallitsrichness.Overall,theyaffordinsightintothedirectandimpliedinfluenceofubiquitouscomputingontheconstructionofsociallifeingeneralandontheconstitutionandsubsistenceofglocalitiesinparticular.Whiletheyaddressquitedifferenttypesofglocalization,eachdrawsattentiontoimmanentcharacteristicsoftheprocess.Twokeyfeaturesofsuchconstitutionareobserved.First,thecentralityofcoded(digitalized)informationinalmosteveryfacetoflife;suchthateverydaythingsbecomethecarriersofdigitalcodes,relaysincomplexnetworksandnodesinthetransmissionofinformation.Second,thefactthat,becauseofdigitaltechnology,wearenowenwrappedinnewmodesofrepresentingandexperiencingtheworldthatarenotrestrictedbytimeorplace,butwhich,crucially,neednoteliminatesuchdeterminations,andmayallowtheirreconfiguration.Glocalization–thecreationofglocalities–playsoutadialecticofsamenessanddifference.Thisisobviouslyamatterofconnection,butalsoofconsciousness,whereinactorsembraceorrejecttheworld;orelsemuddlethroughtowardaccommodation.Glocalizationmaybethedefaultoutcomeoflocal–globalengagement,butworld-makingpracticesofthiskindarecomplexandoftenmessy.Intheireverydayentanglementswitheachotherandwithcommunicationtechnologies,agentsusethelatterasresourcesthatnourishandenableindividualandcollectiverepertoiresofpossibilityandpersonaeonline.ThisisBarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
240Digitalglocalization231notananthemtocyber-determinismbutdoeshavethedistinctadvantageofnotfetishizingrelationshipsbetweenwhatisotherwiseeasilydepictedasan‘integratedandstableglobalsystem’andits‘derivativeandlocalrecipients’,wherethelatterare,bydefinition,passiveandunreflexiveusersandvictimsofinformationtechnology(Hand&Sandywell,2002,p.213).Theworld-makingpracticesofglocalizationhaveapowerfulemergentqualityseenintheimbricationoflocalandglobal,throughtheinteractionofvariousmediascapesandcontingentlocalactors;theserunthewholegamutofaccommodationandresistanceseeninglocaliza-tion’scoreattributes–vernacularization,indigenizationandsyncretism.NOTES1.Theideaofworld-makingpracticeismeanttoconveythecomplex,andoftencontingent,inter-playbetweenagentsandstructuresinprocessesofglobalizationtoeffectmutualconstitution.Forexample,inthischapter,itdetailsthewaysinwhichsubjectsuseandadaptcommunicationtechnologiestosuitpersonalandlocalpurposes.Emergentglobality:Emergence,astheStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophymuses,is‘anotoriousphilosophicaltermofart’(2002),butonethatdoesserviceherebecauseitsyncswithandinformsthesenseofaworldofincreasinglycomplexrelationalities;oneinwhichnovelcommunicativeformsandpracticescontinuetoappear,notcon-stitutedby,orparasiticupon,olderstructuresandrelations.2.Glocalitydenotestheconditionofbeingglocal.Itisdistinguishablefromglocalization,whichisaprocess,andglocalism,whichisanideology.3.The‘logicofconnectiveaction’ascoinedbyLanceBennettandAlexandraSegerbergintheirreworkingofMancurOlson’sseminalthesisontherulesgoverningpoliticalmobilisation,activismandmembership.Theserulesidentifiedthelogicofcollectiveaction(Bennett&Segerberg,2012;Olson,1965).Inparticular,BennettandSegerberg’saccountoftheorganization-lessqualitiesofinternetactivismseen,forexample,intheOccupymovement,LosIndignados,andacrossNorthAfricaandtheMiddleEastinrecentyears,highlightstheprospectsforsolidarityand(political)communityawayfrom,ornotpredicatedon,receivedideasaboutsocietyandcommunityasstableformsoforganization.REFERENCESAppadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsinGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Appadurai,A.(2006),FearofSmallNumbers:AnEssayontheGeographyofAnger,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Arrighi,G.(2007),AdamSmithinBeijing:LineagesoftheTwenty-FirstCentury,London:Verso.Axford,B.andR.Huggins(1997),‘Anti-PoliticsortheTriumphofPostmodernPopulisminPromotionalCultures?’,Javnost,IV(3),5–27.Axford,B.(2013),TheoriesofGlobalization,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Axford,B.(2018),TheWorld-MakingPowerofNewMedia:MereConnection?,Abingdon,UK:Routledge.Axford,B.(2020),PostmodernPopulismandtheNewGlobalization,London:SagePublications.Axford,B.(2001),‘TheTransformationofPoliticsorAnti-Politics?’,inB.AxfordandR.Huggins(eds),NewMediaandPolitics,London:Sage,pp.1–30.Balandier,G.(1992),LePouviorSurScenes,Paris,France:Ballard.Baldwin,R.(2016),TheGreatConvergence:InformationTechnologyandtheNewGlobalization,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Baudrillard,J.(1975),TheMirrorofProduction,StLouis,MO:TelosPress.Baudrillard,J.(1983),Simulations,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
241232HandbookofcultureandglocalizationBenkler,Y.(2006),TheWealthofNetworks,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Bennett,L.andA.Segerberg(2012),TheLogicofConnectiveAction:DigitalMediaandthePersonalizationofContentiousPolitics,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Bimber,B.andR.Davis(2003),CampaigningOnline:TheInternetinU.S.Elections,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.boyd,d.(2005),‘WhyWeb2.0Matters:PreparingforGlocalization’,Apophenia:MakingConnectionsWhereNonePreviouslyExisted,accessed1September2016atwww.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2005/09/05/why_web20_matte.htm.Cadwalladr,C.(2017),‘RobertMercer:TheBigDataMillionaireWagingWaronMainstreamMedia’,TheObserver,accessed26February2017athttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage.Callois,R.(1961),Man,PlayandGames,Chicago,IL:UniversityofIllinoisPress.Castells,M.(1996),TheRiseoftheNetworkSociety,theInformationAge:Economy,SocietyandCultureVol.I,Cambridge,MAandOxford,UK:Blackwell.Castells.M.(2012),NetworksofOutrageandHope,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Chadwick,A.andP.Howard(eds)(2009),TheHandbookofInternetPolitics,London,UK:Routledge.Couldry,N.andA.Hepp(2013),‘ConceptualizingMediatization:Contexts,Traditions,Arguments’,CommunicationTheory,23,191–202.Deleuze,G.andF.Guattari(1984),Anti-Oedipus:CapitalismandSchizophrenia,NewYork,NY:AthlonePress.Eatwell,R.andM.Goodwin(2018),NationalPopulism:TheRevoltAgainstLiberalDemocracy,London:Pelican.Eco,U.(1983),TheIllusionofTransparency(trans.),Milan:Bompiani.ForbesMagazine(2018),‘FieldofStreams:HowBigData,CloudandConnectivityFuelsDAZN’sGlobalExpansion’,8August2018.Foucault,M.(1977),DisciplineandPunish,London,UK:AllenLane.Friedman,J.(2018),‘ANoteonPopulismandtheGlobalSystemicCrisis’,EconomicAnthropology,accessed14July2019athttps://doi.org/10.1002/sea2.12108GagainJr,J.R.(2016),‘Special:SocialMediaasNews’,DelRayVibepodcast,accessed10March2017athttps://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/del-ray-vibe/id1060942457.Gerbaudo,P.(2016),‘RousingtheFacebookCrowd:DigitalEnthusiasmandEmotionalContagioninthe2011ProtestsinEgyptandSpain’,InternationalJournalofCommunication,10(1),254–73.Ghosh,M.(2005),‘Television,NationalismandIndianCricketintheEraofGlobalMedia’,JournaloftheMovingImage,accessed9October2010athttps://jmionline.org/article/television_nationalism_and_indian_cricekt_in_the_era_of_global_media.Giulianotti,R.(2016),‘GlocalizationandGlobalSport’,inR.RobertsonandD.Buhari-Gulmez(eds),GlobalCulture:ConsciousnessandConnectivity,Kent,UK:Ashgate,pp127–143.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2006),‘FormsofGlocalization:GlobalizationandtheMigrationStrategiesofScottishFootballFansinNorthAmerica’,InternationalSociology,21(2),17–98.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2009),GlobalizationandFootball,London:SagePublications.Globalizations(SpecialIssue)(2007),BordersandNetworksintheGlobalSystem,4(3).Gupta,A.(2004),‘TheGlobalizationofCricket:TheRiseoftheNon-West’,InternationalJournaloftheHistoryofSport,21(2),256–76.Haigh,G.(2010),‘WhyClubCricketIsNationalismbyAnotherName’,Cricinfo,15February,accessed5March2010atwww.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/447867.html.Hand,M.andB.Sandywell(2002),‘E-TopiaasCosmopolisorCitadel:OntheDemocratizingandDe-democratizingLogicsoftheInternet,or,TowardsaCritiqueoftheNewTechnologicalFetishism’,Theory,CultureandSociety,19(1–2),197–225.Hepp,A.(2015),TransculturalCommunication,NewYork:JohnWileyandSons.Hjarvard,S.(2008),‘TheMediatizationofReligion:ATheoryoftheMediaasAgentsofReligiousChange’,NorthernLights,6(1),9–26.Horne,J.(2015),‘SportsMega-Events–ThreeSitesofPoliticalContestation’,SportinSociety,20(3),328–40.Hulme,A.(2015),OntheCommodityTrail:TheJourneyofaBargainStoreProduct,London,UK:Bloomsbury.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
242Digitalglocalization233Kearney,M.(1995),‘TheLocalandtheGlobal:TheAnthropologyofGlobalization’,AnnualReviewofAnthropology,24,547–65.Khondker,H.(2004),‘GlocalizationasGlobalization:EvolutionofaSociologicalConcept’,Bangladeshe-JournalofSociology,1(2),1–9.Khondker,H.(2019),‘Glocalization’,inM.Juergensmeyer,M.B.StegerandS.Sassen(eds),TheOxfordHandbookofGlobalStudies,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.93–113.Khondker,HandR.Robertson(2018),‘Glocalization,ConsumptionandCricket:TheIndianPremierLeague’,JournalofConsumerCulture,18(2),279–97.Kraidy,M.M.(2005),Hybridity,ortheCulturalLogicofGlobalization,Philadelphia,PA:TempleUniversityPress.Lash,S.andJ.Urry(1994),EconomiesofSignsandSpace,London,UK:SagePublications.Latour,B.(2016),DowntoEarth:PoliticsintheNewClimateRegime,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Laclau,E.(2005),OnPopulistReason,London,UK:Verso.Levitt,P.(2016),‘GlobalCultureinMotion’,inR.RobertsonandD.Buhari-Gulmez(eds),GlobalCulture:ConsciousnessandConnectivity,Kent,UK:Ashgate,pp.143–61.Lewis,T.(2019),‘DigitalConnectivity’,inM.Juergensmeyer,S.SassenandM.B.Steger(eds),TheOxfordHandbookofGlobalStudies,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.562–77.Liebes,T.andJ.Curran(eds)(2016),Media,RitualandIdentity,London,UK:Routledge.Malik,K.(2020),‘InaPolarisedWorld,EvenCheckingFactsonTwitterbecomesPoliticized’,TheGuardian,31May,accessed1June2020athttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/31/in-a-polarised-world-even-checking-facts-on-twitter-becomes-politicised.Maly,I.(2019),‘AlgorithmicPopulismandAlgorithmicActivism’,DiggitMagazine,26November.Margetts,H.,John,P.,Scott,H.&T.Yasseri(2016),PoliticalTurbulence:HowMediaShapeSocialAction,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Mazzoleni,GandR.Bracciale.(2018),‘SociallyMediatedPopulism:TheCommunicativeStrategiesofPoliticalLeadersonFacebook’,HumanitiesandSocialSciencesCommunications,accessed24April2020athttps://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0104-x.Menon,D.(2020),‘WalkingonWater:GlobalizationandHistory’,GlobalPerspectives,1(1),accessed19March2020athttps://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2020.12176.Moffitt,B.(2014),‘HowtoPerformaCrisis:AModelforUnderstandingtheKeyRoleofCrisisinContemporaryPopulism’,GovernmentandOpposition,accessed24March2020athttps://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2014.13.Morozov,E.(2011),TheNetDelusion:TheDarkSideofInternetFreedom,Toronto,ON:PublicAffairs.Mudde,C.(2004),‘ThePopulistZeitgeist’,GovernmentandOpposition,39(4),541–63.Nabers,D.(2016),‘Crisisasdislocationinglobalpolitics’,Politics,August19,accessed19May2020athttps://doi.org/10.1177/0263395716661341.NationMasterSports(2010),SportsStatistics,accessed3March2020,atwww.NationMaster.com.NederveenPieterse,J.(2003),GlobalizationandCulture:GlobalMélange,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Olson,M.(1965),TheLogicofCollectiveAction:PublicGoodsandtheTheoryofGroups,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Orgad,S.(2012),MediaRepresentationandtheGlobalImagination,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Pariser,E.(2012),TheFilterBubble:WhattheInternetisHidingfromYou,NewYork,NYandLondon,UK:Penguin.Pasquale,F.(2015),TheBlackBoxSociety:TheSecretAlgorithmsThatControlMoneyandInformation,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Phipps,P.(2009),‘Globalization,IndigeneityandPerformingCulture’,Local-Global:Identity,Security,Community,6,28–48.Rabinow,P.(1993),‘ACriticalCuriosity:ReflectionsonHypermodernPlace’,paperpresentedattheIVthAnnualConferenceoftheAssociationofSocialAnthropology,Oxford,UK,10-12June.Raz,A.E.(1999),‘GlocalizationandSymbolicInteractionism’,StudiesinSymbolicInteractionism,22,3–16.Ritzer,G.(2004),TheGlobalizationofNothing,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.Ritzer,G.(2012),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:SagePublications.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
243234HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRobertson,R.(2018),‘Glocalization’,inH.Callan(ed.),TheInternationalEncyclopediaofAnthropology,London,UK:Wiley.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,Abingdon,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2018),‘RecoveringtheLocal:FromGlocalizationtoLocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–17,accessed11October2018athttps://doi.org/10.1177/0011392118812933.Rumford,C.andS.Wagg(eds)(2010),CricketandGlobalization,Newcastle,UK:CambridgeScholarsPublishing.Sandywell,B.(2011),ADictionaryofVisualDiscourse,Abingdon,UK:Routledge.Snow,D.A.andR.D.Benford(1992),‘Ideology,FrameResonanceandParticipantMobilization’,InternationalSocialMovementResearch,1,197–217.Steger,M.B.(2019),‘Globalization3.0:Wheredoesitgofromhere?’,NICWorkshoponGlobalTrends,13December2019,WashingtonDC:DepartmentofState.Steger,M.B.andP.James(2019),GlobalizationMatters:EngagingtheGlobalinUnsettledTime,Cambridge,MA:CambridgeUniversityPress.Sunstein,C.(2017),HashtagRepublic,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Sweney,M.(2010),‘YouTubeConfirmsWorldwideDealforLiveIndianPremierLeagueCricket’,TheGuardian,20January.TheEconomist(2008),‘Fun,GamesandMoney:ASpecialReportontheSportsBusiness’,2August.Urry,J.(2003),GlobalComplexity,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Vattimo,G.(1992),TheTransparentSociety,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Waisbord,S.(2013),‘AMetatheoryofMediatizationandGlobalization’,JournalofMulticulturalDiscourses,8(3),182–9.Wellman,B.andC.Haythornthwaite(eds)(2002),TheInternetinEverydayLife,Oxford,UK:Blackwell.Wellman,B.,Quan-Hasse,A.,Chen,W.,Hampton,H.,DiasdeIsla,I.,andK.Miyata(2003),‘TheSocialAffordancesoftheInternetforNetworkedIndividualism’,JournalofComputerMediatedCommunication,8(3),accessed4August2011athttp://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue3/wellman.html.Žižek,S.(1998),‘HysteriaandCyberspace’,Telepolis,July,accessed23November2020athttp://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/2/2492/1.html.BarrieAxford-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:35AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
24415.Glocalizingculturesandorganizations:ahumanistic,complexandmultiparadigmaticmodelFabrizioMaimoneINTRODUCTIONGlobalizationisoneofthemorecontroversialanddebatedconceptsofthisepoch.AccordingtoGovindarajanandGupta(2001,p.4),globalizationdescribesthe‘growingeconomicinter-dependenceamongcountries,asreflectedintheincreasedcross-borderflowofthreetypesofentities:goodsandservices,capital,andknowhow’.Thisconceptualchapterexplorestherela-tionbetweenglobalizationandcultureandadoptstheperspectiveofglocalization(Robertson,1995).Culturemaybedefinedingeneraltermsas:Asetofbasicassumptions,values,beliefs,languages(verbal,visualandbody),ideologies,modelsofthought,decisionandaction,symbols,myths,legends,rituals,affectiveandbehaviouralpatterns,know-how,socialpracticesandartefacts(materialanddigital)thataresharedbyasocialgroup,sociallyconstructed(Berger&Luckmann,1991)andtransmitted.(Maimone,2017a,p.18)Heldetal.(1999)andHeldandMcGrew(2002)provideanoverviewondifferenttheoreticalperspectivesonglobalization.Thetheoryofglobalizationhasbeenquestionedbyanumberofauthorswhoconsidertheterm‘globalization’assomekindofideologicalconstructandprefertousetheterm‘interna-tionalizationprocesses’(O’Rourke&Williamson,1999;Osterhammel&Petersson,2005).Moreover,theconceptofglobalizationhasbeencriticizedbyscholarsarguingthatglobaliza-tionisacomplexprocess,whichdifferssignificantlyfromasimplifiedandidealizedmodelofaspontaneousandbalancedflowofinterconnectedevents,andshouldinsteadbeconsideredastheoutcomeoftheunequaldistributionofpoweramongnationsandoftheconsequenteconomicandculturalhegemonyofcapitalisticnationsthatfavoursglobalstandardizationandhomologation(seeRitzer,1993).HeldandMcGrew(2002),amongothers,arguefortheovercomingofthegreatdividebetweenglobalizationandanti-globalization.Globalizationdoesnotnecessarilymeanstandardization.Globalizationmay,infact,alsofacilitatedifferentiation.McDonald’s,forexample,openedavegetarianfastfoodrestaurantinIndiainordertomeetthespecificalimentaryneedsofHinduandMuslimpeople(BBC,2012),whileNikedesignedaspecialhijabforMuslimwomenengaginginsportsactivities.Moreover,eventhoughglobalizationmayfacilitateculturalconvergenceacrossanumberofsocial,cultural,economic,politicalandtechnicalsystems,thisdoesnotmeanthatculturaldifferencesareerased.ItalianandJapanesepeoplemaysitaroundarestauranttabletogether,cordiallydiscussingItalianandJapanesecooking,butculturaldifferencesbetweenItalianandJapanesepeoplestillremain.Furthermore,culturalglobalizationprocessesshouldbeanalysedbyadoptingacomplexperspectivethatconsiderspowerissues,religion,ideologies,political235FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
245236Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandeconomicstrategiesandinequalities.Globalizationisnotneutralandculturalprocessesarenotonlyrelatedtoculture.Yetitispossibletoarguethatglobalizationisnotonlyaone-wayprocess.Wemayrefertofoodculture,whichisfundamentaltounderstandingsocialcultures(seeLévi-Strauss,1983):JapanesepeopleloveItaliancuisine,butatthesametime,sushiisverypopularamongItalianmiddleclassadultsandteenagers.Globalizationmayfavourhybridization.NederveenPieterse(1994),amongothers,arguesthatglobalizationmayfacilitateculturalhybridization(seealsoRyoo,2009;Wang&Yeh,2005).NederveenPieterse(1994,p.662)agreeswithRoweandSchellingthathybridizationconsistsof“thewaysinwhichformsbecomeseparatedfromexistingpracticesandrecombinewithnewformsinnewpractices”(RoweandSchelling1991:231).Afewexamplesofculturalhybridizationmaybeobservedineverydaylife:Hawaiianpizzawithpineapple,couscousmadewithfish(aSiciliandish),Pilatesandmixedmartialarts(MMA)aretypicalexamplesofculturalhybridization.Hybridizationisnotonlyapatchworkofdifferentculturalobjectsandpracticestakenfromdifferentculturalsystems,itcouldalsoleadtosomethinggenuinelynew(seeStewart,2007),asintheexampleofjazzmusic,bornfromtheunionbetweenAfricanmusicalcultureandAfro-AmericanmusictraditionthathasbeencontaminatedbyEuropeanmusic.Jazzbecamesomethingnew,originalandextraordinary.Therefore,hybridizationmaycontributetoculturalcreationandchange,facilitatingthemixingofdifferentelementsthroughinterculturalinteractionandcommunicationandtheemergenceofnewculturalelements,triggeredbyinterculturalencounters.Moreover,itisnecessarytopointoutthatglobalizationdoesnotaffecteveryplaceinthesamewayatthesametime.Thereissomekindofgeo-social-spatialityofglobalization,atleastforwhatconcernsculturalglobalization.Therefore,globalization,atleastinculturalterms,maybeseenalsoasatrans-localphenomenon.Theconceptof‘trans-local’describesthesetof‘emergentsocialprocessesthatappeartooperatebelow,above,beyond,orbetweenentrenchedgeopoliticalboundaries’(Brenner,1999,p.40).Globalizationthuscontinuouslyproducesandre-producespolitical,socialandorganizationalspaces(p.40).Themostpopularrepresentationofthedynamic,dialecticandcomplexnatureoftheglo-balizationprocesswasprovidedbyRobertson,asociologistwhocontributedtopopularizingtheconceptof‘glocalization’.AccordingtoRobertson:‘Globalizationrelativizesallparticu-larisms,forcingexponentsofspecificbeliefsoridentitiestoconfrontandtorespondtoother,particularisticideas,identitiesandsocialprocessesacrosstheuniversaldomain.Thus,whileuniversalismandparticularismmayappearascategoricalantinomies,theyareinterdependent,fusedtogetherinaglobewidenexus’(1992,p.102).Theauthorproposesananalysisofcon-temporaneousglobalizationbasedonthecontinuousdialecticbetweenthetwocategoriesof‘particular’and‘universal’,forexample,globalandlocal(p.102).Robertsonalsoarguedthat:Theterm‘glocalization’helpstoexplainhowthesymbiosisofthelocalandtheglobaldiffersaccord-ingtoparticularculturalcircumstances(Robertson1995:27).Glocalization(theword)seeminglyoriginatedinJapanesebusinesspractices,butwhenitisappliedtoexplainbroaderculturalprojects,itcanbearguedthat‘theprojectsofglocalization[are]theconstitutivefeaturesofcontemporaryglobalization.(Robertson1995:41)’.(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004,p.549)Indeed,theword‘glocalization’wasborninthecontextofJapanesebusinessandwascon-ceivedtodescribethecustomizationofproductsandservices,inordertomeetlocalrequire-mentsandadapttolocalculture(Shamsuddoha,2000).FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
246Glocalizingculturesandorganizations237Moreover,Roudometof(2016)proposedanewperspectiveonglocalization,basedontheconceptofglocality,whichwillbedescribedinthenextsection.Thistheoreticalpositionformsthebaseoftheframeworkproposedinthischapter.Theanalysishasastrongfocusoninternationalandtransnationalorganizations,andonmultinationalcompanies,astheymayplayacriticalroleinculturalchangeprocessesandmayprovideanextraordinaryfieldofresearchtobetterunderstandthecomplexdynamicsofculturalglocalization.Thischapteraimstoanswerthefollowingresearchquestions:(1)Whatarethekeycomponents(oractors,ortypesorcharacteristics)ofculturalglocalprocesses?(2)Howdotheyinfluenceorganiza-tionalsystemsandviceversa?And(3)Whatarethemainfactorsimpactingthisrelation?Toanswerthethreeresearchquestions,thechapteradoptsamultiparadigmaticandhuman-isticapproach.GLOCALIZATION,GLOCALORGANIZATIONS,GLOCALMANAGEMENTAsRoudometofpointsout:Thewordglocalisaneologism;thatis,itisanewwordconstructedbyfusingglobalandlocal.Thenewtermhasquietlygainedpopularitysince1990,anditsusehasincreasedacrossavarietyofdis-ciplinesandfields.Itiswidelyusedintheliteratureoncross-culturaleconomicmarketing,butithasalsobeenappliedtofieldsvastlyremovedfrombusinessandmanagement.(Roudometof,2016,p.1)Drorietal.(2013)highlightedtheroleplayedbyRobertson(1995)inovercomingthelong-lastingconflictbetweenglobalistsandlocalistsinthefieldofglobalizationstudies,coiningtheconceptofglocalization,whichistheoutcomeoftheinterplaybetweenglobalandlocalprocessesandcouldleadtowardsynergicandconflictualdynamicsandmayexplainstrategies,decisionsandactionsofcontemporarymultinationalcompaniesandtransnationalorganizations.Roudometof(2016)arguedthatitispossibletonotethreedifferentinterpretationsofglocalization:(1)thetheoreticalperspectiveadoptedbyRobertson(1992),basedonmonism.AccordingtoRoudometof(2016,p.392):‘Monismsuggeststhatavarietyofexistingthings(thelocalandtheglocal,inthiscase)canbeexplainedintermsofasinglerealityorsubstance(theglobal,inthiscase).Theglobalisnotoutsideoftheglocalorlocalbutexistswithinthem,forRobertson(1992)’;(2)thetheoreticalstanceassumedbyRitzer(1993),whoacknowledgesglocalizationintheorybutneglectsitinpractice,focusinghisanalysisonthedarksideofglobalization,associatedwiththeimperialisticattitudeofmultinationalcompaniesstrivingtoimposeculturalhegemony,whichleadstoculturalhomologation;and(3)thetheoreticalposi-tionadoptedbyAlexander(2003),basedontheassumptionthatglocalizationisananalyticallyautonomousconcept.Moreover,Roudometofalsoproposedanewmeta-perspectiveonglocalization:‘Glocalizationisthereforedefinedastherefractionofglobalizationthroughthelocal.Theresultisglocality–ablendofthelocalandtheglobal...Thismechanismenablesaviewofglocalizationasanalyticallyautonomousfromglobalization’(Roudometof,2016,p.403).Furthermore,Mizrahi-ShtelmanandDrori,inthisvolume’schapter‘WorldSocietyTheoryandGlocalization:CulturebetweenTransnationality,Structuration,RationalizationandFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
247238HandbookofcultureandglocalizationActorhood’,provideasystematicanalysisondifferenttheoreticalperspectivesrelatedtoglocalizationandworldsocietytheory.AccordingtoEdenandLenway(2001,p.389):‘Multinationalenterprisesarethe“face”ofglobalizationbecausetheyprovidethreefunctionsthatfacilitateglobalization:MNEsaremarket-makingfirms,theycreateinvestmentbridgestotheglobaleconomy,andtheyactasagentsofchange(Eden,1995)’.Atthesametime,multinationalcompaniesandmoregenerallymulticulturalandtrans-nationalorganizations(eitherpublic,privateornon-profit)arerelatedthroughatwo-wayrelationwithglocalprocesses.Theyareinfluencedbyglocalculturaltransformations,butatthesametimetheyproduceandreproducecultureand,therefore,theyareentangledwithstructuralandmorphogeneticprocesses(Archer,2010),andmayplaytheroleofchangeagent,alsobyvirtueofbeingcorporateactors(Coleman,1994).Forexample,thediffusionof‘Toyotism’and‘leanmanufacturing’indiverseindustrialsectorsallovertheworldisatypicalglocalphenomenonentailingtheactiveroleofcompa-nies:‘ToyotaMotorCorporation’svehicleproductionsystemisawayofmakingthingsthatissometimesreferredtoasa“leanmanufacturingsystem,”ora“Just-in-Time(JIT)system,”andhascometobewellknownandstudiedworldwide’(Toyota,n.d.).Toyotahasatypical,made-in-Japanmanagerialapproach,stronglygroundedinJapaneseculture,whichhasinflu-encedindustrialprocessesintheautomotivesector,andbeyond,worldwide.Atthesametime,theintroductionoftheJapanesewayofproductionhasbeenfollowedineachcountryandcompanyusingadifferentapproach,accordingtodifferentnationalandorganizationalcultures(Wong,2007).Toyotismisanexampleofalocalculturalphenomenonthatbecomesglobalandthenglocal,showingalsohybridconfigurations.Themodelproposedinthischaptermaybealsousefultobetterunderstandglocaldynamicswithinandacrossorganizationalboundaries.Drorietal.(2013)arguedthatthedividebetweenuniversalisticandlocalisticmanagementtheoriesisnotsustainable,bothintermsofconceptualanalysisandempiricalevidence.Infact,globalstrategiesofmultinationalcompaniesshouldalsodealwithlocalissues,concerningdifferentidentities,cultures,operationsmodels,andsoon.Atthesametime,localpracticesmayimpactglobal/transnationalissues,asinthecase,forexample,ofIslamicbankingprac-tices.Furthermore,theauthorsunderlinedtherenewedcentralityofcomparativestudiesininternationalmanagementandorganizationalstudies,alsoconcerningtheemergenceofglocalapproachesinmanagerialresearch.Thecriticalreviewofglocalizationtheoriesinthebusinessandmanagementfieldsallowedtheauthorstodriveacomplextheoreticalperspectiveandtoindividuatethreeaxesofanalysis:(1)averticalaxis,representingtop-downandbottom-upglocalprocesses;(2)ahorizontalaxis,describingconvergentprocessesacrossregionalsectorsandfields,aswellasisomorphicprocessesacrossnationalfrontiers;and(3)atemporalaxis,concerningthereproductionofbusiness,managerialandorganizationalpracticesacrosstime.Accordingtotheglocalperspective,itispossibletofindspecificorganizationalstrategies,modelsandbehavioursreflectingtheinterplaybetweenglobalandlocaldynamics.Forexample,Roudometof(2016,p.111),proposedataxonomyofthemaindifferencesbetweenglobalandglocalstrategiesofmultinationalcompanies.Roudometof’staxonomyreproducedinTable15.1showsthemainstrategiesadoptedbyglocalcompaniestoimprovetheircompetitivenessatthelocallevel:(1)customizationofproductsandservices;(2)localizationofglobalexperienceandbrands;(3)operationwithinglobalmarketsniches;(4)adoptionofglocalapproaches;(5)reconciliationofqualityandFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
248Glocalizingculturesandorganizations239Table15.1Differencesamongglobalization/localization/glocalizationbusinessstrategiesGlobalizationLocalizationGlocalizationThetendencytowardintegrationamongTheadaptationofproductsandservicestoThecustomizationofglobalbrands,ideas,globaleconomicprocesses,goods,localculturesandlanguages,inordertoproductsandservicestolocalneedstechnology,knowledge,labourandcapitalmeetlocalneedsCharacterizedbyglobalconvergenceCharacterizedbycross-countryMixofglobalstrategiesandexperiences,differentiationandcustomizationtolocalneedsMassmarketLocalmarket(tailor-madeoffer)GlobalandlocalmarketnichesGlobalperspectiveLocalperspectiveGlocalperspectiveQuantitativeapproachQualitativeapproach(qualityandvalues)Quanti-qualitativeapproach(qualityandvalues,plusmassproduction)GlobalbrandawarenessLocalbrandawarenessHighbrandawarenessBasedonstandardizationandcostCompetitionfromglobalandlocalbrandsGlocalstrategyreductionGlobalmarketMarketdiversificationGlobalinterconnectionamonglocalmarketsSource:Author’sre-elaborationfromRoudometof(2016,p.111).valuewithlargescaleproduction;(6)promotionofbrandvisibilitygloballyandinlocalmarkets;and(7)provisionofproductsandservicesthatmeetlocalneedsandpreferencesatlowercostsduetoglobalproductionchains.Ifmultinationalcompaniesarenotabletolocalizetheirstrategiesandpracticestolocalmarkets,theymayshowbadperformance,asinthecaseofDisneylandParis,analysedbyMatusitz(2010).Matusitz(2011)alsoshowedthatthesameWaltDisneyCompanywasnev-erthelessabletosurmountdifficultiesinadaptingtothelocalcontextbysuccessfullyapplyingglocalstrategiesinmanagingDisneylandinHongKong.Glocalizationisnotonlylimitedtostrategiesandmarketingatthelocalandregionallevels(seeSinclair&Wilken,2009);itembracesallorganizationalpractices,includingorganiza-tionaldesignandhumanresourcesmanagement.Organizingisconsideredakeyactivityformultinationalcompaniessothattheycanoperateeffectivelyataglocallevel(Drori,2016;Edgington&Hayter,2013;Raz,2009).Glocalstrategiesandpracticesarealsocrucialforhumanresourcemanagement(Crawford&Chen,2015;Mattarelli&Tagliaventi,2010;Raz,2009).TOWARDSAMULTIPARADIGMATICANDHUMANISTICAPPROACHTOTHESTUDYOFGLOCALCULTURALPROCESSESTheconceptofglocalizationassumesthecentralityofthecontinuousinterplaybetweenglobalandlocalculturalprocesses(Robertson,1992).Italsopresumesthatglobalizationisnotnecessarilyassociatedwithhomologation,butfacilitatesanongoingandsometimesdialecticinteractionbetweenglobalprocessesandlocalcultures.Hence,tostudyglocalizationitisnecessarytofocusontheinteractionbetweenlocalandglobalculturaldynamics,unlockingthecriticaldynamicswithinandacrossnational/localsocio-culturalsystems.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
249240HandbookofcultureandglocalizationTheprevailingperspectiveforthestudyofnational/localcultures,atleastinthefieldofeconomicsandbusinessstudies,istheso-called‘eticperspective’(seeHofstede&Hofstede,2005;Houseetal.,2004;Inglehart2006,2015;Minkov,2018;Minkov&Hofstede,2014;Schwartz,2006).Theeticapproachattemptstoidentifyuniversalaspectsofhumanbehaviorandseekstofinduniversalprocessesthattranscendculturaldifferencesortoproducenewtheoriesthatcanbeutilizedacrosscultures(Fukuyama,1990;Ridleyetal.,1994).Inotherwords,thisapproachassumesthatallculturescanbecomparedintermsofgeneralizablephenomena.(Lu,2012,p.109)Theeticperspectiveaffirmsthatitispossibletomeasureandcompareuniversalculturaldimensions,mappingoutdifferencesamongnations.Itisthereforepossibletoassumethatnationalculturesshowcommondimensionsandthatculturaldifferencesmaybemeasuredusingquantitativemethodologies.Theseapproacheshavebeenverysuccessfulinthefieldofbusinessstudiesandbeyond,asculturalmappingofferssimpleandpracticalsolutionsformanagingculturaldifferencesandprovidespoliticians,diplomats,militaryofficers,decision-makersandmanagerswithrelativelyeasy-to-usetoolsforhandlingculturaldiversity.Nevertheless,itispossibletoarguethatcultureisnotaquantitativephenomenon,somethingthatitispossibleto‘weigh’;instead,itistypicallyasocialphenomenon,relatedtosocialandanthropologicaldynamics.Moreover,GouldandGrein(2009)statethatcultureisnotnecessarilyassociatedwithmembershiptoaspecific–particularlynational–group,andproposeanewmodelbasedontheroleofglocalizedcommunitiesandnetworksthatcanovercometherigidassociationbetweencultureandnationality.Thedominantapproachtocross-culturalmanagementhasbeenquestionedbytheso-called‘emicperspective’:Emicresearchersassumethatthebestwaytounderstandacultureasanintegratedsystem.Theendeavorofculturalanthropologiststounderstandculturefrom‘thenative’spointofview’wasthemainfoundationoftheemicapproach(Malinowski,1922).Inthefieldofcross-culturalresearch,theemicapproachinvolvesexaminingonecultureatatimetoevaluatehowinsidersorparticipantsinterpretaphenomenon.(Lu,2012,p.109)Inshort,theemicperspectivefocusesonthenative’sperceptionoftheirownculture,andstudieshistorical,socialandeconomicfactorsthatmayexplaindifferencesandinequalities.Itthereforeprovidesanuancedviewofculturaldynamics(seeNishii&Özbilgin,2007;Özbilgin&Tatli,2011;Tatli&Özbilgin,2012).Theconflictbetweentheeticandemicperspectivesanimatedthescientificdebateforyears,butitisreasonabletoarguethatitispossibletointegratethetwoperspectives(Lu,2012;Morrisetal.,1999)insearchofamorecomplexandarticulatedviewofculturalphenom-ena.Thisapproachshouldintegrateresearchonsynchronicphenomena,aimedatstudyingconnectedinteractionsoccurringinthesametimeframe,andondiachronicrelationsaimedatstudyingcausalbondsandrelatedinfluencesacrosstime.Thisanalysisshouldalsoaccountfortheinfluenceofsocial,economic,politicalandculturalcontexts.Theintegrationofthetwoperspectivesrequiresamultiparadigmaticapproach(Gioia&Pitre,1990)forthestudyofculturalphenomena.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
250Glocalizingculturesandorganizations241Thiscontributiontriestogobeyondtheetic–emicantinomyandaimstoprovideacomplex,humanisticframeworkforbetterunderstandingglocalculturaldynamics(Robertson,1992),andtoapplythismodeltotheanalysisoftransnational/multiculturalorganizationsandmulti-nationalcompanies.AGLOCALANDHUMANISTICMODELTOUNLOCKTHECOMPLEXINTERPLAYBETWEENGLOBALANDLOCALCULTURALDYNAMICSTherelationbetweenglobalandlocalmayleadtodifferentoutcomesintermsofculturaldynamics.Accordingtothetheoreticalpremisespresentedintheprevioussection,glocalphenomenamaybeanalysedusingfourdistinctcategories.Inthesamegeographicalspaceitispossibletoobserve:(1)globalphenomena,relatedtoculturalprocessesoccurringatagloballevel,forexample,TikTok,theverypopularandcontroversialsocialnetworkplat-formthatlaunchedthehitsong‘Jerusalema’,performedbyaSouthAfricanDJ,allovertheworld,thankstoaglobaldancechallenge;(2)hybridphenomena,characterizedbythemixingamongdifferentculturalelements,thatcouldleadtotheemergenceofnewsyncreticculturalobjects/patterns,suchasPilates,thewell-knownsystemofphysicalexercises,whichwasdevelopedbyJosephPilates,aGermangymnastwhocreatedabridgebetweenWestandEast,puttingtogetherexercisestakenfromdance,yoga,martialarts,medicalexercises,andsoon.AccordingtoKraidy(2006,p.1):‘Hybridityisoneoftheemblematicnotionsofourera.Itcapturesthespiritofthetimeswithitsobligatorycelebrationofculturaldifferenceandfusion,anditresonateswiththeglobalizationmantraofunfetteredeconomicexchangesandthesup-posedlyinevitabletransformationofallcultures’;(3)trans-localphenomena,orlocalculturalelementsthatmaybepresentindifferentplaces,forexample,asaconsequenceofmigration,suchasforinstance,thediffusionofSikhcommunitiesinmanyWesterncountriesthathavecreatedculturalenclavesinhostcountries,astheytendtoretainmanyofthereligiousandculturalelementsoftheiroriginalcommunity,basedinPunjab,inthenorthofIndia;and(4)localphenomena,orculturalelementsthatarepresentinaspecificplaceandinacertaintime,asanoutcomeoflocaldynamics,suchasCatalonia’sindependencemovement,whichshowscharacteristicsstronglygroundedinthehistoryofSpainandintheparticularsocial,politicalandculturalmilieuofoneofSpain’swealthiestregions(BBC,2019).Itispossibletoarguethateachoneofthemainculturaldynamicsreportedabovemaybeinterpretedinmultipleways:TikTokisaglobalphenomenon,butitwascreatedinChinain2016andatthebeginningofitslife,whenitwascalledDouyin,ittargetedtheChineseteenmarket.In2018,thecompanythatownedthesocialvideo-sharingcompanydecidedtobuyacompetitor,basedinShanghaibutwithstrongtiestoUSbusiness,andonlythenwasTikTokborn.Pilatesistheoutcomeofinterdisciplinaryandinterculturalhybridizations,butbecameaglobalphenomenon(Tidy&SmithGaler,2020).Translocalphenomenamayinfluencelocalhabitsandlaws,suchasforexampleintheUK,wherethereisahugeSikhcommunity.Inordertofacilitatetheintegrationoftheethnicminority,SikhsareexemptfromafewBritishlaws,forexampletheyareallowedtoridemotorcycleswearingtheirtraditionalturban,insteadofthehelmet.Moreover,Catalonia’sindependencemovementisatypicallocalphenomenon,butithasinfluenced(andwaspresumablyinfluencedinturnby)autonomistmovementsindifferentregionsinEurope,forexampletheLegapartyinLombardyandVenetointhenorthFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
251242HandbookofcultureandglocalizationofItaly.Thecategorizationofculturalphenomena,therefore,dependsonthepointofobserva-tion,sincetheformerremainintrinsicallycomplex.Yet,allthephenomenadescribedabovearedynamic(theymaychangeacrosstimeandspace),stronglyinterrelated,andmaybeinterpreteddifferentlyonthebasisoftheperspectiveadopted.Figure15.1aimstorepresentthecomplexinterplayamongthekeyfourdimensionsofglocalphenomenachosenfortheanalysisunderacomplexanddynamicperspective.Figure15.1TheinterplaybetweenglobalandlocalculturalprocessesAccordingtoFigure15.1,thecategoriesofglobal,hybrid,local,andtrans-localarenotfixedandshouldbeconsideredastherepresentationofdynamicphenomenathatoccurunderthegeneralframeworkofglocalization.Aglobalphenomenon,forexampletheworldwidediffu-sionofTikTok,oneofGenZ’spreferredsocialmediaplatforms,becamealocalphenomenon,whenafewteenTikTokusers,insteadofdownloadingvideosfeaturingK-popstars,decidedtosabotagePresidentTrump’sconventioninTulsa,Oklahoma,bookingthousandsofticketsasaprankandsucceedinginloweringtheattendanceofthemeeting(Lorenzetal.,2020).ThesameTikTokshowedhybridtraitsinItaly,wherethesocialnetworkisusednotonlybyGenZ,butalsobyover-35s(Strizzolo,2020);likewise,Twitterisusedalsobypoliticiansandenter-tainmentstarstoengagewithagrowingaudience.TikTokalsoenablestrans-localdynamics,forexample,IrishdancesgainedanewpopularityfromthesharingofvideosthroughTikTok.Thisphenomenonisatonceglobal,sincethepopularityofIrishdancesisincreasingworld-wide,hybrid,sincemanydancesareassociatedwithmodernpopmusic,andlocal,asIrishdancesarestronglygroundedinCelticandIrishculture(Cafolla,2020).Therefore,whenwerefertoglocalphenomena,itispossibletoassumethattheinclusioninoneofthefourcatego-riesproposedabovedependsonthetimeandspaceofanalysis.Moreover,intermsofsocial/culturalanalysis,itispossibletoanalyticallyseparate‘structure’(culture)and‘agency’(cul-turalchange),onlyforepistemology’ssake,inordertostudyculturalmorphogenesis(Archer,FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
252Glocalizingculturesandorganizations2432010).AccordingtoArcher’stheory:‘“structure”and“agency”operatediachronicallyoverdifferenttimeperiods’,thereforetimescaleisfundamentaltounderstandculturalchangeandhowthedifferentfeaturesproceed(Archer&Morgan,2020,p.184).Itispossibletoassumethatthefourcategoriesofanalysisrepresentdynamicphasesoftheongoingprocessofproductionandreproductionofglocalculturalprocesses.Thekeycate-gorieswerechosentoconstructaheuristicmodelthatdoesnotpresumetoresolvethewholecomplexityofculturalphenomena,buttriestoexplainthecomplexculturaldynamicsenactedbythebinomialglobal/localthroughtheanalysisofkeyprocesses.Themodeladoptsacomplexperspective,sincesocio-culturalsystemsareviewedasevo-lutionarysystemsinflux,wherestructurationandchangearethetwosidesoftheongoingprocessesofcontinuoustransformation,andtheprevalenceoftheformerorthelatterdependsonthescalesofspaceandtimechosenfortheanalysis.Themodelismultiparadigmaticbecauseittriestogobeyondthedifferenttheoreticalstancesinordertoproposeamultiperspectiveapproach,whichreliesondifferentresearchpar-adigms.Thisperspectiveisalsoholistic,becauseitassumesthatinterculturalresearchshouldalsobefocusedonthestudyoftheoverallpicture,andnotonlyofareducedsetofdimensions/variables(consideredmostrelevant),inordertouncoverbroaderfieldsofinterrelatedfactors,aswellasthesystemic/complexrelationsunderlyingobservablephenomena.Anditishuman-istic,becauseitconsiderscultureasaliving,humanphenomenonthatcouldnotbereducedtosomethingthatcanbemeasuredandcompared.Cultureisgroundedinhistoricroots,andalsorelatedtoreligious,political,economicandsocialfactors,andtopowerissues.Inequalities,knowledgeandresourcegaps,varyingopportunitiesandcontingentsituationsallplayaroleincreatingandtransformingcultures.Andpeoplemaychangecultures,breakingthecageofsocialstructuration(Archer,2010).Asexplainedinthenextsection,themodelproposedmaybealsousedtodescribeglocaldynamicsobservedincomplexorganizationsandparticularlymultinationalcompaniesandmulticultural/transnationalorganizations.APPLYINGTHEGLOCALMODELTOUNLOCKCOMPLEXCULTURALDYNAMICSWITHINANDACROSSORGANIZATIONALBOUNDARIESThetheoreticalframeworkproposedearlierinthischaptermaybeusedtobetterunderstandthecomplexculturaldynamicsthatoccurbetweenandacrossorganizationalboundaries.Organizationsmaybedefinedascomplexsocialsystemsthatproduceandreproduceculture,andareinterconnectedwithexternalenvironments,institutions,otherorganizations,inter-organizationalandinter-personalnetworks,andthroughtwo-wayrelationsthataremedi-atedbyidentitarianandself-organizingprocesses.Inotherwords,organizationalsystemsareinfluencedbytheirenvironmentandotherorganizations(throughisomorphicprocesses),butalsohelpconstructtheirenvironment,enactingthetypicalcircularrelationthatcharacterizescomplexsocialsystems.Atthesametime,ifweapplyagaintheperspectiveproposedbyMargaretArcher(2010),itispossibletoassumethatindividualsmaycontributetoculturalchange–throughagency–producingemergingphenomenaandfacilitatingculturalchange.Infact,itispossibletoapplythemodeltocontemporaryorganizations,accordingtotheoutcomesoftheanalysisoftheFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
253244Handbookofcultureandglocalizationliteraturereviewandparticularlyofcasestudies.Specifically,theexistenceofagloballeveloforganizationalcultureisevidencedbyempiricalresearchoncorporateculture.SadriandLees(2001)studiedthecorporatecultureofcompaniessuchasWalmart,SouthwestAirlinesandHewlettPackard.ChoandYoon(2001)analysedthecorporatecultureofKoreanmultina-tionalcompanies,describingmanagerialandorganizationalpracticesaimedatfacilitatingthediffusionandmaintenanceoforganizationalidentitiesandcultureonaglobalscale.Earlier,Denison(1984)hadsurveyedasampleofmanagersfrom34UScompaniesandfoundacor-relationbetweencorporatecultureandperformance.Hybridculturesareveryoftenobservableinsocialenterprises(Lyonsetal.,2017),adoptingmultipleculturalframes(non-profitandfor-profitlogics).Rodríguez(2005),amongothers,describedtheemergenceofathird(hybrid)cultureinastrategicalliancebetweenaNorthAmericanandaMexicancompany.AtypicalexampleoflocalrootsoforganizationalculturewascreatedbyBrunelloCucinelli,avisionaryentrepreneurwhobuilthiscompanyculturegroundedontheItaliantraditionofhumanisticthoughtandontheaestheticandspiritualinheritanceofthespecialplaceinwhichthefirm–BrunelloCucinelliS.p.A.–issituated,intheItalianregionofUmbria,birthplaceofmedievalItalianartandChristianspirituality(seeNapolitano&Fusco,2019;Russo,2017).Moreover,itisimpossibletodenythestrongrelationbetweenToyota’sproductionsystem,andtheJapaneseandSamuraicultures(Sosnovskikh,2016;Warner,1994).Translocalculturaldynamicsareobservable,forexample,inthoseinternationalormulti-nationalorganizationswhereinterpersonalhomophilicnetworksbasedonnationalidentitiesinfluenceintra-andinter-organizationalrelations(seeMaimone,2005).Thefourcategoriesdescribedabove,however,shouldbeconsideredasrelativistic,sincethesameculturaldynamicsmaybeseen–innoparticularorder–asglobal,hybrid,localortranslocal,dependingonthetimeandplaceofobservation.Themodelpresentedaboveusesthesamefourcategoriestoanalyseglocalorculturalorganizationalprocesses.GLOBALANDTRANSNATIONALORGANIZATIONSANDEMERGINGGLOCALPHENOMENAInthissection,theglocalculturaldynamicmodelisappliedtoorganizationalcontexts.GlobalProcessesTheglobaldimensionoforganizationalcultureistraditionallyassociatedwiththeconceptofcorporateculture(Schein,2009).Transnationalorganizationscontinuouslyproduceandreproducevalues,attitudes,paradigms,symbols,behavioursandsocialpracticesatboththeregionalandgloballevels.McDonald’s,Coca-ColaandNike,amongothers,wereconsideredsymbolsofthepowerofmultinationalcompaniestoinvadethesemiosphereandcontaminatelocalcultures(seeKlein,2009;Ritzer,1993).Anti-globalmovementscametoconsidermul-tinationalcompaniesasthevanguardofglobalization,withthemissionofhomologatinglocalculturesandfacilitatingashifttowardaglobalculturalsystem.Theconceptof‘corporateculture’wasverypopularduringthe1980sand1990s,whenthedebateonthepowerofsoftcontrolandtheemergenceofso-calledpost-bureaucraticorgani-zationswasatitsacme(seeMaimone,2017b).FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
254Glocalizingculturesandorganizations245Eventhoughitisassumedthatanoverallorganizationalcultureisfundamentalforthesur-vivalofanenterpriseasaconsistentorganizationalsystem(seeSchein,2009),itisnecessarytohighlightthatcorporatecultureisonlythemostvisibleaspectofacomplexculturalsystem.AsSchein(2009)pointedout:Theleaders’roleinevolvingthecultureiscomplicatedbythefactthat,asorganizationsgrowandmature,theynotonlydeveloptheirownoverallcultures,buttheyalsodifferentiatethemselvesintomanysubculturesbasedonoccupations,productlines,functions,geographies,andechelonsinthehierarchy.Insomeorganizationsthesubculturesareasstrongasorstrongerthantheoverallorgani-zationalculture.Corporate(global)culture,typicalofglobalcompanies,isthereforeonlyonefaceofthecoin.Itcouldbetheexpressionoftheoriginalculturalsystemdevelopedbythecompanyatitsearlystageor,aswehaveseen,thefruitofhybridationalprocesses.Forexample,whenonecompanyfacesamergerandacquisition(M&A)process,theresult-ingcorporateculture,producedbythefusionbetweenthetwoorganizationsinvolvedintheprocess,isoftenahybrid,eventhoughtheculturalsetoftheorganizationthatisthe‘winner’ofthefusionprocess(veryoftenM&Aprocessesarenotegalitarianandoneofthetwocompa-niessucceedingettingmoreinfluenceandpowerthantheother)ismoreprevalent.Especiallyifwearereferringtoahostiletakeover,oneofthecompaniesmaytrytoobtainhegemony,puttingitsmanagersinkeyroles,setting(its)rulesandimposingitsculture.SuchM&Acasesmayleadtoconflict,givingrisetocorporateguerrillawarfare,leadingtofailure.CulturalclashesmayaffectthesuccessofanM&Aevenwhenthemergerbetweentwocompaniesissupposedtobemoreegalitarian,asinthecaseofDaimlerChrysler(Badrtalei&Bates,2007).Corporatecultureisveryoftenprojectedincorporatebranding.Thefamousclaim‘JustDoIt’,usedbyNike,theglobalsportsapparelcompany,isatthesametimeoneofthemostpopularslogansofcontemporaneityandanexpressionofthecompany’sculture,stronglyorientedtowardscompetition,achievementandwinning(Collins&Porras,1996).Itisinterestingtonotethattherelationbetweencorporateidentityandcorporatebrandingisnomoreanexclusivefeatureofglobalcompanies.NGOsthatarerenownedworldwide,forexampleGreenpeace,SavetheChildren,MédecinsSansFrontières,EMERGENCY,andsoon,usethesamemarketingtechniquestoprojecttheirmission,credoandideologythroughtheircorporatebranding.NGOsalsobuildallianceswithmultinationalcompanies(attimesinanefforttosalvageorimprovethelatter’sreputationorimage).GlobalizationisalsotheapparentapproachofUNagenciesthataimtofostersustainabledevelopment.AccordingtotheUN’s2030Agenda,organizationsmayplayanimportantroleinfosteringtheachievementofsustainablegoals.Theagendainfactemphasizestheroleofstakeholdersinfacilitatingthepursuitofsustainablegoals:businesses,industriesandnon-governmentalorganizationsareincludedinthelistofstakeholdersinvolvedinthechangeprocess(UnitedNations,n.d.).Publicorganizationsmayalsoplayarelevantrole.Therefore,(global)corporatecultureisnotalwaysabsoluteevil.Corporateculturemaybeameansforsemioticguerrillawarfare,thatistosay,conflictamongmultinationalbrandsforcommunicationalhegemony(Klein,2009),butatthesametimeitcancontributetosocietalchange.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
255246HandbookofcultureandglocalizationHybridationalProcessesSometimes,transnationalorganizationsshowradicalformsofculturalhybridization.TheiconicCoca-ColaCompanyisaclearexampleofhybridizationsince,differentfromtheenter-prisescitedbelow,itshistoryhasbeenmarkedbyvariousacquisitionsthattransformedthemissionandcommercialaimofthecompany.TheCoca-Colasyrupwascreatedin1886bythePembertonChemicalCompany,foundedbyJohnS.Pemberton,apharmacistfromAtlanta.HisbookkeeperFrankRobinsoncameupwiththenameCoca-Cola:adrinkthatwasoriginallycomposedofcocainefromthecocaleafandextractsofthekolanut,richincaffeine.RobinsonisalsotheauthorofthefamousscriptthatistheCoca-Colatrademark.Thecocainewasnotremovedfromtheformulauntil1903.Anotherinterestingfact:thefirstadvertisementthatPembertonandRobinsonplacedstatedthatCoca-Colawasan‘IntellectualBeverageandTemperanceDrink,’respondingtothetemperancemovementthatwasjustbeginningatthetimeandsignallingtoallthatCoca-Colawasawholesomeandrefreshingdrinkthatcouldsubstituteforalcohol.(Al-Othman,2001,p.8)ItisevidentthatthemissionoftheinventorofCoca-Colawasclearlyinlinewiththereligiousandsocialclimateofthetime;theassociationwiththeconceptsof‘goodness’and‘purity’,inspiredbyProtestantreligiousprinciples,wasaclaimPembertonverymuchsupported.Pembertonalsohadtheideatomakehissyrupavailablethroughlocalsodafountains;asaresult,Coca-Cola–originallyconceivedasasyrupforheadachesandanon-alcoholicbeverageforthetemperate–becameapopulardrinkandacommercialsuccess.In1891,thecompanywassoldtoanotherAtlantapharmacist,AsaGriggsCandler,whodecidedtofocusCoca-Cola’sactivitiesonsoftdrinksand,asanotherdevotedreligiousman,kepttheassocia-tionbetweenCoca-Colaandtheconceptoftemperance,advertisinginreligiouspublications:‘CokebecamethesinlessdrinkforsavedsinnersintheSouth,anddrinkingCokebecamepartofsalvation’(Al-Othman,2001,p.9).In1899,theCoca-ColaCompanyestablishedanagreementwithanindependentbottlingcompanythatfacilitatedthedrink’sdistribution.TheCoca-ColaCompanywasnextacquiredin1919byagroupofinvestorsledbyAtlantabusinessmanErnestWoodruff,whoplayedanimportantroleinshapingCoca-Cola’sorgan-izationalculture,transformingCoca-Colaintoamultinationalcompany(Al-Othman,2001;EncyclopaediaBritannica,2020;Paul&Gulbro,2005).Coca-Cola’sbrandimagechangedfromthegoodChristiandrinktowardsthedrinkrepresentingtheAmericanwayoflife;byWorldWarIIithadbecomethepatrioticAmericanbeverageparexcellence,provisionedtoUSsoldierstoimprovethemoraleofthetroops.Afterthewar,theconsumptionofCoca-Colaaroundtheworldcontinuedtorise,alsoduetotheassociationbetweenthedrinkandtheAmericanlifestyle(Al-Othman,2001).Thecompanyacquirednewdrinks,extendingitsproductportfolio,buttheassociationbetweenCoca-ColaandtheAmericanwayoflifepersistsasaresultofthecompany’sabilitytotransformabrandintoaglobalsymbol;anotherexampleofthisroleisthefamousadvertisementinwhichthemodernfigureofSantaClauswaspopu-larizedallovertheworld(McKay,2008).Anin-depthanalysisofthecaseofCoca-Colaisfarfromtheobjectivesofthischapter,butneverthelessitispossibletoassumethatthehistoryoftheAmericancompanyisalsoahistoryofculturalhybridizationamongthemostinfluentialforcesofUSculture:religion,capitalisticideologyandnationalism.Together,theyfacilitatedtheriseofaniconicglobalbrand.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
256Glocalizingculturesandorganizations247Hybridizationcouldalsobeanemergingphenomenon.Forexample,themarriagebetweenorganizationsthroughanM&Aprocessmaysometimesleadtoamixedculture,producedbythemeltingoftheoriginalculturesrelatedtothetwoorganizationalsystemssubjectedtotheprocessofintegration.Thisprocess,incaseofcross-borderM&As,mayinvolvecross-culturalandinterculturalprocesses,andthereforeshowglocaltraits.Morespecifically,inmultina-tional/multiculturalcompaniesandtransnationalorganizations,hybridizationmayinvolvecomplexglocalculturaldynamics,forexampleintheemergenceofthird/synergeticcultures.Casmir(1993,1999),amongothers,definedthirdcultureasacombinationofmindsetandsharedactions,valuesandcommunicationsystems,resultingfromthenegotiationamongthemembersofamulticulturalteamthatconstructedanewculturalset,alsoincludingdifferenttraitscomingfromthediverseculturesrepresentedinthesameteam.Moreover,athirdculturemaybeseenas‘asharedknowledgestructureconsistingofteamandtaskknowledge,aswellasvaluesandnormsrootedinthetraditionalculturalbeliefsystemofoneormoremembers’(Adairetal.,2006,p.2).Thirdculturescangobeyondworkingteamsandembracethewholeorganizationalsystem,asaconsequenceofculturalsynergy(Adler,1980,1991).Mutatismutandis,thisphenomenonmayalsobeobservedininternationalorganizationsandNGOs.TheRoleofLocalCulturesWiththeexceptionofinternationalorganizationssuchastheUNthatwerefoundedastrans-nationalorganizationsandreflectthestatusofinternationalrelationsandarguablythehegem-onicnationalculturesprevailingontheworldsceneatthetimeofcreationandafterward,themajorityoforganizationsfoundedinaspecifictimeandplacereflectthelocalculture,mediatedbythepersonality,values,andidentityoftheirfounders.Therefore,itispossibletoassume:Whilethereisvariationintheextenttowhichanygivenindividualsharesasociety’sculturalvaluesandbeliefs,culturalimmersiontheoryaswellascognitiveresearchers(e.g.,Hanges,Lord,&Dickson,2000)havearguedthatsocietalcultureinfluencesthebeliefsofindividualsregardingwhatissensibleorstrategicwithinaparticularsociety.Valuesoffoundersandotherorganizationalleadersarethusdifferentiallyinfluencedbythelargersociety’svalues,andthesefoundersandleadershavedifferentialeffectsontheorganizationstheycreateandlead.Thus,aneffectofavalueatthesocietalleveltotheanalogousvalueattheorganizationallevelismediatedbythevaluesoffounders.(Brodbecketal.,2004,p.661)Forexample,itisimpossibletounderstandthemaincharacteristicsofPatagonia,whichisconsideredachampionofenvironmentalsustainability,withouttakingintoaccountthatthewell-knownsportsapparelcompanywascreatedin1970sCaliforniabytheeccentricentrepre-neurYvonChouinard,aCalifornianrockclimberwithapassionfornatureandthewilderness.Moreover,itisverydifficulttounderstandthecultureandidentityoftheItalianluxurycarcompanyFerrari,withoutconsideringthepersonalityofitsfounderEnzoFerrari,aswellasthepassionforenginesandmotorracingofthepeoplelivingintheheartoftheEmiliaregionlocatedinthenorthofItaly.Itispossibletoarguethatthecultureofanewenterprisereflectsthepersonality,values,principlesandethicalstances,aswellasthepersonalgoalsofitsfounders(seeAlvesson,2002;Gagliardi,1986;Schein,2010).TheentrepreneurinfusesinhiscreationhisownparadigmsFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
257248Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandidentitariantraits.AccordingtoSchein(1983,p.18):‘Firmsarecreatedbyentrepreneurswhohaveavisionofhowconcertedeffortcouldcreateanewproductorserviceinthemar-ketplace.Theprocessofcultureformationintheorganizationbeginswiththefoundingofthegroup’.Thefounderofacompany,then,tendstoattractcollaboratorsthatareperceivedtobesimilartotheentrepreneur(Phillipsetal.,2013),atleastintermsofcertaincharacteristics,asaconsequenceofhomophilicprocesses(Mollicaetal.,2003).Moreover,theASAframeworkformulatedbySchneider(1987)affirmsthattheorgani-zationalgoals,aswellastheprocesses,structuresandcultureofanewcompanyreflectthepersonalityofthefounderandhisearlycollaborators.Theseculturalandorganizationaltraits(Schneideretal.,1995)thenattractmanagersandemployeeswhoreflectthesecharacteristics.Thesedynamics,mutatismutandis,mayalsobeappliedtonot-for-profitorganizationsandcertainNGOs.Embeddedastheyareinaninstitutionalandculturalmilieu,whatconcernspublicorganizationsnecessarilyreflectsthevalues,lawsandinstitutionaltraitsofthenationinwhichtheyoperate.Moreover,notethatevenglobalenterprisesandinternationalorgani-zationsmayshowlocalculturaltraits(seeamongothersHofstede,1983;Hofstede&Fink,2007;Maimone,2005).Eachorganizationalsystem,atdifferentlevels,mayalsohostorgani-zationalsub-cultures(seeHofstede,1998),relatedtoprofessional,cultural,geographicalandsocialfactors.Therefore,theconceptof‘local’shouldbeconceivedinnuancedterms,astheoutcomeofthesituated,embeddedandemergingnatureofculturalmorphogeneticprocesses(Archer,2010).Emergingculturaltraitsmaybefoundinorganizationalbranches,unitsandsub-units,teams,internalnetworksandcommunities.Theorganizationalworkplacecanthusbeseenasaplacewherecultureiscontinuouslyproducedandreproduced,enactingconvergentanddifferentprocesses,facilitatingbothintegrationanddifferentiation.Thecontinuousinteractionamongdifferentculturallevelsfavoursculturalhybridation(seeMaimone,2017a).TranslocalProcessesOrganizationsmayalsohosttrans-localculturesandidentities.Veryoften,expatriateworkersmaintainmanytraitsoftheirlocalidentityandculture.Peopleworkingforamulticultural/transnationalorganization,comingfromthesamecountryorbelongingtonational/culturesperceivedasveryclosetoeachother(forexamplepeoplecomingfromEnglish-speakingcountries),tendtoestablishrelativelystablerelationsintermsofinformalgroups/networks,andiftheirnationalityisprevailinginmulticulturalteams/units,theymay(evenunintention-ally)imposetheirculturetotheentiregroup/unit.Themanagementofpersonalidentities/culturesandofhomophilicnetworks,basedonculturalidentity,iscritical(seeMaimone,2017a).Atthesametime,itisimportanttocreateaninclusiveworkplacethatallowsallworkers,regardlessofpersonalidentity,tofeelathomewhilefacilitatingtheconstructionofashared,inclusiveculture.Thisexigencygoesfarbeyondtheperimeterofinterculturalmanagementandembracesalldiversitymanagementactivities.Itisimportanttonotethatlocalculturalidentitiesandtraitsmayprovidethenecessaryrateofdiversityandredundancytotheorganizationalsystemofaglocalorganization.Asassumedbythelawofrequisitevariety(Ashby,1956),asthelevelofcomplexityofexternalenvironmentincreases,therateofinternalvarietyoftheorganizationalsystemshouldgrow.Therefore,trans-localculturalprocessesmaycontributetoprovideworkteams,organizationalunitsandthewholeorganizationalsystemoftransnationalorganizationsandmultinationalcompaniesFabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
258Glocalizingculturesandorganizations249withthediversityrequiredtofacethechallengesofacomplexscenario.Culturaldiversitymaycontributetoincreasingtheleveloforganizationalcreativity,innovation,problem-solvinganddecision-making,knowledgecreationandsharing,facilitatingtheemergenceofunexpectedsolutions,productsandservices,aswellasinnovationthatmakesadifference.Obviously,themerepresenceofasignificantrateofculturaldiversitywithinandacrossthebordersofglocalorganizationsisnotenoughtofacilitatecreativeandinnovativeprocesses.Culturaldiversityshouldbemanagedinordertomaximizebenefitsandreducerisks.Assuch,trans-localpro-cessesmayalsocontributetothedevelopmentoforganizationalsystems.ASyntheticFrameworkTable15.2showsasummaryofkeyglocalculturalprocesses,observableinmulticultural/transnationalorganizations,accordingtothetheoreticalframeworkproposedinthischapter.Table15.2ThematrixofglocalculturalprocessesTypeofprocessExamplesGlobal●Corporatecultures.●Corporatemanagerialideologies,philosophiesandpractices.●Corporatemanagerialmethodsandpractices.Hybrid●Influenceoftwoormoreculturesonthestructurationoftransnationalorganizations.●Creationofhybridcultureswithintransnationalcompaniesandorganizations.Local●Influenceoflocalcultureonnewenterprises,not-for-profitorganizationsandpublicorganizations.●Localculturaltraits,observedinlocalbranchesofglobalandtransnationalorganizations.Trans-local●Interpersonalnetworksbasedonculturalidentity.●Monoculturalgroupswithinmulticulturalorganizations.●Personalculturalidentitiesandtraitsofexpatriatemanagersandemployees.Source:Author’sown.ThefourdimensionssummarizedinTable15.2shouldbeconsideredasthefourkeypro-cessesofculturalglocaldynamics,observableintransnationalormulticulturalorganizations.Accordingtotheprinciplesofcomplexsystemdynamics,theyshouldbeinterpretedasongoingprocessesthatcontributetotheevolutionofthecomplexculturalorganizationalsystems.Figure15.2appliestheglocalculturalmodeltotheorganizationalcontext.Thekeycatego-riesandmainexamplesarereportedbelow.AccordingtoFigure15.2,theseprocessesshouldbeconsideredasongoingphasesofevolutionarypaths.Theymayconcernorganizationalculture,butmayaffecttheexternalenvironmentandalsootherorganizations.Therefore,thestudyofthefourkeyphasesofglocalculturalprocesseswithinandoutsideorganizationalboundariesmaybeworthyofinterest:(1)forabetterunderstandingofglocaldynamicsinorganizationalcontexts,and(2)tounlocktheroleplayedbyglocalorganizationsaschange-makers.Moreover,organizationsmayprovideanextraordinaryecologicalexperimentalcontexttostudyandunderstandinterculturalrelationsandtodesignamoreinclusivecommunity/society.Itmayevenbepossibletolearnsomethingfromtheexperienceofmulticultural/transnationalorganizations,intermsoflessonslearnedandpositivepractices.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
259250HandbookofcultureandglocalizationFigure15.2TheglocalculturalmodelappliedtotheorganizationalsettingDISCUSSIONANDOPENCONCLUSIONSThischapterproposesacomplextheoreticalframeworktodescribeorganizationalculturesbeyondtheantinomiesofstructure–changeandglobal–local.Theframeworkappliesthelogicsanddynamicsofglocalizationtoculturalprocesses,withaparticularfocusontransna-tional/multiculturalorganizationsandmultinationalcompanies.Thecomplexmodelproposedinthischaptertounlockthecriticaldynamicsofculturalglocalizationisfocusedonfourkeycategoriesofanalysis:(1)global,(2)hybrid,(3)local,and(4)trans-local.Themodeldoesnotassumetorepresenttherealityofglocalizationasawhole,butsimplyprovidesaheuristictoolforthestudyofculturalglocalization,focusedonfourcriticaldynamics.Thecategoriesrepresentdifferentstatesorphasesofanongoingprocess,observableindifferenttimesandspacesorcontemporarilyinthesameorganizationalspace.Themodelisbasedontheassumptionthatsocio-culturalsystemsarecomplexsocialsystems,basedonco-evolutionarydynamicsandcirculartransformationprocesses.Thefocusonstruc-turationorchangedependsonlyonthespace–timescalesofanalysis.Peoplemayescapefromthecageofstructuration,enactingnewattitudesandbehaviours.People’svalues,attitudesandbehaviouraretheoutcomeofculturalstructurationprocesses,butalsotheresultofhumanwillandaction,atboththeindividualandcollectivelevel.Culturecannotbemeasured,exceptforpracticalreasons.Itisimportanttonotethatwhilereificationofcultureisuseful,itissimplytheoutcomeofstatisticalproceduresthattransformthesubjectofanalysis(only)forthesakeofheuristics.Therefore,whenwestudyglocalcul-turalphenomenawithinandoutsideorganizationalboundaries,weshouldtakeintoaccountthatcultureisfundamentallyahumanandsocialphenomenon,whichoperatesnotindetermin-isticterms,butrepresentsaframeworktounderstandtheapparentbinomialstructure/change.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
260Glocalizingculturesandorganizations251Thismodel,adaptedforthestudyoforganizationalsystems,assumesthefollowingorder:local,hybrid,globalandtranslocal.Thefourcategoriesshouldbeconsideredasanefforttorepresentthedifferentphases/statesofalivingmatter,theongoingprocessesofcontinuouschangeoccurringwithinandoutsideorganizationalboundaries.Theseprocessesshouldalsobeconsideredasongoingphasesofevolutionarypaths.Whiletheyconcernorganizationalculture,theymayalsoaffecttheexternalenvironment,aswellasotherorganizations.Therefore,thestudyofthekeyfourphasesofglocalculturalprocesseswithinandoutsideorganizationalboundariesmaybeworthyofinteresttwofold:(1)forabetterunderstandingofglocaldynamicsinorganizationalcontexts,and(2)tounlocktheroleplayedbyglocalorganizationsaschange-makers.Moreover,itisarguedthatmulticultural/transnationalorganizationsmayprovideanarenatostudythemainfactorsanddynamicsofmulticulturalencounters,inordertofindnewwaystofacilitateinterculturalrelationsandnegotiations,andbuildmoreinclusivesocialspaces(Maimone,2005).ThefourdimensionssummarizedinTable15.2shouldbeconsideredasthefourkeypro-cessesofculturalglocaldynamics,observableintransnationalormulticulturalorganizations.Accordingtotheprinciplesofcomplexsystemsdynamics,theyshouldbeinterpretedasongoingprocessesthatcontributetotheevolutionofcomplexculturalorganizationalsystems.Thischapterisconceptualandthereforemoreempiricalresearchisnecessarytotestthemainassumptionofthemodel,inparticularthroughcasestudiesinthecontextofmultina-tionalcompaniesand/ormulticultural/internationalorganizations.Finally,itisarguedthatglocalphenomenaarethekeytounlockingcomplexculturaldynamicsemergingwithin,acrossandoutsideorganizationalboundaries.Theroleplayedbyglocalizationinshapingandreshapingorganizationallandscapesandinfacilitatingchange-making,withinandoutsideorganizationalsystems,seemstobeaverypromisingareaofinvestigation,whichwouldrequirebothmultidisciplinaryresearch,aswellasmultiparadig-maticapproaches.REFERENCESAdair,W.L.,Tinsley,C.H.andM.Taylor(2006),‘Managingtheinterculturalinterface:Thirdcultures,antecedents,andconsequences’,inE.A.Mannix,M.A.NealeandY.-R.Chen(eds),NationalCultureandGroups,Bingley,UK:EmeraldGroupPublishing,pp.205–32.Adler,N.J.(1980),‘Culturalsynergy:Themanagementofcross-culturalorganizations’,inW.W.BurkeandL.D.Goodstein(eds),TrendsandIssuesinOrganizationalDevelopment:CurrentTheoryandPractice,SanDiego,CA:UniversityAssociates,pp.163–84.Adler,N.J.(1991),InternationalDimensionsofOrganizationalBehavior,Belmont,CA:Wadsworth.Al-Othman,D.(2001),‘TheimageandpoliticsofCoca-Cola:Fromtheearlyyearstothepresent.Image,DASH,accessed25August2020athttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8852150.Alexander,J.(2003),TheMeaningsofSocialLife:ACulturalSociology,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Alvesson,M.(2002),UnderstandingOrganizationalCulture,London,UK:SageArcher,M.S.(2010),‘Morphogenesisversusstructuration:Oncombiningstructureandaction’,TheBritishJournalofSociology,61,225–52.Archer,M.S.andJ.Morgan(2020),‘Contributionstorealistsocialtheory:AninterviewwithMargaretS.Archer’,JournalofCriticalRealism,19(2),179–200.Ashby,W.R.(1956),AnIntroductiontoCybernetics,London,UK:Chapman&Hall.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
261252HandbookofcultureandglocalizationBadrtalei,J.andD.L.Bates,(2007),‘Effectoforganizationalculturesonmergersandacquisitions:ThecaseofDaimlerChrysler’,InternationalJournalofManagement,24(2),303.BBC(2012),McDonald’sOpensVegetarian-onlyRestaurant,4September,accessed25August2020athttps://www.bbc.com/news/business-19479013.BBC(2019),Catalonia’sBidforIndependencefromSpainExplained,18October,accessed25August2020at:https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29478415.Berger,P.L.andT.Luckmann(1991),TheSocialConstructionofReality:ATreatiseintheSociologyofKnowledge,London,UK:Penguin.Brenner,N.(1999),‘Beyondstate-centrism?Space,territoriality,andgeographicalscaleinglobalizationstudies’,TheoryandSociety,28(1),39–78.Brodbeck,F.C.,Hanges,P.J.,Dickson.,M.W.,Gupta,V.andP.W.Dorfman(2004),‘Comparativeinfluenceofindustryandsocietalcultureonorganizationalculturalpractices’,inR.J.House,P.J.Hanges,M.Javidan,P.Dorfman,andV.Gupta(eds),Culture,Leadership,andOrganizations:TheGLOBEStudyof62Societies,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,pp.654–68.Cafolla,A.(2020),‘HowtraditionalIrishdancingfoundnewlifeonTikTok’,NewStatesman,26June,accessed25August2020athttps://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/social-media/2020/06/tik-tok-irish-dancing-videos-viral-morgan-bullock.Casmir,F.L.(1993),‘Third-culturebuilding:Aparadigmshiftforinternationalandinterculturalcom-munication’,AnnalsoftheInternationalCommunicationAssociation,16(1),407–28.Casmir,F.L.(1999),‘Foundationsforthestudyofinter-culturalcommunicationbasedonathird-culturemodel’,Inter-culturalRelations,23(1),91–116.Cho,Y.H.andJ.Yoon(2001),‘Theoriginandfunctionofdynamiccollectivism:AnanalysisofKoreancorporateculture’,AsiaPacificBusinessReview,7(4),70–88.Coleman,J.S.(1994),FoundationsofSocialTheory,Boston,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Collins,J.C.andJ.I.Porras(1996),‘Buildingyourcompany’svision’,HarvardBusinessReview,74(5),65.Crawford,W.B.andH.Y.Chen(2015),‘“Glocalization”:Thechallengeofmarketglobalizationtohumanresourcesdevelopment’,inProceedingsofthe1997WorldMarketingCongress,Cham,Switzerland:Springer,pp.427–33.Denison,D.R.(1984),‘Bringingcorporateculturetothebottomline’,OrganizationalDynamics,13(2),5–22.Drori,G.S.(2016),‘Globalandcomparativestudiesoforganizationandmanagement:Movingfrom“samenessordifference”to“glocalizationandorientation”’,inB.Czarniawska(ed.),AResearchAgendaforManagementandOrganizationStudies,Cheltenham,UKandNorthampton,MA:EdwardElgarPublishing.Drori,G.S.,HöllererM.A.andP.Walgenbach(eds)(2013),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,London,UK:Routledge.Eden,L.andS.Lenway(2001),‘Introductiontothesymposiummultinationals:TheJanusfaceofglo-balization’,JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,32(3),383–400.Edgington,D.W.andR.Hayter(2013),‘“Glocalization”andregionalheadquarters:JapaneseelectronicsfirmsintheASEANregion’,AnnalsoftheAssociationofAmericanGeographers,103(3),647–68.EncyclopaediaBritannica(2020),TheCoca-ColaCompany,accessed25August2020athttps://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Coca-Cola-Company.Gagliardi,P.(1986),‘Thecreationandchangeoforganizationalcultures:Aconceptualframework’,OrganizationStudies,7(2),117–34.Gioia,D.A.andE.Pitre(1990),‘Multiparadigmperspectivesontheorybuilding’,AcademyofManagementReview,15(4),584–602.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2004),‘Theglobalizationoffootball:Astudyintheglocalizationofthe“seriouslife”’,TheBritishJournalofSociology,55(4),545–68.Gould,S.J.andA.F.Grein(2009),‘Thinkglocally,actglocally:Aculture-centriccommentonLeung,Bhagat,Buchan,ErezandGibson(2005)’,JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,40(2),237–54.Govindarajan,V.andA.K.Gupta(2001),TheQuestforGlobalDominance:TransformingGlobalPresenceintoGlobalCompetitiveAdvantage,SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.Held,D.,McGrew,A.G.,Goldblatt,D.andJ.Perraton(1999),GlobalTransformations:Politics,EconomicsandCulture,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
262Glocalizingculturesandorganizations253Held,D.andA.G.McGrew(2002),Globalization/Anti-globalization,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Hofstede,G.(1983),‘Theculturalrelativityoforganizationalpracticesandtheories’,JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,14(2),75–89.Hofstede,G.(1998),‘Identifyingorganizationalsubcultures:Anempiricalapproach’,JournalofManagementStudies,35(1),1–12.Hofstede,G.andG.Fink(2007),‘Culture:Organisations,personalitiesandnations.GerhardFinkinter-viewsGeertHofstede’,EuropeanJournalofInternationalManagement,1(1-2),14–22.Hofstede,G.andG.J.Hofstede(2005),CulturesandOrganizations:SoftwareoftheMind,2nded.,NewYork,NY:McGraw-Hill.HouseR.J.,Hanges,P.J.,MansourJ.,DorfmanP.W.andV.Gupta(eds)(2004),Culture,Leadership,andOrganizations:TheGLOBEStudyof62Societies,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Inglehart,R.(2006),‘Mappingglobalvalues’,ComparativeSociology,5(2-3),115–36.Inglehart,R.(2015),‘Measuringcultureandculturalchange:Anintroduction’,inL.HarrisonandE.Yasin(eds),CultureMattersinRussia-andEverywhere:BackdropfortheRussia-UkraineConflict,Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks,345–64.Klein,N.(2009),NoLogo:NoSpace,NoChoice,NoJobs,NewYork,NY:Picador.Kraidy,M.M.(2006),HybridityortheCulturalLogicofGlobalization,Philadelphia,PA:TempleUniversityPress.Lévi-Strauss,C.(1983),TheRawandtheCooked,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.LorenzT.,BrowningK.andS.Frenkel(2020),‘TikTokteensandK-PopstanssaytheysankTrumprally’,NewYorkTimes,21June,accessed25August2020athttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/style/tiktok-trump-rally-tulsa.html.Lu,L.T.(2012),‘Eticoremic?Measuringcultureininternationalbusinessresearch’,InternationalBusinessResearch,5(5),109.Lyons,B.J.,Zatzick,C.D.,Thompson,T.andG.R.Bushe(2017),‘Stigmaidentityconcealmentinhybridorganizationalcultures’,JournalofSocialIssues,73(2),255–72.Maimone,F.(2005),Organizzazionecosmopolita.Relazioniorganizzativeecomunicazioneneicontestimulticulturali.Unapprocciosociologico,Rome,Italy:Aracne.MaimoneF.(2017a),InterculturalKnowledgeSharinginMNCs.AGlocalandInclusiveApproachintheDigitalAge,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Maimone,F.(2017b),‘Post-bureaucraticorganizationsascomplexsystems:Towardaco-evolutionaryandmultiparadigmaticperspective’,inM.Pierfranco,C.CannavaleandF.Maimone(eds),EvolutionofthePost-BureaucraticOrganization,Hershey,PA:IGIGlobal,pp.152–79.Mattarelli,E.andM.R.Tagliaventi(2010),‘Work-relatedidentities,virtualworkacceptanceandthedevelopmentofglocalizedworkpracticesingloballydistributedteams’,IndustryandInnovation,17(4),415–43.Matusitz,J.(2010),‘DisneylandParis:Acaseanalysisdemonstratinghowglocalizationworks’,JournalofStrategicMarketing,18(3),223–37.Matusitz,J.(2011),‘Disney’ssuccessfuladaptationinHongKong:Aglocalizationperspective’,AsiaPacificJournalofManagement,28(4),667–81.McKay,G.(2008),‘Consumption,Coca-colonisation,culturalresistance—andSantaClaus’,inS.Whiteley(ed.),Christmas,IdeologyandPopularCulture,Edinburgh,UK:EdinburghUniversityPress,pp.50–67.Minkov,M.(2018),‘ArevisionofHofstede’smodelofnationalculture:Oldevidenceandnewdatafrom56countries’,CrossCultural&StrategicManagement,25(2),231–56.Minkov,M.andG.Hofstede(2014),‘Clusteringof316Europeanregionsonmeasuresofvalues:doEurope’scountrieshavenationalcultures?’,Cross-CulturalResearch,48(2),144–76.Mollica,K.A.,Gray,B.andL.K.Trevino(2003),‘Racialhomophilyanditspersistenceinnewcomers’socialnetworks’,OrganizationScience,14(2),123–36.Morris,M.W.,Leung,K.,Ames,D.andB.Lickel(1999),‘Viewsfrominsideandoutside:Integratingemicandeticinsightsaboutcultureandjusticejudgment’,AcademyofManagementReview,24(4),781–96.Napolitano,M.R.andF.Fusco(2019),‘BrunelloCucinelli:lacreazionedivalorecondivisonell’im-presaumanistica’,Micro&MacroMarketing,28(2),335–60.NederveenPieterse,J.(1994),‘GlobalizationasHybridisation’,InternationalSociology,9(2),658–80.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
263254HandbookofcultureandglocalizationNishii,L.H.andM.F.Özbilgin(2007),‘Globaldiversitymanagement:Towardsaconceptualframe-work’,TheInternationalJournalofHumanResourceManagement,18(11),1883–94.O’Rourke,K.H.andJ.G.Williamson(1999),GlobalizationandHistory:TheEvolutionofaNineteenth-CenturyAtlanticEconomy,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.Osterhammel,J.andN.P.Petersson(2005),Globalization:AShortHistory,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Özbilgin,M.andA.Tatli(2011),‘Mappingoutthefieldofequalityanddiversity:Riseofindividualismandvoluntarism’,HumanRelations,64(9),1229–53.Paul,A.L.andR.D.Gulbro(2005),‘Morethanjustasoftdrink’,AlliedAcademiesInternationalConference.InternationalAcademyforCaseStudies,12(2),91.Phillips,N.,Tracey,P.andN.Karra(2013),‘Buildingentrepreneurialtieportfoliosthroughstrategichomophily:Theroleofnarrativeidentityworkinventurecreationandearlygrowth’,JournalofBusinessVenturing,28(1),134–50.Raz,A.E.(2009),‘Transplantingmanagement:Participativechange,organizationaldevelopment,andtheglocalizationofcorporateculture’,TheJournalofAppliedBehavioralScience,45(2),280–304.Ritzer,G.(1993),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time–spaceandhomogeneity–heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.RodríguezC.M.(2005),‘Emergenceofathirdculture:Sharedleadershipininternationalstrategicalliances’,InternationalMarketingReview,22(1),67–95.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Russo,M.(2017),BrunelloCucinelli:AnInspiredLeaderWhoHelpsEmployeestoHaveItAll.InDevelopingLeadersforPositiveOrganizing,Bingley,UK:EmeraldPublishing.Ryoo,W.(2009),‘Globalization,orthelogicofculturalhybridization:ThecaseoftheKoreanwave’,AsianJournalofCommunication,19(2),137–51.Sadri,G.andB.Lees(2001),‘Developingcorporatecultureasacompetitiveadvantage’,JournalofManagementDevelopment,20(10),853–9.Schein,E.H.(1983),‘Theroleofthefounderincreatingorganizationalculture’,OrganizationalDynamics,12(1),13–28.Schein,E.H.(2009),TheCorporateCultureSurvivalGuide(Vol.158),London,UK:JohnWiley&Sons.Schein,E.H.(2010),OrganizationalCultureandLeadership(Vol.2),London,UK:JohnWiley&Sons.Schneider,B.(1987),‘Thepeoplemaketheplace’,PersonnelPsychology,40(3),437–53.Schneider,B.,Goldstein,H.W.andD.B.Smith(1995),‘TheASAframework:Anupdate’,PersonnelPsychology,48(4),747–73.Schwartz,S.H.(2006),‘Atheoryofculturalvalueorientations:Explicationandapplications’,ComparativeSociology,5(2),137–82.Shamsuddoha,M.(2000),‘Globalizationtoglocalization:Aconceptualanalysis’,inJ.L.Abu-Lughod(ed.),SociologyfortheTwentyFirstCentury:ContinuitiesandCuttingEdges,Chicago,IL:ChicagoUniversityPress,pp.125–37.Sinclair,J.,andR.Wilken(2009),‘Strategicregionalizationinmarketingcampaigns:Beyondthestand-ardization/glocalizationdebate’,Continuum,23(2),147–57.Sosnovskikh,S.(2016),‘ToyotaMotorCorporation:Organizationalculture’,PhilosophyStudy,6(7),442–54.StewartC.(2007),Creolization:History,Ethnography,Theory,London,UK:UCLPress.Strizzolo,N.(2020),‘TikTok,perchéinItaliaèunsuccessoanchetragliover35’,AgendaDigitale,12February,accessed25August2020athttps://www.agendadigitale.eu/cultura-digitale/tiktok-perche-in-italia-e-un-successo-anche-tra-gli-over-35/.Tatli,A.andM.F.Özbilgin(2012),‘Anemicapproachtointersectionalstudyofdiversityatwork:ABourdieuanframing’,InternationalJournalofManagementReviews,14(2),180–200.TidyJ.andS.SmithGaler(2020),‘TikTok:Thestoryofasocialmediagiant’,BBCNews,5August,accessed27August2020athttps://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53640724.Toyota(n.d.),ToyotaProductionSystem:CompanyInformationVision&Philosophy,accessed27August2020athttps://global.toyota/en/company/vision-and-philosophy/production-system.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
264Glocalizingculturesandorganizations255UnitedNations,DepartmentofEconomicandSocialAffairsSustainableDevelopment(n.d.),TransformingOurWorld:the2030AgendaforSustainableDevelopment,accessed25August2020athttps://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda.Wang,G.andE.Y.Y.Yeh(2005),‘Globalizationandhybridizationinculturalproducts:ThecasesofMulanandCrouchingTiger,HiddenDragon’,InternationalJournalofCulturalStudies,8(2),175–93.Warner,M.(1994),‘Japaneseculture,westernmanagement:TaylorismandhumanresourcesinJapan’,OrganizationStudies,15(4),509–533.Wong,M.(2007),‘Theroleofcultureinimplementingleanproductionsystem’,inJ.OlhagerandF.Persson(eds),AdvancesinProductionManagementSystems,Boston,MA:Springer,pp.413–22.FabrizioMaimone-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:38AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
26516.Fromglobalizationtoglocalization:configuringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemandsIngyuOhandWonhoJangINTRODUCTIONIn2013,wefoundedtheWorldAssociationforHallyuStudies(WAHS)1toconnectthegrowingglobalcommunityinterestedinHallyu,whichgaverisetothedevelopmentofHallyuStudies–anindependentdisciplinedistinctfromAsianStudiesorKoreanStudies.TherationaleforsuchamovewasnotimmediatelyapparenttomanyscholarsinAsianStudieswhohadalltooeasilyboughtintothegeneral–thoughnotnecessarilywell-informed–viewthatHallyuwoulddisappearinthreetofiveyears.Tothem,Hallyu’ssuddenpopularitywasonlyaccidental;therefore,theculturaltrajectoryofEastAsiawouldquicklyrecedebacktoitsnormalstateofChinese,JapaneseandWesternpopculturedomination.Indeed,upuntilthispoint,Koreanpopculturehadneverbeenpopularintermsofamassivefollowingorfandombynon-Koreans,whichseemedtoreinforcetheirpredictionthatHallyuwouldmeetaquickdoom.Atthetimeofwriting,WAHSisplanningitseighthWorldCongressattheUniversityofOxfordinSeptember2021,whichsuggeststhatHallyuhasnotonlybecomeaglobalphenom-enonbuthasthrivedasoneaswell.TheveryfactofitsglobalnatureatteststhatHallyuStudiesshouldbeindependentfromKoreanorEastAsianStudies.Sofar,specialistsinthetraditionalandregionalpurviewsofKoreanStudiesandEastAsianStudieshavenotbeenabletofullyaddresswhyHallyuisglobaltobeginwith,norwhyitisanentertainmentformpredominantlyforfemaleaudiences(see,amongothers,Kim,2011;Lie,2014;Lyan,2019;Oh,2009,2011,2013;Oh&Kim,2019;Otmazgin&Lyan2014).Inourfourthcongress,heldatOxfordUniversityinSeptember2016,severalnoteworthypaperswerepresentedaddressingthetheme‘Whatisthe“K”inK-pop?’.ThebasisofthisthemewasapaperwiththesamenamebyourbrilliantcolleagueatWAHS,JohnLiefromUCBerkeley.LiepublishedhisseminalworkonK-popinaspecialissue,whichweedited,ofKoreaObserverbackin2012.Liearguedthatthe‘K’inK-pop,infact,denotesanythingbut‘Korea’,asitssuccessisderivedfromitsnon-Koreanornon-Asian(especiallyJapaneseorChinese)musicalelements,specificallyitsincorporationofEuropeanandAmericandancemusicstyleswithfastbeatsandgyratingdancemovesnoteasilyfoundinAsianmusicscenes(Lie,2012,2014).Thispaper,whichwaslaterpublishedasabook,ignitedmuchdebateamongthecongressionalparticipantsatOxford.ScholarlyinterestinHallyuatthetimewasentirelyfocusedonwhetherHallyuwasKoreaninnatureoraformofhybridculture,epito-mizedbysuchconceptsas‘nonationality’ormukokuseki(Iwabuchi,2008).Thesescholars,however,didnotpayattentiontoathirdpossibility–theglocalnatureofHallyu.256IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
266ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands257Inthischapter,weturnourattentiontotheconceptofglocalpopcultureinthetwenty-firstcentury.UsingK-popasanexample,wedefinewhatglocalpopcultureisandhowitismanufacturedinKorea,payingcloseattentiontowhatcontentissoldglocallyandwhatkindofpeopleloveK-pop.Indoingso,weprovidereasonswhyK-popisnotmerelyahybridizedculturalformandwhyitisdistinctfromotherformsofhybridizedpopmusicormerecopiesofWesternpop.Unlikepreviousstudies,wethereforefocusonwhyHallyuandK-poparepredominantlyfeminineintheirfandomstructureandwhytheyareglobal.THEORETICALBACKDROPLie’spaperandbookonK-popupendedtheconventionalunderstandingofEastAsianpopculturethathadpreviouslybeenshapedbyspecialistsonJapaneseorChinesepopculture(includingpopmusic,films,manga/anime,TVdramasandothers).ThereasonforthiswashisboldargumentthatthekeytocommercialsuccessonaglobalscaleforAsianculturalindus-tries,suchasK-pop,wastosteerclearofChinaorJapanandinsteadcopyUSandEuropeanculturedirectly(thatis,notthroughthetwoAsiansupergiants).Priortothispoint,thedominantexplanationfortheglobalK-popphenomenonwaslargelytheculturalhybridityperspective.ThisperspectiveadvancesaliberalargumentaboutChinese,JapaneseandIndianculturesasagrandAsianCulture(AC)thatmaycountervailthedomi-nantWesternCulture(WC)asawhole(Chua,2008,2012;Iwabuchi,2008,2013).Theword‘countervail’heremeansthesustainedsuccessandcontinuityoflocalculturesdespitetheencroachmentofAnglo-Americanculturalhegemonythathasaccompaniedglobalization.ThisispartlybecauseAChasincorporatedWCtothepointthatitcansustainitselfandnotbeovertakenbyWCthroughaprocessofassimilation.AsHuntington(1993)acknowledged,JapanisamodelcountrythathasmasteredtheartofmixingACandWCtogether,whichhasresultedinitbecominganextremelysuccessfulmodernnationwithoutfullyassimilatingtoWC.Authorsofthisdominantview,includingIwabuchi(2008),concludethattheriseofK-popthereforewastobeexpected,giventhatithassuccessfullyincorporatedbothACandWCinafashionthatcanpleasenotonlyAsians,butWesternersaswell.K-pophassuccess-fullyriddenthewaveofACexpansionvis-à-visWC.Inthissense,K-popisnotanewculturalforceintheglobalculturaldomainaslongasitoriginatesfromJapanand/orChina(thatis,ahybridmodel),bothofwhichhavealreadyhybridizedtheirpopculturewithWCsincethenineteenthcentury(Hirata,2005;Iwabuchi,2008,2013;Ryoo,2009;Shim,2011).Lie’scontributionstotheexpandingliteratureofHallyuservedasacoupdemaintothenotionofculturalhybriditythatwasprevalentinmainstreamHallyudiscourse.HisargumentrancountertoIwabuchi’sbecausehecontendedthatshyingawayfrombothChinaandJapanwasacriticalfactorinKoreanpopculture’ssuccess.Lie(2012,2014)usestheexamplesofK-drama(theseriesWinterSonata)andK-pop,demonstratingthattheformercontainsnothingtypicallyKoreanorChinese,whereasthelatterusesmuchfasterbeatsthanJ-pop.Inthischapter,weprovidereasonsfordeparting,tosomedegree,frombothcontentions.Thehybriditythesishasholesfromseveralpointsofconsideration,thefirstofwhichbeingthathybridityisanobscureconceptbasedonakindofcircularlogic.WhyisJapaneseculturegloballypopular?Becauseitishybrid.Howdoweknowitishybrid?Becauseitisgloballypopular.Hallyu’spopularitycanbelinkedtoitshybridityinasimilarlyfallaciousmanner.Meanwhile,itisawfullydifficulttoknowtheratioofnativetoforeignthatasuccessfulIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
267258Handbookofcultureandglocalizationhybridizationinvolves.Isit50/50,70/30orsomethingdifferent?ItisalsovirtuallyimpossibleforKoreatoemulateJapan,perhapsthemostwell-knowncaseofhybridityintheworld.Despitemodernizationanddevelopment,JapanhaslongbeenrecognizedforitsglobalsuccessinmaintainingbothJapaneseandWesternculturessimultaneously.Withthisinmind,thereisnotenoughconsiderationofwhatexactlythesecretoftheJapaneseformulaofhybridityis,whatshouldbeabandonedintheprocessofimportingoutsideculture,andwhatshouldbepreserved.ItisonlynaturalthereforeforanyaverageJapaneseorKoreantobeappalledathowculturallythetwocountriesaredifferentdespitethesupposedsimilaritiesorhybridity.Atthesametime,thehybridityexplanationdoesnotprovideanexplanationforfailures.WhyhasHallyusucceeded,whenTaiwanesepopculturefailed,forinstance,despitesimilardegreesofhybriditytoJapanese,ChineseandWesterncultures(iftheirinsinuationofsimi-larityorhybridityiscorrect)?WhatdidTaiwandowronginitshybridizationapproach?Nooneamongthestrongbelieversofthehybriditytenetseemstohaveananswertothisquestion.Finally,thisconventionalexplanationfailstoaccountforthesimilaritybetweenJapanesepopandHallyu,despitethedifferentdegreesoftheirglobalsuccess.Whatisacommonhybriditybetweenthesetwoculturesthatmadethemconsistentlysuccessful?Isthiscommonality,ifitevenexists,absentinTaiwaneseorChinesepopculture?Inshort,thehybriditythesisraisesmorequestionsthanitanswerswhenconsideringmattersrelatedtoglobalizationandglocalization.DespitemovingbeyondthehybriditythesisandprovidinganenlighteningexplanationofK-pop’sglobalsuccess,Lie’sanalysislacksinsightintotheanatomyoftheproductionprocessoftheK-popindustryasawhole.WithoutknowinghowtoconstructablackboxofK-popproduction,hassimplycopyingAnglo-AmericanculturebeenthedrivingforcebehindK-popproducers’globalsuccess?Insteadofmixingcultures,thereisanewrequirementtomasterthemimicryoftheAnglo-Americanculturalsymbols,theirsyntaxandtheirsemantics.HowcanthatbedonewithoutdevelopingalocalsystemofproductionthatcanlearnWCandreproduceitinaflawlessfashion?Toprovideanexample,Japanesecarmanufacturershavedominatedtheglobalcarmarketowingtoseveralcrucialexternalfactors,suchastheirprecisioninmimickingWesterncars.However,endogenousfactorsarejustasimportant.Ifglobalfactorsaresignificantforanexportindustrysuchascarmanufacturing,thereisalsoaneedtounder-standwhyautomakerssuchasToyotacreatedtheJust-in-TimeSystem(JIS)orKanban(seeMonden,2011),thetwomostfamouscost-savingandquality-improvingorganizationalmeansdevelopedbyToyota.AsLie(2012)himselfsuccinctlyputit,ifSMEntertainment(hereon‘SM’)is‘thesinglemostimportant’factorbehindtheglobalsuccessofK-pop,ameaningfulanalysiscallsforanunderstandingoftheinternalorganizationaldynamicsofindustriesdomi-natedbyfirmssuchasSMorToyota,butnotbyCubeEntertainmentorIsuzuMotors.Furthermore,afirm-levelanalysisoftheJapaneseandKoreanentertainmentcompaniesthathavesuccessfullyexportedculturalcontentcannotbefoundineitherexplanationofculturalhybridityorAnglo-Americanculturalhegemony.OhandPark(2012)focusedonexportman-agement,characterizedbySM’sbusinessfocusshiftingfromB2C(businesstoconsumer)toB2B(businesstobusiness,inthiscase,SMEntertainmenttoYouTube).SM’scorebusinesscompetencewasthereforebifurcatedintocreativityandexportmanagementcomponents.ThistransformationofSM’sinternationalstrategyfromB2CtoB2BnecessitatedcompetentinternationalmanagerssuchasYoung-minKim,SM’sCEO,whowaspivotalinsuccessfullyintroducingBoAandTVXQtoJapan.KimhadconsiderableexperiencewithJapan,havingspenthisprimaryandsecondaryschoolyearstherebeforeattendingKoreaUniversityforIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
268ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands259undergraduatestudies.WhileSMfounderandchairmanSooManLeefocusedexclusivelyonthecreativitymanagementside,Kimhadfullfreedomandpowertodirectthefirm’sexportoperations.TheconnectionbetweenYouTubeandSM,somethingthatJapaneseandChineseentertainmentmanagershadnotpreviouslysoughttoutilize,wasfirstmappedoutbyKim,whoaccidentallydiscoveredtheYouTubeiconpre-installedonaJapaneseiPhonereleasedin2008.SM’sinsidestorythereforeaddsrichnessandfleshtothetheoreticalskeletonpresentedbyLie(2012).Furthermore,itprovidesinsightintohowfirmsareproactivelymanagingandimplementingtheirpoliciesofculturalmixinginawaythathasledtoidiosyncraticoutcomesofhybridity.Inotherwords,nouniversalorcommonformulaofculturalhybridityhasbeenconducivetoglobalsuccess.Foronething,theideaofshyingawayfromJapanorChinaasapartoftheculturalhybridityprocesshasbeenavaluablediscoverybyLie(2012)inthestudyofculturalglobalization.Nevertheless,itisalsomeaningfultodivulgetheactualprocessofhybridizationbetweenlocal(eitherJapaneseorKoreaninthiscase)andWesterncultureswithintheculturalindustries.Therefore,thosewhoareinterestedinfindingacommonfactorofsuccessforculturalexportsintheglobalmarketsneedtolookindirectionsotherthanhybridityorAnglo-Americanculturalmimicry.Theactualproactiveprocessofhybridizationandmimicryvariesfromfirmtofirmandfromcountrytocountry.Throughoutthischapter,wewillelaborateonthisinathesisofourown.Aswenotedabove,Hallyu’stwomainfeaturesare(1)itsglobalspectrumand(2)itsfem-ininefandom.If(1)isanoutcomeof(2),webelievethatHallyu’sidiosyncraticmethodofeitherculturalhybridityormimickingtheAnglo-Americanculturederivesfromits(3)femaleuniversalism,whichisrealizedbyfemaleHallyufansthroughproactiveHallyuconsumption(specifically,listeningtoK-pop,watchingK-dramas,takingpartinHallyupilgrimagesinKorea,learningtheKoreanlanguageandexperiencingKoreancultureinday-to-daylife).Therefore,anevolutionaryprocessfrom(3)femaleuniversalismto(2)femalefandomandbackto(1)globalspectrumcanbeconceptualized.ThisevolutionaryprocesshasmadeHallyudistinctfromJapaneseorChinesepop,nottomentionitsAnglo-Americancounterparts(althoughonecanfindelementsofallofthemembeddedwithinHallyu).Nonetheless,Hallyuwillsharethesameelementsofitsglobalsuccesswithotherpopcultureproductsthatarebasedonfemaleuniversalism.NeitherIwabuchi’sargumentregardinghybriditynorLie’semphasisonAnglo-AmericanculturalhegemonyexplainshowafemininefandomhasbeenestablishedforHallyu,asbothauthorsoptedforacultural-mixingexplanation.Ourunder-standingoffemaleuniversalism,brieflyoutlinedinthissection,willbethefocusofthesecondpartofthischapter.NOTGLOBALIZATION,BUTGLOCALIZATIONScholarsworkinginthefieldofglobalizationtendtodifferextensivelyintheirunderstandingsofglobalization,localizationandglocalization.Whiletheyseemtoagreewiththetextbookdefinitionofglobalizationastheprocessofintegrationonaglobalscale,theyhaveenormousdifficultiescomingupwithagreedconceptsoflocalizationandglocalization(Jang&Lee,2015;Roudometof,2016).Instudiesonpopculture,globalizationmightaswellbedefinedastheworldwidedominationofonehegemonicculture,suchastheAnglo-Americanone(forexample,English-languagemusic,dramas,films,foodandbeverages,andfashion).IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
269260HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAnglo-AmericanglobalizationcanbethoughtofasakindofWestern,male,‘scientific’uni-versalism,asclearlydepictedingloballypopularculturalproductssuchasSherlockHolmes,SupermanandDoctorWho(Georgiou,2005;O’Neill,1994;Siegel,2002).Localization,ontheotherhand,referstothemodificationofglobalculturalcontentinaccordancewiththedemandsoflocalconsumers(seeRoudometof,2019).Forexample,SherlockHolmesbecameAibōinJapan,whereasSupermanturnedintoMyLoverfromaStarinSouthKorea.However,thereisabigdifferencebetweenJapaneseandSouthKoreanlocali-zation.Forinstance,whereasAibōismorepopularthanSherlockHolmesamongtheJapanesepublic,theformerisnotpopularamongWesternersorotherAsians,exceptforaverysmallnumberofJapanesedramabuffsinTaiwan,SingaporeandHongKong.Incontrast,whileMyLoverfromaStarisnotaspopularasSupermanamongthegeneralKoreanpublic,itisverypopularamongfemalefansofHallyuallovertheworld(over100millionasof2020,accordingtoKoreaFoundation,2021).JapaneselocalizationissowelldoneandauthenticthatforeigncompetitorsstruggletomatchitinpleasingJapaneseaudiences,whereasKoreanlocalizationismeanttobere-exportedtootherpartsoftheworld.Thus,aKoreanizedimageofSuperman,regardlessofwhetherornotitis‘better’thantheoriginal,hasattainedglobalfandom.Thisiswhatwecall‘glocalization’–inotherwords,highqualitylocalizationthatismeanttobere-exportedtoovercomethesmallsizeofthedomesticmarket(seeRoudometof,2016).Other,low-quality,localizationssimplyremainintheirhomecountries,astheyareunabletobeexportedtoothermarkets,evenifsomeofthemcanoutperformK-poporK-dramasathome.Whatmattersmostinglocalization,therefore,isthequalityoftheculturalproductfortargetedfans,suchasthefemalefansofK-popandK-dramas.ForthesefemaleHallyufans,K-popandK-dramasare‘better’thananyothercompetingculturalgenresfromKorea,evenifthelatterhasoutperformedtheformerathomeamonggeneralaudiences.ThiscanalsobethereasonwhytheKoreanteuroteuorTrotgenre(anolderformofKoreanpopularmusic,similartoJapaneseenkaandbasedonthetwo-beatfoxtrotrhythm)couldneverbeexportedtoK-popfansabroadortoWesternmarketsingeneral.ToglobalK-popfans,K-popisbetterthanJ-pop,Chinesepop,Anglo-Americanpop,orEuropeanmusic.Infact,theKoreanlocal-izationofAnglo-Americanpopmusicissowell-executedthatnoothercompetitorcanpleasethefemaleK-popfans.Wearenot,however,arguingthatothercountries,Japanforexample,cannotglocalizetheirculturalproducts.Japaneseproductsoflocalizationcanalsobere-exportedbacktotheorigi-natingcountry:JapanesecarsandcamerashavebeendominatingUSandotherglobalmarketsfordecades.Japaneseanimation,too,whichoriginatedfromDisneyformassconsumption,iscurrentlyneckandneckwithDisneyintheglobalmarketcompetition.Whatwearearguing,though,isthatJapanisatthemomentsatisfiedwiththemammothsizeofitsdomesticmarket,especiallywhenitisdifficulttoexportorlicense,forexample,aJapaneseTVdramaseriestoothercountries(Lie,2014).Japanesepopculturecertainlyhasitsownnicheglobalmarket,butitcannotbeconsidered‘better’thanitsKoreancounterparttothemassiveK-popandK-dramafanbase.Bethatasitmay,whatremainsstrikingisthestoryofHallyu:howcoulditslocalizationbesosuccessfulthatithasreadilybeenre-exportedtomanydifferentcountriesintheworld?In2017,atotalofUS$362million’sworthofTVdramasandformatswereexportedallovertheworld,includingAsia,Europe,theMiddleEast,NorthAmericaandSouthAmerica.Inthesameyear,theexportrevenueforK-poprosetoUS$513million(KOCCA,2018).Alongwithdomesticrevenues,thetotalsizeoftheKoreanpopculturemarketputsitinthetopfiveacrossIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
270ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands261Table16.1ExamplesofKoreanglocalizationGlobalbrandsLocalbrandsGlocalbrandsCarFordHyundaiHyundaiInstantNoodlesNissinNongshimShinRamyonTVsSONYSamsungSamsungCoffeeStarbucksTwosomePlaceTwosomePlaceCosmeticsL’OréalAmorePacificAmorePacificRiceCookersZojirushiCuckooCuckooSource:Author.theglobe.Thisisamiraculousphenomenontohavetakenplaceinlessthanthe25yearssincetheliberalizationoftheSouthKoreanpopularcultureindustry.LiketheearliercaseofJapan,theprodigioussuccessofKoreanlocalizationinvolvedadegreeoftacitknowledgethatKoreansinnatelypossessandcandeploymoreeasilythanforeigners.AccordingtoNonakaandTakeuchi(1995),theworkingdefinitionoftacitknowl-edgeisakindofknowledgethatisdifficulttotransfertoanotherpersonbywritingitdownorverbalizingit.Therefore,tacitknowledgeistheoppositeofexplicitknowledgethatiseasilycodifiedandtransferredtootherpeoplebymeansofwritingorverbalization.Makinggoodsushidishesisoneexampleoftacitknowledge,whileproducinggoodanimationmoviesisanother.Whenitcomestotacitknowledgearoundsushi,fewnon-JapanesechefscanproducedishesthatthemorediscriminatingJapaneseexpertswouldbewillingtopaybigmoneyfor.Thisisnotbecauseofalackofexplicitknowledgeaboutmakingsushi,butratheranabsenceofsufficienttacitknowledgethatcapturestheauthenticsushiflavour,whichonlythelocal,highlytrainedJapanesetastebudscandetect.Inasimilarvein,fewnon-KoreanactorscanmasterfullyreproducethesubtleemotionalexpressionsshownonKoreanwomen’sfacesinKoreandramas.Norcannon-KoreansingerseasilyemulatethehighlysynchronizedK-popdancemovesinacollectivedanceformat.Therefore,tacitknowledgeisdifficulttoexplaintooutsidersinthelocalization(orhybrid-ization)processthatlocalmanufacturershaveproactivelyinitiated.Thisisthesamereasonhybridityalone–asalooseconcept–cannotexplainthesuccessofJapaneseanimeorK-pop(thatis,glocalization,aformoflocalizationwithdeeptacitknowledgeforinnovativeimprove-mentsfromtheoriginalimport).TounderstandtheglocalizationofHallyu,wethereforeneedtodefineKoreantacitknowledge(asaproactivereactiontoglobalization),inadditiontothepracticeofhybridity(thatis,thepassivereactiontoit).WhiletheseK-dramaandK-popgenresarenotKoreanintermsoftheirorigin,theyhavebeenexportedbacktoEurope,NorthAmerica,SouthAmericaandJapanbymeansoftacitknowledgeandglocalization.AsTable16.1shows,examplesofglocalizationarenotlimitedtotheculturalindustry.Followingtheeraofdevelopmentbooms,Korea,likeitsneighbourtotheSoutheast,Japan,successfullybuiltupglocalindustriesthathaveexportedlocallyhybridizedgoodstoglobalcentres,includingNorthAmericaandtheEU.WecanlistseveralexamplesofsuccessfulglocalizationinKorea,suchasHyundaiMotors,aleadingKoreancarmanufacturerthathasexportedglocallybrandedautomobilestoNorthAmerica,SouthAmerica,theMideast,ChinaandtheASEANcountries.NongshimandSamsungwerethefirsttwoKoreancompaniestooutperformJapaneseinstantnoodles(Nissin)andTV(SONY)manufacturersrespectivelyintheglobalmarkets.Havingexplainedglobalization,localizationandglocalizationusingIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
271262HandbookofcultureandglocalizationHallyuandJapanesepopcultureasexamples,wewillnowexplainthecaseofK-popandits‘tacit’glocalizationprocess.THEGLOCALIZATIONOFK-POP:ATACITKNOWLEDGEMODELGlobalizationinthemusicindustryhasprogressedrapidlysincethefalloftheSovietUnionanditsEasternbloc.Thewholesalechangewithinthemusicindustryamidglobalizationimpliesseveralthings.First,itcanrefertoasituationwheremusicfromthecentrecandominateperipheralmusicmarkets(thatis,musicimperialism)(Black,1994;During,1997;Fine,1997;McChesney,2001).Second,itcanmeancosmopolitanism,whereamixofcentre,peripheralandsemi-peripheralmusicissoldinthemarkettosizeablegroupsoffansand‘buffs’ineachsubculturemarket(Cho-Hanetal.,2003;Iwabuchi,2008,2013).Thiscos-mopolitanismisclosetoanidealtypeofamulticulturalmusicmarket.Third,globalizationcanalludetoanewglobaldivisionoflabourinmusicproductionanddissemination.Inthepast,forexample,JapanexportedvinylLPsofAmericanpopmusicbacktotheUSduetotheirhighqualityandcheapprices(duetoproductionoutsourcing).Inanothercase,EuropeansingersandartistswenttoNewYorkandHollywoodtorecordandreleasetheiralbumsduetothesheersizeofthepopmusicmarketintheUS(intermsofproductionandmarketingoutsourcing).Inthenewglobaldivisionofmusicproduction,themusicproductssoldineachsubculturemarketareproducedbyanewsystemofglobaldivisionoflabourthatinvolvesEuropean,AsianandAmericanmusictalents,venturecapitalfirmsanddistributors(Oh&Park,2012).K-popbelongstoanew,thirdtypeofglobaldivisionoflabour,underwhichbothcosmopolitanandtransnationalcharacteristicsoftheentireindustrialecologyloomlargeforqualityandcostrequirements(Dunning,1992).Globalconsumers,nowmorethanever,demandcheaperandhigherqualitygoodsandservicesthatareeasilyprocurablefromthevirtualorrealglobalmarket.Itisherewhereglocalizationisanimportantstrategicchoiceformanymultinationalcorporations,includingpopculturemanufacturersanddistributors.K-pop,bydefinition,entailstheexportofmusic‘madeinKorea’toglobalconsumersbecausethedomesticmusicmarketisdrasticallyham-peredbyitslimitedsizeandrampant,albeitdiminishing,piracy.However,beforethecurrentK-popexportboom,theWesternnetworkofmusicproducersanddistributorshadneitherspottednorrecruitedKoreanmusicaltalentsintotheirproductionanddistributionsystems.KoreanpopularmusicwassimplynotWesternatall,withthetraditionallypopulartrotorkayosongswithpentatonicscalesdominatingEastAsianpopularmusic(Lie,2012,2014).TheexportofKoreanmusiconaglobalscaleonlyemergedinthetwenty-firstcentury,mainlybecauseof:(1)Korea’seconomicascendancetothesemi-peripheryoftheworldsystem;(2)themassiveimmigrationofKoreansintocountriesofthecentre(Japan,theUS,WesternEurope,etc.);(3)theactiveparticipationoftheKoreanpopulation–locallyandabroad–intheglobalculturalindustries;and,mostimportantly,(4)theproactiveparticipationofSouthKoreanentertainmentfirmsintheglobaldivisionoflabourinthemusicmanufacturinganddistributionsystems.TheglocalizationprocessofK-pop,followingitsentryintothenewglobaldivisionoflaboursystem,isnotascomplicatedasitmaysound.Firstofall,Koreanfirmsinthesemi-peripheryoftheworldsystemhavehadtoimportoroutsourcerawmaterialsfromtheIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
272ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands263periphery,whilealsolicensingorlearningadvancedtechnologies.Atthesametime,theymustborrowfinancialresourcesfromthecentre.LikethefamousKoreanelectronicscompany,Samsung,andtheautomobilemanufacturer,Hyundai,whichborrowedmoneyandtechnologyfrombothJapanandtheUS,K-popcompanieshaveoutsourcedoriginalmusicscorestoWestern(notablySwedish,AmericanandBritish)musiccomposers.ThiswasthefirststageoftheglobalizationofKoreanpopmusic,whichhadlongbeendependentondomesticorJapanesemusicalcreativity.TheglobalsuccessofK-popcannot,however,besolelyattributedtoamereparticipationintheglobaldivisionofmusicproductionanddistribution.Foronething,thisparticipationitselfisextremelydifficulttosustain,giventhedominationofEuropean,NorthAmerican,CentralandSouthAmericanandJapanesemusicproducersanddistributors.Equallychallengingistheneedtoremainpopularintheglobalmusicmarket.K-popproducersandexportersneedtacitknowledgeabouthowtoglocalizethemusictheyboughtfromEuropeandNorthAmerica.ThisisthetacitknowledgethatKoreanswouldnaturallyacquireintheprocessofimprovingthequalityofforeignimportsbeforere-exportingthembacktoJapan,EuropeandNorthAmerica.Wecallthislocalization(seeFigure16.1).Thisiswhytheentireprocessof‘Global’(G)to‘Local’(L)to‘Glocal’(GL)isuntenableifthe‘L’componentoftheglobaldivisionoflabourisnotcreativeoruniqueenough(intermsofproductdifferentiation)toattractproduc-ersanddistributors,nottomentionthetargetedglobalfangroups.Torepeat,hybridity(thatis,borrowingandmixing)aloneisnotenough.K-pop’sdifferentiationstrategytomakethe‘L’partoftheprocessattractivetoglobalaudi-encesisthreefold:numbers,physiqueandvoice–dancecoordination.Atfirstglance,K-pop’sproductdifferentiationliesinthenumberofsingersonstageatonetime.UnlikeChinesepopularsingers,J-Popbands,orMichaelJackson,K-pop’ssuccessinitiallycamefromthelargenumberofperformerssinginganddancingsimultaneouslyonstage.BandssuchasTVXQ,Girls’Generation,BigBang,SuperJunior,2PM,SHINeeandBTSfeatureaspecialKoreanstagingformationunmatchedbyanyentertainmentexperienceinthepost-waryears.PeculiaronlytoK-pop,singer-dancersmovethroughdanceformationsonstagewithstrictandperfectsynchronization.2Throughoutthesong,singer-dancerstaketurnsinthespotlight,withnoclearleadvocalist(Jang&Kim,2013).Everyoneinthegroupismeanttoshowcaseanequallevelofvocalanddancingtalent.Thenumbersfactoralone,however,isnotenoughtocommandattentionfrominternationalaudiences.Japan’stopgirlbands,AKB48,SKE48andHKT48,featureupto48singersanddancersatthesametime,keepingtheirpositionconsistentatthetopoftheJapaneseOriconmusicchart.However,theyhavenothadglobalsuccessakintothatofK-popgirlbands,suchasGirls’GenerationorTwice,whichfeatureonlyninemembers.Asmanycompeti-tors–likeAKB48–canmatchthenumbersfactor,K-pop’sphysiquefactorthereforemustalsobetakenintoconsiderationinitsdifferentiationstrategy.Totakearepresentativecase,membersofGirls’GenerationandWonderGirlsareatleastfiveinchestallerthanthoseofAKB48orHKT48;theyalsohavetheadvantageofmuchsexierandsophisticatedlooksthantheirJapanesecounterparts.ThefivemembersofJapan’stopmaleidolgroup,Arashi,alsopaleincomparisonwiththeirKoreancounterpartsintermsoftheirphysique.SingersfromtheK-popboybandsTVXQ,originallyfeaturingfivemembers,andSHNee,alsofeaturingfivemembers,areatleastteninchestallerthanmembersofArashi.Asaresult,toloyalfans,K-popmusicvideosandconcertsaremuchmorevisuallyappealingthanthoseofotherAsian(especiallyJapaneseorChinese)counterparts.IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
273264HandbookofcultureandglocalizationFigure16.1K-pop’sglocalizationprocess(shadedcells)Finally,eventhoughothercompeting,non-Koreanbandsmaywanttorelyonthephysiquefactorfortheirquickrisetostardom,theyoftenfallshortoffans’expectationsintermsoftheirdancing–singingcoordinationinlargegroups.Thisvoice–dancecoordinationisthethirdfeaturedominantamonggloballypopularK-popidols.The‘L’processwithintheK-popindustryinvolvesahighlevelofspecificin-houseinvestmentprovidedbyentertainmentcom-paniesthemselvesthatactlikeventurecapitalfirms.TheprocessofmasteringhowtosinganddanceinasynchronousfashioniscrucialintheKorean‘L’processoftheentireglobaldivisionoflabour.Specifically,thelearningperiodisnoticeablyextensive,oftenrangingfivetotenyears.ThethreemajorK-popmanagingfirmsselectpotentialidolsthroughinternalauditionsand/ortheirK-popcramschools.Traineesgothroughvocal,dancing,languageandtheatreactinglessonsforatleastfivehoursadayintheeveningafterschoolandonweekends.Theymustundergoregularphysicalfitnesstraining,aswellasskinandotherbeautytreatments.Theentireprogrammeresemblesthatofaninstitution;forexample,traineesaresometimesbannedfromusingmobilephonesduringtraining(Ho,2012;Lie,2014;Lie&Oh,2014).Thishasledsomecriticstocallthelearningprocessabusive;K-popmanagersontheirsidedefendtheirmethods,arguingthatK-popcramschoolsarenodifferentfromcollegeprepschools,examcramschools,golfschoolsandothersimilarinstitutions.K-popmanagersemphasizethattheybearthecostofprovidingtheK-popeducationandtraining,unlikeotherprivateeducationalinstitutionsinKorea.3Oncetheirtrainingiscomplete,K-popidolspossessverydifferentskillsfromtheirChineseandJapanesecompetitors:theycannotonlysinganddance,buttheycanalsospeakforeignlanguagesandact.Theyalsolookfarmoreattractiveandpolished.Whenmostofthesystemof‘L’iscompleted,distribution,thefinalstageofK-popglocal-izationiscarriedout.Aswehavementionedearlier,the‘GL’processisnotcompletewithouttheproduct’sexportanddeliverytoforeignconsumersinmassivequantitiesforarevenuelevelthatissustainable.WhathasdistinguishedolderKoreanpopmusicfromK-popisthefactthatnoneofthepriorKoreanpopularmusicgenreswereabletosuccessfullymeetthedemandsofforeignconsumers.ThisisbecausetheKoreanindigenousmusicdistributionIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
274ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands265companiescouldneverreallyexportandselltheirmusicproductsoverseas.Industriespromot-ingK-popinitiallyattemptedlocalizationstrategiesofrelyingonJapaneseandChinesemusicdistributorsfortheirlocalnichemarketsofKoreanpopmusic.InJapan,forexample,SONYMusicJapanandAVEXlicensedK-popmusicinawaythatwaslocalizedfortheJapanesemarket(forexample,BoA,TVXQ,SuperJuniorandSNSD).TopullawayfromJapaneseandChinesedistributorsandbecometrulyglocal(thatis,todistributeK-popoutsideofEastAsia)however,wouldrequireSMEntertainmenttoembarkonatransnationalstrategy.Atransnationalstrategyinmusicdistributioninvolvestherevolutionaryideathatmusiccannowbedistributedbeyondtheboundariesofnation-states,regions,oreconomicblocs,thusbypassingalldomestic,regional,oreveninternationallawsofdistribution.Underthisboldrubric,musicisfree-flowingentertainmentcontentanyonefromanywherecanpurchasebydownloadingfromaplatformthateitherdistributesmusic(legallyorillegally)orstreamsitforafeeorforfree.Furthermore,transnationalmusicdistributionentailsatrulyrevolutionaryideaofartistsanddistributorsuploadingandofferingmusicandmusicvideosthemselvesforfreewiththehopeofpromotingthemselvesforfuturereturnsoninvestmentintheformofdomesticCD/DVDsales,concerttourticketsalesandproductendorsements(Oh&Park,2012).Simultaneously,thisdistributionstrategyisopentolittle-knownartistswhohaveneitheradomesticmarketthatisbigenoughforthemtoreapsignificantprofitsfrom,norforeigndistributorswhowanttoofferthemacontract.InsteadofprofitingdirectlyfromCDandDVDsales,theseartistswhorelyontransnationalonlinedistributionmustrelyonsec-ondaryortertiaryrevenuesfromrelatedproducts,suchascommercialendorsements,royaltiesfromdownloadsandYouTubeclicks,concertticketsalesandmerchandise.Figure16.1capturesthebasicsoftheK-popglocalizationprocess.Eachofthethreestagesofthevaluechain(input,productionanddistribution)hasthreetypesofparticipants(global,localandtransnational).Firmsfromcountriesinthecentreusuallychoosetheglobalstrategyofoptingforallthreeglobalformsofinput,productionanddistribution(the‘Global’column).Traditionallocalfirmssolelyinthedomesticmarket,ontheotherhand,relyonallthreelocalsuppliers,localproducersanddistributors(the‘Local’column).Firmsengaginginpassivehybriditymixglobalandlocalfirmsusuallyinatop-downfashionaccordingtotheorderoftheglobalcentre’smandateofimportingfinanceandtechnology,whileatthesametimeimport-ingrawmaterialsfromtheperiphery.Productionanddistributioncanalsobeoutsourcedunderthepassivehybriditystrategy.Transnationalfirmsinthemusicindustryarenewcomerswhomostlyuseweb/app-basedmusicplatformsforinput,productionanddistribution.However,proactiveglocalfirmscarefullymixglobal,localandtransnationalfirmsinabottom-upfashiontoengendertheglocaleffect(thediametriccombinationofthethreewhitecells).InthecaseofK-pop,producerssuchasSMhavechosenglobalinputfirms,localproductionfirmsandglocal(transnational)distributionfirms.HavingrecapitulatedtheinnerworkingsofK-pop’sglocalization,wemoveontothenextpartofthechapter,namelythetopicoffemaleuniversalism,inordertoanswerthequestionofwhythemajorityofHallyufansarewomenwhorangefromteenagerstowomenintheir70s.FEMALEUNIVERSALISMANDTHEGENDERDIVIDEThe‘K’inK-dramasandK-popisnowobvioustous:theKoreannessrepresentsfemaleuniversalismthatisvividlyconveyedinmajorworksofHallyuthatareexportedallovertheIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
275266Handbookofcultureandglocalizationworld.The‘K’deliberatelytargetsafemalefandomthatappreciatesfemaleuniversalism,whichcanbeconsideredaubiquitousvaluesharedbymostwomenintheworld(thatis,genderedmelancholia).ThisistheareawhereKoreantacitknowledgeismostpresentandwhereitperformsmosteffectively.ThesubtleemotionalactionsthatKoreanTVdramaactressesengageinarethebestexample.Often,theseactressesdonotreceiveanypromptingandsometimesad-libwhileshowingawiderangeofemotionsincludingimpromptu–andreal–tears.FemaleK-popsingersblenddifficultaerobicmovementswiththefacialexpres-sionsofK-dramaactresses–fullofsubtlefacialandbodyexpressions.AdominantthemeforKoreanactressesandgirlbandsingersalikeistheuniversalismoftheirphysicalbeauty–inotherwords,womenacrosstheworldnowfeelKoreanbeautyistheultimatelooktoreplicate(Epstein&Joo,2012).Here,physiqueisnotusedasatoolofsexualsuggestiveness,butratherawayforwomentoovercomeeverydaygenderlimitations.ThegenderdividethatfacilitatedtheriseofHallyuintheworldcameaboutfromthreefactors:genderedmelancholia,racialmelancholiaandpost-colonialmelancholia(Oh,2011;Oh&Kim,2019).Hallyufansinevitablyhaveatleastoneofthesethreetypesofmelancholia.Melancholiaisdefinedasanemotionaloutcomefromthesuppressionofsorrowcausedbythelackorlossofsomethingorsomeonecherished(Butler,2011).Genderedmelancholiaisanarchetypalformofmelancholia,whicharisesoutofthemournfulrealizationthatawomancannot‘weep’openlyaboutthenaturalsexsheisbornwith.Herdutyasawomanistodenouncehermother,sistersandothergirlfriendsaslifetimesexualcompanionsinordertoacceptmalepartnersinstead.Thus,heradultorsometimesevenadolescentsexualpartnersforcehertolivewithgenderedmelancholia(Butler,2011).Wecanalsoascertainthatmaleswhogothroughsimilargendertroublescanalsoexperiencegenderedmelancholia,asmanygaymencannotopenlybemoanthefactthattheyarebornmale.Racialmelancholiaoccursinmenandwomenwhoarenotbornasmembersofthehegem-onicracialgroupintheirsociety.Thefactthatonecannotopenlylamentabouttheracialcat-egoryshewasborninconstitutesthebeginningofhermelancholicexperiences(Eng&Han,2000).Finally,postcolonialmelancholiareferstothesuppressedsorrowimperialistsfeelwhentheylosetheircoloniesbacktothepeopleindigenoustotheregion(Gilroy,2005).Postcolonialmelancholiaisfeltamongformerimperialistsandthenre-manifestsitselfasracismagainsttheirformercolonialsubjectswhoarelivingintheirformerimperialmotherlands,suchastheUK,Japan,France,Germany,Italy,Spain,theUSandsoon.Victimsofracism,whoareminoritieslivingintheglobalcitiesofformerimperialistcountries,thereforefeelenhancedracialmelancholiathatleadstoacollectiveurgetoseekculturalandemotionalcomfortfromtheirstrongtieswiththeirhomelands(Appadurai,1990).Whenmyriadminoritywomenfindculturalcontentfromtheirhomelandisalsofilledwithsexist,racialandpostcolonialbiases,theyturntoHallyu’sfemaleuniversalism.Hallyu’sglocalascendanceasanimportantentertainmentgenreforwomenacrosstheworldisduetoitsfemaleuniversalism.ParticularlyimportantisK-drama’sfemininity,espousingheroineswhorepresentwisdom,rationality,tenderness,careandscientificreasoningalongwithactivesocialparticipation,allofwhichwereonceconsideredcharacteristicsofWesternmaleuniversalism.InHallyudramas,itistheseheroineswhoassumerolesofattorneys,pros-ecutors,politicians,doctors,artistsandordinary,struggling,unemployedcollegegraduateswhowanttorealizetheirCinderelladreams.FemaleuniversalismisthereforeauniversalmessageofthegenderedmelancholiaandstrugglesharedbyallwomenintheworldwhowanttobreakfreefromtheirchainsofthetraditionalandmaledominatedcommunitiesofIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
276ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands267Confucianism,CatholicismandIslam.Itisthewillamongwomentoexplorethepossibilitiesofbuildingandeventuallyrealizingequalcommunities,wheretheycanfreelyrelievetheirgendered,racialandpostcolonialmelancholiawithoutfearofsocialorstateviolence.LikeK-pop,K-drama’ssuccessliesinitsportrayalofKoreanwomenbreakingfreefromtheyokeofConfucianismandotheroppressivelocalvaluesinordertoembraceWesternvaluesandcreateafreeandinclusiveglobalhumanity.ForthefirsttimeinKoreanpophistory,K-popgirlbandshaveelevatedtheircorporealbeautytothelevelofacceptabledefiancetotheConfucianrepressionofKoreanwomen.TheirdancingandsinginghavealsoappealedtomanyfemalefansfromtraditionalCatholic,IslamicandConfucianbackgroundsinAsia,theMiddleEastandLatinAmerica.Unlikethetypicalphenomenonoffemalefanslovingboybands,intheK-popscene,femalefansprovideenormoussupporttogirlbands.Girls’Generation,forexample,hasthemostYouTubeviewsamongK-popsingers,and,in2017,anotherall-girlgroup,RedVelvet,garneredthenumberonespotontheK-popchartsforthegreatestnumberofweeks.Puttogether,Hallyuculturalcontent,initsK-popandK-dramaforms,hascapturedtheattentionoffemalefansacrosstheglobeastheonlytrulypostcolonialculturalindustry,vis-à-vistheso-calledconvivialityculturalindustriesoftheUK,theUSandJapan.Hallyu,asawhole,dealswithgenderedandracial/ethnicmelancholiaonaglobalscale.ItssuccessisnowcorroboratedbytheongoingobservationandempiricalevidencethatKoreanentertainershaveexcellenttacitknowledgeinmixingWesternculturalcontentwithKorean-stylefemaleuniversalism.Furthermore,ithasdemonstratedthatitcanattractthemajorityoffemalefansfromallovertheworldwhoaretiredofpopculturefromJapanand/orHollywood(Oh,2011).GENDERFLUIDITYANDANDROGYNOUSMEN:AGLOCALPHENOMENONWITHINTHEK-COMMUNITYWithintheworldoffemaleuniversalism,howdoesHallyupackageandmarketKoreanmales?AretheyscientificandrationaluniversalmenlikewhitemalesortheirJapanesevariations?WhatvaluedoKoreanmenhaveintheworldofK-dramaandK-pop?Theseareourfinalquestionsinthesecondpartofthischapter.InbothK-popandK-drama,maleactorsandsingerstendtopresentasfluidintermsoftheirgenderidentity,muchtotheinitialdismayoftheSouthKoreanculturalcommunitywheretraditionalmaleandfemalegenderroleshad–untiltheemergenceofHallyu–beenstrictlyupheld.Inordertocompetewithlocalandglobalcelebritiesandcatertofemalefansallovertheworld,maleK-popsingersandK-dramaactorsalikehadtoundergoarapidevolutionfrommachocharacterstopromotingimagesofandrogynousmaleswithfemininelooksandtrim,hairlessbodies(C.Oh,2015).‘Beautifulboys’(misonyeonorbishōnen),however,hasbeenauniversallypopulartermintheWestandEastAsiaforliteraryandoperacharacters.InRenaissanceItaly,beautifulboyswereoftenperceivedbyartistsasmodernmanifestationsofbeauty,whereasinJapanesekabukiplays,beautifulboys,asyakusha,wheedledenormousfansupportmostlyfromolderwomen(Fujitani,2006;Rocke,1998).Beautifulboys,alongwithbeautifulgirls(bishōjō),alsooccupysignificantpositionsinmuchofmodernJapanesemangaorcomicbookstories.However,inKorea,suchaconceptdidnotexist,especiallybecauseofthestrictConfucianvaluesthatdistinguishedmenfromwomenbysexfromtheageofseven.ItisonlythroughIngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
277268HandbookofcultureandglocalizationKoreanTVdramasandK-popscenesthattheconceptofbeautifulboysemergedandlaterproliferatedinKoreathroughacarefuluseofKoreantacitknowledge.SinceKoreanshadnotreallybeenfamiliarwiththeRenaissanceortheJapaneseconceptofbishōnen,itmayseemunlikelythattheywouldpossessanytacitknowledgeonhowtomanufactureprettyboys.Yettherealityhasprovenotherwise.IntheHallyuindustry,prettyboysweremanufacturedaccordingtothedemandsofthefemalebeholderswhoknewhowtocreatethem.KoreandramaandK-popproducersuseavastarrayofbeautytechniquesattheirdisposal,includingcosmeticproductsandmakeupskills,oroutrightcosmeticsurgery(Epstein&Joo,2012).MostbeautytechniciansareofcoursewomenwhodefinewhatconstitutestheK-dramaorK-pop‘pretty’boylook.KoreanboybandsandactorsmaintainRenaissancestylefacialandbodycompositions(forexample,goldenratios),rarelyfoundinJapanorotherAsiancoun-tries.Koreanbeautifulboys,therefore,havegarneredenormousfanloyaltyfrombothChineseandJapanesewomen,whichhasresultedinawiderrushoffemalefansupportfromSoutheastAsia,theMiddleEast,LatinAmerica,NorthAmericaandEurope.Inthissense,theK-community,whereglobalfansofK-dramasandK-popinteracteitherofflineoronline,isfilledwithglocalizedbeautifulboys.ThesemalesservethedemandsoffemaleuniversalismsharedamongfemaleHallyufanswhowanttodefytraditionalgenderroles.Physicalbeautyisnotagiventrait,butsomethingmanufacturedintheK-communitythroughproactiveapplicationsofbeautyandathletictechniques.Themodificationoftheirbodiesisnottoimprovetheirphysicalappealtotheoppositesex,buttorelieveHallyufansoftheirgendered,racialandpostcolonialmelancholia.IftwentiethcenturyEuropeandNorthAmericaembodiedwhitemaleuniversalism,EastAsiainthetwenty-firstcenturyepitomizesfemaleuniversalismintheformofgenderedmelancholia.Inanutshell,femaleentertainersinHallyuconstitutetheOtherwhomfemalefanswanttobecomeoremulate,whereastheKoreanmaleactorsandsingersrepresenttheirideal‘genderneutral’sexualpartners.Often,itisalsoobservablethatmanyofthesefemalefanswanttobebewitchedbytheandrogynousmaleidolswhocanbebothmalesandfemales(Oh&Kim,2019).Allthesegender-bendingtechniquesarepartoftheHallyuglocalizationthoughtprocess,whichatteststohowtheKoreanHallyuindustryhasperfecteditstacitknowledgearoundcreatingandmanufacturingbeautifulboysandgirlsforthenewworldoffemaleuniversalism.Itisthereforeonlynaturalthatfemaleuni-versalisminK-popandHallyuhaspromotedaproactivefandom,includingHallyupilgrimagetourismtoKorea,Koreancultureandlanguagelearning,K-popcoverdancevideoproduction,participationinK-popauditionsandultimatelyjoiningtheK-popindustryasproductionstaffandsingers(seeKimetal.,2013;Madrid-Morales&Lovric,2015;Oh,2009,2011;Otmazgin&Lyan,2019).CONCLUSIONInouranalysisofHallyu,usingtheconceptsofglocalization,femaleuniversalismandgenderfluidity,threefindingsaboutHallyufromthe(Korean)producers’perspectivearepossible.First,HallyuisnotreallyaboutKoreannessorAsianness,butinsteadentailstheglobalculturalvaluesoffemaleuniversalism.Femaleuniversalismdoesnotintendtoreplacewhitemaleorscientificmaleuniversalism,butratheraimstoliberatewomenfromtheyokeofgenderedmelancholia,asuppresseddesiretoidentifyone’sselfdistinctlyfromherprescribedgenderidentity.Insodoing,someofthesewomenalsosufferfromracialandpostcolonialmelancho-IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
278ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands269lia,bothofwhichcanbeliberatedbythesameworldviewoffemaleuniversalism.Inshort,femaleuniversalismistherealizationoffemaleidentitybypeoplewhogenerallypossesstheproblemofgenderedmelancholia,butnotnecessarilytheothertwoformsofmelancholia.Second,thegenderdivideintheappealofHallyuisnotanaccidentaloccurrencebutinsteadtheproductofaprolongedperiodofplanningandexperimentationbyKoreandramawriters(mostlywomen),K-popproducers,K-popchoreographersandvoicecoaches(again,mostlywomen)andHallyuartists.Withhindsight,appealingtofemaleuniversalismhasturnedouttobemuchmoresuccessfulthanappealingtomalescientificuniversalism.ThegenderdividehascreatedanuneasyoutcomeforHallyu,asitsfandomispredominantlyfemale,withonlyasmallfractionofmalefollowers.OneestimatebyWAHSisthatthatmorethan90percentofthe100millionregisteredfanclubmembersintheworldarefemale.Third,Hallyu’ssuccessisbasedentirelyonitsglocalstrategyofbusinessexpansioninawaythathasbypassedthelureofglobalizationorlocalizationstrategies.However,theglocalstrategywillfinditdifficulttosustainits‘L’process(thatis,localization),whichnecessitatestheemploymentofKoreantalent.AstheglobalpopularityofHallyuexpandstoEuropeandNorthAmerica,morefans,mostofwhomareproactivelearnersthemselves,willlikelydemandtheopeningofthe‘L’tointernationalcontenders.WhenHallyuopensupits‘L’toglobalcontenders,itwillhavetoabandonitsglocalstrategyinfavourofaglobalstrategy,where‘L’itselfwillhavetobeglobalizedortransnationalized,justlikeitsinputanddistribution.IfBTSonedayweretofeatureglobalandtransnationalboysotherthanKoreans,woulditsfemaleuniversalismbesustainable?Orwoulditperhapsattractmoremalefansthanfemales?ThesearesomeoftheimmediatequestionswecanraiseaboutHallyu’sfuturebasedontheglocalizationframeworkithasmaintainedsofar.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWethanktheeditorofthisbook,ProfessorVictorRoudometof,andananonymousreviewerofourearliermanuscriptforconstructiveandhelpfulsuggestions.GratitudeisalsocordiallyextendedtoPeterMoodyforhisexcellentEnglishediting.Allremainingerrorsareours.NOTES1.Seewww.iwahs.org.2.AsimilarcasecanbefoundinNorthKoreanmassgameswithcardstunts.3.BasedoninterviewswithCEOYoung-minKimandA&RManagerChrisLeeatSMEntertainmentinNovemberandDecemberof2012,respectively.REFERENCESAppadurai,A.(1990),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,Theory,CultureandSociety,7(2-3),295–310.Black,G.D.(1994),HollywoodCensored:MoralityCodes,CatholicsandtheMovies,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Butler,J.(2011),GenderTrouble:FeminismandtheSubversionofIdentity,NewYork,NY:Routledge.IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
279270HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCho-Han,H.,Hwang,S.,Iwabuchi,K.,Lee,D.andH.Kim(2003),HallyuwaAsiauiDaejungMunhwa[HallyuandAsianPopularCulture],Seoul,SouthKorea:YonseiUniversityPress.Chua,B.(2008),‘StructureofidentificationanddistancinginwatchingEastAsiantelevisiondrama’,inB.H.ChuaandK.Iwabuchi(eds),EastAsianPopCulture:AnalysingtheKoreanWave,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress,pp.73–90.Chua,B.(2012),Structure,AudienceandSoftPowerinEastAsianPopCulture,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress.Dunning,J.H.(1992),‘Theglobaleconomy,domesticgovernance,strategiesandtransnationalcorpora-tions:Interactionsandpolicyimplications’,TransnationalCorporations,1(3),7–45.During,S.(1997)‘Popularcultureonaglobalscale:Achallengeforculturalstudies?’,CriticalInquiry,23(4),808–33.Eng,D.andS.Han(2000),‘Adialogueonracialmelancholia’,PsychoanalyticDialogues,10(4),667–700.Epstein,S.andR.Joo(2012),‘Multipleexposures:Koreanbodiesandthetransnationalimagination’,Asia-PacificJournal,10(33)(1),1–24.Fine,G.A.(1997),‘Scandal,socialconditionsandthecreationofpublicattention:FattyArbuckleandthe“problemofHollywood”’,SocialProblems,44(3),297–323.Fujitani,A.(2006),‘Nihonnodentōbunkanohonsitsunikannsurukōsatsu’[‘AstudyoftheessenceoftheJapanesetraditionalculture’],NihonJendāKenkyū,9,13–28.Georgiou,M.(2005),‘DiasporicmediaacrossEurope:Multiculturalsocietiesandtheuniversalism–particularismcontinuum’,JournalofEthnicandMigrationStudies,31(3),481–98.Gilroy,P.(2005),PostcolonialMelancholia,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Hirata,Y.(2005),HangukeulSobihaneunIlbon:Hallyu,Yeoseong,Deurama[JapanthatConsumesKorea:Hallyu,Women,andDrama],Seoul,SouthKorea:Chaeksesang.Ho,S.L.(2012),‘FuelforSouthKorea’s“globaldreamsfactory”:ThedesiresofparentswhosechildrendreamofbecomingK-popstars’,KoreaObserver,43(3),471–502.Huntington,S.(1993),‘Theclashofcivilizations’,ForeignAffairs,72(3),22–49.Iwabuchi,K.(2008),‘WhentheKoreanwavemeetsresidentKoreansinJapan:Intersectionsofthetransnational,thepostcolonialandthemulticultural’,inB.H.ChuaandK.Iwabuchi(eds),EastAsianPopCulture:AnalysingtheKoreanWave,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress,pp.243–64.Iwabuchi,K.(2013),‘Becoming“culturallyproximate”:Thea/scentofJapaneseidoldramasinTaiwan’,inB.Moeran(ed.),AsianMediaProductions,London,UK:Routledge,pp.62–82.Jang,W.andY.Kim(2013),‘EnvisagingthesocioculturaldynamicsofK-pop:Time/spacehybridity,redqueen’sraceandcosmopolitanstriving’,KoreaJournal,53(4),83–106.Jang,W.andB.Lee(2015),‘TheglocalizingdynamicsoftheKoreanwave’,KoreanRegionalSociology,17(2),5–19.Kim,K.(2011),VirtualHallyu:KoreanCinemaoftheGlobalEra,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Kim,A.E.,Mayasari,F.andI.Oh(2013),‘Whentouristaudiencesencountereachother:DiverginglearningbehavioursofK-popfansfromJapanandIndonesia’,KoreaJournal,53(4),59–82.KOCCA(2018),2018KontenchuSaneopTonggyeJosa[The2018SurveyoftheContentIndustries].Naju,SouthKorea:KOCCA.KoreaFoundation(2021),2020JiguchonHallyuHyeonhwang[The2020HallyuStatisticsfortheGlobalVillage].Jeju,SouthKorea:KoreaFoundation.Lie,J.(2012),‘WhatistheKinK-pop?SouthKoreanpopularmusic,thecultureindustryandnationalidentity’,KoreaObserver,43(3),339–63.Lie,J.(2014),K-pop:PopularMusic,CulturalAmnesiaandEconomicInnovationinSouthKorea,Oakland,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Lie,J.andI.Oh(2014),‘SMEntertainmentandSooManLee’,F.YuandH.Yan(eds),HandbookinEastAsianEntrepreneurship,London,UK:Routledge,pp.346–52.Lyan,I.(2019),‘WelcometoKoreaDay:FromdiasporatoHallyu“fan-nationalism”’,InternationalJournalofCommunication,13,3764–80.Madrid-Morales,D.andB.Lovric(2015),‘“Transatlanticconnection”:K-popandK-dramafandominSpainandLatinAmerica’,TheJournalofFandomStudies,3(1),23–41.McChesney,R.W.(2001),‘Globalmedia,neoliberalismandimperialism’,MonthlyReview,52(10),1–19.IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
280ConfiguringKoreanpopculturetomeetglocaldemands271Monden,Y.(2011),ToyotaProductionSystem:AnIntegratedApproachtoJust-In-Time,BocaRaton,FL:CRCPress.Nonaka,I.andH.Takeuchi(1995).TheKnowledge-CreatingCompany:HowJapaneseCompaniesCreatetheDynamicsofInnovation,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Oh,C.(2015),‘QueeringspectatorshipinK-pop:Theandrogynousmaledancingbodyandwesternfemalefandom’,TheJournalofFandomStudies,3(1),59–78.Oh,I.(2009),‘Hallyu:TheriseoftransnationalculturalconsumersinChinaandJapan’,KoreaObserver,40(3),425–59.Oh,I.(2011),‘Tornbetweentwolovers:RetrospectivelearningandmelancholiaamongJapanesewomen’,KoreaObserver,42(2),223–54.Oh,I.(2013),‘TheglobalizationofK-pop:Korea’splaceintheglobalmusicindustry’,KoreaObserver,44(3),389–409.Oh,I.andS.A.Kim(2019),‘ComprendrelacommunicationdelagendermélancolieautourdufanféminindeHallyu’,Societes,145,11–24.Oh,I.andG.S.Park(2012),‘FromB2CtoB2B:SellingKoreanpopmusicintheageofnewsocialmedia’,KoreaObserver,43(3),365–97.O’Neill,S.(1994),‘Morality,ethicallifeandthepersistenceofuniversalism’,Theory,Culture&Society,11(2),129–49.Otmazgin,N.andI.Lyan(2014),‘Hallyuacrossthedesert:K-popfandominIsraelandPalestine’,Cross-Currents:EastAsianHistoryandCultureReview,3(1),32–55.Otmazgin,N.andI.Lyan(2019),‘Fanentrepreneurship:Fandom,agency,andthemarketingofHallyuinIsrael’,KritikaKultura,32,288–307.Rocke,M.(1998),ForbiddenFriendships:HomosexualityandMaleCultureinRenaissanceFlorence,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–17.Ryoo,W.(2009),‘Globalization,orthelogicofculturalhybridization:ThecaseoftheKoreanwave’,AsianJournalofCommunication,19(2),137–51.Siegel,H.(2002),‘Multiculturalism,universalismandscienceeducation:Insearchofcommonground’,ScienceEducation,86(6),803–20.Shim,D.(2011),WaxingtheKoreanWave,Singapore:AsiaResearchInstitute,NationalUniversityofSingapore.IngyuOhandWonhoJang-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:41AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
28117.TheglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustryBalaA.MusaINTRODUCTIONTheworldofcinemawaspleasantlysurprisedwhenthemovieParasite(2019)wonfourawards,includingBestPictureandBestScreenplayatthe2020AcademyAwards.Itwasthefirsttimeaforeign-languagemoviehadwonBestPictureinthe92-yearhistoryoftheawards.Thiswasalandmarkdevelopmentbecauseitwastheculminationofatrendthathadbeengrowingfordecades:moviesaddressingthemesthatresonatewithbothlocal(domestic)andglobal(international)audiences.Inadditiontoitsgreatstorytellingandartisticexcellence,ParasitehighlightedtheissueofsocialclassinKorea,aswellthepan-humanrealitiesofine-quality,injusticeandstruggleforsurvival.AnotherthingthatwinningtheOscarsymbolizedwastheriseofotherpopcultureandentertainmentcentresaroundtheworld,forexample,SouthKoreaandK-pop.Fordecades,HollywooddominatedthecinemascenebeyonditsnativeUnitedStates.Itwasalsothecapitalofworldcinema.Forthegreaterpartofthetwentiethcentury,themovieindustrywassynonymouswithHollywood,whichwas,inturn,synonymouswithAmerica,intheeyesofpopcultureobservers(Wasser,1995).Now,thetrendischangingtowardsthein-countryproductionofmoviesthroughlocal–globalcollaborations.Storiesfromtheglobalperipheryarealsocapturingtheattentionofdominantmarketstudios.YouTube,Netflix,Disney+,Vimeo,Hulu,aswellasotherstreamingplatformsarecateringtolocalandglobalaudiencesandtastes.MoviesfromtheEastandfromtheSoutharestreamedontheseplatformsforlocalandglobalaudiences(Hale,2020).Citiesaroundtheworld,suchasCapeTown,Vancouver,Toronto,London,Berlin,Shanghai,HongKongandWellingtonhavebecomeglobaldestinationsformovieproduction.Netflix’sInternationalOriginalsbrandhasseensuccessfulmoviesandtelevisionshowssuchasKingofBoys,BeastsofNoNation,TrackersandBlood&Water(Hale,2020).Hollywood’sremakeofMulan(2020)isgeneratingsignificantinterestaswellascontro-versyinwaysthatspeakofthetimes.Thecastofcharacters,thoughmostlyofChineseherit-age,wereborn,andhavelivedorpracticetheirprofessionsinAmerica,HongKong,China,NewZealand,Singapore,Canada,Taiwan,Vietnamandotherpartsoftheworld.Theglobalreleaseofthemoviehasbeenovershadowedbyworldwidesocialmediaprotestsandcallstoboycott.CriticsciteChina’shumanrightsviolationsinHongKongandagainsttheUyghurs,bothofwhichChinawantstreatedaslocalmatters.TheglobalpandemicforcedDisneytoreleasethemovieonitsDisney+streamingchannel.Meanwhile,thecompanyispartneringwithNollywood,Nigeria’smovieindustry,toexpandproductionanddistributionofDisneymoviesinAfrica,aswellasAfricanmoviesinDisney’sglobalmarket(Salaudeen,2020).AfricanentertainmentstudiosaregrowingtheirbrandsbygoingbeyondthehomevideoculturetowardsIMAXandCinemaxtheatres.Theground-breakingboxofficesuccessof272BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
282Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry273BlackPanther(2018)hassparkedinterestingenremoviessuchassuperheroesandsciencefictionamongThirdCinemaindustries,thathavebeen,untilnow,veryformulaic.OtherglocalpartnershipsbetweenAfricaandtheworldincludeadealbetweenChinesemoviegiantHuahuaandFilmOnetoproduceChinese-Nigerianmovies,thefirstonebeing30DaysinChina,whichisintheworks.WealsoseeFrenchentertainmentgiant,Canal+,buyingROKfilmstudios,aleadingNollywoodproductionstudio.Therearemanybenefitsofthesecollab-orationsandmergers(Salaudeen,2020;Salaudeen&Busari,2019).ThirdCinemaartistsinAfricaandotherdevelopingcountrieshavemuchtalent,buthavebeenhamperedbylimitedcapitalandtechnology.ThesepartnershipsenableAfrican,LatinAmerican,AsianandMiddleEasternstudiostocreatehighqualityworks,usingthelatesttechnology.Storiesfromprevi-ouslymarginalizedregionscannowreachglobalaudiences.Ontheirpart,American,ChineseandFrenchstudioscanexpandtheirmarkets.Muchhasbeenwrittenontheforcesthathavedriven,andnowshape,thepopculturelandscape(Appadurai,1990,2019;García-Mainar,2016;Musa,2019a;Robertson,1997;Yoshimoto,2003).Scholarshavegainedamoreprecisevocabularytodescribeaphenom-enonthathasbeenvariouslylabelled‘glocalization,’‘hybridization’or‘translocalization’(Appadurai,1995;NederveenPieterse,1995;Robertson,1994).Robertson(1992,p.173;1994)coinedtheterm‘glocalization’todescribetheculturaldialectsofglobalandlocalforcesfunctioninginthesameplane;andthefilmandcinemaindustryoffersarelevantillustration.Thecontemporaryworldoffilmsandcinemahasbeeninfluencedandshapedbymyriadeconomicfactors,technologicaladvances,politicalandpolicyconsiderations,culturalvaluesandsocialnorms.Thisdiscoursefocusesonpopcultureratherthanfolkcultureoreliteculture.AccordingtoMartinandNakayama(2018),‘[p]opularcultureoftenisseenaspopulist,inthatitincludesformsofcontemporaryculturethataremadepopularbyandforthepeoplethroughmassconsumptionoftheseproducts’(p.205).Among‘theseproducts’are‘soapoperas[and]realitytelevisionshows’(p.205).Onecouldalsoaddmovies,cinema,popularmusic,sportsandfashioninthiscategory.Aspopularentertainment,moviescutacrossnichesofculture-specificfare.Whilehighartisassociatedwithbourgeoisandelitecultures,andfolkartisregardedaspartoflocal,traditionalandmassculture,movies,generally,appealtosocietyatlarge.Inhisanalysisofmetaphorsandfunctionsofculture,Mazrui(2009)speaksof‘cultureasaladderofstratifi-cation’(p.20).Bythisframework,movies,asculturalfare,belongtothemiddlerungoftheladder.Somehavearguedthatmoviesconstitutethemostpopularofpopularentertainment.Panofsky(1999)arguesthat,[w]hetherwelikeitornot,itisthemoviesthatmold,morethananyothersingleforce,theopinions,thetaste,thelanguage,thedress,thebehavior,andeventhephysicalappearanceofapubliccompris-ingmorethan60percentofthepopulationoftheearth.(Panofsky1999,p.280)Moviesareapolysemicartformthatspeaktoallculturesandaddressdiverseissues.Filmmakerstailortheirworktoanysectorofsociety,fromtheyoungtotheelderly.Thesubjectsandcontentofmoviesaddressawidevarietyofthemesandappealtodiverseaudiences.Thisunderscoresthepotentialofcinemaasaculturalforce.Film,asbothentertain-mentandanartform,hasbecomemoreembeddedintheculturescapethanotherartformsthathavebeenaroundlonger.Itmaybealittlebitexaggerated,albeitnotfar-fetched,thatPanofsky(1999)putsmoviesabovemanyothercreativeartforms:BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
283274HandbookofcultureandglocalizationIfalltheseriouslyricalpoets,composers,paintersandsculptorswereforcedbylawtostoptheiractivities,arathersmallfractionofthegeneralpublicwouldbecomeawareofthefactandastillsmallerfractionwouldseriouslyregretit.Ifthesamethingweretohappentothemoviesthesocialconsequenceswouldbecatastrophic.(Panofsky1999,p.280)Thisunderscorestheextenttowhichcinemahasbecomehighlyintegratedintoculture.Partofitssuccessasanentertainmentmediumliesinthevarietyofdistributionandconsumptionoutlets.Thisanalysistakesamediaecologyperspectiveinexaminingtherelationshipbetweenthecinemaindustryandculture.Itlooksatinteractionsbetweentechnological,culturalandeconomicdeterminismasmeansofunderstandingtheglocalizationofcinema.Itcritiquestheimplicationsoftheglocalizationofcinemaforculture,andviceversa.Theapproachandframeworkcallforexpandingparadigmsofevaluatingconsumer,practitioner,andpolicyneedsandprioritiesinanewandemergingpopcultureenvironment.CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORKTraditionalanalysesofcinemahingeonfilmtheories,rangingfromthesemioticapproachtotheclassicalandneo-realisttothepost-structural.Here,however,wesituatethediscussioninthehistorical–critical–culturalperspective,morespecifically,amediaecologyapproach.Throughthislens,wecanhighlightthehistoricalandculturalfactorsthatpropeltheglocali-zationofthefilmindustry,andalsocriticallyexaminetheroleofthecinemaindustryintheglocalizationofculture.Amediaecologyperspectivepositsthatmodesofcommunicationconstitutesubstructuresofsociety.Itistheviewthathistoryisshapedanddrivenbymodesofcommunication(Griffinetal.,2019;McLuhan,1964).Thisisincontrasttothepoliticaleconomyperspective,whichholdsthatmodesofproduction,meansofproductionandrelationshipsoflabourconstitutethesubstructureofculture.ItisalsoatvariancewiththeNeo-Hegelianmaterialdialecticalviewofhistoryandcivilization.Amediaecologyanalysisprovidesanidealframeworkforanalysingtherelationshipbetweenthefilmindustry–bothastechnologyandartform–anditsplaceinculture.Ithelpsusunderstandhownationalandtransnationalcultureshaveshapedtheevolutionoftheindustry,andhowithasimpactedlocal,nationalandglobalcultures.Thisapproachfocuseslessontheaestheticaspectsoftheglocalfilmindustry.WhileitlooksathowNorth–SouthandEast–Westdialogueandexchangearere-mappingindustrypracticesandprocesses,itwillemphasizegrandnarrativesandculturalissues,whichconstitutethefocusofthisvolume.CULTUREANDTHEGLOCALIZATIONOFCINEMACommunicationtechnologyhasservedtobringculturestogether.Associetieshavegrown,cultureshavebuiltlinkagesacrossdivides,forthepurposesofcommerce,growth,expansion,development,diplomacyand/orconquest.Themetaphorof‘TheGreatWallofChina’(Gannon&Pillai,2016),whichservedtoseparatecultures,isbeingreplacedwiththenewmetaphorofthe‘SilkRoad’,designedtolinkcultures.Internationalandinterculturalrelationshipshavevariedfrombasiccuriositytopragmaticinterests.TherangeofinterestsandtheapproachesBalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
284Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry275torealizingthemhavebeenthesubjectofacademicandscholarlyinvestigation.Theconcernhereistheantitheticalroleofpopcultureinglocalization,whichRolandRobertsondescribesas‘thesimultaneity–theco-presence–ofbothuniversalizingandparticularizingtendencies’(Robertson,1997,p.4).Thedialecticalrelationshipiscriticaltotheglocalizationofculture.Throughoutthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies,therestoftheworldwaseagertoacquireandadoptmoderntechnology,alongwithitsembeddedtechniqueandrationality,bothphilosophicalandideological.AdoptionandconsumptionofWesterncultureandmediacontentweredesirablegoalsandsymbolsofmodernity.Thetechniqueandtechnologyoffilmmakingmaturedintheearly1900s.By1920,thebasicstructureofthefilmindustryhademerged,consistingofthreemaincategoriesofplayers:producers,distributorsandexhibitors(Dominick,2013).AfterinitialconflictsbetweentheMotionPicturePatentsCompany(MPPC)andemergingactors,aswellasdistributionhouses,theMPPCmanagedtoestablishastronggriponallaspectsofthefilmbusiness.ItscontroloftheindustrywassostiflingthatindependentproducersbrokeawayfromtheNewYorkfilmestablishmenttofindanewhomeinHollywood,LosAngeles.There,theyestablishedanewethosforthefilmindustry,basedonstarpower,creativeindependenceandblockbusters.Actorswerenolongercontractuallyboundtoworkforonlyonestudio.Theycouldpickandchoosetheirprojects.Starpowerwasusedtomarketmovies.Innotime,Hollywoodbecamethemoviecapitaloftheworld,whichsetthenormforanddefinedthecultureofthefilmindustry.Withtheadditionofsoundandnationalstandardsinthe1920s,themovieindustrywassettogrowrapidlyintheUnitedStates.Morecapitalwasinfusedbyfinancialinvestorstofundmovieproductions,studiosandtheatres.Cinemabecametheentertainmentandpastimeactivityofchoiceforthefast-growingurbanpopulations.Movietheatresmultipliedandmovieviewingbecameaffordablenotjustfortheeliteandupper-middleclass,butfortheworkingclassaswell.AccordingtoWasser(1995),insteadoflocalstandards,stylesandorientations,‘nationallybasedcinemadominatednationalcultures’(p.428).Furthermore,‘[b]othnorthandsouthAmericancinemasappealedtothemassesflockingtotheurbancentersandseekingnewnationalidentitiestoreplacethetraditionalonesofthevillageandtheoldworld’(p.428;seealsoMartin-Barbero,1993).Wasser(1995)notesthattwophenomenaemergedbetweenthelate1920sandmid-1940s,namely,thenationalizationandtransnationalizationofAmericancinema.Notonlydidtele-visionbecomeafavouritenationalmediumofentertainment,itfosterednationalcultureandvaluesbyenablingcitizensacrossregionstoenjoyandcultivatesharedexperiences.Insodoing,cinemahelpedtofosteranationalwayoflife.Thelifestyles,relationships,language,myths,heroes,villains,dreams,fashionandpolitics,asshowninmovies,becamethemodelsandidealsfornationalviewers.Movieswerecreatedtoappealtoanationalaudience,cuttingacrossregional,generational,ethnicandsocio-economicsensibilitiesandtastes.Theindustrysoughtnewmarkets,audiencesandprofitsabroadbybecomingatransnationalinstitution.Transnationalizationmeantproductscreatedfromnationalcentresweredistributedandconsumedacrossbordersandinasmanycountriesastheycouldreach.Theuniquechar-acteristicoftransnationalmediaisthatthesamecontentandgenrewassoldanddistributedtotheworldwithlittleornoregard(orattempt)totailorittowardspecificnationaltastesandnorms.Thus,Americancinemabecameworldcinema.Itbecameatrulynationalandglobalmassmedium.ThisalsodovetailedwithAmerica’sincreasinginfluenceasaworldeconomicpower.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
285276HandbookofcultureandglocalizationWithbothafinancialandatechnologicaladvantage,theAmericanfilmindustrydominatedtheworldinthenumberofmoviesproducedandsold.Commerciallyviablemovieindustriesinmostotherregionswereeithersmallornon-existent.Asian,LatinAmerican,andAfricancountrieslookedtotheirgovernmentstoestablishandsupporttheirfledglingdomesticmovieindustries(Garritano,2008).Manyoftheseeffortswereunsuccessful.Nationalfilmindustriesdidnotproliferateinotherpartsoftheworldtoprovidealternativesoreffectivelycompeteontheglobalscale.ThismeanttherewasawideglobalmarketforHollywoodmovies.Hollywoodwasabletosellitsmoviestoforeigndistributorsandexhibitorsatalowercostthanitdidathome.Crane(2014)associatedHollywood’ssuccessindominatingworldcinemawiththegreaterconcentrationofexperiencedmovietalentandtheabundanteconomicresourcessupportingtheindustry.Otherfactorsincludealargemarket,generatingsignificantprofitannuallyandwell-organizedfilmmarketinganddistribution,includingexportinfrastructure.Hollywoodtalenthasincludedforeignactorsattractedtopursueandadvancetheircareersthere.FromHollywood’searliestdays,manystudioownersandproducerswereearlyimmi-grantswhowerelookingforbusinessopportunities.So,ithasbeenbothanationalandglobalcapitalofmovies.CriticsviewtheinfluenceofHollywoodfilmsonworldcultureaspartoftheUScorporateandpoliticalagendatoexertsoftpowerandwintheglobalculturalwaragainstothercountriesandideologies(Wasser,1995;Endong,2018).Americanmoviescarrywiththemthevaluesofindividualism,capitalism,democracy,liberalism,ambition,equalityandcompetition.Whetherintendedornot,HollywoodmoviesbecamethetoolformarketingAmericancultureandvaluesaswell.Likeallinstitutions,Hollywood’sgrowthandinfluencehaditsebbandflow.Evenasanationalindustry,itfacedcompetitionfromtelevisionasadominantentertainmentmedium.Thereweretimeswhenitsappealandreachwaned,anditexperiencedfunctionaldisplace-mentfromothermediaduetochangesintechnologyandculture.Changesincultureandlifestyle,suchasthedemassificationoftheaudience,forcedtheindustrytoadapt,repositionandredefineitsrole,structureandbusinessmodel.TrendsintheglobalenvironmentbegantochallengethetransnationalpostureofAmericanandWesternmedia,includingthecinemaindustry.Inthe1950sand1960s,manycoloniesbegantoagitateforindependence.Therewerenationalculturalrevolutionsandresistanceincolonialandpost-colonialsocietiesseekingtodismantletheyokeofpoliticalandculturaldomination.Thisledtoagitationsamongthesenationstorecoverandprotecttheirculturalidentityandautonomy(Musa,2020;Steeves,2008).Inemergingpost-colonialsocieties,theemphasiswasonpreservingandpromotingtheirnationalcultures.TheCulturalRevolutioninChinaandothermovementsintheEastalsosawcountriesthathadnotbeencolonizedseekingtoaffirmandadvancetheirculturalindependenceandidentity.Foreignfilms,music,literature,andotherculturalproductswereviewedasmeansofculturalimperialism.Theeffectoftransnationalizingpopcultureanditsresultantculturalimperialismwasdeemedevidentinculturalhomogeneityandconvergence(Tomlinson,1991).ThedisseminationofculturalproductsfromWesternculturalcentresexpresseditselfintheglobaldiffusionandadoptionofallthingsWestern–language,technol-ogy,food,businessandculture.Whilesomeviewedthisasprogresstowardgreaterunderstanding,cooperationandunityamongcultures,othersvieweditasanewconquestoftheWestoverothercultures,notthroughgunsandphysicaldomination,buttheconquestofmindsthroughcorporateculture.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
286Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry277Stadtler(2005)notesthat,tosome,‘globalizationhasbeenregardedasaeuphemismforWesternculturaldomination’(p.517).Likewise,Yoshimoto(2003)arguesthat,[t]heideaofglobalizationcertainlyconjuresupanimageofmoviesconqueringeverycorneroftheglobalfilmmarketandthushomogenizingfilmcultureallovertheworld.Atthesametime,globali-zationcanalsobeunderstoodasaprocesswherebyheterogeneitiesanddifferenceandexponentiallymultiplied.(Yoshimoto,2003,p.454)Homogeneityandheterogeneityareopposingtendencies.Globalizationandtransnationaliza-tionofthefilmindustryfostershomogenizationofprinciplesandprocesses.Heterogeneityisanoffshootoflocalityandinternationalization.Thatiswhatglocalizationrepresents.Itencapsulatestheglobalandthelocal,includingrespecting,embracingandaffirmingboththegeneralandthespecific,theuniversalandtheunique,aswellasintegrationanddissociation.Duetotheinterconnectednessoftechnologyandtheworldeconomy,culturalexclusionandisolationarevirtuallyimpossibleatthispoint.Nevertheless,countrieshavesoughtwaystoresistandovercomethehomogenizingtendenciesofglobalization.Theagitationstodismantleculturalimperialismmanifestedinpopcultureandothermeanswerewagedbothindividu-allyandcollectively.Inthe1970s,theUnitedNationsEducationalScientificandCulturalOrganization(UNESCO)servedasaforumforThirdWorldandnon-Westerncountriestoairgrievancesontheperceivedimbalanceintheinternationalflowofculturalinfluenceandproducts.ThisgroupcalledforaNewWorldInformationandCommunicationOrder(NWICO).Thecomplaintagainsttheprevailingorderwasthatitwasskewedinfavourof,anddominatedby,NorthAmericaandWesternEurope.Theyarguedthatotherregions’cultures,valuesandinterestswerebeingunderminedbytheone-way,North–Southflowofinformationandculturalproducts.TheybelievedthestoriesandexperiencesofothercultureswerenotbeingproperlypresentedthroughWesternmediaandpopculture(Campaiola,2014;Ding,2017;Gillam,2017).Theycalledforanewworldorderthatwouldcorrecttheimbalanceandbecomemorefair,justandequitable.TheWestarguedinfavourofafreerflowofinforma-tionandculturalproductsamongcountries.TheothercountrieswantedmoreregulationandcontrolasameansofprotectingpoorercountriesfromthedumpingofWesternmovies,music,literatureandotherproductsonthem.HollywoodandtheWesternfilmindustryhavenothelpedmatterswhenitcomestothechargesofculturalimperialism.Earlyfilmswerecriticizedfortheirnegativeportrayalsofnon-Westernsocietiesandcultures.Thefirstbigbudgetfeaturefilm,D.W.Griffith’sBirthofaNation(1915),wasobsceneinitsnegativeandstereotypicalportrayalofoutgroupsandglorificationofingroups.Itsformat,scriptandstorylinesetthetoneforwhatwouldbeknownastheclassicalHollywoodcinematiccanon.AccordingtoYoshimoto(2003),‘[t]hecentralfeaturesoftheHollywoodcinemaarethesenseofnaturalnessconstructedbynarrativeandspatio-temporalcontinuity,whosefundamentalbuildingblocksincludethecharacter-centeredworldviewandthecause-effectrelation’(p.452).Yoshimoto(2003)furthernotesthat,‘[t]heclassicalHollywoodcinemaasananalyticalcategoryisalsotooinclusiveandtotalitarian’(p.425).ItseekstotelltheAmericanstoryandalsothehumanstory.Criticsseethebasicscriptasmostlyethnocentric,wheretheracializedOtherisportrayedassavage,primitive,cannibalisticanduncivilized.Communitiesandculturesaredestroyedundertheguiseofbenevolentcivilizingmissions(Stam&Spence,1974[1999]).SometimesthemoviesareguiltyofmisrepresentinganddistortingtheimageoftheOther.Othertimes,BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
287278HandbookofcultureandglocalizationtheyareguiltyofexcludingorignoringtheOther.StamandSpence(1974[1999]),forinstance,observethat:CountlesssafarifilmspresentAfricaasthelandof‘lionsinthejungle’wheninfactonlyatinypro-portionoftheAfricanlandmasscouldbecalled‘jungle’andwhenlionsdonotliveinjunglebutingrasslands.Hollywoodfilms,inanycase,showdisproportionateinterestintheanimal,asopposedtohumanlifeinAfrica.(StamandSpence,1974[1999],p.239)Untilnow,mostofwhattherestoftheworldseesofAfrica,forinstance,arebrutaldicta-tors,suchasIdiAmin,orbloodyandsenselesswars,suchastheRwandangenocideandtheLiberianandSierraLeoneancivilwars.HollywoodmoviesonAfricathathavehadsuccessfulrunsincludeDisney’sanimatedfilm,TheLionKing(1994)anditsBroadwayremake,TheLastKingofScotland(2006),HotelRwanda(2004)andBloodDiamond(2006).Allfitthescriptdescribed.ThesamehasbeentrueoftheportrayalofLatinAmerican,Asian,andMiddleEasternculturesinHollywoodmovies.NicholsandRobbins(2015)alsoasserthow,‘[s]tereotypically,LatinAmericaisdepictedasaregionofcrime,corruption,anddrugtrafficking,aviewthatalsohasitsplaceinLatinAmericanfilm’(p.129).PortrayalofMiddleEasternersasfanaticsandterroristshasintensifiedinpopcultureintheWestandbeyond,especiallysince9/11(Alsultany,2015).Itishopedthatthroughtheinter-industryglocalcollaborationsdescribedearlier,moreauthenticpresentationsofothercultureswillbegintoproliferate.Theattemptsbycountriestoseizetheirownnationalnarratives,aswellastheirdesiretoreapeconomicbenefitsfromdevelopingtheirfilmindustriesandalsoemancipatethemselvesfromculturalandmediaimperialismhaveledtoaculturalshiftfromglobalizationandtrans-nationalization,towardaglocalizationofcultureandcommunication.Thatmeansculturestrytostayconnected,whileupholdingtheiridentities.Glocalizationofthefilmandcinemaindus-tryhasmeantmanythingsandtakenmanyforms.Rulyova(2007)opinesthat,‘[g]localizationresiststheglobalizationprojectbyinterpretingtheglobalthroughthelocal’(pp.1367–8).Onecouldsaysucharesponseisnotsomuchresistingbutappropriating.Resistingoccursintheformofrestricting,banning,andexcludingforeignculturalcontentandinfluence.ThishasrangedfromtheIronCurtainerectedbytheEasternBlocattheheightoftheColdWartotheBambooCurtainofChina.TheresistancemetaphorisalsoemployedbyGarcía-Mainar(2016),whobelieves‘glocal-izationovercomesboththeglobal/localanditsattendanthomogeneity/heterogeneitybinariesbyarguingthatthelocalisalsoconstructedonasupra-localbasis,andbyviewingbothhomo-geneityandheterogeneityasmutuallyimplicativeprocessescausedbyglobalization’(p.49).TheweaknessoftheadversarialmodelintheworldorderisthatitconceivesofarelationshipbetweennationsandregionsinaColdWar-erawin/losematrix.ThisperpetuatestheculturalimperialismmindsetoftheWestagainsttherest.ThisisconsistentwiththeThirdCinemaschoolthatemergedinLatinAmerica,which,accordingtoNicholsandRobbins(2015),isamovementthatrepresentsa‘combinationofpoliticsandfilmmaking’(p.103).ThirdCinemacametobeassociatedwithThirdWorldCinema,andfoundexpressionintheworksofAfrican,Asian,MiddleEastern‘directorsOusmaneSembeneinSenegal,RutwikGhatakinBengal/IndiaandTheoAngelopoulosinGreece’(pp.103–4).AsThirdCinemaandothernationalcinemashaveexpanded,theyhavewrestledwithfindingtheappropriatenicheandrelationalposturetowardHollywoodandclassicalcinema.TheirorientationshavevacillatedbetweentheformerandtheresistancefervourafootBalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
288Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry279acrosstheThirdWorld.Manyproducersanddirectorshavefocusedonapartnershipmodel.Dialecticalandcompatibilitymodelshaveexistedside-by-sideinthenewera.Experiencehasshownthatglocalizationofthemovieindustryandtheattendantproliferationofpopculturecentresacrosstheglobehavefosteredmorecooperation,collaboration,exchangeandsynthesis.Ithasbeenmorethecaseofarisingtideliftingallboats.García-Mainar(2016)rightlyobservesthatthebestwaytoconceiveglocalizationistoregard‘bothhomogeneityandheterogeneityasmutuallyimplicativeprocesses’(p.49).Thisisevidentbothamongnationsandwithinnations.Thisalsoapplieswithinandacrossregions.Zhang’s(2010)descriptionoftheChinesefilmindustry,asbothtranslocalandtransnationalequallyappliestothenewHollywoodandalltheother‘-woods’thathaveemergedintheglocalcinemaenvironment:theserangefromBollywoodtoNollywood,andfromPollywoodtoRiverhood.Thesehaveoperatedastransnationaland/ortranslocalphenomena(ontherelationshipbetweentranslocalityandglocalization,seethediscussioninthisvolume’schapter‘TranslocalityandGlocalization:AConceptualExploration’).WhileBollywoodestablisheditselfapartfromHollywood,SouthIndia’sfilmindustry,consistingofTamil,Telugu,Malayalam,KanadaandBengalicinema,soughttocarveaseparatenichefromBollywood.AfricancinemaindustriessuchasGhallywood,BongowoodandKannywoodarealsoseekingtoestablishtheiridentitiesseparatefromthedominationofNollywood.AsZhang(2010)seesit:filmproduction,distribution,exhibition,andreceptionoftentakeplaceatthescaleofthelocalortranslocalratherthanthenational,especiallyintermsofmarketeconomy.Translocalityprefersplace-basedimaginationandrevealsdynamicprocessesofthelocal/global(orglocal)—processesthatinvolvenotjustthetrafficofcapitalandpeoplebutthatofideas,images,stylesandtechnologiesacrossplacesinpolylocality.(Zhang,2010,p.136)Thankstotheglocalizationofpopculture,today’sfilmandcinemaindustryexistsinamul-tiverseofdifferentcentresofinfluence(forexamples,seeRoudometof,2016,pp.102–15).WhileHollywoodremainsthestrongestfinancialandtechnologicalcentreofmovie-makingintheworld,itisnolongerthemostprolificinnumberoffilmsmadeorticketssoldinagivenyear.In2019,Hollywoodrankedfirstinboxofficerevenue($11.08billion),butthirdinnumberofdomesticticketssold(1,170million).Italsorankedfourthinnumberofmoviesproduced(786),behindIndia,NigeriaandChina.Thistrendshowsthereisnotonecentreandcapitalofworldcinema;instead,theindustryreflectstheproliferationofpopculturehubsandcentresacrosstheglobe(Musa2019a,2019b;Musa&Ahmadu,2014).Upuntiltheearly1990s,theWesterncommercialandculturalcentresofNewYork,LosAngeles,FranceandLondonweretheentertainmentcapitalsoftheworld.TheemergenceofK-pop,Nollywood,Bollywoodandotherregionalculturalindustrypowerhouseshavetransformedtheland-scape.FORCESANDTRENDSSomeoftheforcesandfactorsthatpropeltheglocalizationofthefilmandcinemaindustryhavebeenexaminedearlier.Thissectionlooksmorecriticallyatspecificaspects,notonlytoidentifytheirinfluencebutalsothedirectionsinwhichtheydrivelocalandglobalfilmindustriesandculture.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
289280HandbookofcultureandglocalizationThePoliticalEconomyLookingattheglocalizationofthecinemaindustrythroughapoliticaleconomylensisessen-tialbecauseofthemanyconvergingfactors.Wasser(1995)proposesthatapoliticaleconomyperspectiveoffers‘anintegratedtheoreticaltreatmentofthefundamentalproblemsofvalue,exchange,socio-economicgrowthanddevelopmentclassstructureandtheproperplaceofthestateinsociety’(Mueller,1995,p.462,emphasisinoriginal).Alltheseelementsareimpli-catedintheglocalizationofpopcultureandtheentertainmentindustry.Forthisdiscourse,however,we’llselectandexaminejustafew.Inthe1960sand1970s,anumberofforcesbegantoconvergetoengenderagradual,butcertain,transformationofthemediascape,includingtheworldofcinema.Embeddedwithinthestructureoftransnationalizationandglobalizationwerealsotheforcesthatwouldundermineit.Thelandscapebeganshiftingtowardsinternationalization,insteadoftransnationalization.Internationalizationmeantnationalnorms,identities,andinterestsbegantobeassertedintheproductionandconsumptionofpopculture.Manycountriesbeganenactingpoliciesandregu-lationsdesignedtoprotecttheirsocietiesfromcultural,mediaandtechnologicalimperialism.EvendevelopedcountriessuchasCanadaintroducedlawstoincreaseandpromotedomesticmediacontentandlimittheamountofforeigncontentthatcouldbeairedonnationalmedia.Economicandpoliticalfactorswerepushingnationstopayattentiontotheirlocaltalentandculturalindustries.Manygovernmentsbegantoinvestintheirownnationalfilmindustriesandprojects.Atthesametime,theysawitasanopportunitytapintotheeconomicpotentialoftheirartsandculturalindustries.TheUNESCOCharterallowedcountriestoprotecttheirnationalculturesbyrestrictingtheflowofculturalgoodsandproductsintotheirmediamarkets(Crane,2014).CountriessuchasChina,IranandCubaestablishedverystrictpoliciesonthedegreeofforeignmovies,music,artsandotherculturalcontentwelcomeintheircountries.Atthesametime,countriessoughttostrengthentheirownartsandculturesectors.Almosteverycountrynowhasanationalfilmcorporationoragency.Indevelopingcountries,inparticular,governmentsfunded,orsup-portedthefundingoffilminfrastructureaspartofnationaldevelopmentprogrammes.Someusedthisinfrastructureasaninstrumentfornational(re)orientation,mobilizationandindoc-trination.Chinaisacaseinpoint(Crane,2014;Gao,2009).Indevelopingcountries,wherenation-buildingandsocialmobilizationarepolicypriorities,governmentsregardthefilmindustryasanessentialinstrumentforachievingnationalobjectives.Theypursuethisagendathroughtaxbreaksandsubsidies,infrastructuredevelopmentandeducationalprogrammes.Theyexpecttoreapthebenefitofhavingtheirstoriestoldtocounterthenegativeportrayalinforeignmovies.Themovieindustryisalsoamajorsourceofrevenueformanydevelopedanddevelopingcountries:‘Inmanycases,thebusinessofthefilmindustryinessencegoeshandinhandwiththecurrenteconomichealthofthenation’(Nichols&Robbins,2015,p.118).Movie-makingrequiressignificantfinancialinvestment.Countrieswithfewerresourcesoftenseekforeigninvestmentandco-productionpartnerships:‘China’scheaplaborisanimportantlinkintransnationalproductionchains,notjustforHollywoodbutalsoforJapaneseculturalindustriessuchasanimation’(Iwabuchi,2010,p.49).Iwabuchi(2010)furtherassertsthatEastAsiancountriesviewedthepopcultureindustryasacriticalplayerintheir‘Co-ProsperitySphere’project(p.150).Theynote,‘[m]utualconsumption,coproductionandco-promotionarebecomingmoreandmorecommonamongJapan,Japan,Korea,TaiwanBalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
290Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry281andHongKong’(p.49).Co-productionisalsoanincreasingphenomenoninLatinAmerica.NicholsandRobbins(2015)observethat,whileco-productionsinSouthAmericadatebacktothe1930s,they‘nearlydoubledfrom66inthe1980sto126inthe1990s’(p.118),andtheyhavegrownevenmoreinthetwenty-firstcentury.TheycitehowtheproductionofTitanic(1997)inMexicobroughtsignificantrevenuetotheregionthroughtheexpenditureofthecrewandcast,butalsothelot,studioandequipmentandtechnologyhavecontinuedtobeusedbylocalproducersandstudios.Itcontinuestounderscorethetranslocalityandglocalizationoftheindustry(Ince,2008).Co-productionswithSpainkepttheCubanfilmindustryaliveduringtheeconomiccrisisinCubafollowingthecollapseoftheSovietUnion(Nichols&Robbins,2015).Notonlydoco-productionsprovideafinanciallifelineforcapitalandtechnologytoinitiateprojects,they‘alsogiveLatinAmericanfilmsawidermarket,givingthemaccesstotheEuropeanUnionthroughthedistributingnetworksinvolvedinthecoproductionprocess’(Nichols&Robbins,2015,p.119;seealsoDeTurégano,2004).BothCanadaandMexicoendeavourtoattractHollywoodfilmmakersthroughfinancialincentives.Thisbringsmutualbenefittothecountriesandtheindustries.Ernest-Samuel(2019)analysestheregionalflowofcapitalinvestmentintheNigerianandSouthAfricanentertainmentindustriesandtheimpactonNigeria’smovieproductionanddistribution.TheriseofNollywood,asNigeria’smovieindustryiscalled,uniquelyillustratesthisconfluenceofgovernmentpolicy,marketforcesandtechnologicaldeterminisminshapingpopcultureandentertainment.ThankstoNollywood,cinemaisfastsurpassingsports,musicanddanceasbothasourceofrevenueandapopularleisureactivityinAfrica(Gannon&Pillai,2016).Withapproximatelyathousandreleasesannually,Nollywoodhasgrowntobethesecondlargestmovieindustryintheworld,surpassedonlybyBollywood,intermsofvolumeofmoviesproduced.ItwasinthecrucibleofeconomichardshipthatNollywoodwasborn(Azeez,2019;Haynes,2000).TheeconomicrecessionandtheStructuralAdjustmentProgramme(SAP)ofthe1980sbecamethecatalystthattransformedtheentertainmentindustry,notjustinNigeriabutonthecontinentasawhole,andlaunchedaculturalrenaissancethatcontinuestoexpandacrosstheglobe(Endong,2018).Facedwithadroughtofcapitalinvestmentandaninabilitytoimportcelluloidfilms,aNigerianbusinessman,KennethNnebue,decidedtomonetizehisconsignmentofVHScassettes,fundingalow-budgetmovietobedistributedviahomevideos.Thefirstmovie,LivinginBondage(1992),launchedNollywoodandthehomevideomovieindustry(Adedayo,2008;Haynes,2000;Husseini&Sunday,2019;Miller,2016).IthasbeenobservedthatHollywood,BollywoodandNollywoodaretheonlymovieindustriesthatdom-inatetheirdomesticmarketsintermsofviewership(Onuzulike,2007).Insteadofthelinearandone-waytransmissionandflowofmoviesfromtheglobalNorthtotheglobalSouth,thethreedominant‘-woods’haveresultedinamoreequitabledistributionandflowofformulas,talentandtechnology.CulturalSyncretismandSynthesisAsmentionedearlier,moviesarebothproductsandpurveyorsofculture.Glocalizationofthefilmindustryhasenabledthelocalizingoftheglobalandtheglobalizingofthelocal.Glocalizationhasbrokendownsomedemarcationsanddichotomies.Theuniversalandtheparticularareintertwined.Thisisbecause,withtoday’stechnology,whatwasremoteandBalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
291282Handbookofcultureandglocalizationhiddenhasbecomeuniversallyavailableandaccessible.Storiesgainattentiononthebasisoftheirmerit.ThirdCinema,CinemaNovoandNewWaveCinemamaynothavethebudgetandresourcesofclassicalcinema,yettheyaregainingglobalaudiencesbecauseofthepoweroftheirstoriesandtheirabilitytotranslatelocalrealitiestoglobalaudiences,andviceversa.Today,inadditiontoHollywood,othercinemaindustries,suchasBollywood,NollywoodandGhallywood,havebecomeorarefastbecoming‘worldcinema’.Inthepast,theyweremarginalornon-existentontheworldstage.Whatwasperipheralhasbecomecentral.Returningtothemediaecologygrid,itisfairtosaytherehavebeenseismicshiftsinthefilmindustryonsomanylevels.Commentingontheparadigmshift,Stadtler(2005,p.519)says,‘ithasbeenseenasdifficulttomarketHindicinematotheWestbecauseofthesesong-and-dancesequences.However,itseemsthataudience’stasteshaveshiftedinthisrespect’.Theyaregainingviewershipacrosstheglobe.Theyaredominatingdomesticmarketsandattractinglargeviewershipsindifferentpartsoftheworld.Stadtler(2005)elaboratesonthistrend,inshowingthat:TheBombaybasedHindifilmhashadaglobalfollowingfordecadesintheMiddleEast,Africa,theformerSovietUnion,andthethenCommunistbloc,ChinaandthelargeSouthAsiandiasporaacrosstheglobe...Thesecross-overshavecertainlycreatedanincreasingawarenessandinterestamongnon-Asianaudiencesandasaresult,theoverseasmarketisbecomingmoreandmorelucrativeforBombay’sfilmproducers,theirmoviescrackingtheBritishboxofficetoptenonaregularbasis.(Stadtler,2005,p.522)Thenewworldofcinemaconsistsofmanycentresofculturalinfluence,ratherthanoneorafewcentresthatshapeworldentertainment.Today’sglocalcinemaenvironmentischarac-terizedmorebysharingandcollaborationamongpartners.Insteadofatop-downflowfromNorthtoSouthoralinearflowfromWesttoEast,thereisincreasedcross-culturalexchange.Mutuallearningbetweenindustriesandculturesistakingtheplaceofresistanceandconflict.Thatwhichwaslocalandperipheralisbecomingglobalandmainstream,andviceversa.Theworldhasbecomefluidintermsofthemovementoftalents,traditionsandtechniques.EvenHollywoodhasbecomeopentoideasandpracticesfromotherfilmculturesandcentres.CriticsarguethatAmericanfilmsarebecomingmore‘“Non-American”,de-culturated,andlessplace-/culture-specific’(Lee,2008,p.133;ascitedinCrane,2014,p.375).Thatisnottosaytheylacksoulandculturalanchors,butthatdifferentculturesandinfluencesarelendingingredientstoAmericancinemainsuchawaythattheproductappealstoandreflectstheappetitesofmultipleculturesratherthanjustafew.Theoppositeisalsotrue.Thiscultureofcollaborationstrengthensthevariousregionalindustriesratherthanunder-miningthem.Lee(2008)suggeststhattheneedtobeinclusiveandcatertoaglobalaudienceisrenderingnationalmovies‘culturallyempty’(p.133).Thatisamislabelling.Theabsenceofasingularlyidentifiablegeographicalanchordoesnotmeantheabsenceofculturalidentityorflavour.García-Mainar(2016),forinstance,pointstohow:Crematorioborrowsfromglobalgenresandtendencieswhichitinflectswithlocalaestheticsandsocialconcerns.Itslocaldimensionisinfactcreatedthroughaglobalform,sinceitisintheframechosenbytheseriesthatallowsittodeviatefromit,makingthedepictionoflocalculturepossiblebyitsinvestmentinaglobalaestheticandideology.(García-Mainar,2016,p.58)ThirdCinema,CinemaNovoandNewWaveCinemahavetheirrootsinclassicalcinema.TheyhavebranchedoffHollywoodmainstreamtraditionbecauseofculturalandsocialreal-BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
292Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry283ities,butarenotcompletelydetachedfromtheirroots.AccordingtoRao(2010),‘thelabelBollywoodhascometorepresentbothanacknowledgmentofthedebtMumbaifilmmakersowetoHollywoodforcreativeideasaswellasadescriptionthatchallengesthehegemonyofHollywood’(p.2).ThesameargumentcanbemadeaboutKannywood,Bongowoodandothersimilarinstitutions.Intheageofglocalization,therelationshipbetweentheseseeminglycompetingculturalindustrieshasbeenseekingtobalancebetweenopposingtendenciesofisolationandassimilation.Itistofindthepropermiddlegroundofstrategicengagement.BothestablishedWesterncinemaandemergentThirdCinemaareadoptingthisstance.TotheextentthatAmericanandotherWesternfilmindustrieshavefoundinspiring,creative,innovativeandprofitableformulasfromemergingpopculturecentresthatcouldbeimitated,theyhavenotbeenshytoembraceandincorporatethose.Stadtler(2005)pointstoHollywoodreturningtomusicalcinemafollowingthesuccessofMoulinRouge(2001).OnecanpointtoLaLaLand(2016)asonesuchexample.Similarargumentshavebeenmadebyothers.Lee(2008)holdstheviewthatHollywoodmoviesrequireless‘culturaldiscount’(p.119).Inotherwords,theyaretargetingtheworldaudience,inamannerthatviewersdon’tneedmuchculturalbackgroundorculture-specificliteracytocomprehend,makesenseof,interpretorenjoy.Crane(2014)supportsthisviewbyarguingthat,‘[t]helevelsofviolence,action,sex,andfantasy,allofwhichcanbeconveyedvisuallyratherthanthroughdialogue,havesteadilyincreasedinHollywoodfilms’(p.375).Itisbelieved,thisisoneawayHollywoodmoviesattempttoholdontosomeoftheirAmericanvalues,whileappealingtoaworldwideaudience.Othermeansbywhichculturalmeldingisoccurringinthefilmandcinemaindustryincludetheexchangeoftalentandtheroleofdiasporiccommunities.ArtistsfromAsia,LatinAmerica,Africa,andevenEuropeandCanada,looktoHollywoodasthedreamdestinationandultimatesuccesspointoftheircareers.Hollywoodhasattractedactors,writers,producers,directors,camerapeopleandcomposersfromacrosstheglobe.ManymakeittoHollywoodandstaythere.Somehavetakentheexperiencegainedbacktotheirnativecultures.OthersstraddleworldsandworkbothinHollywoodandtheirhomeland.Whilethefollowingisfarfromanexhaustivelist,itisworthmentioningsomenames.ThelateBruceLee’scareerofferssuchanexample.AlthoughborninSanFrancisco,hisfirstattempttogetaroleinHollywoodwasunsuccessful.Hemovedtohisparents’homeland,HongKong,andquicklybecameastar.Afterwards,hewasabletolandactingrolesinHollywood(Maeda,2016).LupitaNyong’o,whowonanAcademyAwardforBestSupportingActressin12YearsaSlave(2013)andalsohadroles(amongothers)intheJungleBook(2016),BlackPanther(2018)andUs(2019),isanothertransnationalartist.LupitaidentifiesasKenyan-Mexican,havingbeenborninMexico,raisedinKenya,andeducatedintheUS.ShehasplayedbothAmericanandAfricancharacters.NicholsandRobbins(2015)showhow‘AmericanfilmsandfilmindustryhavebeenpopulatedwithLatinAmericanactorsandactressessincetheinceptionofsilentfilm’(p.138).TheyidentifyRamonNovara,DoloresdelRio,RaulJulia,RicardoMontalban,KatyJurado,GuillermoDelToro,BenicioDelToroandSalmaHayek,amongsuchfigures.AnumberofEuropeanactorsandactressessometimesworkconcurrentlyonmoviesintheUSandinEurope.NollywoodandBollywoodartistsalsostraddletheWesterncinemaindustryandtheirhomeindustry(Naficy,2001).ActorsandactressessuchasPriyankaChopra-Jonas,IrrfanKhan,AishwaryaRai,andAnilKapoorhaveconcurrentHollywoodandBollywoodcredits.Similarly,NollywoodstarssuchasStephanieLinusOkereke,GenevieveNnaji,OsasIghodaroAjibade,OmotolaJaladeEkeindeandOluJacobshavebeenfeaturedinHollywoodmovies.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
293284HandbookofcultureandglocalizationWhiletheissueofrepresentationandaccesspersists,italsotruethatalmostallgeo-culturalregionsarerepresentedinHollywood.Thesetalentsareabletocross-pollinatetheglocalindustrybyservingaslocalandglobalambassadors.ThemesandSubjectsGlocalizationofthefilmindustrybringsattentiontoawideandhithertounexaminedrangeofissues.ThedistinctivenessofCinemaNovo,ThirdCinemaandNewWaveCinemaisinlargepartduetotheirabilitytoaddressthemesthatWesterncinemahasbeenunableorunwillingtotackle.WhileinmanycasesthefociandinterestsofFirstWorldandThirdWorldcinemaconverge,therearealsomanyinstancesofdivergence.Attimes,whenbothWesternandnon-Westernfilmsaddresssimilarthemes,theycomeattheissuesfromdifferentperspectives.Glocalcinemaisabletobringlocalperspectivesandlensestobearonglobalsituations.Theyarealsoabletobringworldwideattentiontolocalissues,problemsandcrises.NewWaveCinematendstobefarmoreattentivetoissuesofgenderinequalityandtherightsofwomen,minorityrightsandinjustice,poverty,poorgovernance,andenvironmentalissues(Adedayo,2008;Banaji,2014;Johnson&Culverson,2016;Kääpä&Gustafsson,2013;Nichols&Robbins,2015;Roberts,2020).HollywoodandNewWaveCinematreatviolence,poverty,corruption,humanrightsabuse,crimeandtotalitarianismdifferently.InWesternmovies,thesesubjectsareoftenmattersofspectacle.TheyareportrayedasnaturalstatesinThirdWorldcountries,asproblemsforwhichtherearenosolutionsorpresentedtomaketheforeignertheheroandsaviourofahelplesspersonorgroup.ToAfrican,LatinAmerican,Asianandotherfilmmakers,thesearethingsinsocietytheyneedtobechallengedandundone.Banh(2020)underscoresthisdivergencebycomparingthreeversionsofthetellingofMulan,‘awell-knownChinesestoryoffilialpietyandpatriotism’(p.147).Banhhighlightshowtheplots,charactersandobjectschangebasedonwhoistellingthestory.IntheoriginalChineseballad,‘[t]hereisnowhiteAngloAmericansaviors[sic]inthestorynoristherealoveinterest’(p.147).ThecharacterintheDisneyanimatedmovieversion–Mulan(1998)–fitsthemouldofathrill-seekingAmericanteenager,ineptinleadinganarmyandnotawarriordeservingrespect.Incontrast,‘theChineseHuaMulan(2009),live-actionisatransnationaldiscoursethatexpressesChinesenationalpatriotisminapost-feministcinematicwaywhichisdepictedinmanymodernChinesefilms’(p.153–4).BahngoesontoobservethatnowondertheDisneyversionwasaboxofficefailureinChina,whiletheChineseversionwasasmash-ingsuccess.This,inaway,explainswhydomesticaudienceshavecometofavournationalmoviesovertransnationalones.Incountriesandcommunitiesstrivingtodismantleoppression,inequalityandmarginali-zation,glocalcinemacanhelporhurttheircause.Evenadvancedeconomiesfacesituationssuchaspandemics,economicrecessions,familycrisesandsocialconflicts,thatglocalcinemacanaddressbyplacingthefeltneedsandrealitiesofindividualsandgroupsontheglobalandtheglocalagenda.Thatexplainstheappealoflocalhomevideosandlowbudgetmoviestodomesticanddiasporicaudiences.Thereleaseofthelive-actionMulan(2020)andtheattendantsocialandpoliticalcontro-versysurroundingthefilm’sstarLiuYifei’ssupportfortheHongKongpoliceisanotherillus-trationtheglocalculturechange.Thehashtag#BoycottMulandrewattentiontohumanrightsissuesinHongKongaswellastheplightofUyghurs.Themobilizationandconscience-raisingBalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
294Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry285amongglobalaudiencestorespondtonationalandlocalissuesillustratehowtheEastmeetsWest,andNorthmeetsSouthinnewworldcinema.CONCLUSIONCultureisanintegratedwhole.Changesintheeconomic,social,politicalandtechnologicalrealmimpactentertainment,educationalandotherinstitutions.Thefilmindustryhasunder-gonesignificanttransformationsinhowitisconstitutedandhowitoperates.Glocalizationhashelpedreducethegapbetweenlocal,national,andtransnationalcinemaindustries.Advancesintechnologyareempoweringdifferentsectors.Co-productionspromotethesharingoftalents,resourcesandinstitutionalpractices.Thesetrendscomewithbenefitsandliabilities.Thetrendofmovingawayfromthemediaandculturalimperialismmodelandtowardsinter-institutionalcollaborationandmutualityhasservedtheaudiencebetter.Thecinemaindustryhasanoppor-tunitytoadoptabusinessandculturalmodelthatwouldmaximizethepotentialofitsglocaltalent,consumers,andtechnology.Glocalizationofthefilmandcinemaindustryhaspositivelyimpacteddifferenteconomies.Whiletherearesomefinancialandregulatorychallenges,theindustryhasbecomemoreopenandaccessibletodifferentpeople,thankstothedigitalrevolutionandtheabilitytodistributemoviesacrosstheglobethroughnumerousoutlets.Inthepast,thedomesticreleaseofamoviewouldprecedeitsforeignrelease.Withthepandemicandthelockdown,somestudioshavetakenmajorproductionstodirectstreamingandglobalrelease.Thatisanotherdevelopmentoccasionedbythechangingtechnologicalandculturallandscape.Itisachangethatisredefin-ingboththefilmindustryandtheaudience’srelationshiptotheindustry.REFERENCESAdedayo,L.A.(2008),‘Onestepforward,twostepsbackward:AfricanwomeninNigerianVideo-Film’,Communication,Culture&Critique,1(4),335–57.Alsultany,E.(2015),‘TheculturalpoliticsofIslaminU.S.realitytelevision’,Communication,Culture&Critique,9(4),595–613.Appadurai,A.(1990),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,Theory,Culture&Society,7,295–310.Appadurai,A.(1995),‘TheProductionoflocality’,inR.Fardon(ed.),Counterworks:ManagingtheDiversityofKnowledge,London:Routledge,pp.204–25.Appadurai,A.(2019),‘Theready-madepleasuresofdéjàvu:RepeatviewingofBollywoodfilms’,CambridgeJournalofPostcolonialLiteraryInquiry,6(1),140–152,accessed17September2020athttps://doi.org/10.1017/pli.2018.38.Azeez,A.L.(2019),‘HistoryandevolutionofNollywood:Alookatearlyandlateinfluences’,inB.A.Musa(ed.),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.3–24.Banaji,S.(2014),‘Bollywoodhorrorasanuncannypublicsphere:Genretheories,postcolonialconcepts,andtheinsightfulaudience’,Communication,Culture&Critique,7(4),453–71.Banh,J.(2020),‘#MakeMulanRight:RetracingthegeneologyofMulanfromancientChinesetaletoDisneyclassic’,inS.Roberts(ed.),RecastingtheDisneyPrincessinanEraofNewMediaandSocialMovements,Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks,pp.147–61.Campaiola,J.(2014),‘TheMoroccanmediafield:Ananalysisofhybridityintelevisionandfilminstitu-tions’,Communication,Culture&Critique,7(4),487–505.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
295286HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCrane,D.(2014),‘CulturalglobalizationandthedominanceoftheAmericanfilmindustry:Culturalpolices,nationalfilmindustriesandtransnationalfilm’,InternationalJournalofCulturalPolicy,20(4),365–82.DeTurégano,T.H.(2004),‘Theinternationalpoliticsofcinematiccoproductions:SpanishpolicyinLatinAmerica’,Film&History,34(2),15–24.Ding,S.(2017),‘ArticulatingforTibetanexperiencesinthecontemporaryworld:AculturalstudyofPemaTseden’sandSontharGyal’sfilms’,CriticalArts,31(6),44–58.Dominick,J.R.(2013),TheDynamicsofMassCommunication,Boston,MA:McGraw-Hill.Endong,F.P.(2018),‘Cinemaglobalizationandnationbranding:AnexplorationoftheimpactofNollywoodontheNigerianimagecrisis’,JournalofGlobalizationStudies,9(1),accessed19September2020athttps://doi.org/10.30884/jogs/2018.01.06.Ernest-Samuel,G.C.(2019),‘Multichoice®Corporation’sinterventioninNollywood:Acaseinglocalpartnershipexpectations,issuesandoutcomes’,inB.A.Musa(ed.),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.209–29.Gannon,M.J.andR.Pillai(2016),UnderstandingGlobalCultures,LosAngeles,CA:SagePublications.Gao,Z.(2009),‘Servingastir-fryofmarket,cultureandpolitics–onglobalizationandfilmpolicyinGreaterChina’,PolicyStudies,30(4),423–38.García-Mainar,L.M.(2016),‘Crematoriooralocalcaseofglobalcrimefilm/television’,HispanicResearchJournal,17(1),49–61.Garritano,C.(2008),‘Contestingauthenticities:TheemergenceoflocalvideoproductioninGhana’,CriticalArts,22(1),21–48.Gillam,R.(2017),‘RepresentingblackgirlhoodinBrazil:Cultureandstrategiesofempowerment’,Communication,Culture&Critique,10(4),609–25.Griffin,E.,LedbetterA.andG.Sparks(2019),AFirstLookatCommunicationTheory,NewYork,NY:McGraw-Hill.Hale,M.(2020),‘NetflixandCinemaxgotoSouthAfricaforreal’,NewYorkTimes,June12,accessed19September2020athttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/arts/television/netflix-blood-and-water-trackers-cinemax.html.Haynes,J.(ed.)(2000),NigeriaVideoFilms,Athens,OH:OhioUniversityCenterforInternationalStudies.Husseini,S.H.andO.O.Sunday(2019),‘FromNigeriafilmindustrytoNollywood:Land-markingthegrowthoftheNewWaveCinema’,inB.A.Musa(ed.),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.25–43.Ince,K.(2008),‘“Disunitednations”:Cinemabeyondthenationstate’,NewCinemas:JournalofContemporaryFilm,6(2),71–3.Iwabuchi,K.(2010),‘“China,”Japan’schimera,andmediaculturalglobalization’,CinemaJournal,49(3),149–53.Johnson,E.andD.Culverson(2016),FemaleNarrativesinMelodramas,Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks.Kääpä,P.andT.Gustafsson(eds)(2013),TransnationalEcocinema:FilmCultureinanEraofEcologicalTransformation,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Lee,F.L.F.(2008),‘HollywoodmoviesinEastAsia:Examiningculturaldiscountandperformancepredictabilityattheboxoffice’,AsianJournalofCommunication,18(2),117–36.Maeda,D.J.(2016),‘Trans-Pacificflows:GlobalizationandhybridityinBruceLee’sHongKongfilms’,inS.Davé,L.NishimeandT.Oren(eds),GlobalAsianAmericanPopularCultures,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress,pp.15–26.Martin,J.N.andT.K.Nakayama(2018),ExperiencingInterculturalCommunication:AnIntroduction,NewYork,NY:McGraw-Hill.Martin-Barbero,J.(1993),Communication,CultureandHegemony:FromtheMediatoMediations,NewburyPark,CA:SagePublications.Mazrui,A.A.(2009),‘Mediamessages,Sinsofdistortionandsignsofwisdom’,inR.T.M’bayo,C.OnwumechiliandB.A.Musa(eds),CommunicationinanEraofGlobalConflicts:PrinciplesandStrategiesfor21stCenturyAfrica,Lanham,MD:UniversityPressofAmerica,pp.15–24.McLuhan,M.(1964),UnderstandingMedia:TheExtensionsofMan,Boston,MA:TheMITPress.Miller,J.L.(2016),NollywoodCentral:TheNigerianVideoFilmIndustry,London,UK:BFIPalgrave.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
296Theglocalizationoffilmsandthecinemaindustry287Mueller,M.(1995),‘Whycommunicationspolicyispassing“MassCommunication”by:Politicaleconomyasthemissinglink’,CriticalStudiesinMassCommunication,12(4),457–72.Musa,B.A.(2019a),‘Nollywoodandglocalizationofprosocialentertainment’,inB.A.Musa(ed.),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.127–44.Musa,B.A.(2019b),‘DigitalrevolutionandtheempowermentofwomenintheAfricanmovieindustry:VistasfromNollywoodandRiverwood’,inB.A.Musa(ed.),NollywoodinGlocalPerspective,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.231–48.Musa,B.A.(2020),‘Africaatdevelopmentpolicyandpracticecrossroadsinthedigitalera:Navigatingdecolonizationandglocalization’,inK.LangmiaandA.L.Lando(eds),DigitalCommunicationsatCrossroadsinAfrica:ADecolonialApproach,Cham,Switzerland:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.71–92.Musa,B.A.andI.M.Ahmadu(2014),‘Newmedia(il)literacyandprosocialentertainment:Implicationsforyouthdevelopment’,inB.A.MusaandJ.Willis(eds),FromTwittertoTahrirSquare:EthicsinSocialandNewMediaCommunication,SantaBarbara,CA:Praeger,pp.319–33.Naficy,H.(2001),AnAccentedCinema:ExilicandDiasporicFilmmaking,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.NederveenPieterse,J.(1995),‘GlobalisationasHybridization’,inS.Lash,M.Featherstone,andR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.45–68.Nichols,E.G.andT.R.Robbins(2015),PopCultureinLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,SantaBarbara,CA:ABC-CLIO.Onuzulike,U.(2007),‘Nollywood:TheinfluenceoftheNigerianmovieindustryonAfricanculture’,HumanCommunication,10(3),231–42.Panofsky,E.(1999),‘Styleandmediuminthemotionpicture’,inL.BraudyandM.Cohen(eds),FilmTheoryandCriticism:IntroductoryReadings,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.279–92.Rao,S.(2010),‘“IneedanIndiantouch”:GlocalizationandBollywoodfilms’,JournalofInternationalandInterculturalCommunication,3(1),1–19.Roberts,S.(ed.)(2020),RecastingtheDisneyPrincessinanEraofNewMediaandSocialMovements,Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London:SagePublications.Robertson,R.(1994),‘Globalizationorglocalization?’,JournalofInternationalCommunication,1(1),33–52.Robertson,R.(1997),‘Commentsonthe“GlobalTriad”andglocalization’,inN.Inoue(ed.),GlobalizationandIndigenousCulture,KokugakuinUniversity,Japan:InstituteforJapaneseCulturalClassics,accessed30June2020athttp://www2.kokugakuin.ac.jp/ijcc/wp/global/15robertson.html.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Rulyova,N.(2007),‘DomesticatingtheWesternformatonRussianTV:SubversiveglocalizationinthegameshowPoleChudes(TheFieldofMiracles)’,Europe-AsiaStudies,59(8),1367–86.Salaudeen,A.(2020),‘DisneypartnerswithNollywoodtobringAmericanmoviestoEnglish-speakingWest-Africa’,CNNMarketplaceAfrica,accessed19September2020athttps://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/africa/disney-partners-with-nollywood/index.html.Salaudeen,A.andS.Busari(2019),‘ChinaandNollywoodhavesignedupfortheirfirstmajorfilmcol-laboration’,CNNMarketplaceAfrica,accessed19September2020athttps://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/21/africa/china-nigeria-film-partnership/index.html.Stadtler,F.(2005),‘Culturalconnections:Lagaananditsaudienceresponses’,ThirdWorldQuarterly,26(3),517–24.Stam,R.andL.Spence(1974),‘Colonialism,racismandrepresentation:Anintroduction’,inL.BraudyandM.Cohen(eds)(1999),FilmTheoryandCriticism:IntroductoryReadings,5thed.,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.235–50.Steeves,H.L.(2008),‘CommodifyingAfricaonU.S.Networkrealitytelevision’,Communication,Culture&Critique,1(4),416–46.Tomlinson,J.(1991),CulturalImperialism,Baltimore,MD:TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.Wasser,F.(1995),‘IsHollywoodAmerica?Thetrans-nationalizationoftheAmericanfilmindustry’,CriticalStudiesinMassCommunication,12(4),423–37.Yoshimoto,M.(2003),‘Hollywood,Americanismandtheimperialscreen:GeopoliticsofimageanddiscourseattheendoftheColdWar’,Inter-AsiaCulturalStudies,4(3),451–9.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
297288HandbookofcultureandglocalizationZhang,Y.(2010),‘TransnationalismandtranslocalityinChinesecinema’,CinemaJournal,49(3),135–9.BalaA.Musa-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:43AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
29818.GlocalizationandnewsproductionJonathanIlanINTRODUCTIONIntoday’sglobalmediabusiness,onebasicprincipleisalreadycommonknowledge:ifmediacompanieswishtoexpandtheirinternationalpresence,theyneedtodesigntheirproductstosuittheiraudiences’culturalpriorities.Thisprincipleessentiallyentailsaclearcommercialstrategy;thatis,howtosellthesamemediaproductstodiverseclientsandaudiences(Thussu,2018).Asimilarlogicischannelledintoforeignnews-making.1Globalandinternationalnewsprovidersaimtheirnewsproductsatglobalmarkets,and,muchlikeotherglobalmediacom-panies,theytooarewellawarethatinorderfortheirproductstosellwellglobally,theyarerequiredtobothappealtonewsclientsworldwideand,simultaneously,tohavetheirproductstailoredtonationalandlocalmarkets’demands(Atad,2017).Thiscommercialimperativeresultsindifferentmicro-tacticsinnewsroomsthataffecttheproductionroutineinvariousways:forexample,ontheselectionofwhichstoriesshouldbecovered,thewaysinwhichtheyarepackaged,andtheirformsofdissemination–amongstothers(Ilan,2020).Yetacloseinspectionofhowthesenewsproductsaremadealsounveilsvarioustensionsandconflictsatcertainmomentsandsitesofproduction,overdifferentformsofpowerandauthority,atvariouslocal/globallevelsofoperations(e.g.,amongprofessions,nationalidentities,orevenvariousspatialformationsofproduction).Tothatend,thesenewsprovidersarealsoseentoperformassitesofnegotiationwherebyalocal/globalinterplayisconstantlyinmotion(Lee,2005).Ofcourse,global/internationalnewsorganizationsarenotaloneinthisgame,since,eventu-ally,theirproductsneedalsotogothroughthe‘gates’ofvariousnationalandsmall-sizelocalnewsorganizations,andothers,beforetheyreachthedoorstepsofdiverselocalaudiences.Andwhilesomeoftheselocal/nationalorganizationseasilyabsorbtheglobally/internationallyproducednewsproductsintotheirownparticularizationsystemssoastofitlocalaudiences’demands(Clausen,2003,2004),otherscan,infact,beseentobetakinganinstrumentalroleinthelocal‘resistance’againsttheso-calledpowerfulforcesofglobalization(Hafez,2007;Harsin,2014;Norris&Inglehart,2009;Ramos,2019).Thischapterthustacklesthisuniqueformofnewsproduction,yetfromthelesscommonvantagepointofglocalization.Stemmingfromthemaintheoreticalconceptualizationsinthefield,thefollowinganalysisisbasedonafundamentalassumption:glocalnewsproductionillustratesanestablishedbusinessstrategythatisadoptedbyinternational,global,nationalandlocalnewsorganizationsalike,soastoincreaseaudiencesandprofits.Thisisachievedbyactivatingcertain‘glocalmechanisms’earlyinproductionsothattheseproductsappealinternationallyandaretailoredtolocalmarkets’demands(intheglobal/internationalcontext),or,similarly,acquirebothhomogenizedanddiversifiedtraits(inthelocal/nationalcontexts).Yet,apartfromitsbusinessuses,thischapteralsoseekstoshowhowglocalizationismademanifestasasignificantforcethataffectstheentireglobalnewsinformationflow–both289JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
299290Handbookofcultureandglocalizationinsidetheglobal/international/national/localnewsorganization,andinthebroadercomplexrelationsbetweenthelocal/nationalandglobal/internationalspheres.Thechapterthusbeginswithashortliteraturereviewofmediaandglocalization,withapar-ticularfocusonglocalnewsproduction.Itthendiscussestheproductionofglocalnewsandtheglocalizationofnewsproduction,andreviewsthemainprofessionalglocalnewsnetworksthatareoperatingintoday’sglobalnewsarena,alongwithnewentrantsandrivalriesinthefield.Finally,anoverviewofthecurrenttrendsandsomesuggestionsforfuturepathsinthestudyofglocalizationandnewsproductionareprovided,followedbyashortconclusion.LITERATUREREVIEWMediaandGlocalizationTheconceptofglobalizationgainedpopularitybackinthe1990s,therebyattractingscholarlyattentionfromanarrayofdisciplines.Robertson(1992),forexample,sawitasan‘intensifi-cationofconsciousnessoftheworldasawhole’(p.8).Waters(1995)observeditasaprocesssignifyingtherecedingofgeographicalconstraintsonsocialandculturalarrangements,inwhich‘peoplebecomeincreasinglyawarethattheyarereceding’(p.3).Albrow(1996)characterizedit,amongotherthings,aswhenasetofglobalpractices‘exerciseanincreasinginfluenceoverpeople’slives’(Albrow,1996,p.88).Giddens(1991)defineditasthatwhichexpresses‘fundamentalaspectsoftime-spacedistanciation’,therebyconcerning‘theintersec-tionofpresenceandabsence,theinterlacingofsocialeventsandsocialrelations“atdistance”withlocalcontextualities’(Giddens,1991,p.21)–amongmanyotherdefinitions.2Yetwhatisperhapsparticularlystrikingwiththeseattemptsandotherstocaptureglobalization,isthattheyallseemtopointtotheinevitableconnectionofglobalizationwiththemedia,evenwhenglobalizationisdiscussedprimarilyasamyth(Hafez,2007;seealsotheconvergencehypoth-esismythinjournalismandjournalismeducationmodelsinShaw,2018).3Intheearlyyearsofthetwenty-firstcentury,suchtightconnectionswerevisibleintheoperationsofafewtransnationalmediaconglomeratesandtheirpowerfulgripovertheentireglobalmediaindustry(Bagdikian,2004;Devereux,2003).However,withtheriseofadvanceddigitalmediatechnologies(Lehman-Wilzig,2018),andwiththeemergenceofvarioustechno-socialsystems–Web2.0sites,whichareknowntohavebeenshapingusers’internetexperiencesinmodernsociety(Fuchs,2011)–newformsofrelationsbetweenmediaandglobalizationhaveemerged.Ontheonehand,theinternetwasthussaidtohavesignificantlyincreasedtheoptionsofchoiceandaccessibilityforconsumers/usersworldwide(Çöteli,2019;Rao,2009;Roberts,2019).Toanextent,thiswasduetothegrowingabilityofvariousindividuals(e.g.,politicians,celebrities)andorganizations(e.g.,civilsocietyassociations)topublishonline;thelegacymedia’slargeinvestmentindigitalmedia;thenewdigital-bornentrants;andtheexplosionofuser-generatedcontent(UGC)ontheopenwebandthroughmicroblogs(Twitter)andmessagingapplications(WhatsApp)(Nielsen,2019).Ontheotherhand,therearecertainlocalsocio-technologicalconditionsthatare,infact,saidtohaveastrongimpactuponinternetexpansionglobally,andthereisevidencethatparticulargovernmentsareseekingvariousmethods(e.g.,contentblocking,usertracing,andsophisticatedtechnicaltoolswithwhichtoconditionaccessandcreatenewlegalframeworksforcensorship)soastolimititsusesontheJonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
300Glocalizationandnewsproduction291nationallevel(Ramos,2019).Andwhileinternettrafficwithinnationalbordersissaidtobegrowingfarmorerapidlythantheincreaseinprocessesofcross-bordercommunicationontheinternet,thisshowsthatglobalization/mediarelationsare,perhaps,farmorecomplexthanhadbeenperceivedpreviously,andoneswithwhichasimple‘globalization’approachmightstruggletocope(Hafez,2007).Onesignificantphenomenonthatcannotbeignoredintoday’snetworkedmediaenviron-ment,however,isclearlytheunprecedentedgrowth,onaglobalscale,ofcertaintechnologyfirms–headedbytheplatformcompaniesGoogleandFacebook–whodominatethedigitalmediaenvironmentinmuchoftheworld.Thisisachievedbycleverlycreatingmarketsofexchangeandbybenefitingfromthetransactionsthatsuchmarketsenableundertheasym-metricalpowerrelationsbetweentheseplatformsandtheirlocalusers.Whiletheseusersarethusbeingprovided,forexample,withcertaintoolstoexpresstheirlocalidentity(forinstance,throughthevarietyoflanguagesthatareavailableontheseplatforms),suchrelationsareperformed,atthesametime,inthewaysinwhichthedailyactivitiesofusersacrosstheseplatformsareconstantlybeingmonitoredandtheirbehaviouranalysed.Eventually,thesedataaresoldbythegiantglobalplatformstoadvertisingclients,whoarethenabletoprovidetheirlocaluserswithtargetedadvertising(Cohen,2008;Coté&Pybus,2007;Fuchs,2011;Nielsen,2019).YetsuchtailoringtoolsandformsoftargetingareintriguingnotsimplybecausetheyunveilsomeofthemainbusinesstacticsofWeb2.0’spowerfulplatforms,butmainlybecausetheyimplythatreceptionisahighlycomplexprocessthatrequirestheactivationofsophisticatedmediamechanismsandstrategiessothatitcaneventuallyleadtothedesiredformofconsump-tion(Sutikno&Cheng,2012).Thisactiveprocess,which,toanextent,parallelswhatCotéandPybus(2007)describeasaformof‘becomingsubjects’(p.89),suggeststhatmediausersarepartofvaryinglocalcommunitieswithdifferingreceptionandconsumptionpracticesthatcomeintoplaywhenfacedwithsimilar,globallydistributed,mediaproducts.Tothatend,mediacontentisthusmadesenseofaccordingtotheusers’culturalbackgroundsandpersonalrepertoires(Cohen,2002;Liebes&Katz,1990;Shaw,2018).Andwhilesomeoftheseuserswelcomesuchproductswithopenarms,othersseemtoexpressamorecritical,perhapsevenhighlyresistant,approach;thispointstohowtheformationofthestate,forexample,isfarfrombecomingobsolete(Hafez,2007).Still,onequestionremainstobeansweredhere:howisitthatcertainmediacompaniesthathavetheirrevenuefocusedonthenumberofactiveconsumerspossesssuchpowerfulglobalreach,while,atthesametime,theirconsumerscomefromvaryinglocalcommunitiesandperformdiffering,evencontestingattimes,receptionandconsumptionpractices?Indeed,adialecticisinplayhere,which,infact,isresolvedinpractice:inorderforglobalmediacompaniesto‘succeed’,theyneedtoaddresstheirmediaproductstothewidestaudiencepos-sible,andonaglobalscale.Thisresultsina‘homogenization’processinwhichthesemediaproductsarestandardizedwithinpredesignedformatsthatareeventuallytargetedatthelowestcommondenominator,earlyintheirproductionprocesses.Yet,sincetheseprocessesareeventuallyfacedwithvarious‘heterogeneous’formsofreception,suchmediaproductsrequireasenseofdiversification,sotheywillbetailoredspecificallytolocalmarkets’demands(Clausen,2003;Ilan,2020;Thussu,2018).Suchtacticscoincidewithawell-knownmarketingstrategythatoriginatedinthe1980sJapanesebusinessworldintheformofgloballocalization;thatis,the‘tailoringandadvertis-ingofgoodsandservicesonaglobalornear-globalbasistoincreasinglydifferentiatedlocalJonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
301292Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandparticularmarkets’(Robertson,1995,p.28).However,moresignificantly,itfamiliarizedthevibrantcommunityoftheglobalizationscholarsofthe1990swiththeideaofglocalization.Thisideawouldquicklybecomeakeyconceptthatcutsacrossacademicdisciplines,andthatwouldbeappropriatedbyvariouscompaniesfromdiversefieldsintheirstrivingtoincreasetheirbusinessesworldwide.Insocial-scientificscholarship,theconceptualizationofglocalizationcanbesummarizedinthreekeyinterpretations:Robertson(1995)discusseshowglobalizationwasmistakenlytakenasa‘processwhichoverrideslocality’(p.26)andhowthelocal–globalproblematicinglobalizationdiscourseisoftenfalselyunderstoodintermsofpolarrelations.Havingglo-balizationseenastheveryinventionoflocality,glocalization,inhisview,istheveryglobalcondition,involvingbothheterogenizationandhomogenizationalike.Ritzer(2003,2007),however,offersanopposingviewintheformof‘grobalisation’;namely,the‘imperialisticambitionsofnations,corporations,organizations,andthelikeandtheirdesire,indeedneed,toimposethemselvesonvariousgeographicareas’(Ritzer,2007,p.15),soastohave,asthemaininterestofthesenations/corporations/organizations,thepossibilitytoseetheirpowergrow.Thisisdonethroughaunilateralhomogenizationprocessthateventuallyoverwhelmslocality;glocalizationasglobalization.Finally,byaddressingitasanautonomousunitforanalysis,Roudometof(2016)seesglocalizationas‘globalizationrefractedthroughthelocal’(p.399,emphasisinoriginal),havingthelocaloperatingsymbioticallywithglobalization,andtherebyformingglocality(thatis,ablendofthelocalandtheglobal).Indeed,whenmanyaspectsofourcontemporaryglobalizedworld,andtheglobalmediasphere,inparticular,areglocalized,asmostnewsnowadaysmaybe‘glocal’(Roberts,2019,p.205),aglocalmodelisrequired,perhapsnowmorethanever,toparticularlyexaminejour-nalisticpracticeintransnationalcontexts,andtodiscussthemultiplecoexistingnewsspheresinourcurrentglobalage(Sariyati,2016;Shaw,2018).GlocalNewsProductionIninternationalnewsscholarship,the‘solutions’totheaforementioneddialecticwereusuallyconnectedtoanestablishedglobalnewsproviderasawhole,ortoparticularnewsprofes-sionalsintheglobalnewsroom,underwhatcanbeseenasasophisticatedRitzerianbusinessstrategy.Boyd-Barrett(1980),forexample,describesaformof‘regionalization’,thatis‘theextenttowhichthe[news]agencydifferentiatesbetweenmarkets,or“tailors”aservicetomeetspecificclientrequirements,eitherindividualclientsor,moreusually,clientsofspecificcountriesorgeographicalregions’(p.60).Theglobalnewsproductionproblematic,inhisview,isthusresolvedinaprocesswherebytheentireinternationalnewsagencycansimplydiversify,andhenceincrease,itsclientele,byadaptingitsproductstotheparticularneedsofclientsandmarkets(seealsothetailoringstrategiesofinternationaltelevisionnewsagenciesinPaterson,2011).Cohenetal.(1996)describeamorecomplexprocessintheirconceptualizationof‘domes-tication’,whichismadeupofthemeansthroughwhich‘journalistssometimesconstructforeignnewsstoriesinwayswhichattempttocreatelinksofmeaningbetweenthestoriesandthehistory,culture,politics,society,etc.,oftheviewers’.Theycontinue:‘domesticationmaybethoughtofaspartoftheworking-theoriesthatjournalistsbringtotheirjobs,oneofmanycraftguidelinesforhelpingjournalists“know”howtotellstories’(p.85.SeealsosimilarconsiderationsofdomesticationprocessesinthenewsinAlasuutarietal.,2013;Baden&JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
302Glocalizationandnewsproduction293Tenenboim-Weinblatt,2017;Cohen,2013;Curranetal.,2017).Globalnewsproduction,intheirview,isillustratedasanactualactiveprocessthatjournalistsundertake‘inside’thenewsroomtomakeforeignnewsstorieseasiertodigestbyviewersfromdifferentculturalbackgrounds(seealsoGurevitchetal.,1991).Yet,whatisinterestinginthesepioneeringdefinitions,isthatbothseemtobedrawingfromthefalseideathatglobal/internationalnewsproductionissomehowseparatefromconsumptionpractices.Inaddition,theseattemptsmistakenlypointtotheunderstandingthatthisformofnewsproductionismaintainedinsomewhatlinearhierarchalformations(thatis,fromglobal/internationaltoregional/domestic.See,forexample,thecounter-ideaofreverseddomestication,asthelevelsofconnectionthataremadebetweenthenewscontentandthetransnationalbroadcastingmedium’scountryoforigininAtad,2017),andthatinternationalnewsroomsoperateassomewhatunified,magnificentlyorchestrated,fieldsofproduction.Furthermore,theygivethewrongimpressionthatnewsproductsprovidedbyglobal/interna-tionalinstitutionspossessaglobal/internationalappealbytheirverynature,when,infact,theyarecarefullydesignedassuch(althoughcertainlynotjust)earlyintheirproductionprocesses.Theyalsoseemtoimplythattheseprocesses,howevercomplex,arealways‘successful’onaglobalscale.Finally,theyfailtoacknowledgetheactualtailoringmechanisms;namely,whathappensatthedifferentsitesandstagesofproductioninwhichglobal/internationalnewsacquiresitsextraordinarytraits(Ilan,2020).Clausen(2003)providesamoreelaborateconceptualizationofthisnotion.Focusingonthenews-makingprocessesofthree‘global’newsevents(i.e.,theNATOinterventioninBosnia,theUNWomen’sConferenceinBeijing,andtheFrenchNuclearTestsinMoruroain1995),sheinvestigatesthedifferentstrategiesthatwereusedbynationalnewsproducersinJapantoassignmeaningstosignsandsymbolsatanearlystage,beforethesestoriesweredisseminatedthroughthebroadcastmedia.Globalnews,shepointsout,isnever‘global’,sinceinternationalnewsalwaysgoesthroughaframingprocessofdomestication;thatis,‘selectingparticularelementsandadaptingglobalinformationintoalocalframework’(p.15),sothatinternationaleventsaresimilarlyperceivedbynewsworkersandaudiencesinthesamenationalculture.Exploringthefactorsthatinfluenceinternationalnewsproduction(albeitonlyinthenationalcontext)attheglobal,national,organizationalandprofessionallevels,Clausenseesinterna-tionalnewscommunicationtoincludebothuniversalandparticularfeatures.For,eventhoughglobalimagesaredistributedworldwideviatransnationalformats,‘theyarealsogivenlocalmeaningthroughproductionpractices’(Clausen,2003,p.9).Clausen’sviewprovidesasomewhatdifferentpre-conceptualization,pointingouthowdomestication(orwhatshealsodescribesasdifferentformsof‘localization’)servesaspartoftheglobalizationprocess.Tothatend,itresemblesRitzer’snotionofglocalizationasglobalization(Roudometof,2016).Furthermore,Clausencarefullytakesintoaccount,withinthenationalcontext,theinterpenetratingandoverlappinginfluencesofthedifferentlevelsinthedomesticationprocessesofglobalnews,andalsopointstodifferentstrategiesinthemicro-dynamicsofproduction(e.g.,variouscommunicationstrategies,suchasform,studio-decoration,narrativeandstyle,andhowthesehelptocreatethebrandimageofnationalpublicserviceandcommercialbroadcastersaccordingtosimilarglobalformats;seeClausen,2003,2004.SeealsothevariousstrategiesthatwereusedlocallytoarticulatelocalconditionstoaglobalaudienceinHarsin,2014).Yet,eventhoughshedoesacknowledgethesignificanceoftheinternationalnewsagenciesasthemainprovidersofvisualmaterialstonational/localnewsorganizations,sheseemstobemakingthefalseassumptionthattheeditingandframingJonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
303294Handbookofcultureandglocalizationprocessesofsuch‘raw’materialsremainonly‘inthehandsofnewseditorsinthenationalbroadcastingorganizations’(Clausen,2003,p.19).Surprisingly,informationontheproductionoperationsofglobal/internationalnewsorgan-izationsissomewhatscarce,notwithstandingarenewedscholarlyinterestintheseinstitutionsinthepastfewdecades(seemorerecentworkonnewsagencies’productionprocessesinGürsel,2016;Paterson,2011;Paterson&Domingo,2008;Silberstein-Loeb,2014).Amongsttheseveryfewworks,however,isanextensiveethnographicexplorationcon-ductedbytheauthorontheproductionprocessesofnewspicturesatoneofthe‘BigThree’internationalnewsagencies.4Twoparticularfindingsofthisworkarerelevanttothecurrentdiscussion.First,theoverallproductionprocessofpicturesintheagencywasseentoworknotonalinearstructure,but,rather,inacomplexmulti-directionalcircularformation,paral-leling,toanextent,Reese’snetworkedassemblagesas‘constantlychanginginterestclustersdrivenbyinformationentrepreneurs’(2016,p.821).Second,sincetheagencyisaimingitsnewsphotosatlocal/national/international/globalnewsandnon-newsclients,variousglocalmechanismswerefoundtohavebeenactivatedatthedifferentstagesandsitesofproduction.Theseincluded,forinstance,thecomputerizedCulturallySensitivePictures(CSP)category,whichhelpedtopreventthedistributionofpotentiallyoffensivepicturestocertaincountries;orhowtheinternationalmarketwasdividedintolocal,national,regionalandglobaldivisionsinSales(thatis,thestrategicuseofspatialscalinginordertoachievebetterorganizationalcontrol;seeSwyngedouw,2004).Yet,glocalization,inthisanalysis,wasalsomademanifestinotherforms.Theseincluded:(1)thewaysinwhichcertainmomentsandsitesofproductionintheinternationalnewsagencywereseentogeneratesocio-strugglesoverpowerandauthority(e.g.,betweenthenational/pro-fessionalidentitiesofdifferentpersonnelsuchaslocalphotographersvs.foreignchiefs);and(2)thewaysinwhichglocalizationwasseenasaninstrumentalingredientintheinternationalnewsorganization’s‘geneticcode’(e.g.,bytheinevitablepositioningoflocalandforeignpersonnelalikeatthevariouslocal/globallevelsofoperations;seeIlan,2018,2020).Toacertainextent,thesefindingsillustratetwodifferentformsofglocalization.Ontheonehand,thereisaRobertsoniansinglereality,inwhichtheglobalexistswithinthelocal;thatistosay,glocalizationastheveryglobalcondition(Robertson,1995).Ontheotherhand,thisalsoparallelswhatRoudometof(2016)describesasarefractionofglobalizationthroughthelocal.Tothatend,localityisdemonstrated,here,eitherashavingdifferentformsofwave-resistancecapacities(e.g.,theinternationalagencyservingasasiteofconflictbetweenvariousforma-tionsoflocality),orashavingvaryingdegreesofthickness(e.g.,howlocalnewspracticesareoperatedsymbioticallywiththeglobalproductionapparatus,orwhenlocalityperformsasaninstrumentalelementintheverystructuralformationsoftheinternationalnewsagency).Thiseventuallyresultsintheformationofaheterogeneousglocalnewsproductionarray.THEPRODUCTIONOFGLOCALNEWS/THEGLOCALIZATIONOFNEWSPRODUCTIONItwouldbeuseful,atthispoint,tospellthingsout.Ontheglobal/internationallevelsofoper-ations,newsstoriesarecarefullypackagedbynewsprofessionalsinwaysthatrenderthemcomprehensibleintheglobal/internationalmarkets,yeteasytodigestbynationalandlocalclientsandaudiences.Thistaskisachievedbytheactivationofcertain‘glocalmechanisms’JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
304Glocalizationandnewsproduction295byvariouslocal/foreignnewsprofessionals,earlyinthedifferentstages,andatthedifferentsites,ofproduction.Oncethesestoriesarereceivedatthenational/localnewsdesk,theygothroughasimilarprocessbymeansofwhichthecoverageofthesame‘worldevents’isdesignedbyvariouslocal/foreignnewsprofessionalsindivergentways,therebyacquiringbothhomogenizedandheterogenizedtraits.Eventually,thesearemadetobegearedfordiversenational/localaudiences.Yet,apartfromtheactivationofcertainmechanisms,glocalizationinnewsproductionisalsomademanifestwithintheverywebofmacro-andmicro-dynamics,structuresandpro-cesses.Fromamacro-vantagepoint,thissideofglocalizationisillustratedinthewaysthatindividual,local,national,internationalandglobalnewsorganizationsandprovidersalltakepartintheoverallproductionanddistributionof‘worldarresting’stories.Theserelationsarepropelledinacomplexcircularmulti-directionalformationthroughwhichnewsstoriesareinitiatedinvariousways,andincomplex,attimesresistant,local/globalspatialsites.Thesestoriescanthuseitherbeinitiatedanddeliveredfromthe‘local’fielditself,orcanbereceivedfromvariousnewsandnon-newsproviders(onthelocal/national/international/globallevels),orevenfromsingle‘prodnewsers’(moreontheseinthefollowingsection).Atthesametime,however,certainlocal/nationalsitesofproductioncanbeseentobeforminga‘lastlineofdefence’againsttheglobal/internationalspheresofnewsmanufacturing.Fromamicro-pointofview,glocalizationisreflectedinthewaysinwhichpowerandauthorityareconstantlystruggledoverinvariousmicro-formationsoflocalityandglobalitywithintheorganization,andatvariousmomentsandsitesofproduction(e.g.,betweenlocal/foreignpersonnel,orbetweendifferentcontestingspatialstructures).However,itisalsoillus-tratedasameaningfulingredientthatgeneratescertainmomentsofproductionfromwithin(e.g.,global/internationalnewsorganizationshavingtoemploylocal/foreignnewspeopletoachievemaximumworldcoverage,whilethisalsoresultsindifferentmomentsandsitesofproductionbeingpropelledbybothlocalandglobalnewspractices).Takenbothasabusinessorganizationalstrategyperformedatvariouslevelsofoperations,butalsoasameaningfulforcethatputstheentireglobal/localnewsinformationflowintomotion,whatisrenderedvisiblehereistheproductionofglocalnewsformationandtheglo-calizationofnewsproduction.THEPROFESSIONALGLOCALNEWSNETWORKSTheseprocessesandstructures,howevercomplex,donotsimplyoccurinavacuum.Rather,theyarepropelledby/inparticularnetworksthroughwhichglocalnewsflowisputinmotion.Thesenetworksareverymuchresponsiblefortheselectionofcertainpotentially‘worldarresting’storiesoverothers,fortheirformsofmanufacturingandwaysofdissemination;eventually,theyplayasignificantpartinhowweperceivetheworld.Themaininternationalnewsmanufacturers,andperhapssomeofthemostsignificantnewsinstitutionsoperatingintoday’sglocalnewsflowarena,areclearlytheinternationalnewsagencies:TheCanadian–BritishThomsonReuters,theAmericanAPandtheFrenchAFP,whoarealsoknownasthe‘BigThree’.5Theinternationalnewsagenciesareconsideredtobethefirstinternationalmediaorganizationsandamongstthefirsttransnationalcorporations–the‘agentsofglobalization’(Boyd-Barrett&Rantanen,1998,p.1).Theseagenciesreceivedtheirfirstscholarlyattentioninthe1970sand1980s,andsawarevivedinterestfromtheJonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
305296Handbookofcultureandglocalization1990sonwards(Bielsa,2008;Boyd-Barrett,1980,2000;Boyd-Barrett&Rantanen,1998;Boyd-Barrett&Thussu,1992;Fenby,1986;Paterson&Sreberny,2004;Rantanen,2002;Thussu,2018).Withbureauxinmorethan100countries,whichareoperateddailybyinter-nationalstaff,theinternationalnewsagenciesareinvolvedincompilingnewspackageswiththe‘raw’materials(thatis,video/image/text/internetnews,etc.)ofthosestoriesthatmightcatchtheattentionofalargenumberofclientsworldwide.Oncetheseareselected,theyaremodifiedattheclients’endsinordertofitlocal/national/international/globaldemands.Sothattheagenciesacquireastrongholdontheinternationalnewsarena,theyarerequiredtocleverlyselectparticularstoriesthatmaypotentiallyinterestclientsworldwide,anddesigntheirmanufacturinginsuchawaythatthesestorieswilleventuallybecome‘onethingtoallpeople’(Fenby,1986,p.23).Inthenewdigitalmarket,however,therolesofinternationalnewsagencieshavebeenchangingfrombeingproviders,tobeingclients,tobeingcompeti-tors.Theagencieshavebeenadaptingtosuchchangesbytailoringtheirinfrastructurestotheparticularneedsofclients,andbydiversifyingtheiroperations,therebyalsoofferingvideonewsfeedsandfinancialinformationtobroadcasters,onlinenewsportalsandothernon-newsclients(Rantanenetal.,2019;Thussu,2018).Smallerinsizeandinreach,yetcertainlynotinconsequence,arethenationalnewsagen-cies;theorganizationsthat‘provide,inexchangefororwithoutpayment,mainlyfact-baseddigitalnews(text,picturesandvideo),and,increasingly,otherservicestomedia,corporate,institutionalandindividualcustomersnationallyand/ortransnationallyand/orglobally’(Rantanenetal.,2019,p.2).6Toacertainextent,someoftheseagenciescanbeseentobeplayingasignificantrole,alongsideothernationalnewsorganizations,inhelpingtoprotectculturaldiversityfromforeigninfluencesintheirnation-states.Insodoing,theseagenciesillustratethelimitedimpactofacosmopolitancommunicationsapproach(seee.g.,thefirewallmodelinNorris&Inglehart,2009).Nonetheless,manyofthenationalnewsagenciesplayacomponentpartintheworldnewscirculationsystem,possessinginvaluablelocalnetworksandknowledge.Asaresult,theyserveasattractiveresourcesforinformationtointernationalandglobalnewsproviders(Boyd-Barrett,2000),and,atthesametime,theyarealsopartoftheirclientele.Moreover,therapidandinstrumentalchangesinthedigitaleconomyhaveforcedmanyofthenationalnewsagenciestocompensatefortheirlossofincomebysearchingfornewclientsanddiversifyingtheiroperations.Asaresult,theyhavebeentailoringtheirservices(whichnowalsoincludepicturesandvideocontentalongsidetheirgeneralnewsservice)formediaclients,lookingtoincreasetheirclienteleoutsidethemediasector,andseekingnewmediaclients,suchassocialmediasitesoronlineportals(Rantanenetal.,2019).Othersignificantplayersinthearenaareafewnewschannels,headedbyCNN,currentlytheworld’sleadingnewsnetwork.CNNstartedasanationalserviceandquicklyturnedintoaglobalnewsorganization,therebyestablishingtheimportanceofthe‘round-the-clock’TVnewsnetwork.Bythelate1990s,whilerecognizingtheneedforlocalnewsinlocallanguages,CNNalreadyhadregionalversionsforadvertisersandaudiencesintheMiddleEast,Europe,theUSA,LatinAmericaandtheAsia-Pacificregion(Volkmer,1999).Today,itisavailableinvariouslanguagesandacrossdifferentplatforms,whilereachingmorethan425millionhouseholdsinmorethan200countries(Rampal,2019;Thussu,2018).CNN’smainrivalsareBBCWorld(BBCWorldNewsasof2008),thesecondmostinflu-entialglobaltelevisionnewsbroadcaster,whichissaidtoreachmorethan200countriesandabout430millionhouseholds.BBCWorldNewsoffersseparatefeedsforAmerican,Latin,JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
306Glocalizationandnewsproduction297AsianandEuropeanviewers,whichinturnalsocontainregionalcoverage,yetitbroadcastsonlyinEnglish(apartfromitsdubbedprogramminginJapananditsSpanishsubsforviewersinLatinAmerica).TheAlJazeeraMediaNetworkhasmorethan3,000stafffromover70nationalities,andAlJazeeraEnglish(arguablythebestknownnon-Westerninternationalbroadcaster)reachesmorethan310millionhouseholdsinmorethan100countries.SkyNews,thefirst24-hournewschanneltobroadcasttoBritainandEurope,wasavailableby2016to102millionhouseholdsacross127countries(withthemajorityofitsviewerslocatedinEurope).Euronews,meanwhile,hasbeenproviding24-hourdailyservicebroadcastingtoover430millionhomesin166countries,andisalsoconsideredtobetheonlypan-Europeannewschanneltobroadcastsimultaneouslyinmorethantwolanguages(now12).Euronewstodayseesitselfastheworld’sfirst‘glocalnewsbrand’thatadaptstoitslocalaudiences,eventhoughbehinditspan-EuropeanimagehidesastrongUK–USstake(Thussu,2018).Therearealsoafewmajorsupplementalnewsservicesthatareinvolvedintheprofessionalglocalnewsnetworks:Theseinclude,forexample,TheNewYorkTimesNewsServiceandSyndicate,whichhassubscribersfromsome50countries;TheWashingtonPostNewsServiceandSyndicate,whichprovidesnationalandinternationalnewscontenttoclientsaroundtheworld;orTheDowJonesNewsWires,asubsidiaryofNewsCorp,whichdeliversfinancialnewsinformationglobally.Thisdivisionalsoincludesseveralinternationalnewspapersandmagazineswithacertainglobalmagnitude,suchasTheNewYorkTimes;TheWashingtonPost;TheGuardian;TheWallStreetJournal;TheFinancialTimes;andthemagazinesTime,Newsweek,andTheEconomist(Rampal,2019).Alloftheseestablishedorganizationsadduptoanenormousamountofnewsandnon-news,nationalandlocalclientsandcustomers.Theseactorsplayacrucialroleasdailysuppliersofinformationonlocal/globaloccurrencestothemorepowerfulnational,international,globalandtransnationalorganizationsinthecomplexcircularmulti-directionalformationofglocalnewsinformationflow(Harsin,2014;Lee,2005;Roberts,2019).7NewEntrantsandRivalriesWithglobalconnectivity,Reese(2016)pointsout,journalism’sconceptualboundarieshaveshifted.Asaresult,newentrantshaverecentlyemerged,andadditionalrivalriesformed,intheglocalnewsnetworks.ThegiantGettyImages,forexample,playsaninstrumentalpartintheglocalsupplyofstockimagesand,sincethe1990s,hasbeenexpandingitslineofprod-ucts,therebyalsoacquiringastrongpresenceintheinternationalnewsarena.Gettyhasbeenservingnewsimagestolocalandglobalnewsorganizationsalike,astheyarenowadaysstrug-glingwithhavingtocommissiontheirownphotoassignments(Handworker,2009;Seymour,2016).OneinterestingresultofGetty’sbusinessexpansion,forinstance,liesinthefactthatatthestartof2016,Gettyrenewedits2003contentpartnershipwiththeFrenchinternationalnewsagency–AFP.Bothbusinessesweresaid,byLeeMartin,Getty’sSeniorVicePresidentSalesatthetime,to‘complementeachotherinbringinganunrivalledbreadth,depth,reachandqualityofcoveragearoundworldNews,SportsandEntertainmentimageryandvideotocustomersaroundtheglobe’(AFP,2016).ThispartnershipshowshowGettyisbecomingapowerfulcontestantintheinternationalphotojournalismarenatoo,therebyturningintoahighlyfield-specificexpertiseagencythataimstoprovidetailor-madeimagerytonewanddiversemarkets(Frosh,2013;Ilan,2018).JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
307298HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAnewandsignificantproductiveforceintheglocalnewsnetworksisclearlyreflectedintheriseofactivecommunitiesofusers,alsoknownas‘produsers’.IntheWeb2.0era,theyhave,forexample,beengivenaccesstoinformationalgoodsonapullbasis,andcaneasilyengagewith,share,modify,produceanddistributecontenttootherusersviavarioussocialtechnologicalplatformswhile,atthesametime,formingtheirowndigitalidentities(Benkler,2006;Bruns,2008;Çöteli,2019).Thesecommunitieshavealsohadasignificanteffectontheprofessionalworldofnewsproduction.Usingeasytooperatesmartphonetechnologieswithcutting-edgecameras,workingoveradvancedcellularnetworksorWiFiconnections,andthroughhighlystablesocialnetworkplatformsandmessagingapplications,today,anyonecanpotentiallyshoothigh-resolution,high-qualityamateurfootageanddeliverittoalmostanywhereintheworldinamatterofseconds.Toillustratehowjournalismshouldperhapsbeconceptualizedmoreasacomplexcontingentassemblagethanassomenaturallyexistingcategory(Reese,2016),thelocal‘prodnewsers’(thatis,newsprodusers)caneasilyproduceanddelivernewsworthymaterialstolocal/national/international/globalprovidersdailyandcanthereforeserveasasignificantforceintheoverallarenaofglocalnewsinformationflow.Thereis,however,adifferentsidetothisaswell.Sincenewsisabusinessthatthrivesonimmediacy,theemergenceofprodnewsersalsoputsalotofpressure,forexample,ontheprofessionalglobal/internationalnewsproviders.Theyareforcedtotrytolocatethenewsmaterialsthataredistributedoverthenetbythelocalprodnewsersbeforetheirrivalscan,andtheyareevendedicatingparticularpositionsinsidetheirnewsroomsjusttothesetasks(Usher,2014).Whatismore,evenwhensuchmaterialsarelocatedintime,theystillrequirevigorouscheckingandverificationprocesses,sothatthesecanbereadyforprofessionaluse(Pantti&Sirén,2015).Thisunstablenewmediaeconomyisthereforefloodedwithamateurfootage,which,ontheonehand,canpotentiallycontributetoprofessionalnewsproviders’profit-making,yet,ontheotherhand,isalsopressuringthemtremendously.Thisresultedinaneedinthemarketforathirdpartytoconnectthedots,whicheventuallyledtotheemergenceofseveralorgani-zations,headedbyStoryful–‘theworld’ssocialmediaintelligenceandnewsagency’,whichwasestablishedin2010(andwhichwasacquiredbyNewsCorpin2013).Seeingsocialmediaas‘thekeytoadeeperunderstandingofglobaleventsandculturalphenomena’,Storyful’snewswireisthereforedesignedtohelppartners‘breakstoriesandutilizeuser-generatednewsfootageandviralvideointheirreporting’.Servingasauniqueplatformforpublishersandnewsroomsthatrequirenewsworthyandverifiedcontent,Storyfuljournalistsarethereforesaidto‘monitorthefullsocialmedialandscapetoverifyandlicenseuser-generatedcontent[UGC],providingunmatchededitorialinsightandservicesforpartnersallovertheworld’.8Storyfulstartedoutbysimplylocating,verifying,andeventuallyselling,therightstotheusageofsuchlocalnewsworthymaterialstovariousglobal/internationalandothernewsproviders,who,asaresult,cansavevaluabletime,whilealsoincludingrarefootageintheirnewsitems/packages.However,inthepastfewyears,andwhileprofessionalnewsprovidersarebecomingmoreandmoredependentonamateurfootage,StoryfulhasmanagedtopositionitselfasapowerfulcompetitorinthefieldofnewsworthyUGC,andthereforeasasignificantplayerintheglocalnewsflowarena.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
308Glocalizationandnewsproduction299CURRENTSCHOLARLYTRENDSANDPOSSIBLEFUTUREPATHSRecentstudiesintheinternationalnewsfieldseemtobefocusingonwhat,bynow,cancer-tainlybeseenasvariousmanifestationsofglocalizationinnewsproduction(eventhoughtheconceptitselfhasnotyetreceivedtheattentionitdeserves).BadenandTenenboim-Weinblatt(2017),forinstance,assesswhetherandwhenconflictnewsindifferentmediahasbecomemoresimilarordissimilar.ThisisdonebyanalysingthecoverageoftheIsraeli–PalestinianconflictoveradecadeinthreeIsraeli,twoPalestinian,andeightinternationalnewsoutlets.Inoneofthemoresignificantconclusionsintheanalysis,theirstudyissaidtosupportthenotionthatnationalnewsculturesandmediasystemscontinuetoshapethenews,evenintoday’sglobalizedandcommercializedinformationenvironment.Curranetal.(2017)lookedatthewayinwhichthreesignificantinternationalnewseventswerereportedinfivedifferentcoun-tries,inordertoexaminehownationalmediasystemsreporttoglobalnewscues.Nationalmedia,theythusargue,cansometimesgenerateasenseofwhattheycallthe‘transnationalpublicsphere’(p.2),bywayofprojectingunifiedmeaningstoparticularinternationalevents.Alasuutarietal.(2013)wereinterestedinidentifyingthedifferentwaysinwhichtheEgyptianrevolutionwasreportedanddiscussedinBritain,FinlandandPakistan.Adheringtotheideathatforeignnewsitemsareoftenconstructedaspartof,andalsogiveriseto,domesticpolitics,theythusargueforthesignificantrolethatisplayedbyagents,otherthanjournalists,inthedomesticationofforeignnews,particularlywhencertainnewsitemsarerelatedtoparticulardomesticactorsandpolitics(seealsoArchetti,2008).Yet,unfortunately,theseworks,andmanyothersinthefield,tendtodelveintothenationalcontext;namely,onthewaysthatnationalnewsorganizationsare‘bringinginformationhome’(Clausen,2003,p.15).Withinthiscontext,moreworkisclearlyneededonsmall-scalelocalnewsorganizationsandthewaysinwhichdifferentformsofglocalizationarebothactivatedandinfluencethemakingofglobal/internationalnewswithinthelocalframe-worksofanalysis.Aninterestingexplorationinthatrespect,forexample,isHarsin’s(2014)caseanalysisoftheinternetprotestvideoTheFrenchDemocracy–avideowhichservesastherepresentativeoflocalvoicesthatwereeventuallycirculatedasglobalinter-mediaagenda-setters.Roberts(2019)alsoprovidesausefulethicaldiscussiononprivacyinthecontextofcommunity-focusednewscoverageanditspossibleglobalimpact.AndShaw(2018)suggestshowUNESCO’sModernCurriculaforJournalismEducation(MCJE)shouldbeorientedmoretowardstheglocal;thatis,adaptedtolocaljournalismstructuresinAfricaandtherestoftheworld.Ontheglobal/internationalfront,apartfromafewratherrecentnotableinquiries(Gürsel,2016;Usher,2014),thefieldstillsuffersfromasignificantlacuna,specifically,thatofethnographicworkonnewsmanufacturing.Itwouldbeinterestingtosee,forexample,howglobalandinternationalnewsorganizationsarecopinginnon-Westerncountries,wherenewsmediaareheavilycontrolledbygovernmentalcensorship.Alternatively,scholarlyworkinthisdivisionmightalsofocusontheworkoffixers(i.e.,local,on-the-groundguides),whoassistforeignjournalistsinunfamiliarterrain,andwhoselocalknowledgemakesthemanessentialpartoftheglobal/internationalnews-gatheringprocess.Morespecifically,workfromapro-ductionperspectiveisrequiredonthenewentrantsandrivalriesinthearena,suchasGettyImages,andevenmoresoonthecaseofStoryful,whichhasalreadybecomeapowerfulactorintheoverallglobalnewsinformationflow,andwhoseinfluencecannotbeignored.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
309300HandbookofcultureandglocalizationFinally,therearetwomoreaspectsthatdeserveattentionhereaswell:first,itisimportanttopointouthow,intoday’sdigitalmedia,thecompetitionforattentionhasbecomemoreintensethanever.Thisresulted,forexample,inthewaysmostnewsorganizationshavenowmovedfromalow-choiceenvironment(hencepossessinghighmarketpoweroveraudiencesandadvertisers),toafarlesslucrativehigh-choiceenvironment,withlowmarketpower.Suchashiftofpowerisperhapsmostlyfeltbythestrongpresenceofthegianttechnologicalplat-forms–headedbyGoogleandFacebook–inglobalnewsinformationflow,andmostonlineusershavealreadybeensaidtobeusingsearchenginesandsocialmediaastheirmainwaysofaccessingnewsonline(Nielsen,2019).Second,itisalsoworthconsideringtheincreasingnumbersofglobalandnationalnewsproviderswhohavealreadyincorporatedvariousartificialintelligence(AI)functionsintotheirdailynewsproductionroutines.Thesefunctionsareused,forexample,toimprovecontentrecommendations,tohelpautomateworkflows,ortohelpjournalistsfindstories.Infact,ithasevenbeenpredictedthattheywillplayamoresignificantroleinwritingnewsstoriesinthenearfuture.Suchinnovativetoolsaresettocombineideasofbothgeneralandparticularrelevance,sothatusersareeventuallyexposedtomorecontentthatismoretailoredtotheirinterests(Newman,2018).Theeffectsofboththesephenomenamightbefoundinthewaysinwhichlocal/nationalusersarenowbeingtargeted,forexample,bysophisticatedalgorithms,soastoattractatten-tionglobally–whetherthisisusedtoincreaseprofitsortopromotecertainpoliticalagendas(e.g.,theeffectsof‘fakenews’onFacebookandTwitter,anditsinfluenceontheBrexitref-erendumintheUK),anditwouldbeinterestingtoinvestigatethesetechnologiesfromaglocalnewsperspective.OneinterestingworkalongtheselinesisLehman-Wilzig’s(2018)studyonAutonomous,AlgorithmicSimultaneousTranslationSystems(AASTS),andparticularlyontheirpossibleimplicationsinthenewscontext:How,thankstoAASTS,immigration,forinstance,willbecomeevenmoreattractive,asimmigrantswillbeabletoeasilykeepupwithlocal/nationalnewsand,atthesametime,followthenewssitesfromtheirnationsoforigin.Orhow,oncenewspaperswillbeabletocompletelydependonAASTSforreportagetranslations,andonAI-powerednewsbotsforaprofessionalcoverage,afargreaterexposureto‘newsfromtheworld’willbeenabled,thusworkingbothfromthenon-Englishworldandforit.CONCLUSIONTheideasinthedifferentsectionsinthischapterareconnectedtothetheoreticalexplorationofglocalizationfromthesocio-economicfacetsoforganizations,ontheonehand,andthecontext-specifictailoringofproductsandservicesfromaproductionperspective,ontheother–whatRoudometof(2015,p.6)describesasthemissing‘culturallogicofthecapitalistenterprises’inglocalizationstudies.Astheconceptualizationofjournalismresearchissaidtobeshiftingtowardsa‘newgeogra-phy’(Reese,2016,p.816),thechapterthusillustrateshowtheconceptofglocalizationservesasapowerfulforceinthemakingofnews,andonethatshouldbetakenintoaccountinjour-nalismstudiesintoday’srapidlychangingdigitalmedia.Allcombined,theaforementionedsectionsmightcertainlyhelptocrystalizetheimportanceofglocalizationintoday’snewseco-system,andtheinstrumentalrolethatitplaysinthecurrentsocio-culturalmediaenvironment.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
310Glocalizationandnewsproduction301NOTES1.Shoemakeretal.(2012)differentiatebetweenforeignnews(informationaboutanothercountry),internationalnews(theflowofnewsfromonecountrytoanother),andglobalnews(newsthatisprovidedbymediaorganizationssimultaneouslytolargepartsoftheworld).Seealsotheconcep-tualizationof‘globalnewsworthiness’thatisusedtoassessthedifferencesbetweenforeignnewscontentandtransnationalnewscontentinAtad(2017).2.Forothernotableattempts,see,forexample,FeatherstoneandLash(1995);Friedman(2000);Fukuyama(1992);Giddens(1990);Heldetal.(1999);HirstandThompson(1996);Lull(2000);Ohmae(1995);Wallerstein(1999);andSilverstone(1999).3.Rantanen(2005)describestherelationsbetweenglobalizationandthemediaashavingthetwopaired‘likeahorseandcarriage’(p.1).Seealsotheimpactofglobalizationonmedia,andviceversa,inLule(2018).4.Forarecentoverviewofthe‘BigThree’(ThomsonReuters,APandAFP),andotherdominantnewsorganizationsintheglobal/internationalnewsarenaseeIlan(2018,pp.210–15)andThussu(2018,pp.136–47).5.Newsthatisproducedbyinternationalnewsagenciesisreferredinthischaptertowhatisknownasaformofinternationalnews;thatis,newsthatislocallyproduced,butdistributedinternationallytobothlocalandglobalnewsproviders.Although,quiteoften,notallagencymaterialsaredistributedtoallcountries;seeIlan,(2018).6.See,forexample,membersoftheEuropeanAllianceofNewsAgencies(EANA)acrossEuropeathttps://www.newsalliance.org/.7.See,forexample,thecoverageoftheSARScrisisindifferentregionsbyvariousonlinenewssites(Lee,2005)andthecaseofTFD’sinternetprotestvideoasaformofacounter-narrativeandglocalprotestonthe2005Frenchbanlieueriots,incontrasttothedominantFrenchMSNglobalagenda(Harsin,2014).8.www.storyful.com,2020.REFERENCESAFP(2016),‘GettyImagesandAFPrenewleadingcontentpartnership’,AFP,25January,accessed21December2020athttps://www.afp.com/en/agency/press-releases-newsletter/getty-images-and-afp-renew-leading-content-partnership.Alasuutari,P.,Qadir,A.andK.Creutz(2013),‘Thedomesticationofforeignnews:Newsstoriesrelatedtothe2011EgyptianrevolutioninBritish,FinnishandPakistaninewspapers’,Media,Culture&Society,35(6),692–707.Albrow,M.(1996),TheGlobalAge:StateandSocietyBeyondModernity,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Archetti,C.(2008),‘Newscoverageof9/11andthedemiseofthemediaflows,globalizationandlocal-izationhypotheses’,InternationalCommunicationGazette,70(6),463–85.Atad,E.(2017),‘Globalnewsworthinessandreverseddomestication:Anewtheoreticalapproachintheageoftransnationaljournalism’,JournalismPractice,11(6),760–76.Baden,C.andK.Tenenboim-Weinblatt(2017),‘Convergentnews?Alongitudinal,studyofsimilarityanddissimilarityinthedomesticandglobalcoverageoftheIsraeli-Palestinianconflict’,JournalofCommunication,67(1),1–25.Bagdikian,B.(2004),TheNewMediaMonopoly,Boston,MA:BeaconPress.Benkler,Y.(2006),TheWealthofNetworks:HowSocialProductionTransformsMarketsandFreedom,NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Bielsa,E.(2008),‘Thepivotalroleofnewsagenciesinthecontextofglobalization:Ahistoricalapproach’,GlobalNetworks,8(3),347–66.Boyd-Barrett,O.(1980),TheInternationalNewsAgencies,London,UK:Constable.Boyd-Barrett,O.(2000),‘Nationalandinternationalnewsagencies:Issuesofcrisisandrealignment’,Gazette,62(1),5–18.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
311302HandbookofcultureandglocalizationBoyd-Barrett,O.andT.Rantanen(1998),TheGlobalizationofNews,London:SagePublications.Boyd-Barrett,O.andD.K.Thussu(1992),Contra-flowinGlobalNews:InternationalandRegionalNewsExchangeMechanisms,London,UK:JohnLibbey.Bruns,A.(2008),Blogs,Wikipedia,SecondLife,andBeyond:FromProductiontoProdusage,NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Clausen,L.(2003),GlobalNewsProduction,Copenhagen,Denmark:CopenhagenBusinessSchoolPress.Clausen,L.(2004),‘Localisingtheglobal:“Domestication”processesininternationalnewsproduction’,Media,CultureandSociety,26(1),25–44.Cohen,A.A.(2002),‘GlobalizationLtd.:Domesticationontheboundariesoftelevisionnews’,inJ.M.ChanandB.T.McIntyre(eds),InSearchofBoundaries:Communication,Nation-statesandCulturalIdentities,Westport,CT:Ablex,pp.167–80.Cohen,A.A.(2013),ForeignNewsonTelevision:WhereintheWorldIstheGlobalVillage?,NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Cohen,A.A.,Levy,M.R.,Roeh,I.andM.Gurevitch(1996),GlobalNewsrooms,LocalAudiences:AStudyoftheEurovisionNewsExchange,London,UK:JohnLibbeyPublishing.Cohen,N.S.(2008),‘Thevalorizationofsurveillance:TowardsapoliticaleconomyofFacebook’,DemocraticCommuniqué,22(1),5–22.Coté,M.,andJ.Pybus(2007),‘Learningtoimmateriallabour2.0:MySpaceandsocialnetworks’,Ephemera,7(1),88–106.Çöteli,S.(2019),‘Theimpactofnewmediaontheformsofculture:Digitalidentityanddigitalculture’,OnlineJournalofCommunicationandMediaTechnologies,9(2),1–12.Curran,J.,Esser,F.,Hallin,D.C.,Hayashi,K.andC.C.Lee(2017),‘Internationalnewsandglobalintegration:Afive-nationreappraisal’,JournalismStudies,18(2),118–34.Devereux,E.(2003),UnderstandingtheMedia,London,UK:SagePublications.Featherstone,M.andS.Lash(1995),‘Globalization,modernityandthespatializationofsocialtheory:Anintroduction’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.1–24.Fenby,J.(1986),TheInternationalNewsServices,NewYork,NY:SchockenBooks.Friedman,T.L.(2000),TheLexusandtheOliveTree,NewYork,NY:AnchorBooks.Frosh,P.(2013),‘Beyondtheimagebank:Digitalcommercialphotography’,inM.Lister(ed.),ThePhotographicImageinDigitalCulture,2nded.,London,UK:Routledge,pp.131–48.Fuchs,C.(2011),‘Web2.0,prosumption,andsurveillance’,Surveillance&Society,8(3),288–309.Fukuyama,F.(1992),TheEndofHistoryandtheLastMan,London,UK:HamishHamilton.Giddens,A.(1990),TheConsequencesofModernity,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Giddens,A.(1991),ModernityandSelf-Identity:SelfandSocietyintheLateModernAge,Oxford,UK:Polity.Gurevitch,M.,Levy,M.R.andI.Roeh(1991),‘Theglobalnewsroom:Convergencesanddiversitiesintheglobalizationoftelevisionnews’,inP.DahlgrenandC.Sparks(eds),CommunicationandCitizenship:JournalismandthePublicSphereintheNewMediaAge,London,UK:Routledge,pp.195–216.Gürsel,Z.D.(2016),ImageBrokers:VisualizingWorldNewsintheAgeofDigitalCirculation,Oakland,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Hafez,K.(2007),TheMythofMediaGlobalization,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Handworker,C.(2009),‘TomGlocer,ReutersCEO:Ifpeoplepayforaringtone,whynotpaytoread2,000words?’,TheMarker,accessed15July2020athttp://www.themarker.com/consumer/1.538405.Harsin,J.(2014),‘“TheFrenchDemocracy”:Mappingpromiseandlimitationofglocaldigitalprotest’,Communication,Culture&Critique,7(2),174–91.Held,D.,McGrew,A.,Goldblatt,D.andJ.Perraton(eds)(1999),GlobalTransformations:Politics,EconomicsandCulture.Cambridge,UK:Polity.Hirst,P.Q.andG.Thompson(1996),GlobalizationinQuestion,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Ilan,J.(2018),TheInternationalPhotojournalismIndustry:CulturalProductionandtheMakingandSellingofNewsPictures,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Ilan,J.(2020),‘Glocalizationandinternationalnews-photoproduction:NewsimagesfromIsraelmadeforglobalnewsmarkets’,Journalism:Theory,PracticeandCriticism,21(6),784–99.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
312Glocalizationandnewsproduction303Lee,A.Y.(2005),‘Betweenglobalandlocal:Theglocalizationofonlinenewscoverageonthetrans-regionalcrisisofSARS’,AsianJournalofCommunication,15(3),255–73.Lehman-Wilzig,S.(2018),‘Autonomous,algorithmic,simultaneoustranslationsystemsintheglocalvillage:Consequencesandparadoxicaloutcomes’,inS.BrunnandR.Kehrein(eds),HandbookoftheChangingWorldLanguageMap,Cham,Switzerland:Springer,pp.1–19.Liebes,T.andE.Katz(1990),TheExportofMeaning:Cross-CulturalReadingsof‘Dallas’,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Lule,J.(2018),GlobalizationandMedia:GlobalVillageofBabel,Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield.Lull,J.(2000),Media,Communication,Culture:AGlobalApproach,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Newman,N.(2018),Journalism,MediaandTechnologyTrendsandPredictions2018,Oxford,UK:ReutersInstitute,UniversityofOxford.Nielsen,R.K.(2019),‘Thechangingeconomiccontextsofjournalism’,inK.Wahl-JorgensenandT.Hanitzsch(eds),TheHandbookofJournalismStudies,2nded.,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.324–40.Norris,P.,andR.Inglehart(2009),CosmopolitanCommunications:CulturalDiversityinaGlobalizedWorld,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Ohmae,K.(1995),TheEndoftheNation-state:TheRiseofRegionalEconomies,NewYork,NY:Simon&Schuster.Pantti,M.andS.Sirén(2015),‘Thefragilityofphoto-truth:VerificationofamateurimagesinFinnishnewsrooms’,DigitalJournalism,3(4),495–512.Paterson,C.A.(2011),TheInternationalTelevisionNewsAgencies:TheWorldfromLondon,NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Paterson,C.A.andD.Domingo(2008),MakingOn-lineNews:TheEthnographyofNewMediaProduction,NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Paterson,C.A.andA.Sreberny(eds)(2004),InternationalNewsinthe21stCentury,Luton,UK:UniversityofLutonPress.Ramos,C.T.(2019),‘Fromthefreedomofthepresstothefreedomoftheinternet:Anewpublicsphereinthemaking?’,inA.VisviziandM.D.Lytras(eds),PoliticsandTechnologyinthePost-truthEra,Melbourne,Australia:EmeraldPublishingLimited,pp.9–22.Rampal,K.R.(2019),‘Globalnewsandinformationflowinthedigitalage’,inY.R.Kamalipour(ed.),GlobalCommunication:AMulticulturalPerspective,3rded.,London,UK:RowmanandLittlefield,pp.149–78.Rantanen,T.(2002),TheGlobalandtheNational:MediaandCommunicationsinPost-CommunistRussia,Boulder,CO:Rowman&Littlefield.Rantanen,T.(2005),TheMediaandGlobalization.London,UK:SagePublications.Rantanen,T.,Jääskeläinen,A.,Bhat,R.,Stupart,R.andA.Kelly(2019),TheFutureofNationalNewsAgenciesinEurope:ExecutiveSummary,London,UK:LondonSchoolofEconomicsandPoliticalScience,accessed21December2020athttp://doi.org/10.21953/lse.aeginold23jj.Rao,S.(2009),‘GlocalizationofIndianjournalism’,JournalismStudies,10(4),474–88.Reese,S.D.(2016),‘Thenewgeographyofjournalismresearch:Levelsandspaces’,DigitalJournalism,4(7),816–26.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),194–209.Ritzer,G.(2007),TheGlobalizationofNothing2,London,UK:SagePublications.Roberts,C.(2019),‘Allnewsis“glocal?”Considerationsofcommunityandpersonalprivacywithglobalpublicationoflocalnews’,JournalofMediaEthics,34(4),205–14.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:SagePublications.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:SagePublications,pp.25–44.Roudometof,V.(2015),‘Mappingtheglocalturn:Literaturestreams,scholarshipclustersanddebates’,Glocalism:JournalofCulture,PoliticsandInnovation,3(1),1–21.Roudometof,V.(2016),‘Theorizingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
313304HandbookofcultureandglocalizationSariyati,F.A.(2016),‘De-globalizingglobalcommunicationresearch:A“glocal-comparative”takeontransnationalresearch’,Sarjana,31(1),15–28.Seymour,T.(2016),‘BillGatessellsCorbistoGettyviaChineseconsortium’,BritishJournalofPhotography,accessed15July2020athttp://www.bjp-online.com/2016/01/bill-gates-sells-corbis-to-getty-via-chinese-consortium/#closeContactFormCust00.Shaw,I.S.(2018),‘TowardsajournalismeducationmodelcurriculainAfrica:Acallfora“glocal”ratherthanglobal(universal)journalismmodel’,inH.M.Mabweazara(ed.),NewsmakingCulturesinAfrica:NormativeTrendsintheDynamicsofSocio-politicsandEconomicStruggles,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan,pp.31–52.Shoemaker,P.J.,Cohen,A.A.,Seo,H.andP.Johnson(2012),‘Comparingnewsonforeignandinternationalaffairs’,inF.EsserandT.Hanitzsch(eds),HandbookofComparativeCommunicationResearch,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.341–52.Silberstein-Loeb,J.(2014),TheInternationalDistributionofNews,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeBooks.Silverstone,R.(1999),WhyStudytheMedia?,London,UK:SagePublications.Sutikno,B.andJ.M.S.Cheng(2012),‘Howglobalcompaniescommunicateinhostcountry:Aglocal-izationstrategyinwebspace’,AsianJournalofCommunication,22(1),58–77.Swyngedouw,E.(2004),‘Globalisationor“glocalisation”?Networks,territoriesandrescaling’,CambridgeReviewofInternationalAffairs,17(1),25–48.Thussu,D.K.(2018),InternationalCommunication:ContinuityandChange,3rded.,NewYork,NY:BloomsburyPublishing.Usher,N.(2014),MakingNewsatTheNewYorkTimes,AnnArbor,MI:UniversityofMichiganPress.Volkmer,I.(1999),NewsintheGlobalSphere:AStudyofCNNanditsImpactonGlobalCommunication,Luton,UK:UniversityofLuton.Waters,M.(1995),Globalization,London,UK:Routledge.Wallerstein,I.(1999),‘Globalizationortheageoftransition?:Along-termviewofthetrajectoryoftheworld-system’InternationalSociology,15(2),251–67.JonathanIlan-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:45AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
31419.Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsintheinternationalentertainmentlandscape:theNetflixCaseinItalyPaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofaloINTRODUCTION:HOWTHEDIGITALREVOLUTIONDISRUPTEDTHEINTERNATIONALENTERTAINMENTLANDSCAPEThedigitalrevolutionisnotthefirstcommunicationtechnologytohaveusheredindisruptivechangessignificantlyimpactingtheglobalentertainmentlandscape.Acenturyago,ifwewantedtowatchafeature-lengthmotionpicture,forexample,wehadtoleaveourhouses,drivetothenearestmovietheatre,payanadmissionticketandenjoythemovieexperiencesurroundedbystrangers.Theentertainmentcontentwewouldhavehadaccesstowouldonlyhavehadavagueresemblancetowhat’savailableinthemodernday.Therewasnosynchro-nizedsound–moviesweresilent,withintertitleframesplacedbetweenscenestointroduceaformofdialoguebetweenthecharacters–norwasthereanycolour,saveforblackandwhite.Theentertainmentexperiencewas,asaresult,vastlydifferentfromtoday’s,althoughmov-iegoerswereaspreparedthenastheyarenowtoenjoythespectaclebywillinglysuspendingtheirdisbelieftoimmersethemselvesinthestoriesandlandscapesproposed.Majorcommunicationtechnologyrevolutionstookplaceoverthecourseofthetwentiethcenturytoprovideenhancedfeaturestotheentertainmentexperienceprovidedbymovies,suchassynchronizedsound,colour,andthepossibilitytoenjoythemfromhomewhilecontrollingtheenvironmentinwhichtheviewingwouldtakeplace,withouthavingtovisitamovietheatretosharetheentertainmentexperiencewithstrangers.Thesepossibilitiesweremadeavailablebytheintroductionoftelevisionsetsinthe1940s,andmorecustomizedbythearrivalofvideorecordingdevicesinthe1980s,allowingaudiencestoselectboththecontentandthetimingoftheirviewingathome.Thenumberofplatformsavailablehasalsosignificantlyincreasedovertime,withtheintroductionofmulti-channelcableandsatelliteplatformsinthelaterdecadesofthetwentiethcenturyand,attheturnofthenewcentury,withtheriseofinternetplatformsdeliveringanavalancheofentertainmentmediacontenttoaudiencesworldwide.Whilenotthefirstmajortechnologicalrevolution,theunfoldingdigitaloneishavingadisruptiveeffectonmanykeyaspectsoftheglobalentertainmentindustry,mostnotablyonitscontent,businessmodelsanddistributionplatforms,unlikeanythingthatcamebefore(Sigismondi,2011).Inthischapter,wewillspecificallyanalysehowmodern-daydigitalplat-formsarecreatingnewvenuesinwhichtheinternationalflowsofentertainmenttakeplaceandthrive.Inparticular,wewillfocusonthecaseofaleadingstreamingplatform,Netflix,analys-ingitsroll-outinItaly.Inbringingtotheforetheprocessesofglocalizationofthisnewglobalconduitanddiscussingthereflectionsthatcanoriginatefromtheanalysisofitsstrategies,weaimtoprovideacontributiontoscholarlyconversationssheddinglightonthecomplexitiesofthephenomenaofglocalizationintheglobalcommunicationlandscape.305PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
315306HandbookofcultureandglocalizationNETFLIXANDTHERISEOFGLOBALDIGITALPLATFORMS:PLAYERS,BUSINESSMODELSANDCOMPETITIVEADVANTAGESOneofthemostvisiblechangesusheredinbythedigitalrevolutionintheglobalmediaenter-tainmentlandscapeistheproliferationofinternet-baseddistributionplatforms,whosereachcancrossnationalandculturalboundaries.Theyear2020madethepotentialreachandrele-vanceofsuchplatformsclearerthanever,asaresultofthelockdownsactivatedbynationsallovertheworldwiththeintenttocurbthedeadlyspreadofthecoronavirus.PlatformchangesgainedcentrestageinhomeentertainmentduringtheCOVID-19healthcareemergency,whichsignificantlylimited,andforafewmonthsoutrighteliminated,theactivitiesofotherexhibitionoutletsforentertainmentcontent,suchasmovietheatres.Workingfromhomehasalsobeenanecessityforalargenumberofhouseholdsaroundtheworldand,asaresult,theamountoftimedevotedtowatchingmediaentertainmentathomehasincreasedsignificantly.Moreover,mostleadingglobalentertainmentplayershadalreadyplannedtorollouttheirinternet-basedstreamingplatformspriortothepandemicbreakingout.Theunlikelycombi-nationofthesevastlydifferentenablingconditionsbroughttotheforethecentralrelevanceoftheseplatformsintheglobalentertainmentlandscape:in2020theglobalnumberofsub-scriberstoTVstreamingservicescrossedthethresholdofonebillionandsurpassed,intheprocess,thenumberofglobalpayTVsubscriptionforthefirsttime(seeO’Halloran,2020).Thisphenomenonappearstosignalamajorshiftinthedynamicsofviewinghabitswithintheglobaltelevisionlandscape,whichisunlikelytobereversedoncethehealthemergencyceasestobeadeterminingfactorinthepreferencesofconsumptionofmediaentertainmentforaudiencesworldwide.AleadingplayerandanearlymoverinthecompetitivelandscapeofglobaldigitalplatformsisNetflix.NetflixasthePioneerofDigitalStreamingPlatformsTheriseofNetflixintheglobalmediaentertainmentlandscapeinrecentyearshasbeentrulyremarkable,acceleratinginthelastdecadeandleadingtothecurrentdimensionsasaresultofthestructuralchangesinthemediaindustrymadepossiblebytheworldwidediffusionofdigitaltechnology.Therelevanceanduniquenessofthisriseasacasestudyinthenewdigitalmedialandscapecannotbeoverstatedanditdidnot,asaresult,gounnoticedinscholarlyliter-atureandconversationsinthefieldofglobalmediaentertainmentfromauthorswithdifferenttheoreticalperspectives,rangingfromculturalandmediastudiestoeconomicsandbusiness(see,forexample,Aguiar&Waldfogel,2010;Lobato,2019;Re,2017;Voigtetal.,2016).Foundedin1997inSiliconValleyasaDVDsalesandrentalbymailcompany,Netflixquicklyabandonedthelesslucrativesalessegmenttofocusontherentalbusiness,inwhichDVDswerehomedeliveredonamonthlysubscriptionbasis.Thekeyinnovation,inanoth-erwisematuremarket,wasthatconsumerscouldretaintheDVDstheyrentedforaslongastheywantedwithoutincurringpenalties,unlikethemodusoperandiofthethengiantplayerinthehomeentertainmentlandscape,Blockbuster.Theonlydrawbackforconsumerswasthattheycouldnotordernewtitlesuntiltheyreturned(inthealreadyprovidedredenvelopes)theoldones.Takingadvantageofthediffusionofdigitaltechnology,andinparticulartheincreasedavailabilityofbroadband,thecompanypivoteditscompetitivepositioningin2007byalsoofferingmediacontentondemandviatheinternetwithasubscription-basedbusinessPaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
316Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment307model.Asignificantincreaseinsubscribersensuedand,asaconsequence,anincreasedneedformediaentertainmentcontenttobedelivereddigitally,whichwasinitiallysatisfiedbylicensingmoviesandTVseriesfromthelargelibrariesofestablishedlegacyplayers,suchastheHollywoodstudios.Asthecompanygrewandexpandeditsreach,itbecameapparentthatitalsoneededtofundoriginalcontent,whichwouldallowittoretainworldwidecopyrightinperpetuityandbuildasustainablecompetitiveadvantageinternationally.Asaresult,Netflixinrecentyearshasbecomeaprominentfinancierofmediaentertainmentcontentwhileatthesametimeexpandingonaglobalscale.Toprovideanideaofthemagnitudeofitsfinancialcommitmenttothispositioning,andconsequentlyofthedimensionsandrelevanceofthecompanywithinthemedialandscape,itisworthpointingoutthat,accordingtothetradejournalVariety,thecompanyreportedlyinvestedUS$17billiononoriginalmediacontentin2020alone(Spangler,2020),increasingitsexpenditurefromaroundUS$15.3billionin2019,withpro-jectionstocontinuetoexpanditsinvestmentsinthefuturetoreachUS$26billionby2028.Alsoworthnotingisthatthesamereportindicatesthattheresearchunit(VarietyIntelligencePlatform)positionsNetflixasaleadinginvestorinoriginalmediacontent,secondonlytolegacymediaconglomeratessuchasDisneyandComcast,andsignificantlyabovealltheothermediacompetitors.TheUnfoldingCompetitiveLandscape:NewStreamingPlatforms,NewandOldMediaPlayersThecompetitivelandscapeofstreamingmediaplatformshasundergonedramaticchangesasoflateandisstillintheprocessofbeingshaped,withdifferententitiesjoiningorplanningtosoonenterthecompetitivearenavyingfortheattentionofaudiencesworldwide.Itisindeedacrowdedarena,asthepioneersofthelandscape,Netflix,havebeenjoinedbyavarietyofcompetitors:ontheonehand,leadinglegacymediaplayerssuchastheHollywoodstudioshavebeenlaunchingtheirownplatforms,while,ontheotherhand,leadingcorporationsoper-atingsuccessfullyinotherrealmsofthedigitallandscapehavedecidedtofullyembracemediaentertainmentcontentaspartoftheirconglomerates’portfolioofassets.Itcanbeuseful,then,tobrieflyanalysethemajorplayersandtheirdistinctpositioning.CBSAllAccesswaslaunchedin2014bythemediaconglomerateViacomintheUStodis-tributeoriginalcontentandtorepurposeprogrammesairedinthevariousbroadcastingproper-tiesownedbytheconglomerate,whichin2019alsopurchasedthefree,advertising-supportedplatformPlutoTVoperatingontheinternetintheUSandinternationally.TheCBSAllAccessplatformwasrebrandedasParamount+inearly2021,amovehighlyanticipatedbyindustryinsiders(Littleton,2020).Thisrebranding,utilizingamorerecognizablebrandworldwide,expandedtheoffering,drawingontheextensivelibrariesownedbytheconglomerate’sport-folioofcompanies,suchasParamountPictures,BET(BlackEntertainmentTelevision),CBS,ComedyCentral,MTVandNickelodeon.LaunchedintheUSinNovember2019,Disney+hasbeen,todate,themostprobingchal-lengertoNetflixinthestreamingplatformarenaforsubscription-basedservices.Itis,infact,thestreamingplatformcreatedbytheHollywoodstudioDisney,whichinrecentyearshasbecometheleadingplayerintheglobalmediaentertainmentlandscapethroughtheacqui-sitionofothermediaentities(suchasPixar,LucasFilms,andmorerecentlytheHollywoodstudio20thCenturyFox),aswellasorganicgrowth.FollowingitsintroductionintheUS,thePaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
317308Handbookofcultureandglocalizationplatformwassoonmadeavailableinternationally(mostlyinWesternEuropeandAustralia)andDisneyhasannouncedplanstolaunchitinothercontinentsaswellinthenearfuture,withthegoalofdevelopingaglobalstreamingplatformtodistributethecontentofitsvastandmultifacetedlibrary.Moreover,withtheacquisitionof20thCenturyFox,DisneyalsobecamethecontrollingentityofHulu,anearlyplayerinthestreamingplatformlandscape(since2007)whichisnowofferedintheUSinabundlepackagewithDisney+andthesportsplatformESPN+.PeacockwaslaunchedintheUSinspring2020bythemediaentertainmentdivisionNBCUniversalwithintheglobalmediaconglomerateComcast.MuchlikeDisney+,thestreamingplatformoffersfeature-lengthmotionpicturesandTVshowsdrawingmostlyfromthelargelibraryofcontentownedbytheHollywoodstudioUniversal,whichisitselfpartoftheverti-callyintegratedmediaconglomerate.Peacock’sdistinctivefeaturehowever,fromabusinessmodelpointofview,isthatitcouldbedescribedasa‘freemium’service(Anderson,2009),asaportionofitscatalogueisavailableforfreewithadvertising,whereasitalsoofferspremiumaccesstoitsfulllibraryofcontentforamonthlysubscriptionfee.HBOMaxwassimilarlylaunchedinspring2020intheUSbyAT&T’sWarnerMedia.AT&TisaleadingUStelecommunicationscompany,whoserootscanbetracedbacktotheendofthenineteenthcentury,whenitwasfoundedbyAlexanderGrahamBellasoneofthefirsttelephonecompaniesoperatingintheUS.In2018,thecompanyacquiredtheAmericanmediaconglomerateTimeWarner(includingamongothermediaassets,theHollywoodstudioWarnerBros.)renamedWarnerMedia,creatinganotherlarge,verticallyintegratedmediaenterprisewithglobalreach.Similartotheotherplatformslaunchedbythepreviouslydescribedmediaconglomeratesowninglargelibrarieswithintheirmediacontentdivisions,theplatformprovidesaccesstointellectualpropertiesownedbytheconglomerate(suchasHBOandWarnerBros.)comprisingthousandsofhoursofmoviesandTVseries,anditisalsoscheduledtosoonbedistributedinternationally.Inadditionto,andincompetitionwith,alltheaforementionedinitiativesoriginatingwithinthemediaentertainmentindustry,twootherplayerswhohaveemergedasgloballeadersindifferentsectors(suchascomputerelectronicsandretail)asaresultofthedisruptivechangesusheredinbythedigitalrevolution,havealsostrategicallypositionedthemselvesinthiscom-petitivelandscape:AppleandAmazon.TheconsumerelectronicsleaderApplehasbeenforyearsaplayerinthemediaindustry,buildingtheiTunesoutletfirstandsubsequentlyAppleTV.AmajorshiftwasannouncedwithAppleTV+inNovember2019,anad-free,onlinesubscriptionvideoondemandservice.Whilethecontentstrategyandcompetitivepositioninghavenotbeenfullydisclosedatthetimeofthiswriting,AppleTV+appearstomostlyrelyonoriginalcontent,whichin2020wonmultipleEmmys(Jarvey,2020b).TheserviceisbundledatadiscountwithtwoalreadyestablishedApplesubscriptionservices–MusicandArcade–aswellasnewones,suchasthefitnesssubscriptionserviceFitness+(Jarvey,2020a),seem-inglytakingadvantageofApple’sexistingecosystemofdevicesandservices.BeforeApple,thegiantdigitalretailerAmazonidentifiedthedistributionofmediaenter-tainmentasanaturalfitwithitscorebusiness,launchingAmazonPrimeVideoin2006.Asinalmosteverysectorinwhichitoperates,Amazonseemstohavejoinedthiscompetitivearenaasfarmorethanaspectatororamarginalplayer,despitenotinitiallyhavingspecificcompetenciesinthemediaentertainmentindustry.Itlicensescontentfromexistingmedialibraries,whilefundinganddistributingoriginalprogramming(see,forexample,Kilkenny,2020).ItssheersizeandcompetitiveadvantageinthedigitaldistributionlandscapesuggestsPaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
318Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment309itwillbeplayingasignificantroleintheglobaldevelopmentofdigitaldistributionplatformsintheforeseeablefuture.AslightlydifferentapproachledtothecreationandlaunchofQuibibyHollywoodstudioveteransjoiningforceswithSiliconValleyexecutives,builtasanotherpartnershipcombiningtheSouthernCalifornialeadershipinthecreativeindustrieswiththeleadingtechnologicalcompaniesoperatinginNorthernCalifornia.Thedistinctivefeaturesofthisdigitalplatformareboththenatureofitscontentanditsconduit.Thecontentstrategyoftheplatformfocusedonprofessionallyproduced,high-production-valueshortstories,whileitsdeliveryconduitwasbasedonmobiledevices(suchassmartphonesandtablets)asthenewfrontierofmediadeliveryforyoungerdemographics.Industryinsiders(Vlessing,2019)anticipatedplansforaninternationaldistributioninEnglish-speakingcountriesfollowedbyaglobalroll-outintheeventthemarketsreactedfavourablytothisnewmediaentertainmentpropositionintheUS,bothintermsofthecontentandthedeliveryoutlet.Onlysixmonthsfollowingitslaunchthough,thecompanyannounceditsintentionof‘windingdownthebusinessandlookingtosellitscontentandtechnologyassets’(Jarvey,2020c).Althoughwell-fundedandbackedbyexperiencedprofessionalsfrombothHollywoodandSiliconValley,thisfailedendeavourtoestablishanewdigitalmediaplatformbringstotheforetheintensityofthecompetitioninthemarketandforeshadowspotentialfuturecasualtiesinthisincreasinglycrowdedlandscape.Thebriefsituationanalysisofthecompetitivelandscapeofstreamingplatformshasshownatrulychallengingandevolvingarena,inwhicheverycompetitorneedstoimplementastrat-egytobuildandsustainauniquevalueproposition.Mostoftheleadingandemergingstream-ingplatformsaredisplayingsimilargrowthstrategies,launchingtheirservicesintheUSfirstandsubsequentlyexpandingworldwide.Theinternationaldimensionoftheseplatformscanbedeemedasacentralelementtoproduceinvestmentsinhighproductionvaluemediaenter-tainment,whichcouldberecoupedglobally.Andmostofthemare,indeed,globalorintendtobecomesointhenearfuture.Whilebecomingglobalinadigitalmedialandscapeisessentialforplatformstoreacheconomiesofscaleandbuildacompetitiveadvantage(Sigismondi,2017),culturaldifferencesremainwhentheirmediaartefactscrossnationalborders.Netflixhasenjoyedthefirstmoveradvantageinmanyterritories,butitscompetitorsfromlegacymediasuchasthosewithinverticallyintegratedmediaconglomerates,includingHollywoodstudios,havetheadvantageofdrawingonlargelibrariesofentertainmentcontentbuiltoverdecades.Furthermore,leadingdigitalplayers,suchasAmazonandApple,canleveragetheirexistingbaseofglobalconsumers,bundlingtheirstreamingplatformsinwiththeirdigitalservices.Therearethereforedifferences,similaritiesanddistinctivecompetitiveadvantagesacrossplatforms.Glocalizationcanbeaneffectivestrategyinaverycompetitivelandscapewherethereareglobalopportunities,madeavailablebydigitaltechnology,whilelocaldifferencesremain(Sigismondi,2011).Glocalizationprocessesinmediaentertainmentcouldtranslateintostandardizingcertainfeaturesglobally,suchasbranding,platformoperations,customermanagementandsomecontentwithworldwiderightsinperpetuity,whilelocalizingotheraspects,mainlythelibrariesofcontentofferedindifferentcountries,throughlicensingfromlocalthirdpartyentitiesandfundingoriginallocalcontent.ThisseemstobepreciselythemodusoperandiselectedbyNetflixinitsglobalexpansion.Itisuseful,then,toanalyseindetailitsroll-outandstrategywithacasestudyofaspecificcountry–Italy–whichhasbeenfordecadesoneofthemostrelevantmarketsinEurope.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
319310HandbookofcultureandglocalizationNETFLIXINITALYThearrivalofNetflixinItalyanditsevolutionthereafterfurnishaparticularlyinterestingcasestudyfromtheviewpointoftheglocalizationoftheentertainmentmarkets,andofthedigitalglocalizationoftheaudiovisualsector.Inordertofullyappreciateitsrelevance,wemustuseanecologicalapproachcapableofunderstandingthemultiplekeycharacteristicsoftheItaliancontext.YetitalsoappearsessentialtostartbyconsideringtheculturalroleandtechnologicalimpactthattelevisionhashadinItaly,andindeedcontinuestohave,albeitunderdifferentforms.Inotherwords,ourstartingpointmustbetheunderstandingofitsdoublenatureoftechnologyandofculturalform(Williams,1975).Thisisausefulapproach,firstofallbecauseitallowsustomakeameaningfulconnectionwiththattypeofconvergencethatisbothtechnological(Negroponte,1995)andcultural(Jenkins,2006)ofwhichNetflixisperhapsoneofthemostparticularexamples,bothwithrespecttoawiderlogicofplatformizationandinthelightofthemorespecificplatformizationstrategiesofculturalproduction.Afurtherreasonisthepossibilityofidentifyingthetwostages,differentyetcomplementary,thathavecharacterizedthecourseofItalianculturalindustrializationandparticularlytheevolutionofthetelevisionmedium,openingoutasce-nariowhereinNetflixhassettledandcurrentlyoperates.Thefirstreasoncameaboutrapidly(almostinstantaneously)withthestart-upoftelevisionbroadcastinginItaly:‘Eversinceitsappearancein1954thetelevisionmedium…immedi-atelytookontheroleofanagencyforsocialization,literacyteachingandthediffusionofculturalmodelswhilere-organizingspacesandtimes’(Ciofaloetal.,2019,p.47).Evenmorethanthetechnologicalimpact,televisionhadaculturalimpactthatwasuniqueinaprofoundlyItalianway.Intransformingitselfintooneofthemostpowerfuldriversofchange,televisioninItalyoverturnedtheclassicaldesignofmodernizationandindustrialevolution.Thespreadoftelevisionpreceded,andtriggered,anincreaseinawarenessandanensuingsuccessofmassculturalproducts.Thisfundamentalshifttookplacenotsomuch,ornotonly,forthecontentonoffer,norfortheattemptbypoliticalpartiestoexercisecontrol,norforthecommunicationpotentialthattelevisionitselfsucceededinactivating.ItistheoverallculturalsignificanceattributedoracknowledgedtoTVtomakeofit,insuchashorttime,themostwidespreadmeansofcommunication,longedforandbelovedbytheItalians(Grasso,1998).Throughtelevisionyouobtaininformationmoreeasily,yougainaccesstotheworldofcon-sumptionandadvertising(Alberoni,2011),youspendtimewithyourfamily,youenjoyit,yousingalongwithit,andyoucanevenlearntoreadandwrite.Besideswhich,forapproximately20yearsallthishappenedunderastatemonopoly,inpursuitofinformationandentertainment,aswellasforapedagogicalobjective(Grasso,2013).Fromthe1970sonwards,withthearrivalonthesceneoftheprivatetelevisionnetworks,andmoreoverwiththecreationinthe1980sofatelevisionmarketthatwasfree(fundedbyadvertising),nottosayunscrupulous(Ciofalo,2011;Colombo,2012),televisionacquiredyetmorerolesandfunctions.Itbecameinfactmanythingsallatonce:thenewdomestichearth;agoodteacher;amum;awindowtotheworld;apost-modernbabysitter;abadteacher;anewtechnology(thankstotheprolifera-tionofchannelsandthecombinationwiththevideotape-recorder);asecretmirror;andsoon.Whatcountsisthat,overall,thegrowingsocialcentralityachievedinItalybytelevisionhasremainedstableovertime.ItisasignofthedeepdependenceofItalianstowardsthismedium(Morcellini,2005),butalsoaresultofthefascinationexertedbyitslanguage,itscontentandtheimaginarythatitcontributestoconstructing(Abruzzese,1995;Leonzi,2010).PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
320Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment311Thearrivaloftechnologiescapableofstructurallychangingthespectator’suserexperi-ence,particularlythroughthegradualenhancementofTV’srole,isthestartingpointforthesecondapproachwehavetoconsider.Thegradual‘domestication’(Silverstone,1994)oftechnologies,fromcomputerstoeverythinghenceindicatedbytheexpression‘newmedia’,includingtheinternet,wasalsoasignintheItalyofthe1990softhebeginningofanewstageinwhichtelevisionbecametheobjectofanevermoreevidentre-mediationprocess(Bolter&Grusin,2000).Thistime,however,itisspecificallythetechnologicaldimensionthatappearsdecisive,leadingfirsttoaredefinition,aswellasacrisis(Gavrila,2010),ofthetraditionaltelevisionmarketalsothroughthearrivalofnewplayers,thentoitscompletere-elaborationundertheeffectofaprogressivepassagefromtheneo-televisionofthepreviousdecade(Eco,1983)throughtothepost-television(Scaglioni,2011;Spigel&Olsson,2004),andontothemulti-television(Marinelli&Celata,2012;Scaglioni&Sfardini,2008)uptothepost-networkera(Lotz,2014).Inanycase,thesearethesametheoreticalformulaethatfeatureintheevolutionaryprocessofscientificandsocialdebate,andnotonlyinItaly,inlightoftheprofoundtransformationofthetelevisionpanoramatriggeredbyfactorssuchas‘themultiplicationofdigitalchannels,thesegmentationofaudiencesfavoredbynarrowcasting,thefirstwidespreadexperimentationofthePVR(PersonalVideoRecorder)andtheaccesstoon-demandcontent(throughtheser-vicesofcableoperators)’(Marinelli,2020,p.11).Thisparticulartransformationcameaboutoverthecourseoftwenty-oddyears,fromaroundthefirsthalfofthe1990suntilthe2010s.Ahigherandhigherperformancedigitaltransformation,whoseeffectsreverberatethroughthemeansofcommunicationthatcapturedparexcellencetheattentionofwholegenerationsofItalians(Aroldi&Colombo,2003),producingfurtherbroadeningofitscentralpositionanditssignificance.Anewpanoramaopenedwiththemorehighly-structuredlocalinteractionofferedbythemultiplicationofchannels,thenthediffusionofaremoteinteractionpotentialsymbolicallyrepresentedbythe‘normalization’ofon-demandandthe‘commercialization’ofsmarttelevi-sionsets,andsotothearrivalonthesceneofa‘socialTV’(Barkhuus,2009;Ducheneautetal.,2008)andtheconfirmedhabitofbinge-watching(Jenner,2017)when(atleastapparently)theTVschedulebecameathingofthepast.InItalyalso,therefore,televisionbecametheobjectofaprocessoftechnologicalmetamorphosis.Inotherwords,attheendofthesecondstagewehavedescribed,aswellasbeingaculturalplatform,ItalianTVbecameatechno-logicalplatform(inspiteofcertainelementsofstructuralcriticality)thankstotheshift‘fromameanscentralinenablingconnectionwithacontinuousflowof“vertical”communicationtoameanswithinamorecomplex,stratifiedhorizontal“connectedness”ofmany-to-manycommunicativeflows’(Colombo,2015,p.9).ItisinthisItaliantelevisionscenariothatNetflixstageditsentranceonthenightbetween21and22October2015(Cavazzuti,2015).ComparedwithneighbouringcountrieswhereNetflixhadalreadybecomeavailable–forexample,intheUnitedKingdom,IrelandandScandinaviasince2012,intheNetherlandssince2013,inGermany,France,Belgium,AustriaandLuxembourgsince2014–thelateradoptionwasasignificantindicator:Awareofourcountry’sstructuralissues,laggingbehindinthediffusionofultra-broadbandinallinternationalclassifications,featuringapreponderanceoftraditionalbroadcastersintheaudio-visualsystem,anddifficulttopenetratefororiginalcontentsinEnglishwithoutdubbing,NetflixformanymonthsputoffitsentranceintoItaly.(Marrazzo,2016)PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
321312HandbookofcultureandglocalizationTherefore,inlightofwhatwehavejustdescribed,suchatimegappointstoanassessmentoftheItalianmarket:amarket,ifnotinfactcomplexorevenpotentiallyrisky,atleastunusual.Inadditiontothereasonsalreadyindicated,thiswasanassessmentbased,further,on:demo-graphicfactorsowingtotheadvancedageofsignificantsectorsofthetelevisionaudience;thestillinfrequentuse,atthatmomentintime,ofonlinepurchasing;asimilarlyreducedten-dencytopayfortelevisioncontent,co-relatedtothewidespreadnatureofpiracy;theongoingcentralpositionofmainstreamformsoftelevisionandmoretraditionalcontent;aswellasthecomplexquestionrelatingtorights(Marrazzo,2016).Yet,inspiteofthissetofpotentialobstacles,withinthewidertelevisionscenarioan‘ItalianwaytoNetflix’finallydeveloped,astheplatform’sgrowingdatadisseminationtestifies.Fromtheapproximately20,000subscribersregisteredinthelastfewmonthsof2015,numbersroseto500,000in2016,reachingonemillionin2017(Corvi,2019).Overthenexttwoyears,growthseemedtostabilizeatthe500,000markfornewcustomersannually,showingrespectively1.5millionsubscribersin2018(Spotti,2019),then2millionin2019(ANSA,2019).Themostsignificantincreasewasregisteredin2020(Secchi,2020)likelyduetotheCOVID-19pandemic:thenumberofNetflixsubscribersrosetowellover4million(inAprilalonereaching4.6million).Asalways,notonlyinthewayinwhichthedataarepresentedandinterpreted,theirsignificanceisalsodeterminedbythecontextinwhichtheyarenecessarilysetandbytheexaminationoffurthervariables.Inthiscase,whiletheincreaseinsubscriberstellsofaconstantlygrowingtrend,itisofyetgreaterinterestwhenrelatedtootheraspects,suchasthewaytheplatformisusedorthequantityandqualityofthecontentinitsarchives.Inthefirstcase,wecanseethat,inItaly,withaninternetcoverageofapproximately82%ofthepopulation(over49million)inJanuary2020,about60%ofusersagedbetween16and64watchtelevisioncontentfollowingasubscriptiontoastreamingservice(Starri,2020).Thisactivity,whichonaverageoccupiesaboutthreehoursperday,isnothoweverlimitedtoonlyonlineviewing,butalsotakesintoaccounttraditionaltelevisionchannels(Starri,2020).Aslateas2018,morethanhalf(54%)ofItalianNetflixuserssaidtheypreferredtoenjoytheplatform’sofferingonthelarger,moreconvenienthometelevisionscreen,asopposedtotheirPC,tabletorsmartphone(DiMarco,2018).Thistendencyisinlinewithlaterdatafrom2019,whichdescribesanotableincreaseinsmartTVsanddevicestobringinternetconnectivitytotelevisionsets,whichbythatyearcouldbefoundinthehomesofmorethan30%ofItalianfamilies(Auditel&CENSIS,2019).However,inrelationtothedimensionofcontent,wemustpointoutthatinOctober2020theNetflixItaliacataloguecontainedmorethanfourthousandtitles(4244),dividedbetweenfilms(2434),TVseries(1273)anddocumentaries(537),ofwhich1872were‘original’productionsand601forchildren(NetflixLovers,n.d.).If,ontheonehand,thesignificantincreaseincontentthatcameaboutinaperiodoflittlemorethanfouryearsistheumpteenthconfirmationofanexpandingtrend,ontheother,ittestifiestoaveryspecificcommercialstrategy.WithanunderstandingofthepeculiaritiesoftheItalianmarket,thisstrategyconcentratedonlaunch-ingtitlesfromproductionsattimesremotefromthosetraditionallyestablished,knownandsoughtafterinItaly.Althoughfacinganundeniablemarginofrisk,thischoicewasknowinglypursuedinthewakeofentertainmentglocalization;itaimedtomodify,howevergradually,thehabitsoftheItalianpublic–astrategybasedontheefforttotranslatecontent,butalsotounderstandandadapttocontextsaccordingtoa‘centripetallogic’.Aswewilltrytoillustrateinthefollowing,thisattempt,whichwithhindsightwemayconsidertohavehitthemark,notonlyintegratesadiametricallyoppositelogic–a‘centrifugal’logic–pursuedthroughPaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
322Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment313therealizationoforiginalproductions,butalsostronglyimpliestheveryessenceofNetflix:comparedwithothers,aplatformthatseemstoseekdistinctionthroughrecoursetoabalancedmixturebetweentechnologyandculture,symbolicallyhybridizingitsalgorithm’scapacitieswiththeopportunitiesofdubbingorofcreatingoriginalproductions.Whileundeniablycontributingtoapotentialhomogenizationofneedsurgedonbytechnol-ogy(Levitt,1983),Netflixseemstointendinanycasetoobserve,preserveand,ifpossible,makethemostoftheculturaldifferencesofthemarketsinwhichitactsandofwhichitthenbecomespromoter–clearlytoitsownadvantage.Fromthisviewpoint,ratherthanthefactthataplatformhasinnovatedtheideaoftelevision,themajoraffirmationofNetflixinItalyconsistsofthefinalmergerithasmanagedtomakebetweentheconceptofTVasaculturalplatformandthatofTVasatechnologicalplatform.THEGLOCALIZATIONOFNETFLIXINTHEITALIANMEDIALANDSCAPEHavingillustratedtheparticularitiesofthecaseofItaliantelevisionregardingthetwocom-plementarynotions(culturalandtechnological)ofitsoverallevolutionandthespecificwaysemployedbyNetflixtoenterthemarket,thenextstagecanonlycoincidewiththeanalysisoftheglocalizationprocessthathastakenshapeinItaly,firstthroughtheplatform’simpulse,theninthewakeofthereactionsandeffectsproduced.Insodoing,wehavetoconsideranextremelybroadscenariocontainingwithinitamultitudeoffactors:fromeconomicandproductivelogictothedifferentwaysofusingit;fromconsumerhabitstopotentialviralitydynamics;andontotheencounter,orattimestheclash,betweeninnovationandtradition.Ineffect,thesetoftrajectoriestakengloballyandlocallybyinteractionforms,connotingthenewecologyoftheglobalpanoramaofentertainment.ItisinlightofsuchconsiderationsthatwewillattempttounderstandtheglocalizationprocessactivatedinItalybyNetflixthroughthreemaindimensions:licensing,audienceengagementandcontentproduction.Licensingprocesses,whichprovideforthetransfer(whethertemporaryornot)oftherightsofaparticularpieceofcontentforthepurposeofitscommercialexploitation,donotcomewithinonefixedpattern.Thecostbornebythedistributormaycoincidewithafixedquotaorelsewithapercentage;theuseofsaidcontentmayormaynotbeexclusiveand,almostalwaysinthecaseof(productiveanddistributive)supranationalcompanies,thecontractsarestructuredatthelocalratherthangloballevel(Lobato,2017).InthecaseofNetflix,however,licensingalsobecomestheobjectofaparadoxicalturnaroundsincetheoriginaldistributorfunctionisassociatedwiththeproducerfunction,ormoreoftenwiththatofcommissioneroforiginalseries(NetflixOriginals).Inthissense,themultidimensional,hybridnature(Chadwick,2017)ofNetflixcertainlyrepresentsanelementcapableofinducingacompleterethinkoftherelationshipbetweendigitaldistributionplatformsandalgorithmicculture(Lobato&Lotz,2020).ThefactthatNetflix‘usesanewdistributiontechnologyandapreviouslyuncommonbusi-nessmodel,andisdisruptingestablishednormsofinternationalvideodistributionbasedontemporalandspatialwindowing’doesinfactappeartoreinforcethehypothesisthatitconsti-tutesasortoftechno-culturalbrandcapableofevadingthestandardizingeffectofplatformi-zation(Ciofaloetal.,2019)or,betterstill,bendingthedynamicstoone’sownadvantage,frequentlyoriginallyandunpredictably.Naturally,thishasrepercussionsonthecompositionPaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
323314HandbookofcultureandglocalizationoftheItaliancatalogue,specificallyforthreemainreasons(NetflixHelpCenter,n.d.):first,localpreferences,thatis,thewishtoadaptthefeaturesoftheservicetothegeographicalareaitaddresses.Second,themulti-ownershiportemporarytransferoftherightsofcertaincontent,sinceanumberofproductionordistributionhouses(nationalorinternational)mightholdtheoriginalrightsorelsemighthaveobtainedsolerightsfromNetflixbeforeitsarrival.Lastly,thecompletenon-availabilityofrightsforcertaincontentinaspecificgeographicalarea.Thefirstcase(localpreferences)isconnectedtothefactthat,asinothercountries,theNetflixItaliacataloguewasconstructedusingalgorithmsandprofilinginstruments(Nightingale,2016;Richeri,2016a).Theaimistooptimizethepresenceoftitlesthatwillrespondtotheexpectationsandwishes(realorpresumed)oftheItalians:examiningthechoicesandtheopinionsofNetflixsubscribersdefinesthefeaturesofnewproductionswithasufficientdegreeofreliabilitytoexcludeanyneedtorealizethe‘pilot’episodebeforetakingthefinaldecisiontogoaheadwiththewholeseries.(Richeri2015,p.278)Thisisevidentlyadynamicprocesswhich,evenconsideringthemoregeneralcharacteristicsoftheEuropeanmarket,inItalyagainproposesthesametendency,accordingtowhichalmosthalfthecatalogueiscomposedofUScontent,followedbyEuropeancontent(includingnationaltitles)andlastly,onlyasmallproportionoftitlesfromothercountries(Richeri,2016b).Thesecondcase(multi-ownershiportemporarytransferofrights),muchmoresimply,isconnectedtocontentwhich,whileavailableintheNetflixcatalogueelsewhere,isnotavailableinaspecificcountry.InItaly,themostsignificantexampleisthatoftheHouseofCardsseries,aNetflixOriginalproductionbroadcastfromApril2014toNovember2018bytheSkyAtlanticchannel,andthereforeavailableonlythroughtheon-demandservice,SkyItalia.Finally,onthebasisofaprinciplepreciselycomplementarytothatjustillustrated,thethirdandlastcaseincludesallthecontentforwhichNetflixdoesnotpossesstherightsforlocaldistribution(noteventemporarily).InItalyoncemore,andparadoxically,HouseofCards,butalsoproductsmadeanddistributedwiththeaimofuselimitedtowithinnationalterritory(rangingfromIlCommissarioMontalbanotoDonMatteo).Thesizeofaudienceengagementappearsequallyimportant,sinceitidentifieshowtheItalianaudienceacceptsNetflixcontent,andtheirformsofreaction.Startingfromthecom-binationofappreciation(ofagivencontent)andtaste(whichmayreflecttheculturalincli-nationsofaspecificterritory)engagementderivesthereforefromanewformofdistinction(Bourdieu,1979),albeittechnologicallydetermined.Asortofhabitus2.0,amathematizationoftaste(Alexander,2016),expressedthroughanencounterbetweenthere-intermediationformstypicaloftheplatformandthechoicesandwaysofusingtheglobalentertainmentcontentthatariseslocally.Fromthisviewpoint,theclassificationofthemostpopularcontentbyNetflixitselfcertainlyoffersanimmediateindicator,howevergeneral.AsregardsItaly,forexample,inOctober2020thetenmostpopulartitlesintheNetflixOriginalscategorywereLucifer(USA,2016),Lacasadicarta(Lacasadepapel,Spain2017),EmilyinParis(USA,2020),VisaVis(Spain,2015),Barbari(Barbarians,Germany2020),PeakyBlinders(UK,2013),CobraKai(USA,2018),StrangerThings(USA,2016),TheCrown(UK–USA,2016),andSuburra.Laserie(Suburra.BloodonRome,Italy,2017).Aswellastendingtoreflectthedistributionofthereferencequotasdescribedaboveinrelationtothemake-upoftheplatform’scatalogues,theclassificationdoesnotindicatesimplywhatItalianslikemost;indeed,beingitselfaprofilinginstrument,itmakesmorevisible,PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
324Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment315andthereforepotentiallymorepopular,certaincontentatthecostofothers,extendingandre-elaboratingthe‘FilterBubble’effect(Pariser,2011),evenwithinasubscriptionvideoondemand(SVOD)platformsuchasNetflix.Movingtoamorequality-basedaspect,however,itisalsoimportanttoconsiderthediverseroleofthefandom(Jenkins,1992)anditsoverallevolution(Coppa,2014;Gray,2017;Grayetal.,2017;Linden&Linden,2017),determinedpreciselyinthewakeoftheadventoftelevisionservicesofthistype.AlsoinrelationtotheItaliancase,itappearsessentialtoreflectonhowtheverynatureofNetflix’s‘transTV’(Hills,2018)increasesformsofuserparticipationandinteractionthatoverrunitsborders,developingwithinotherplatforms(Facebook,Twitter,Instagram,andsoon).Thisisatransmediapredis-positioncapableofleadingtoatransfandomthatcanbeidentified‘asuncannilydividedandsplitintolivedfantastes,andtheghostedimageofadatafiedfanprofileintowhichonehasbeensimultaneouslysorted(orinterpellated)byNetflix’(Hills,2018,p.497).Thetwodimensionsunderconsiderationsofar,alsoonthebasisofproductive,distributiveandtechnologicalelements,seemtoshareacertainpredominanceofglobalaspectsoverlocalonesthroughasortofcentripetallogic,yetthecontentproductiondimensionreferstoadynamicofacompletelyoppositetype.Specifically,throughdifferentformsofinvolvement(commission,production,co-production,purchase,re-broadcast,andsoon),NetflixseemstobetonItaliancontent,exploitingitshighqualityandshowingconfidenceinitsgrowingexportation.Theessenceofthiscentrifugallogic,inbeingorientedtowardsoptimizingwhatislocalinaglobaloutlook,isthatNetflix,asaninternationalOTT,amplifiesthevisibilityofItaliancontent,exploitingtheattractionofwhatis‘MadeinItaly’.Overall,sinceitsentryintoItalyuptothepresentday,therehavebeenabout20Italiantitles,bothTVseriesandfilms,includedintheNetflixOriginalscategory.However,NetflixholdstherightstomuchmoreItaliancontentinothercountries.Amongthese,theSuburraandSkamItalia(Italy,2018)seriesaretwoofthemostinterestingcasestoconsider.SuburraisaNetflixOriginalproducedincollaborationwithCattleya(anItaliancinemaproductionhouse),andRaiFiction,thestructurewithinthepublicItaliantelevisionRAIthathandlestheproductionoftelevisionseries.Developedoverthreeseasons(thelastwasreleasedon30October2020),theseriesamplifiesastoryuniversederivedfromabest-selling2002novelRomanzoCriminalebyGiancarloDeCataldo,whichhadalsobeenthesubjectofa2005cinemaversionandofatwo-seasonseriesthatwasbroadcastbetween2008and2010onSky.Suburrastoodoutnotonlyforitsmanynotablecharacters,butalsointhewayittoldthestoryofthedark,under-groundside–literallytheunderworld–ofthecityofRome,therealprotagonistoftheseries.SkamItaliawasinitiallydistributedbyNetflixthroughlicensingandlater,onceitbecameahit,asaco-production.Exploitingthesubjectivitymechanismbymeansofwhichitalter-natestheviewpointsofanumberofcharactersthroughtheseasons,achoralstoryofgrowingupandmaturingdevelops.TheseriesispartofaninternationalfranchisestartingfromaNorwegianweb-series;itgaverisetoatransmediauniverse,alsomadeupofbooks,theatri-calshowsandothersecondaryproducts(Sundet,2020),aswellasnineversionsrealizedinasmanycountriesandafurthereightproducedin2020(Galvagno,2020).Asshownbythehighlevelofpopularityobtainedinternationally,amongthemall,theItalianversionhasprobablysucceededbestinthedifficulttaskofinnovatingastandardizedformat,withoutre-producingyetanotheradaptation.Fromthispointofview,thecentralityoftheleadingcharactersisunde-niablethankstotheirfunctioninthestoriestheyexperienceandtherelationshipstheyform,butalsothankstotheItalianwayoflifethattheyalltogethermanagetorepresent.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
325316HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCONCLUSION:NEWCENTRIFUGALDYNAMICSANDNEWRESEARCHTRAJECTORIESTOEXPLORETHEGLOBALMEDIALANDSCAPETheglobalentertainmentlandscapeisacomplexandcontestedspace,shapedbyglobal,regionalandlocaldynamicsandintersections(Sigismondi,2019).DominantflowsofentertainmentfromtheWesttotherestoftheworld,analysedinparticularbyscholarlyconversationssituatedwithinthetheoreticalframeworkofculturalimperialism(Tomlinson,1991),competewithlocallygeneratedentertainmentartefactsandwithcontra-flowsofmediaentertainment(Thussu,2007)alsocrossingnationalandculturalboundaries.Glocalizationprocessesplayapivotalroleincontributingtoshapeanddeterminethecontoursofamedialandscapewheretheglobalmeetsthelocal,increasinglyembracingthepossibilitiesmadeavailableinadigitalenvironmentimpactingitscontent,conduitsandbusinessmodels.Asillustratedinthecasestudyoftheroll-outandoperationsofNetflixinItaly,glocalizationisindeedaneffectivestrategywhenaglobalplayerentersaforeignmarketwithdistinctivefeatures,rootedindecadesofuniqueexpertiseandevolutionsinmediaproduction,distribu-tionandexhibition.Itcombinesglobalfeatures,centralaspectsoftheknow-howdevelopedsuccessfullyovertimebytheglobalplayer,withlocalonestomeettheexpectationsoflocallysituatedaudiences.Interestingly,therecanbeunexpectedsideeffectswithpotentiallynovelconsequencesfortheinternationalmediaflowsworthexploringfurther:whenthelocalizedmediaproducedintheforeigncountry,suchastheglocalizedapproachofNetflixinItaly,isdeemedasalsohavingpotentialforexportinothermarkets,itcouldsubsequentlybedistributedinternation-ally,generatinganadditionalwindowofexhibitionandcreatingnewcentrifugaldynamicsintheinternationalmedialandscape.Thisnewdimensionismadepossiblewhenglobalplatformswithaglocalizedapproach,suchasNetflix,operateincountries,suchasItaly,withalongtraditionofcreatinghighproductionvaluemediaartefactsthatcanbetracedbackdecades.Theendresultofthiscomplexprocessofglocalizationistheproductionofmediaentertainmentartefactswithpotentialadditionalinternationalappealthatcanbeutilizedbythesameplatform,Netflix,inotherinternationalmarkets,nottomentiononaglobalscale.Thenewphenomenonoflocalizedcontentbeingdistributedaboveandbeyondthelocalmediamarketforwhichitwasoriginallyproducedisworthinvestigatingfurthertodetermineifthisisanisolatedcaseorasignofnewtrajectoriesunfoldinginglobalmediaentertainment,madepossiblebynewglobalplatformswithaglocalizedapproachopentoconsiderthedifferentmedialandscapesnotassilos,butascommunicatingvessels,creatingthepreconditionforosmoticcommunicationamongdifferentmedialandscapes.Newresearchendeavourscoulddevelopastrandofinquiryanalysingthesenewphenomenaoflocalizedcontentcrossingnationalandculturalborders,aswellastheirimpactandcon-sequences.Newresearchtrajectories,andpotentiallynewtheoreticalframeworks,mightbenecessarytodeterminetowhatextentthesephenomenacouldhelpshedlightontheunfoldingchangesintheglobalmedialandscape.Theycanalsohelpexplicatethecomplexitiesofflowsandcontra-flowsofmediaentertainmentcrossingtheglobe,andperhapschallengeorcontributeadditionaldimensionstoexistingtheoreticalframeworks,forexample,culturalimperialisminadigitallyconnectedtwenty-firstcenturycommunicationlandscape.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
326Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment317REFERENCESAbruzzese,A.(1995),LosplendoredellaTV:originiedestinodellinguaggioaudiovisivo[TV’sSplendour:OriginandDestinyofAudiovisualLanguage],Genova,Italy:Costa&Nolan.Aguiar,L.andJ.Waldfogel(2010),‘Netflix:globalhegemonorfacilitatoroffrictionlessdigitaltrade?’,JournalofCulturalEconomics,42(3),419–45.Alberoni,F.(2011),Pubblicitàtelevisioneesocietànell’Italiadelmiracoloeconomico[TelevisionAdvertisingandSocietyintheItalyoftheEconomicMiracle],Rome,Italy:ArmandoEditore.Alexander,N.(2016),‘Cateredtoyourfutureself:Netflix’s“predictivepersonalization”andthemathe-matizationoftaste’,inK.McDonaldandD.Smith-Rowsey(eds),TheNetflixEffect:TechnologyandEntertainmentinthe21stCentury,NewYork,NY:Bloomsbury,pp.81–97.Anderson,C.(2009),Free:TheFutureofaRadicalPrice,NewYork,NY:Hyperion.ANSA(2019),‘Netflix:inItaliaduemilionidiabbonati’[Netflix:TwomillionsubscribersinItaly],Ansa.it,8October,accessed22September2020athttps://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/tecnologia/tlc/2019/10/08/netflix-in-italia-due-milioni-di-abbonati_92114a25-cb6f-442a-a4f0-77d8981651b2.html.Aroldi,P.andF.Colombo(eds)(2003),LeetàdellaTv:indaginesuquattrogenerazionidispettatoriitaliani[AgesofTelevision:ASurveyonFourGenerationsofSpectators],Milano,Italy:VitaePensiero.AuditelandCENSIS(2019),‘Traanzianidigitaliestranieriiperconnessi,l’ItaliainmarciaversolaSmartTV’[‘Betweendigitalseniorsandhyper-connectedforeigners,ItalymarchestowardstheSmartTV’],CENSIS,3October,accessed23September2020athttps://www.censis.it/sites/default/files/downloads/Secondo%20Rapporto%20Auditel%20Censis.pdf.Barkhuus,L.(2009),‘Televisionontheinternet:newpractices,newviewers’,CHI’09ExtendedAbstractsonHumanFactorsinComputingSystems,2479–88.Bolter,J.D.andR.A.Grusin(2000),Remediation:UnderstandingNewMedia,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.BourdieuP.(1979),Ladistinction.Critiquesocialedujugement[TheDistinction.SocialCritiqueofJudgement],Paris,France:ÉditiondeMinuit.Cavazzuti,N.(2015),‘NetflixsbarcainItaliaerivoluzionalatv:costerà7.99euroalmese,ilprimoègratis’[‘NetflixlandsinItalyandrevolutionizesTV:Itwillcost7,99Europermonth,thefirstisfree’],IlMessaggero,22October,accessed23September2020athttps://www.ilmessaggero.it/tecnologia/hitech/netflix_sbarca_italia_rivoluziona_tv-1312114.html.Chadwick,A.(2017),TheHybridMediaSystem:PoliticsandPower,NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.Ciofalo,G.(2011),InfinitianniOttanta:Tv,culturaesocietàalleoriginidelnostropresente[Thenever-endingEighties:Tv,cultureandsocietyofapaststillpresent],Milano,Italy:MondadoriUniversità.CiofaloG.,LeonziS.andA.Marinelli(2019),‘Brandsasplatforms?RiuscirannoimondinarrativicomplessiasopravvivereallaPlatformSociety?’[‘Brandsasplatforms?WillthecomplexnarrativeworldssurvivethePlatformSociety?’],paperpresentedattheScreenCulturesconference,SapienzaUniversityofRome,21-22February.Colombo,F.(2012),Ilpaeseleggero:gliitalianieimediatracontestazioneeriflusso(1967-1994)[TheLightCountry:ItaliansandtheMediabetween1967and1994],Roma-Bari,Italy:Laterza.Colombo,F.(2015),SocialTV:Produzione,esperienzaevalorenell’eradigitale[SocialTV:Production,ExperienceandValueintheDigitalEra],Milano,Italy:Egea.Coppa,F.(2014),‘FuckYeah,fandomisbeautiful’,JournalofFandomStudies,2(1),73–82.Corvi,E.(2019),‘Netflix,gliabbonatiinItaliasono1,5milioni’[‘Thereare1.5millionNetflixsubscrib-ersinItaly’],MilanoFinanza,28January,accessed22August2020,athttps://www.milanofinanza.it/news/netflix-gli-abbonati-in-italia-sono-1-5-milioni-201901281858089392.DiMarco,M.(2018),‘MacchéPC,tabletosmartphone:NetflixinItaliasiguardasulTV’[‘ForgetPCs,tabletsorsmartphones:NetflixiswatchedinItalyonTV’],DDay.it,9March,accessed25September2020athttps://www.dday.it/redazione/26000/macche-pc-tablet-o-smartphone-netflix-in-italia-si-guarda-sul-tv.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
327318HandbookofcultureandglocalizationDucheneaut,N.,Moore,R.J.,Oehlberg,L.,Thornton,J.D.andE.Nickell(2008),‘SocialTV:Designingfordistributed,sociabletelevisionviewing’,InternationalJournalofHuman–ComputerInteraction,24(2),136–54.Eco,U.(1983),Setteannididesiderio[SevenYearsofDesire],Milano,Italy:Bompiani.Galvagno,G.C.(2020),‘Beyondscreens,beyondborders.IlcasoSKAM’[‘Beyondscreens,beyondborders.SKAM,acasestudy’],H-ermes.JournalofCommunication,16,125–35.Gavrila,M.(2010),LacrisidellaTV,laTVdellacrisi:televisioneepublicservicenell’eternatran-sizioneitaliana[TheCrisisofTelevision,theTelevisionOFTHECrisis;TelevisionandPublicServiceINTHEEternalItalianTransition],Milano,Italy:FrancoAngeli.Grasso,A.(1998),Storiadellatelevisioneitaliana.LaTvitalianadalleorigini[HistoryofItalianTelevision.TheOriginofItalianTV],Milano,Italy:Garzanti.Grasso,A.(2013),Storieeculturedellatelevisioneitaliana[StoriesandCulturesofItalianTelevision],Milano,Italy:Mondadori.Gray,J.(2017),‘Revivingaudiencestudies’,CriticalStudiesinMediaCommunication,34(1),79–83.Gray,J.,Sandvoss,C.andC.L.Harrington(eds)(2017),Fandom,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Hills,M.(2018),‘Netflix,transfandomand“transTV”:Wheredata-drivenfandommeetsfanreflexiv-ity’,CriticalStudiesinTelevision,13(4),495–8.Jarvey,N.(2020a),‘Appleunveilssubscriptionservicebundle’,TheHollywoodReporter,15September,accessed29September2020athttps://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/apple-unveils-subscription-service-bundle.Jarvey,N.(2020b),‘AppleTV+winsfirstEmmyaward’,TheHollywoodReporter,20September,accessed29September2020athttps://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/apple-tv-wins-first-emmy-award.Jarvey,N.(2020c),‘Quibitoshutdownsixmonthsafterlaunch’,TheHollywoodReporter,21October,accessed22October2020athttps://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/quibi-to-shut-down-six-months-after-launch.Jenkins,H.(1992),TextualPoachers,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Jenkins,H.(2006),ConvergenceCulture:WhereOldandNewMediaCollide,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Jenner,M.(2017),‘Binge-watching:Video-on-demand,qualityTVandmainstreamingfandom’,InternationalJournalofCulturalStudies,20(3),304–20.Kilkenny,K.(2020),‘AmazonPrime’snewreleasescominginAugust2020’,TheHollywoodReporter,31July,accessed29September2020athttps://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/amazon-prime-august-2020-new-releases-movies-tv-1305120.Leonzi,S.(2010),Lospettacolodell’immaginario:imiti,lestorie,imedia[TheSpectacleoftheImaginary:Myths,Stories,Media],Latina,Italy:Tunué.Levitt,T.(1983),‘Theglobalizationofmarkets’,HarvardBusinessReview,May.Linden,H.andS.Linden(2017),FansandFanCultures:Tourism,ConsumerismandSocialMedia,Basingstoke,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Littleton,C.(2020),‘CBSAllAccesstorebrandasParamountPlusearlynextyear’,Variety,15September,accessed22September2020athttps://variety.com/2020/tv/news/cbs-all-access-paramount-plus-rebrand-game-godfather-1234769980/.Lobato,R.(2017),‘Streamingservicesandthechangingglobalgeographyoftelevision’,inB.Warf(ed.),HandbookonGeographiesofTechnology,Cheltenham,UKandNorthampton,MA:EdwardElgarPublishing,pp.178–92.Lobato,R.(2019),NetflixNations.TheGeographyofDigitalDistribution,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Lobato,R.andA.D.Lotz(2020),‘Imaginingglobalvideo:ThechallengeofNetflix’,JCMS:JournalofCinemaandMediaStudies,59(3),132–6.Lotz,A.D.(2014),TheTelevisionWillBeRevolutionized,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Marinelli,A.(2020),Television(s).Comecambial’esperienzatelevisivatratecnologiaconvergentiepratichesociali[Television(s).HowtheTelevisionExperienceChangesthroughConvergentTechnologiesandSocialPractices],Milano,Italy:Guerini.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
328Glocalizationprocessesandnewcentrifugaldynamicsininternationalentertainment319Marinelli,A.andG.Celata(eds)(2012),Connectingtelevision.LatelevisionealtempodiInternet[ConnectingTelevision.TelevisionintheTimeofInternet],Milano,Italy:Guerini.Marrazzo,F.(2016),EffettoNetflix:Ilnuovoparadigmatelevisivo[TheNetflixEffect:TheNewTelevisionParadigm],Milano,Italy:Egea.Morcellini,M.(ed.)(2005),Ilmediaevoitaliano:industriaculturale,TVetecnologietraXXeXXIsecolo[TheItalianMediaAges:TheCulturalIndustry,TVandTechnologiesoverthe20thand21stCenturies],Roma,Italy:Carocci.Negroponte,N.P.(1995),BeingDigital,NewYork,NY:AlfredA.Knopf.NetflixHelpCenter(n.d.),‘HowdoesNetflixlicenseTVshowsandmovies?’,accessed23September2020athttps://help.netflix.com/en/node/4976.NetflixLovers(n.d.),‘CatalogoNetflix(ottobre2020)’[‘NetflixCatalogue(October2020)’],accessed5October2020athttps://www.netflixlovers.it/catalogo-netflix-italia.Nightingale,R.(2016),‘HowNetflixknowsexactlywhatyouwanttowatch’,Makeuseof,4March,accessed12June2020athttps://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-netflix-knows-exactly-what-you-want-to-watch/.O’Halloran,J.(2020),‘TVstreamingaccountstobreakbillionbarrierin2020’,RapidTVNews,12June,accessed12June2020athttps://www.rapidtvnews.com/2020061258639/tv-streaming-accounts-to-break-billion-barrier-in-2020.html.Pariser,E.(2011),TheFilterBubble:WhattheInternetisHidingfromYou,London,UK:Penguin.Re,V.(ed.)(2017),StreamingMedia.Distribuzione,circolazione,accesso,Milano-Udine,Italy:Mimesis.Richeri,G.(2015),‘Televisione,crisidelmercatoenuovimodellicommerciali’[‘Television,marketcrisisandnewcommercialmodels’],Problemidell’Informazione,2(15),263–81.Richeri,G.(2016a),‘IBigdatanellaproduzioneenell’offertatelevisiva:ilcasodiNetflix’[‘BigDataintelevisionproductionsandoffering:TheNetflixcase’],Economiadellacultura,26(4),525–34.Richeri,G.(2016b),‘Risorseperlaproduzioneaudiovisiva:crisi,prospettive,problemi’[‘Resourcesforaudiovisualproduction:Crises,perspectives,issues’],Economiadellacultura,26(3),421–32.Scaglioni,M.(2011),Latvdopolatv.Ildecenniochehacambiatolatelevisione:scenario,offerta,pubblico[‘TVpost-TV.Thedecadethatchangedtelevision:scenario,supply,public’],Milano,Italy:Vita&Pensiero.Scaglioni,M.andA.Sfardini(2008),MultiTV.L’esperienzatelevisivanell’etàdellaconvergenza[MultiTV.TheTelevisionExperienceintheAgeofConvergence],Rome,Italy:Carocci.Secchi,A.(2020),‘Streaming,2020alraddoppio’[‘Streamingdoublesin2020’],TVZoom,30April,accessed25September2020athttps://www.tvzoom.it/2020/04/30/83525/netflix-4-milioni-abbonati/.Sigismondi,P.(2011),TheDigitalGlocalizationofEntertainment:NewParadigmsinthe21stCenturyGlobalMediascape,NewYork,NY:Springer.Sigismondi,P.(2017),‘Thedigitaltransformationofinternationalentertainmentflows’,inP.MessarisandL.Humphreys(eds),DigitalMedia:TransformationsinHumanCommunication,2nded.,NewYork,NY:PeterLang,pp.247–54.Sigismondi,P.(ed.)(2019),WorldEntertainmentMedia:Global,RegionalandLocalPerspectives,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Silverstone,R.(1994),TelevisionandEverydayLife,London,UK:Routledge.Spangler,T.(2020),‘Netflixprojectedtospendmorethan$17billiononcontentin2020’,Variety,16January,accessed23September2020athttps://variety.com/2020/digital/news/netflix-2020-content-spending-17-billion-1203469237/.Spigel,L.andJ.Olsson(2004),TelevisionafterTV:EssaysonaMediuminTransition,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Spotti,D.(2019),‘Netflix,svelatoilnumerodegliabbonatiinItalia2019’[‘NetflixrevealssubscribernumbersinItaly’],Multiplayer,9October,accessed25September2020athttps://multiplayer.it/notizie/netflix-svelato-numero-abbonati-italia.html.Starri,M.(2020),‘Digital2020,IDatidiLuglio’[‘Digital2020,Julydata’],WeAreSocial,22July,accessed25September2020athttps://wearesocial.com/it/blog/2020/07/digital-2020-i-dati-di-luglio.Sundet,V.S.(2020),‘From“secret”onlineteendramatointernationalcultphenomenon:TheglobalexpansionofSKAManditspublicservicemission’,CriticalStudiesinTelevision,15(1),69–90.Thussu,D.K.(ed.)(2007),MediaontheMove:GlobalFlowandContra-flow,London,UK:Routledge.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
329320HandbookofcultureandglocalizationTomlinson,J.(1991),CulturalImperialism,Baltimore,MD:JohnHopkinsUniversityPress.Vlessing,E.(2019),‘JeffreyKatzenberg’sQuibitolaunchinNorthAmericain2020’,TheHollywoodReporter,9June,accessed25September2020athttps://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/quibi-launch-north-america-april-2020-1216932.Voigt,K.,Buliga,O.andK.Michl(2016),‘Entertainmentondemand:ThecaseofNetflix’,inK.Voigt,O.BuligaandK.Michl(eds),BusinessModelPioneers:HowInnovatorsSuccessfullyImplementNewBusinessModels,NewYork,NY:Springer,pp.127–42.Williams,R.(1975),Television:TechnologyandCulturalForm,London,UK:Routledge.PaoloSigismondiandGiovanniCiofalo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:49AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
33020.Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexplorationVictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentierINTRODUCTION1Ournotionsoflocality,place,communityandorganizationhavechangedinaworldevenmorecharacterizedbyfluidityandcontingency.Astheboundariesthatsurroundthesenotionsandpracticeshaveopenedup,wenowneedtolookat‘placebeyondplace’(Escobar,2000,p.168),localitybeyondlocality,communitybeyondcommunity,andorganizationbeyondorganization.Thisdoesnotimplythatweneedtogiveuponthesenotionsinfavourofglo-bality,spaceorsociety.Instead,contemporaryscholarshipcontinuallyattemptstotheorizeandanalysethenumerouswaysinwhichthelocalinteractswithitsboundariesandcontexts.Theconceptsoftranslocalityandglocalizationwereintroducedintoscholarlydiscoursearoundthesametime,withtheexpresspurposeofaddressingthenecessityforcreativewaysofreconfig-uringourunderstandingofcommunity,localityandplace-ness,andspatialmovement.Bothhaveattractedthebroadattentionofsocialscientists.Inthischapter,thetermsareusedinthemannermostpopularinacademicwriting:translocalityisoftenreferredtoasacondition(e.g.,‘-ity’),whileglocalizationisconventionallyreferredtoasaprocess(e.g.,‘-zation’).Thischapter’sopeningdiscussionsectionoutlinestheproblematicthattheseconceptshavesoughttoilluminate.Itfurtheroffersabriefsynopsisoftheemploymentoftranslocalityintheliteratureandaddressesthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweentranslocalityandglocalization.Bothconceptshavebeenparticularlyrelevanttoresearchorientedtowardthestudyofcommu-nitiesandurbancontexts,andareofspecialsignificancetodisciplinesandfieldsthatpaycloseattentiontonotionsofplace,localityandspatiality.Buttherearealsodistinctfocithateachofthetwoconceptshighlight,whichaccountsfortheirdifferences.Asawayoflookingforwardintothefuture,thechapterproposestothinkoftherelationshipbetweentranslocalandglocalinwayssimilartotherelationshipbetweenglobalizationandtransnationalism.LOCALITY,COMMUNITYANDGLOBALIZATION:SETTINGTHESTAGETheconceptualintertwiningbetweenlocalityandcommunityhasalonghistory.AsLeunissen(1986)argues,conceptualizationsofcommunityreferpredominantlytogeographicalcontextstructuringcollectiveidentityand/orgrouprelations.ThedominantroleofplaceandspaceinthetraditionaldefinitionsofcommunitygoesbacktoTönnies’(1887[1963])distinctionbetweenGemeinschaftandGesellschaft.Communitystandsforthe‘notionofabigfamily’,whilesociety‘representsacolder,unattachedandmorefragmentedwayoflivingdevoidofcooperationandsocialcohesion.Insteadofasenseofneighbourliness,peopleareisolated’(Morris&Morton,1998,pp.12–13),‘Community’meantcloseandconcretehumanties322VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
331Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration323andacollectiveidentity,while‘society’meanttheabsenceofidentifyinggrouprelations(Martin-Barbero,1993,p.29).Localityplayedakeyroleintheconstructionofacontrastbetweencommunionandassociation,asurbanspaceswereviewedasathreattocommunityandtheindividual,withTönnies’(1887[1963])modelbasedonaromanticviewofruralspaces.Meanwhile,Simmel(1903[1950],p.409)warnedabouttheproblemsthatindividualshadtofaceinurbanenvironmentsinordertomaintaintheirindividuality‘inthefaceofover-whelmingsocialforces’,andcalledforaresistanceto‘beinglevelleddownandwornout’.Laterwork,forinstance,Crow’sWhatareCommunityStudies?(2018)hasemphasizedthat‘[c]ommunitiesaremultifacetedphenomena’(Crow,2018,p.4),forinstance,intersectingwith‘socialclass,gender,andraceandethnicity’(p.18).Inordertoovercometherigidarticula-tionsofcommunity,aseriesofre-conceptualizationstranscendingthestructuralorgeographicconceptualizationofcommunityhavebeendeveloped.Afirstsetofre-conceptualizationsintroducesthenon-geographicalasacomplementtothestructural-geographicapproachtocommunity.Inparticular,thenotionofa‘communityofinterest’allowsemphasizingtheimportanceofotherfactorsinstructuringsocialrelationsandcanformtheconditionsofpos-sibilityfortheemergenceorexistenceofacommunity.AsimilarargumentcanbemadeforWenger’s(1999)so-called‘communitiesofpractice’,whichdrawfromtheinformalnetworksoffamily,workandfriendships(Hewson,2005,p.17).Alreadyinthe1990s,informationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICT),withtheirconsiderableimpactoneverydaylife,demon-stratedthatcommunitiesarealsoformedincyberspace.Researchfromthisperiod,e.g.,Jones(1995),wasquicktopointoutthatsuch‘virtual’or‘on-linecommunities’havesimilarchar-acteristicsasgeography-basedcommunities,and–asVerschueren(2006;seealsoAgostini&Mechant,2019)argued–thedifferencesbetweenofflineandonlinebehaviourappeartobeofdegreeratherthanofkind.ICT-basedcommunitieshaveneverthelessalteredfixedideasaboutspace,clearlyshowingthatgeographicalproximityisnotanecessaryconditionfor,orqualityof,community.AsLewis(1993,p.13)remarks,communitiesofinterestcanextendacrossconurbations,nationsandcontinents.Whatisadefiningfeatureforcommunityisthedirectandfrequentcontactbetweenthemembersandthefeelingofbelongingandsharing.Asecondsetofre-conceptualizationsisbasedonthecultural,asacomplementtothestructural-geographiccommunityapproach,whichalsoprovidesspacetomoveawayfromthearticulationofthecommunityasahomogeneousentity(Amit,2002;Brubaker,2004).Theseapproachesemphasizethesubjectiveconstructionofcommunity,whereLindlof’s(1988)conceptof‘interpretativecommunity’andCohen’s(1989)‘communityofmeaning’becomerelevant.AlthoughLindlof’sre-conceptualizationisspecificallyaimedatredefiningtheaudienceasacommunity,bothre-conceptualizationsapproachtheconceptofcommu-nityfromwithin.Cohenpleadsfor,inlinewiththeabove,‘ashiftawayfromthestructureofcommunitytowardsasymbolicconstructionofcommunityandinordertodoso,takesculture,ratherthanstructureaspointofdeparture’(Cohen,1989,p.70).Intheseperspectives,communityisnolongerstructurallyimposed,butactivelyconstructedbyitsmembers,andthosemembersderiveanidentityfromthisconstruction.Thesere-conceptualizationsraisethequestionofwhethercommunityandlocalityhavenowbecomedisconnected(seeKennedy&Roudometof,2006),anissueofparticularsignificancesincetheadventofdigitalmedia.Inthetwenty-firstcentury,weliveinaworldwheretheproductionoflocalityhasbecomedeterritorialized(Deleuze&Guattari,1987),diasporic,andtransnational(Appadurai,1995,p.213;Appadurai,1996).Thatunavoidablyimpactstheroleattributedto‘place’.Anumberofauthors(Albrowetal.,1994;Casey,1998;Dirlik,1999;Escobar,2000)havepointedVictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
332324Handbookofcultureandglocalizationtothemarginalization,obscurationanderasureofplaceinmodernsocieties.AsAlbrowetal.(1994)haveremarked,globalizationmakesthestructurationofnewformsandtypesofcommunalrelationshipsakeyconceptualproblem.Theconventionalspatiallylimitednotionofculturalmilieuexpandstocoversocialrelationshipsestablishedacrossbordersandthenewde-territorializedcommunitiesreconfigureourverydefinitionofwhatacommunityis(Kennedy&Roudometof,2006).Inadditiontotheformationofnewimmigrant-driventransnationalcommunitiesandcommunitiesoftasteorprofession,therenewedsignificanceofcommunityhasinlargepartrevitalizedtheage-oldnotionofdiaspora(Roudometof,2000;Tölölyan,1991).Theverynotionofdiasporahasbeentransformedintoaclaimorastancethathasenabledvariedconstituenciestogainavoiceindomesticandinternationalpoliticsandpolicies(Brubaker,2006).Casey(1998,p.x)arguesthatthereisa‘richtraditionofplace-talk’,butthatthistradition‘hasbeenbypassedorforgottenforthemostpart,mainlybecauseplacehasbeensubordinatedtoothertermstakenasputativeabsolutes:mostnotably:SpaceandTime’.Atthesametime,ithasbecomeimpossibletoignorethesesocietalchangesthathavetransformedlocalityandplace,andweneedtolookattheissueof‘placebeyondplace’(Escobar,2000,p.168).Theenduranceof‘place’withinaglobalizedworld(seeDeBlij,2009)isindeedamajorfacetofdailylives.Contemporaryresearchhasrediscoveredtheperseveranceofplacewithinthecontextofinternationalmigration(Yu,2018)aswellasinlabourandleisureactivitiesthroughtheuseofICT(Flecker,2016;Hjorth&Richardson,2017;Ozkul,2017).UsingICTforplace-makinghasrenderedGieryn’s(2000,p.465)initialexclusionofcyberspacefromnotionsofplaceobsolete.Infact,oneofthemajorconsequencesoftheICTrevolutionisthepopularizationofnewdigitalorlocativeplaces(Evans,2015;Horan,2000;Wilken&Goggin,2015)thatprovidenewformatsforarticulatingplaceness.Mobilemediaareconnectedtopeople’ssenseofplacethroughavarietyofmodalitiesofpres-ence,whereby‘placing’becomesadynamicprocess.Recoveringthelocalisaprerequisiteforgraspingthemeaningofcommunalattachments(Massey,2005;Roudometof,2019).Still,‘tothinkintermsoflocalism’whentheorizing,meansthatonehas:toswimagainstthecurrentofthegrandtheoriesofemancipationwhichweresuchafeatureofthe19thcenturyandaccordingtowhichitwasnecessaryabovealltouprootpeople’slifestyles,theiridiosyncrasiesandtheirwaysofthinking.(Maffesoli,2016,p.743)Inrevisitingtheglobalizationdebatethroughthelensofthelocal,Appadurai(1993,1995,1996)offersarelevantstartingpoint:henotesthatglobalizationconcentratesindifferent‘-scapes’(ethnoscapes,mediascapes,ideoscapes,technoscapesandfinanscapes).Theseincorporateflowsofpeople,culturalmeanings,ideologies,technologiesandcapitals.ForAppadurai,globalizationischaracterizedbythedisjuncturesthatoccurwithinandbetweentheselandscapes.Inmediascapes,forexample,media(suchasfilmsorTVprogrammes)travelaroundtheworld,hoppingfromonelocalmarkettothenext.Thisdisconnectionunderscoresacomplexinterplaybetweenthelocalandtheglobal.Althoughthehomogenizingeffectsofglobalcultureexist,theyareabsorbedbylocalpoliticalandculturaleconomiesandreappearasheterogeneousdialogueswiththeoriginalversions.Inthe1990s,whenglobalizationbecamedominant,thelocalwasoftenseenasthreatenedbythecolonizinganderasingimpactoftheglobalmediaflowsandencroachingWesterncommercialproducts.Theconceptofglocalization(Robertson,1995)andconceptualvariantssuchashybridization(Kraidy,2005;NederveenPieterse,1995)werebroughtintothisdebateinordertoreducethisde-contextual-VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
333Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration325izationofcommunityandplace.Theirgoalwastotheorizethecomplexglobal–localbinaryrelationship.Glocalization’soriginalaimwastocapturethedynamicprocesswherebythehomogeneousandheterogeneous,andtheglobalandthelocalfindthemselvesinpermanentfieldsoftension.ABRIEFHISTORYOFTRANSLOCALITYJustasglocalwasarelativenewcomerinthesocial-scientificdiscourseofthelatetwentiethandearlytwenty-firstcenturies,sowasthenotionoftranslocality.AsKytölä(2016)notes,translocalityisgenerallyseenasabidirectionalprocesswherebythelocalandtheglobalimpactandshapeeachother.ForFreitagandvonOppen(2010a,p.5)translocalitysubsumes‘allphenomenawhicharecreatedbycirculationsandtransfers’.Itsbasicparametersinclude:(1)asenseofconnectednessbetweenlocales,whereboththelocalandtheglobalaremean-ingfulframeworksforsocialandculturalaction;and(2)afluidunderstandingofcultureasoutward-lookingorexogenous,withkeyrolesreservedfortheprocessesofhybridizationandtranslation,andtheabilityofactorstoassumeordeploymultipleidentities.MosttreatmentsoftheconcepthavegrownoutofAppadurai’s(1995)initialemploymentoftheterm.Appaduraidealswiththecomplexinterplaybetweenlocality–morespecifically,neighbourhoods–andcontext.Hearguesthatcontextprovidestheconstitutiveoutsideoflocality,butthatlocalitysimultaneouslyprovidesuswithacontext.Tousehiswords:‘Thecentraldilemmaisthatneighbourhoodsbotharecontextsandatthesametimerequireandproducecontexts’(Appadurai,1995,p.209)or‘[n]eighbourhoodascontextproducesthecontextofneighbourhood’(Appadurai,1995,p.210).Atthesametime,thecapacityoflocal-itiestoproducetheir‘own’contextandsubjectivitiesisaffectedbythe‘locality-producingcapabilitiesoflarger-scaleformations(nation-states,kingdoms,missionaryempiresandtradingcartels)’(Appadurai,1995,p.211).Slightlysurprisingly,Appaduraiuses‘translocal’onlyinthesecondpartofhistext,wherehediscussestheglobalproductionoflocality,mainlythroughthenation-state.Forthatreason,hereferstothetranslocalassituatedbetweenthelocalandthenation-statewhenhementionsthe‘conflictingrelationbetweenneighbourhoods,translocalallegiancesandthelogicofthenation-state’(Appadurai,1995,p.220).Thesecondreferencetothetranslocallinksittothetourismindustry,whenhewritesthat:Theethnographyofthesetouristlocationsisjustbeginningtobewrittenindetail,butwhatlittlewedoknowsuggeststhatmanyofsuchlocationscreatecomplexconditionsfortheproductionandreproductionoflocality,inwhichtiesofmarriage,work,businessandleisureweavetogethervariouscirculatingpopulationswithkindsof‘locals’tocreateneighbourhoodswhichbelonginonesensetoparticularnation-states,butare,fromanotherpointofview,whatwemightcalltranslocalities.(Appadurai,1995,p.216;emphasisinoriginal)Arguably,theconceptofthetranslocalisatitsstrongestwhenitiscombinedwiththefirstpartofAppadurai’sanalysis,wherehedealswiththeinteractionbetweenthelocalanditscontexts(atwhateverscalethesecontextsaresituated).Thetranslocalthenbecomesthemomentwhenthelocalisstretchedbeyonditsborders,whilststillremainingsituatedinthelocal.AsBroeckmann(1998)putsit,itisthemomentwhere‘differentworldsandtheirlocalagents,individuals,organizations,machinesco-operatewithglobalandnomadicagentswithinnetworkedenvironments’.ItisthemomentwherethelocalmergeswithapartofitsoutsideVictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
334326Handbookofcultureandglocalizationcontext,withouttransformingitselfintothiscontext.Itisthemomentwherethelocalsimul-taneouslyincorporatesitscontextandtransgressesintoit.Itisthemomentwherethelocalreachesouttoafamiliarunknown,andfusesitwiththeknown.TouseDeleuzeandGuattari’s(1987)words,itistheplace-basedversionoftherhizome.Fromthisinitialconceptualization,thenotionoftranslocalhasproliferatedacrossdisciplinesandfieldsofstudy(Kraidy&Murphy,2003;Ma,2002;McFarlane,2009).Translocalityisusedtodescribesocio-spatialdynamicsandprocessesofsimultaneityandidentityformationthattranscendboundaries.ThegrowthofscholarlyinterestcanbeascertainedthroughGoogleNgramViewer,where,circa1996,thereisasharpincreaseintheterm’suse,withGoogleScholarreporting(in2020)over6,000mentionsof‘translocality’.Thetermgainedmomen-tumamongscholarsconcernedwithmobility,migrationandsocio-spatialinterconnectedness.Translocalityhasbecomeoneofthekeywordswithinthebroaderspatialturnofthestudyofculture(Low,2017)andperhapshaditsdeepestimpactwithinthedisciplinesofgeographyandanthropology.Indigitalcommunication,translocalityismanifestintheenhancedconnectivityaffordedbydigitalmedia(orWeb3.0)andthesocialactors’semioticchoicesvis-à-visself-identificationwhenaddressingmultipleaudiences.Translocalmediatednetworkingisamajorfeatureofthetwenty-firstcentury’scommunicativespaces,whichincludethe‘domesticworld’,‘elsewhere’and‘somewhere’(Hepp,2009).Inthisframework,thedomesticworldreferstothelocalityoftheprivatelifeorthe‘home’,while‘elsewhere’referstootherlocalitiesofregulareverydaymediause(suchasshops),and‘somewhere’indicatesnon-habituallocalitiesusedformediaappropriation(Hepp2009,pp.333–34).Thelistofparticularsubfieldswherethenotionhasbeenappliedisquitediverse.Amongothers,itincludes:urbanstudies(Lahiri,2011;McGarrigle&Ascensão,2018;Smart&Lin,2007),geography(Brickell&Datta,2011a;Datta,2016;McFarlane,2009;Porst&Sakdapolrak,2017),politics(Mandaville,1999),linguistics(Kytölä,2016)communicationandmedia(Carpentier,2007),popularculture(Englert,2019),religion(Castryck,2019;Kallisetal.,2019;Kinder,2016;Mohan&Hughes,2020),andtransnationalartisticconnectionsandexperiences(Oakes&Schein,2006;Tuan,2018;Uimonen,2009;Zhang,2010).Overall,translocalityhasbeenparticularlypopularinfieldswherespatialityandplace-nessareimpor-tantfociforresearch.Fromthereon,thenotionhasbeengivenmoresophisticatedtheoreticaltreatments:Stephan-EmmrichandSchröder(2018),forexample,usetranslocallensestointerrogatetheintersectionbetweenemotionandimagination.FreitagandvonOppen(2010a,p.5)conceiveoftranslocalitybothasaresearchperspectiveaswellasanobjectofenquiry.InTranslocality.TheStudyofGlobalizingProcessesfromaSouthernPerspective,FreitagandvonOppen(2010b)attempttoshowhowspacesandplaces(suchastheIndianOceanandTrans-Sahara)areconstitutedandshapedthroughmovement.Byforegroundingmovement,translocalperspectivesmovebeyonddescribingthemereinterconnectednessbetweendiffer-entlocales;theybringthetransformativequalitiesofmovementitselfintosharperfocus.Inadditiontoofferingsubstantivenewinsightsintosocialandculturalprocesses,researchontranslocalitydovetailswithSouthernperspectives.Thus,itprovidesinsightstoworkunder-takenwithinareastudies(Freitag&vonOppen,2010b),wherebyavarietyofregionsareaddressed:theserangefromCentralAsiaandtheCaucasus(Stephan-Emmrich&Schröder,2018)overtoAfrica(Verne,2012b)andChina(Oakes&Schein,2006).Intheiroverviewoftheusesoftranslocality,GreinerandSakdapolrak(2013)tracetheemergenceoftheideaoftranslocalityandsummarizethecharacteristicsthatdifferentauthorsassociatewiththeterm.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
335Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration327Mostoften,scholarshipontranslocalityhasuseddemographicorsociologicaldataasthefoundationforpursuingqualitativeethnographicorfieldresearch(Alim,2009;Low,2017;Verne,2012a).Thepursuitofhistoricalordiachronicstudieshasbeenlesscommon.Translocalityhasalsobeenexploredwithinthecontextofsocio-spatialapproaches(Porst&Sakdapolrak,2017;Verne,2012b).Inparticular,Verne(2012b,p.17)arguesthattranslocalitydoesnotimplythemereadditionofanintermediaryscalebetweentheglobalandthelocal.That,sheargues,simplyreifieshierarchicalandclearlydistinguishablescales.Instead,atrans-localperspectiveconsiderssocio-spatialscalestobesociallyproduced,bothfluidandfixed,andfundamentallyrelational.Thus,the‘intermediaryarrangements,[withtheir]fluidityandinterminglingprocesses’(Verne,2012b,pp.17–18)emergeasofcriticalimportance.Reflectingthecontemporarysignificanceofdebatesonpositionalityandreflexivity,thetranslocalhasbecomeameanstoovercomemethodologicalnationalisminethnographicresearch:insteadofseeing‘thefield’asanaturalgivenorterritoriallycircumscribedtoaspe-cificsite,useoftranslocallensesenablesmoreself-criticalengagementswiththeresearchprocessthatlayopennotonlythepositionalitiesinrespecttoencounterswiththe‘researchsubjects’,butalsotheconstructionof‘thefield’itself(Verne,2012a).Perhapsafar-reachingargumentaboutthemethodologicalsignificanceoftranslocallensesliesinLawreniukandParsons(2020),whoseworkexaminestheprocessesthroughwhichsocio-economicinequalitytransmigratesacrossborders:theauthorsdefinetranslocalinequalityastheprocesswherebywealthdiscrepanciesinonelocationengenderdifferencesinlivelihoodselsewhere.Translocalinequalityistheunequaldistributionofresourcesandopportunitiesacrossboundaries;itissustainedthroughactionsundertakensimultaneouslybymultiplegroupsofpeopleinmultiplelocations.Theuseoftranslocallensestostudyinequalityaddsaseriousconceptuallayerinthemannertheverynotionofinequalityisconventionallyunderstood(i.e.,ineithersocialormerelymonetaryterms).Translocalitycloselyrelatestotransnationalism.Sinceitsinceptionintheearly1990s,thetransnationalagendahasexplicitlysoughttoovercomethelimitationsofmethodologicalnationalisminherentintraditionalstudiesofinternationalmigration(GlickSchilleretal.,1992;Wimmer&GlickSchiller,2002).Infact,theuseoftranslocalityissometimesaccom-paniedbyacritiqueof‘methodologicallocalism’–revisinganargumentinitiallymadebyscholarsoftransnationalismintheirowncritiqueofpastscholarshiponmigration.Echoingearlyresearchontransnationalism,advocatesoftranslocalitysimilarlysuggestthattheconceptcantranscendthe‘limitationsofnationalisthistoriographies’andcontributetowardsanon-Eurocentricunderstandingofglobalhistoryasconstitutedbyprocessesof‘entangle-mentandinterconnectedness’(Freitag&vonOppen,2010a,p.1).Shiftingtowardsamore‘groundedtransnationalism’(Brickell&Datta,2011b,p.3),scholarshipemployingtranslocallensesisconcernedwithlocalcontextsandhowmobileactorsaresituated.Butuseoftranslocalityalsotakesaimatthenotionoftransnationalismitself.Theintentionistoovercometransnationalism’spresupposedrelevanceofthe‘nation’asafoundationalframeofreference(Greiner&Sakdapolrak,2013,p.3).AsRoudometof(2000,p.367)writes,‘transnationalismcameintoexistenceatthattime’inhistorywhennation-statebuildingonaglobalscaleerectedboundariesandconstructedidentitiesthatleft‘alargenumberofpeople“outofplace”’.Toputitdifferently,the‘transnational’istheflipsideofthe‘national’:thesearemirrorconceptsgeneratedbybroadersocialprocessesaroundtheglobe.Byremovingthe‘nation’andoptingfor‘local’,theconceptoftranslocalitycapturesthesenseoflocal-to-localconnectionsacrossstateorregionalornationalboundaries(Brickell&Datta,2011b,p.10)orVictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
336328Handbookofcultureandglocalizationevenwithinnation-states.Itfurtherallowsforafarmorehistoricallynuancedunderstandingoflocal-to-locallinkagesbyexplicitlyenablingresearcherstolookforsuchrelationshipsbeyondthenationalframeofreference.TRANSLOCAL/GLOCAL:FROMCONVERGENCETODIVERGENCIESANDBACKTheaforementionedbriefoverviewhasrenderedtheelectiveaffinitybetweenglocalandtrans-localquiteapparent:thetranslocalisnotthatdifferentfromtheglocal,atleastfromwithinthelensesthatthelatterisusedinseveralchaptersofthisvolume.Bothconceptsusefluiddefini-tionsofthelocalandtheglobal,ofplaceandspace.Theybothcombinestructural-geographic,non-geographicandculturalperspectivestodescribeandanalyseoursocialrealities.Theintroductionofglocalizationwasafirstattempttostrengthentheimportanceofthelocalandplace-ness,butitsunavoidableemphasisontheglobal(asthestartingpointofanalysis)never-thelessgeneratesaone-sidedperspective,anunevennessthatmanyfindproblematic.Toputitsimply,anemphasisonglobaldoesnotdoenoughjusticetolocalagency.Inmostanalyses,theoriginsoftheglobalarerarelycontemplated.Iftheflowsofrelation-ships,powerandinfluenceareconceivedwiththelocalastheirpointofdepartureandtheglobalasasecondcomponent,wegetfarclosertowhatresearcherspracticallymeanwhenthenotionoftranslocalityisemployed.Inthisway,translocalizationbecomesthemirrorimageofglocalization.Usingthetranslocalreconcilesthesituatedoremplacednatureofcommuni-tiesandtheirmultitudeofexpressions(frommediatopoliticsandsoon)withtheircapacitytotransgresstheirlocalboundaries.Thissenseofactiveagencyisprominentlydisplayedinanthropologicalresearchontranslocalityandreligion(seeMohan&Hughes,2020),butalsoincommunicationandmediastudiesresearch(Carpentier,2003,2007).Thistendencyisparticularlypronouncedinaccountswherebyglocalisusedinthecontextofmarketingorintheworldsocietyperspective:glocalbecomesawayforglobaltrendstotranslatethem-selvesontoalocalcontext(forexamples,seeRoudometof,2016,pp.44–47;comparewithWisniewski&Brzezicka,2019).Thedirectionalityofinfluenceorthecausalflowofpowerandideasemanatefromtheglobaltowardsthelocal.Thatisperhapsmostexplicitintheworldsocietyperspective,inwhichglocalizationisseenintermsoftranslatinginfluencesontothemicro-level.Forexample,Drorietal.(2013,p.10)considerthatglocalization‘involvestranslation–asinordertoadjustideas,structuresandmodelstonewanddifferentsocialandculturaldomains’.Thisinterpretationstressestop-downinfluencesintheprocessofglobaldiffusion,with‘thedynamicnatureoftranscendentalglocalization’seenas‘areboundeffect...wherelocallyenactedideasandmodelsinfluencethegloballytheorizedschemes’(Drorietal.,2013,p.10).(Furtherdiscussionisavailableinthisvolume’schapter‘WorldSocietyTheoryandGlocalization:CulturebetweenTransnationality,Structuration,RationalizationandActorhood’.)Forthosescholarswhoarescepticaloftheworldsocietyperspectiveorotherlike-mindedapproaches,glocalizationisthusseenas‘guiltybyassociation’:itrepresentsthemeansbywhichtheglobalplayerscanreachintolocalcontext,asopposedtothemeansbywhichthelocalcangainaglobalfoothold(Korff,2003;Thornton,2000).Incomparisonwithglocaliza-tion,then,thetranslocalimpliesaninverseapproachthatallowstakingthelocalasthepointofdeparture,andsubsequentlyaddingtheglobalasasecondcomponent.Inthisway,trans-VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
337Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration329localizationactsasglocalization’smirrorimage.Itallowssocialscientiststoretainthefocusonthedynamicsofthelocalandtheglobal,whilesimultaneouslytheycanusethelocalasastartingpoint.Translocalityisemployedasanotionthatallowsresearcherstomakefulluseoflocalagencywithoutacceptingthenotionofanoverpoweringglobalization.Translocalityiscertainlynottheonlytermthatclaimstostandforsuchaperspective:twootherconceptualalternativestotheaforementionedunderstandingofglocalizationaretheproposedconceptsoflobalization(Chew,2010)andlogalization(Lyu&McCarthy,2015).However,translocalityisunequivocallythetermthathasbeeninlargepartsuccessfulinclaiminganintellectualdomainovertheseotherrivalconcepts.ApossibleconvergencepointbetweenthedifferentunderstandingsoftranslocalityandglocalizationcouldbelocatedinRoudometof’s(2016,pp.72–75)analysisoftheroleofpowerwithintheoverallprocessofglocalization.Roudometofdealswiththeissueofpowerexplic-itly:hearguesthattheglobalactuallyoriginatesfromsomewhereaslocalandthattheflowsofinfluencethatcomefromtheglobalareindirectlyemanatingfromanothersocialactor,andnotfromanethereal‘global’canopy.Fromthisviewpoint,itcanbearguedthatwhatseemslikeaglobalinfluenceisnothingbutalocalagencythathassuccessfullygainedglobaldominanceorinfluence.Hisinterpretationunderscoresthemajorthemeofthischapter’sdiscussion–namely,thecloseelectiveaffinitybetweentranslocalityandglocality.Theconceptualdistinctionbetweenglocalandtranslocalcanbeconsideredinamannersimilartothedistinctionbetweenglobalizationandtransnationalism.Strictlyspeaking,glo-balizationshouldbeaboutthephenomenaofactualglobalreach.However,researchersoftenamendthispropositionbyaddinginstanceswherethereisglobalintentorwheretheimpactofparticularprocessesisclearlytransregional.Inotherwords,thelinebetweenthetwoisnotatallclear-cut.Whilescholarsoftransnationalismhaveattemptedtodistinguishtransnation-alismfrom‘strong’versionsofglobalizationasasetofworldwideorinterregionalprocesses,itisneverthelesstruethat‘giventhecomplexityoftoday’sworld,theboundariesamongthetransnational,global,anddiasporic’areporous(Vasquez,2008,p.164).Theelectiveaffinitybetweentranslocalityandglocalizationmirrorsinmanyrespectsthecloserelationshipbetweenglobalizationandtransnationalism.Glocalinvolvesrelationsbetweenglobalandlocal,whereastranslocalinvolvesrelationshipsthatmightbenotbeglobalassuch,butinsteadconnectaseriesoflocalscenes,groups,movements,andsoon.Thisisafeatureoftenhighlightedinstudiesofpopularmusic.Translocalityhasbeenusedtomakesenseofthenumerousscenesthatareconstructedbyconnecting‘groupsofkindredspiritsmanymilesaway’(Peterson&Bennett,2004,p.8–9;seealsoMa,2002).Globalhiphopyouthusetranslocalmediatedconnectionsbetweensitesofhiphoppracticestocreatea‘GlobalHipHopNation/Culture’(Alim,2009,p.103–107).Socialactorscreatemultiplerenewedopportunitiesto‘rework,reinvent,andrecreateidentitiesthroughtheremixingofstyles...moregloballyavailablethaneverbefore’(Alim,2009,p.105).InthecaseoftheUK’sGothscene,forexample,translocalhasbeenusedtosignifya‘singularandrelativelycoherentmovementwhosetrans-localconnectionsareofgreatersignificancethanitslocaldifferences’(Hodkinson,2004,p.144).Translocalmediaformats,consumertrends,andthelatestsubculturalfashionsareinstrumentalinshapingindividualtastesandidentities.Muchlikeamusicscene’sinfrastructure,fans’dailyexperiencesremaingroundedinlocalsocialconnections;nevertheless,fansoftentraveltogigs,clubs,shops,orfestivals.Furtherappli-cationsoftranslocalinvolvetransregionalmusic,musicfestivals,andcarnivals(Bennett&VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
338330HandbookofcultureandglocalizationPeterson,2004).Translocalortransnationalcommunitiesoftasteandpreferenceemergeasaconsequenceoftheseconnections.Advocatesoftranslocalityhavefurthersuggestedthattransnationalismisitselfasubcate-goryoftranslocalism.Forhistoricalcontexts,translocalityissaidtopredatetheemergenceofmodernnation-states.Fromahistoricalperspective,FreitagandvonOppen(2010a,p.12)suggestthattransnationalism(thatis,thelinkagesamongdifferentnationalcontexts)emergesasmerelyaparticularinstanceoftranslocalism(thatis,local-to-locallinkages)(Englert,2018,p.544).Fromsuchapointofview,then,translocalityappearsastheoverarchingconcept.NaumannandGreiner(2016),forexample,referto‘translocalvillagers’inpost-apartheidSouthAfricainareplayofLevitt’s(2001)classicstudyoftransnationalvillagers.FromwithintheperspectiveoftheGlobalSouth,nation-buildingisrelativelyrecent,havingahistoryofmeredecades.Incontrast,interregionalsocial,culturalandeconomicexchangeshavealonghistorythatgoesbackthousandsofyears(forspecificexamples,seeFreitagandvonOppen,2010bandVerne,2012afortheArabworldandtheIndianOceanregion).Inseveralpost-colonialsocietiesinAsiaandAfrica,internationalboundarieshavebeenarbitrarilydrawnandpoorlyimplemented,therebyrenderingtheconventionaldistinctionbetweendomesticandinternationalmigrationmeaningless.GLOCALANDTRANSLOCALINCONTEMPORARYSCHOLARLYCONTEXTInthechapter’sfinaldiscussionsection,theexplorationpursuedintheprevioussectionscanbeplacedontoalargercanvas.Situatingtheglocalandthetransnationalwithinthecontempo-raryscholarlycontextisnotonlychallenging,butalsomurky.Thetwoconceptsdovetailintoanddepartfromeachother;bothdivergencesandconvergencescanbeobserved,astheusesandthemeaningsattributedtothemcanshiftovertimeandwithinoracrossdisciplinesandotherfieldsofstudy.Ourdiscussionhasdemonstratedtheextensiveeclecticaffinitybetweenthetwoconcepts.However,itisalsofairtosaythatthetwoconceptsdonotcompletelyoverlap–insofaras‘glocalization’meanstop-downinfluencesand‘translocality’meansbottom-upinfluences.Totheextentthatresearchersdecodethetermsalongtheselines,itisquitemeaningfultodrawadistinctionbetweenthem.Still,thereisnounanimityinacceptingsuchadelineationoftheterms–anditispreciselythislackofunanimitythatmakesthesitua-tiontricky.Theaforementioneddiscussionhasdemonstratedthedifficultiesofunequivocallydistinguishingbetweentermsthathaveacloseconceptualaffinity.Insuchasituation,itmightbetemptingforauthorstolegislatetheirfavouritepointofview.Butinsteadofthat,itispossibletoadoptadifferentviewpoint.Perhapsitiswisertogazeuponglocalandtranslocalastwonewconceptsthathavebecomepartofanewconceptualvocabu-laryinthesocialsciencesofthetwenty-firstcentury(forfurtherdiscussion,seeRoudometof,2020).Generallyspeaking,thisnewvocabularyconsistsoftheneworrevivedandreformu-latedconceptsofcosmopolitanism(Delanty,2018),thevariousstreamsofsubalternperspec-tivesorpost-colonialityorde-colonialorSoutherntheory(Bhambra,2007;Connell,2007;Young,2016)transnationalism(Levitt&Khagram,2007),translocality(Datta,2016;Brickell&Datta,2011a;Freitag&vonOppen,2010b),transculturalism(Antoretal.,2010),aswellasglocalizationandhybridity(NederveenPieterse,2015;Roudometof,2016).VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
339Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration331Insomecases,conceptsappearinterrelatedandtheoreticallyinterconnected:forexample,thenotionoftransculturalhasbeenevokedbothwithregardtotheglocalizationorcosmopolit-anizationofculturesandidentities,aswellaswithregardtoculturalexchangesbetweenethnicornationalboundaries(Bucholtz&Skapoulli,2009;Pennycook,2007).Whileheacknowl-edgesthe‘detrimentaleffectsofglobalizationoneconomiesandecologies’,Pennycook(2007,p.6)definestransculturalflowsas‘culturalforms[that]move,changeandarereusedtofashionnewidentitiesindiversecontexts’bywayof‘take-up,appropriation[and]refash-ioning’.Asculturalformstraverseboundariestheyarereceived,adopted,reworkedandrecirculatedbothlocallyandglobally:translocalityemergesasaprocessualphenomenonof‘borrowing,blending,remakingandreturning...alternativeculturalproduction’(Pennycook,2007,p.6).Althoughmanyoftheseconceptshaveprovedtremendouslypopular,itisnecessarytoadmittheshortcomingsoftheirownsuccess.Namely,itisnecessarytoacknowledgetheirinflation-aryandoftenun-reflexiveover-use,whichleadstotheirtrivialization.WhatCarpentier(2010,p.8)hascalledthe‘politicsoftheprefix’,forinstance–thatis,theuseoftheprefix‘trans-’interminology(e.g.,transnationalism,transculturalism,…)–hasincreasedthedangerofthembeingturnedintomeaninglessconcepts;thatis,justcatch-allphrasesdevoidoftheoreticaloranalyticalvalue(Bromber,2013).Onapracticallevel,thismeansthatresearchersandauthorsshouldbeawarethatconceptsareusefulwhentheyremaingroundedandbounded;andnotusedindiscriminatelyformerelyrhetoricalpurposes.Severaloftheseconceptsareoftenincludedsidebysideintheverynamesofresearchgroups;therebysuggestingthecloseintertwiningoftheseconceptsinthemindsoftheresearchers.Regardlessoflinguisticchoices,though,itistheemergenceofthisnewvocab-ularyassuchthatisanimportantdevelopmentforthesocialsciencesandthehumanities.Thisvocabularygraduallyreconfigurestheboundariesamongdisciplinesandfieldsofstudy:thatisapparentwhenlookingatthefieldswheretheconceptssurveyedinthischapterhavebeenused.Whetherthisvocabularywilltransformtheexistingdisciplinesorwilleventuallycoalesceintotheformationofanewdiscipline(suchasGlobalStudies,forexample;seeJuergensmeyeretal.,2018)orentirelynewdisciplinesisunknown.Thisnewvocabularyclaimsthat–atleastintheory–itiscapableofanalysingandinterpretingtheworldofthetwenty-firstcentury.Thisreservationisimportant,foradistinctionshouldbemadebetweentheconceptualvocabularyandspecifictheoriesthatemploythisvocabularyfortheconstruc-tionofparticularinterpretations.Fromwithintheselenses,then,thecloseelectiveaffinitybetweenglocalandtranslocalisnotnecessarilyproblematic,butratheremblematicoftheemergenceofthisnewvocabulary.Becausethisnewvocabularyisstillintheprocessofbeingappliedtoabewilderingvarietyofcasesandfields,itstillrequiresconsiderablerefinement,revisionandelaboration.Thecirculationofcloselyrelatedtermsinasituationwherethingsareinfluxmakesitimpossibletoisolateasingleconceptfromtherest.Toputitdifferently,theseoften-interrelatedconceptsshouldbeseenasabundleoftermsthatareameanstoanendwithregardtomakingsenseofthesocialworld.Astheconceptualexplorationconductedinthischapterhasdemonstrated,itisoftenthecasethattheoristsproposetheirowncreativeideasforrelatingtheseconcepts.Thatistheverytaskoftheoryassuchandshouldnotbesurprising.Ultimately,empiricalresearchandtheoreticalpropositionhavetomeeteachotherinordertoproduce(relatively)stablesynthesesforthefuture.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
340332HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCONCLUSIONSThischapterhasofferedanexplorationofthecloseelectiveaffinitybetweenthenotionsofglocalizationandtranslocality.Bothconceptshavebeenemployedtoaccessthewaysinwhichthelocal–globalbinaryoppositioncanbetranscended.Evenifthereisaneedtocarefullyavoidunnecessaryconceptualinflation,thediscussionsonspatialrelationsandscalesimulta-neouslynecessitatearichandvariedvocabulary,combinedwithin-depthreflectionsabouttheconcept’stheoreticalandempiricalopportunitiesandlimitations.Thisconceptualrichnessistobewelcomed,andnottobelamentedupon,astherelationsbetweenspace,scaleandhumanactivity,nottomentionnon-humanactivity,arevastlycomplex.Differententrypointstostudythiscomplexitythusbecomeindispensable,inordertoavoidoneleveloftheorizationandanalysistobeprivilegedoverothers.Thediscussionsonthetranslocalandtheglocalareper-manentremindersthat–inthewordsofAppadurai(1995)andRobertson(1995)–thecontextsoftheglobalandthelocalareinpermanentinteractionwitheachother,andsimplycannotbedisregarded.Deployinganexclusivefocusononeofthetwocomponentsofthelocal/globaldimensionmighteasilycauseustoglideintoaone-sidedanalysis,whichtendstoromanticizeorcelebratetheprivilegedcomponent.Butatthesametime,asconcepts,thetranslocalandtheglocalarealsostrongremindersthattheacknowledgementofanon-hierarchicallocal/globaldimensionimpliesthatthecom-ponentsofthelocalandtheglobalarenecessarilybalanced.Theglobalandlocalmightbeengagedinpermanentinteractions,buttheintensitiesoftheseprocessesofmutualinfluencingmightvarystrongly.Thetranslocalallowsustothinkofthewaysinwhichthelocalmovesbeyondlocality,withoutreducingtheweightofthelocalinitsdefinition,whiletheglocalallowsustoreflectabouthowglobalprocessesmoveintolocalities,andbecomeadjustedtotheselocalcontexts.Astwinconcepts,thetranslocalandglocalarealsoremindersthatmovingbeyondthelocaldoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheseprocessesthennecessarilybecomeglobal,northatmovingglobalprocessesintoparticularlocalitiesmeansthattheseprocessesthenbecomeunrecognizablyaltered.Afterall,noteverythingismadeglobal,andnoteverythingisbornlocal.NOTE1.Thischapterincorporatesrevisedmaterialofanearlierpublication(Carpentier,2007),whichhasbeenalteredandrestructured.VictorRoudometofpresentedaversionofthematerialfeaturedinthischapteratthe2021mid-conferenceoftheEuropeanSociologicalAssociation’sResearchCommitteeonGlobal,Transnational&CosmopolitanSociology(Tampere,FL,May26–27).REFERENCESAgostini,S.andP.Mechant(2019),‘Towardsadefinitionofvirtualcommunity’,SignoyPensamiento,38(74),accessed21March2021athttps://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.syp38-74.tdvc.Albrow,M.,Eade,J.,Washbourne,N.andJ.Durrschmidt(1994),‘Theimpactofglobalizationonsoci-ologicalconcepts:Community,cultureandmilieu’,Innovation,7(4),371–89.Alim,H.S.(2009),‘Translocalstylecommunities:Hiphopyouthasculturaltheoristsofstyle,language,andglobalization’,Pragmatics,19(1),103–27.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
341Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration333Amit,V.(2002),‘Reconceptualizingcommunity’,inV.Amit(ed.),RealizingCommunity:Concepts,SocialRelationshipsandSentiments,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.1–20.Antor,H.,Merkl,M.,Stierstorfer,K.andL.Volkmann(eds)(2010),FromInterculturalismtoTransculturalism:MediatingEncountersinCosmopolitanContexts,Heidelberg,Germany:Universiträtsverlag(AnglistischeForschungen405).Appadurai,A.(1993),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,inB.Robbins(ed.),ThePhantomPublicSphere,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,pp.269–95.Appadurai,A.(1995),‘Theproductionoflocality’,inR.Fardon(ed.),Counterworks:ManagingtheDiversityofKnowledge,London,UK:Routledge,pp.204–25.Appadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Bennett,A.andR.A.Peterson(eds)(2004),MusicScenes:Local,TranslocalandVirtual,Nashville,TN:VanderbiltUniversityPress.Bhambra,G.K.(2007),RethinkingModernity:Post-colonialismandtheSociologicalImagination,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Brickell,K.andA.Datta(eds)(2011a),TranslocalGeographies.Spaces,Places,Connections,Farnham,UKandBurlington,VT:Ashgate.Brickell,K.andA.Datta(2011b),‘Introduction.Translocalgeographies’,inK.BrickellandA.Datta(eds),TranslocalGeographies.Spaces,Places,Connections,Farnham,UKandBurlington,VT:Ashgate,pp.3–20.Broeckmann,A.(1998),‘Translocalurbanities:Considerationsaboutexperimentalinterfacesfortheurbanmachine’,accessed12March2021athttps://krcf.zhdk.ch/krcfhome/AllTexts/11Abroeck_TranslocalUrbanities_e.doc.Bromber,K.(2013),‘Workingwith“translocality”:Conceptualimplicationsandanalyticalconse-quences’,inS.Wippel(ed.),RegionalizingOman:Political,EconomicandSocialDynamics,NewYork,NY:Springer,pp.63–74.Brubaker,R.(2004),EthnicitywithoutGroups,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Brubaker,R.(2006),‘The“diaspora”diaspora’,EthnicandRacialStudies,28(1),1–19.Bucholtz,M.andE.Skapoulli(2009),‘Introductionyouthlanguageattheintersection:Frommigrationtoglobalization’,Pragmatics19(1),1–16.Carpentier,N.(2003),‘Accessandparticipationinthediscourseofthedigitaldivide:TheEuropeanperspectiveat/ontheWSIS’,inJ.Servaes(ed.),TheEuropeanInformationSociety:ARealityCheck,Bristol,UKandPortland,OR:Intellect,pp.99–120.Carpentier,N.(2007),‘Theon-linecommunitymediadatabaseRadioSwapasatranslocaltooltobroadenthecommunicativerhizome’,Observatorio(OBS*),accessed12March2021athttp://obs.obercom.pt/index.php/obs/article/view/44.Carpentier,N.(2010),‘Readingbackbeyondthe“post”prefix:Thepoliticsofthesignifier“post-socialism”,anditsopportunitiesfortheenrichmentofparticipatorymediatheory’,Mediálnístudia,1/2010,7–30.Casey,E.(1998),TheFateofPlace:APhilosophicalHistory,BerkeleyandLosAngeles,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Castryck,G.(2019),‘LivingIslamincolonialBujumbura:ThehistoricaltranslocalityofMuslimlifebetweenEastandCentralAfrica’,HistoryinAfrica,46,263–98.Chew,M.M.(2010),‘Delineatingtheemergentglobalculturaldynamicof“lobalization”:Thecaseofpass-offmenswearinChina’,Continuum,24(4),559–71.Connell,R.(2007),SouthernTheory,London,UK:Polity.Cohen,A.P.(1989),TheSymbolicConstructionofCommunity,London,UK:Routledge.Crow,G.(2018),WhatareCommunityStudies?,London,UKandNewYork,NY:BloomsburyAcademic.Datta,A.(2016),‘TranslocalgeographiesofLondon:Belongingand“otherness”amongPolishmigrantsafter2004’,inK.BrickellandA.Datta(eds),TranslocalGeographies:Spaces,Places,Connections,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.73–92.DeBlij,H.J.(2009),ThePowerofPlace:Geography,Destiny,andGlobalization’sRoughLandscape,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
342334HandbookofcultureandglocalizationDelanty,G.(ed.)(2018),RoutledgeInternationalHandbookofCosmopolitanismStudies,2nded.,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge.Deleuze,G.andF.Guattari(1987),AThousandPlateaus:CapitalismandSchizophrenia,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Dirlik,A.(1999),‘Place-basedimagination:Globalismandthepoliticsofplace’,Review:(FernandBraudelCenter),22(2),151–87.Drori,G.S.,Höllerer,M.A.andP.Walgenbach(2013),‘Theglocalizationoforganizationandmanagement:Issues,dimensions,andthemes’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,London,UK:Routledge,pp.3–24.Englert,B.(2018),‘Lookingthroughtwolenses:ReflectionsontransnationalandtranslocaldimensionsinMarseille-basedpopularmusicrelatingtotheComoros’,Identities:GlobalStudiesinCultureandPower,25(5),542–57.Englert,B.(ed.)(2019),‘Specialissue:Translocalpopularcultures’,WienerZeitschriftfürkritischeAfrikastudien,19(36).Escobar,A.(2000),‘Place,power,andnetworksinglobalisationandpostdevelopment’,inK.G.Wilkins(ed.),RedevelopingCommunicationforSocialChange:Theory,PracticeandPower,Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield,163–73.Evans,L.(2015),LocativeSocialMedia:PlaceintheDigitalAge,Basingstoke,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Flecker,J.(ed.)(2016),Space,PlaceandGlobalDigitalWork,London,UK:Palgrave.Freitag,U.andA.vonOppen(2010a),‘Introduction.“Translocality”:Anapproachtoconnectionandtransferinareastudies’,inU.FreitagandA.vonOppen(eds),Translocality:TheStudyofGlobalizingProcessesfromaSouthernPerspective,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill,pp.1–21.Freitag,U.andA.vonOppen(eds)(2010b),Translocality:TheStudyofGlobalizingProcessesfromaSouthernPerspective,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill.Gieryn,T.F.(2000),‘Aspaceforplaceinsociology’,AnnualReviewofSociology,26,463–96.GlickSchiller,N.,BaschL.andC.Blanc-Szantion(1992),‘Transnationalism:Anewanalyticframe-workforunderstandingmigration’,AnnalsoftheNewYorkAcademyofSciences,645(1),1–24.Greiner,C.andP.Sakdapolrak(2013),‘Translocality:Concepts,applicationsandemergingresearchperspectives’,GeographyCompass,7(5),373–84.Hepp,A.(2009),‘Localitiesofdiasporiccommunicativespaces:Materialaspectsoftranslocalmediatednetworking’,TheCommunicationReview,12(4),327–48.Hewson,C.(2005),LocalandCommunityTelevisionintheUnitedKingdom:ANewBeginning?APolicyReview,SheffieldandLincoln,UK:CommunityMediaAssociationandUniversityofLincoln.Hjorth,L.andI.Richardson(2017),‘PokémonGO:Mobilemediaplay,place-making,andthedigitalwayfarer’,MobileMedia&Communication,5(1),3–14.Hodkinson,P.(2004),‘TranslocalconnectionsintheGothscene’,inA.BennettandR.A.Peterson(eds.),MusicScenes:Local,TranslocalandVirtual,Nashville,TN:VanderbiltUniversityPress,pp.131–48.Horan,T.A.(2000),DigitalPlaces:BuildingOurCityofBits,Washington,DC:UrbanLandInstitute.Jones,S.G.(1995),‘Understandingcommunityintheinformationage’,inS.G.Jones(ed.),CyberSociety;Computer-mediatedCommunicationandCommunity,London,UK:Sage,pp.10–35.Juergensmeyer,M.,Steger,M.B.andS.Sassen(eds)(2018),OxfordHandbookofGlobalStudies,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Kallis,G.,Yarwood,R.andN.Tyrrell(2019),‘Translocalspaceacrossmigrantgenerations:ThecaseofaGreekOrthodoxChurchintheUnitedKingdom’,Population,SpaceandPlace,25(5).Kennedy,P.andV.Roudometof(eds)(2006),CommunitiesacrossBorders:NewImmigrantsandTransnationalCultures,London,UK:Routledge.Kinder,K.(2016),‘Technologiesoftranslocality:Vegetables,meatanddressesinArabMuslimDetroit’,InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch,40(5),899–917.Korff,R.(2003),‘Localenclosuresofglobalization:Thepoweroflocality’,DialecticalAnthropology,27,1–18.Kraidy,M.M.(2005),Hybridity,ortheCulturalLogicofGlobalization,Philadelphia,PA:TempleUniversityPress.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
343Translocalityandglocalization:aconceptualexploration335Kraidy,M.M.andP.D.Murphy(2003),‘Mediaethnography:Global,localortranslocal?’,inM.M.KraidyandP.D.Murphy(eds),GlobalMediaStudies:AnEthnographicPerspective,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.299–312.Kytölä,S.(2016),‘Translocality’,inA.GeorgakopoulouandT.Spilioti(eds),TheRoutledgeHandbookofLanguageandDigitalCommunication,Abingdon,UK:Routledge,pp.371–88.Lahiri,S.(2011),‘Rememberingthecity:Translocalityandthesenses’,Social&CulturalGeography,12(8),855–69.Lawreniuk,S.andL.Parsons(2020),GoingNowhereFast:MobileInequalityintheAgeofTranslocality,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Leunissen,J.(1986),‘“Community”en“CommunityDevelopment”bijdeAustralischeAborigines’,inM.VanBakel,A.BorsboomandH.Dagmar(eds),Traditieinverandering;NederlandsebijdragenaanantropologischonderzoekinOceanië,Leiden,TheNetherlands:DSWOPress,pp.57–82.Levitt,P.(2001),TheTransnationalVillagers,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Levitt,P.andS.Khagram(eds)(2007),TheTransnationalStudiesReader:IntersectionsandInnovations,London,UK:Routledge.Lewis,P.(1993),‘Approachtothealternativemediaimpactstudy’,inP.Lewis(ed.),AlternativeMedia:LinkingGlobalandLocal,Paris,France:UNESCO,pp.11–14.Lindlof,T.R.(1988),‘Mediaaudiencesasinterpretivecommunities’,CommunicationYearbook,11(1),81–107.Low,S.(2017),SpatializingCulture:TheEthnographyofSpaceandPlace,London,UK:Routledge.Lyu,L.andL.McCarthy(2015),‘“Logalization”:Local–globalprocessesandtheShilingleatherindus-trialdistrictinGuangzhou,China’,AsianGeographer,32(1),37–57.Ma,E.K.-W.(2002),‘Translocalspatiality’,InternationalJournalofCulturalStudies,5(2),131–52.Maffesoli,M.(2016),‘Fromsocietytotribalcommunities’,TheSociologicalReview,64(4),739–47.Mandaville,P.G.(1999),‘Territoryandtranslocality:Discrepantidiomsofpoliticalidentity’,Millennium,28(3),653–73.Martin-Barbero,J.(1993),Communication,CultureandHegemony:FromtheMediatoMediations,London,UK:Sage.Massey,D.(2005),ForSpace,London,UK:Sage.McFarlane,C.(2009),‘Translocalassemblages:Space,powerandsocialmovements’,Geoforum,40(4),561–7.McGarrigle,J.andE.Ascensão(2018),‘Emplacedmobilities:LisbonasatranslocalityinthemigrationjourneysofPunjabiSikhstoEurope’,JournalofEthnicandMigrationStudies,44(5),809–28.Mohan,U.andJ.Hughes(eds)(2020),‘Translocalityasconnectionsthatdisrupt’,TheJugaadProject,SpecialIssue,accessed11October2020athttps://www.thejugaadproject.pub/home/translocality-as-connections.Morris,A.andG.Morton(1998),Locality,CommunityandNation,London,UK:Hodder&Stoughton.Naumann,C.andC.Greiner(2016),‘Thetranslocalvillagers.Mining,mobilityandstratificationinpost-apartheidSouthAfrica’,Mobilities,12(6),875–89.NederveenPieterse,J.(1995),‘Globalisationashybridization’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.45–68.NederveenPieterse,J.(2015),GlobalizationandCulture:GlobalMelange,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Oakes,T.andL.Schein(2006),TranslocalChina:Linkages,IdentitiesandtheRe-imaginingofSpace,London,UK:RoutledgeOzkul,D.(2017),‘Placingmobileethnography:Mobilecommunicationasapracticeofplacemaking’,inL.Hjorth,H.Horst,A.GallowayandG.Bell(eds),TheRoutledgeCompaniontoDigitalEthnography,London,UK:Routledge,pp.221–32.Pennycook,A.(2007),GlobalEnglishesandTransculturalFlows,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Peterson,R.A.andA.Bennett(2004),‘Introducingmusicscenes’,inA.BennettandR.A.Peterson(eds),MusicScenes:Local,TranslocalandVirtual,Nashville,TN:VanderbiltUniversityPress,pp.1–16.Porst,L.andP.Sakdapolrak(2017),‘Howscalemattersintranslocality:Usesandpotentialsofscaleintranslocalresearch’,Erdkunde,71(2),p.111–26.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
344336HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRobertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalisation:Time-spaceandheterogeneity-homogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,25–44.Roudometof,V.(2000),‘Transnationalismandglobalization:TheGreek-Orthodoxdiasporabetweenorthodoxuniversalismandtransnationalnationalism’,Diaspora,9(3),361–97.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–17.Roudometof,V.(2020),‘Thenewconceptualvocabularyofthesocialsciences:The“globalizationdebates”incontext’,Globalizations,accessed1December2020at10.1080/14747731.2020.1842107.Simmel,G.(1903),‘Themetropolisandmentallife’,reprintedinK.H.Wolff(ed.)(1950),TheSociologyofGeorgSimmel,NewYork,NY:TheFreePress,pp.409–24.Smart,A.andG.C.S.Lin(2007),‘Localcapitalisms,localcitizenshipandtranslocality:RescalingfrombelowinthePearlRiverDeltaregion,China’,InternationalJournalofUrbanandRegionalResearch,31(2),280–302.Stephan-Emmrich,M.andP.Schröder(eds)(2018),Mobilities,Boundaries,andTravellingIdeas:RethinkingTranslocalitybeyondCentralAsiaandtheCaucasus,Cambridge,UK:OpenBookPublishers.Thornton,W.H.(2000),‘Mappingthe“glocal”village:Thepoliticallimitsof“glocalization”’,Continuum,14(1),79–89.Tölölyan,K.(1991),‘Thenation-stateanditsothers:Inlieuofapreface’,Diaspora:AJournalofTransnationalStudies,1(1),3–7.Tönnies,F.(1887),GemeinschaftundGesellschaft,reprintedinC.P.Loomis(ed.)(1963)CommunityandSociety,London,UK:HarperandRow.Tuan,I.H.(2018),TranslocalPerformanceinAsianTheatreandFilm,London,UK:PalgravePivot.Uimonen,P.(2009),‘Internet,artsandtranslocalityinTanzania’,SocialAnthropology,17(3),276–90.Vasquez,M.A.(2008),‘Studyingreligioninmotion:Anetworksapproach’,MethodandTheoryintheStudyofReligion,20,151–84.Verne,J.(2012a),‘“Leterrain,c’estmoi?”Reflectionsontheemergenceofthefieldintranslocalresearch’,Annalesdegéographie,2012/5-6(no687–688),561–82.Verne,J.(2012b),LivingTranslocality:Space,CultureandEconomyinContemporarySwahili,Stuttgart,Germany:FranzSteinerVerlag.Verschueren,P.(2006),‘Fromvirtualtoeverydaylife’,inJ.ServaesandN.Carpentier(eds),TowardsaSustainableInformationSociety:DeconstructingWSIS,Bristol,UK:Intellect,pp.169–84.Wenger,E.(1999),CommunitiesofPractice:Learning,MeaningandIdentity,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Wilken,R.andG.Goggin(eds)(2015),LocativeMedia,London,UK:Routledge.Wimmer,A.andN.GlickSchiller(2002),‘Methodologicalnationalismandbeyond:Nation-statebuild-ing,migrationandthesocialsciences’,GlobalNetworks,2(4),301–34.Wisniewski,R.andJ.Brzezicka(2019),‘Factorsthatdeterminetranslocalityontherealestatemarket–globalizationandglocalization’,ERESeres2019_55,EuropeanRealEstateSociety(ERES),accessed12March2021athttps://ideas.repec.org/p/arz/wpaper/eres2019_55.html.Young,J.C.(2016),Postcolonialism:AHistoricalIntroduction,Oxford,UK:BasilBlackwell.Yu,S.(2018),‘Mobilocality’,UrbanGeography,39(4),563–86.Zhang,Y.(2010),‘TransnationalismandtranslocalityinChinesecinema’,CinemaJournal,49(3),135–9.VictorRoudometofandNicoCarpentier-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:51AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
34521.Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization:culturebetweentransnationality,structuration,rationalizationandactorhoodRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.DroriINTRODUCTIONWorldsocietytheory(WST)andglocalizationtheoryrarelyengagewitheachotherinadirectmanner,althoughtheyoverlap,bothconceptuallyandempirically.Thischapterisdevotedtoelaboratingonthepotencyofgreatersynergybetweenthesetwosociologicaltraditions.WST,whichemergedduringthelate1970sbycontestingbothmodernizationtheoryandworldsystemtheory,appliessociologicalandphenomenologicaltheoriestoreorientdiscussionsofglobalprocessestowardsnewemphases.Whereasmodernizationtheoryandworldsystemtheoryweremiredinthedebatesoverwhetherdevelopmentresultsinpatternsofglobalcon-vergenceordivergenceandwhoseinterestsareservedbydevelopment,WSThighlightstheemergenceofworldsocietyastheimaginedcommunityandtheco-constitutionofglobalandlocal.Inaddition,sinceJohnW.Meyer,thepioneerofWST,wrotethefoundationalarticlesofneo-institutionaltheoryoforganizations,WSTinterpretsglobalizationthroughtheprismsofstructuration,diffusion,isomorphism,loosecoupling,rationalizationandactorhood.Uponthesefoundations,WSTnotonlyemergedtotakeitsplaceamongthedominantsociologicaltheoriesofglobal,transnationalandcomparativeprocesses,butalsoasatheoryinherentlyinclinedtohighlightbothworldcultureandglocalvariations.Therefore,whilethetraditionsofWSTandglocalizationresearchhavedifferentintellectualtrajectories,theyarehighlycompatibleandmutuallysupportive.TheaimofthischapteristoexploretheinextricablelinkbetweenWSTandthestudyofculturalglocalization.Webuildthisclaimonthefollowingsequenceofdiscussions.FollowingareviewofthetenetsofWST,wedescribethemannerinwhichWST’sprincipalconceptsrelatetotheinterpretationofglocalization,bothconceptuallyandempirically.Buildingonthisthickdescriptionofthesynergybetweenthesetwosociolog-icaltheories,weproposeseverallinesforfruitfulresearchatthenexusofworldsocietyandglocalizationtraditions.WORLDSOCIETYTHEORY:TENETSANDHISTORYStartinginitsinitialformulations(Meyer,Boli-Bennett&Chase-Dunn,1975;Meyer&Hannan,1979)andconsolidatinginitsmaturestatements(Boli&Thomas,1997;Meyer,2000;Meyer,Boli&Thomas,1987;Meyer,Bolietal.,1997),WSTarticulatesasociologicalandinstitutionaltheoryofglobalizationandtransnationality.Startinginthelate1970s,thistheorydrewonsocialconstructivismandphenomenologytoposeanimportantparadigmaticchallengetothethen-dominanttheoriesofglobalization,namelyworldsystemstheory337RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
346338Handbookofcultureandglocalization(Wallerstein,1974,2000)andmodernizationtheory(Inkeles,1969).Moreover,althoughbothworldsystemandmodernizationtheorieshavenotbeenentirelyovertaken,1sincethe1990s,WSThasascendedtoprominence.2Itsadvancewasaidedbythetriumphofinstitutionaltheoryinthefieldoforganizationstudies(Dobbin&Schoonhoven,2010;Scott,2008)andbytherenownofJohnW.Meyerinleadingthedevelopmentandarticulationofphenome-nologicalinstitutionalisminbothfields(Drori,2008;Drori&Krücken,2009;Meyer,2009,2010).Therefore,WSTisinformedbyfoundationalinstitutionalistterminologysuchas‘isomorphism’and‘loosecoupling’,‘theorization’and‘diffusion’,‘actorhood’and‘carriersofideas’,and‘structuration’and‘formalization’;throughitsrichbodyofempiricalstudiesinparticular,WSThasalsocontributedtotheadvancementofsociologicalinstitutionalismanddiscursiveandphenomenologicaltraditions(seeAlasuutari,2015).Importantlyforthestudyofglobalizationandglocalization,suchinstitutionalistandphenomenologicalfoundationsallowedWSTtoredirectstudiesofsocialphenomenaandprocessestoaccountfortheirglobalcontextandtoredirectglobalizationstudiestoaccountforcross-nationalisomorphism,globalrationalizationandtransnationalorganization.Atitscore,WSTposesthreeclaimsthataffirmthreechallengestofunctionalistandration-alistexplanationsofglobalization(seeHöllereretal.,2017).First,ithighlightsthestrikingisomorphismamongentitiesworldwide.Attentionwasinitiallydirectedtowardsisomorphicfeaturesacrossnation-states(seeMcNeely,1995).Forexample,nation-statesworldwidehaveasimilarsetofministries(e.g.,science;Jang,2000),governmentalagencies(e.g.,ombuds-men;Koo&Ramirez,2009),andnationalpolicies(e.g.,culture;Alasuutari&Kangas,2020;education;Baker&LeTendre,2005;Meyer,Ramirez&Soysal,1992).Subsequently,WSTresearchersaddedevidenceofisomorphismacrossorganizationsworldwide;forexample,cor-porationsadoptasimilarsetofcorporatepractices,includingcorporatesocialresponsibility(Tsutsui&Lim,2015),humanresourcemanagement(Brewsteretal.,2008),andcompliancewithISOstandards(Guleretal.,2002).Second,WSThighlightsthatthesourceforsuchglobalisomorphismisembeddednessinworldsociety:nation-statesororganizationsthataredeeplytangledinthewebofworldpolityaremoreinvolvedparticularlyintheorganizational‘backbone’ofglobalandinternationalaffairs(Beckfield,2010;Boli&Thomas,1997,1999).Inaddition,worldsocietyanditsculturalscriptsinfluencethemtoagreaterdegree.Worldsocietyemanatesscriptsthatdeclaremodelsofappropriateness–modelsthatdefinenation-statehood,corporatecitizenshiporper-sonhoodandaddressenvironmentalism,stateservices,education,genderequalityorsimilarissuesthatarereframedascarryinguniversalvalueandareoftenredefinedasaglobalsocialproblem.Forexample,for-profitcorporationsembracecorporatesocialresponsibilitymeas-uresanduniversitiesadoptinternationalizationpracticestoadheretotheepochalglobalscriptsofappropriatenessfortheirrespectiveorganizationalfields.Likewise,numerousstudiesshowthatnation-statesthatareimmersedinworldpolity–intermsofmembershipinintergovern-mentalorganizations,engagementwithtransnationalnongovernmentalorganizations,andratificationofinternationaltreaties–arequickertoadoptawholehostofpracticesassociatedwiththeglobalscriptofnation-statehood.Third,WSThighlightstheinstitutionaldynamicsthatshapeandsteerglobalization.Ratherthanassumingthatrationalandstrategicchoicesorpowerandinterestsmotivatehumanaction,WSTpostulatesthatinstitutionaldriversoflegitimacyandappropriateness,whichdrawonculturalscripts,influencehowpeople,organizationsandnation-statesnavigate.BuildingonMarch’scritiquethatsheerpowerholds‘surprisinglylittlepurchase’fortheRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
347Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization339explanationofcomplexsocialsituations,WSTarguesthatauthorityandenactmentarebothpowerfulandimpactful(seeDrori,2020).Inthisway,theworldwideadoptionofhumanrightslanguageinnationalconstitutions(Becketal.,2012)andanti-corruptionmeasures(Drori,Jang&Meyer,2006)–tonametwoofthemanynationalpoliciesandstructuresthat‘travel’andbecomeadoptedworldwide–aredrivenbytheauthorityofexpertcarriersoftheseglobalscripts.Thescriptsevolvefromthelociofexpertise–inorganizations(Alasuutari&Kangas,2020;regardingUNESCO,seeFinnemore,1993)orprofessions(Fourcade,2006regardingeconomists;seeJang,2005regardingaccounting).Moreover,similardynamicsalsoinflu-enceorganizationsthatareembeddedinworldsociety,suchascorporationsadoptingglobalstandards(Guleretal.,2002),schoolsrevisingthecontentandpedagogicaltoneoftextbooks(Bromleyetal.,2011;Meyer,Bromley&Ramirez,2010),andtheexpansivefoundingofvoluntaryassociations(Schofer&Longhofer,2011).Scholarshavepointedtothespecificglobal‘instrument’drivingglobaldiffusionandimprintingofembeddedentities,suchastheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,Social,andCulturalRights(ICESCR;Cole&Ramirez,2013),UNESCO(Alasuutari&Kangas,2020;Finnemore,1993),theRedCross(Finnemore,1996a),andtheConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationagainstWomen(CEDAW;Wotipka&Ramirez,2008).Therejectionofrationalistandpower-basedtheoriesallowsWSTtoexplainineffectualimplementationasloosecouplingandthusasideeffectoftheritualisticenactmentofglobalscripts.WSTstudiesshowthatadoptionofglobalscriptsisfrequently‘cheaptalk’,divorcedfromcomprehensiveandeffectualimplementation,revealingagapbetweenpolicyandpractice(seeDobbin&Kelly,2007).Hafner‐BurtonandTsutsui(2005)showthatnationalratificationofhumanrightstreatiesisakintoan‘emptypromise’,whereasDrori,Meyer,etal.(2003)showthattheadoptionofanationalsciencepolicy,asalsorecordedbyFinnemore(1993)andJang(2000),isunrelatedtothescientificlabourforceorscientificoutputs.Inaddi-tion,ColeandRamirez(2013)showthateventhecreationofgovernment-sponsorednationalhumanrightsinstitutions,whichareintendedtoserveas‘receptorsites’fortheimplementationofglobaltreaties,resultsindecoupledaction,withsomerightsviolationstightlymonitored,whileothersareneglected.Internationalorganizations,asmuchastheyarethe‘teachersofnorms’(Finnemore,1993)andthusthesourceofritualisticadoptionofglobalscripts,arealsotheinstrumentsfortightercouplingbetweenpolicyandaction.Cole(2012)showsthatinter-nationalhumanrightstreatiesthatincludestrongermonitoringprovisionsinducehigherlevelsofnationalcomplianceandthushavedirectbeneficialeffectsonhumanrightsprotections.Inthesevariousstudies,ritualisticenactmentandloosecouplingdrivesocialtransformations.TosupportthethreeoverarchingclaimsthatencapsulateWST(thatis,isomorphism,embeddednessandinstitutionaldynamics),WSTscholarsalsoanalyseworldsocietyanddescribeworldculture;suchdescriptionsdetailthescriptsthatinfluenceembeddedentities.Amongtheseglobalscriptsareglobalorganizations(Bromley&Meyer,2015;Pope&Meyer,2016),whichinvolvetheperson(Frank&Meyer,2002),schooling(Baker,2014;Drori,2016),universalrights(Meyer,Bromley&Ramirez,2010),rationalization(Boli,2006),andscientization(Drori&Meyer,2006;Drori,Meyer,etal.,2003).ThesedescriptionsoftheWestern,nowglobal,normativeordershowtheconsolidationofanimaginedglobalsociety,supportedbythedual‘pillars’,ornormativeprinciples,ofprogressandjustice(seeDrori,2005).WSTstudiesalsoaddimportanthistoricaldepthtothedescriptionofworldsociety,detail-ingtheevolutionofculturalmeaningsoverthecenturies.Forexample,InoueandDrori(2006)RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
348340Handbookofcultureandglocalizationdescribethesedimentationoffourdifferentmeaningsofhealthcareprovisionbyinternationalorganizationsoverthepastseveralcenturies–fromcharity,toprofessionalism,todevelop-mental,tohumanrights.Moreover,Berkovitch(1999)describesthechanginglogicofthewomen’srightsmovement,frommotherhoodtocitizenship.Thesestudiesrecognizeepochalscriptsofworldculture.Inaddition,withsuchahistoricalreviewcomestherecognitionofthehistoricalchangestoglobalpolitical,economicandtechnologicalcontexts.Inthisspirit,Djelic(1998)detailstheroleofpost-WWIIAmericanhegemonyintheshapingoftheWesternEuropeansociallandscape,andBromleyetal.(2020)recordtheworldwideeffectsofthecon-temporaryilliberalwinds.Importantly,theseglobalculturalchangesimprintembeddedenti-ties,eveninaratherliteralsense;forexample,Drori,ObergandDelmestri(2017)showhowtheemblemsofuniversitiesincludevisualsignsoftheirreverenceforcertainglobalnormsregardingacademiaandhighereducationandhowtherebrandingofuniversitiesisareactiontochangesintheseglobalnorms.Insummary,WSTstandsasarobusttheoryofglobalization,offeringsociological,institutionalandphenomenologicalperspectivesofglobal,transnational,internationalandcross-nationalprocesses.ThetraditionofvoluminousWSTresearchoutlineshowglobali-zationoccurs(highlightinginstitutionaldynamics,mainlyisomorphism,loosecouplingandenactment),whopropelsglobalization(pointingtoworldpolity,thatis,organizationsandtheprofessions),whatformsofglobalizationdiffuseworldwide(describingworldculture,mainlythepillarsofprogressandpracticeandthenormsofrationalizationandactorhood),andwhereglobalizationhasitseffects(focusingmostlyontop-downinfluence,buthighlightingenactment‘frombelow’,thatis,byembeddedentities).Reflectedinthechangeinthetheory’sself-identification–fromworldpolity(Drori,Meyer,etal.,2003)toworldsociety(Krücken&Drori,2009;Meyer,Boli,etal.,1997)–WSTannounceditsfocusontheculturalfoundationofglobalization.AlthoughWSTinitiallyfocusedprimarilyoncross-nationalisomorphismandglobalconvergenceaspartofitsassaultonthethen-dominantsociologicalfocusoninequality,thetheoryalwaysconcededthatcross-nationalvariationsexistandreliedoncross-nationalvariationasarequiredfeatureforallempiricalanalyses(Drori,2020).Nevertheless,untilrecently–and,eventhen,byonlyafewscholars(Höllereretal.,2017regardingorgani-zationsandpersons;Drori,HöllererandWalgenbach,2014a;Mizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2016)–WSThasnotexplicitlyengagedwith,norreliedupon,thenotionofglocalization.Inthefollowingsection,weelaborateonhowWSThastreatedglobal–localinteractions,globalvariationand,withthat,theideascapturedbytheterm‘glocalization’.WSTANDGLOCALIZATIONMuchliketheinstitutionaltheoryoforganizations(seeMunir,2019),WSTisalsocri-tiquedforbeinginattentivetoissuesofpower,hierarchy,andinequality.WST’semphasisonisomorphismandglobaldiffusioniscondemnedasoveremphasizingconvergenceandtop-downpressuresandasdiscountingdivergence,resistanceandinequality(see,forexample,Finnemore,1996b).Yet,asforcefullyexplicatedbyDrori(2020),forinstitutionalists...patternsofdifferenceandunevennessarecentraltoanyresearch,forconceptualandmethodologicalreasonsalike,thus...showingthatalthoughdifferenceandinequalityarenotitsraisond’être,thesemattersareatthecoreofinstitutionaltheory’scriticalobservationofthesocialorder.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
349Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization341Moreover,DroriassertsthattherootofthismisconceptionofWSTisduetoitsparadigmaticchallengeofmodernizationandworldsocietytheories:‘Whatismistakenforobliviontodissimilarityanddisparityoravoidanceofattentiontoorganisationalreproductionisineffectamovetoshakesociologicalresearchoforganisationoutofitsparadigmaticfixation’(Drori,2020).Indeed,asmuchasWSTanalysestracediffusionofglobalmodels,theyalsopayattentiontounequalpatternsofdiffusionandthedifferentialcostsofisomorphism.Numerouslongi-tudinalandquantitativeWSTanalysesrevealthatdiffusionofglobalscriptstoembeddednation-statesvariesbylocalinstitutionsandstructures.Forexample,studieshaveaddressedcross-nationalvariationinsocialpracticesasdiverseasenvironmentalpolicy(Frank,1999),genderrights(Ramirezetal.,1997),corporatesocialresponsibility(Lim&Tsutsui,2012),universitycurricula(Franketal.,2000)anddivorce(Wang&Schofer,2018).Likewise,albeitwithadifferentmethodologyforhistoricalandcomparativeanalysis,Finnemore(1993)showsthattheadoptionofUNESCO’sschemeregardingnationalagencyforsciencepolicyvariedgreatlyamongrecipientcountries,exemplifyingsuchpatternsbycomparingEastAfricatoLebanon.Inaddition,severalWSTstudiesdocumentthecostsofglobalisomorphism,showingthatcross-nationaldiffusionofglobalpracticeshasunequaleffectsonnation-states.ShenhavandKamens(1991)showthattheglobalizationofsciencepractices,whichindevel-opedcountriesisrelatedtoeconomicdevelopment,isdisassociatedfromdevelopmentinunderdevelopedcountriesand,amongthepoorestcountries,extractseconomicpenaltiesduetodiversionoftheirresources.Kimetal.(2002)showthatthecostofisomorphisminadopt-inganexpandedcentralgovernment(indicatedbythenumberofgovernmentalministries)isgreaterforyounganddevelopingcountries.Theyconcludethat‘centralgovernmentsaroundtheworldcontinuetoexpandandbecomestructurallymorecomplex,forinternal,functionalreasonsincertaincountries,butinmanycountriesasaresultofimitatingglobaltrends’(Kimetal.,2002).Overall,thesestudiesshowthatcross-nationaldiffusionprocessesreflectcoun-tries’effortstoenacttheirnation-statehoodandobtaininternationallegitimization.Assuch,globaldiffusionprocessesnotonlyvarybynationalcapacityandinstitutionalconditions,butalsobearcostsforsomecountries.Inthisspirit,recenttreatmentsofglobalvariationsinWSTdirectlyusetheterm‘glocal-ization’andengagewithglocalizationtheory.Ourworkonglocalizationdescribesglocalvariationsamongdifferentsortsofgloballyembeddedsocialactors,bothorganizations(Drori,Höllerer&Walgenbach,2014a;Höllereretal.,2017;Mizrahi-Shtelman,2021;Mizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2020)andpersons(Mizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2016).Thesestudiesimportantlyaspiretofurtherthestudyofglocalizationwithanalyticschemesandempiricalanalyses.First,Drori,HöllererandWalgenbach(2014c)proposeananalyticschemeforglocalizationstudies,thusconcentratingonthedefinitionofglocalizationanditspotencyforempiricalresearch.Thisworkproposesaschemethatdefinesglocalizationalongthreeaxesanddemandsanalysesofthekindsofglocalizationthatoccur,howglocalizationcomesabout,andwhomitaffects.Specifically,itdefinesverticalglocalization(thatis,betweenglobalandlocal)asprivilegedbytheterm‘glocalization’andthusitexpandsthedefinitiontoincludehorizontalglocalization,acrossequivalentsocialspaces,suchasacrosscountriesoracrossorganizations,andtemporalglocalizationacrosshistoricaleras.ThevariouschaptersinDrori,HöllererandWalgenbach(2014a)illustratethediversityofempiricalworkfromtheperspectiveofcomparativeorganizationalinstitutionalism.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
350342HandbookofcultureandglocalizationSecond,severalWSTstudiesexplicitlyapplyaglocalizationperspectivetoorganizationstudies.Walgenbachetal.(2017)problematizethecategoryofmultinationalcorporations(MNCs).ThisworkarguesthatglocalizationrequiresthattheMNCsbereconceptualizedasgloballyorientedorganizations.Furthermore,itarguesthattheglocalityofMNCs,whichisamatterofdegreebetweenglobalandlocal,isalsoamatterofdegreeofglocalitybetweenidentityandofoperations(2017,p.108).Inaddition,theyarguethat‘definingtheorganisationbystrengthoforientation,ratherthanincategoricalorbinaryterms,alsoaffirmsthecomplex-ityofthecontemporaryglobalenvironmentinwhichcorporationsoperate’(2017,p.109),thusspurringfurtheranalysisofglobalembeddedness.Mizrahi-Shtelman(2021)buildsuponglocalizationasorientationtodescribehowtheleadersofanewlyfoundedorganization(anassociationofschoolprincipalsinIsrael)constructedadiscourseofcollectiveglocalidentity,showingthat‘theglocalnatureoftheircollectiveidentitywasevidentineachoftheadoptedidentities’,namelyprofessional,labourunionandpolitical.AlsousingIsraeliorganizationstoexploreglocalization,Mizrahi-ShtelmanandDrori(2020)relatetheissueofglocalorganiza-tionalidentitytotheRobertsonianideaofspace.InstudyingthemissionstatementsofIsraelihighereducationorganizations,thisstudyfindsanalignmentbetweenlocality–globalityandplace–spacedistinctions(Mizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2020,p.3).Specifically,‘expressionsoflocalityandglobalitybyIsraeliHEOsidentifytheseasdistinctspheres:Localityreferencesplace(asnotedearlier,primarilyintermsofcity,region,landscapeorcampus),whereasglo-balityreferences(academic)space’.Withthat,thisworkarguesthatglocalizationanalyses,hereregardingorganizationsbutalsogenerally,shouldtreatspaceasa‘socialspherethatissociallyconstructed,producedandreproducedandthusinvolvessocialimaginationandrefer-encing’(Mizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2020,p.13).ThethirddirectionofWSTstudiesonglocalizationcentresonpersonhood.Mizrahi-ShtelmanandDrori(2016)considerglocalizationintermsoftheprofessionalidentityofIsraelischoolprincipals,whoareconsideredtobeagentsofglocalization.Thisstudyfindsthatschoolprincipalswithstrongorientationstowardsglobaleducationalmodelsexpressedasenseofhybridglocality(smoothlycombiningideasfrominternationalsourcesandlocalconstituents),whereasschoolprincipalswithstrongorientationstowardsthelocalexpressedasenseofstrategicglocality(usingglocalitytoappeasedivergingprofessionalobligations).Together,thesestudiesexplicitlybridgethegapbetweenWSTandglocalizationtheory.Importantly,theyalsoposeasetofpropositionsthatcanspurfurtheranalysisofglocalizationfromaWSTperspective,regardingbothorganizationsandpersons.BecauseWSTdoesacknowledgethediversityofformsthatresultfromglobalization,theprincipaldifferencebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheoryremainsterminological,pertain-ingtotheexplicituseoftheterm‘glocalization’.RolandRobertson’sinitialformulationof‘glocalization’astheintegrationprocessbetweentheglobalandthelocal(Robertson,1995)hasbeensubsequentlyrefinedandelaboratedupon.GiulianottiandRobertson(2004)defineglocalizationasinterdependenciesbetweenglobalandlocal,explainingthatwithregardtotheglocalizationoffootball/soccer,‘debatesregardingcommodificationandmarginalizationfromthe“glocalgame”areunderpinnedbyintensifiedglobalityandgreaterconsciousnessofhumankind’(2004).Uponreflection,Robertson(2014)describestheemergenceofglocali-zationasapartof‘thedrifttowardsamultidimensionalconceptionofglobalisation’(2014)andsuggeststhat‘therearegoodreasonsforusingtheterm“glocalization”asasubstituteto“globalisation”’(2014).FollowingRobertson’semphasisonsynergiesacrosstimeandspace,Drori,HöllererandWalgenbach(2014c)addananalyticdistinctionamongthreeaxesRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
351Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization343ofglocalization:whereasmostglocalizationdiscussionsprivilegetheverticalaxisbetweenglobalandlocal,theauthorsexpandthedefinitiontoincludehorizontalglocalizationacrossequivalentsocialspacesandtemporalglocalizationacrosshistoricaleras.Roudometof(2015)summarizesthedefinitionaldiscussionsbypointingtothreemeaningspouredintotheterm‘glocalization’,eachdrawingonadifferentsetofpresuppositions:(1)Robertson’smeaning,whichcentresonthedynamicsofuniversalismofparticularism,thusequatingglocalizationwithglobalization;(2)Ritzer’sdefinitionofglocalizationinoppositionto‘grobalization’andtheoverwhelmingforceofcorporations;and(3)Roudometof’sowndefinition,whichregardsglocalizationasglobalizationalteredthroughthelocal,thusblendingthelocalandtheglobalandcreatingahybridspacethatallowsavarietyofideastobeexpressed.Eachofthesevarioususesoftheterm‘glocalization’,weargue,createsanopportunityforfurthersynergybetweenWSTandglocalizationtheory.Inthefollowingsection,weelaborateonhowWSTandglocal-izationtheoryoverlap,bothconceptuallyandempirically,althoughtheyrarelyengagedirectlywitheachother.Inthesectionfollowingthat,weelaborateontheextensivesynergybetweenthesetwosociologicaltraditions.CONCEPTUALFOUNDATIONSFORABONDLikeothersegmentsofJohnW.Meyer’sscholarship,WSTisintertwinedwithandhasimpactedseveralsocialsciencefields.DroriandKrücken(2009)describeitsintellectualconnectionswithfourfieldsofstudy:(1)organizationstudiesandmanagement,(2)politicalscienceandinternationalrelations,(3)socialtheory,and(4)globalization.Seeingthesharedinterestinglocalizationasacentralanalyticalapproachtostudyingglobalprocesses,wearguethatWSTandglocalizationtheoryhavesolidfoundationsforconceptualoverlapand,conse-quently,forcreatingafruitfulpathbywhichtoaddressglocalizationempirically.Specifically,here,wedescribeseveraljunctions–co-constitution,diffusionandculturalanalysis–betweenthetwotheoriesregardingglocalization.First,forboththeories,glocalizationmeanstheco-constitutionoftheglobalandthelocal.Thisnotionsuggeststhatthesepresumablydistinctcategoriesaredefinedinreferencetoeachother.WithRitzer(2003)describingglobalandlocalasinterconnected,Roudometof(2019)describingthesymbioticorsynergeticglobal–localrelationshipandDrori,Meyer,etal.(2003)usingtheterminologyofco-constitution,allofthemrecognizethatthecategoriesof‘global’and‘local’areidealtypesintheWeberiansense.Inotherwords,theglobalandthelocalarenever‘purely’so,otherthanintheanalyticsense:theglobalisanamalgamationoflocaltradi-tions,practicesandforms,whilethelocalisneverquitepureorexternaltotheglobal(Drori,Höllerer&Walgenbach,2014b;Robertson,2014).Withthat,glocalizationisnever‘outside’theglobalorthelocal;rather,itisacontinuumextendingbetweentheidealtypesofglobalandlocal,andglocalityisamatteroforientationtowardstheglobalorthelocalalongthiscontinuum(seeMizrahi-Shtelman&Drori,2016;Walgenbachetal.,2017).Second,bothWSTandglocalizationtheoryassumethatglocalizationdescribesthediffu-sionofglobalmodelsintolocalcontextsandregardglocalizationasaprocessofdiffusion,adoptionandadaptation.Empiricalstudiesfromboththeoreticaltraditionsconcentrateonaspecificglobalpracticethatspreadsworldwide,anddescribeitsauthorityandassumeduniversality.Withrespecttofocusingonaninstitutionalizedandvalorizedglobalpractice,Meyer,Ramirez&Soysal’s(1992)analysisoftheglobaldiffusionofmassschoolingisakinRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
352344HandbookofcultureandglocalizationtoKaufmanandPatterson’s(2005)analysisofthespreadofcricket,andtoGiulianottiandRobertson’s(2004)analysisoftheglobalizationoffootball/soccer.Inaddition,boththeoreticaltraditionslinkdiffusionwithvariation.Specifically,bothWSTandglocalizationtheorypointtolocalconditionsasmediatingtheglobalmodel’sadoptionandadaptation.Inthisrespect,Kimetal.’s(2002)descriptionofhow,overandabovetheimpactsoflocaleconomicandpoliticalconditions,acountry’sageanddevelopmentalstatecanmediatetheexpansionofitscentralgovernmentisakintoKaufmanandPatterson’s(2005)conclusionthatcricket’sglobaldiffusiondependsuponlocalelites’roleinpromotingadoptionandadaptation.Withthat,boththeoriesrecognizethevarietiesofglocalization,comparingnotonlyacrossentitiessubjecttothesameglobalizationprocesses,butalsoacrosssectorsorpracticesthatarebeingdiffusedworldwide,orasexpressedbyGiulianottiandRobertson(2004),theycompare‘continuitiesanddifferenceswiththepatternsofglocalisationexperiencedbyotherculturalforms’.Third,boththeoriesfocustheirexplanationsontheroleofcultureandexpressastrongconstructivistperspective.Althoughglocalizationtheoryself-identifiesas‘global-realist’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004)andstressestheimpactsofcapitalistforcesonglocalization,ittoofocusesonthemeaningspouredintotheglobalthemeandonthereceptionofsuchmean-ingsacrossadoptivelocales.Glocalizationtheoryemergedfromaculture-basedcritiqueofWST’semphasisoncapitalisttransactions(Robertson&Lechner,1985),beforesubsequentlywrestlingwiththeironyofusingtheterm‘glocalization’,eventhoughitisrootedinJapanesebusinessculture(Robertson,2014).ForWST,cultureisobviouslyaconstitutiveelement.WSTstudiesonorganizationalformsstillregardtheseformsastheformalexpressionsofculture(Boli&Thomas,1997,1999;Bromley&Meyer,2015).Moreover,boththeorieswrestlewiththeself-propellingmechanismsofsocialconstructionthatbindthelocalwiththeglobalandactorswithstructures.RecognizingtheproductionofsuchmeaningsleadsRobertson(2014)toseehowtheglobalandlocal,likeothersocialcategories,areconstantlyredefined.Hewrites,‘whenwespeakofglocalizationinvolvingadaptationtoaplace,weshouldnotbemisledintoattributingtoadaptationatooessentialistmeaning.Theideaofadaptationismuchmorefluidthanthat’(2014).Here,echoingRobertson’suniversalismofparticularism,Meyer(J.W.Meyer,2014)addsthat‘bothconformityandvariation...areshapedbyarapidlyexpandingglobalsystem’thatisorganizedaroundWestern,andnowglobal,culturalrules.Thesesharedunderstandingsofglocalizationasglobal–localprocessesrevealthesharedsociologicalandconstructivistfoundationsofbothWSTandglocalizationtheory.Suchcommongroundsallowthemeachtofocusoncultureandonconstructedsocialactors.Therefore,boththeoriesaddresstheprimacyofculturaldynamicsoverthatofsolelyeco-nomic,politicalortechnologicaldependencies.Albeitwithdramaticallydifferentmethod-ologies,WSTandglocalizationresearchersstudythejunctionofglobalthemesandlocalvariations.WhereasWSTanalysesareoverwhelminglycross-national,quantitativeandlongitudinal,glocalizationtheorystudiestendtobecasebased.Overall,bothWSTandglo-calizationtheoryarguethattheexpandingworldsocialorderencouragesandlegitimatesthelocalcontext,thusfurtheringthesimultaneityoftheglobalandlocal.Bothacknowledgethat,ratherthanbeingopposingprocesses,globalizationandlocalizationare,ineffect,‘twosidesofthesamecoin’(seeR.E.Meyer,2014);inotherwords,‘theglobalisnoparticular“place”andglobalmodelsexistonlytotheextentthattheyareenactedinthere-localizedvariants’(2014).Nonetheless,whileglocalizationtheoryaccentuatesthelocalcontext’sinfluentialroleinshapingnationalresponsesandengagementwithglobalmodels,WSTmaintainsthatglobalRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
353Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization345andnationalactorsatvariouslevelsadoptsimilarmodelsanddiscoursesduetoadesiretoconformtoglobalnormsofmodernity.Despitesuchnuanceddifferences,thesharedemphasisontransnationality,global–localrelationsandculturalprocessesprovidesasolidbasisforasynergeticresearchtrajectory.ThefollowingsectionpostulatesseveralsuchresearchpathsthatdrawuponthesynergybetweenglocalizationandWST’salreadyfruitfulresearchbodies.FRUITFULCORRESPONDENCEGiventhesharedtenetsoftheWSTandglocalizationresearchtraditions,weproposefourlinesofinquiryintoworldsocietyandglocalization,namely(1)cross-fertilizingconceptualvocabulary,(2)recognizingdynamictransformations,(3)exploringthediversityoflevelsandactors,and(4)payingattentiontoreferentialityandvalorization.Theseproposedvenuesforfurtherstudy,weclaim,willtakeadvantageoftheconceptualandempiricalcorrespondencesbetweenWSTandglocalizationtheory.Ourfirstagendaitemforfruitfullyexpandingcurrentresearchistobridgeterminologicaldistinctions.Astheglobal,transnationalandphenomenologicalvariantofinstitutionaltheory,WSThasextensivelydrawnoninstitutionaltheoryterminologytodescribeandexplainglobali-zationandglobal–localinteractions.Specifically,asnotedearlier,WSTcommonlyemploystheterms‘isomorphism’and‘loosecoupling’todescribesimilaritiesinformandidentityofgloballyembeddedentitiesandtoexplainthedisjunctionbetweenactionandresult,policyandimplementation,andidentity-speakandbehaviour(Cole&Ramirez,2013;Hafner‐Burton&Tsutsui,2005).Importantly,suchterminologyaccentuatesthe‘mechanisms’thatdrivecurrentformsofglobal–localinteractions.Ontheotherhand,glocalizationtheorymostlyemploystheterms‘synergy’and‘hybridity’todescribeglocality.Suchtermsemphasizethejuncturebetweenglobalandlocal,thusmainlyhighlightingthe‘state’,or‘description’,ofglocality.ThisterminologicaldifferencebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheoryenvelopesmethodo-logicalandepistemologicaldifferences.Forexample,mostempiricalresearchusingWSTemployscausalorassociationalmodels(forexample,Schofer&McEneaney,2003),whereasmostresearchinglocalizationtheoryrestsoncaseanalyses.Still,thisdifferencebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheoryisnotinherenttotheirapproaches;rather,weproposethatmuchcanbegainedbyintegratingandevenexpandingtheirconceptualvocabulary.EndeavoursinthisdirectionareevidentintheefforttoapplyglocalizationandWSTapproachestothestudyoforganizationandmanagement.Drori,HöllererandWalgenbach(2014a)considertherele-vanceoftermssuchas‘translation’,‘contextualization’,‘domestication’and‘re-localisation’totheadoptionandadaptationofmanagementandorganizationalpracticesandideas.Forexample,Czarniawska’s(2014)treatmentofglobalizationasaprocessoftrans-localizationthatoperatesthroughthetranslationofideas,allowshertoexplainhowSwedishorganiza-tions‘fail’toadoptthefashionable(andmanipulative)managementtoolofstorytelling.R.E.Meyer’s(2014)treatmentofglocalizationas‘thede-localisation/de-contextualizationofaspecificcultural“item”fromitsoriginalcontextanditsre-localisation/re-contextualizationinanewcontext’(p.79)allowshertodescribehowthepracticeof‘shareholdervalue’isdisembeddedandthemobilizationrequiredtosupportitstranslationintoitsadoptivesocialcontext.Withsuchexamplesinmind,ourproposaldrawsupontheexpansiveterminologicalvocabularyofboththeoriestospurfutureresearch,bothempiricalandconceptual,onglocalityanditsunderlyingculturalprocesses.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
354346HandbookofcultureandglocalizationSecond,withWSTemphasizingglobalizationmechanisms,andglocalizationtheoryemphasizingthedescriptionofglocality,bothshouldfurtheraddressthedynamicsofboththeconditionsandmeansofglobal–localinteractions.Therefore,WST-glocalizationresearchshouldregardboththeglobalandthelocalashighlydynamicandinvestigatethetransforma-tionswithinsuchanever-changingglocalcontext.Inthisspirit,studieswould–andsomealreadydo–focusonthehistoricaltransformationoftheglobalandlocal,whichhascreatedperpetualtransformationsanddrivencontinuousredefinitionsandadjustmentstotheglobal,localandglocal.Severalstudiesdescribethehistorictransformationoftheglobal,whichthencreatedanewbasisforinfluencingthelocalandforcreatinganewglocaljuncture.Forexample,BarrettandFrank(1999)describetheriseandthendramaticfallofeugenicsastheglobalscriptfordemographicandhealthpolicy;Meyer,Franketal.(1997)describetheriseofenvironmentalismasaglobalsocialproblem,whichinturnspawnedaglobalsocialmovementandaglobalpolicyagenda.KooandRamirez(2009)andBecketal.(2012)describetheriseofthediscourse,policyandstructurationofhumanrights,indicatingtheemergenceofaglobalscriptofpersonhoodandactorhood.InoueandDrori(2006)tracethechangeinthemeaningsoftheglobalprovisionofhealthcare.Bromleyetal.(2020)considertherecentworldwideriseofilliberalism,postulatingthisassignallinganemergentglobalmodel.Likewise,severalstudiesdescribethehistorictransformationofthelocal,whichinturncreatesanewformu-lationoftheglocal.Forexample,Bestor(2001)describestheglobalizationofsushi,which,whiledrawingonJapanesetradition,hasbecomeaglobalconsumerfashion.DelmestriandGreenwood(2016)describeasimilarprocesswithregardtograppa,whichhasbeentrans-formedfromaparticularItaliantraditiontoaglobalconnoisseurproduct.Sahlberg(2014)describestherecognitionofFinnisheducationasasuccessfulnationalsystem,whichthen,especiallyoncequantifiedintorankings,redefinedtheglobalstandardforpubliceducationsystemsworldwide.Insuchcases,weargue,Japanese,ItalianandFinnishparticularitieswerevalorizedasglobaliconsofsuccessandthusredefinedtheglobalscriptandtransformedtheglocalform.Likewise,thedynamicsofcontinuouschangecometotheglocal.Forexample,themultilinguafranca(seeMakoni&Pennycook,2012)emergedasanewformof‘theglocal’,whichisWesternizedbutnotWesternand,assuch,hasbecomethecosmopolitanandtrans-culturalcontextforfuturetransformationsoftheglobal,localandforthcomingglocal.Overall,theseexistingstudiessetthebasisforfutureresearchthatformallyrecognizesthecontinuoustransformationsoftheglobal,localandglocal–farbeyondchangestotheglobalhegemony.Recognizingsuchperpetualtransformationsrequiresresearcherstoregardnocategoryasfixed;rather,societalchangemustbeconsideredasboththeobjectandcontextforthestudyofglocalizationprocesses.Therefore,glocalizationmustbestudiedasglobal–localchangewithinachangingglocal–localcontext,orglocalitywithinglocalization.Third,socialprocessesandsocialchangesresultfromthemovements,activitiesandinteractionsamongdifferentlevelsofactors(Krücken&Drori,2009).However,themainmethodstakenbyWSTandglocalizationtheorycentreononelevelofactors.WSTisbasedonmacro-sociologicalandculturalisttheoreticalinterpretations(Drori&Krücken,2009).Assuch,itgivescloserattentiontomacro-levelaspectsandinvestigatesinternationalorganiza-tions(Drori,Meyer&Hwang,2006),globalcivilsocietyorganizations(Tsutsui&Wotipka,2004)andsocialmovements(Tsutsui,2004).Thispointofviewresultsinamethodologicalapproachthatemployscausalorassociationalmodels(e.g.,Schofer&McEneaney,2003).Ontheotherhand,glocalizationtheorylooksatmeso-ormicro-levelsandtriestounderstandtheendstateofglobalization(Roudometof,2015),mostlybyexploringcasestudies.ForRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
355Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization347example,GiulianottiandRobertson(2004)examinetheglobalizationoffootball/soccerandarguethatglocalizationoccursacrossso-calledlevelsofanalysis.Theyclaimthatglocaliza-tionoccursbecauseof‘interrelationsbetweenthefour“referencepoints”thatareelementaltothe“global-humancondition”:theseareindividualselves,(national)societies,theworldsystemofsocieties(internationalrelations),andhumankind’(Giulianotti&Robertson,2004,p.557).Engwall(2014)studiesacademicbusinessschoolsandshowshowdifferentlocalarrangementsledtothefield’sglocalization.Mizrahi-ShtelmanandDrori(2016)lookattheindividuallevelandstudyhowschoolprincipalsserveasglocalizationagents.Wesuggestthatbyembracinganetworkapproachthatreferstoasetofentitiesandtheconnectionsbetweenthem,boththeoriescanmixvarious‘levels’andtypesofactorsintoasingleinteractionsphere.Whenthinkingaboutsocialnetworks,werefertotheentitiesasactors–individuals,organiza-tions,collectivesorstates(McLean,2016).Thisdefinitionofentitiescanbequiteusefulinitsabstractness.Itoffersopportunitiestomoveawayfromrationalassumptionsregardingactorsandtoconcentrateonstructuralcharacteristicsortrendswithinthenetwork(McLean,2016).ThinkingaboutWSTandglocalizationtheoryinnetworktermscallsforamoveawayfromrationalexplanationsandtowardsthevariouswaysinwhichco-constitutionoperates:ontheonehand,howglobalnormsandlocalbeliefscaninfluencehowsocialnetworksareformedanddevelopand,ontheotherhand,hownetworksoperateasamechanismforthediffusionofideas,structuresandbehaviours.Takingthatsteprequiresboththeoriestoadoptasensitivitytoglobal–localcontextandmeaning.Lastly,muchinlinewithphenomenologicaltraditions,weproposethatthecorrespondencebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheoryspursthestudyofglocalizationasdependingonimagination,referentialityandideationalmodelling.Glocalization,weargue,isaprocessofreferentiality:whatisdescribedasan‘interaction’betweentheglobalandthelocal(whichare‘idealtypes’anywayintheWeberiansense)isaprocessofacknowledgingtheothercategory’sexistenceandidentifyingitasacounterpart.Thisalsomeansthatthedefinitionofeitherglobalorlocaldependsonitsdemarcationfromtheother,whichthereforeinvolvesimaginingthatreferentcategoryandattributingfeaturestoit.AlasuutariandKangas(2020)attributethesuccessofUNESCO’sinitiativetodiffusenationalculturalpoliciesto‘peerpressure’:theywritethat‘diffusionoftheideaofculturalpolicybenefitedfrominternationalcomparisonsenabledbythenationalreportsandthetendencyofcountriestoemulateothers,especiallythosebelongingtothesamereferencegroup’(2020).KaufmanandPatterson(2005)soughttoexplainsuchreferentiality.Theiranalysisofcricket’sglobalizationrevealsthattheglobaldiffusionofcricketoccursamongcountriesthatexpressasenseofrelationship,heretothecommontraditionsofformerBritishrule,albeitacrossaheterophilicrelationship.3Expandingfromthis,thepart–counterpartdefinitionsinvolveideation,namelytheimaginingandprojectingofideasorfeaturesaboutwhatthecounterpartisinordertodefinethepart,whichisakintoJ.W.Meyer’s(1996)descriptionofactorhoodasdefinedinreferenceto‘otherhood’.Consequently,glocalization/referentialityinvolvesenactment,sense-makingandsense-giving,ultimatelyconstitutingthecategory(localorglobal;personororganization)throughitsactionswithinaprescribedsocialcontext.WithbothWSTandglocalizationtheoryacknowledgingglocalizationasabidirectionalprocess,inwhichtheglobalshapesthelocalandviceversa,glocalizationshouldalsoberecognizedasaprocessofmodelling,attribution,mimicryandenactment.SuchrecognitioncomesinHöllereretal.’s(2017)descriptionofglocalizationasastepwiseprocess,which‘starts’withtheorizationandwithabstractingtheparticularintoageneralizablemodel,evolvesthroughtheconstructionofequivalencyacrossRavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
356348Handbookofcultureandglocalizationentities,continuestore-contextualizethroughtranslationandadaptation,andsubsequentlyallowsforbottom-upreboundeffectsontheglocal.Importantly,asdescribedbyWalgenbachetal.(2017),such‘phenomenological-institutionalanalysisputsstrongeremphasisonthecog-nitiveandnormative,ratherthantheregulative,pillars’ofinstitutionalizationingeneralandglocalizationinparticular.Inemphasizingthisconstructedaspectoftheglocalandindrivingresearchontheroleofreferentialityinsuchreflexivesocialconstructions,thecorrespond-encebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheoryisfurtherstrengthenedintermsofsociologicalfoundations.Insummary,weproposefourlinesofinquiryintoworldsocietyandglocalizationthatbuilduponthesolidsociologicalandconstructivistcorrespondencebetweenWSTandglocalizationtheory.Weregardtheselinesofinquiryaspotentialvenuesforconceptualandempiricaldevelopmentsinthesociologicalanalysisofculturalglocalization.CONCLUDINGCOMMENTSBothWSTandglocalizationtheoryarecentraltothesociologicalanalysisofglobalization,whichhasexpandeddramaticallysincethe1990s(seeFiss&Hirsch,2005;Guillén,2001).Althoughrarelyandonlyrecentlylinkedinanexplicitmanner,WSTandglocalizationtheorydiscussionsexhibitsubstantiveoverlap.Asdescribedinourchapterhere,WSTandglocalizationtheoryemphasizecultureandhavelaunchedaresearchstreamonthetenetsofworldcultureandonthediffusionofglobalculturalprinciplesandpractices.Inaddition,boththeoriespayattentiontoglobalandlocalconditions,actorsandprocesses,whileseekinganuancedwaytodescribethejunctionsof,orrelationsbetween,theglobalandlocal.BybuildingastrongeremphasisontheformalandstructuraldimensionsofcultureinWST,thefuturepathforglocalizationresearchshouldleadthestudyofculturetowardsorganization,organizationsandorganizing,andseekformalandstructuralpatternsanddynamicswithregardtotheglocalization–culturenexus.NOTES1.JeffreyAlexander(1995)claimsthatmodernizationtheory,whichhasledpost-WWIIAmericansocialthinking,hasevolvedandremainsrobust.Hedescribesfourstagesofthetheory’sevolution:modernization,anti-modernization,postmodernizationandneo-modernization(orreconversion).2.Forreviewsof,andcommentaryon,WST’sascendency,seeFinnemore(1996a),DroriandKrücken(2009)andBuhari-Gulmez(2010).3.Namely,thestablerelationshipofstatus-inequalitybetweenthosewhobroughtcricketfromEnglandandthelower-statuscolonialpopulations.REFERENCESAlasuutari,P.(2015),‘Thediscursivesideofnewinstitutionalism’,CulturalSociology,9(2),162–84.Alasuutari,P.andA.Kangas(2020),‘Theglobalspreadoftheconceptofculturalpolicy’,Poetics,82.Alexander,J.C.(1995),‘Modern,anti,post,neo’,NewLeftReview,63–101.Baker,D.(2014),TheSchooledSociety:TheEducationalTransformationofGlobalCulture,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
357Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization349Baker,D.andG.K.LeTendre(2005),NationalDifferences,GlobalSimilarities:WorldCultureandtheFutureofSchooling,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Barrett,D.andD.J.Frank(1999),‘Populationcontrolfornationaldevelopment:Fromworlddiscoursetonationalpolicies’,inJ.BoliandG.M.Thomas(eds),ConstructingWorldCulture:InternationalNongovernmentalOrganizationsSince1875,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Beck,C.J.,Drori,G.S.andJ.W.Meyer(2012),‘Worldinfluencesonhumanrightslanguageinconsti-tutions:Across-nationalstudy’,InternationalSociology,27(4),483–501.Beckfield,J.(2010),‘Thesocialstructureoftheworldpolity’,AmericanJournalofSociology,115(4),1018–68.Berkovitch,N.(1999),FromMotherhoodtoCitizenship:Women’sRightsandInternationalOrganizations,Baltimore,MD:JHUPress.Bestor,T.C.(2001),‘Howsushiwentglobal’,Foods&FoodIngredientsJournalofJapan,41–54.Boli,J.(2006),‘Therationalizationofvirtueandvirtuosityinworldsociety’,inM.-L.DjelicandK.Sahlin-Andersson(eds),TransnationalGovernance:InstitutionalDynamicsofRegulation,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Boli,J.andG.M.Thomas(1997),‘Worldcultureintheworldpolity:Acenturyofinternationalnon-governmentalorganization’,AmericanSociologicalReview,171–90.Boli,J.andG.M.Thomas(1999),ConstructingWorldCulture:InternationalNongovernmentalOrganizationssince1875,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Brewster,C.,Wood,G.andM.Brookes(2008),‘Similarity,isomorphismorduality?Recentsurveyevidenceonthehumanresourcemanagementpoliciesofmultinationalcorporations’,BritishJournalofManagement,19(4),320–42.Bromley,P.andJ.W.Meyer(2015),Hyper-Organization:GlobalOrganizationalExpansion,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Bromley,P.,Meyer,J.W.andF.O.Ramirez(2011),‘Theworldwidespreadofenvironmentaldiscourseinsocialstudies,history,andcivicstextbooks,1970–2008’,ComparativeEducationReview,55(4),517–45.Bromley,P.,Schofer,E.andW.Longhofer(2020),‘Contentionsoverworldculture:TheriseoflegalrestrictionsonforeignfundingtoNGOs,1994–2015’,SocialForces,99(1),281–304.Buhari-Gulmez,D.(2010),‘Stanfordschoolonsociologicalinstitutionalism:Aglobalculturalapproach’,InternationalPoliticalSociology,4(3),253–70.Cole,W.M.(2012),‘Humanrightsasmythandceremony?Reevaluatingtheeffectivenessofhumanrightstreaties,1981–2007’,AmericanJournalofSociology,117(4),1131–71.Cole,W.M.andF.O.Ramirez(2013),‘Conditionaldecoupling:Assessingtheimpactofnationalhumanrightsinstitutions,1981to2004’,AmericanSociologicalReview,78(4),702–25.Czarniawska,B.(2014),‘Storytelling:Amanagerialtoolanditslocaltranslations’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagementPerspectivesonGlocalization.NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.65–78.Delmestri,G.andR.Greenwood(2016),‘HowCinderellabecameaqueen:Theorizingradicalstatuschange’,AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,61,507–50.Djelic,M.-L.(1998),ExportingtheAmericanModel:ThePost-warTransformationofEuropeanBusiness,NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPressonDemand.Dobbin,F.andE.L.Kelly(2007),‘Howtostopharassment:Professionalconstructionoflegalcompli-anceinorganizations’,AmericanJournalofSociology,112(4),1203–43.Dobbin,F.andC.B.Schoonhoven(2010),‘Stanford’sorganizationtheoryrenaissance,1970–2000’,inF.DobbinandC.B.Schoonhoven(eds),ResearchintheSociologyofOrganizations(Vol.28),Bingley,UK:EmeraldGroupPublishing.Drori,G.S.(2005),‘UnitedNations’dedications:Aworldcultureinthemaking?’,InternationalSociology,20(2),175–99.Drori,G.S.(2008),‘Institutionalismandglobalizationstudies’,inR.Greenwood,C.Oliver,K.SahlinandR.Suddaby(eds),TheSageHandbookofOrganizationalInstitutionalism,London,UK:SagePublications.Drori,G.S.(2016),‘Rationalizingglobalconsciousness:Scientizededucationasthefoundationoforganization,citizenship,andpersonhood’,inR.RobertsonandD.Buhari-Gulmez(eds),GlobalCulture:ConsciousnessandConnectivity,Surrey,UK:Ashgate,pp.93–108.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
358350HandbookofcultureandglocalizationDrori,G.S.(2020),‘Hasn’tinstitutionaltheoryalwaysbeencritical?!’,OrganizationTheory,1(1),1–9.Drori,G.S.,HöllererM.A.andP.Walgenbach(eds)(2014a),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Drori,G.S.,HöllererM.A.andP.Walgenbach(2014b),‘Theglocalizationoforganizationandmanage-ment:Issues,dimensions,andthemes’inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.3–24.Drori,G.S.,HöllererM.A.andP.Walgenbach(2014c),‘Unpackingtheglocalizationoforganization:fromterm,totheory,toanalysis’,EuropeanJournalofCulturalandPoliticalSociology,1(1),85–99.Drori,G.S.,Jang,S.Y.andJ.W.Meyer(2006),‘Sourcesofrationalizedgovernance:Cross-nationallongitudinalanalyses,1985–2002’,AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,51(2),205–29.Drori,G.S.andG.Krücken(2009),‘Worldsociety:Atheoryandaresearchprogramincontext’inG.S.DroriandG.Krücken(eds),WorldSociety:TheWritingsofJohnW.Meyer,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.3–33.Drori,G.S.andJ.W.Meyer(2006),‘Scientization:Makingaworldsafefororganizing’,inM.-L.DjelicandK.Sahlin-Andersson(eds),TransnationalGovernance:InstitutionalDynamicsofRegulation,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.32–52.Drori,G.S.,MeyerJ.W.andH.Hwang(2006),GlobalizationandOrganization:WorldSocietyandOrganizationalChange,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Drori,G.,Meyer,J.W.,Ramirez,F.O.andE.Schofer(2003),ScienceintheModernWorldPolity:InstitutionalizationandGlobalization,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Drori,G.S.,Oberg,A.G.andDelmestri(2017),‘Forestandtrees,institutionaldynamicsandartifacts:Onvisualorganizationalindicatorsofglobalandhistoricalculturalpatterns’,inG.Krücken,C.Mazza,R.E.MeyerandP.Walgenbach(eds),NewThemesinInstitutionalAnalysis,Cheltenham,UKandNorthampton,MA:EdwardElgarPublishing,pp.224–52.Engwall,L.(2014),‘Theglocalizationofacademicbusinessstudies’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYorkandLondon:Routledge,pp.232–47.Finnemore,M.(1993),‘Internationalorganizationsasteachersofnorms:TheUnitedNationsEducational,Scientific,andCulturalOrganizationandsciencepolicy’,InternationalOrganization,47(4),565–97.Finnemore,M.(1996a),NationalInterestsinInternationalSociety,Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress.Finnemore,M.(1996b),‘Norms,culture,andworldpolitics:insightsfromsociology’sinstitutionalism’,InternationalOrganization,50(2),325–47.Fiss,P.C.andP.M.Hirsch(2005),‘Thediscourseofglobalization:Framingandsensemakingofanemergingconcept’,AmericanSociologicalReview,70(1),29–52.Fourcade,M.(2006),‘Theconstructionofaglobalprofession:Thetransnationalizationofeconomics’,AmericanJournalofSociology,112(1),145–94.Frank,D.J.(1999),‘Thesocialbasesofenvironmentaltreatyratification,1900–1990’,SociologicalInquiry,69(4),523–50.Frank,D.J.andJ.W.Meyer(2002),‘Theprofusionofindividualrolesandidentitiesinthepostwarperiod’,SociologicalTheory,20(1),86–105.Frank,D.J.,Wong,S.-Y.,Meyer,J.W.andF.O.Ramirez(2000),‘Whatcountsashistory:Across-nationalandlongitudinalstudyofuniversitycurricula’,ComparativeEducationReview,44(1),29–53.Giulianotti,R.andR.Robertson(2004),‘Theglobalizationoffootball:Astudyintheglocalizationofthe“seriouslife”,TheBritishJournalofSociology,55(4),545–68.Guillén,M.F.(2001),‘Isglobalizationcivilizing,destructiveorfeeble?Acritiqueoffivekeydebatesinthesocialscienceliterature’,AnnualReviewofSociology,27,235–60.Guler,I.,Guillén,M.F.andJ.M.Macpherson(2002),‘Globalcompetition,institutions,andthediffusionoforganizationalpractices:TheinternationalspreadofISO9000qualitycertificates’,AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,47,207–32.Hafner‐Burton,E.M.andK.Tsutsui(2005),‘Humanrightsinaglobalizingworld:Theparadoxofemptypromises’,AmericanJournalofSociology,110(5),1373–411.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
359Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization351Höllerer,M.A.,Walgenbach,P.andG.S.Drori,(2017),‘Theconsequencesofglobalizationforinsti-tutionsandorganizations’,inR.Greenwood,C.Oliver,T.B.LawrenceandR.E.Meyer(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofOrganizationalInstitutionalism,pp.214–42.Inkeles,A.(1969),‘Makingmenmodern:Onthecausesandconsequencesofindividualchangeinsixdevelopingcountries’,AmericanJournalofSociology,75(2),208–25.Inoue,K.andG.S.Drori(2006),‘Theglobalinstitutionalizationofhealthasasocialconcern:Organizationalanddiscursivetrends’,InternationalSociology,21(2),199–219.Jang,Y.S.(2000),‘Theworldwidefoundingofministriesofscienceandtechnology,1950–1990’,SociologicalPerspectives,43(2),247–70.Jang,Y.S.(2005),‘Theexpansionofmodernaccountingasaglobalandinstitutionalpractice’,InternationalJournalofComparativeSociology,46(4),297–326.Kaufman,J.andO.Patterson(2005),‘Cross-nationalculturaldiffusion:Theglobalspreadofcricket’,AmericanSociologicalReview,70(1),82–110.Kim,Y.S.,Jang,Y.S.andH.Hwang(2002),‘Structuralexpansionandthecostofglobalisomorphism:Across-nationalstudyofministerialstructure,1950-1990’,InternationalSociology,17(4),481–503.Koo,J.-W.andF.O.Ramirez(2009),‘Nationalincorporationofglobalhumanrights:Worldwideexpan-sionofnationalhumanrightsinstitutions,1966–2004’,SocialForces,87(3),1321–53.Krücken,G.andG.S.Drori(2009),WorldSociety:TheWritingsofJohnW.Meyer,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Lim,A.andK.Tsutsui(2012),‘Globalizationandcommitmentincorporatesocialresponsibility:Cross-nationalanalysesofinstitutionalandpolitical-economyeffects’,AmericanSociologicalReview,77(1),69–98.Makoni,S.andA.Pennycook(2012),‘Frommonologicalmultilingualismtomultilinguafrancas’,inM.Martin-Jones,A.BlackledgeandA.Creese(eds),TheRoutledgeHandbookofMultilingualism,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.439–53.McLean,P.(2016),CultureinNetworks,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.McNeely,C.L.(1995),ConstructingtheNation-State:InternationalOrganizationandPrescriptiveAction,Westport,CT:GreenwoodPublishingGroup.Meyer,J.W.(1996),‘Otherhood:Thepromulgationandtransmissionofideasinthemodernorganiza-tionalenvironment’,inB.C.G.Sevon(ed.),TranslatingOrganizationalChange,NewYork,NY:WalterdeGruyter,pp.241–2.Meyer,J.W.(2000),‘Globalizationsourcesandeffectsonnationalstatesandsocieties’,InternationalSociology,15(2),233–48.Meyer,J.W.(2009),‘Reflections:Institutionaltheoryandworldsociety’,inG.KrückenandG.S.Drori(eds),WorldSociety:TheWritingsofJohnW.Meyer,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.36–63.Meyer,J.W.(2010),‘Worldsociety,institutionaltheories,andtheactor’,AnnualReviewofSociology,36,1–20.Meyer,J.W.(2014),‘Empoweredactors,localsettings,andglobalrationalization’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork:Routledge,pp.413–24.Meyer,J.W.,Boli,J.andG.M.Thomas(1987),‘OntologyandrationalizationintheWesternculturalaccount’,inG.M.Thomas,J.W.Meyer,F.O.RamirezandJ.Boli(eds),InstitutionalStructure:ConstitutingState,Society,andtheIndividual,NewburyPark,CA:SagePublications.Meyer,J.W.,Boli,J.,Thomas,G.M.andF.O.Ramirez(1997),‘Worldsocietyandthenation-state’,AmericanJournalofSociology,103(1),144–81.Meyer,J.W.,Boli-Bennett,J.andC.Chase-Dunn(1975),‘Convergenceanddivergenceindevelop-ment’,AnnualReviewofSociology,1(1),223–46.Meyer,J.W.,Bromley,P.andF.O.Ramirez(2010),‘Humanrightsinsocialsciencetextbookscross-nationalanalyses,1970–2008’,SociologyofEducation,83(2),111–34.Meyer,J.W.,Frank,D.J.,Hironaka,A.,Schofer,E.andN.B.Tuma(1997),‘Thestructuringofaworldenvironmentalregime,1870–1990’,InternationalOrganization,51(4),623–51.Meyer,J.W.andM.Hannan(1979),NationalDevelopmentandtheWorldSystem,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
360352HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMeyer,J.W.,Ramirez,F.O.andY.N.Soysal(1992),‘Worldexpansionofmasseducation,1870-1980’,SociologyofEducation,65(2),128–49.Meyer,R.E.(2014),“Re-localization”asmicro-mobilizationofconsentandlegitimacy’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.79–89.Mizrahi-Shtelman,R.(2021),‘Lookingfortheirvoice:TheformationofidentityinthenewIsraeliprincipals’organisation’,Globalisation,SocietiesandEducation,19(1),81–97.Mizrahi-Shtelman,R.andG.S.Drori(2016),‘“Takingrootandgrowingwings”:OntheconceptofglocalityfromtheperspectivesofschoolprincipalsinIsrael’,EuropeanJournalofCulturalandPoliticalSociology,3,306–40.Mizrahi-Shtelman,R.andG.S.Drori(2020),‘World-rankand/orlocallyrelevant?Organizationaliden-tityinthemissionstatementsofhighereducationorganizationsinIsrael,2008–2018’,Minerva,1–25.Munir,K.A.(2019),‘Challenginginstitutionaltheory’scriticalcredentials’,OrganizationTheory,1(1),1–10.Pope,S.andJ.W.Meyer(2016),‘Localvariationinworldsociety:Sixcharacteristicsofglobaldiffu-sion’,EuropeanJournalofCulturalandPoliticalSociology,3(2-3),280–305.Ramirez,F.O.,Soysal,Y.andS.Shanahan(1997),‘Thechanginglogicofpoliticalcitizenship:Cross-nationalacquisitionofwomen’ssuffragerights,1890to1990’,AmericanSociologicalReview,62(5),735–45.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time-spaceandhomogeneity-heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,pp.25–44.Robertson,R.(2014),‘Glocalization:Arelativelyautobiographicalintervention’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.25–36.Robertson,R.andF.Lechner(1985),‘Modernization,globalizationandtheproblemofcultureinworld-systemstheory’,Theory,Culture&Society,2(3),103–17.Roudometof,V.(2015),‘Theorizingglocalizationthreeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Roudometof,V.(2019),‘Recoveringthelocal:Fromglocalizationtolocalization’,CurrentSociology,67(6),801–17.Sahlberg,P.(2014),FinnishLessons2.0:WhatCantheWorldLearnfromEducationalChangeinFinland?,NewYork,NY:ColumbiaTeachersCollegePress.Schofer,E.andW.Longhofer(2011),‘Thestructuralsourcesofassociation’,AmericanJournalofSociology,117(2),539–85.Schofer,E.andE.McEneaney(2003),‘Methodologicalstrategiesandtoolsforthestudyofglobaliza-tion’,inG.S.Drori,J.W.Meyer,F.O.RamirezandE.Schofer(eds),ScienceintheModernWorldPolity:InstitutionalizationandGlobalization,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress,pp.43–74.Scott,W.R.(2008),‘Approachingadulthood:thematuringofinstitutionaltheory’,TheoryandSociety,37(5),427–42.Shenhav,Y.A.andD.H.Kamens(1991),‘The“Costs”ofinstitutionalisomorphism:Scienceinnon-Westerncountries’,SocialStudiesofScience,21(3),527–45.Tsutsui,K.(2004),‘Globalcivilsocietyandethnicsocialmovementsinthecontemporaryworld’,SociologicalForum,19(1),63–87.Tsutsui,K.andA.Lim(2015),CorporateSocialResponsibilityinaGlobalizingWorld,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Tsutsui,K.andC.M.Wotipka(2004),‘Globalcivilsocietyandtheinternationalhumanrightsmove-ment:Citizenparticipationinhumanrightsinternationalnongovernmentalorganizations’,SocialForces,83(2),587–620.Walgenbach,P.,Drori,G.S.andM.A.Höllerer(2017),‘Betweenlocalmooringandglobalorienta-tion:Aneo-institutionaltheoryperspectiveonthecontemporarymultinationalcorporation’,inC.DörrenbächerandM.Geppert(eds),MultinationalCorporationsandOrganizationTheory:PostMillenniumPerspectives(Vol.49),Bingley,UK:EmeraldPublishing,pp.99–125.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
361Worldsocietytheoryandglocalization353Wallerstein,I.(1974),TheModernWorld-system:CapitalistAgricultureandtheOriginsoftheEuropeanWorld-economyintheSixteenthCentury,BerkeleyandLosAngeles,CAandLondon,UK:AcademicPress.Wallerstein,I.(2000),‘Globalizationortheageoftransition?Along-termviewofthetrajectoryoftheworld-system’,InternationalSociology,15(2),249–65.Wang,C.-T.L.andE.Schofer(2018),‘Comingoutofthepenumbras:Worldcultureandcross-nationalvariationindivorcerates’,SocialForces,97(2),675–704.Wotipka,C.M.andF.O.Ramirez(2008),‘Worldsocietyandhumanrights:Aneventhistoryanal-ysisoftheConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationagainstWomen’,inB.A.Simmons,F.DobbinandG.Garrett(eds),TheGlobalDiffusionofMarketsandDemocracy,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.303–43.RavitMizrahi-ShtelmanandGiliS.Drori-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:32:58AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
36222.ThechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworldGiampietroGoboINTRODUCTIONMostresearchmethods(bothquantitativeandqualitative)usedinthesocialandpoliticalsciencescanberegardedasglobalmethods,thatis,methodsthatareapplied(withfewvari-ations)inalmostallresearchconductedintheworld.ThesemethodshavelongbeenincrisisandqualitativeandquantitativeresearchisnowquestionedbyboththepostcolonialturnandthoseepistemologieswhicharealternativetoWesternthinkingmodelsor,atleast,donotentirelyfitwiththem.Thechallengesdirectlyconcernthetacitculturalfoundationsoftradi-tionalresearchmethods(especiallythequantitativeones),whichstillembodyanethnocentric,andsometimescolonial,attitude.Hence,agrowingneedtofindpostcolonialmethodologiesandnon-ethnocentricmethods,andtotransformcurrentglobalresearchmethodsintomoreflexibletools,ischallengingcontemporaryresearchproceduresandpractices.Researcherswantingtopursuethisalternativecanchoosefromatleastthreemethodologicaldirections:indigenization,glocalizationandcreolization.MostresearchersfollowingapostcolonialapproachhavestronglyaffirmedtheneedtoemployIndigenousMethodologies.However,uponcarefulinspection,wediscoverthatthesemethodologies,ifalternativefromanepistemologicalpointofview,arenotfromapurelymethodologicaloneeither.Inotherwords,IndigenousMethodologieshavenotbeenfollowedbythemakingofindigenousmethodsandtechniques.Infact,theseresearcherscontinue,ulti-mately,toadopt(withsmallvariations)Westernorglobalorcolonialmethodsandtechniques.Whyisthishappening?If,asvariousscholars,suchasRobertson,RitzerandMeyrowitzstate,theglobalandlocalnolongerexist,thisexplainsontheonehandwhyglobalmethodsareincrisis,andontheother,whyindigenousmethodshavenotyetbeenborn(andprobablyneverwill).Inthissituation,tobetterunderstandtheculturestheyinvestigate,researchersarepresentedwithtwodifferentalternatives:glocalmethodsandcreolemethods.Thesetwomethodologicaldirectionswillbescrutinizedinregardtotheiradvantagesand(also)intrinsiclimitations.QUESTIONINGCURRENTRESEARCHMETHODSContemporaryresearchisquestionedbyboththepostcolonialturn(Bauchspies,2007;Grosfoguel,2007)aswellasWesternalternativeepistemologies,becausethe(tacit)culturalgroundofconventionalresearchmethodsstillembodiesanethnocentric,andsometimescolonial,vision.Infact,mostcurrentresearchmethodsinsocialandpoliticalsciencesorigi-natedinEurope(seeGobo,2011a),andlaterreceivedanAnglophonetransformation,whosefootprintbecamedominantduringthetwentiethcentury(seeAlasuutari,2004;Fielding,2014;354GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
363Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld355Hsiung,2012).Hence,contemporaryworldwidemethodologyisalmostentirelyconstitutedbyresearchmethods(suchassurveys,experiments,tests,focusgroups,in-depthinterviews,eth-nography,visualmethods,discourseandconversationanalysis)recraftedbyanAnglophonemiddle-classacademicculture.AftertheSecondWorldWar,thisparticular(Anglophone)localorindigenous1methodologicalculturewasthenglobalized,becomingdominantinalmostallformsofinquiryinsocialandpoliticalsciencesaroundtheworld.Thisphenome-nonledtoasortof‘methodologicalgenocide’ofnon-Anglophoneresearchtraditions:manylocalresearchtraditions(forexamplethoseinNorway2andItaly3)andtheiroutcomes(nottranslatedintoEnglish)disappearedfromlocalmemoriesandmethodologicaltextbooksalike.Thoughalreadyglobal,conventionalresearchmethodsstillembodytheWestern(ingeneral)andAnglophone(inparticular)localknowledgefromwhichtheyoriginated,andtheysharethelimitsofglobalizationevidentinmanyotherfields,fromtheeconomytopolitics,frommarketingtocultureandsociallife.Infact,whenexportedandappliedinmarginalWesterncultures(towhichthepoorlyeducated,lowerclassesandculturalperipheralcommu-nitiesbelong),amongmigrants(seeFlick&Röhnsch,2014)andAfro-Americancommunities(seeMcDougalIII,2014),andobviouslyinnon-Westernresearchcontexts(Ryen,2000),theseresearchmethodsrunintoseveralculturaldifficulties(foranextensivereview,seeGobo,2011a,2018).Forthisreason,agrowingneedtofindpostcolonialmethodologiesandnon-ethnocentricmethods,andtotransformthecurrentresearchmethodswithmoreflexibletoolsischallengingcontemporaryresearchproceduresandpractices.Researcherswantingtopursuethisalternativecanchoosefromatleastthreemethodologicaldirections:indigenization,glocalizationorcreolization.Thesethreemethodologicaldirectionswillbescrutinizedinregardtotheiradvantagesandintrinsiclimitations.INDIGENOUSMETHODOLOGIES(IMS)ANDPARTICIPATORYACTIONRESEARCH(PAR)Overthepast20years,awarenessoftheneedtodecolonizemethodologyhasintensified.SincethepioneeringworkofDeloria(1969)andespeciallysincethewatershedpublicationofSmith(1999),theframeofsocialjusticemethodologyhasbeengrowingamongresearchersactivelyseekingtorecognizetheinjusticesofthepastandpresentinresearchpractices(Evansetal.,2009;Nicholls,2009).ParticipatoryActionResearchorPAR(Chevalier&Buckles,2013;Rahman,2008)andIndigenousMethodologiesorIMs(Foley,2003;Martin&Mirraboopa2003;Porsanger,2004;Rigney,2006)havebothbeenpresentedaswaystoovercomemethodologicalcolonialism,askindsofresearchbyandforindigenouspeoplesusingtechniquesandmethodsdrawnfromthetraditionsofthosepeoples.PARemphasizesparticipationandactioninresearchingcommunities.Itaimsalsotounderstandtheworldbytryingtochangeit,collaborativelyandfollowingreflection.PARemphasizescollectiveinquiryandexperimentationgroundedinexperienceandsocialhistory.WithinaPARprocess,communitiesofinquiryandactionevolveandaddressquestionsandissuesthataresignificantforthosewhoparticipateasco-researchers.PARcontrastswithmanyresearchmethods,whichemphasizedisinterestedresearchersandreproducibilityoffindings.PARpractitionersmakeaconcertedefforttointegratethreebasicaspectsoftheirGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
364356Handbookofcultureandglocalizationwork:participation(lifeinsocietyanddemocracy),action(engagementwithexperienceandhistory)andresearch(soundnessinthoughtandthegrowthofknowledge).AccordingtoMoreton-RobinsonandWalter(2009,p.2),‘IndigenousmethodologiesareavigorousandactivefieldofknowledgeproductioninvolvingIndigenouspeoplesfromaroundtheworld,includingAustralia,applyingtheirownlenses,perspectivesandunderstand-ingstosocialresearchandmethodologies’.Indigenousmethodologyis:aresearchbyandforindigenouspeoples,usingtechniquesandmethodsdrawnfromthetraditionsofthosepeoples.Thissetofapproachessimplyrejectsresearchonindigenouscommunitiesthatuseexclusivelypositivistic,reductionist,andobjectivistresearchrationalesasirrelevantatbest,colonial-istmostofthetime.(Evansetal.,2009,p.894)IMs‘tendtoapproachculturalprotocols,valuesandbehavioursasanintegralpartofmethod-ology’(Smith,1999,p.15).Researchersareexpectedtodevelopprevailingrelationshipswithparticipantsonthetermsofthelocalcommunity(Bishop,2005,pp.117,129).IMandPARovertlyaimtoprovidealternativestodominantpositivisticparadigms,andbothareintendedtogivevoiceandprominencetocommunitiespreviouslymarginalizedinresearchpractices(Bergetal.,2007).Muchofthefocusofthisapproachisaboutrelationalityandconduct,distinguishingbetweenthedevelopmentofrapportwithparticipantsandthedevelopmentoftrust(Bishop,2005,pp.111–12).‘Relationalityinthiscontextisontology,epistemologyandaxiology’(Nicholls,2009,p.120).Heshusiussuggests‘describingourselvesandourworkinethical(andthereforeparticipatory)terms’(1994,p.20),andWilsonstates,‘ratherthanaskingaboutvalidityorreliability,youareaskinghowamIfulfillingmyroleinthisrelationship?’(2008,p.177).KaupapaMāoriThemostsystematicmodelofIndigenousMethodologiesisKaupapaMāoriresearch,anaboriginalresearchpatterntheorizedbyLindaTuhiwaiSmith,LeoniePihama,TainaPohatu,RussellBishop,KuniJenkins,CherylSmithandothers(seeRangahau,n.d.-a).Kaupapameansdifferentthingssimultaneously:philosophy,principle,basis,theme,topic,project,planandproposal.ThereareeightmainmethodologicalprinciplesofKaupapaMāori:self-determina-tion(TinoRangatiratanga),culturalaspiration(TaongaTukuIho),culturallypreferredpedagogy(AkoMāori),socio-economicmediation(Kiapikiakeingāraruraruotekainga),extendedfamilystructure(Whānau),collectivephilosophy(Kaupapa),thetreatyofWaitangi(TeTiritioWaitangi)andgrowingrespectfulrelationships(Ata).Theseprinciplesareinspiredbysixmainethicalvalues:Aroha(respect),KānohiKitea(meetingwithpeoplefacetoface),ManaakiTangata(collaborationandreciprocity),Mana(caring),Māhaki(sharingknowledge)andTīkanga(guidelinesonwhatis‘right’).Thesemethodologicalprinciplesandethicalvaluesareveryinterestingandinformative.Smith(2005)presentsKaupapaMāoriasopposedtoindigenousresearch,becausetheformeristransformativeandservesasamodelofsocialchangeandtransformationthatprivilegesMāoriknowledge,aspirations,empowermentandemancipation.Bycontrast,Smith(2005)statesthatindigenousresearchismerelyacognitiveandnaturalisticenterprise.However,manyoftheKaupapaMāoriconceptsarealsotobefoundinfeminist,post-modernistandtransformative(actionresearch)methodologicalapproachesdevelopedintheGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
365Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld3571980sand1990sby(mainly)Anglophonescholars.4WhatisitinKaupapaMāorithatcannotbefoundinthoseWesternqualitativeapproaches?ThedisappointmentincreaseswhenwepassfromtheMāorimethodologytoitsmethods,becauseKaupapaMāori‘usesanumberofquantitativeandqualitativeresearchmethodsthatarealsocommonlyusedwithinothermeth-odologies’(Rangahau,n.d.-b).Inits‘exemplar’research(Rangahau,n.d.-c)onthe‘HistoricalandContemporaryUnderstandingsandExpressionsofMāoriSexuality’,theprojectincludedfocusgroupsand20interviews.Inotherwords,specificMāoriresearchmethodsdonotexist:itisnotreallyalternativemethodology,ratheralocallyadapted,interpretativeframeworksurroundingexisting(conventional)researchmethods,amereadaptationofWestern/colonialresearchmethodstotheMāoriculturalandsocialcontext,totheprinciplesofKaupapaMāoriresearch,andtotheMāoriparticipants’epistemology.TheMmogo-Method™Differentisthecaseof‘Mmogo’,aSetswanaworddenotinginterpersonalrelatedness,co-ownership,togetherness,co-constructionand/orinterpersonalthreads(Roos,2008).TheMmogo-Method™isaprojectivevisualdata-gatheringmethod.Clay,beads,strawsandgrasssticksaremanipulatedintothree-dimensionalshapesbyparticipantsinordertoproduceassociationsrelatedtotheirpersonalandcollectiveexperiences.Throughanopen-endedresearchquestion,theresearcherinvitestheparticipantstovisuallyexpresstheirexperienceofaspecificsubject.Thisisfollowedbyacollectivediscussionoftheirvisualpresentations.TheMmogo-Method™wasformalizedandpatentedbyVeraRoos,aresearcherwhodevel-opedit(insouthernAfricancontexts)fromtheobservationthatwhenconductingresearchincross-culturalenvironments,traditionaldatacollectionmethodssuchasquestionnairesarelimitedinthedesireddatathattheyproduce.Similarly,interviewsandfocusgroupsdeliverlittletonorichdatainresearchthatstrivestodiscerntheexperiences,feelingsandperceptionsofparticipantsofwhichtheythemselvesmaynotbeawareorwhichmaybehardtoverbalize.TheMmogo-Method™isararecaseofanindigenousmethod.AnotherexceptionisDingxingYanjiu(investigativeresearch),anapproachdistinctfromqualitativeandquantita-tiveapproaches,withChinesesocialistcharacteristics,andpractisedbyformerChairmanMaoZedongandothersbeforeandafterthecountry’s‘liberation’in1949(seeHsiung,2015).Itisquitedifferentfromtypicalqualitativeresearchbecauseithasaverystrongpoliticalagendawithpredeterminedassumptions,whilequalitativeresearchismoreofanaturalisticinquiry,andalsobecausetraditionalqualitativeresearchwasintroducedintoChinaonlyinthe1990s.WHYDOINDIGENOUSMETHODOLOGIES(IMS)LACKINDIGENOUSMETHODS?Apartfromtheseexceptions,mostoftheliteratureonIMsgivesagreatdealofspacetoindigenousmethods’epistemologicalassumptions(foracollectionofthese,seeDenzinetal.,2008),butnotverymuchtotechnicalproposals,whichshouldbemarkedlydifferentfromthedominantcolonialmethods.Inotherwords,therearemanywaysofunderstandingtheworld–epistemologiesorIndigenousWaysofKnowing(IWOK)–andevenwaysofbeingintheworld(ontologies),butthatitishard(ifnotimpossible)tofindalternative‘scientific’waystostudythesedifferences.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
366358HandbookofcultureandglocalizationInfact,anincreasingnumberofWesternqualitativeresearchers(workingwithorwithinNGOsengagedinactionresearchandinterventionprojects),andrelatedgrowingliteratureonhowtocreateconnectionsandsocialcapitalinordertosucceedindatacollection(forVietnam,forexample,seeBoggianoetal.,2015)ortobeacceptedasanindigenousinsiderbytheparticipants(forThailandandAustralia,forexample,seeSuwankhong&Liamputtong,2015),proposedoubtlesslyusefulsuggestions,tipsandrecommendationsforpostcolonialfieldwork.However,intheend,theseIMsrarelyconveytechnicalinnovations(Travers,2009)andstillheavilyrelyoncolonialandethnocentricmethodsintheirresearch.Whyisthisso?Therecouldbetwomainrelatedreasons:onesociologicalandtheother,methodological.TheDisappearanceofGlobalandLocalThefirst(sociological)reasondealswiththehypothesisthatIMslikelyconflictwithanddefendtwothingsthatnolongerexist:globalizationandthelocal.Globalizationisconsideredaforcethatpressesfromoutside(alsothroughresearchmethods)bycolonizinglocalrealities.Whilethismayhavebeenlikelyinthelastcentury,thingsseemtohavechangednow.IndeedRobertson(2013)statedthat,today,onlytheglocalexists(whichisnolongereitherglobalorlocal).Theglocalisthefinaloutcomeofthehistoricallylongstrugglebetweentheglobalandthelocalinwhichbothlost.AccordingtoRobertson,contrarytothegeneralview,glo-balizationdoesnotultimatelyproduceuniformity(evenifthiswasitsoriginalcolonialaim),butdifferences;afragmentationoftheworldintoamultitudeofglocalrealities,althoughtheyhavethemouldofglobal.LiketheHindudeities,theyhaveessenceandmultiplerealities.Today,glocalizationis(theresultofthefailureof)globalization,whichhaslostitshegemonicproject.Withadifferentemphasis,glocalizationisaglobalizationrefractedthroughthelocal.Intermsofthemetaphorofrefraction,thelocalisnotannihilatedorabsorbedordestroyedbyglobalizationbut,rather,operatessymbioti-callywithglobalizationandshapesthetelosorendstate…Theresultisheterogeneity(e.g.popmusicororganizationaltechniqueorreligion,andsoon).Glocalityisdefinedasexperiencingthegloballocallyorthroughlocallenses(whichcanincludelocalpowerrelations,geopoliticalandgeographicalfactors,culturaldistinctiveness,andsoon).(Roudometof,2015a,p.11)AccordingtoMeyrowitz,‘wenowlivein“glocalities”.Eachglocalityisuniqueinmanyways,andyeteachisalsounequallyinfluencedbyglobaltrendsandglobalconsciousness’(2005,quotedbyRoudometof,2015a,p.11).Ritzer(2003)alsoagreesthatpureglobalandpurelocalnolongerexist.Perhaps(conven-tional)purelocalusedtoexistbut,withtheadventofcapitalism,itdisappearedafterhavinglostthestrugglewithglobalization.Infact,isolatedrealities(forexample,remoteorculturallypristinetribes)arerare.Whenthelocaldisappears,whatisleftisglocal,becauselocalandglobalaremutuallyexclusive.Hence,perhapsimpossibletodayisthesurvivalofsolelyindigenousthought,ofexclusivelylocalpractices.Thelocalseemstodisappearinfavourofglocalizationandunansweredques-tionsre-emerge:Whoaretheindigenous?Whoisnotindigenous?Whocanspeakonbehalfofindigenouspeoplesandcommunities?Dopureindigenesstillexist?Isindigenousnessafixedidentityoranintersectionalone?Whatisauthentic,consideringthattheanthropolog-icalreflectiononthepoliticsofauthenticityiswide?Whatismoreimportant,thequalityofresearchoritsethnicity/indigeneity(seeAtkinson&Ryen,2016)?GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
367Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld359InherdiscussionofresearchethicsandtheConfucianworldview,theChineseeducationistLee(2014)enquireswhetheranEast–Westpolarizationisreallynecessary.Shesuggestsathirdway.Inmanagementstudies,IndianMathur(2014),insteadofrejectingWesternresearch,proposesavarietyofinquiryapproaches,andAtal(2014),anIndiansociologist,stressestheneedtomakeexogenouselementssuitlocalrequirements,whichstronglyrecallstheconceptof‘glocalization’.ItseemsimportanttoavoidiconoclasticattitudestoWesternresearchmethods,seenasthedevilcomparedwiththegoodnessoftheindigenousones.DesperatelySeekingIndigenousMethodsThesecond(methodological)reasoncanbebrokenupintwoaspects.First,scholarswhoadvocateandpromoteindigenousmethodsconductquitelimiteddiscussiononspecificones,becausetheybelievethatmanyofthetraditionalqualitativemethodscouldworkwellwithresearchinvolvingindigenouspeople(Schneider&Kayseas,2018).Inotherwords,theendeavourtoindigenizequalitativeresearchmethodsendsupwithslightadaptationsorminorrevisionsofexistingWesternqualitativemethods.Thisminimalistperspective(whichresemblesmorewhatIconsidertobeglocalization–seebelow–ratherthanindigenization)isproposed,forexample,byKovachwhenshestatesthat‘indigenousmethodologiesandqualitativeresearchatbestformaninsider/outsiderrelationship’(2009,p.31).Inotherwords,indigenousresearchmethodsexistboth‘inside’and‘outside’traditionalqualitativeresearchmethodologies.FollowingKovach,whatpassasindigenousmethodsareonlytradi-tionalqualitativemethodsbasedonstory-gatheringmethods(suchasthetalkingcircleand/orresearchsharingcircle,whichgiveseveryoneachancetospeakuninterrupted,thecasemethod,narrativeresearchandcertainethnographicinterviewmethods).Also,accordingtoChilisa(2012,pp.31,230),evenquestionnairesandsurveyscanbeadaptedtoanindigenousmethodology,rephrasingquestionsandterminologiesinordertomatchtheparticipants’knowledgesystems,languagesandexperiences.However,thiswaspreciselytheinteractionalandinterviewer-centredsurveyalreadyproposedbytheAmericansurveyistRensisLikertinthe1930s(seeGobo,2011b,2016;Gobo&Mauceri,2014).Thisisratherparadoxical,becauseacultureisusuallyrecognizedasbeinglocalorindig-enouswhenitproducessomethingspecificandunique:aspecialcuisine(seeMiller,2008),aparticularmusic,anunusualceremonyordistinctformsofknowledge(epistemologies).Consequently,itshouldalsoproducespecificknowledgepracticesandresearchmethods,ashappenedinmedicinewhenspecificepistemologiesandworldviewsproducedapproachesandmethodswhichembodiedspecificlocalculturalfeatures:homeopathy(Germany),natur-opathy(ScotlandandGermany),chiropractic(Canada),osteopathy(US),traditionalChinese(China),anthroposophy(German),Ayurveda(India),andTibetan(Tibet).Asecondexplanationofwhynon-WesternepistemologiesareratherfruitlessinregardtomethodologicalinnovationhasbeenputforwardbyDeniseGastaldoattheUniversityofToronto,referringtoLatinAmerica:It’smyimpressionthatinplaceswherethereissomuchtobedone,peopledon’tspendmuchtimethinkingaboutmethods,whichareseenas‘justatool’.Also,IbelieveFrenchscholarshiphasbeenveryinfluentialinBrazil–ideasmatter;methodsareforNorthAmericans…thereare‘indigenous’methods,butpeopledon’trealizetheyarelocal.IwouldsaythewholetraditionofPARfollowingFreire’sculturalcircles(andFalsBorda’swork),TheateroftheOppressed,5etc.areseenasamixofinterventionandresearch,whichmanytimesarenotclearlyunderstoodhistorically(e.g.manythinkGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
368360HandbookofcultureandglocalizationofPARasaNorthAmericaninvention).Colonizationisverystrong.AlotofmethodologiesareconsideredrigorousbecausetheyareAnglo-American.(Personalcommunication,23January2016)GLOCALIZATIONASSUBTLECOLONIALISMGlocalresearchmethodscanbeseenasavaluableremedytoovercometraditionalglobalmethods.Ritzer(1993,2003)balancesRolandRobertson’soptimisticvisionaboutglocaliza-tionbyhighlightingsomeofthemorenegativeaspects.UnlikeRobertson,Ritzermaintainsadualistperspective(Roudometof,2015a,p.6).Hence,globalizationisageneralprocesswithtwoideal-typicaloutcomes:grobalitionandglocalization.Theformer(centredongrowth)isaformofhardimperialism(Americanization)pursuedbynations,corporationsandorganiza-tionswhenthesameproductisdelivered,inthesameway,aroundtheworld.Thelatterisasoftandsubtleformofcolonialism,atop-downadaptationtothelocal,stillmaintaininganunbalancedrelationwiththelatter,whichremainssubordinate.Inotherwords,theglocalsupersedesthelocal.Glocalizationprincipleshavebeenimplementedbysomeinternationalmanagerialstyles,worldwideorganizations,religiousenterprises(forexample,SokaGakkai,aJapaneseBuddhistreligiousmovement),aswellasincross-culturalbusinessandmarketing;glocalizationcanbeseeninthecommercialstrategiesofcompaniessuchasCoca-Cola,Mattel(withmulticulturalBarbiedolls–seeVarney,1998,pp.162–4),Procter&Gamble,Starbucks,NikeandMcDonald’s.ThislastoneisprobablythemostcitedcasebecauseMcDonald’shasadapteditsoriginalmenutomeetcustomerwantsindifferentcoun-tries(seeRam,2004,pp.13–15;Vignali,2001,pp.99,104–6).Withinthisframework,thereareinterestingattemptsinsocialsciencemethodologythatIwouldclassifyasglocalresearchmethods(seeSalazar,2010).SamplingandRecruitmentinConfucianContexts:TheKoreanCaseThenatureofConfuciansocietiespresentspotentialconceptualandepistemologicalgapsbetweenWesternmethodsandtheirimplementationinnon-Westerncontexts.Forexample,traditionalKoreanvalues,whichstillhaveanimportantroleinsocialandmanagementsystems,areexpressedintheformoffivebasicprinciples:(1)respectforelders,(2)respectforhonour,(3)collectivism,(4)familyand(5)thedominanceofthreekindsofpersonalconnec-tion:bloodnetworks,regionalnetworksandschoolnetworks(Jung,2007).Accordingtotheseprinciples,wecandiscoverhowrandomsamplingisamethodculturallydrivenbytheWest:indeed,whilstpurposivesamplingbypersonalnetworkcanbecriticizedfor‘cherrypicking’,allow-ingtheresearchertohandpickrespondentsforease,itperhapsfittedsomewhatmorenaturallywithConfucianmoresandexpectationsratherthanattemptingtorecruitunknownindividualswholieoutsidenetworks.(Park&Lunt,2015)Infact,inherresearch,SungheeParkhaddifficultiesinrecruitingseniorcivilservants(forhierarchicalreasons)and,generally,personsoutsideherdirectpersonalnetworkalike,becauseitisdifficulttopenetrateConfucian-orderedsocieties.Unliketheelite,civilservantswhobegancareersasmid-levelmanagerswereeasiertorecruit,becausetheresearcherbelongedtothisgroup.Ofcourse,theseculturalandsocialconstraintscanundermine(asnotedabove)GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
369Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld361therepresentativenessofthesample,andresearchersshoulddotheirbesttomeetquotas(seePark&Lunt,2015).TheGroupInterviewinThaiContextsWesawabovewhyfocusgroupsareunsuitedtoinquiryintoThairesearchcontexts.AsChareeratIntarachamnongputsit:[t]hewayoutforthiswillbethe‘groupinterview’,inwhichtheresearcherasksthequestionsseparatelyandindividuallytotheparticipants…[The]DelphimethodisanothertechniquewhichmaysuitThai;alsoEDFR(EthnographicDelphiFuturesResearch),whichwasdevelopedbyThaiacademicstocreate‘Criteria’inordertoavoidcollectiveface-to-facesituation[s]…ThediscourseinterviewisaverysuitabletechniqueforThaisocietyorEasternculturesinmyopinion.Becausethereisnoconfrontationbetweenkeyinformants;Easternpeoplearenotcomfortableinfacingoppo-siteopinionsandwetrytoavoidconflict.Basically,ThaiandAsianpeoplehavealotofcompassion…forme,thediscourseinterviewisthebesttechniqueintheworldtocollectdata.Itsuitsourculturetotalkonetoone:noconfrontation,noconflicts,andnoprivateinformationtotearout?(Personalcommunication,13January2016)LocallyCraftedQuestionnaireScalesAlsoinquantitativemethods,thereareinterestingglocalefforts.Forexample,DebraRenaMiller,whileinterviewingsomenativeresearchersinSouthAfrica,discoveredthat‘Likertscalesarenotanaturalwayofthinkingforindigenouspeople…Whenaskingparticipantswhetherthey“agree[or]stronglyagree,asintheoldLikertscale”,participants’responsesdonothelptheresearcherunderstandwhytheparticipantsprovideaparticularanswer’(Miller,2015,p.121).Insearchoflocalvariationsfortheirexperimentsondemocraticpersuasion,GibsonandGouws(2003)made‘littlecards’torepresentscales(responseoptions).Theygavethecardstoparticipantstomaketheresponsecategorieslessabstractbecausemanypeoplearenotnumerate.AsimilarstrategyhasbeenpursuedbyWeaverandKaiser(2015)whendevelopinglocallyderivedmentalhealthscalesinNorthIndiaandHaiti.Moreover,inordertosolveasimilarproblem,pictorialresponsescalesandnon-verbalresponsecardshavebeenusedinCongo(Bolton&Tang,2002)andEthiopia(Lindstrometal.,2010).Theseadaptationscouldbeconsideredfineinaglocalistperspective.Thequestionisthis:couldwegofurtherandovercomethesubtlecolonialismembodiedinglocalization?‘INTER-LOCALIZEDMETHODOLOGY’ANDCREOLIZATIONASALTERNATIVESTheconceptof‘glocalization’seemstoorelatedtothemarketeconomyandtheory-laden,anditstillcarriesasubtlecolonialism.However,aswejustsaw,theindigenizationofmeth-odologyisalsoanoutdatedproject:almostnothingisindigenousanymore.Whileontheonehand,followingHaraway(1988),thinkingisalwayslocal,embodiedinaspecificcontextandconnectedtoaspecificplace–afterall,thereisnosuchthingasa‘god-trick’and‘theviewfromnowhere[hasbecome]aviewfromsomewhere’–ontheother,embracingahistoricalperspective,nothingisreallylocalorindigenous.ProductswetendtodefineaslocalhaveGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
370362Handbookofcultureandglocalizationusuallycomefromanotherplace.Mostthingshavebeenimportedinaparticularhistoricalmoment.Ifwelookattheworldfroma,say,Europeanstandpoint,potatoescamefromPeru,tomatoesfromCentralAmerica,vines(probably)fromtheCaucasus,applesfromCentralAsia,andsilkandpeachesfromChina.Allthethingsthatwetodayconsiderlocalhave,inreality,comefromanotherplaceandbeenmixedup.ThiscouldexplainwhythemainfeaturesofHawaiianepistemologyarealsotraceabletotheBuddhistorTaoistones.Epistemologiesaremoretranslocalthanweadmit.Forexample,theideathatthehumanbeingistripartiteinbody,soulandspiritcanbefoundamongtheAncientGreeks,theearlyChristiansuntilalmostad1000,andcontemporaryInuits,aswellaspeoplesinhabitingtheArcticregionsofGreenland,CanadaandAlaska.Thesameappliestoshamanism.Althoughtheword‘shaman’probablyoriginatesfromtheTungusicEvenkilanguageofNorthAsia,shamanicmedicineiswidespreadinMongolia,China(Hmongpeople),Indonesia,NorthandSouthKorea,Japan,SiberiaandNorthAsia,India,Nepal,TibetandCentralAsia,Taiwan,Vietnam,Europe(fromFinlandtoItaly),Circumpolar(EskimoInuitandYupikcultures),NorthAmerica(NativeAmericans),Mesoamerica(MayaofGuatemala,BelizeandsouthernMexico),SouthAmerica(KunaofPanamaandColombia;TapirapéandShuarpeopleofEcuadorandPeru;severaltribeslivingintheAmazonrainforestofBrazil;MapucheofChile,AymarapeopleofAndesandAltiplanoregionsofSouthAmericainBolivia,PeruandChile;andFuegianpeoplesofTierradelFuego),PapuaNewGuinea,Australia(variousAboriginalgroups),Africa(DogonpeopleofMali;Zulu,NguniofSouthernAfrica;NubaofSudan;andBantuofZimbabwe,Zambia,SouthAfricaandBotswana).Inlightofthesedescriptions,‘indigenous’ismoreapoliticalcategorythanatheoreticalone.Ifglobalpersedoesnotexist,becauseeverythingglobalhassomethinglocalinsideit,thenperhapsalsoglocalizationisnonsense:thereisneveranencounterbetweenglobalandlocal.Thereisalwaysanencounterbetweentwolocals,twoindigenouscultures(forexample,theNorthAmericanandtheThai)thatmayunderstandandaccepteachother,inanintercul-turaldialogue,orelsetheformerprevailsoverandcolonizestheother.An‘inter-localizedmethodology’(Gobo,2011a,p.433),basedonanencounterbetweentwo(local)cultures,couldproduceanewoutcome,basedon‘dialogicality’andsymmetricity,withoutanyhegem-onicclaims.Thisencountercanbecalled‘creolization’,an‘unpredictablenewcreation’,astheorizedbyEdouardGlissant(1928–2011),aMartinican(FrenchWestIndies)writer,poetandlit-erarycritic,oneofthemostinfluentialfiguresinCaribbeanthought.InGlissant’s(1998)view,creolizationisanewconstitution,notasimplemodificationorsignificantvariationoftheexistingone;butareallydifferent,substantialmixoforiginalparts.Thereexistcreoleculturesandcreolelanguages(throughthepidgin–seeHymes,1971andSalikoko,2001)suchasChavacanointhePhilippines,KrioinSierraLeone,TokPisininPapuaNewGuinea,PapiamentointheNetherlandsAntilles,BelgranodeutschintheneighbourhoodsofBelgranoinBuenosAires,FanakaloinSouthAfrica),Chinglishandmorethan50others.‘Creole’,alongsideotherpopulartermssuchas‘hybrid’,‘syncretism’,‘transcultural’,and‘mestizae’(foranoverview,seeBurke,2009,pp.34–65andforanexample,seeRitzer,2011;bothquotedbyRoudometof,2015b,p.2),recallsthewell-knownideaoffusionorculturalhybridity.AsRoudometofwrites:[t]hecontributionofLatinAmericanscholarshiptotherevitalizationoftheseideasisconsiderable.Itisfromwithinthatregionthatthetermstransculturalism,mestizaeandcreoleemergedandeventuallyGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
371Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld363transferredintothediscoursesofNorthAmericansandEuropeans.Theideathatinterculturalmixedpeoples(métissage)offerthekeyinlegitimizingLatinAmericanidentityisanotionoriginallyputforthin1891byJoséMartiinanarticleentitled‘NuestraAmerica’.Métissagewasviewedasadis-tinctivetraitofaculturefoundeduponamixtureofthenativepopulationwithdifferentimmigrantgroups.Inthe1940sFernandoOrtizdevelopedthisnotionfurtherinordertoarticulatetheconceptoftransculturalism.Calcini(1995)hasfurtheredOrtiz’sideasandexpandedthemintotheideaofculturalhybridity.Eventually,theconceptoftransculturalismgainedafootholdnotonlyinthefieldsofliterarystudiesbutalsointhesocialsciences(forexamples,seeAntoretal.(2010);Stockhammer(2012)).(Roudometof,2015b,p.3)Therearemanycaseswheretheincorporationof(individualandcultural)othernessbecomesanewculturalfeature(see,forsomeofseveralexamples,Boccara,2002ontheethnogenesisoftheMapuche,orJolly,1992onthepoliticsofinauthenticity).Creolecarriestheideaofequalstatusbetweencultures,equilibrium,blend,balance.Exemplarsofcreolization(outsidemethodology)areworldandethnicmusic,blues,jazzand…theFulladoll.TheFullaDollBy2004,BarbiedollshadallbutdisappearedfromtheshelvesoftoyshopsintheMiddleEast.Intheirplace,therewasFulla,adark-eyeddollwith,ashercreatorputit,‘Arabvalues’(Martin,2005).6FullaroughlysharesBarbie’ssizeandproportions,butstepsoutofhershinypinkboxwearingablackabayaandmatchingheadscarf.SheisnamedafteratypeofjasminethatgrowsintheLevant,andalthoughshehasanextensiveandbeautifulwardrobe(soldsepa-rately,ofcourse),Fullaisusuallydisplayedwearinghermodest‘outdoorfashion’.Fulla’screator,NewBoyFZCO,basedinSyria(nowintheUnitedArabEmirates),intro-ducedherinNovember2003,andshequicklybecameabestsellerthroughouttheregion.ItisnearlyimpossibletowalkintoacornershopinEgyptorJordanorQatarwithoutencounteringFullabreakfastcerealorFullachewinggumorseeinglittlegirlspedallingdownthestreetontheirFullabicycles,allintrademarkFullapink.‘Thisisn’tjustaboutputtingthehijabonaBarbiedoll’,brandmanagerFawazAbidinsaidin2005,‘[y]ouhavetocreateacharacterthatparentsandchildrenwillwanttorelateto.OuradvertisingisfullofpositivemessagesaboutFulla’scharacter.She’shonest,loving,andcaring,andsherespectsherfatherandmother’(Martin,2005).AlthoughFullawillneverhaveaboyfrienddolllikeBarbie’sKen,Abidinsaid,aDoctorFullaandaTeacherFullawillbeintroducedsoon.‘Thesearetworespectedcareersforwomenthatwewouldliketoencouragesmallgirlstofollow…Ifthisdollhadcomeout10yearsago,Idon’tthinkitwouldhavebeenverypopular…Fullaispartofthisgreatculturalshift’(Martin,2005).7CREOLIZINGMETHODOLOGYAlthoughtheFulladollseemstohavenothingtodowithmethodology,itillustrateswhatacreoleresearchmethodcouldbe:themergeofvaryingknowledgeandtraditionsinanewproductortool.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
372364HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAmongdifferentmethodologicalsolutions(global,glocalorIndigenous)thereisspaceforacreolemethodologyinwhichresearchmethodsoriginatingindifferentpartsoftheworld–evenifweknowthatmostarefromEuropeandtheUS–canhybridize.Thereisagrowingsetofmethods,beyondmethodologiesandepistemologies,thatareneitherreallyindigenousnorsimplycolonial.Theseincludenewwaysofsampling,collaborativedrawing-basedinquiryinAustralia(Morganetal.,2009),andinterviewingtechniques(inArgentina)withcardsprintedwithkeyresearchconceptsrelatedtothebody(Sutton,2011).Someinterestingexamplesfollow.BuddhistSystemsMethodologyIntheiractionresearchdescribedabove,ShenandMidgleycreatedaBuddhistSystemsMethodology(BSM):‘unlikemanyWesternactionresearchapproaches,whichrequirepar-ticipantstostartbyidentifyingproblemsorproblematicsituations,theBSMusesBuddhistconceptsthatarecloselyassociatedwiththepracticeofharmoniousliving’(Shen&Midgley,2015,p.170).TheprincipalstrengthofBSMisthatitreinterpretsthephenomenonintermsthatareculturallyfamiliarto,anddeeplyvaluedby,peopleinTaiwaneseBuddhistorgani-zationsandintroducesaroutetoidentifyproblems,critiquethestatusquoandconsiderhowthingsoughttobedone,usingfamiliarBuddhistconceptsthatarecloselyassociatedwiththepracticeofharmoniousliving;thusavoidingtheuseoflessfamiliarWesternsystemicactionresearchconceptsthatcanbeinterpretedasthreateningorganizationalharmony(Shen&Midgley,2015,p.188).MethodsforInterpretingSilence(andNotSolelyVerbal)inInterviews:TheJapanCaseAsKawabataandGastaldowellsummarize:[t]hewaysindividualscommunicatevaryacrosscultures(Gudykunst&Ting-Toomey,1996;Gudykunstetal.,1996).Gudykunstetal.(1992)suggestthatindividualisticcultures,suchastheUSandCanada,usedirectandexplicitmessagestoconveymeaning,whilecollectivistculturessuchasJapanuseindirectandimplicitexpressions.PeopleinWesternculturesfocusonexplicitcommuni-cationwhileviewingsilenceasmerelybackground(Kim,2002).(Kawabata&Gastaldo,2015,p.6)Except(maybe)forpsychology,silencehasnotbeenfullyappreciatedinqualitativeresearch,whereitisoftenconsideredasaproblemandviewedasrepresentativeoffailureonthepartoftheinterviewers:[i]ntheWest,forexample,peoplethinkthatcommunicationisessentiallyaverbalactivityandtendtofeelsomewhatuncomfortablewhenothersaresilent(Newman,1982).Incontrast,inJapan,silenceisvaluedandconsideredacommunicationstrategy.Ratherthanindicatingalackofinformation,itisaculturallygroundedpartofcommunication(Nakai,2002).(Kawabata&Gastaldo,2015,p.1)Thesefeaturesdevelopedfromthecollectivistimperativebecause,inacollectivistsociety,peopleneedtodevelopcommunicationstrategiestopreservegroupcohesionandsolidarityratherthanprioritizingindividualinterests(Hofstede,1991).Forthesereasons,itisalsoarguedthatJapanesepeoplewould‘prefertobesilentthanutterwordssuchas“no”or“Idisagree”’GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
373Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld365(Nakane,1972,p.35).AsinTaiwanand,generally,inBuddhistcontexts,‘theavoidanceofsuchopenandboldnegativeexpressionsisrootedinthefearthatitmightdisrupttheharmonyofthegroup’(Nakane,1972,p.35).Evenfeelingsofdefianceorangercanbeexpressedthroughsilence(Lebra,1987).Itshouldalsoberecalledthat,inJapan,asimilaremphasisonharmonyandthecritiqueofindividualismareoftenideologicallychargedandcontributetoexpressionsofculturalnationalismsuchastheconceptofnihonjinron.ReflectingonherresearchexperienceinterviewingJapanesedaylabourers(oneofthemostexcludedgroups),MakieKawabatafoundthattheirsilencesreflectedsocialexpectationsinJapanesesociety,oneofwhichis‘thelesssaid,thebetter’.Accordingly,shefoundthat:[s]ilenceisnotnecessarilyasignofinterviewees’inabilitytoexpresstheirthoughtsbutcouldbeusedpurposefullytomaketheirstoriesauthentic…someparticipantswereevasivewhentheyresponded…usingexpressionslike‘severalthings’or‘complicatedreasons’tomanifestreluctancetospeakfrankly.Someparticipantsrespondedvehementlyandcreatedtenseandawkwardmoments,whichisawayforpeopletomasktheirtruefeelings.InJapan,expressingpersonalfeelingsinformalconver-sationisdiscouragedbecauseemotionsareasignofweaknessandmen,inparticular,aretaughttobestrong(Sugihara&Katsurada,1999)andnegativefeelingscreatedisharmony(Markus&Kitayama,1991)…daylaborersbecamesilentorassumedatenseanduncooperativetoneofvoicewhentheywereindisagreementordiscomfort,insteadofsaying,‘Idon’tagreewithyou’or‘Idon’tfeelcom-fortabletalkingaboutthisissue’.(Kawabata&Gastaldo,2015,p.5)KawabataandGastaldostatethat‘withoutconsideringparticipants’silenceininterviews,researchersmaynotonlyhaveproblemsunderstandingandinterpretingmeaningbutcouldalsocreateethicalproblemswhenconductinginterviewswithmarginalizedpopulations’(2015,p.6).Theauthorsnotethatqualitativeresearchassessmentcriteriashouldbeconsid-eredasamanifestationofAnglo-Americanacademicculture.Theyillustratewaysinwhichsilencecanbeusedindataanalysisandhowtotreatitinordertorevealtheunderlyingmean-ingsofsilenceinresearchconductedinnon-Westernsettings.CONCLUSIONMostoftheresearchmethods(bothquantitativeandqualitative)usedinthesocialandpoliticalsciencesareglobalmethods.However,thesemethodshavebeenquestionedbothfromameth-odologicalandfromanideologicalpointofview.Regardingtheformerpointofview,theseglobalmethods(whichoriginateinWesternepistemologies)donotworkadequatelywhenappliedinnon-Westerncultures(Gobo,2011a,2018;Ryen&Gobo,2011);asforthelatter,theseglobalmethods(surveysinparticular)presupposeethnocentricprinciplesandvaluesthathavebeenstronglycriticizedbythepost-colonialturn(Bauchspies,2007;Grosfoguel,2007).Amidcallsfor‘alternativediscourses’(Alatas,2011)inthepast20years,IMandPARhavebeenproposedasalternativestoWesternmethodologies.However,ifwelookatwhatisindigenousintheseIndigenousMethodologies,wewillfind(withsomeexceptions)verylittlebecausemostoftheirepistemologicalassumptions,principlesandvalues(forexample,respect,relevance,reciprocity,andresponsibility)arealreadypartoffeministandpostmod-ernistepistemologies.Inaddition,andcuriously,whenapplied,IMsandPARoftenendupusingWestern/global/colonial,(albeitqualitative),8researchmethodsandtechniques,suchasfocusgroups,interviews,ethnography,theDelphimethod,drawings,projectivetechniques,photo-taking.Inotherwords,IMs’epistemologicalassumptionsdonotfollowanyrelevantGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
374366Handbookofcultureandglocalizationnewtechnicalproposalsandnewindigenousmethods.Hence,changingepistemologywhilestickingtothesameresearchmethodsseemscontradictory.Maintainingthedistinctionbetween‘localpractices’andhowtostudythosepracticessci-entifically,wecanaskourselvesthereasonsforthegapbetweenthefertilityof‘decolonizingmethodology’theoryandthebarrennessinproducingreallyindigenoustechniques.Onemightanswerbecause‘science’,asweknowit,isaWesternconstructforwhichitishardtocomeupwithalternativemethodologiesthatareequally‘scientific’.Idonotthinkthisisanappropriateanswersince,forinstance,manyqualitativemethodshavegainedascientificlegitimacythatwasnotpreviouslyrecognized.Onthecontrary,Ithinkthatindigenoustechniquesare(inthecontemporaryage)amirage,because(accordingtoRobertson,Ritzer,Meyrowitzandothers)thepurelyindigenous/localnolongerexists.Inthissituation,tobetterinquirenon-Westerncultures,twodifferentmethodologicalalternativescouldbeenvisioned:glocalmethods(Salazar,2010)andcreolemethods.Ifglo-calizationstillcarriesasoftcolonialism,thecreolizationofresearchmethodscouldbeavalidoption,asithasbeeninmusic(blues,jazz),cultureand(creole)languages.Theencounterbetweentwo(local)methodologicalculturescanproduceaninterlocalizedmethodology,anewoutcome(fusion,hybrid,syncretic,transcultural,mestizo)basedondialogicalityandsymmetricity,withoutanyhegemonicmethodologicalclaims,liketheyinandyang,twointe-gratedpartsofthesamereality.NOTES1.Inliterature,‘indigenous’and‘local’areoftenusedinterchangeably.Itisaseriousconfusion,whosesolutionisbeyondthescopeofthispaper.2.EilertSundt(1817–1875)studiedtheologyandwasaparishpriest.Involvedinsocialstudies(prisonconditions,customsandtreatmentofGypsies,causesofdeath,theevilsofmarriedlifeinNorway,conditionsofprostitutes,suicide,fisheryandforestryworkers’livingandworkingconditions,buildingcustoms,shippingpractices,householdcleanlinessandadministrationofpovertylaws)asethnographer,demographerandlinguist,heuseddifferentsourcesofsocialdata,suchasquestion-naires,documentsandstatistics.Thismadehimapioneerofmixedmethods.HisOnMarriageinNorway(1855[1980])canberegardedasamanualofresearchmethodsinthesocialsciences.Intheperiod1850–1860,hedocumentedlocallifeintheNorwegiancountryside.Heobservedandtalkedtoordinarypeopleintheirownsetting,forexample,ingardens,livingroomsandfields;hemadearchitecturaldrawingsoflocalhousestostudyfoodpreservationandhygiene.Wecanalsoreadabouthisreflectionsonmovingfromatheologicalnormativedisapprovalofwhatheinitiallysawasunethicallocalwaysoflifetobecomingasociologistinterestedindocumentingandunderstandingthroughtheactors’ownviewslongbeforetheChicagoschools.3.InItaly,ethnographicmethodsweredevelopedbetweenthelate1940sandearly1950s.Inethnology,twoscholarsinparticular,ErnestodeMartino(1908–1965)andVittorioLanternari(1918–2010)–althoughmentionshouldalsobemadeofotheroutstandingresearchers,mostnotablyGiuseppePitrè(1841–1916)andhispupilGiuseppeCocchiara(1904–1965)–mademajormethodologicalcontributionstotheanalysisofSicilianpopulartraditions.Insociology,DaniloDolci(1924–1997)andRoccoScotellaro(1923–1953)investigatedtheconditionofpeasantsandlabourersintheSouth.Theydidsobyconsistentlycombiningpoliticalcommitmentandsocialresearch,whichwouldbecomeacornerstoneofinterventionresearchandactionresearch.Attheendofthe1950s,thebiographicalmethodwasalsoborninItaly,whosepioneerwasDaniloMontaldi(1929–1975).AmilitantwithaMarxistbackground,hetookcareoftheproletariatandunderclassofhisland,theLowerPoValley.ThemethodologicalnoveltylayinthefactthatMontaldiinvitedhisintervieweestospeakaboutthemselves,withouteverinterveninginthestory,withoutmediatingoninconsistencies,withouteliminatingredundanciesorreworkingtheirGiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
375Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld367language.Montaldididnotfilterwhencollectingthedata;inanalysingit,however,herefinedthematerialbyeditingthetestimonies,thustransformingoralhistoryintoanoccasionforindividualandcollectivereflection.Histwomainworks(1961,1970)dedicatedrespectivelytovagabondsandthieves,andtopoliticalmilitants,arepartofalargerinvestigationintothecultureofthesubalternstrataintheLowerPoValley.Thefarms,thetaverns,thelanguages,thestrikes,theprisonsandthethousandprofessionsconstitutethecommonbackgroundofthetwoinvestigations,conceivedbyMontaldiastoolsofknowledgeandtransformationofreality.4.Thesamecriticismcanbeaddressedtootherscholars’proposals.Forexample,KirknessandBarnhardt’s(1991)relationalaxiology,embodiedinthe‘4Rsframework’(respect,relevance,reciprocityandresponsibility),forconductingresearchwithaboriginalcommunities,morerecentlyhighlightedalsobyWilson(2008)andChilisa(2012).5.TheTheatreoftheOppressedwasinventedintheearly1960sbytheBraziliantheatrepractitionerAugustoBoal.HewasinfluencedbytheworkoftheeducatorandtheoristPauloFreire.Originally,itwasamethodtomakepeoplemoreawareaboutsocialconflicts.InitsEuropeaninterpretation,theTheatreoftheOppressedwasusedtoworkonintra-personalconflicts,exploringtheinnerperson(loneliness,helplessness,confusion,unease)andone’sownhiddenoppression.Boal’stechniquesusetheatreasameanstopromotepersonal,socialandpoliticalchange.6.ForavisualoftheFulladoll,seehttp://riadzany.blogspot.com/2005/11/fulla-barbie.htmlorhttps://alchetron.com/Fulla-(doll)(bothpagesaccessed4May2021).7.Foranupdateonthisphenomenon,seeBadoandSachsNorris(2015).Foraninterestingcaseoftheglocalizationofthehijab,seeHassim(2017).8.Qualitativemethods(forexample,focusgroupsanddiscursiveinterviewsandsoontendtoembodyWesternandcolonialculturalassumptions(seeGobo,2018).REFERENCESAlasuutari,P.(2004),‘Theglobalizationofqualitativeresearch’,inC.Seale,G.Gobo,J.F.GubriumandD.Silverman(eds),QualitativeResearchPractice,London,UK:Sage,pp.595–608.Alatas,S.F.(2011),‘Thedefinitionandtypesofalternativediscourse’inG.Wang(ed.),De-WesternizingCommunicationResearch:AlteringQuestionsandChangingFrameworks,London,UK:Routledge,pp.238–53.Atal,Y.(2014),‘Thecallforindigenisation’,inP.M.MukherjiandC.Sengupta(eds),IndigeneityandUniversalityinSocialScience.ASouth-AsianResponse,NewDelhi,India:Sage,pp.99–113.Atkinson,P.andA.Ryen(2016),‘Indigenousresearchandromanticnationalism’,Societies,6(34),1–13.Bado,N.andR.SachsNorris(2015),‘Gamesanddolls’,inJ.C.LydenandE.M.Mazur(eds),TheRoutledgeCompaniontoReligionandPopularCulture,London,UKandNewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.261–80.Bauchspies,W.(2007),‘Methods,postcolonial’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),BlackwellEncyclopediaofSociology,Volume6,Hoboken,NJ:Wiley-Blackwell,pp.2981–6.Berg,L.D.,Evans,M.,Fuller,D.andtheOkanaganUrbanAboriginalHealthResearchCollective(2007),‘Ethics,hegemonicwhiteness,andthecontestedimaginationofAboriginalcommunityinsocialscienceresearchinCanada’,ParticipatoryResearchEthics,6(3),395–410.Bishop,R.(2005),‘Freeingourselvesfromneo-colonialdominationinresearch:AKaupapaMāoriapproachtoresearchandcreatingknowledge’,inN.K.DenzinandY.S.Lincoln(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofQualitativeResearch,3rded.,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,pp.109–35.Boccara,G.(2002),‘TheMapuchepeopleinpost-dictatorshipChile’,EtudesRurales,3(163/164),283–303.Boggiano,V.L.,Harris,L.M.andD.T.Nguyen(2015),‘Buildingconnectionswhileconductingquali-tativehealthfieldworkinVietnam:Twocasestudies’,InternationalJournalofQualitativeMethods,14(4),accessed27April2021athttps://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915619249.Bolton,P.A.andA.M.Tang(2002),‘Analternativeapproachtocross-culturalfunctionassessment’,SocialPsychiatryandPsychiatricEpidemiology,37(11),537–43.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
376368HandbookofcultureandglocalizationChevalier,J.M.andD.J.Buckles(2013),ParticipatoryActionResearch:TheoryandMethodsforEngagedInquiry,Oxford,UK:Routledge.Chilisa,B.(2012),IndigenousResearchMethodologies,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.DeloriaJr.,V.(1969),CusterDiedforYourSins:AnIndianManifesto,NewYork,NY:Macmillan.Denzin,N.K.,Lincoln,Y.S.andL.Smith(eds)(2008),HandbookofCriticalandIndigenousMethodologies,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Evans,M.,Hole,R.,Berg,L.D.,Hutchinson,P.andD.Sookraj(2009),‘Commoninsights,differingmethodologies:Towardafusionofindigenousmethodologies,participatoryactionresearch,andwhitestudiesinanurbanaboriginalresearchagenda’,QualitativeResearch,15(5),893–910.Fielding,N.G.(2014),‘Qualitativeresearchandourdigitalfutures’,QualitativeInquiry,20(2),1064–73.Flick,U.andG.Röhnsch(2014),‘Migratingdiseasestriangulatingapproaches:Applyingqualitativeinquiryasaglobalendeavor’,QualitativeInquiry,20(9),1096–109.Foley,D.(2003),‘Indigenousepistemologyandindigenousstandpointtheory’,SocialAlternatives,22(1),44–52.Gibson,J.L.andA.Gouws(2003),OvercomingIntoleranceinSouthAfrica:ExperimentsinDemocraticPersuasion,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Glissant,E.(1998),‘Noussommestousdescréoles’,Regards.fr,1January,accessed4May2021athttps://web.archive.org/web/20111004091602/http://www.regards.fr/culture/edouard-glissant.Gobo,G.(2011a),‘Glocalizingmethodology?Theencounterbetweenlocalmethodologies’,InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,14(6),417–37.Gobo,G.(2011b),‘BacktoLikert.Towardsaconversationalsurvey’,inM.WilliamsandP.Vogt(eds),TheSageHandbookofInnovationinSocialResearchMethods,London,UK:Sage,pp.228–48.Gobo,G.(2016),‘Why“merged”methodsrealizeahigherintegrationthan“mixed”methods.Areply’,QualitativeResearchinOrganizationsandManagement:AnInternationalJournal,11(3),199–208.GoboG.(2018),‘Qualitativeresearchacrossboundaries:Indigenousation,glocalizationorcreoliza-tion?’,inC.Cassell,A.CunliffeandG.Gandy(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofQualitativeBusinessandManagementResearchMethods,pp.495–514.GoboG.andS.Mauceri(2014),ConstructingSurveyData.AnInteractionalApproach,London,UK:Sage.Grosfoguel,R.(2007),‘Theepistemicdecolonialturn’,CulturalStudies,21(2–3),211–23.Haraway,D.(1988),‘Situatedknowledges:Thesciencequestioninfeminismandtheprivilegeofpartialperspective’,FeministStudies,14(3),575–99.Hassim,N.(2017),‘“Glocalizing”thehijab:AMalaysianperspective’,SHSWebConference,33,accessed27April2021athttps://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20173300086.Heshusius,L.(1994),‘Freeingourselvesfromobjectivity:Managingsubjectivityorturningtowardaparticipatorymodeofconsciousness?’,EducationalResearcher,23(3),15–22.Hofstede,G.(1991),CultureandOrganizations:SoftwareoftheMind,London,UK:McGraw-Hill.Hsiung,P.-C.(2012),‘Theglobalizationofqualitativeresearch:ChallengingAnglo-Americandomina-tionandlocalhegemonicdiscourse’,ForumQualitativeSozialforschung/Forum:QualitativeSocialResearch,13(1),accessed27April2021athttp://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1201216.Hsiung,P.-C.(2015),‘Pursuingqualitativeresearchfromtheglobalsouth:“Investigativeresearch”duringChina’s“GreatLeapForward”(1958–62)’,ForumQualitativeSozialforschung/Forum:QualitativeSocialResearch,16(3),accessed27April2021athttps://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-16.3.2287.Hymes,D.(1971),PidginizationandCreolizationofLanguages,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Jolly,M.(1992),‘Spectersofinauthenticity’,TheContemporaryPacific,4(1),49–72.Jung,S.(2007),TheKorean’sCulturalGrammar,Seoul,SouthKorea:SaenggakuiNamu.Kawabata,M.andD.Gastaldo(2015),‘Thelesssaid,thebetter:Interpretingsilenceinqualitativeresearch’,InternationalJournalofQualitativeMethods,14(4),1–9.Kirkness,V.J.andR.Barnhardt(1991),‘Firstnationsandhighereducation:ThefourR’s—Respect,Relevance,Reciprocity,Responsibility’,JournalofAmericanIndianEducation,30(3),1–15.Kovach,M.(2009),IndigenousMethodologies,Toronto,ON:UniversityofTorontoPress.Lebra,T.S.(1987),‘TheculturalsignificanceofsilenceinJapanesecommunication’,Multilingua–JournalofCross-CulturalandInterlanguageCommunication,6(4),343–57.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
377Thechallengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld369Lee,M.C.Y.(2014),‘Aninsider’smomentsofConfucianethicalconflict:Reflexivityasthe“MiddleWay”response’,JournalofAcademicEthics,12(4),299–316.Lindstrom,D.P.,Belachew,T.,Hadley,C.,KleinHattori,M.,Hogan,D.andT.Fasil(2010),‘NonmaritalsexandcondomknowledgeamongEthiopianyoungpeople:Improvedestimatesusinganonverbalresponsecard’,StudiesinFamilyPlanning,41(4),251–62.Martin,S.T.(2005),‘CallittheFullaphenomenon’,ChicagoTribune,25May,accessed27April2021athttps://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2005-05-25-0505250142-story.html.Martin,K.andB.Mirraboopa(2003),‘Waysofknowing,beinganddoing:Atheoreticalframeworkandmethodsforindigenousandindigenistre-search’,JournalofAustralianStudies,27(76),203–214.Mathur,A.N.(2014),‘Inquiringmindsandinquiryframes’,inP.M.MukherjiandC.Sengupta(eds),IndigeneityandUniversalityinSocialScience.ASouth-AsianResponse,NewDelhi,India:Sage,pp.171–86.McDougalIII,S.(2014),ResearchMethodsinAfricanaStudies,NewYork,NY:PeterLang.Miller,D.(2008),TheJungleEffect:ADoctorDiscoverstheHealthiestDietsfromAroundtheWorld,NewYork,NY:Harper.Miller,D.R.(2015),‘Tacitculturalknowledge:AninstrumentalqualitativecasestudyofmixedmethodsresearchinSouthAfrica’,Dissertation,UniversityofNebraska.Montaldi,D.(1961),Autobiografiedellaleggera,Torino,Italy:Einaudi.Montaldi,D.(1970),Militantipoliticidibase,Torino,Italy:Einaudi.Moreton-Robinson,A.andM.M.Walter(2009),‘Indigenousmethodologiesinsocialresearch’,inA.Bryman(ed.),SocialResearchMethods,2nded.,SouthMelbourne,VIC:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.1–18.Morgan,M.,McInerney,F.,Rumbold,J.andP.Liamputtong(2009),‘Drawingtheexperienceofchronicvaginalthrushandcomplementaryandalternativemedicine’,InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,12(2),127–46.Nakane,C.(1972),JapaneseSociety,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.Nicholls,R.(2009),‘Researchandindigenousparticipation:Criticalreflexivemethods’,InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,12(2),117–26.Park,S.andN.Lunt(2015),‘Confucianismandqualitativeinterviewing:WorkingSeoultosoul’,ForumQualitativeSozialforschung/Forum:QualitativeSocialResearch,16(2),accessed27April2021athttps://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-16.2.2166.Porsanger,J.(2004),‘Anessayaboutindigenousmethodology’,Nordlit,8(1),105–120.Rahman,M.A.(2008)‘Sometrendsinthepraxisofparticipatoryactionresearch’,inP.ReasonandH.Bradbury(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofActionResearch,London,UK:Sage,pp.49–62.Ram,U.(2004),‘Glocommodification:Howtheglobalconsumesthelocal–McDonald’sinIsrael’,CurrentSociology,52(1),11–31.Rangahau(n.d.-a),About,accessed4May2021atwww.rangahau.co.nz/about/.Rangahau(n.d.-b),Method,accessed4May2021atwww.rangahau.co.nz/method/.Rangahau(n.d.-c),Exemplar,accessed4May2021atwww.rangahau.co.nz/exemplar/.Rigney,L.I.(2006),‘IndigenistresearchandAboriginalAustralia’,inJ.E.KunnieandN.I.Godukka(eds),IndigenousPeoples’WisdomandPower:AffirmingOurKnowledgeThroughNarratives,Farnham,UK:Ashgate,pp.32–48.Ritzer,G.(1993),TheMcDonaldizationofSociety,London,UK:Sage.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Robertson,R.(2013),‘Situatingglocalization:Arelativelyautobiographicalintervention’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.25–36.Roos,V.(2008),‘TheMmogo-Method™:Discoveringsymboliccommunityinteractions’,JournalofPsychologyinAfrica,18(4),659–67.Roudometof,V.(2015a),‘Theorizingglocalization:Threeinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Roudometof,V.(2015b),‘Mappingtheglocalturn:Literaturestreams,scholarshipclustersanddebatesinglocalism’,JournalofCulture,PoliticsandInnovation,3,1–21.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
378370HandbookofcultureandglocalizationRyen,A.(2000),‘Colonialmethodology?Methodologicalchallengestocross-culturalprojectscollect-ingdatabystructuredinterviews’,inC.Truman,D.M.MertensandB.Humphries(eds),ResearchandInequality,London,UK:UCLPress,pp.183–99.Ryen,A.andG.Gobo(2011),‘Managingthedeclineofglobalizedmethodology’,InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,14(6),411–5.Salazar,N.B.(2010),‘Fromlocaltoglobal(andback):Towardsglocalethnographiesofculturaltourism’,inG.RichardsandW.Munsters(eds),CulturalTourismResearchMethods,Wallingford,UK:CABI,pp.188–98.Salikoko,M.(2001),TheEcologyofLanguageEvolution,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Schneider,B.andB.Kayseas(2018),‘Indigenousqualitativeresearch’,inC.Cassell,A.L.CanliffeandG.Grandy(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofQualitativeBusinessandManagementResearchMethods:HistoryandTraditions,accessed27April2021athttps://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526430212.Shen,C.-Y.andG.Midgley(2015),‘ActionresearchinaproblemavoidingcultureusingaBuddhistsystemsmethodology’,ActionResearch,13(2),170–93.Smith,L.T.(1999),DecolonizingMethodologies:ResearchandIndigenousPeoples,London,UK:ZedBooks.Smith,L.T.(2005),‘Ontrickyground:Researchingthenativeintheageofuncertainty’,inN.K.DenzinandY.S.Lincoln(eds),TheSAGEHandbookofQualitativeResearch,3rded.,ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,pp.85–107.Sundt,E.(1855),OmgiftermåliNorge,trans.byM.Drake(1980),OnMarriageinNorway,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.Sutton,B.(2011),‘Playfulcards,serioustalk:Aqualitativeresearchtechniquetoelicitwomen’sembod-iedexperiences’,QualitativeResearch,11(2),177–96,accessed4May2021athttps://doi.org/10.1177/1468794110394070Suwankhong,D.andP.Liamputtong(2015),‘Culturalinsidersandresearchfieldwork:Caseexamplesfromcross-culturalresearchwithThaipeople’,InternationalJournalofQualitativeMethods,14(5)accessed27April2021athttps://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915621404.Travers,M.(2009),‘Newmethods,oldproblems:Askepticalviewofinnovationinqualitativeresearch’,QualitativeResearch,9(2),161–79.Varney,W.(1998),‘BarbieAustralis:Thecommercialreinventionofnationalculture’,SocialIdentities,4(2),161–75.Vignali,C.(2001),‘McDonald’s:“Thinkglobal,actlocal”–themarketingmix’,BritishFoodJournal,103(2),97–111.Weaver,L.J.andB.N.Kaiser(2015),‘Developingandtestinglocallyderivedmentalhealthscales.ExamplesfromnorthIndiaandHaiti’,FieldMethods,27(2),115–30.Wilson,S.(2008),ResearchisCeremony:IndigenousResearchMethods,BlackPoint,NovaScotia:FernwoodPublishing.GiampietroGobo-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:00AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
37923.Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures:globalpopcultureandtheexampleofitsKoreanglocalizationVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobreINTRODUCTION:WHATAREYOUTHCOSMO-CULTURES?Oneofthesignificantlessonsofglobalstudiesreferstothecomplexdynamicsbywhichglobalculturalprocessesareintegratedintolocalcontexts,andareappropriatedandrein-vented–inaword,glocalized(Robertson,1992;Robertson&White,2007).DrawingontheworkofVictorRoudometof(2016a,2016b),weconsiderinthischapterthatglobalizationisrefractedthroughthelocal.Thelocalisnotmerelyabsorbedbyglobalizationbut,instead,operatessymbioticallywithit.Roudometof’sanalysisallowsforarenewedappraisaloftheglobal–localbinarywithoutassumingasingleuniversalsystemimposingitsdynamicsuponlocality.Thisapproachisparticularlyenlighteningwhenappliedtotheglocalizationofcul-turalgoodsproducedbytheglobalculturalindustry.Indeed,sincetheSecondWorldWar,culturalproductshavebecomethosemostcirculatedamongnations.Thecirculationofculturalgoodshasincreasedtoadramaticpointthankstothedigitalizationandspreadoftheinternet,aswellassocialnetworks:someproductscanbefoundeverywhereontheplanet,spreadingasenseofcommonknowledgeandglobalimag-ination(Cicchellietal.,2019).AformalizedapproachtotheglocalizationofglobalculturalproductscanbefoundintheanalysisproposedbyWonhoJangandByungminLee(2016);itshowshowglobalization,followinganadaptationtolocalcontexts,allowsfortheemergenceofnewglobalflowsfromnewproductioncentresthatpromoteanoriginalculturalcharacteridentifiableasbothspecificandhavingglobalfeatures.Inthisprocess,acountryrecreatesanewhybridculturetorespondtoaworldwideinfluenceonitslocalculture.Thenewhybridcultureis,inturn,consumedtransnationallythroughculturalcommunications.Culturalhybridizationcreatesbalancebymaintaininglocalidentitiesintheprocessofinteractionwithglobalcultures.Theseglocaldynamicsapplyinanexemplarymannertoyoungsters,whoarethemostconnectedandmobile,andcharacterizedbyglobalgenerationalintegrationthroughpopculture.Inthisvein,globalpopculture–asamixoftransnationalandglocalizedculturalartefacts,iconsandimaginaries(suchashitmusic,TVseries,blockbustersandbestsellingbooks,socialmedia,popandrockstars,andotherartists)–maybeconsideredadriverofcos-mopolitanwaysofbeingamongyoungpeople.Theomnipresenceofglocalizedpopculturalproducts–thatistosay,ofstandardizedproductsjuxtaposedwithlocalproductions–makesanyfirstencounterwithalteritytobeofaestheticnatureandcontributestotheconstitutionofsharedimaginariesofalterityandculturalidentityforyoungpeople(Cicchelli&Octobre2018a;Regev,2013).Isthereayoungpersonwhodoesnotknowwhatbushido(thesamuraicodeofhonour)is,thankstomoviesandmangas?Isthereayoungsterwhodoesnotknow371VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
380372HandbookofcultureandglocalizationthatGangnamisatrendySeoulneighbourhood,thankstothesong‘GangnamStyle’byPsy(2012)?Andwhoamongthem,settingfootinNorthAmericanterritoryforthefirsttime,wouldnotbestruckbyastrangesenseofdéjàvu,thankstoHollywoodmoviesandUSTVseries(Rodriguez,2019)?AndwecouldsaythesameaboutJapaneselandscapes,thankstothepopularityofStudioGhiblianime.Youngpeopletendtobemorecosmopolitanbecausetheyareplacedinthemidstofdynamicculturalflows,arehighlyskilledinmulticulturalinterac-tions,anddevelopaculturalawareness,opennessandknowledge(Cicchellietal.,2019).Theinternationalizationofordinaryculturalconsumptionhasstronglycontributedtothereshapingoftastesandtotheconstitutionofcommon,sharedculturalandartisticimaginariesofalterityandculturalidentity,whichyoungpeopleusetostructuretheirworld:thatis,toexplainit,aswellasorientandsituatethemselveswithinit(Cicchelli&Octobre,2017).Weproposeinthischaptertograspthedynamicsofproduction,circulationandreceptionofglocalizedproductsofpopculturewithoutprivilegingorneglectinganyoftheelements,butratherdistinguishingthemtoconstructanexhaustiveframework.Insteadofopposingthestructuretotheagency,theoffertoconsumption,thepromotiontothereception,wewouldliketoanalysethemjointly.Thisambitionforexhaustivenessisbasedonthreeconcerns.First,weacceptJimMcGuigan’sinvitationtoconsiderthat‘consumptionisonlyonemomentwithinacircuitofproduction,distribution,andexchange.Toisolateconsumptionfromtheseothermomentsisone-dimensionalandunabletograsptheontologicalcomplexityofcultureincirculation’(McGuigan,2002,p.425).Second,wetakeintoaccounttheneedtoinvestigatewhatDavidWright(2015)calls‘thetasteinfrastructure’,thatis,theecosystemformedbypro-ducers,mediators,institutions,governmentandtechnology.Third,wearefirmlyconvincedthatthiscomprehensiveapproachcancapturetheeminentlyglocalnatureofculturalproducts,whicharesubjecttoacomplexprocessofhybridizationthroughouttheproduction/consump-tioncircuit.Wethereforeproposetheconceptof‘youthcosmo-cultures’,asanattempttocapturetheglobaldynamicsoftheglocalizationofyouthculturalproductsbyinvestigatingtheinteractionbetweentheglobalpopculturescapeanditsglocalvariationthat,inturn,producesanewversionofglobalization.Wewillsubstantiatethisframeworkwithastudyofanemerginghybridyouthcosmo-culture:thecultureofHallyu(KoreanWave).Hallyuformsa‘culturalpackage’(Hong,2014)byaggregatingawidevarietyofproducts(fromK-pop,K-dramaandK-videogamestoK-foodandK-beauty)whoseonlycommonpoint,intheeyesofthelayman,isthattheyareproducedinSouthKoreaandaregloballysuccessfulthankstodigitaldissemination,especiallyamongyoungpeople.Hallyuisasmuchasuigenerisproductofglobalpopcultureasitisanagentchallenging,orevenrenewing,particulardynamicsofthelatter.TograspthecontributionofSouthKoreanpopculture–whichishighlyestheticizedandhighlyorientedtoyoungpeople–toglobalpopculture,thetheoreticalmodelproposedherewishestocloselylinkthemacroandmicrolevelsofanalysis.Eachelementwillbepresentedeitheronitsglobalizedandglocalizedlevel.WeconsiderthecaseofHallyuasthemoreimpressivetofeaturethisalternativeglobalizationbecauseoftheincrediblespeedwithwhichithasimposeditselfasaglobalculturalphenomenon.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
381Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures373UNDERSTANDINGTHEGLOCALPOPCULTURESCAPEPopculture,whichreferstothecultureproducedbyculturalindustries,disseminatedbymassmediaandnetworks,andconsumedbyglobalaudiences(Parker,2011;Pickering,2010;Williams,2018),allowsustoobservetheinclusivedynamicsofglobalizationamongyoungpeople.Thepervasivenessofpopcultureprovidesyoungindividualsacrosstheglobewithanextensiverangeofchoices,aswellasastockofdiverseandofteninterrelatedreferences(Kidd,2014).TheImportanceofPopCulture2.0intheMakingofGlocalImaginariesApowerfulmakerandvectorofmyriadimagesoftheworld–thankstoaudiovisualanddigitaltechnologies(During,1997;Octobre,2020)–popcultureisattheveryfoundationoftheriseofglobalcommonalitiesinthedailyimaginationandfuelledbydesirablefantasies(Appadurai,1990,1991,1996)anddesiresofaffiliationtotransnationalimaginedcommunities.Awholepanoplyofhighlyseductiveimagesofmodernlifeisdeployedthroughtheculturalcontentofpopculture,whichgivesrisetoasmanydesiresasfrustrations(Regev,2019),asstatedbySuarez-OrozcoandQin-Hilliard:Thenewtechnologiesofglobalizationgenerateimages,powerfulandseductive,ofthegoodlifeandthegoodthingsthatmakethegoodlifeandcirculatethemworldwide,creatingnewglobalizedstruc-turesofdesire,modernistlongings,andwiththem,feelingsofrelativedeprivation.(Suarez-Orozco&Qin-Hilliard,2004,p.19)ToparaphraseRaymondWilliams,popcultureisa‘wholewayoflife–thecommonmean-ings’(Williams,1958[1988],p.4).Itwasundoubtedlyinthe1960sthatpopculturesucceededinestablishingitselfastheculturalformofwidedisseminationwiththegeneralizationofradioandtelevisionequipmentandtheemergenceofyouthcultures,andinthe1980sthatitbecameasociologicalobjectworthyofinvestigation(Bennett,1980).Moreover,upuntilthe1970sand1980s,popculturewasaWesternaffair.Sincethen,Asiancountriesgraduallyenteredtheglobalcompetitionofpopculture,graspingtheeconomicandsymbolicassetsinvolvedinexportingculturalproducts,startingwithJapan(Kim,2009a).ThecontemporarycontextischaracterizedbyanunprecedentedcompetitionbetweenculturalproductsmadeintheWestandthosemadeintheEast(Kim,2009b).Thischaracteristichasbecomeevenmorepronouncedsincecontemporarypopculturehas,thankstotheinternet,emancipateditselffromTVandradiobroadcastingschedulesandconvergedwithgeekculture,resultingfromthedisseminationofJapanesevideogameculture.Popculturehasgivenrisetocommunitiesoffans(mostlycomposedofyoungpeople)and,morebroadly,participatoryaudiences,whichhavegrownconsiderablyinnumberandsizethankstonetworksanddigitaltools.Duetothemassificationofdistributiontechnolo-giesandtheemergenceofparticipatorytools,contemporarypopculturehasbecomeauniqueobservatoryofthearticulationof‘atop-downcorporate-drivenprocessandabottom-upconsumer-drivenprocess’(Jenkins,2006,p.18)intheanalysisofculturalfacts.Ithasflour-ishedthankstothetransitionfromtheworldofofficialmediatoaworldof‘spreadablemedia’(Jenkinsetal.,2013),aswellastheengagementofconsumers/amateursininteractingwithculturalindustriesandincreatingeconomicandculturalvalues.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
382374HandbookofcultureandglocalizationMoreover,bydrawingonancientstories,talesandlegendsorcreatingthemfromscratch,andbyhybridizingancientnarratives,popcultureaimstoproduceuniversalmythsthatareaestheticallyinclusive(Hatfieldetal.,2013;Wolf,2018).Itseekstoensurethecoexistenceandhybridizationofproductsderivedfromdominantaestheticmodels(mainlyEuropeanandAmericaninthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury)andlocalproducts(Chua&Iwabuchi,2008;Dorfman,1972[1984];Martin-Barbero,1993;Martinez,1998),whoseinnovativeformsarethenreintegratedintomainstreamproductioncircuits.Thisisthecaseoftechno(agenreofelectronicdancemusic,orelectro),inventedinwhatwasatthetimeUS-influencedWestGermany,whosedevelopmentwas,initsearlydays,mainlyEuropean.Bringingtogethermusicians(suchasKraftwerk,DaftPunk,LaurentGarnier,AirandothersthatwerepartofFrenchTouch)producersandclubbers,electroalsodistinguisheditselfwithinpopculturebydistancingitselffromtheAnglo-Saxonhegemonyinthemusicalfield,beforebeingreinte-gratedthroughcollaborationswithartistsfromthemainstream(forexample,Madonna).ThisisalsothecaseofCantonesekungfufilms,amixtureofnarrative,aesthetics,Westernvalues,andtheirChinesecounterparts,whichrevitalizedHongKong’sdecliningfilmindustry(Ang,1990),thenservedasinspirationforAmericanproductions:theHongKongfilmmakerJohnWoodirectedMissionImpossible2(2000)andQuentinTarantinopaidtributetothiscinemaintheearly2000sdiptychKillBill.1Thisinclusivecapacityisitselflinkedtothechoicesofparody,wink,andself-citation.Itisthe‘superimpositionsandcrossbreedingthatformtheveryD.N.A.ofpopculture’(Artus,2017,p.68).Astherearesomanyexamples,let’sjustmentionherethecoveroftheBeatles’SgtPepper’sLonelyHeartsClubBand(1967)(Draper,2020),thefamouscollageof58characters,includingmanypopcultureicons,ortheanimatedfilmShrek(2001),inwhichtherearenolessthan22directreferencestootherAmericanfilms.2Morerecently,StevenSpielberg’sfilmReadyPlayerOne(2018)mademorethan50nodstopopculture,includingmoviesorseries,butalsovideogamesandsongs(IMDb,2018).Inpopculture,creatorspastiche,adapt,andparodyworks(frombothhighandlowculture)thatareembodiedbyicons(realorfictionalcharacters,orevenobjects),usingtransmediasupports(Cantor,2003;Ramet&Crnković,2003).Thiskindofcreativeworkpresupposesabroadandeclecticculturethatissharedbybothcreatorsandconsumers,aswellasaknackforcatchingallusionsandreferences.Somehaveevenarguedthat‘thewink’isadefiningcharacteristicofglobalpopculture,whichoftenoperatesatametalevel(Yano,2013).Italsorequirestoabandonamuch-discussedoppositionbetween‘fragrance’and‘odourlessness’thathasoftenbeenmobilizedinthepasttocriticizecertainculturalproductsandtheirreception(Iwabuchi,2002):thisoppositionclaimsthatsomeproductsareodourlessbecausetheyarenot‘authentic’,whileothersarecharacterizedbyanadherencetogivenculturalpropertiesthatwouldensuretheirsuccess.Therearetwoflawsintheargument.First,itfailstoaccountforthetextuallyandcontex-tually‘impure’natureofpopculture,throughthedoubleeffectofthecirculationandglobalmixingofthetechno-cultural2.0ecosystemontheonehand,andthepreponderanceofpar-ticularnarrativeandaesthetictraitsofthemainstreamontheother.Thehighlycontroversialquestionofthesearchforrelevantanddiscriminatingfeaturesofculturalauthenticityintheanalysisofculturalgoodsbecomessuperfluousinthisperspective.Still,itdoestendtohigh-lighttheelementsthatmakeupspaceforinterculturalsharing,withahighemotionalandtrans-nationalvalue(Elfving-Hwang,2013).Second,italsofailstoaccountfortheappropriationsbythepublic;notonlybecausewhatcirculatesbestmaywellbewhatisculturally‘impure’,whichisbornofthecrossoverofmultipleinfluences,givingtheproductaparticulartaste,butVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
383Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures375alsobecausethecriteriaoftastemayvaryandnotcoincidewithanapriorilegitimacyoftheauthentic,alargelynormativecategorybasedonarepresentationofculturesasisolates.Cross-pollinatingPopCultureandGlobalStudiesTograspthesechanges,onemustconsiderbothhomageandcritiqueofpopculturestudies–whichcloselylinkproduction,distributionandconsumption/reception,butwhichmakelittlereferencetotheglobalizationofculture–andglobalstudies–which,ontheotherhand,havemadetheglobalizationofculturetheirhobbyhorsewithoutelevatingpopculturetotherankofasignificantobjectofinvestigation(Crane,2002;Curran&Park,2000;Featherstone,1990;Tomlinson,1999).Thisapproachisfavouredbythefactthattheglobalizationofcultureisintimatelylinkedtoitsdualnatureoftheproductionofculturalcontentstrictosensuandculturalproductionlatosensu.Thesetwoaspectsarepartiallyautonomous:thefirstreferstotheproductionofgoods,whilethesecondreferstotheproductionofaculturalphenomenon.Culturalglobalizationisthuscharacterizedbytheintertwiningofthecultural,economicandpolitical.Researchmustthereforearticulatethemacroandthemicrolevels,aspreviouslydemonstratedbyChristineYanoinheranalysisofHelloKitty,aJapaneseproductthatexem-plifies‘pinkglobalization’–definedas‘thetransnationalspreadofgoodsandimageslabeledkawaii(glossedinEnglishas“cute”)fromJapantootherpartsoftheindustrialworld’(Yano,2013,p.6).Thefirstlevelfocusesonaglobalpoliticaleconomyofthecutesetupinthe2000s,andofwhichHelloKittywasoneoftheagents.Thus,‘thismacroperspectiveembracesthecomplexfactorsthatframethephenomenonofbothproductionandreception:nation-cultures,politicalinterrelationships,andglobaleconomies’(p.9).Thesecondlevelistheindividualone,relatingtothemicroperspectiveofdailylife.‘Thesepersonalstoriesetchintimacyuponthepink,globalencounter.PinkGlobalizationthussearchesforthepersonalinthepoliticalasmuchasthepoliticalinthepersonal’(p.9).Startingfromthisscalarapproachandmakingitmorecomplex,wetakeamonographicapproachtoglobalpopcultureanditsKoreanglocali-zationbysettingthefocus,inturn,ontheindustrialproductionsystemofHallyu;thecentralityofSouthKoreaintheadventofamultiple,non-hegemonic,alternativeglobalpopculture;themajorroleplayedbyculturalgoodsinthediplomaticstrategyundertakenbytheLandoftheMorningCalmtobringaboutaprofoundchangeinitsimageonaglobalscale;andfinally,thereceptionofthesesameproductsamonganaudienceofyoungpeoplewhoarestronglyinvolvedinpromotingtheirsuccessandusingthemasresourcesforself-expression,thecon-structionoftastesandbiographicaltrajectories.Moregenerally,itcanbehypothesizedthattheaestheticizationoftheworld,whichaccompaniesthedevelopmentofvisualmarketing(amongothers,viadesignandadvertising),hasdevelopedamongyoungpeopleinmanycountriesanaestheticapproachtoculturaldifference,basedonforms,sounds,colours,moods,rhythms,andsoon(Cicchellietal.,2019).HALLYUASACASESTUDYOFTHEGLOCALIZATIONOFYOUTHCULTURESSuccessivelyoccupiedbyChinaandJapanandstillhavingastrongAmericanmilitarypres-ence,SouthKoreahasdevelopedanaptitudeforrecyclingandreinvention.ForSunJung,theVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
384376HandbookofcultureandglocalizationconceptthatbestexpressesKoreanproductionismugukjeok,which‘impliesthetransculturalhybridityofpopularculture,whichisnotonlyinfluencedbyodorlessglobalelements,butalsobytraditional(national)elements’(Jung,2011,p.3).HallyuasaCulturalPackageCharacterizedbyContinuousCreativeHybridizationUnliketheJapanesemukokusekiprinciplefromwhichitwasinspired,thisKoreanhybridiza-tionprocessemphasizesharmony:themixingofdespecifiedculturalelements(bibim)mustnotconflictwiththeoverallbalance,acrucialtraditionalvalueinSouthKorea.Koreahasalongtraditionof‘mixingcultures’.TheSamulnori(traditionalKoreanpercussionquartet),inwhichthefourpopularpercussioninstrumentsofdrum,janggu(two-handeddrum),jing(gong)andkkwaenggwari(smallgong)areplayedinharmony,andthebibimbap(ricemixedwithcolourfulvegetablesandmeats)aresignificantexamples.Inthiscultureofmixing,alltheparticipatingelementsactinconcertwhilepreservingtheirindividuality(Kim&Bae,2017,p.339).Globalsuccesswasnotmerelyduetoculturaltraits:itwasalsoaresultofatransmediaticstrategythatstronglylinkedthevariouscomponentsoftheKoreanculturalpackage(forexample,K-pop,K-dramas,K-fashionandK-cosmetics)throughthemobilizationofculturalentertainers(suchastheIdols),thatareatthesametimeactors,singers,showrunners,andsoon.Thistransmediaticstrategywasalsobasedonthepossibilitiesoftheinternet:theproductswerespreadandpromotedthroughthedisseminationof‘K-contents’thankstothemobiliza-tionofconsumersthemselvesonaglobalscale.Justanexampletomeasurethepowerofthesecommunities:K-popsingerLisa,memberofBlackPink,hasreached40millionfollowersonInstagram.SouthKoreahasthusmasteredtheartofadaptingtoforeignmarketstopromoteawidedistributionofitsproductsandservices:‘TheKoreanWavecanbeconsideredanexemplarycaseofglocalculture.ItskillfullyblendsWesternandAsianvaluesintoculturalproducts,presentinga“visionofmodernization”anduniversalvaluessuchaspureloveandfamilisminKorea-specificways’(Jang&Jung,2017,p.187).ItisthisabilitytoglocalizeandhybridizethatbecametheexpressionofKoreanculturalknow-howandgaverisetotheflourishingsociologicalliteratureonHallyu.TheseproductsadaptAmericanandWesternculturetoAsiantastesbyusingConfucianvaluesandideologiesinthenarrativeschemesoffilmsandseriesormusic(Howard,2006).TheadaptationofWesternformatstoreachAsianmarketsistheruleinmusic,withtheseadaptationsbecomingnewstandards(asSeoTaijiandBoys,andH.O.T.didinthe1990s)(Shim,2006).K-popis,infact,basedonthemixbetweenWesternandKoreanmusicandoffersablendofthereferenceuniversesofbothworlds.Thus,theclipssystematicallyincludeelementsfrombothuniverses:itisnotuncommontoseeGirls’GenerationsingersperforminginKoreanAirForceuniforms(whichestablishesanationalconnection)orascheerleaders(whichestablishesaninternationalconnectioninspiredbytheAmericanexample).AsJung-BongChoiandRoaldMaliangkay(2015,p.4)havestatedsoclearly,takingtheexampleoftheKoreanmusicindustry:stylistically,K-popisbestdescribedasanintegratedpopularculturesuigeneris–andentertainmentofitsownclass.Itisamosaicthatblendsstorytelling,music,groupdance,bodyperformance,andfashionshow.Intermsofmusicalandperformativeconventions,itdrawsonhiphop,Eurotechno,grunge,pop,andrap,allthewhileincorporatingcontemporarychoreographies,acrobatics,andVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
385Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures377runwayacts.Linguistically,itroutinelyfusesKoreanwithEnglishwords,introducesneologismsandmobiledevice-basedjargons,andoccasionallyinterjectsJapaneseandChineseonomatopoeia.Inaddition,theK-popformationsofthemajorproductionhousesare(re)composedaccordingtothetargetedmarketsegments:theyincludeVietnameseorThaiperformerstosatisfytheconsumersofthesecountries,andsinginotherlanguages,withsongtitlesinEnglish,JapaneseandThai.Forexample,Girls’GenerationhastwoKoreanAmericanmembers,whichisadoubleasset:theyexpressthemselvesinimpeccableEnglishduringinterviewsabroad,andtheirmulticulturalismresonateswiththediasporaspresentinthecountrieswheretheytour.ThiselementiscrucialinunderliningthefactthatthereisahierarchicalvisionofSouthKoreadiasporasintermsofrecruitmentintopopgroups:thosereturningfromtheUnitedStatesareconsideredcosmopolitanandhavethehaloofthemostaccomplishedmodernity,whilethosereturningfromChinaarescrupulouslyavoided(Epstein,2011).Glocalizationisalsoachievedthroughcollaborationsthatarehighlymediatized:arapversionofthesong‘Idol’byBTS,withthefamousNickiMinaj,wasreleasedin2018.3ThistransnationalproductionmodeisalsoimplementedbytheIndonesian-KoreanagencyYSEntertainment,whichmanagesthemixedgroupS4(forsweet,smart,sexyandsentimental)andthegroupS.O.S.(forSensationofStage)fortheIndonesianmarket.Inaddition,theentireproductionchaincallsuponforeignprofessionals.Thus,whilewealthyK-poplabelsworkwiththeirownauthors,composersandproducers,theyoftenoutsourcethecreativeprocess,especiallytoSweden,whichproducesmanyhits.Reportingonthealbum‘Loveyourself:Tears’byBTS(releasedinMay2018),Billboardmagazinenotedthatthegroupintegratesmusicalstylesfarfromthegenresonwhichithasbuiltitsfame:thetrack‘Airplanept.2’takesLatinAmericanrhythmsandincorporatesinstrumentalpassagesoftango‘toprovideabackdropforthememberstorelaytheirfeelingsaboutbeingabletotraveltheworldaspopstars’(Herman,2018).ItiswiththishybridformulathatBTS’s‘Idols’dethronedTaylorSwiftastheclipthatreceivedthemostvisitorsinlessthan24hoursonYouTube.TheFourPillarsofHallyuTounderstandthefeaturesoftheglobalpopculturescapeanditsSouthKoreanglocalizationbothontheproductionside(thatis,Hallyuproducts)andonthereceptionside(thatis,Hallyuculture),weproposeatheoreticalmodelthatarticulatesfourdimensions.TheriseofHallyuwithinglobalpopcultureisthusthepointofconjunctionofprofoundtransformationsin:(1)capitalistmodesofproductionandconsumption,(2)flowsofglobalization,whichproducearestructuringofthegeopoliticsofculturalflowsand,eventually,analternativeglobaliza-tion,(3)thediplomaticuseofculturalgoodsbycountriesthathaverecentlyenteredintotheglobalculturalcompetition,and(4)thedevelopmentofhighlyparticipatoryandcosmopolitanconsumers.AestheticcapitalismandentertainmentcapitalismKoreanpopculturehastodayacquiredhighvisibilityfarbeyonditsAsianorigin,evenifthismarketremainsthemostimportantforincomes.Hallyustemsfromamodeofcapitalistproductionofaestheticcommodities(suchasaestheticorartisticcapitalism;seeBöhme,2017;Pharo,2018)thathasmadethemarketingofdifference(Emontspool&Woodward,2018)oneofitssignificantassets,whichsustainsdemand:thedesiretoconsumetheOther–astheVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
386378Handbookofcultureandglocalizationbasisofaneo-exoticismstrippedofitscolonialistandelitistmatrix–hasbecomeanengineofglobalgrowth.Thisdesireisskilfullynurturedthroughpermanentemotionalstimulation(Illouz,2019)thatiswidelydisseminatedamongWesternyoungpeople(Cicchelli&Octobre,2018a).Theriseofacapitalistmodecentredontheproductionofaestheticcommodities(aestheticcapitalism)hasmadeculturalconsumptionthemeanstointegratecriticismofit,togenerateandmaintainastrongdependenceamongconsumers,tomaketheintimacy–bothcognitiveandemotional–acommodity:thisevolutionhasgivenglobalindustriesandcosmopolitanconsumersinsearchofnewstimuliafundamentalweightinthefunctioningoftheglobaleconomy.Basedontheseelements,SouthKoreanculturalindustrieshavedevelopedaspecificproductionmodel,entertainmentcapitalism(Cicchelli&Octobre,2021).Itisthepartnershipbetweenstatecapitalismandlargeprivateconglomerates(thechaebols)thathasfacilitatedtherapidtransitionfromheavyindustrycapitalismtoculturalindustrycapitalism.TheoriginalityofHallyuinthecompetitivemarketofpostcolonialculturalproducersisamixtureofverygreatmodernity(especiallyintheuseofdigitaltoolsandnetworks),masteryofthehybridityofaesthetics,andinternationalstandardsofquality.HegemonicandalternativeglobalpopcultureWecanconsidertheKoreanWaveasalitmustesttograspthefeaturesofalternativeglobali-zationofpopculture;afterall,Hallyucomesfromacountryonceconsideredatbestexotic,ifnotperipheral,evenculturallyandeconomicallybackward.IfSouthKoreaisnotthefirstexampleoftheAsianculturalmiracle(Iwabuchi,2004),itisattheveryleastbecomingthemostcrediblealternativetothemagisteriumoftheUnitedStates,itsmostseasonedcompetitorinthearenaofglobalpopculture,intermsofthehegemonyandworldviewresultingfromtheculturalcontentproduced.ThedevelopmentofculturalindustrieshasmadeHallyu,liketheJapanesewavebeforeit,aphenomenoninphasewithaglobalyouth(Cicchelli&Octobre,2019;Elfving-Hwang,2013;Thorpe&Inglis,2019)thatisfondofaestheticnovelties.SincetheSecondWorldWar,Westernhegemonyhasshapedaspecificvisionofmodernity,backedbycapitalistsocieties,andmodelledontheexampleoftheUnitedStates.Byimposingasymmetricalculturalencounters,thespreadofthismodernityhasresultedinthediscoveryofmanyworldculturesthatsimultaneously(andparadoxically)becomesimilar(inthisnon-hegemonicposition)anddifferent(intermsofcontent).Asymmetricalculturalglobali-zationthusgivesriseto‘familiardifferences’,‘strangesimilarities’thatcombineatmultiplelevelstogenerateacomplexperceptionofwhatseparatesculturesorbringsthemtogether.Thismixtureofdissimilaritiesandsimilarities–thataudiencesconsidernon-threatening–iswhatliesattheheartofculturalglobalization.The‘in-betweenness’ofSouthKoreancultureowesmuchtothefactthatitemanatesfromageopolitically‘new’country–formerlydefeatedintheglobalgeopoliticalcompetition–whichisconqueringtheworldwithoutimperialistaims,whilecontinuouslysynthesizingdom-inantculturaldynamics.Thus,inLatinAmericaandCentralEurope,audiencesareattractedtoHallyubythequalityandoriginalityofitsproducts,bythemodernityofitsuseofnetworks,bytheaestheticandculturaldifferenceoftheproductscomparedwiththoseoftheAmericanmainstream,andbythefactthatthemovementoffersalternativeculturalmodels(relational,loving,historical,politicalandsoon):theseelementsappealtoaudiencessensitive,duetolocalcontext,toissuesrelatedtocultural,andmorebroadly,geopoliticalimperialism.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
387Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures379ItisthereforenotsurprisingthatHallyuhasbeenenvisionedasamodelofglobaliza-tion(Kim,2007)alternativetotheWesternone,whoseanalyseshavefocusedmainlyonhowWesterncontentaffectsotheraudiences(Thussu,2006).YounaKim(2007,p.149),forexample,considersHallyuas‘awaytocounterthethreatandinsensitivityoftheWestern-dominatedmediamarket’.Almost20yearsafterKoichiIwabuchi’s(2002)diagnosisoftheroleplayedbyculturalflowsfromJapanona‘recenteringglobalization’,wearewit-nessingashiftinglobalpopculturewithwhatcouldbecalleda‘de-centralizingmultiplicity’(Kim,2007).ThisalternativeglobalizationredistributesthecardsoftheWesternhegemonyofpopcultureintermsofnorms,valuesandideals.Historically,theculturalproductsofthesubalterncountrieswereconsumedbythedominantcountriesinanexoticway.Incontrast,theculturalproductsofthedominantcountrieswereconsumedbythemoresubalterncountriesinamodernway.However,withamodernandhighlyattractive,butnon-dominantSouthKorea,thisdichotomyhaslapsed.Softpowerand‘sweet’powerThecompetitionbetweencountriesintheglobalarenaisreflectedinthestronguseofculturaldiplomacy,orsoftpower(Nye,1990),topromotepositiveimagesoftheirsocieties.SouthKorea’sirruptionontheglobalculturalsceneisallthemoreremarkablesinceitisnotaccom-panied–asinthecaseofAmericanglobalbrands–bythedeploymentofmilitaryhardpoweranddoesnotreactivatepainfulmemoriesofanimperialistorcolonialpast,asmayhavebeenthecasewithJapaneseculturalproductsinEastAsia.SouthKoreaisenteringthearenaofinternationalculturaldiplomacyinacontextwhereUSimperialismisbeingchallenged,and‘coolJapan’intheAsianregionhasshownitslimits(Iwabuchi,2002).Drawingontheconceptofnationbranding,whichappliesbrandingandmarketingtechniquestopromoteanation’simageandreputation(Fan,2008),SouthKoreaseekstoattracttourismandinvestment,boostexports,restorecredibilityandexpandinternationalawareness,increasepoliticalinfluence,buildstrongerinternationalpartnerships,combatnegativenationalstereotypes,andnurturenationalconfidence,pride,harmonyanddetermination(Dinnie,2010).Inthisperspective,sweetpoweristosoftpowerwhatentertain-mentcapitalismistoaestheticcapitalism:aspecificvariant(Cicchelli&Octobre,2021).AsinJapaneseculturaldiplomacy,sweetpoweristheresultof–anevencloser–collaborationbetweendirigismeandtheculturalindustries.AsinJapan,themassiverecoursetopopculturehasledtoaculturalizationandaestheticizationofKorea’simage.However,unlikeJapan,thisaestheticizationisinseparablefromanassumedaffirmationofitspast,itsownculturalandspiritualroots,anditsmodernity,whichcontributestocreatingpositivestorytellingthatseemstobelackingintheLandoftheRisingSunandwhichconfirmstherolethatSouthKoreaintendstoplayasacounter-hegemoniccountryvis-à-vistheUnitedStatesinthefieldofpopculture.TheproductsoftheKoreanWaveinsistonaestheticdimensionsdevoidofsubversivemes-sages,whichmakesHallyumorereassuring.Theculturalindustriesofmusicandaudiovisualandfashion,cosmeticsandcosmeticsurgeryarededicatedtopromotingahighlyaestheticimageofthecountry.Koreanpopnationalism(Joo,2011;Kang,2015)isevolvingintoanewformofsoftpowerwhich,tomaximizeitsreceptivenessinforeignmarkets,playsthecardofdifferentiationwiththeAmericanorJapanesecompetitor:whileAmericanproductsarecharacterizedbytheuseofimagesandwordsthatportrayconflict(relatedtorace,sex,ageandclass)andviolence,andJapanispermanentlyassociatedwithitshistoryofimperialism,theVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
388380HandbookofcultureandglocalizationmostwidelydistributedKoreanproducts(K-popandK-dramas)spread‘sweet’messages.Theprojectaimstocreateanenvironmentthatisbothaestheticallypleasingandsociallysafe.ThissweetpowerechoesboththenationalreconciliationbroughtaboutbyHallyuafterthe1997crisis–acrisisthatwasbotheconomicandsocial–andtheimagethatSouthKoreawishestoprojectofitselfbeyonditsborders:nolongeranationofpeopleinneed,butapeaceful,creativeandmodernnation.CosmopolitanamateursanddigitalintimacyAnanalysisoftheeffectsoftheglobalizationofcultureintermsofproductionandsoftpowercannotoverlooktheideologies,imaginationsandstoriespromotedbyHallyuproductsthatshapetherelationshipwiththeworldofconsumers,thankstothepervasivenessofsocialmediathatcreatesproximitybetweentheproductsandthetransnationalpublicsandtransmis-sionofloyaltyfromoneculturalpackagetoanother(Choi,2015).Ithasbeenpointedoutthat‘KoreanWavefansindifferentregionsare“transnationalconsumersandlearnersofpopularcultureforinter-ethnicculturalunderstanding”basedontheiractiveconsumptionandpartici-pationintheKoreanWave’(Oh,2009,p.426).ToapprehendthelearningsandskillsresultingfromtheconsumptionofKoreanculturalproducts,oneshouldanalysethecontributionofthe‘consumptionofdifference’(Schroeder,2015)toself-formation.Foramateurs,theseactsofconsumptionconstitutepowerfulmediatedencountersintermsofcosmopolitansocialization,particularlyamongtheyoungergenerationslivinginincreasinglymultipolarculturalflows–somuchsothatcosmopolitanamateurismcanbeconsideredanewgenerationalnormfor‘goodtaste’(Cicchelli&Octobre,2018b).InsteadofdecidingontheintrinsicrealityofthisKoreannessoronitsimagined,recom-posedcharacter,oneshouldinvestigatehowKoreanproductsfeedtheimaginationsofyoungpeople.ResearchshowsthatthesuccessofHallyuonaglobalscaleisbasedonthepredomi-nanceeitherofthelogicof‘culturalproximity’(especiallyintheAsianregion)orof‘culturalshareability’(especiallyinmoredistantregionsoftheworldwithnostrongdiasporas,suchasFrance)(LaPastina&Straubhaar,2005).Itisalsoimportanttonotethatitisgirls/womenratherthanboys/menwhosupportthesuccessofHallyuallovertheworld:admittedly,thefanattitudeismostlylinkedtoa‘feminineuniversalism’(Oh,2016)thatraisesissuesconcern-ingthestatusofwomenandgenderedrelationsasdepictedinHallyuproducts(empoweredwomenwithsoftrelationtomen),andtheneedforsuchrolemodelsindifferentpartsoftheworld.TounderstandthecontributionofHallyutothenewimaginariesoftheworld,weshallconsidertheiconic‘K’oftheKoreanWaveasafloatingsignifier(Lie,2012),whosemeaningsarefilledbycosmopolitanfans.Theseproductsareconsumedanddisseminatedbyaudiences(Asianfirst,thenglobal)madeupofcosmopolitanfanswhobuildarelationshipwithKoreanothernessaccordingtoadialecticofexoticismanddéjàvu,andusetheskillsacquiredintheseconsumptionstoconstructbiographicaltrajectories.Itisintheconstructionofthesebiographicaltrajectoriesthatwecanfindthemoststrikingtraceoftheeffectsofsweetpower:markerscanincludeashiftinone’sstudiesandthedecisiontostudyKorean,orthediscoveryofavocation.Astheplaceparexcellenceforthedeploymentofculturalconvergence,andthereforeaprivilegedobservatoryforthearticulationof‘atop-downcorporate-drivenprocessandabottom-upconsumer-drivenprocess’(Jenkins,2006,p.18),globalpopculturealsoshouldbeunderstoodthroughtheconceptof‘spreadablemedia’(Jenkinsetal.,2013).ThelatterVincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
389Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures381placesgreatemphasisonparticipatorycultures,theinvolvementofamateursandconsumeragencyintheinteractionwithculturalindustries,andinthecreationofeconomicandculturalvalues.Theconcentrationofproducersanddistributorsofculturalproductsinfewerandfewerconglomeratesandmultinationals,andtheconcentrationofthevaluechainondistributionplatforms(broadcastersareincreasinglyalsoproducers,asisthecasewithAmazonPrimeorNetflix,forexample)areechoedbythemultiplicationofself-produced,remixedand/oruser-circulatedcontent,thankstothegrowingimportanceofnetworksandmobiledigitalequipment,whichresultsintherisingcomplexityofglobalculturalflows.Hallyuisaculturalphenomenon,anexpressionofthedesiresandpracticesofusersscatteredallovertheworldandlinkedbyparticipatoryloops,whichimpliesacertainautonomyconcerningtheculturalproductsthatareatitsorigin.Thus,thefancanbeconsideredasanactorintheculturalprocessevenifheorsheisexternaltotheplaceswheretheculturalproductsareproduced:heorshecanassumetheroleofinformant(disseminatingculturalcontent),mediator(explainingandtrainingfanexpertise)ordistributor(disseminatingcontent).Fansfromallovertheworldtakepartinactivitiesaroundsocialmediacommunities(flashmobs,cover-dancecontests)andgatherinfestivalsaroundtheworld.TheHallyudevelopmentmodelusesthemedianotonlyasdistributors,butalsoasco-producersoftheconsumptionexperience:linkswiththepublicareregularlymaintainedviathesocialmediaaccountsofgroupsorstars,‘bonuses’,‘backstage’or‘stories’thatarepublishedsometimesdaily,andgamesthatallowaccesstoexclusivecontent.Further,audiencesareencouragedtoposttheirowncomments,productions,coversandsoon,toensureasustainedandseeminglyintimatelinkbetweenartistandpublic.Therefore,Hallyuis‘anintriguingexampleofhowboththeindustryandtheconsumerssuccessfullytransformthemselvesintoequallyimportantplayersintheglobalgameofsocialnetworking’(Jung,2015,p.85).CONCLUSIONIntheinternationalliterature,variousapproachescontribute,albeittovaryingdegrees,tothedialecticsoftheuniversalandtheparticular.Somestresshowtheparticularisbeinguniversalizedthroughthedisseminationoflocalreferences,whichhavenowbecomeglobalreferents,whileothersemphasizetheinversemovement,theparticularizationoftheuniversalmovement(Robertson,1992),whichhassometimesbeencalledhybridization(NederveenPieterse,2009),creolization(Tomlinson,1999),orindigenization(Appadurai,1996).Beyondtheirdifferences,allthreetermsrefertothecomplexdynamicsthroughwhichglobalculturalprocessesareincorporated,appropriatedandreinventedinlocalcontexts.Inthischapter,wehaveattemptedtoshedlightonthelogicofglocalizationthroughtheper-spectiveofbothmicroandmacroyouthcosmo-cultures.Therefore,tofullygrasptheheuristic,weadvocatefor:(1)areconsiderationofanynewglobalplayer(suchasKorea)asanavatarofglobalpopculturefromwhichitborrowssomecrucialfeaturesandrenewsthematthesametime;(2)takingintoaccountthepoliticalnatureoftheglobalizationofculturethroughtheriseofthediplomaticuseofculturalgoodsbycountriesthathaverecentlyenteredtheglobalcul-turalcompetition–whichreframesthegeopoliticsofculturalflowsintermsofhegemonyandalternativemodels;and,finally,(3)understandingtheprofoundtransformationsincapitalistmodesofbothproductionandprosumption,throughthedevelopmentofhighlyparticipatoryandcosmopolitanyouthaudiences.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
390382HandbookofcultureandglocalizationThesevariousdimensionsformasystem:sweetpowerisinseparablefromanalternativevisionofglobalization,whichisinturnfavouredbyconsumerswhocultivateopennesstotheworld,acosmopolitanvirtueifevertherewasonethatentertainmentcompanieshavelearnedtomakethemostof,andviceversa.Thissystemseemstoustohavetheoriginalityofbeinghighlyaesthetic,notonlybecausetheaestheticqualityoftheproductsishigh,butbecausethequalityjudgementconcerningitplacesaestheticsattheheartoftheconstructionofarelation-shipwiththeworld.Itisindeedtheaestheticizationofthispopculturethatmakesiteasierforindividualstoconsumeproductsfromacountrywhoseculturalcodestheydonotknowandtousethesenewculturalresourcestonourishtheirbiographicaltrajectories,theirsystemsoflikesanddislikes,andtosocializewithOtherness.Thankstothisfour-pillarapproach,wecananalyseHallyuasaglocalphenomenoncharac-terizedby(1)abroadconceptionofartandculturebasedonthenotionofentertainmentandversatileartists(suchastheIdols),whoseskillsareasmuchapartoftheculturalfielditselfastheyareofthecommercial/advertisingcomplex;(2)arenewalofthelogicofcreativity,relyingonacloseinteractionbetweenentertainmentagenciesandparticipatoryaudiences;(3)aproductioninfrastructurethatallowsforthepromotionofaSouthKoreanpopculturethatisanalternativetotheAmericanandJapanesemainstream,andthatreliesheavilyoninter-nationally-orientedpublicpolicies;and(4)thepromotionofalternativeculturalglobalization,inspiredmainlybytheoldglobalplayers(US,UK,Japanandsoon),anddrawinglessonsfromtheirlimitations,whichwouldinturnhelptoshapetherepresentationsoftheworldofyoungpeopletakingnon-Westernmodelsintoaccount.NOTES1.KillBillisatwo-volumefilmseriesbyQuentinTarantino,whohasoftenhighlightedhistasteforvideogamesandtheirimpactonhisbodyofwork.TarantinohasalsospokenofhisfascinationwithAsia:thetwofilmswereshotinChinaandJapan.2.ForacomparisonbetweentheoriginalscenesandtheirparodiedversionsinShrek,seeEngvalson(2018).3.Asuccessfulartist(rapper,singer,lyricist,songwriter,model,radiohostandactress),NickiMinajwasrecognizedasoneofthemostinfluentialblackwomenbyTheNewYorkTimesin2013(alongwithBeyoncéandMichelleObama).REFERENCESAng,I.(1990),‘Cultureandcommunication:Towardsanethnographiccritiqueofmediaconsumptioninthetransnationalmediasystem’,EuropeanJournalofCommunication,5(2),239–60.Appadurai,A.(1990),‘Disjunctureanddifferenceintheglobalculturaleconomy’,Diaspora,2(2),1–23.Appadurai,A.(1991),‘Globalethnoscapes:Notesandqueriesforatransnationalanthropology’,inR.G.Fox(ed.),RecapturingAnthropology:WorkinginthePresent,SantaFe,NM:SchoolofAmericanResearchPress,pp.190–210.Appadurai,A.(1996),ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization,Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Artus,H.(2017),PopCorner.DeSupermanàPokemonGo:LagrandehistoiredelaPopculture,Paris,France:DonQuichotteEditions.Bennett,T.(1980),‘Popularculture:Ateachingobject’,ScreenEducation,34,20–36.Böhme,G.(2017),CriticofAestheticCapitalism,Milan,Italy:MimesisInternational.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
391Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures383Cantor,P.A.(2003),GilliganUnbound:PopCultureintheAgeofGlobalization,Lanham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Choi,J.-B.(2015),‘LoyaltytransmissionandculturalenlistingofK-popinLatinAmerica’,inJ.-B.ChoiandR.Maliangkay(eds),K-POP–TheInternationalRiseoftheKoreanMusicIndustry,London,UK:Routledge,pp.98–115.Choi,J.-B.andR.Maliangkay(2015),‘Introduction:WhyfandommatterstotheinternationalriseofKPop’,inJ.-B.ChoiandR.Maliangkay(eds),K-POP–TheInternationalRiseoftheKoreanMusicIndustry,London,UK:Routledge,pp.1–18.Chua,B.H.andK.Iwabuchi(eds)(2008),EastAsianPopCulture:AnalyzingtheKoreanWave,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2017),‘Aesthetico-culturalcosmopolitanismamongFrenchyoungpeople:Beyondsocialstratification.Theroleofaspirationsandcompetences’,CulturalSociology,11(4),416–37.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2018a),Aesthetico-CulturalCosmopolitanismandFrenchYouth:TheTasteoftheWorld,London,UK:Palgrave.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2018b),‘Aesthetico-culturalcosmopolitanism:Anewkindof“goodtaste”amongFrenchyouth’,inJ.EmontspoolandI.Woodward(eds),Cosmopolitanism,MarketsandConsumption:ACriticalGlobalPerspective,London,UK:Palgrave,pp.69–95.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2019),‘Introducingyouthandglobalizationandthespecialissue:Theriseandfallofcosmopolitanism’,YouthandGlobalization,1(1),1–18.Cicchelli,V.andS.Octobre(2021),TheSociologyofHallyuPopCulture:SurfingtheKoreanWave,London,UK:Palgrave.Cicchelli,V.,Octobre,S.andV.Riegel(eds)(2019),AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture,Leiden,TheNetherlandsandNewYork,NY:Brill.Cicchelli,V.,Octobre,S.,Riegel,V.,Katz-Gerro,T.andF.Handy(2018),‘Ataleofthreecities:Aesthetico-culturalcosmopolitanismasanewcapitalamongyouthinParis,SãoPaulo,andSeoul’,JournalofConsumerCulture,accessed4April2021athttps://doi.org/10.1177/1469540518818629.Crane,D.(2002),‘Cultureandglobalization:Theoreticalmodelsandemergingtrends’,inD.Crane,N.KawashimaandK.Kawasaki(eds),GlobalCulture:Media,Arts,Policy,andGlobalization,London,UK:Routledge,pp.1–25.Curran,J.andM.-J.Park(2000),‘Beyondglobalizationtheory’,inJ.CurranandM.-J.Park(eds),De-WesternizingMediaStudies,London,UK:Routledge,pp.1–27.Dinnie,K.(2010),NationBranding:Concepts,Issues,Practice,London,UK:Routledge.Dorfman,A.(1972),HowtoReadDonaldDuck:ImperialistIdeologyintheDisneyComic,(1984),NewYork,NY:InternationalGeneral.Draper,J.(2020),‘Who’swhoontheBeatles’“Sgt.Pepper’sLonelyHeartsClubBand”albumcover’,Udiscovermusic,26May,accessed10October2020athttps://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/whos-who-on-the-beatles-sgt-peppers-lonely-hearts-club-band-album-cover/.During,S.(1997),‘Popularcultureonaglobalscale:Achallengeforculturalstudies?’,CriticalInquiry,23(4),808–833.Elfving-Hwang,J.(2013),‘SouthKoreanculturaldiplomacyandbrokeringin“K-Culture”outsideAsia’,KoreanHistories,4(1),14–26.Emontspool,J.andI.Woodward(eds)(2018),Cosmopolitanism,MarketsandConsumption:ACriticalGlobalPerspective,London,UK:Palgrave.Engvalson,A.(2018),‘22popculturereferencesyoudefinitelymissedinShrekmovies’,BuzzFeed,8May,accessed4April2021,athttps://www.buzzfeed.com/audreyworboys/shrek-hidden-pop-culture-references.Epstein,S.(2011),‘J-pop,K-popandtransnationalreconciliation’,inC.Song(ed.),KoreanStudiesinShift:PACKS2010Proceedings,Auckland,NewZealand:NewZealandAsiaInstitute,pp.73–86.Fan,Y.(2008),‘Softpower:powerofattractionorconfusion?’,PlaceBrandingandPublicDiplomacy,4(2),147–58.Featherstone,M.(1990),‘Globalculture:Anintroduction’,Theory,Culture&Society,7(2–3),1–14.Hatfield,C.,JeetH.andK.Worcester(2013),TheSuperheroReader,Jackson,MS:UniversityPressofMississippi.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
392384HandbookofcultureandglocalizationHerman,T.(2018),‘BTSreleasesexpressive“LoveYourself:Tear”album:Listen’,Billboard,18May,accessed4April2021athttps://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/8456639/bts-releases-expressive-love-yourself-tear-album-listen.Hong,E.(2014),TheBirthofKoreanCool:HowOneNationisConqueringtheWorldthroughPopCulture,NewYork,NY:Picador.Howard,K.(2006),‘Comingofage:KoreanPopinthe1990s’,inK.Howard(ed.),KoreanPopMusic:RidingtheWave,Kent,UK:GlobalOriental,pp.82–98.Illouz,E.(ed.)(2019),Lesmarchandisesémotionnelles,Paris,France:PremierParallèle.IMDb(2018),ReadyPlayerOne,accessed4April2020athttps://www.imdb.com/title/tt1677720/.Iwabuchi,K.(2002),RecenteringGlobalization:PopularCultureandJapaneseTransnationalism,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Iwabuchi,K.(ed.)(2004),FeelingAsianModernities:TransnationalConsumptionofJapaneseTVDramas,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress.JangW.andE.S.Jung(2017),‘WebtoonasaNewKoreanWaveintheprocessofglocalization’,KritikaKultura,29,168–87.Jang,W.andB.Lee(2016),‘TheglocalizingdynamicsoftheKoreanWave’,KoreanRegionalSociology,17(2),5–19.Jenkins,H.(2006),ConvergenceCulture:WhereOldandNewMediaCollide,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Jenkins,H.,FordS.andJ.Green(2013),SpreadableMedia:CreatingValueandMeaninginaNetworkedCulture,NewYork,NY:NewYorkUniversityPress.Joo,J.(2011),‘TransnationalizationofKoreanpopularcultureandtheriseofpopnationalisminKorea’,JournalofPopularCulture,44(3),489–504.Jung,E.-Y.(2015),‘Newwaveformations:K-Popidols,socialmediaandtheremakingoftheKoreanWave’,inS.LeeandA.M.Normes(eds),Hallyu2.0.TheKoreanWaveintheAgeofSocialMedia,AnnArbor,MI:UniversityofMichiganPress,pp.73–89.Jung,S.(2011),KoreanMasculinitiesandTransculturalConsumption:Yonsama,Rain,Oldboy,K-PopIdols,HongKong:HongKongUniversityPress.Kang,H.(2015),‘ContemporaryculturaldiplomacyinSouthKorea:Explicitandimplicitapproaches’,InternationalJournalofCulturalPolicy,21(4),433–47.Kidd,D.(2014),PopCultureFreaks:Identity,MassMedia,andSociety,Boulder,CO:Westview.Kim,Y.(2007),‘TherisingEastAsian“wave”’,inD.K.Thussu(ed.),MediaontheMove:GlobalFlowandContra-Flow,London,UK:Routledge,pp.131–52.Kim,Y.(2009a),‘Introduction:ThemediaandAsiantransformations’,inY.Kim(ed.),MediaConsumptionandEverydayLifeinAsia,London,UK:Routledge,pp.1–24.Kim,Y.(ed.)(2009b),MediaConsumptionandEverydayLifeinAsia,London,UK:Routledge.Kim,K.-D.andBaeS.-J.(2017),‘HallyuandthetraditionalculturalgenesofKorea’,KritikaKultura,29,319–39.LaPastina,A.C.andJ.D.Straubhaar(2005),‘Multipleproximitiesbetweentelevisiongenresandaudiences:Theschismbetweentelenovelas’globaldistributionandlocalconsumption’,Gazette,67(3),271–88.Lie,J.(2012),‘WhatistheKintheKoreanPop?SouthKoreanpopularmusic,thecultureindustry,andnationalidentity’,KoreaObserver,43(3),339–63.Martin-Barbero,J.(1993),Communication,CultureandHegemony:FromtheMediatoMediations,London,UK:Sage.Martinez,D.(ed.)(1998),TheWorldsofJapanesePopularCulture:Gender,ShiftingBoundariesandGlobalCultures,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.McGuigan,J.(2002),‘Thecoolnessofcapitalismtoday’,TripleC,10(2),425–38.NederveenPieterse,J.(2009),GlobalizationandCulture:GlobalMélange,NewYork,NY:Rowman&Littlefield.Nye,J.S.(1990),BoundtoLead:TheChangingNatureofAmericanPower,NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.Octobre,S.(2020),YouthTechnocultures:FromAestheticstoPolitics,Leiden,TheNetherlandsandBoston,MA:Brill.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
393Unpackingyouthcosmo-cultures385Oh,I.(2009),‘Hallyu:TheriseoftransnationalculturalconsumersinChinaandJapan’,KoreaObserver,40(3),425–59.Oh,I.(2016),‘Hallyufansandgendercontrol’,EastAsiaForum,11November,accessed4April2021athttps://www.eastasiaforum.org/2016/11/11/Hallyu-fans-and-gender-control/.Parker,H.N.(2011),‘Towardadefinitionofpopularculture’,HistoryandTheory,50(2),147–70.Pickering,M.J.(2010),PopularCulture,London,UK:Sage.Pharo,P.(2018),Lecapitalismeaddictif,Paris,France:PUF.Ramet,S.P.andG.P.Crnković(eds)(2003),Kazaaam!Splat!Ploof!:TheAmericanImpactonEuropeanPopularCulture,since1945,Landham,MD:RowmanandLittlefield.Regev,M.(2013),Pop-RockMusic:AestheticCosmopolitanisminLateModernity,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Regev,M.(2019),‘Postlude:Worldcultureafterculturalglobalization’,Poetics,75,accessed15April2020athttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2019.101383.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.andK.E.White(2007),‘Whatisglobalization?’,inG.Ritzer(ed.),TheBlackwellCompaniontoGlobalization,Oxford,UK:WileyBlackwell.Rodriguez,C.(2019),‘Cosmopolitansocialization:HowIseeme,howtheyseeme’,inV.Cicchelli,S.OctobreandV.Riegel(eds),AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill,pp.181–200.Roudometof,V.(2016a),‘Theorisingglocalization:Tinterpretations’,EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory,19(3),391–408.Roudometof,V.(2016b),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,London,UK:Routledge.Schroeder,J.E.(2015),‘Communicatingidentity/consumingdifference’,ConsumptionMarkets&Culture,18(6),485–9.Shim,D.(2006),‘HybridityandtheriseofKoreanpopularcultureinAsia’,Media,Culture&Society,28,88–97.Suarez-Orozco,M.andD.B.Qin-Hilliard(2004),‘Globalization:Cultureandeducationinthenewmil-lennium’,inM.Suarez-OrozcoandD.B.Qin-Hilliard(eds),Globalization:CultureandEducationintheNewMillennium,Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,pp.1–37.Thorpe,C.andD.Inglis(2019),‘Do“globalgenerations”exist?’,YouthandGlobalization,1(1),40–64.Thussu,D.K.(ed.)(2006),MediaontheMove:GlobalFlowandContra-Flow,London,UK:Routledge.Tomlinson,J.(1999),GlobalizationandCulture,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.Williams,R.(1958),‘Cultureisordinary’,reprintedinR.Gable(ed.)(1988),ResourcesofHope:Culture,Democracy,Socialism,London,UK:Verso,pp.3–18.Williams,R.(2018),‘Popularculture:Historyandtheory’,CulturalStudies,32(6),903–28.Wolf,M.J.P.(ed.)(2018),TheRoutledgeCompaniontoImaginaryWorlds,London,UK:Routledge.Wright,D.(2015),UnderstandingCulturalTaste:Sensation,Skill,andSensibility,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Yano,C.(2013),PinkGlobalization:HelloKitty’sTrekacrossthePacific,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.VincenzoCicchelliandSylvieOctobre-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:02AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
39424.Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogueVivianeRiegelThischapterpresentstheintersectionbetweenglocalizationandthepost/decolonialper-spectives,addressingthelocal–globalinterplayinthediscussionsofthesetwoscholarships.PostcolonialStudieshavebeendevelopedmoresignificantlyintheIndian-Anglophoneworld,whereasDecolonialStudiesarefocusedmainlyinLatinAmericancountries.Mymainhypothesisisthatpost/decolonialperspectivesonglocalizationdifferfromtheWesternoneinthecontextoftheconceptionoflocal–globaldynamics,withsignificantimpli-cationsfortheconceptsofexperienceandcontext.Thisdifferenceisduetotheemphasisonpowerrelations(basedonthecolonialstructure)andonglobalhistoricalprocesses(explainedbycolonialism).Regardingthediscussionofexperience,theagencyofindividualsisfoundindiversepractices,whichleadtotherecognitionofculturaldifferences.Connectedtothecontextualstructureofthesocietiesthathaveexperiencedcolonialism,differenttemporalitiesandsocialinequalitiesmarktheunderstandingofthelocal–globaldynamics.Asawayofunderstandingthesedifferences,aglobalstudyonmediarepresentationontheAnthropoceneisexemplified.GlobalStudiesscholarsaimtounderstandtheimpactsofglobalizationanditsincreasingconnectivityovertime,accompaniedbyculturalchangesandsubjectivities.GlobalStudiesthenbroadlymatchsocialsciencereorientations(NederveenPieterse,2013)thatincludedecentring,aswellasthinkingplural–ratherthanacanon,whichimpliesasinglecentreofpower,cross-cuttingsensibilitiesarerelevant(asinSubalternStudies).OurcritiquehereontheWestern–NorthernperspectivesofGlobalStudiesliesintheneedfordiscussionsthataddressandengageglobalinequalityinaccesstoculture.Pointinginthisdirection,Delanty(2016)explainshowthetransnationalshiftinsociology,andspecificallyinhistory,gaveamajorimpetustonewthinkingaboutcultureandpower,thelargestsinceFoucault.Thisisduetotheorthodoxandcanonicapproachesthathadpre-supposedaEurocentricunderstandingoftheworld.Newapproachescanbedescribedfromexperiencesindifferentregions,then,intheEastandintheSouthoftheglobe.LookingtotheEast,OrientalismhasbeendefinedasadiscoursethatproducestheOrientasanobjectofpowerandknowledge.EdwardSaid’ssignalwork,Orientalism,in1978,pavedthewayforanewapproachtoglobalhistory.Heoffersananti-foundationalistepistemology,whichshouldnotbeawayofessentializingthehierarchicaldivisionofEastandWest.Theperspectivesfromtheso-calledGlobalSouthemergeasnewformsofunderstandinganddiscussingsocieties.Connell(2007)explainsthatmakingthesocialcanonmoreinclu-sive,ingender,raceandevenglobalterms,isnotanadequatecorrection.Hence,importanttypesofsocialknowledge–includingmovement-basedandIndigenousknowledges–resistcanonization,andaturntowardspost/decolonialandSouthernperspectivesopensupnewavenuesofthoughtonthehistoryofknowledge.DeSousaSantos(2014)alsoexploresinhisdiscussionofepistemologiesoftheSouthasetofinquiriesintotheconstructionandvalidation386VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
395Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue387ofknowledgeborninstruggle,ofwaysofknowingdevelopedbysocialgroupsaspartoftheirresistanceagainstthesystematicinjusticesandoppressionscausedbycapitalism,colonialismandthepatriarchy.Heproposesacounterhegemonicuseandunderstandingofexistinghegem-onictoolswithinourcurrentreality(andanexpansionofthepresent)inordertobeabletoimagineandbuildabetterfuture.Theuseofthesedichotomousmetaphors(NorthandSouth,WestandEast)mustavoidtheerrorsofessentialism,invitingresearcherstobeawareoftheinternalcomplexityofthesecon-cepts.Todesignateanepistemologyas‘regional’meanstoconsiderasvalidtheknowledgethatresistedthedominationofanotherregion.Furthermore,aregionalepistemologyallowsthisregiontothinkaboutknowledgeandwaysofproducingitthatarenotimported,butsuitedtoitsreality.TheseperspectivesfromtheSouthandfromtheEastaimtofillthegapofwhatismissinginstandardsociologicalunderstandings,whichisasystematicconsiderationoftheworld-historicalprocessesofdispossession,appropriation,genocideandenslavementascentraltotheemergenceanddevelopmentofmodernityanditsinstitutionalforms(Fanon,1963;Gilroy,1993).ScholarswithinthefieldsofPost/DecolonialStudies–suchasHomiBhabha(1994),DipeshChakrabarty(2000),StuartHall(1992),WalterMignolo(2011)andGayatriSpivak(1988)–followthisshift.Postcolonialtheoriesdiscussandcriticallyanalyseknowledgeproductionsystems,aimingtostudytheknowledgeandexperiencessilencedbythecolonial-capitalist.PostcolonialperspectivesarecharacterizedbyanattempttovaluenarrativesotherthanthetotalizingEurocentricnarrative.Inthissense,itisthroughthevisibilityofpluralitythatPostcolonialStudiesconformtoproposalsofcounterhegemonictheories(Bhabha,1994;Bhambra,2007,2016;Go,2013,2016).ConnectionsbetweenthesetheoriesandGlobalStudiesarefoundindiscussionsofcosmopolitanism(Appiah,1997;Bhabha,1996;Bhambra,2011;Prysthon,2002)andglocalization(Bhabha,1994;Canclini,2006;Grosfoguel,2008).Decolonialthoughthascontributedsignificantlytothetheoreticalcritiqueofcolonialityinsofarasitseekstodeconstructcolonialdiscourses.Broadly,thedecolonialmovementaimstore-centrecolonialism,empireandracism,whichareoftenobscuredfromview.Itarguesthatthesearenothistoricaleventscommittedinthepast,butepistemologicalandontologicalsystemsthataredeeplyembeddedinthelocalandgloballevelsthatconstitutethepresent.Thesestudiesshowitisnecessarytomoveforwardbyqualifyingmoreclearlythechallengesofsocialactionandhistory(Mignolo,2003;Quijano,2002).TheintersectionsofdecolonialtheorieswithGlobalStudiesarefoundindiscussionsofcosmopolitanism(Mignolo,2011)andglocalization(Dussel,1999;Mignolo,2000,2005;Mignolo&Escobar,2011;Quijano,2002).Bothpostcolonialanddecolonialperspectivesmaycontributetotheprocessofbreakingmethodologicalandtheoreticalnationalisms.Thediscussionofmethodologicalnationalism(Beck,2000)isrelevantforrethinkingthetrajectoriesofnationalsociology(-ies)andhowtheseareorganizedandlegitimizedterritoriallyasscientific,aswellasforexplainingthebroadersocialrealityatthetransnationalandgloballevels.Inthecontextofperipheralsoci-eties,methodologicalnationalismreproducestheEuropeanEnlightenmentprovincialismthatsoughttomonopolizetheproductionofacertaintypeofmodernity(Chakrabarty,2000).TheWestern/Northernmodelofmodernity,addsSérgioCosta(2006),simultaneouslyinterferedintheprovincializationofcentralandperipheralsociologies.Basically,methodologicalnation-alismextolsalocalizedgeopoliticsofknowledge,withclaimstobeuniversal.ItanswersthepracticalimpossibilityofauniversalistreasonmonopolizedbyEurocentricexperience.Andthatiswhypost/decolonialperspectivesinGlobalStudiesarespecificallyimportantfortheVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
396388Handbookofcultureandglocalizationdevelopmentofacriticaldiscussionofthemosttraditionalstudiesinthefield,withaspecificcritiqueofthepossibleexperiencesofthoseindividualsfromEasternandSouthernsocieties.GLOBALSTUDIESANDTHEPOST/DECOLONIALPERSPECTIVESGlobalizationprocessesshapesocioculturalrealityindialecticalprocessesbetweenthelocalandtheglobal(Friedman,1990;Giddens,1991).Theglobalizationofculturalindustrieshasinitiatedsignificantsocialandculturalchanges,requiringanaccountofnew,post-nationallydefinedculturaldispositions(anddiscussedinseveralchaptersinthisvolume).Theprolif-erationofinformationcomingfromeverypartoftheworldproducesacomplexlexiconofaestheticandculturalpossibilities,withadenselyconnectednetworkofglobaliconsandimag-inaries.Theseprocesseshavebeenanalysedinstudiesofcosmopolitanism(Papastergiadis,2012)andglocalization(Roudometof,2016).InGlobalStudies,differentperspectivesarisefrombothpostcolonialanddecolonialdebates,withcriticismdirectedtowardstheinattentionofWesterndiscoursetopoliticsandhistory,aswellastotheWest’sEurocentrism.Simplisticimageriesofotherregionsarecriticizedinamovementtoreduceboundarycreation(geographical,aswellassymbolic)inthesestudies.PostcolonialStudiesofferacritiqueofuniversalism,highlightingthedifferentpossibilitiesfortheideaofmodernity,itstemporalitiesandspatialities.Thisidearequiresthespecificationofa‘temporalbreak’withtheWesternmodelofsociologicalexplanation,whichisbasedonthemajorshiftfromtheagrarianorpre-modern(ortraditional),towardstheindustrialormodern.Regardingspatialities,thecolonialspaceisthe‘non-place’,setagainstthecolonialists’place.Aparticulartheoryofculturaldifferenceistheninstituted–onethatinstalls‘culturalhomo-geneityintothesignofmodernity’(Bhabha,1994,p.243).Forpostcolonialtheorists,thisultimatelydemonstratestheethnocentriclimitationsoftheconceptofmodernity;specifically,thewayinwhichitsparticularismbecomestransformedintoauniversalidea.Bhambra(2007,2016)presentsareconstructionoftheideaofmodernityincontemporarysociology,criticizingtheabstractionofEuropeanmodernityfromitscolonialcontextandthewaynon-Westernothersaredisregarded.Thispostcolonialperspectiveaimstoestablishadia-logueinwhichotherscanalsospeakandbeheard.Inasimilarvein,Go(2013,2016)developsaproposalinwhichpostcolonialsociologycouldincorporaterelationalsocialtheoriestogivenewaccountsofmodernity.Ratherthansimplystudyingnon-Westernpostcolonialsocietiesoronlyexaminingcolonialism,thisapproachinsistsupontheinteractionalconstitutionofsocialunits,processesandpracticesacrossspace.InadaptingthepostcolonialargumentforLatinAmerica,the‘decolonialturn’understandscolonialityasthehiddenandconstitutivefaceofmodernity.Theexplanationofthemech-anismsofreproductionofcolonialityispossiblethroughanunderstandingofthelogicofimperialism,whichisconstitutiveandrelationaltocoloniality(Mignolo,2003).Intheglobalcontext,theinformality,invisibilityandcloudinessofcontemporaryimperialistmechanismsreproduceimperialismwithoutempirethroughgovernancewithoutgovernment.Inthepostmodernworld,guidedbyglobalism,thereisasketchofthecontinuityanddiachronicaccumulationoftherhetoricofmodernity(salvation,conviviality,prosperityandfreedom)anditsdarkerside,thelogicofcoloniality(discrimination,racism,domination,unilateralismVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
397Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue389andexploitation)(Quijano,2002).Basedonthesetwoperspectives,wepresenthereitsmaindiscussionsfortheconceptsandpracticesofcosmopolitanismandglocalization.POST/DECOLONIALDISCUSSIONSOFCOSMOPOLITANISMThediscussionsofcosmopolitanismarestillcentredonWesternandmostlyEuropeansocie-ties.AsJanNederveenPieterse(2006)explains,ifglobalizationcannotbelocatedonlyintheWesternworld,cosmopolitanismshouldabandonitscentristperspectiveandbecomeplural.FewstudieshaveexaminedcosmopolitanismbeyondWesternEurope(Haller&Roudometof,2010;Norris,2000;Pichler,2012;Schueth&O’Loughlin,2008).Thedevelopmentofstudiesofcosmopolitanisminotherregionsoftheworldisrelevant.PostcolonialistssuchasHomiBhabha(1996)proposeda‘vernacularcosmopolitanism’.Thisperspectiveaimstoformulateanon-elite,non-ethnocentricversionofcosmopolitanismthatacknowledgesrealindividualsandtherelevanceofeverydaylife.Inherpostcolonialcritiqueoftheconcept,GurminderBhambra(2011)addressestheques-tionofwhethercosmopolitanismcanbeprovincializedsuchthatitbecomesausefulconceptforthediscussionofcontemporarysocialdiversity.Bhambra’sargumentmaybefoundinherdiscussionofmigrationandrefugeestudies,inwhich,sheaffirms,‘theonethingthatappearstobemissingisahistoricalcontextualisation’(Bhambra,2017).Thismeansthatsomepeoplehavethepresent-dayprivilegeofcitizenshipandothers–migrantsorrefugees–aredenied,eventhoughmanyinthelattertwocategoriesofpeoplewereatonetimecitizensofEuropeanempires.SheemphasizesthisamnesiawithinEuropeanpoliticsaswellasinGlobalStudies.Appiah(1997)identifiesthecosmopolitanpatriotassomeonewhoentertainsthepossibilityofaworldinwhicheveryonelivesasarootedcosmopolitan–attachedtoahomeofone’sown,withitsownculturalparticularities–buttakingpleasurefromthepresenceoftheOther,indifferentplacesthatarehometotheOther,withdifferentpeople.Thiscosmopolitanalsoimaginesthat,insuchaworld,noteveryonewillfinditbesttostayintheirnatalpatria,sothatthecirculationofpeopleamongdifferentlocalitieswillinvolvenotonlyculturaltourism(whichthecosmopolitanadmitstoenjoying)butmigration,nomadism,diaspora.Inthepast,theseprocesseshavetoooftenbeentheresultofforcesweshoulddeplore;theoldmigrantswereoftenrefugees,andolderdiasporaoftenbeganinaninvoluntaryexile.Butwhatcanbehateful,ifcoerced,canbecelebratedwhenitflowsfromthefreedecisionsofindividualsorofgroups.Themultiplicityandcomplexityofspacesandoftemporalitiesareconstitutivepartsofthecontemporaryperipheralcosmopolitanismconcept,proposedbyPrysthon(2002).Accordingtotheauthor,ifmoderncosmopolitanismislinkedtomultinationalindustrialcapitalism,contemporarycosmopolitanismisdefinedbythedispersionofcapitalandtheemergenceoftransnationalmarkets,thetechnologicaldevelopmentofmediaandnewformsofcommunica-tion.Inthisprocess,thevalueofdiversity(mainlythroughmulticulturalism)combineswithdestabilizationofthecentralizingforceofthemodernmetropolis,the‘Centre’.Ifmoderncosmopolitanismwasdefinedbyaccesstometropolitandiversity,byaCentrethatprovidedandlegitimizedreferences,contemporaryperipheralcosmopolitanismwouldthenbedefinedbyaccesstodiversitythatresultsfromthecontactbetweenthecentreandtheperiphery,notlegitimized,butpresentinseveralpartsoftheworld.Hence,cosmopolitanismisconfigurednotonlyonspatialtensionsofdifferentregionsoftheworldascentresorperipheries,butalsoVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
398390Handbookofcultureandglocalizationontemporaltensions,withdifferenthistorical-culturalcontextsthatdefinehowthenationalandtheOtherareunderstood.Thediscussionofcosmopolitanismincontemporarytimesdif-ferentiatesitselffromprevioushistoricaldiscussion,insofarasrepresentationsoftraditionalorcentralmodelshavechanged,whileeverydaylifeexperienceshavebecomeinherentlycosmopolitan.ThisistrueofmetropolisessuchasNewYork,LondonandParisintheNorth,andalsoSãoPaulo,MexicoandCapeTownintheSouth,wheretherearezonesofconflictandnegotiationbetweenthecentreandtheperiphery,atthesametimethateachcitystillisconnectedtoitsplaceintheglobaleconomicsphere,creatingorreceivingmoreinfluenceofglobalflows.InthedecolonialdiscussionproposedbyMignolo(2011),itisnecessarytoreduceKantianlegaciesofthetermcosmopolitanism,consideredasuniversal,sothatEuro-Americanconceptsofcosmopolitanismalsohavetherighttoexist.Cosmopolitanlocalismmeansthemultiplicationofnodes,theactiveinterventionoflocalcosmopolitanprojectsfromallovertheworldandthereductionofWesterncosmopolitanstotheirownlocalhistory.Cosmopolitanism,likeglobalism,wasalsounidirectionalandcentrifugal;bothwereglobaldesignsimaginedanddiscussedwithinWesternEuropeandtheUnitedStatesfortherestoftheworld.Kant’scosmopolitanideals(andbyextensionwithenlightenment,clearcosmopol-itanambitions)coexistedwithhisnotoriousracistunderpinning.So,thequestionwas,howcouldcosmopolitanismbepossiblewhenthedesigneroftheprojecthadahierarchicalviewofhumanityaroundtheplanet?TheKantianperspectiveforcosmopolitanismwas,expresslyornot,aprojectofWesternexpansion(whatwetodaydescribeasglobalization),whoseimple-mentationwasthroughthecivilizingmission,ratherthanbythefreemarketineconomyanddemocracyinpolitics.TheRightsofManbecamethemeasuringsticktojudgesocialbehav-iourthat,accordingtoWesternstandards,wasun-civilizedand,therefore,violatedtherightsofmanoutsideEurope.Thesilentassumptionwasthattherewasnoviolationoftherightsofcitizens,becausetherewasnosuchsocialroleoutsideEurope.Thus,thecivilizingmissionandcosmopolitanismappearedtobetheunderlyingprojectofsecularWesternexpansion.Tomaintaincosmopolitanidealsinpractice,itisnecessarytodecolonizecosmopolitanism,whichmeansmovingtowardadecolonialcosmopolitanorder,nolongermodelledonthelawofnaturediscoveredbyscience.Decolonialcosmopolitanismshallbethebecomingofapluriversalworldorderbuiltuponanddwellingontheglobalbordersofmodernity/coloni-ality.Oneofthefirststepsofdecolonialcosmopolitanismistogetridoftheideaoffriendsandenemiesinwhichthepoliticalfindsitsraisond’être.TheideaofthepoliticalconceivedintermsoffriendsandfoespresupposedtheideologicalframeofEuropeanhistory.Decolonialcosmopolitanismproposesadoubledeparture,aradicalshiftinthegeopoliticsofknowingandbeing.Thescenariosinwhichdecolonialcosmopolitanismcouldbethoughtoutarethefollowing:ontheonehand,thetransformationofthemonocentric(andunilateral)Westernworldfromthesixteenthcenturyestablishmentofthecolonialmatrixofpowertothetwenty-firstcentury.Inthisnewcentury,thecolonialmatrixofpowerhasbeenunderdispute.Wearewitnessingthetransformationofamonocentrictoapolycentricworldsharingthesametypeofeconomy,acapitalisteconomy.However,polycentricityappearsatthelevelofcontrolofpoliticalauthority,controlofknowledgeandcontrolofsubjectivity(forexample,gender,sexuality,religiosity).Ontheotherhand,apolycentriccapitalistworldisnotofcourseadecolonialworld,sinceweliveinaworldthathasnotdispensedwiththecolonialmatrixofpowerandthecolonialandimperialdifferencesregulatingthefieldofforcesinthemodern/colonialworld.VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
399Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue391InastudyconductedwithyoungpeopleinBrazil(Riegel,2019)regardingtheiraestheticcosmopolitanismdispositionsconnectedtoculturalpractices,itwaspossibletofindbarriers,relatedtoinequalities,anddifferentperspectivesofculturalcontext.Barriersweremarkedbythemisunderstandingofdifferentculturalcodes–foreignlanguagebeingoneexample–intheaccessibilityofamultiplicityofglobalculturalmeanings.Differenthorizonsandperspectiveswerefoundintheinterbreedingofculturalelements,whichcomebothfromabroadandfromdifferentpartsofthecountry,withapluralculturalreality.Globalimaginariesweredissonant,sincehighervaluewasregisteredfornationalandlocalelements,withahighpercentageofBrazilianelements,andinternationalelementswereonlyvaluedbythoseindividualswithahighersocialstatus,explainingtherealityofinequalitiesinthissociety.ThemaincontributionofthesediscussionsistoofferacritiquetoWesternlocalismthataimstobecomesynonymouswithuniversalism.WesterncosmopolitanismanditslegacyproposetheuniversalizationofWesternlocalism.Onthecontrary,non-Westernlocalismisplural,sincetherearemultiplememoriesandcolonialwoundsinflictedbyracism,waysoflife,languages,beliefsandexperiencesconnectedtotheWest,butatthesametimenotcircumscribedtoit.Localismshouldbepluriversalandthereforedecolonial.GLOCALIZATIONINTHEPOST/DECOLONIALDISCUSSIONSRobertson(1992)introducedtheconceptof‘glocalization’intosocialandscientificdiscourse.Robertson’s(1995)definitionofglocalizationisthat‘theglobalisnotinandofitselfcounter-poisedtothelocal.Rather,whatisoftenreferredtoasthelocalisessentiallyincludedwithintheglobal’.Inthisrespect,globalization,definedinitsmostgeneralsenseasthecompressionoftheworldasawhole,involvesthelinkingoflocalities.Butitalsoinvolvesthe‘invention’oflocality,inthesamegeneralsenseoftheideaoftheinventionoftradition.Afterreviewingtheconceptduetosomecriticismofhisideas,Robertson(2013)statesthattoday,onlytheglocalexists(weareneitherglobalnorlocalanymore).Theglocalistheoutcomeofthehistoricallylongstrugglebetweentheglobalandthelocal,wherebybothlost.InRobertson’svision,unlikethegeneralviewpoint,intheend,globalizationdoesnotproduceuniformity(evenifthiswasitsoriginal,colonialaim);instead,thedifferencesandfragmen-tationoftheworldresultinamultitudeofglocalrealities.Glocalizationwouldbeinourcontemporaryworldtheresultofglobalization,whichwaslostinitsownhegemonicproject.Inhisturn,Roudometof’s(2016)perspectiveofglocalizationisthatofajuxtapositionbetweenthepopularglobalizationconstructinrelationtoglocalization.Thereisamultilayeredinteractionbetweenthelocalandtheglobal.JohnTomlinsonembracedtheperspectiveof‘ethicalglocalism’(1999).IrrespectiveofwhetherweareopentotheculturalOther,glocalismariseswherewedisplayadegreeofmoralorperhapspoliticalresponsibilityforpeoplewedonotknowandwhocomefromsocietiesverydifferentfromourown.Hedefinesthisas‘ethicalglocalism’,wherethereisasimul-taneouscareaboutthelocalandtheglobal.Thisviewlinksupdirectlywiththeconceptofglobalityasagrowingconsciousnessoftheworldasoneplace.VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
400392HandbookofcultureandglocalizationAPOSTCOLONIALPERSPECTIVEFORGLOCALIZATIONTherecognitionofthedifferencesbetweencentralsociologiesandperipheralsociologiesmakessenseintheunderstandingofhowthefrontiersofcolonizationallowustovisualizeamultiplicityofexperiencesproducedbetweentheoldtraditionaldevicesrelatedtomemo-riesofresistanceandnewdevicesproducedbycoloniality.Thesedevicesaimtoerasethememoriesinordertoreleaseexploitationandunproductiveconsumerism.Recognizingtheintellectualexperienceoftheperipheryisawayofunderstandingmoreclearlythechallengesofknowledgethatisproducedonthefrontiersbetweencapitalismandcoloniality,whichrevealunprecedentedculturalhybridities(Bhabha,1994;Canclini,2006;Grosfoguel,2008).HomiBhabha’s(1994)theoryofdisavowalhascontributedgreatlytoourunderstandingoftheracialpoliticsofcolonialism.Hisanalysisofviolenceandnationalconsciousnessmovesbeyondsimplistic,binaryconceptionsofthestruggleagainstcolonialism.Thecontinuityfromthesixteenthtothetwenty-firstcentury,thatis,theformation,consolidationandexpansionofWesternidealsandcivilizations,isoneofthecentralthesesofthemodernity/colonialityproject(Grosfoguel,2008).ThepostcolonialdiscussionofculturalhybriditybyGarciaCanclini(2006)opposesthehomogenizingvisionofthephenomenonofglobalization,withthemainthesisthatthereareglobalculturalaspectsthatdonotlosetheirrelationwiththelocal,allowingforthedevelopmentofculturalhybridization.Itisintheheterogeneousrealityofglobalizationthatnewmeaningsmayemerge,comingfrompopularculturesinperipheralareas.Thelocalandtheperipheral,throughencountersandnegotiationswiththeOther,recon-figurethecentreandproposehybridmodels.Specifically,LatinAmericahasacomplexandrichcontexttobeunderstoodfromtheperspectiveofglobalizationprocessesandtheirimpactonindividuals’lives.Theconceptofculturalhybridityintheregionalcontextcanbeunderstoodthroughits‘multitemporalheterogeneity’whichoccursbecause,accordingtoCanclini(2006,p.206),inLatinAmerica,oldtraditionsarestillpresent,whilemodernityhasnotyetcompletelyarrived,sothereisacoexistenceofdifferenttemporalities.Thismeansthatthereisacontinuationofresidualtraditionsaswellastheproductionofmodernelements,resultingindiverseandhybridcultures,orculturalplurality,polyvocality,code-switching,mestizajeandculturalsyn-cretism.Themainprocessesthatpromotethisrealityare:thebreakupandmixingofthecol-lectionsthatusedtoorganizeculturalsystems,thedeterritorializationofsymbolicprocesses,andtheexpansionofimpuregenres.TheprocessofculturalhybridizationisanimportantperspectiveintheunderstandingofglobalphenomenainLatinAmerica,andspecificallyinthestudiesofglocalization.Whilstassertionsofnationalcultureandpre-colonialtraditionshaveplayedanimportantroleincreatinganti-colonialdiscourseandinarguingforanactivedecolonizingproject,theo-riesofthehybridnatureofpostcolonialcultureassertadifferentmodelforresistance,locatingthisinthesubversivecounter-discursivepracticesimplicitinthecolonialambivalenceitselfandsounderminingtheverybasisonwhichimperialistandcolonialistdiscourseraisesitsclaimsofsuperiority.Manyoftheissuesandproblemssurroundingthetopicofglobalization(amongwhich,theplaceofthe‘glocal’;thefunctionoflocalagencyunderthepressureofglobalforces;theroleofimperialisminglobalization;andtheconnectionbetweenimperialismandneoliberaleco-nomics)areaddressed,andcontinuetobeaddressedbythepostcolonialanalysisofimperialpower.Thus,althoughweneedtobecarefulaboutfalselyprescribingpostcolonialtheoryasVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
401Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue393apanacea,andshouldkeepinmindthefirmgroundingofpostcolonialdiscourseinthehistori-calphenomenonofcolonialism,thefieldofPostcolonialStudieshasprovidedusefulstrategiesforawiderfieldofglobalanalysis.Thesestudieshavedemonstratedtheinsistentrealityoflocalagency,anagencythatcanaddresssimpledualisticapproachestothelocalandglobal.Inastudyofglobalmediarepresentationsoftheterm‘Anthropocene’,postcolonialperspec-tivesarepresentinthesocialsciencesaspectoftheenvironmentalglobaldiscussion(Riegel,2020).ThehistorianDipeshChakrabarty(2000)offersacentralideaof‘provincializing’Europeasawayofexplainingthecollectiveamnesiaoftheimpactsofcolonialism,withdifferentperspectivesoncapitalismandindustrialization.TheconceptofglocalizationisparticularlyimportanttoPostcolonialStudiesbecauseitcanbeunderstoodintermsofthetransculturalrelationshipsbetweencolonyandimperialcentreinimperialism.Aswithclassicalimperialism,theimpactofcolonialincursionwasnotsimplyoneway,oppressiveandhierarchical,butreciprocal,transculturalandeventuallytransforma-tive.Thetransculturalscenarioemphasizestheagencyofthelocalandofindividualsubjectsandcolonialcommunitiestointerpolatethediscoursesofimperialpower.GlocalizationthroughDecolonialLensesIntermsofnon-WesternandSouthernsociology,wecansaythatthesealsodidnotovercometheelementofprovincializationinthattheywerecaughtupinthesearchformacro-knowledge,tiedtothemythofregionalmodernizationinthestruggleagainstcoloniality.AlongsideitsperipheralUSvariationofAmericano-centrism,Eurocentrismimposesasuniversalanalyticalcategoriesaseriesofconcepts–suchascivilsociety,theState,democracy,citizenshipandhumanright.Thatisdonewithoutproperreconsiderationandquestioningoftheseconcepts’underlyingontologicaltensions.Todecolonizeistostandagainstthedifferentformsofdominationthatexistedandexistandthatimposealogicofthinking.Todecolonize,hence,istobuilddifferentlogics.BoaventuradeSousaSantos(2006)bringsimportantcontributionstothedecolonialperspectiveinGlobalStudiesbytakingseriouslytheSouthernperspective.TheSouthisametaphor,butithasimpactsinthereflectionaboutthemodesofexploitationbetweenthecentreandtheperipheryoftheworldsystem.Inthisway,anepistemologyoftheSouthcontributestotheadvanceofdecolonialcriticism,emphasizingthevalueofthisprojectasanintellectualcritique,aswellasapoliticalproposition.Colonialityoperatesonthreelevels:thecolonialityofpower,relatingtoeconomics,politicsandinstitutions;thecolonialityofknowledge,foundattheepistemic,philosophicalandscien-tificlevels,andinthelanguage–knowledgerelationship;andthecolonialityofthebeingthatoperatesinsubjectivity,inthecontrolofsexuality,inassignedroles.Quijano(2002)discusseshow,throughtheexerciseofpower,categoriesthatidentifythesubjectsarise.Forexample,thecategoriesofEuropean,IndianandBlack.Theauthordemonstrateshowpowernaturalizesthesecategories,makingsomesuperiorandothersinferior.Mignolo’s(2005)modelprovidesanultimateunitofanalysisthroughtherecognitionofasociallyembeddedethnicidentitytraumatizedthroughcolonialism.Asthistraumawasexperiencedindifferentwaysacrossmultiplelocations,suchanidentityisnotuniversal,butaformofrelativeuniversalismthatdrawsonmultipleautochthonousepistemicandonticlocations.Itisthroughtheconnectionbetweenthesecommunitiesthattheglobalimaginationemerges,throughwhichsocialandVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
402394Handbookofcultureandglocalizationpoliticalexperimentationcanbedeveloped.Mignolodrawsourattentiontothefallibilityofclaimstocertainty,whichhighlightsincompleteness.Specifically,thedecolonialconceptionoftransmodernity(Dussel,1999)isaboutthetransgressionandtranscendenceofmodernity,understoodasasystempremisedoncolonizingideas,institutionsandpractices.Theconceptinvitescriticalandcreativeappropriationsofselectmodernideas,alongwithmultipleotherconceptualframeworksthatcancontributetoforgealessoppressivefuture.Itrecognizesthatliberationanddecolonizationcanbetoldinmultiplelanguages,withuniqueandrichmeaningsandconceptualbases,andthereforevaluesSouth–Southencountersanddialogues.Transmodernitywouldbeonewayofexpressingadecolonialattitudewithregardstomodernity,openingituptomultiplelanguagesandstrip-pingmodernityofitscolonizingelementsandbiases.Throughanontologicalreadingoftheculturalbackgroundfromwhichculturalproductsemerge,Escobar(2018)morerecentlyaddstheideaofapluriverse,asapossibilityofacritiquetothedualistontology–whichcharacterizestheprevailingversionsofWesternmodernity.AnumberofauthorsemphasizethreefundamentaldualismsasthedominantformofEuro-modernity,specifically,thedividebetween:natureandculture;usandthem(ortheWestandtheRest,themodernsandthenon-moderns,thecivilizedandthesavages,etc.);andsubjectandobject(ormind/bodydualism).Thepluriverseisanontological-politicalfieldthatquestionsandgoesbeyondthesedualisms.ThisperspectivecanbeexplainedbytheculturalproductionofculturalnarrativesanddiscoursesinboththeGlobalNorthandtheGlobalSouth.ItsummarizesemergentnotionsandmovementsintheGlobalNorth,suchasdegrowth,com-moning,convivialityandavarietyofpragmatictransitioninitiatives.FortheGlobalSouth,thedebatesandstrugglesarearoundbuenvivir(well-being),therightsofnature,communallogics.Theargumenthereisthatthesearetransitionimaginations,whichposittheneedforradicaltransformationsinthedominantmodelsoflife.Byshowinghowdifferentrealitiesarepatchedtogether,onecouldhopetocounteracttheontologicalpoliticsoftheuniversalwithanotherthatoperatesonthebasisofradicalontologicaldifferenceandpluriversality.Inanotherperspective,asapoliticalengagementofdecolonialdiscussionofaglocalexpe-rience,Nichols(2020)pointsouttheideaofdispossessioninIndigenousstrugglesagainstcolonization.TheformulationofargumentsbyIndigenousscholarsandactivistsregardingdispossessionshowthatithascometonameauniquehistoricalprocess,oneinwhichprop-ertyisgeneratedunderconditionsthatrequiredivestmentandalienationfromthosewhoappear,onlyretroactively,asitsoriginalowners.Inthisway,theftandpropertyarerelatedinarecursive,ratherthanalinear,manner.Theterm‘dispossession’isusedtodenotethefactthatIndigenouspeopleshavenotonlybeensubjugatedandoppressedbyimperialelites,theyhavealsobeendivestedoftheirlands,thatis,theterritorialfoundationoftheirsocieties,whichinturnhavebecometheterritorialfoundationsforthecreationofnew,European-style,settler-colonialsocieties.Inthestudyofglobalmediarepresentationsoftheterm‘Anthropocene’,therearecritiquesofcolonialism,especiallysettlercolonization,ofteninthecontextofLatinAmerica(Riegel,2020).ThisisrelatedtothethesisthattheoriginsoftheAnthropocenecanbefoundinwhatLewisandMaslin(2015)conceptualizeastheColumbianExchange,whichattemptstoachievethecrossoverbetweenEarthsystemscienceandsocio-environmentalhistory.MediacoverageoftheAnthropoceneusuallyreportsthisintermsoftheyear1610(analternativestartdatefortheAnthropocene).Thepath-breakingresearchandactivismofKyleWhyte(2018)arguesthattheAnthropoceneisthedeliberateenactmentofcolonialprocessesthatrefusetoVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
403Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue395acknowledgespecificrelationsbetweenhumans,thelandandourotherkin.Thedammingofrivers,clear-cuttingofforests,andimportationofplantsandanimalsremadetheworldsofAmericaintothevisionofadisplacedEurope,fundamentallyalteringtheclimateandecosys-tems.Furthermore,theforceddisplacementthatmanytribalcommunitiessufferedinvolvedadaptationtoentirelynewenvironments,climates,ecosystems,plantsandanimals.ManyIndigenouspeopleshavelonglivedinadystopianAnthropoceneandhavealsolongfoughtanexistentialwaragainstit.ResearchonIndigenousknowledgealsouncoversmanywaystoconsidernatureandcontributestorecastingglobalenvironmentalstudiesintheAnthropocene(Danowski&ViveirosdeCastro,2016)soastoanalysethetraditionsofIndigenousgroupsinLatinAmerica.Indigenousconceptionsofnaturevarygreatly,aseachgrouphasitsparticularwaytoconceivenatureandunderstandtherelationsestablishedwithit.However,onecansaythatthereissomethingincommonamongallofthem,inthatthe‘naturalworld’isprimarilyawidenetworkofinter-relationsbetweenandamongagents(humanornon-human).Thedecolonialdiscussionsrelatedtotheconceptofglocalizationshowtheneedtoseri-ouslythinkthroughandenactprocessesofdecolonization.Thisinvolvesself-governanceforIndigenouspeoples,thereturnofstolenlands,andreparationsforthedescendantsofcapturedAfricans,butitalsofundamentallyquestionstheboundsandthelegitimacyofthenation-statestructureitself.Italsoaddsapluralformofdiscussionoftheglobeandtheexperienceslivedbydifferentindividualsonit.FORAPOST/DECOLONIALPERSPECTIVEOFGLOCALIZATIONThelogicwithinculturalpracticesandhybridizationassumesthecoexistenceoflocalandglobalcodesintheconstitutionoftheSelf,therebyimplyingadouble,immanentmovementofintra-culturalandinter-culturalexperience.Phenomenologicallysituatedculturalexperiencesmayexplainwhyculturalglobalizationdoesnotentailculturalhomogenization.Robertson(1995)affirmsthatweareconfrontedwiththedilemmasoftheorizingaphenom-enonthatcontainsaspatialcomponent,butalsoatemporalone,inordertoreconcilethelocalandtheglobalinacoherenttheoryofculturalglobalization.Ritzer(2003)developstheideaofacontinuum,wheremostofwhatisthoughtofasglobalizationliessomewherebetweenthesetwopoles.Bothglocalizationandgrobalizationare‘idealtypes’withfew,ifany,actualprocessesbeingoneortheother.Fortheauthor,globalphenomenashouldbeassessedintermsoftheirmixofglocalandgrobalelements.ForRitzer(2003),glocalizationisasoftandsubtlecolonialism,atop-downadaptiontothelocal,whilestillmaintaininganunbalancedrelationwiththelocal,whichremainssubordi-natetotheglocal.Inotherwords,theglocalovercomesthelocal.Principlesofglocalizationhavebeenimplementedbysomeinternationalmanagerialstyles,worldwideorganizations,religiousenterprises(forexample,EasternOrthodoxChristianityorSokaGakkai,aJapaneseBuddhistreligiousmovement),cross-culturalbusinessandmarketing,andcommercialstrate-giesforspecificproducts(forexample,Coca-Cola).Itisthereforenecessarytocomplementtheconceptualmetaphorofdiffusionwiththatofrefractionsoastounderstandglocalityanditsexperiences.Refractionreferstothefactorphe-nomenonoflightorradiowavesbeingdeflectedwhenpassingthroughtheinterfacebetweenonemediumandanotherorthroughamediumofvaryingdensity.Refractionoffersaconcep-tualmetaphorthatallowsthereinterpretationoftherelationshipbetweenglobalizationandVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
404396Handbookofcultureandglocalizationglocalization.Thestrategyrestsontheconceptionofglobalizationasagenericprocessintermsofwavesspreadingaroundtheglobe,aswellasthenotionofrefractionofwavesusedasameansofunderstandingtheglobal–localbinary.Globality,however,isnotbyitselfsufficienttocapturethecomplexityofsocialrelations.Rather,onehastoacknowledgeandincorporateintoone’stheoreticalvocabularythefactthattheencodinganddecodingofglobaleventsdonotnecessarilynegatethelocallensesthatcanbeusedtointerpretaneventordeterminethelocallevelofparticipation.Thatisnotmerelyatheoreticalargument,butonederivedfromNorrisandInglehart’s(2009)conclusions,inwhichtheauthorsconfirmthatthenationalfilterremainsanimportantfactorshapingtheimpactofcross-culturalcommunication.Ratherthanahomogeneousaccountofknowledgeandhowthisisexperienced,thisrepresentsanexampleofnon-dualisticheterogeneitythatisapre-conditionforco-creation,co-cognitivityandexchangeofpower.Inthissense,consciousnessrelatestosocialrealitybylimitingpossibilitiesthroughtheadoptionofcertainobjectsthatareconvenientfictionsinrespecttoproblem-solving,butitcanalsobecreative.Thatis,itisnotcontrarytoconventionalexperience,onlyintheclaimsofclosureinrespectofconventionalfictions.Thiscanonlybeunderstoodagainstthebackgroundofconcentricspaceasapre-condition,inthatitcannotbecolonizedbyasinglereferencepoint,butmustbepopulatedbyinfinitecombinations.Inthepostcolonialperspective,theformsofknowledgeentailnotafusionorintegration,butthenotionofspeakingfrommanyplacesatonce(Canclini,2006).Socially,thisrepresentsthepossibilityofreimaginingtruthsthroughanexposuretothelogicofdualityasaheuristictoolthatdestabilizesconventionalknowledgeforintraculturalandinterculturalcommunication.Fortheindividual,thismeansthatthescriptthatoneobtainsthroughlife,againstabackgroundofconvenientfictions,isalterable.Todoso,inmovingawayfromperpetual,conceptualandlinguisticreification,requiresthatthesubjectgainsindependencefromexternalcoercion,ornegativeliberty,butequally,thatthestructuresofsocietyprovidethestructuresorconditionsrequiredforthatself-expressiontoberealized,orpositiveliberty.Thedecolonialperspectiveappreciateshowspacehasbeenaffectedbytemporalclaimstouniversalism.Fromsuchaperspective,itresiststheethicaluniversalismofEurocentrism.Thedecolonialprojectisbasedonthefundamentalpropositionoftheconcentricdualityofsocialspacethroughwhichtoanalysethecausesandeffectsofonticandepistemicviolence.Thisacknowledgesthatitwastheexperiencesofcolonialismthatmediatedtheco-cognitiveself-representationofcolonizerandcolonized.Ithasrightlyreactedtothetemporalenuncia-tionsofmodernity’sidealswithacallfortheenunciationofinjusticesoftheglobaleconomic,legalandpoliticalsystemfromotherspaces.Focusingfurther,itfailsintworespectstoprovideaconceptualspacetoreleasethecreativesocietalforcesthatititselfbringstothefore.Althoughitrecognizestheconcentricco-cognitiveproductionofknowledge,itstillmaintainsadiametricdualityofspaceandtimethroughrelyingonasystemicaccountthatbuildsontotalitiesinabsoluteterms.Itmissestherelationshipswithinandbetweenspatialandtemporalcategories.Aresultofthistotalizingofspaceandtimeistoproduceareductivistmethodthatexcludestheinternalheterogeneitythatthisverymethodisclaimingtorepresent(Mignolo,2000).Althoughtheresourcesforsuchanalysisarepresentwithinthedecolonialproject,modernityfailstofollowthroughonthepotentialofitsownfundamentalpropositionforthecreationofnewandinclusiveformsofsocialandpoliticalexperimentation.SocialtheoryhasfailedasithasnoresourcesthroughwhichtoidentifytheinfinitywithinSelf,internalheterogeneity,aswellastheinfinityoftheOther,beyondtherejectionoftheVivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
405Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue397Other:theWest.Thepotentialtranscendenceofadiametricdualityoftheworld–theWestandtherest–isstillnotareality.Decolonialandpostcolonialperspectivesaimtocontributewitharadicalchangetotheideasofuniversalismandhumanityasone,transformingthemintopluralpossibilities,withcriticaldiscussionsofexistinginequalities.Thesepluralpossibilitieshaveafocusonpowerrelationsandexperiences,throughbotharecognitionofcolonialismanditsglobalhistoricalprocessesinPostcolonialStudies,withademandforagencyandreparation,aswellasanemphasisoninequalitiescreatedbycolonialdifferencesinDecolonialStudies,withaproposalfornewformsofknowledge.Thepostcolonialperspectiveofglocalizationcontributestotheunderstandingoffrontiersofcolonization,andtheconsequentmultiplicityofexperiences,withtheinsurgenceofculturalhybridities.Now,forthedecolonialdiscussion,itaddsuptotheunderstandingofglocalizationinthedifferentlevelsofpowerinequalitiesthatarefoundfrominstitutionstothesubjectivityofindividuals,inalegitimizationprocessthatdemandsashift,withtheadditionofnewformsofpopularcultureandtheirownformsofproducingandreproducinglocalandglobalimaginaries.REFERENCESAppiah,K.A.(1997),‘Cosmopolitanpatriots’,CriticalInquiry,23(3),617–39.Beck,U.(2000),‘Thecosmopolitanperspective:Sociologyofthesecondageofmodernity’,BritishJournalofSociology,51(1),79–105.Bhabha,H.(1994),TheLocationofCulture,London,UK:Routledge.Bhabha,H.(1996),‘Unsatisfied:Notesonvernacularcosmopolitanism’,inL.Garcia-MorenaandP.C.Pfeifer(eds),TextandNation:Cross-disciplinaryEssaysonCulturalandNationalIdentities,London,UK:CamdenHouse,pp.191–207.Bhambra,G.K.(2007),RethinkingModernity:PostcolonialismandtheSociologicalImagination,London,UK:PalgraveMacmillan.Bhambra,G.K.(2011),‘Cosmopolitanismandpostcolonialcritique’,inM.RoviscoandM.Nowicka(eds),TheAshgateCompaniontoCosmopolitanism,Ashgate,UK:Routledge,pp.313–28.Bhambra,G.K.(2016),‘Postcolonialreflectionsonsociology’,Sociology,50(5),960–6.Bhambra,G.K.(2017),‘ThecurrentcrisisofEurope:Refugees,colonialism,andthelimitsofcosmo-politanism’,EuropeanLawJournal,23(5),395–405.Canclini,N.G.(2006),CulturasHíbridas:EstratégiasParaEntrareSairdaModernidade,SãoPaulo,Brazil:Edusp.Chakrabarty,D.(2000),ProvincializingEurope:PostcolonialThoughtandHistoricalDifference,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.Connell,R.(2007),SouthernTheory:TheGlobalDynamicsofKnowledgeinSocialScience,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Costa,S.(2006),‘Desprovincializandoasociologia:acontribuiçãopós-colonial’,RevistadeCiênciasSociais,21(60).Danowski,D.andViveirosdeCastro,E.(2016),TheEndsofTheWorld,trans.byR.G.Nunes,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Delanty,G.(2016)‘Atransnationalworld?:Theimplicationsoftransnationalismforcomparativehistor-icalsociology’,SocialImaginaries,2(2),p.17–33.deSousaSantos,B.(2006),Agramáticadotempo:paraumanovaculturapolítica,SãoPaulo,Brazil:Cortez.deSousaSantos,B.(2014),EpistemologiesoftheSouth:Justiceagainstepistemicide,Boulder,CO:ParadigmPublishers.Dussel,E.(1999),Posmodernidadytransmodernidad:diálogosconlafilosofíadeGianniVattimo,Puebla,Mexico:UniversidadIberoamericana.VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
406398HandbookofcultureandglocalizationEscobar,A.(2018),DesignsforthePluriverse:RadicalInterdependence,Autonomy,andtheMakingofWorlds,Durham,NCandLondon,UK:DukeUniversityPress.Fanon,F.(1963),TheWretchedoftheEarth,NewYork,NY:GrovePress.Friedman,J.(1990),‘Beingintheworld:Globalizationandlocalization’,inM.Featherstone(ed.),GlobalCulture:Nationalism,Globalization,andModernity,London,UK:Sage,pp.311–28.Giddens,A.(1991),ModernityandSelf-Identity:SelfandSocietyintheLateModernAge,Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.Gilroy,P.(1993),TheBlackAtlantic.ModernityandDoubleConsciousness,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Go,J.(2013),‘Forapostcolonialsociology’,TheoryandSociety,42(1),25–55.Go,J.(2016),PostcolonialismandSocialTheory,Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.Grosfoguel,R.(2008),‘Paradescolonizarosestudosdeeconomiapolíticaeosestudospós-coloniais:transmodernidade,pensamentodefronteiraecolonialidadeglobal’,RevistaCríticadeCiênciasSociais,80,115–47.Hall,S.(1992),‘Thewestandtherest:Discourseandpower’,inS.HallandB.Gieben(eds),FormationsofModernity,Cambridge,UK:OpenUniversity,pp.37–69.Haller,W.andV.Roudometof(2010),‘Thecosmopolitan—localcontinuumincross-nationalperspec-tive’,JournalofSociology,46(3),277–97.Lewis,S.andM.Maslin(2015),‘DefiningtheAnthropocene’,Nature,519,171–80.Mignolo,W.(2000),‘Themanyfacesofcosmo-polis:Borderthinkingandcriticalcosmopolitanism’,PublicCulture,12(3),721–48.Mignolo,W.(2003),‘Osesplendoreseasmisériasda‘ciência’:colonialidade,geopolíticadoconheci-mentoepluri-versalidadeepistémica’,inB.deSousaSantos(ed.),ConhecimentoPrudenteparaumavidadecente:‘umdiscursosobreasciênciasrevisitado’,Porto,Portugal:Afrontamento,pp.631–71.Mignolo,W.(2005),LaideadeAméricaLatina.Laheridacolonialylaopcióndecolonial,Barcelona,Spain:GedisaEditorial.Mignolo,W.(2011),‘Cosmopolitanlocalism:AdecolonialshiftingoftheKantian’slegacies’,Localities,1,11–45.Mignolo,W.andA.Escobar(eds)(2011),GlobalizationandtheDecolonialOption,London,UK:Routledge.NederveenPieterse,J.(2006),‘Emancipatorycosmopolitanism:Towardsanagenda’,DevelopmentandChange,37(6),1247–57.NederveenPieterse,J.(2013),‘Whatisglobalstudies?’,Globalizations,10(4),499–514.Nichols,R.(2020),TheftIsProperty!,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.Norris,P.(2000),‘Globalgovernanceandcosmopolitancitizens’,inJ.S.NyeandJ.D.Donahue(eds),GovernanceinaGlobalizingWorld,Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitutionPress,pp.155–77.Norris,P.andR.Inglehart(2009),CosmopolitanCommunications:CulturalDiversityinaGlobalizedWorld,NewYork,NY:CambridgeUniversityPress.Papastergiadis,N.(2012),CosmopolitanismandCulture,Cambridge,UK:Polity.Pichler,F.(2012),‘Cosmopolitanisminaglobalperspective:Aninternationalcomparisonofopen-mindedorientationsandidentityinrelationtoglobalization’,InternationalSociology,27(1),21–50.Prysthon,Â.(2002),CosmopolitismosPeriféricos:EnsaiossobreModernidade,Pós-ModernidadeeEstudosCulturaisnaAméricaLatina,Recife,Brazil:EdiçõesBagaço.Quijano,A.(2002),‘Colonialityofpower,EurocentrismandLatinAmerica’,Nepantla:ViewsfromSouth,1(3),533–80.Riegel,V.(2019),‘AestheticcosmopolitanisminSãoPaulo:Aperipheralperspectivefromaglobalcity’,inV.Cicchelli,S.OctobreandV.Riegel(eds),AestheticCosmopolitanismandGlobalCulture,Leiden,TheNetherlands:Brill,pp.111–38.Riegel,V.(2020),‘MediacoverageoftheAnthropoceneinthesocialsciencesandenvironmentalhuman-ities’,inL.Sklair(ed.)TheAnthropoceneinGlobalMedia,Oxford,UK:Routledge,pp.217–31.Ritzer,G.(2003),‘Rethinkingglobalization:Glocalization/grobalizationandsomething/nothing’,SociologicalTheory,21(3),193–209.Robertson,R.(1992),Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture,London,UK:Sage.Robertson,R.(1995),‘Glocalization:Time–spaceandhomogeneity–heterogeneity’,inM.Featherstone,S.LashandR.Robertson(eds),GlobalModernities,London,UK:Sage,pp.25–44.VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
407Glocalizationandthepost/decolonialperspectives:acriticaldialogue399Robertson,R.(2013),‘Situatingglocalization:Arelativelyautobiographicalintervention’,inG.S.Drori,M.A.HöllererandP.Walgenbach(eds),GlobalThemesandLocalVariationsinOrganizationandManagement:PerspectivesonGlocalization,NewYork,NY:Routledge,pp.25–36.Roudometof,V.(2016),Glocalization:ACriticalIntroduction,NewYork,NY:Routledge.Said,E.W.(1978),Orientalism:WesternConceptionsoftheOrient,London,UK:Penguin.Schueth,S.andJ.O’Loughlin(2008),‘Belongingtotheworld:Cosmopolitanismingeographiccon-texts’,Geoforum,39(2),926–41.Spivak,G.C.(1988),‘Canthesubalternspeak?’inC.NelsonandL.Grossberg(eds),MarxismandtheInterpretationofCulture,Chicago,IL:UniversityofIllinoisPress,pp.271–316.Tomlinson,J.(1999),GlobalizationandCulture,Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.Whyte,K.P.(2018),‘Indigenousscience(fiction)fortheAnthropocene:Ancestraldystopiasandfan-tasiesofclimatechangecrises’,EnvironmentandPlanningE:NatureandSpace,1(1-2),224–42.VivianeRiegel-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:05AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
408Index20thCenturyFox308Amstutz,Galen1422030AgendaofUN245analyticallyautonomousconcept150–51Aadujeevitham(Koyippally)53–4ancientIndianOceanworld,materialAASTS.SeeAutonomous,Algorithmictransculturalityin39–40SimultaneousTranslationSystemsAndrews,David202Abu-Lughod,J.L.31,37androgynousmeninK-popculture267–8AC.SeeAsianCultureAnglo-Americanglobalization259–60academicdivisionoflabour5–8Anglophonetransformation354accommodation220Anthikad,Sathyan53acculturation30Anthropocene394–5Achebe,Chinua47‘anthropologyofphilosophy’project68actorhood338anti-colonialperspectives18Adiga,Aravind52anti-foundationalistepistemology386Aegean-stylebichromepottery30anti-globalism220aestheticcapitalism377–8anxietyofpotentiality72AFCinitiative.Seeage-friendlycityinitiativeAppadurai,Arjun16,201,222,223,324,325,Africanentertainmentstudios272332Africanfolktechniques48Appiah,K.A.389‘AfricanModesofSelf-Writing’(Mbembe)70Apple228,308,309Africanphilosophy73Aquinas,Thomas63Afropolitan63,71ArabianGulf51–2age-friendlycityinitiative(AFCinitiative)13,ArabianSea37156ArabSpring47ChiayiCity,Taiwan164–5,166ArchaeologicalReviewfromCambridge(Pitts)Global162–3929inHongKong163–4,166archaeology,glocalizationin28–30,40method162Archer,Margaret243agency242–3Archer’stheory243AI.SeeartificialintelligenceArendt,Hannah63Aibō260art11,92–3Airbnb126–7onbody101Ajibade,OsasIghodaro283contemporary93,98al-Idrisi102n1decolonialconcept96–9Alasuutari,P.347decolonizingKantiancosmopolitanismAlexander,Jeffrey237,348n199–102algorithmicpopulism218,226globalturnin93Alharahsheh,H.H.127glocal93Ali,Iftikhar206precursorsfromGlobalSouth93–6alimentarylocalism114artefactsinRomanarchaeology30alimentarysemiosphere118n4artificialintelligence(AI)300AlJazeeraMediaNetwork297Artusi,Pellegrino111,119n10allomorphism8AsianCulture(AC)257Alsanousi,Saud51Asianreligions,glocalizationof141alternativeglobalization372,377–9Askegaard,S.132Altglas,Véronique145Atal,Y.359Alÿs,Francis98Atido,GeorgePirwoth146AmazonPrimeVideo228,308–9,381AT&T308Americanization82–3,116,160,220Auburnpenitentiarysystem174Amselle,Jean-Loup105AugustineofHippo63400VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
409Index401authenticity115–17Bolsonaro,Jair223–4authenticotherness202Bongowood279,283Autonomous,AlgorithmicSimultaneousBottery,M.187TranslationSystems(AASTS)300Bourdieu,P.149Axford,Barrie14,150Boyd-Barrett,O.292boyd,d.14Baden,C.299Braithwaite,John174Badiou,Alain73Brauer,Daniel10Baeten,G.160BrazilianZen143Bahadur,Gaiutra52Brenner,N.157Balibar,Etienne97Brexit221BambooStalk,The(Alsanousi)51bricolage138,145,148Banh,J.284Broeckmann,A.325Barakat,Hoda51Bromley,P.340,346Barber,B.5BronzeAgePhilistine30Barbiedolls363Bronzization34–5Barnhardt,R.367n4Brooks,J.S.187,190,192Barrett,D.346‘brotherhoodallovertheworld’concept49Basketball205Brouder,P.125Basso,Keith66Bruguera,Tania98Bastide,Roger145brujería(witch-healing)143Bateson,G.107BSM.SeeBuddhistSystemsMethodologyBaudrillard,Jean222,224Buddhism,glocalizationin146Bauman,Zygmunt61,64BuddhistSystemsMethodology(BSM)364BayiRockets205buenvivir(well-being)394BBCWorldNews296–7Buhari-Gulmez,D.8Beaujard,P.31Bullock,Brad142Beck,C.J.346bushido(samuraicodeofhonour)371Beck,Ulrich98businessapproachtotourismexperiences,BeltandRoadInitiative83glocalizationas127–9Benford,Robert149Butler,Judith97Benkler,Ytzak218Bennett,Lance231n3Cain,Maureen172,173Benyamin53,58n13Calcini363Berkovitch,N.340Callois,Roger230Berman,J.R.54CalvaryTempleinAndhraPradesh140Bestor,T.C.346Campbell,GeorgeVanPelt144Beyer,Peter138–9,150Cancamliterature50Bhabha,Homi144,387,389,392Canclini,Garcia392Bhambra,Gurminder388,389CandiLoroJonggrang125BigData218Candler,AsaGriggs246BigMac204Cantonesekungfufilms374BigThreenewsmanufacturers295capitalism157Birnhack,M.78aesthetic377–8BirthofaNationfilm277entertainment377–8bishōnenconcept268logicof211Bishop,Russell356micro-marketingstrategiesof202BlackLivesMattermovement57n4Carpentier,Nico16,331BlackPantherfilm273,283cascadephenomena172,173–4,180blockchain-encodedcryptocurrencies222Casey,Edward62,63,66Blood&Water272Casmir,F.L.247blurringprocess106castediscrimination57n5Bock,R.D.194Castells,Manuel157–8,160201,24Boli,J.2Castles,Stephen201Bollywood279,282,283Cawley,M.132VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
410402HandbookofcultureandglocalizationCBN.SeeChristianBroadcastingNetworkCiofalo,Giovanni16CBSAllAccess307circulationculture223Ceccarini,R.119n17CitiesofSalt(Munif)51centre–peripherybinaries45civicsociety203centrifugaldynamics316civilization175centrifugallogic312class-space189centripetallogic312classicalcinema278,282Chakrabarty,Dipesh387,393classicalmodernizationtheories2challengesofmethodologyinaglocalworld17Clausen,L.293change236,250Clifford,James105agents238CNN204,296culturalchangeprocesses237,242–3Coca-ColaCompany244,246societal245Coca-Colaization201ChangingEducationalAssessment:InternationalCoca-Colonization201PerspectivesandTrends(Torrance)194Cocchiara,Giuseppe366n3chaoticpluralism224Coghlan,A.131Chao,Tzu-YuanStessa13Cohen,A.A.292chauvinisticglocalization141Cohen,A.P.323Chilisa,B.359Cole,W.M.339Chinese/China48Collins,Randall67,68,69Americanizationof83colonialism30ChineseBasketballAssociation205coloniality388–9,393cinemaindustryin280colonization79counter-hegemonicforeignpolicyorientationColumbianexchangeonfoodspheres11,106–7,in84394.Seealsocontemporaryfoodspheres,culture257,258glocalizationinfootballin209exclusionprocess107glocalizationofreligions142incorporationprocesses108–13legaldiplomacy85–6naturalizationasuniversalization108literature49purificationprocess107nationalpatriotism284combatsports228philosophy48Comcast307Choi,Jung-Bong376communicationChokr,Nader10andmedia14Chopra-Jonas,Priyanka283technology274Chouinard,Yvon247technologyrevolutions305Cho,Y.14,244community322–3ChristianBroadcastingNetwork(CBN)139de-contextualizationof324–5Christian/Christianityde-territorialized324andglobalization145ofinterest323glocalizationin138–40,146interpretative323socialresponsibility140ofmeaning323universalism149ofpractice323chronotopesoflaw173,180complexity105,188,329,332ChurchGoingGlocal,The146ofculturalexchanges133Cicchelli,Vincenzo17evocationof224cinemaandfilmindustry272ofglocalizedreality173conceptualframework274normative81culturalsyncretismandsynthesis281–4oftranslationprocesses117cultureof274–9complexmixes81glocalizationof274–9,285Connell,R.386politicaleconomy280–81Conrad,Sebastian29themesandsubjects284–5‘conservative’value203CinemaNovo282,284contemporaryart3,98VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
411Index403contemporaryfoodspheres,glocalizationinCricketWorldCup207,211113.SeealsoColumbianexchangeoncrime173foodspheresascascadephenomenon174authenticity115–17globalizationand174,177contemporaryre-naturalizations117–18glocalized179,180culturalappropriation114–15internationalandtransnational173–4,177–9hiddensyntheses117–18modalitiesof179locavorism114–15criminaljustice179(un)translatability113–14globalizationvocabulariesin177contentiouspolitics159criminology,glocalizationin171–2context386,389cascadephenomena172,173–4colonial388chronotopesoflaw173historical-cultural390culturalcriminology176–7ofperipheralsocieties387globalizationvocabulariesincriminaljusticecontextualization145,345177continuum343insightsfromgreencriminology178–9Contrapunteocubanodeltabacoydelazúcarinternationalandtransnationalcrimes177–8(Ortiz)32micro,meso,andmacrovictimizationconvergence328–30179–80cultural220polycentricproblems172,173–4global218,219,221southernanddecolonialcriminology174–6logicof220super-diversity173Conway,Kellyanne225variable-geometryglobalization172,173CoolieWoman:TheOdysseyofIndenturecrimmigration176(Bahadur)52crisismitigationintourismexperiences,core–peripherydynamicmodel31glocalizationastoolto126–7corporateculture244–5cross-pollinatingpopculture375‘corporatistwelfare-state’approach13Crow,G.323cosmicvisionincultures99Csordas,Thomas149cosmogenicagency102CSP.SeeCulturallySensitivePicturescosmopolitan(ism)46,57n3,71,94,101,330Cucinelli,Brunello244amateursinHallyuculture380–81cultural/culture1,8,97–8,235,243,250,285,criticismsagainst92359decolonizingKantian99–102appropriation114–15localis390awarenessanddisembedding145methodological98ofcinema274–9post/decolonialperspectivesof389–91convergence3,220cosmosfromGlobalSouth99–101corporate244–5Costa,Sérgio387criminologies177–9Coté,M.291culturalapproachtotourismexperiences,Cotton,M.173glocalizationas124–5’couchsurfing’experience132differentialism3counter-hegemonicforeignpolicyorientation84diplomacy379COVID-19pandemic4,8,11–12,46,171,221diversity249Crane,D.276,283Eurocentricdefinitionof93Crematorio282globalizationof210,235–6,375creolemethods354,362–3,366glocalizationof3,202–4,220–21,250creolization17,28,30–1,35,138,381heterogeneity202creolizationinIMs361–3homogeneity202FullaDoll363hybridity392244methodology363–4hybridization3,144,220,236,371BSM364imperialism160forinterpretingsilenceininterviewsindustries1364–5intermediaries114cricket205–7logicofglobalization221VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
412404Handbookofcultureandglocalizationnationalism149Derrida,Jacques63,64,92nostalgia230Desai,Kiran52products371deSousaSantos,Boaventura386,393reframingof98Dessì,Ugo4roleinpost-WorldWarIImodernizationdeterritorialization38,39theories1–2deTocqueville,Alexis174syncretismincinemaindustry281–4Dewey,J.69,192traits248diasporastudies52–4transformationofmeaning1Dietschy,P.208translation7–8,145diffusion7,338inworldsocietyperspective2oflaw78–80,88n1culturaldynamicsdigitalapplyingglocalmodeltounlockcomplexdigitalconnectivity220243–4foodscapes222global241–3greatconvergence’218local241–3intimacyinHallyuculture380–31translocal244marketing14CulturallySensitivePictures(CSP)294media14,224CulturalRevolutioninChina276mediatizationofsport218,224–5Curran,J.299revolution305curricula,glocaleducationand192–3incommunication222cyber-determinism231technologies222,230cybercrime171,179digitalglocalization14,218Czarniawska,B.345digitalizationandglocalizationofsport227–30DalitliteratureinIndia49pathological(g)localism223–7Damrosch,D.10,56,57n2,58n14digitalization217DaoistSocietyofBrazil144ofglobalization221–2de-colonialization1–2ofsport227–30deBeaumont,Gustave174digitaltelevision(DTV)228DeCataldo,Giancarlo315digitization4deCerteau,Michel72DingxingYanjiu(investigativeresearch)357DecolonialAestheSis96disavowaltheory392decolonialperspectives386,387Disney+272onart94–9Disneyization46ofcosmopolitanism389–91DisneylandParis239criminology174–6Disneystudio307–8inglobalstudies388–9dispossession394onglocalization386Divakaruni,Chitra52glocalizationin391395–7divergence328–30,337,340decolonization18diversity248,341,342,345Kantiancosmopolitanism99–102cultural249Decrop,A.132super-diversity173,178,180deDuve,Thierry101Djelic,M.-L.340delaBarre,S.125dochakuka(indigenization)5,26,151n1Delanty,G.386DoctorWho260Deleuze,Gilles63,67,73,98,223Dolci,Danilo366n3Delmestri,G.340,346domestication292–3,345Delphimethod361,365oftechnologies311delRio,Dolores283Dono,Heri94DelToro,Benicio283Donohoe,Janet63DelToro,Guillermo283Douyin241deMartino,Ernesto366n3Drori,GiliS.7,17,237–8,328,339–43,345–7deMooij,M.15drugtrafficking178Denison,D.R.244DTV.SeedigitaltelevisionVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
413Index405Durkheim,Émile2social124exclusionprocessfood107EANA.SeeEuropeanAllianceofNewsAgenciesexperience,conceptof389EasternOrthodoxChristianity139East–Westpolarization359Facebook228,291,300Economist,Thenewspaper227,297fandom256,257,269Eco,Umberto227female/feminine259,266Eden,L.238global260EDFR(EthnographicDelphiFuturesResearch)proactive268361Fanon,F.70education101Farahmand,Manéli143educationalassessment194fast-foodculture204EducationPolicyandPracticeDepartment188FateofPlace,The(Casey)62,66Ekeinde,OmotolaJalade283FédérationInternationaledeFootballAssociationEkvall,G.195(FIFA)208–9,211Elberfeld,Rolf67femaleuniversalism259Eliot,T.S.57n1inK-popculture265–7,268EMERGENCYcompany245Fernandes,V.187emergentglocalities219Ferrando,M.G.14emicperspective240Ferrarese,M.R.78Emmanuel,Jean-Francois13Ferrari,Enzo247empiricalphilosophymovement68FIFA.SeeFédérationInternationaledeFootballemployability189AssociationEnglishPremierLeague211Figari,Pedro94Enlightenment94,99,179FilmOne273entertainmentcapitalism377–8films273.SeealsocinemaandfilmindustryEoyang,E.C.47‘FilterBubble’effect315epistemicdisobedience101,102n3financescapes201epistemology70,242,356,357FinancialTimes,The297anti-foundationalist386Finnemore,M.339changing366Fitzpatrick,M.31,38Hawaiian362FjellhaugInternationalUniversityCollegeinregional387Oslo146ofSouth393Flandrin,Jean-Louis108Equiano,Olaudah52Floyd,George176Ereignis(Heidegger)73Flusty,S.159Ernest-Samuel,G.C.281Foer,F.210Escobar,A.394food204ethicalglocalism391codes119n13ethicaluniversalismofEurocentrism396globalization105ethnicfood117glocalization105,106ethnographicmethods366n3incontemporaryfoodspheres113–18ethnoscapes201andlessonofColumbianexchangeeticperspective240106–13Eurocentricuniversalism92translation114Eurocentrism388,393foodsphere118n4Euronews297football207EuropeanAllianceofNewsAgencies(EANA)inChina209301n6FIFAWorldCup208–9,211EuropeanEnlightenmentprovincialism387football–globalizationnexus208Europeanization221globalizationof207–8,210–11EvangelicalProtestantism139glocalizationof210–11exceptionalism102n3ForbesMagazine228exchangesFordistcrisis161cultural124,130,133foreignnews-making289VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
414406HandbookofcultureandglocalizationFoucault,M.179modernization2foundationalinstitutionalistterminology338newsworthiness301n1Francois,E.J.64organizations244–51Frank,D.J.346phenomena241–2,249,250FraternitéÉvangéliquedePentecôteenAfriqueprocesses244–5auCongo(FEPACO)146researchmethods354–5,360Freire,Paulo367n5standardization186Freitag,U.26,325televisionlandscape306FrenchDemocracy,The299village201Friedrichs,D.O.177GlobalAFCNetwork164,166–7FromModernizationtoGlobalization(Timmons‘GlobalAge-friendlyCity’project162–3andHite)2‘globalart’,ideaof92Fujino,Gary146globalculture2,3,36FullaDoll363‘GlobalHipHopNation/Culture’329global/internationalnewsorganizations289Gadamer,Hans-Georg69globalisationGalily,Y.14definitionof342–3games,glocalizationof204–7asglobal–localprocesses344GangnamStyle372globality201–2,220,396García-Mainar,L.M.278–9,282Globalization(Robertson)138Garcia,JoaquinTorres94globalization3,28,65,118n2,218,324.SeealsoGarnier,Laurent374glocalizationGastaldo,Denise359,364,365antithesisof223Gemeinschaft64,322Bartelson’sthreeconceptsof201genderdividecomponentof217inappealofHallyu269contemporary105inK-popculture265–7crimes177genderedmelancholia266,268–9crisisoflegaltransplants85genderfluidityinK-popculture267–8cultural375geo-social-spatialityofglobalization236ofculturalindustries388geography68ofculture210‘GeographyofPhilosophy’project68debates2Gesellschaft64,322definitionof123,172,201,235GettyImages297,299andeducation186Ghallywood279,282endof18Ghosh,Amitav51favouringhybridization236Gibson,J.L.361generatingtensionsandconflicts123–4Giddens,A.204,211,290globalizationbusinessstrategies238,239Giulianotti,Richard4,14,46–7,202,207,toglocalizationoffootball207–11219–20,229,342,347glocalizationvs.32–4Giulianotti,Robert211ofhighereducationmarkets13Glissant,Édouard105,362inhomogeneousview123global-humancondition347andindigenousmethodologies358global-localization167andliterature47–8global219,236.Seealsoglocalmediatizationanddigitalizationof221–2awareness114inmusicindustry262capitalism202offeringalternativestoWST38citizenry189ontology219citizenship188ofpopularculture201competence189,191questioningforpromotinginterdependencedisappearanceinindigenousmethods358–946education186,196researchagendasinsociologyofsport201–2isomorphism341rhetoricof92leadership189scepticismaround4localization5theoryof235VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
415Index407inUNagencies245poetics48–50inurbanstudies157–8,160popculture257useinmultipleprofessionaldomains190publictheology145vocabulariesincriminaljustice177sustainabilityeducation189WSTand340symbiosis190GlobalizationandCulture(Pieterse)3yoga142GlobalizationsandtheAncientWorld(Jennings)GlocalArchaeology932glocalculturalprocessesGlobalizingtheSacred(VásquezandMarquardt)humanisticapproachto239–41139multiparadigmaticapproachto239–41global–localbinaries45toorganizationalsetting250global–localnexus143,156,159,161–2phasesof251globalmedialandscape316glocaleducation13,196glocalizationofNetflixinItalianmediaandassessment194–5landscape313–15andcurricula192–3newcentrifugaldynamics316glocalcitizenshipandcompetence188–9newresearchtrajectories316glocalcurriculaandpedagogies187–8GlobalNetworkofAge-friendlyCities163glocaleducationalleadership186–7GlobalNorth95,295glocalsustainabilityeducation189globalpopculture371andleadership192cross-pollinatingpopcultureandglobalandlearneroftomorrow190–91studies375andorganizationalclimate195Hallyuculture372,375–81andpublicpolicy191PopCulture2.0inmakingofglocalglocalism61,231n2imaginaries373–5legal84–5,87–8SouthKoreanpopculture372pathological223–7GlobalRepositioningofJapaneseReligions,Theglocality50,77,117,217,219–20,231n2(Dessì)141definitionof172GlobalSouth18,56,92,94–5,209,386–7,394gameof113GlobalStudies331,386glocalensembleof110ofpopculture375ofMNCs342post/decolonialperspectivesin388–9redefinitionof108globalwidenexus219glocalization1,10,12,18,17,28,30–2,186,glocal61,71,73,92,93,95–6.Seealsoglobal196,330,342art93andacademicdivisionoflabour5–8cinema284inAmericas36citizenship188–9inarchaeologyandhistory28–30,40competence13,188–9,196associatedwithdeterritorializationandincontemporaryscholarlycontext330–31reterritorialization167fromconvergencetodivergences328–30businessstrategies238,239cultures3,4incommunicationandmedia14curricula187–8conceptualizationof292definitionof172ascreationofglocalities230identities219ofcrime13lenses12cultural220–21management237–9inculturalcircumstances236methods354,356ofcultureandpopularculture3,202–4modeltounlockcomplexculturaldynamicsdefinitionof76,77–8243–4offilmandcinemaindustry14,273,274–9,organizations237–9285pedagogies187–8vs.globalization13–14,32–4perspective203glocaleducation13phenomena242,244–51andgrobalization82–4philosophyand61–3identifyingprocesses,accommodationsandphilosophythinking63–6ruptures218–19VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
416408Handbookofcultureandglocalizationandindigenousmethodologies358–9Greenwood,R.346individualsandlocalculturesin219–20Greimas,AlgirdasJulien112intellectualconversationon19Grein,A.F.240interpretationsof237Greiner,C.326inItalianmedialandscape313–15Griffith,D.W.277inJapan46grobalization5,118n2,160,228–9inKoreanmusic377glocalizationand82–4mediaand290–92inlegalfield85–7meta-perspectiveon237groupinterviewinThaicontexts361asmodalfeatureofglobalsystems221Guardian,The297nationalpopulism220Guattari,Felix9,223inpost/decolonialdiscussions391–7Gulffilm53referencepoints347Gulfmigrantexperience53–5,57n8fromscalarpoliticsperspective161Gupta,A.K.235insocialsciencesandhumanities3Gutierrez,A.K.47,57n1assubtlecolonialisminIMs360groupinterviewinThaicontexts361Hafner‐Burton,E.M.339locallycraftedquestionnairescales361Haigh,Gideon229samplingandrecruitmentinConfucianHall,Stuart387contexts360–61Hallyuculture15,17,257,259,268,372,375–6inurbanstudies158–9aestheticcapitalism377–8Glocalization:ACriticalIntroductioncosmopolitanamateursanddigitalintimacy(Roudometof)29380–81glocalizedcrimes179culturalcontent267glocalizeddiscourse131asculturalpackage376–7glocalizedtourismservices127entertainmentcapitalism377–8glocalizedvictimization179genderdivide266,269glocalliterature57n1glocalascendance266petrofictionas51–6hegemonicandalternativeglobalpopculture‘GlocalReligions’140378–9glocalSlowFoodMovement159–60pilgrimagetourismtoKorea268glocalsports13–14,200pillarsof377,382cricket205–7softpowerandsweetpowerin379–80emergenceof212Hamed,Huda51football207–11Hannerz,Ulf17,105globalizationof211Haraway,D.361insportingevents212–13HarithAlMiya(Barakat)51theoreticalandconceptualissues201–2Harsin,J.299GoatDays(Benyamin)53,55–6HawParVillainSingapore125Gobo,Giampietro17Hayek,Salma283‘GoingGlocal’programme188HBO228,308Gooch,M.131Hegel,GeorgWilhelmFriedrich63,66Google291,300hegemonicglobalpopculture378–9Gould,S.J.240Heidegger,Martin63Gouws,A.361Held,D.235governance164Herald,William208collaborative165,168hermeneutics69local167Heshusius,L.356urban161heterogeneity38,39,105,277Govindarajan,V.235multitemporal392Grainger,Andrew202non-dualistic396Gramsci,Antonio93–4HewlettPackard244‘GreatWallofChina,The’metaphor274Hicks,J.128greencriminology178–9higherorderthinkingskills(HOTskills)190Greenpeace245HildegardofBingen63VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
417Index409Hill,Michael144continuouscreative376–7Hinduism45cultural236,371Hindunationalistgroups204infilmsandcinema273hisabetsuburaku(discriminated-against’hamlet’hybridphenomena241–2,249,250people)141hyper-religions144historiographyofphilosophy’project67hyperculturality176–7history,glocalizationin28–30,40HyundaiMotors261,263Hite,A.2HKCSS.SeeHongKongCouncilofSocialICT.SeeinformationandcommunicationServicetechnologies(ICT)Hobsbawm,E.115,144,151n4identity219Hodos,Tamar9ideoscapes201Hogan,P.C.49IKEAtheoryoflegaltransfer82Hogg,James208Ilan,Jonathan15Hogg,R.175,176IMs.SeeindigenousmethodologiesHogg,Thomas208ImaginaryHomelands(Rushdie)50Holenstein,Elmar67ImmigrantMovementInternational98HöllererM.A.341,345,347‘imperialistgrandtheologicalnarratives’145Hollywood204,272,276–8283,284incommensurability101–2homogeneity277‘incommensurablelocaltheologies’145homogenization28,105incorporationprocessesoffoods108–9HongKong156discoursesin111–12AFCinitiativein163–4,166namingoffoods112–13interactionsbetweenglobalknowledgeandpracticesof110–11localpractices167structuresof109–10policymakingin166India38,48HongKongCouncilofSocialService(HKCSS)Indianculture257163Indianfuneralfeast142HongKongDisneyland128SubalternStudiesgroupin94hooks,bell49IndianOceanworld33,36–7HopewellInteractionSphere36networksofexchangein38horizontalaxisofbusinessanalysis238tradenetworksin38–9Horne,J.14IndianPremierLeague(IPL)206,228Horton,P.14indigenization149,201,220,381HotelPapadopoli–MGalleryinVenice127–8ofChristianity5HOTskills.Seehigherorderthinkingskillsoffoods109HouseofCardsseries314indigenousmethodologies(IMs)354,355–6,365Howell,Signe150creolization361–5Huahua273glocalizationassubtlecolonialism360–61HuaMulan284inter-localizedmethodology361–2Huizinga,Johan200KaupapaMāoriresearch356–7Hulu228,272lackingofindigenousmethods357–8humanisticapproachtoglocalculturalprocessesdesperatelyseekingindigenousmethods239–41359–60humanities9disappearanceofglobalandlocal358–9glocalizationin3Mmogo-Method™357popularizationofglocalizationin5IndigenousWaysofKnowing(IWOK)357humantrafficking178informationandcommunicationtechnologiesHume,David63(ICT)4,14,157–8,191,323,324Huntington,S.257informationrevolution190Hutton,AlexanderWatson208informationtechnology224hybridationalprocesses246–7Inglehart,R.15,396hybridcultures244Inglis,D.63hybridity28,30,81–2,88n1,241,261,345Inoue,Nobutaka144,339–40,346hybridization31,81,138,220–21,236,247,381institutionaldesign161,167VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
418410Handbookofcultureandglocalizationinstitutionalism,sociological338Jennings,Justin32–3,34,36Intarachamnong,Chareerat361Jijon,I.14inter-localizedmethodology361–3jing(gong)376internalheterogeneity396–7Jinping,Xi83,209,220internationalcareers175JITsystem.SeeJust-in-Timesysteminternationalcrimes177–9JockeyClub(JC)charity163–4InternationalCriminalCourt179John,B.187,189internationalization175JohnofGod(Rocha)143ofcurriculumdiscourse192–3Joon-ho,Bong15processes235Julia,Raul283internationalnewsJung,HwaYol10agencies292,296JungleBookfilm283organizations289Jung,Sun375–6scholarship292Jurado,Katy283InternationalSocietyforKrishnaConsciousnessJust-in-Timesystem(JITsystem)238,258(ISKON)142internet217,290kafalasystem52,54,56InternetofThings218Kaif,Mohammad207interpretativecommunity323Kaiser,B.N.361intersectionality173Kamens,D.H.341intertextuality57n1Kanafani,Ghassan51‘inventionoflocality’3Kanban258IPL.SeeIndianPremierLeagueKang-in,Lee209Irigaray,Luce63Kangas,A.347Isaksen,S.G.195Kannywood279,283ISKON.SeeInternationalSocietyforKrishnaKantiancosmopolitanismdecolonization99–102ConsciousnessKantiantranscendentalism101Islam,glocalizationin140–41Kant,Immanuel63,64,92,99,101,390Islamicphilosophicalthought68Kapoor,Anil283isomorphism8,338,345Karavanta,Mina70Italianmedialandscape,glocalizationofNetflixKaufman,J.344,347in313–15KaupapaMāoriresearch356–7Italy,Netflixin310–13Kawabata,Makie364,365iuspuniendi177K-cosmetics376Iwabuchi,Koichi259,379K-dramas257,259–61,265–7,376,380IWOK.SeeIndigenousWaysofKnowingK-fashion376(IWOK)Khambayat,R.P.190Khan,Irrfan283Jackson,Michael263Khan,Zaheer207Jacobs,Olu283Khondker,HabibulHaque13–14,217,229James,Jonathan140KhorRori38janggu(two-handeddrum)376Kierkegaard,Søren63,66Jang,Wonho15,339,371KillBillfilm374,382n1Japanese/JapanKillebrew,A.E.30Buddhism142Kim,Young-min258,341culture257,258Kim,Y.S.341,344enka260Kirkness,V.J.367n4glocalizationofreligions141–2,150Kjeldgaard,D.132pizza116Knappett,C.33JapaneseReligionsandGlobalization(Dessì)141Knollenberg,W.132JasmineDays(Benyamin)58Koo,J.-W.346JavaSeaShipwreck39Korea(n)379Jazzmusic236glocalization261Jean-Francois186,187,189–91Korean’GL’process263–4Jenkins,Kuni356Korean’L’process264VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
419Index411teuroteu260legalhybridity81values360–61legalreforms87KoreanHallyu.SeeHallyuculturelegaltransplants79–80KoreanHallyuphenomenon.SeeK-popcirculationof80Koreanpopculture(K-popculture)15,17,crisisof85256–7,376–7,379,380Legrand,Pierre80androgynousmenin267–8Lehman-Wilzig,S.300femaleuniversalismin265–7Lehmberg,D.128genderdividein265–7Lendon,Nigel102n2genderfluidityin267–8Lenway,S.238glocalization259–62Leone,Massimo114tacitknowledgemodelofglocalizationLeunissen,J.322262–5Lévi-Strauss,Claude145theoreticalbackdrop257–9Levitt,Peggy223,330KoreanWave.SeeKoreanpopculture(K-popLewis,Tanya222,394culture)Lie,John256,257,259Kovach,M.359lifeworld61Koyippally,Joseph53Li,L.H.125Kraftwerk374LimpopoPark132–3Kraidy,M.M.241Ling,Jia13Kresse,Kai68,69linguisticimperialism186Krishnaswamy,R.49–50literaryKrücken,G.343adaptations57n1Küster,Volker146anthologies48Kytölä,S.325poetics50studies47LaCecla,F.118Liu,Shu-Hsien146Laclau,Ernesto223LivinginBondagemovie281‘lacunae’concept150Livingston,R.E.47Lahiri,Jhumpa52local219,220,236,237LaLaLand283cultures247–8languageandliterarystudies9–10inglobalperspective45–7Lanternari,Vittorio366n3re-embedding38–9Latin-Americanspirituality143disappearanceinindigenousmethods358–9Latour,Bruno67local–globalproblematic157lawandglocalization76locallycraftedquestionnairescales361diffusionoflaw78–80phenomena241–2,249,250glocalizationandgrobalization82–4localisticmanagementtheories238grobalizationinlegalfield85–7locality77,159,200,322–3hybridity81–2creationof217legalglocalism84–5importanceof157,161mixity80–1incorporationof78lawscapes80inventionof151n4leadership,glocaleducationand192inplace160leanmanufacturingsystem238productionof323–4Lechner,F.J.2reframingof159Lee,Bruce283roleininternationally-orientedpolicyLee,Byungmin371framework160–61Lee,F.L.F.282localization28,160,260Lees,B.244businessstrategies238,239Lee,SooMan259locavorism114–15legaldiplomacy85longueduréeprocess9legalflows80loosecoupling338,345legalglocalism84–5,87–8LosAngelesReviewofBooks,The(Berman)54legalgrobalism10,85–6,87–8LosIndignados231n3VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
420412HandbookofcultureandglocalizationLoss,Joseph144MCJE.SeeModernCurriculaforJournalismLotman’stheory118n4EducationLuz,Nimrod140McKittrick,Katherine70Lynch,H.187,189,192–3McLuhan,Marshall201Lyon,David138MédecinsSansFrontières245mediamacrocriminology174discourses119n14macro-victimization13,172,179–80ecologyanalysis274Mahfouz,Naguib47–8andglocalization290–92Maimone,Fabrizio14–15mediascapes201Majumdar,Boira207mediatizationofglobalization221–2Majumdar,S.190Mehta,SandhyaRao9–10,57n10Maliangkay,Roald376melancholiaMalpas,Jeff63gendered266,268–9Maly,Ico227post-colonial266–7,268ManBookerprize52racial266,267Mancuso,Salvatore10Mendieta,Eduardo96,98Mandaville,Peter144,150MenintheSun(Kanafani)51Manian,Sabita142Menon,Dilip219Mannion,G.188mereology64MaoZedong357mergerandacquisitionprocess(M&Aprocess)MAP(MinoritiesandPhilosophy)69245,247M&Aprocess.SeemergerandacquisitionMeskimmon,Marsha93processmesovictimization179–80Maran,J.34Messi,Lionel210Margetts,Helen224metaphysics65–6‘Margherita’117methodologicallocalism327Mariategui,JoseCarlos94methodologicalnationalism387Marquardt,Marie139Meyer,JohnW.17,337–9,343Marramao,Giacomo10Meyer,R.E.345,347Marshall-Fratani,Ruth149Meyrowitz354,358Martí,José142,363microvictimization179–80Martin,J.N.273MiddleWoodlandPeriod36Martin,Lee297Midnight’sChildren(Rushdie)52Maruyama,Tetsuo146Mignolo,Walter96,98,101,387,390,393Marx,Karl63,94,191migrantsfromIndia57n8Marzano,R.J.192Miller,DebraRena361Maslin,M.394Miller,James144Massey,D.160Minaj,Nicki377,382Matar,N.49MinoanCrete34materialtransculturality28,39–41minoanization35Mathew,S.189MissionImpossible2film374Mathur,A.N.359mixedjurisdictions80matryoshka46mixedmartialarts(MMA)239Matthews,R.179mixingcultures376Matusitz,J.129,239mixity80–1Mawurndjul,John100Mizrahi-Shtelman,Ravit17,237–8,342,347‘Mayan’revitalization143MMA.SeemixedmartialartsMazrui,A.A.273Mmogo-Method™357Mbembe,Achille70–1MNCs.SeemultinationalcorporationsMcDonaldization3,46,82,114,118n2,201,221MNEs.SeemultinationalenterprisesMcDonald’s204,235,244mobilemedia324McGrew,A.G.235mochipizza116–17McGuigan,Jim372moderncosmopolitanism389VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
421Index413ModernCurriculaforJournalismEducationnationbranding379(MCJE)299naturalization11modernglobalization37offoodasuniversalization108modernity2NawabofPataudi206modernization2NBA.SeeNationalBasketballAssociationanddevelopment2‘Neapolitan’pizzerias116theory337,338,348n1neo-globalization19visionof376neo-Hindumovements145Modica111neo-institutionalism2modokiryōri117neo-institutionaltradition17Moffitt,Benjamin224–6neologism99,237Mohamed,R.130glocalization5,28monism237neo-syncretism144Montalban,Ricardo283neo-television227Montaldi,Danilo366–7n3Netflix16,228,272,305,381Moreton-Robinson,A.356glocalizationinItalianmedialandscapeMotionPicturePatentsCompany(MPPC)275313–15MoulinRouge283inItaly310–13movies204,273Italiacatalogue312,314creationof275Originalsseries314creativeartformsof273–4aspioneerofdigitalstreamingplatformsroleinculture281306–7MPPC.SeeMotionPicturePatentsCompany()andriseofglobaldigitalplatforms306Mufti,A.R.48unfoldingcompetitivelandscape307–9mugukjeok376networkedindividualism218Mukherjee,Bharati52networksociety157,201mukokusekiprinciple376NewBoyFZCO363Mulan272,284newcatholicity145multiculturalism389NewCatholicity,The(Schreiter)145multiculturalorganizations238NewEvangelizationcampaign139multilinguafranca346news301n5multinationalcompanies239newsorganizations16,289–90,294–6,299multinationalcorporations(MNCs)14–15,342newsproduction289–90multinationalenterprises(MNEs)238Clausen’sviewof293–4multiparadigmaticapproachtoglocalculturaldomesticationof292–3processes239–41global/internationalnewsproduction293multipolarisminChina84glocalizationof293,294–5multitemporalheterogeneity392professionalglocalnewsnetworks295–8Munif,Abdulrahman51regionalizationof292Murray,Daniel144scholarlytrendsandfuturepaths299–300Musa,BalaA.15,16Newsweek297mutatismutandis247,248NewWaveCinema282,284mycenaeanization35NewWorldInformationandCommunicationMyLoverfromaStar260Order(NWICO)277NewYorkTimes,The297Nakayama,T.K.273Neymar210namingoffoods112–13Ng,PeterTzeMing145nation-building330Nichols,E.G.278,283,394national220Nietzsche,Friedrich63,69NationalBasketballAssociation(NBA)205Nigerianreligiousculture149nationalfilter15Nigeria’smovieindustry281nationalization149nihonjinronconcept365ofAmericancinema275Nike235,244nationalpopulism221,223Nnaji,Genevieve283NationalSpatialPlan2016165Nollywood273,279,281,282VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
422414HandbookofcultureandglocalizationNomainDenmark128–9globalizationbusinessstrategies238,239nominalism,realismvs.62–3glocalizationbusinessstrategies238,239non-Westerntheories49–50localizationbusinessstrategies238,239Nonaka,I.261organizations243Nongshim261globalandtransnational244–51normativereligiousdiscourses,glocalizationinOrientalism(Said)386145–6OrthodoxChristianity139–40,395Normore,A.H.187,190,192Ortiz,Fernando32,363Norris,P.15,396Örücü,Esin80Novara,Ramon283Othering,riskof125‘Novo-Andeancuisine’(cocinanovoandina)115OttomanEmpire49NovoCinema.SeeCinemaNovoNWICO.SeeNewWorldInformationandPachamama(motherearth)102CommunicationOrderpaleo-television227Nyaupane,G.P.130–31PalermoConventionagainstTransnationalOrganizedCrime178Obadia,Lionel142Palmer,David142Oberg,A.G.340Pamuk,Orhan48O’Connor,P.129Pan-Africanism71Octobre,Sylvie17Pandit,L.49ofK-popculture259–62Panofsky,E.273ofnewsproduction15,293,294–5Panopoulos,Sam116offeringalternativestoWST38Papastergiadis,Nikos11,18perspectivebasedonglocalityconcept237,Parasitefilm15,272238Park,Sunghee258,360post/decolonialperspectivesof395–7Parmentier,Augustine110ofpre-modernhistory34–40Parrish,C.210researchagendasinsociologyofsport201–2participatoryactionresearch(PAR)355–6roleinmediaentertainmentlandscape316participatorymedia14ofsportsandgames204–7,227–30particularism92,236ofstreamingplatforms309Patagonia247theoriesof45,46,337,348,344,346,347Patel,F.187,189,192–3understandinginpolicymaking165–7Pathan,Irfan207viewingasliterarystrategy45,56–7Pathan,Yusuf207andWST17,340–43pathological(g)localism223–7Oh,Ingyu15,256Patterson,O.344,347Okereke,StephanieLinus283PaulII,PopeJohn139Olson,Mancur231n3‘PeacebuildingCompared’project174OnMarriageinNorway(Sundt)366n2Peacock(streamingplatform)307OnthePostcolony(Mbembe)70Pearson,Clive145ontology65PembertonChemicalCompany246Orbán,Viktor224Pemberton,JohnS.246organicsportingglocalization202Pennycook,A.331organizationalcultures235–6,244–5,250Pentecostalism149–50applyingglocalmodeltounlockcomplexperipherallocation51culturaldynamics243–4PersonalVideoRecorder(PVR)311globalandtransnationalorganizationspetrofictionasglocalliterature51–6244–50philosophy10glocalandhumanisticmodel241–3debtsanddutiestoplaces71–3glocalization237–9andglocalconcept61–3glocalmanagement237–9modalitiesofengagement63glocalorganizations237–9respondingtoplaces68–71multiparadigmaticandhumanisticapproachsittinginplaces66–8239–41thinkingglocalconcept63–6organizationalstrategiesphilosophy-in-place72VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
423Index415NederveenPieterse,Jan3,144,236,389forglocalization392–3Pihama,Leonie356ofglocalization395–7Pilates(systemofphysicalexercises)239,241glocalizationin391–2Pilates,Joseph241postcolonialstudies386pinkglobalization375postcolonialtheories387Pink,S.159post-globalization18PISA.SeeProgrammeforInternationalStudent‘post-truth’politics224AssessmentPothier,J.18Pitts,Martin29Poudel,S.130–31Pius,A.127powerstructures30,62pizzanapoletana116PrambananTempleCompounds125place,conceptof5,219pravasi55Pliny39pre-modernhistory34Plotinus63Bronzization34–5pluriverse394glocalizationinAmericas36PlutoTV307long-distancetradeinancientandmedievalPohatu,Taina356Afro-Eurasia36–9Polanyi,M.174materialtransculturalityinAncientIndianpolicymaking161,167OceanWorld39–40age-friendly162–5RomanEmpire35globallyoriented160–61preservation119n15inHongKong166‘produsers’298understandingglocalizationin165–7professionalglocalnewsnetworks295–8policymobility156ProgrammeforInternationalStudentAssessmentfromglobaltolocal161–2(PISA)191grassrootsmodeof163–4,166prosaluteImperatorisritual35politicaleconomyofcinemaindustry280–81Protestantism144‘politicsoftheprefix’331Prysthon,Â.389Pollywood279pseudocuisine.Seemodokiryōripolycentricity390publicorganizations245polycentricproblems172,173–4,180publicpolicy,glocaleducationand191popculture53,373Pulcini,Elena10cross-pollinating375Punk,Daft374globalizationof201purificationprocessoffood107glocalizationof202–4Putin,Vladimir220PopCulture2.0373–5PVR.SeePersonalVideoRecorderpopularculture.SeepopculturePybus,J.291populism225inageofdigitalization227‘Qana’/Qāni’38algorithmic218,226qualitativemethods367n8national221,223QuibibyHollywoodstudioveterans309performativecharacterof225–6Quijano,Anibal96–7,99,393relationshipbetweenglobalizationand223resurgent218racializedOther277post-bureaucraticorganizations244racialmelancholia266,267post-colonialism17,18racism,victimsof266post-coloniality16Rai,Aishwarya283post-colonialmelancholia266–7,268Ramirez,F.O.339,343,346post-colonialorde-colonialstudies17Ramsey,Claire13postcolonialperspectives94,387Ramutsindela,M.132ofcosmopolitanism389–91Ranger,T.115,144,151n4decoloniallenses,glocalizationthroughRantanen,T.301n3393–5Rao,S.283inglobalstudies388–9RCCG.SeeRedeemedChristianChurchofGodonglocalization386re-localisation345VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
424416Handbookofcultureandglocalizationre-naturalizationsoffoodspheres117–18Roos,Vera357ReadyPlayerOnefilm374Rothe,D.177realismvs.nominalism62–3Roudometof,Victor4,10,14,16,29,45,56,Reddy,SuneelKumar5357n7,58n14,61,64,66–7,77,81,139–40,RedeemedChristianChurchofGod(RCCG)144149,172,186,202,221,236,237,294,Reese,S.D.297329,332n1,343,362,371,391referentiality345,347–8Rowe,W.236refraction395–6Roy,Arundhati52RegionalAutonomy94Rushdie,Salman47,50–2relationalaxiology367n4ruttedlocalities219relationality356relativization220Sadri,G.244Religionsjournal12,140Sahlberg,P.346religiousglocalizationstudy138Said,Edward386inAsianreligions141–3Sakdapolrak,P.326developingtrends149–51Salah,Mohamed209futuredirections149–51Salazar,Noel11–12,124–7,130withinIslamiccontext140–41Samkari,Nowfal13NewEvangelizationcampaign139samplingandrecruitmentinConfuciancontextsproblemsin146–9360–61Roudometofworkon139–40Samsung261intheologyandnormativediscourses145–6Samulnori(traditionalKoreanpercussionquartet)TorontoBlessingphenomenon138–9376useofalternativeconcepts143–5Sandywell,Barry222religioussystem151n3Santos,Sousa18Renaissancehumanism70Sanyal,S.57n6Renda,G.49SAP.SeeStructuralAdjustmentProgrammeresearchmethods156,354–5Sassen,S.5resistancemetaphor278SathyaSai,globalizationof145resurgentpopulism218Saussy57n2Rhaptaemporium39SavetheChildren(NGO)245Riegel,Viviane17,18scalarparity173RightsofMan390scalarpolitics157RisshōKōseikai142‘-scapes’theory143,201,210,324Ritzer,George6–7,78,83,126,228,237,292,scepticismaroundglobalization4343,354,358,360,395Schein,E.H.245,246Roach,Joseph150Schelling,V.236Robbins,T.R.278,283Schneider,B.248Roberts,C.299Schreiter,Robert145Robertson,Roland2–5,12,14,16,46–7,61,63,Schröder,P.32666,78,124,138,143–4,150,151,151n1,Scordiscangroup30172,186,201,202,204,207,211,219–20,Scotellaro,Rocco366n3229,236,237,275,290,292,332,342,Sedda,Franciscu4347,354,358,360,391,395.Seealsoseemspizza.Seeseemssushiglocalizationseemssushi117Robinson,Frank246Segerberg,Alexandra231n3Rocha,Cristina143,150Sehwag,Virender207RodríguezC.M.244Selasi,Taiye71Rohbeck,Johannes10semanticWeb.SeeWeb3.0Roldán,Concha10semiotics11,106,114RomanEmpire33,35,38‘senseofspace’5,160Romanization35Servon,L.J.159Romano,Claude73SEZs.SeeSpecialEconomicZonesRomanzoCriminale315Shaftel,J.194Romberg,Raquel143Shaftel,T.L.194VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
425Index417shamanism362Soyinka,Wole94ShanghaiDisneyland128Soysal,Y.N.343Shenhav,Y.A.341‘spaceofflows’158SherlockHolmes260SpecialEconomicZones(SEZs)81Sherrat,Susan29Spence,L.278ShewhoCountstheStairs(Hamed)51Spielberg,Steven374SHINee263Spinoza,Baruch63Shinto141,142Spivak,Gayatri387SHNee263sports200Shoemaker,P.J.301n1inChina209Shor,E.14culturalimperialistviewof210Sigismondi,Paolo16digitalizationandglocalizationof227–30Sikhcommunity241digitalmediatizationof218Simi,D.129glocalizationof204–7simplemixes81Sportscape210Singh,Harbhajan207‘spreadablemedia’concept373,380–81Siraj,Mohammed207Srinivas,Tulasi145,149,150SkamItalia315Sriraman,B.193Sklad,M.188Stadtler,F.277,282,283SkyMobileTV227Stam,R.278SkyNews297StanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy231n1SMEntertainment258–9statelaw81Smith,Cheryl356Steger,Manfred150,222Smith,LindaTuhiwai356Stephan-Emmrich,M.326Smith,M.P.159Storrar’sapproach145Snow,David149Storrar,William145socialconstructionism226Storyful298socialinter-relationships100strategicsportingglocalization202socialism,Marx’stheoryof94streamingplatforms272,306,307–9.SeealsosocialsciencesNetflixdiscourseonglocalizationin77StructuralAdjustmentProgramme(SAP)281glocalizationin3structuralism2hybridityin81structuration338popularizationofglocalizationin5studyofreligions12.Seealsoreligiousreorientations386glocalizationstudyWestern17subscriptionvideoondemand(SVOD)315socialspace5Suburra315socialtheory396Sundt,Eilert366n2SocialWelfareDepartmentofHongKong164Sunstein,Cass225socio-culturalsystems243Sun,Yi13socio-economicsystem46super-diversity173,178,180sociology1,14,68–6,106,146Supermanfilm260SociologyofPhilosophies,The(Collins)67survivance94softpowerinHallyuculture379–80SVOD.SeesubscriptionvideoondemandSokaGakkai(JapaneseBuddhistreligioussweetpowerinHallyuculture379–80,382movement)142,360,395Swyngedouw,Erik5,159,160Solkar,Eknath207symbolicexchange35Sorel,George94syncretism138Soulard,Joelle11–12,131synergy345South(metaphor)386,390,393southerncriminology174–6,179tacitknowledgemodelofK-popglocalizationsoutherntheory18,175262–5SouthKorea375–6Taiwan156SouthKoreanculture,in-betweennessof378AFCinitiativein164–5,166SouthwestAirlines244VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
426418HandbookofcultureandglocalizationinteractionsbetweenglobalknowledgeandTrackers272localpractices167traditionalists203three-layerpolicymakingframework165transcendence201Takeuchi,H.261transculturality.SeematerialtransculturalityTalibanrule205transference201Tamilpoetics50transformation201,220Tamiltypologyoflandscapes50transformativetourism129Tansuhaj,P.123analyticaltenetsofglocalization130,132Tarantino,Quentin374,382communitydevelopmentapproachin132tasteinfrastructure372desireforsociallyresponsiblepartnershipstechno-cultural2.0ecosystem374132technologicalrevolution305glocalizationmechanismsand129–30technoscapes201glocalizeddiscourse131television227interactionswithdestinationresidents131–2temporalaxisofbusinessanalysis38positiveimpactoncross-communityprojectstemporalglocalization206132–3temporality37tourguidesand130–31TemporaryPeople(Unnikrishnan)53–4,56translation345Tenenboim-Weinblatt,K.299translocal236,325Teo,P.125incontemporaryscholarlycontext330–31TheatreoftheOppressed367n5fromconvergencetodivergencies328–30theology,glocalizationin145–6culturaldynamics244theorization7,338mediatednetworking326Thiongo,NgugiWa94phenomena241–2ThirdWorldCinema278–9,282,284processes248–9ThomsonReuters295translocality16Thoumrungroje,A.123advocatesof330Tichnor-Wagner,A.192indigitalcommunication326TikTok241,242andglocalization322Time297historyof325–8TimeWarnercompany308relatedtotransnationalism327Timmons,R.2scholarshipon327tinai(landscape)50translocalizationinfilmsandcinema273Tolkappiyam50transmodernity,decolonialconceptionof394Tomlinson,John391transnationalcrimes177–9Tönnies,F.64,322–3transnationalidentities-in-politics98top-downcorporate-drivenprocess373,380transnationalism52,327,330Topel,Marta140transnationalization140,149topinambur110ofAmericancinema275tōrōnagashi(lanternfloating)ritual142transnationalMuslimpolitics144TorontoBlessing138transnationalorganizations238,244Torrance,H.194–5globalprocesses244–5tourismexperiences11–12glocalculturalmodeltoorganizationalbusinessapproach,glocalizationas127–9setting250culturalapproach,glocalizationas124–5hybridationalprocesses246–7customerloyalty,glocalizationingainingmatrixofglocalculturalprocesses249133roleoflocalcultures247–8glocalizationasimpetusfortransformativesyntheticframework249129–33translocalprocesses248–9glocalized123–4,133transnationalrules85mitigatingcrises,glocalizationastooltotransnationalstrategyinmusicdistribution265126–7Trau,A.M.125roleoflocalein202travelingconcepts71ToyotaMotorCorporation238,258travelingcultures105Toyotism238Tresidder,R.128–9VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
427Index419Trippestad,T.A.193vernacularization139–40,149Trotgenre.SeeKorea(n)—teuroteuVerschueren,P.323Trump,Donald204,223,225verticalaxisofbusinessanalysis238tsumami117Vertovec,S.173Tsutsui,K.339Viano,E.C.178Twenty20cricket229–30victimization173Twining,William78glocalized179–80Twitter242internationalandtransnational173–4micro,meso,andmacro179–80Uber126victimology171Ubuntu71Victorianmorality203–4UGC.Seeuser-generatedcontent(UGC)Vimeo272Ukah,Asonzeh144Vizenor,Gerald94UNESCOCharter280vonOppen,A.325,326UnitedNationsEducationalScientificandCulturalOrganization(UNESCO)124–5,WAHS.SeeWorldAssociationforHallyu277StudiesUnitedStatesofAmerica(USA)Walgenbach,P.341–2,345,347AmericaInvertida94Walker,K.131Americanbasketball204Wallerstein,Immanuel31Americanbeans110WallStreetJournal,The297AmericanChristianity12Walmart244Americanlawfirms,foreignexpansionof86Wal-Martization82AmericanMemorialDaydate142Walsh,Catherine96glocalizationin36WaltDisneyCompany126universalism92,236Walter,M.M.356universalisticmanagementtheories238Wang,N.49universalityofphilosophy69WashingtonPost,The297universalization117Wasser,F.275,280universaljurisdiction178Waters,M.290Universalstudios308Watson,Alan80universalvalues376Watson,J.204Unnikrishnan,Deepak53,55,57n11WC.SeeWesternCulture‘unofficial’mixes81Weaver,L.J.361(un)translatability113–14Web2.0290,291,298urbanism156Web3.014,217–18urbanstudies13Weberiansense200,343,347globalizationin157–8Wei,Francis146global–localnexusof161–2Weiler,B.131glocalizationin158–9Welikala,T.193strategicimportanceof161–2Wellman,Barry218,226–7US–Chinarapprochement205Wenger,E.323user-generatedcontent(UGC)290Westerncosmopolitanism391Usfilm283WesternCulture(WC)257,258USlegalmodel,circulationof79,80,88n2Westernfilmindustry277Westernization34,220Valamanesh,Hossein100Westernliteraryandphilosophicalstudies48Valverde,Mariana173Westernlocalism391VanEngen,Charles146Westernmodernity,peculiarityandparadoxofVanuatuculture125114Varavelpufilm53Westernsocialscience17variable-geometry172,173,180Wheatly,Phyllis52variegatedurbanism156White,K.E.6,66VaronaMartínez,Gema13Whitson,D.14Vásquez,Manuel139WHO.SeeWorldHealthOrganizationVictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
428420HandbookofcultureandglocalizationWhyte,Kyle394–5evolutionofculturalmeanings339–40Williams,Raymond373fruitfulcorrespondence345–8Wilson,S.356globalisomorphism338,341WisdomSitsinPlaces(Basso)66andglobalization340Witcher,R.35andglocalization340–43Woo,John374ineffectualimplementation339Woolf,G.30institutionaldynamics338–9world-makingpractice101,217,219,230–31,worldsystemstheory.Seeworldsocietytheory231n1(WST)WorldAssociationforHallyuStudies(WAHS)Wright,David372256,269.SeealsoHallyucultureWST.SeeworldsocietytheoryWorldBank126Wuaku,Albert44worldculture2Wynter,Sylvia70WorldHealthOrganization(WHO)156,162–3worldheritage124yakisoba117WorldHeritageCommittee124Yano,Christine375WorldHeritageList124Yeats,W.B.57n1worldliteraryknowledge50Yifei,Liu284worldliterature56,58n14Yolngupeople100globalizationand47–8Yoon,J.244glocalpoetics48–50Yoshimoto,M.277localcultureinglobalperspective45–7youthcosmo-cultures17,371–2petrofictionasglocalliterature51–6YouTube272worldsocietyperspective2YSEntertainment377worldsocietytheory(WST)28,29–31,35,38,YukonTerritoryofCanada125337–8,347conceptualfoundationsforbond343–5Zhang,Y.279VictorRoudometofandUgoDessì-9781839109010DownloadedfromPubFactoryat05/28/202208:33:06AMviaYaleUniversityMainLibrary
此文档下载收益归作者所有
