Buchan Nancy R, Grimalda Gianluca, Wilson Rick, Brewer Marilynn, Fatas Enrique, Foddy Margaret
Sonoco International Business Department, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Mar 17;106(11):4138-42. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809522106. Epub 2009 Mar 2.
Globalization magnifies the problems that affect all people and that require large-scale human cooperation, for example, the overharvesting of natural resources and human-induced global warming. However, what does globalization imply for the cooperation needed to address such global social dilemmas? Two competing hypotheses are offered. One hypothesis is that globalization prompts reactionary movements that reinforce parochial distinctions among people. Large-scale cooperation then focuses on favoring one's own ethnic, racial, or language group. The alternative hypothesis suggests that globalization strengthens cosmopolitan attitudes by weakening the relevance of ethnicity, locality, or nationhood as sources of identification. In essence, globalization, the increasing interconnectedness of people worldwide, broadens the group boundaries within which individuals perceive they belong. We test these hypotheses by measuring globalization at both the country and individual levels and analyzing the relationship between globalization and individual cooperation with distal others in multilevel sequential cooperation experiments in which players can contribute to individual, local, and/or global accounts. Our samples were drawn from the general populations of the United States, Italy, Russia, Argentina, South Africa, and Iran. We find that as country and individual levels of globalization increase, so too does individual cooperation at the global level vis-à-vis the local level. In essence, "globalized" individuals draw broader group boundaries than others, eschewing parochial motivations in favor of cosmopolitan ones. Globalization may thus be fundamental in shaping contemporary large-scale cooperation and may be a positive force toward the provision of global public goods.
全球化放大了那些影响所有人且需要大规模人类合作才能解决的问题,比如自然资源的过度开采和人为导致的全球变暖。然而,全球化对于应对此类全球社会困境所需的合作意味着什么呢?有两种相互竞争的假说。一种假说是,全球化引发反动运动,强化人们之间的狭隘区分。大规模合作于是聚焦于偏袒自己的种族、民族或语言群体。另一种假说则表明,全球化通过削弱种族、地域或国家身份作为认同来源的相关性,强化了世界主义态度。本质上,全球化,即全球各地人们日益增强的相互联系,拓宽了个体认为自己所属的群体边界。我们通过在国家和个体层面衡量全球化,并在多层次顺序合作实验中分析全球化与个体与远方他人合作之间的关系来检验这些假说,在这些实验中,参与者可以为个体、地方和/或全球账户做出贡献。我们的样本取自美国、意大利、俄罗斯、阿根廷、南非和伊朗的普通民众。我们发现,随着国家和个体层面的全球化程度提高,个体在全球层面相对于地方层面的合作也会增加。本质上,“全球化”个体划定的群体边界比其他人更宽泛,摒弃狭隘动机而倾向于世界主义动机。因此,全球化可能是塑造当代大规模合作的根本因素,并且可能是提供全球公共产品的一股积极力量。