- Email: [email protected]
Globalization and local and global identities among Iranian students
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
International Journal of Intercultural Relations journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel
Globalization and local and global identities among Iranian students夽 Bahman Mahammadbakhsh ∗ , Eskandar Fathiazar, Akram Hobbi, Mahdieh Ghodratpour Sociology Committee, Research Services Counselling Engineers Institute, No. 58, next to Fire Brigade, Modarress St., 5136986961 Tabriz, Iran
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 1 January 2010 Received in revised form 22 October 2011 Accepted 7 November 2011 Keywords: Globalization Global identity Local identity
a b s t r a c t The process of globalization is both a disputable and an ambiguous issue and it has been approached through various and sometimes contradictory views. One of the major topics related to the process is the survival or persistence of local identities during the process of globalization in which at least two fundamental yet contradictory approaches can be identified. The first approach is promising decrease in local and ethnic arguments in globalization process and as a matter of fact, it points out that by worldwide cultural assimilation, local identities will decrease. On the other hand, there is another approach which forecasts augmentation of ethnic crisis and increase of local identity in the process. Which one of these approaches applies to our three ethnic groups in our research then? This is the topic under investigation in this paper. This survey method research, the subjects of which are Azeri Turk, Fars and Kurd students of Tabriz University, indicates that as the global identity among the students increase, their local identities decrease. In other words, with the augmentation of globalization process, local identities begin to decrease and it means that the theories of latter approach in the research are rejected and the theories of the former approach are confirmed. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Nowadays, in addition to the problems and difficulties governments have with their local cultures, expansion of globalization and emergence of new players such as multi-national companies, international organizations and media such as Internet and satellite are new threats for national states. It is to the extent that some critics believe that in the process of globalization some of developed countries, utilizing modern technologies can, in a way, expand a global culture in favor of themselves and cause transmutation and elimination of territorial characteristics of other cultures (Karimi Maleh, 2000a, 2000b). Globalization process is a disputable as well as an ambiguous subject and at least two different and sometimes contradictory perspectives have approached it. From the first perspective, the globalization is an issue which has emerged from history and is rooted in the long past that causes time-space compression in the world and consequently increases mutual understanding among people. Globalization, encompassing all dimensions of life changes subjectivities and objectivities and through organic cohesion of the world, promises cultures to tend to exchange from each others; and as a result it leads to global understanding even though there is cultural variation and multiculturalism (Arenson, 1997; Berry, 2008; Dehshiri, 2000; Rosenau & Czempiel, 1989). However, according to the second perspective, globalization is not considered a process, it is rather regarded as an aimed project which results in cultural assimilation rather than cultural multiplicity .From this perspective, globalization is considered a globalism ideology in which reflects supremacy of powerful countries to the world. Moreover, it reflects oppressive approach
夽 The paper was reviewed and accepted by the prior Editor-in-Chief, Dan Landis. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 411 5264601; fax: +98 411 5264602. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (B. Mahammadbakhsh), [email protected] (E. Fathiazar), [email protected] (A. Hobbi), [email protected] (M. Ghodratpour). 0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.11.005
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
15
of powerful industrial countries to distribute the west culture and folklore and impose it to other countries (Amin, 1996; Dehshiri, 2000; Huntingtion, 1992, 1995; Wiseman, 1998). In consequences of the mentioned views, it is plausible to have different approaches regarding outcomes of local and ethnic identities in the process of the globalization. It is in a way that one of these approaches claims growth of local identities in the globalization process, while the other reports about the decline of ethnical and local identities in this process. Thus the purpose of this research is to explore the relationship between local and global identities of students and consequently to examine the validity of the mentioned approaches. 1.1. Globalization Being a new subject for discussion in social sciences, globalization has been discussed widely in recent decades. Marshall Mc Luhan’s work helped to popularize this concept. McLuhan, one of the first thinkers of globalization to analyze the social impact of media technology, introduced the concept of the “global village.” In this concept, McLuhan encapsulated the increased time-space compression in human affairs. McLuhan foresaw, then, the impact of the new communication and information technologies. Many manifestations of such impact have been diagnosed and forecasted by Alvin Toffler in Future Shock (1970) and The Third Wave (1980). Levitt’s (1983) article “the globalization of markets” popularized the term “globalization” in the business and economic sphere and later this term was used widely in other fields too (Kim & Bhawuk, 2008). Presenting a comprehensive definition for the globalization that would satisfy all people appears to be a difficult task because there are disagreements on the essence and origin of it among researchers. One of the main issues related to the globalization is the disagreement on the origin and start point of this event; in other words, it is disputed whether it is a modern event or an old one. While some researchers such as Giddens (1991), Kim and Bhawuk (2008), Wallerstein (1979) and Sklair (1994, 1999) believe that it is a modern event and that modernity is in essence tends toward globalization; others like Robertson (1992), Waters (2000) and particularly Held (1999) believes that globalization dates before modernity. Even they sometimes search for its origin and the time of emergence of the globalization in the ancient times. In addition to the arguments on the origin and commencement of globalization, there are some other discrepant ideas which do not allow us to present a comprehensive definition; an example is the existence of various theories and approaches in this field. The followings are some main approaches (Ahmadi, 2002): World system approach, world culture approach, world society approach and world capitalism approach. Although there are various works on globalization, there is not a single definition for this concept. Therefore, in order to do applied researches some common features of definitions should be cleared. When we skim several views on the globalization such as economical and cultural views (Friedman, 2000; Giddens, 1991) and various approaches which have been discussed in this matter, the main agreement that we find is the increase of communication in globalization. In other words some researchers such as McGrew (1992), Baylis, Smith, and Owens (2005) and Legrain (2002) call globalization as affiliation process and the ever increasing interactions (Nonejad, 2005). Therefore, by using these definitions, it could be expressed that in the light of globalization of communication, identity subjects also have been expanded. The causes and effects of these identity subjects are discussed worldly, and it reaches to composition of a global identity (Ghoreishi, 2002). 1.2. Global and local identities Regarding that global and local identities are considered as parts of social identity, it is necessary to have a brief indication on social identity. Investigations in this field lead us toward emphasizing two main elements of forming social identity which are commitment feeling and emotional belonging. We can express that social identity is a combination of feelings, attitudes and emotional belongings in a public society which leads to unity and social cohesion and overall becomes a part of individual’s identity (for example see, Branch, Tayal, & Triplett, 2000; Hajiani, 2000; Tajik, 2000; Tavassoli & Ghasemi, 2002; Ting-Toomey et al., 2000; Yousefi, 2000). Likewise, in defining global identity, regarding social identity, it can be said that it is a combination of the individual’s tendencies, feelings and affiliation to global traits and values which leads to unity and global cohesion and overall forms a part of individual’s identity. In addition, local identity is also taken into consideration in this paper, which as a combination of tendencies, feelings and individual affiliation to local and ethnical traits and values leads to local unity and cohesion and overall forms a part of individual’s identity. 1.3. Local identities in the globalization process Survival and continuity of local identity in the great cultural and economical trend of the globe is one of significant discussions in the globalization. It is evident that different views in this respect have been presented; however, summing up the views in respect of ethnical and local crisis, two fundamental yet opposite approaches can be identified: First approach promises decrease in local and ethnical disputes in the process of the globalization and in fact, it refers to the point that worldwide cultural assimilation will lead to decline in local identities. Hobsbawm (1990), Doutsche (1966), Fukuyama (1992) and Ohmae (1998) are considered some of thinkers of this approach. Appreciating communication and cultural development in globalization process, they promise diminishing local and ethnical disputes. In other words, they
16
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
oppose globalization and localization, calling the present world the time of globalizing culture (Breton, 1988; Dehshiar, 2000; Gharagozlou, 2002; Maghsoudi, 2000; Sajjadpour, 2002). On the other hand, there is another approach which anticipates the increase in ethnic crisis and local identity claiming. The second approach believes that development and increase of communication and global identity leads to development of local awareness and finally causes ethnical unrests. Thinkers of this approach, such as Robertson (2004), Rosenau (2003), Guibernau (1999), Turner (2000), Bhawuk (2008) and Berry (2008), have remarked on the globalization event and inability of technologies in diminishing local ties and believe that the communication revolution has caused cultural-ethnic awareness arise (Bashirieh, 2000; Mowlana & Robinsons, 1979; Seyed Emami, 1997). There have been numerous empirical researches in this subject conducted in various countries; such as Yoshino’s (1992) research in Japan society, Liber and Weisberg (2002) and his colleague in various areas of the world, Blum (2003) search in transcaspian region and others. Inspecting Japan society, Yoshino (1992) concluded that globalization has reinforced ethnic distinctions and identities. He states that paying attention to the culture has risen particularly among several industrial, commercial and productive companies. For instance, Mitsubishi, in its advertisements and mottos emphasizing Japanese culture and identity, tries to reinforce a better international communication. Liber and Weisberg (2002), in their research with the title of “globalization, culture and identities in crisis”, believe that nowadays culture in its various forms acts as the main conveyor of globalization and modern values, creating an important competitive field for local, national and religious identities. They proclaim that from mass and local cultures there are some reaction against globalization and American’s cultural superiority in the world. The reaction varies in different societies and countries. In another research done by Castles (1992) it is stated that history of the world has witnessed dual opposition in recent decades; in other words, the increase of world convergence has caused simultaneous homogenization and fragmentation of culture. Blum (2003), another researcher, doing research on transcaspian countries concludes that while there is very much attraction toward the progress of the west in economics, science and technology, simultaneously, there is a strong detest in uncontrollable disobedient trends of western government. He finally declares that the development of hybrid culture in the cities under investigation proves a model of hybrid culture in a bigger world. There have been researches in Iran too, which often have discussed effective factors on identities and the hierarchy of these identities. However, they have not examined the existing theories in this topic that is one of main purposes of this paper. As a matter of fact, most of results of those researches demonstrate that the local identity stands as the first priority and the global identity as the second place for the respondents. The amount of these identities also varies from individual to individual depending on their ethnicity, gender, age, religion and socio-economic status (Abbasi, 2004; Aghazadeh, 1995; Armi, 2004; Hajiani, 2000). Concluding the mentioned researches it should be stated that the results in the researches in different areas of the world have approved the theories of the second approach. Since these approaches have not been examined in Iran, the question here is that in a country like Iran which is multi-ethnical and multi-cultural and consist of a special political governing system, how do local and global identities reside? Do globalization and augmentation of global identity have a positive effect on local identities of individuals? Or in a smaller scale and in a case study if we want to discuss, the question is that what relationship is there between local and global identities of Kurd, Fars and Azeri Turk students of Tabriz University? 2. Method 2.1. Participants This research has been done in 2008 among three ethnical groups of the students of Tabriz University: Azeri Turk, Kurd and Fars. It has employed a survey method and a questionnaire containing 21 questions to gather data. The final sample size is 370 subjects. The sample design developed corresponds to random stratifed sampling with proportional affixation. In the sample the proportions observed correspond to departments and Gender. The final sample consists of 48.9% males and 51.1% females. Besides, 59.2% of the sample is Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars and 20% is Kurd. 2.2. Procedure Respondents have filled the questionnaire in their classes. In this research, because of the sensitivity of the subject and in order to avoid probable ethnical problems, not only the views of the three groups in the research have been assessed but also views of all students have been evaluated. Therefore, the respondents who didn’t belong to any one of the three ethnical groups have been excluded from the analyses. 2.3. Instruments This research consists of two dependant variables, local identity and global identity, and several independent variables (gender, ethnicity, religion and socio-economic status). There are questions in questionnaire which solicit self report of respondents such as information about demographic variables, global identity variable and local identity variable. Demographic variables include gender, ethnicity and religion. Socio-economic status of the respondents has also been measured
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
17
Table 1 Factor analysis of the items related to local identity scale and global identity scale. Items
1. In listening to music which one of the following songs is often your preferred choice? 2. Which one of the following person’s tombs do you prefer to visit? 3. When you choose a spouse for one of your kinsmen, which one of the following religions is your priority? 4. In which of the following cities do you prefer to live? 5. Listening to which of the following poems make you enjoy the most? 6. In which one of the following languages do you prefer to read and write? 7. Who do you prefer to be your roommate from the following people? 8. If one of your kinsmen decides to marry, a citizen of which of the following cities do you prefer him/her to be? *
Local identity
Global identity
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 1
.72* .56* .05
.03 .39 .62*
.61* .58* .01
.00 .37 .66*
.39 .72* .71* .16 .15
.63* .16 .05 .71* .67*
.27 .55* .66* .20 .26
.57* .26 −.14 .71* .66*
Factor 2
p < .05.
by means of available previous resources and researches in this subject (Rafipoor, 2002); there are questions to indicate it such as occupation of parents, education of parents, the kind of vehicle they use, the type of house and their furniture. In preparing the questionnaire the followings have been used: Phinney’s (1992) Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM), Ting-Toomey et al. (2000) ethnic/cultural identity salience questionnaire, Armi’s (2004) local and global identity and some others have been utilized. It is noteworthy that instead of Likert scale answering, respondents were asked to indicate their priority of responses for rank list questions. In other words, from eight choices of each question, the respondents could choose up to six prioritized choices. Placement of each of local identity and global identity in the first position or priority shows a stronger local or global identity. As an example, for the question of “in which one of the following languages do you prefer to read and write?” the following choices have been presented: (a) Arabic, (b) English, (c) Balouchi, (d) Gilaki, (e) Azeri Turki, (f) Persian, (g) Lori, (h) Kurdi. The reason for the number of alternatives given in questions is due to ethnical combination of the population under investigation. On the basis that the questionnaire has been distributed among all of ethnics of the society under investigation, therefore, to avoid sensitivities and in order to take into account the traits and values of all ethnics of the society, the alternatives represents the number of all ethnics in the country. Thus, considering the research society, seven main ethnics were used as choices plus one additional choice that is global trait. In order to discover global and local identity dimensions, a factor analysis with varimax rotation has been used. Outcome of factor analysis of local identity is two factors that each consist of four items. The items of the first factor which will be mentioned as cultural factor, in fact, measures individual’s attitudes and belongings in his/her cultural behavior and the second factor items are applied in individual’s attitudes and belongings in his/her social behavior which we refer to it as social factor. It should be mentioned that alpha of Cronbach of scale of local identity in this research for different ethnical samples is 72% (˛ = 72%). Similarly, outcome of factor analysis of global identity is two factors that each factor consists of four items. Accordingly the first and items of the second factor are the same as items of scale of local identity. Thus, initial factor of global identity like counterpart of its local identity is called cultural factor and the second factor like its counterpart is called social factor. Also alpha of Cronbach gained from this scale for different ethnical samples of the research is 62% (˛ = 62%). Factor analysis of items related to local and global identity is shown in Table 1. 3. Results 3.1. Description of local and global identity according to ethnicity, religion and gender Descriptive results show that from the total sample size (370 subjects) 48.9% are males and 51.1% are females. Besides, the final sample consists of 59.5% Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars and 20% Kurd. Finally, contribution of religions in the sample is 80.5% Shiite, 16.8% Sunnite and the rest 1.35% other religions. For mean difference test of local identity and global identity among different ethnical groups, religious groups and genders T-test, ANOVA and Tukey Hsd have been used and the results are given in Table 2. As shown in Table 2, respondents’ ethnicity, religion and gender have no effect on the amount of their local identities. In this case the result is not consistent with the results of research of Abbasi (2004) and Hajiani (2000). Probably this difference is because of the methodological limitations of the research which has been explained. However, in the amount of global identity the case is different; it is in a way that among all groups of the participants there is a significant difference regarding their global identity scores. For instance a significant difference between different ethnical groups means (F[2, 367] = 5.41, p < .05) that Tukey HSD paired comparisons show this difference between Azeri Turk and Fars students (p < .05) and between Azeri Turk and Kurd students (p < .05). This result is consistent with results of Armi’s research (2004) and it seems to have
18
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
Table 2 Description of local identity and global identity according to different groups. Variable
Ethnicity Azeri Turk Kurd Fars Religion Shiite Sunnite Others Gender Male Female
Local identity
Global identity
Mean
Standard deviation
Statistic
Mean
Standard deviation
Statistic
4.50 4.38 4.58
1.31 1.38 1.12
F(2, 367) = .46 p = .62
2.03 2.38 2.43
1.08 1.11 .99
F(2, 367) = 5.41 p < .05
4.51 4.58 3.75
1.26 1.19 1.73
F(2, 362) = 1.01 p = .36
2.10 2.45 2.45
1.05 1.10 .87
F(2, 362) = 2.95 p < .05
1.33 1.24
4.53 4.45
t = .63 p = .52
2.03 2.31
1.13 1.03
t = 2.33 p < .05
Mean is computed on the basis of the ranks from zero to six.
relationship between different cultural, social and economical facilities of each ethnic. It means that we believe that the increase of global identity depends on the familiarity and encounter of the individual with the surrounding world and the globalization process accelerates the width and speed of this familiarity. Furthermore, the perception and going along with the process of globalization requires some essential facilities and amenities. Regarding the better socio-economical conditions of the dominant Fars ethnic, these facilities are prepared for Fars residential areas rather than Kurd and Azeri Turk residential areas. Therefore, it is predictable that Fars ethnic respondents would have a higher global identity than the other two ethnics and the results of this paper proves it. Moreover, Table 2 demonstrates that the mean of the global identity also differs among respondents of various religious groups (F[2, 362] = 2.95, p < .05). Tukey HSD paired comparisons show this difference between Shiite and Sunnite respondents (p < .05). It means that global identity of Sunnite respondents is higher than Shiite respondents. This result contradicts with the explanation of the preceding paragraph. There, we said that global identity of individuals has a direct relationship with economical and social facilities, so we accepted that Sunnite respondents, having lower degree of facilities than Shiite respondents who are Fars and Azeri Turks, have lower global identities. However, in this section, Sunnite respondents who are all Kurds, have a higher global identity than Shiite respondents who are Fars and Azeri Turks. It seems this is because the unequal number of the three ethnical groups in the final sample of the research. The final sample consists of 59.2% Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars, and 20% Kurd. Since Azeri Turk Shiite respondents have a lower global identity than Fars Shiite respondents and are large in their number when they mix with Fars respondents as a common religious group, they bring Fars global identity mean so low to a point lower than global identities of Sunnite Kurds. In addition to it, with a quick survey in the Table 2 we find out that there is a significant difference between the scores of global identity within gender groups too (t = −2.33, p < .05). That is to say, females have gained a higher global identity score than males. Results of this part are consistent with the results of previous researches (for example see Abbasi, 2004; Aghazadeh, 1995; Armi, 2004; Hajiani, 2000). This result probably is because women are more flexible in accepting various cultures and ideas than men. Furthermore, descriptive results of this paper are consistent with many of previous studies in Iran that different ethnical groups of students own higher local identities than global identity. This result could show that globalization have not influenced tendency and ideas of the youth so much, or it is a little early to speak about globalization and its wide effects in Iran.
3.2. The relationship between local identity, global identity and socio-economic status Pearson correlations show that in the whole sample of the research, socio-economic status scores of the respondents have a negative relationship with their local identity scores (r = −.12, p < .05) and have a positive relationship with their global identity scores (r = .14, p < .01). The result of this part approves the mentioned issues and is consistent with many of previous studies in this field. In our idea, this could mean that high socio-economic status which leads to the increase in materialistic and non materialistic facilities can play a gigantic role in the way of a person’s global communications so that it can provide more opportunity in gaining experience and comparison of cultures and so the person can easily discover his/her assets as well as shortages and go beyond local imaginations and thoughts to think more globalized. Also, responding the main question of the research (RQ) with paying attention to Table 3 it should be stated that there is a negative relationship between students’ local identities and their global identities (r = −.48, p < .001). This relationship is applicable among dimensions of these identities, too. Table 4 shows the relationship between local and global identities among different ethnicities, religions and genders. This table indicates that among different ethnical and religious groups and also between genders, the relationship between local identity and global identity is negative.
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
19
Table 3 Correlation between dimensions of global and local identities. 1. Global identity 1.1. Cultural dimension 1.2. Social dimension 2. Local identity 2.1. Cultural dimension 2.2. Social dimension ** ***
– .77*** .82*** −.48*** −.35*** −.45***
– .28*** −.31*** −.36*** −.18**
– −.44*** −.21*** −.53***
– −.83*** −.85***
– .43***
–
p < .01. p < .001.
Table 4 Correlation between global identity and local identity according to individual’s ethnicity, religion and gender. Correlation
Azeri Turk
Kurd
Fars
Local identity and global identity
−.50***
−.46***
−.23*
Correlation
Shiite
Sunnite
Others
Local identity and global identity
−.50***
−.44***
−.13a
Correlation
Male
Female
Local identity and global identity
−.49***
−.46***
a
Not statistically significant *p < .05; ***p < .001.
4. Discussion and conclusion Regarding the purpose of the research which looks for the amount and the type of relationship between local and global identities of students, we have discussed the existing views in literature review within two basic yet contradictory approaches. That is to say, the thinkers of the first approach believe that the globalization is against localization and state that there is a negative relationship between localization and the globalization. On the other hand, thinkers of the second approach believe that these two have a positive relationship and promise a growing trend of the local identities. Numerous empirical researches in different areas of the world other than Iran often approve the second approach. Although there have not been researches in this issue in Iran, it is anticipated that regarding ethnical unrests and riots in recent years and also the increase of some meetings about local identities and the rights of nations which are held in unofficial gatherings and in the Internet, the globalization process and consequently the increase of global identity would cause the increase of local identities of individuals. However, the results of this paper show vice versa: while local identities of the respondents are higher than their global identities, the relationship between these two identities is reverse. In other words, the increase of global identities of respondents causes decrease of their local identities. Thus contrary to previous studies, the theories of the second approach in this research are rejected and the theories of the first approach are confirmed. Therefore, it should be stated that contrary findings like this confirm Schaeffer’s (2003) remarks that the globalization process could have diverse consequences for people. Thus it may be simultaneously good for some people and bad for some others. In explaining the findings of this research and the discrepancies, if we ignore the methodological limitations of this research that we will deal with in the last part, we can remark the effects of other variables like the different political, social, economical and cultural atmosphere of societies in which these researches have been done. The importance of these variables could be observed in some researches like Vedder and Virta (2005). They came to know in their research that Swedish Turks and Turks of Netherlands behave differently in their choices of the kind of their acculturation strategies. Thus, they investigated other variables to conclude that this difference is related to the difference of lingual and ethnical policies of these two countries. Likewise, in this research regarding Iran’s different social and political atmosphere comparing countries like Japan, Russia, Azerbaijan and Australia which have done researches in this topic, the different outcome of these researches is a matter of discussion (for example see Blum, 2003; Castles, 1992; Yoshino, 1992). one of the basic differences that lead to contrary results in this research is the existence of an ideological government in Iran contrary to the other societies. Iran is a country that its government owns a religious ideology and is somewhat in contrast with western culture and always competes with it (Bashirieh, 2000). This is a specification that seldom exists in the mentioned countries, or if it exist it is not so obvious. In other words, the government of Islamic Republic of Iran has been in contrast with non-Islamic cultures, particularly with western cultures and does not believe in cultural exchanges between Iran and the west and often calls it cultural invasion rather than cultural exchange. This opposition is practically seen in some cases such as prohibition of using of media by means of satellite, specific restrictions for Internet users and filtering some websites. Therefore, we believe that these restrictions not only have not led to carrying out an ideal society, but also have been disliked by many people. In other words, individuals feel inferiority with the increase of the globalization process, when they encounter western culture, and find themselves absolute surrenders of that culture. It is a matter that is seen in the results of this research. Nevertheless, with understanding and accompanying the globalization process by the government and redefinition of some
20
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
of native cultural concepts and their representation by means of modern instruments for individuals, this would probably not have led to this problem. Regarding Iran’s recent ethnical riots which are apparently in contradiction with the results of this paper, we may have some explanation. Investigating the research results, we observe that although there is a reverse relationship between local identities and global identities, local identities of respondents are far higher than their global identities. It means that the globalization has not yet been able to decrease individuals’ local identities. Therefore, local identity claiming is a possibility and it can have other reasons than the globalization. Historical investigation of the demand for local identities in contemporary history shows that many of these ethnical and local unrests and riots against central state in the 20th century have been originated from a kind of emptiness in the public atmosphere of the country. All ethnics except Fars have some pain in common. It could be stated that this common pain is the lack of equal economical, social and political rights for other ethnics compared to the Fars one. Therefore, in investigations it is observed that almost in all ethnical unrests, riots and crisis, ethnical policies and actions of the central state have been a main factor (Blue, 2000; Kohnepoushi, 2004; Maghsoudi, 2001; Naderpour, 2001); these policies are those which mysteriously have exploited the three main models of cultural assimilation, unequal pluralism and equalitarian pluralism. The effects of these policies can be even detected in the investigations of the recent ethnical riots. Some of these riots are: wide unrests in Ahvaz city in 2005 in reaction to the letter of presidential office forcing replacements of population in Arab residential areas (Khozestan Provicne); outbreak of a series of demonstrations and coordinated protests in 2005 in reaction to murdering of a young Kurd by government militia (Bayat, 2005) and wide unrests of residents of Azerbaijan of Iran in 2006 in reaction to insolence to Azeri Turk ethnic by printing a humiliating caricature in one of the state newspapers of Iran. Therefore, as we observe, it is the central state factor that provokes the recent riots rather than the globalization factor. However, there is a probability that it is the globalization which has increased the rate of the reactions of the ethnics to such actions. We hope that we could indicate some of the methodological limitations of the research in this part and make the way for the subsequent researches easier. First of all, in this research, unlike all previous researches, the prioritization method has been used for responding the questionnaire instead of Likert scale; it is a feature that probably is not ineffective in contradictive results of the previous researches out of Iran. Then, because all samples have been chosen from one university, the result cannot be generalized for all of Iran society or even all of academic society of Iran. Another limitation is that since the sample of this research consists of only young people, we should consider that the research does not represent older age groups. Probably it is because of this limitation that we have not been able to find a relationship between local identity of the individuals and their gender, ethnicity and religion unlike Hajiani (2000) and Abbasi (2004) who have used different ages for their researches. Furthermore, since the number of Fars, Kurd and Sunnite respondents in the sample is few, there is a possibility that the results would not be representative for Fars and Kurd ethnics and Sunnite religion. Therefore, subsequent empirical researches, considering these limitations, in order to have a more reliable results, can use from other Iranian ethnics too. Acknowledgments This is a great opportunity to thank Dr. Mohammad Hariri Akbari for his guidance in theoretical section and Dr. Ali Bandeh Hagh for his kind help in statistics section of the paper. References Abbasi, K. (2004). Social identity and its effective factors. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tabriz University, Iran, unpublished results. Aghazadeh, H. (1995). Collective identity: Sociological investigation of dimensions of identity among students of Allameh Tabatabaie University. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Allameh Tabatabaie University, Iran, unpublished results. Ahmadi, H. (2002). Globalization: Ethnic identity or national identity? National Studies, 11, 13–36. Amin, S. (1996). The challenge of globalization. Review of International Political Economy, 3(2), 216–219. Arenson, J. P. (1997). Nationalism, globalization and modernity. In Soroush book, paper collections (2), medias and culture (M. Kashi, Trans). Armi, A. (2004). Comparative study of local and global identities among Tabriz University’s students. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tabriz University, Iran, unpublished results. Bashirieh, H. (2000). Political development and national identity crisis. National Studies, 5, 287–315. Bayat, K. (2005). The just and unjust features of ethnic issues in contemporary Iran. Goft-o-gu, 43, 7–21. Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owens, P. (2005). The globalization of world politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Berry, J. W. (2008). Globalization and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 328–336. Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2008). Globalization and indigenous cultures: Homogenization or differentiation? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 305–317. Blue, Zh. (2000). Kurd question (historical and sociological investigation) (P. Amin, Trans.). Kurdistan: University of Kurdistan. Blum, D. (2003). Globalization and identity in the transcaspian region. Washington, DC: Center for Stratrgic and International Studies. Branch, C. W., Tayal, P., & Triplett, C. (2000). The relationship of ethnic identity and ego identity status among adolescents and young adults. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 777–790. Breton, R. (1988). From ethnic to civic nationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 11(1), 85–102. Castles, S. (1992). Mistaken identity. Sydney: Pluto Press. Dehshiar, H. (2000). Globalization, the evolution of sending overseas western values and institutions. Political-Economical Information, 143-144, 165–166. Dehshiri, M. R. (2000). Globalization and national identity. National Studies, 5, 71–100. Doutsche, K. W. (1966). Nationalism and social communication (second ed.). Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press. Friedman, T. L. (2000). The lexus and the olive tree. New York: Farrar. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. New York: Avon Books. Guibernau, M. (1999). Nationalism schools and nation-state in twentieth century (A. M. Ejtehadi, Trans.). Tehran: Foreign Ministry Press.
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
21
Gharagozlou, M. (2002). Globalization. Political-Economical Information, 177–178, 80–99. Ghoreishi, F. (2002). Globalization and the change of our ego image. National Studies, 11, 37–59. Giddens, A. (1991). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hajiani, E. (2000). Sociological analysis of national identity in Iran and presenting some hypotheses. National Studies, 5, 193–228. Held, D. (1999). Global transformation. London/New York: The Open University Routledge Press. Hobsbawm, E. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huntingtion, S. (1992). The clash of civilization. Foreign Affairs, 32(3), 22–79. Huntingtion, S. (1995). In M. Amiri (Ed.), Clash of civilization theory: Huntington and his critics. Tehran: Tehran University Press. Karimi Maleh, A. (2000a). Editorial. National Studies, 5, 7–8. Karimi Maleh, A. (2000b). Editorial. National Studies, 4, 7–8. Kim, Y. Y., & Bhawuk, D. (2008). Globalization and diversity: Contributions from intercultural research. International Journal of Intercultural Rlations, 32, 301–304. Kohnepoushi, S. (2004). Ethnical discrimination in Kurdistan. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tehran University, Iran. Legrain, P. (2002). Open World: The truth about globalization. London: Abacus. Levitt, T. (1983). The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 92–102. Liber, J. R., & Weisberg, E. R. (2002). Globalization, culture and identities in crisis. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 16(2), 273–296. Maghsoudi, M. (2000). Culture, communication and ethnical changes. National Studies, 6, 171–196. Maghsoudi, M. (2001). Ethnical changes in Iran. Tehran: Research Institute of National Studies. McGrew, A. (1992). A global society. In S. Hall, D. Held, & T. McGrew (Eds.), Modernity and its futures. Cambridge: Polity Press. Mowlana, H., & Robinsons, A. E. (1979). Ethnic mobilization and communication theory. In Ethnicity in an international context. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Naderpour, B. (2001). Subcultures, modern government of Pahlavi and the political development. National Studies, 9, 104–127. Nonejad, M. (2005). Globalization and its cultural effects globalization and its cultural impacts. Islamic Azad University’s Special Periodical on Political Science, 2, 189–211. Ohmae, K. (1998). The end of the nation state; the rise of regional economies. New York: Diane Publishing Company. Phinney, J. S. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 156–176. Rafipoor, F. (2002). Researchs and supposes. Tehran: Enteshar Company. Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage Publication. Robertson, R. (2004). Glocalization: Time–space and homogeneity–heterogeneity. (M. Farhadpoor, Trans.), Arghanun, 24, 211–238. Rosenau, J. N. (2003). Distant proximities: Dynamics beyond globalization. Princeton University Press. Rosenau, J. N., & Czempiel, E. O. (Eds.). (1989). Global change and theoretical challenge. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Sajjadpour, M. K. (2002). Globalization, withdraws from and consequences. Tehran: Foreign Ministry Press, Political and International Studies Office. Schaeffer, R. K. (2003). Understanding globalization: The social consequences of political, economic and environmental change. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Seyed Emami, K. (1997). Ethnical nationalism, exploration for a better understanding. Middle East Studies, 10, 252–260. Sklair, L. (1994). Capitalism and development in global perspective. London: Routledge. Sklair, L. (1999). Competing conception of globalization. Journal of World System Research, V(2), 143–163. Tajik, M. R. (2000). enlightened Iranians and the riddle of national identity. National Studies, 5, 159–176. Tavassoli, G. A., & Ghasemi, Y. (2002). Ethnical decorums and its relationship with transformation of collective identity. Sociology Magazine of Iran, 4, 3–25. Ting-Toomey, S., Yee-Jung, K. K., Shapiro, R. B., Garcia, W., Wright, T. J., & Oetzel, J. G. (2000). Ethnic/cultural identity salience and conflict styles in four us ethnic groups. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 47–81. Turner, B. S. (2000). Globalization and the post modernization of culture, globalization the reader. London: Athlone Press. Vedder, P., & Virta, E. (2005). Language, ethnic identity, and the adaptation of Turkish immigrant youth in the Netherlands and Sweden. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 317–337. Wallerstein, I. (1979). The capitalist world econamy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Waters, M. (2000). Globalization (I. M. Givi & Moridi, Trans.). Tehran: Sazman Press. Wiseman, J. (1998). Global nation? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yoshino, K. (1992). Culture nationalism in contemporary: A sociological enquiry. London: Routledge. Yousefi, A. (2000). Special session: Culture of Iranian Identity. National Studies, 4, 11–60.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
International Journal of Intercultural Relations journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel
Globalization and local and global identities among Iranian students夽 Bahman Mahammadbakhsh ∗ , Eskandar Fathiazar, Akram Hobbi, Mahdieh Ghodratpour Sociology Committee, Research Services Counselling Engineers Institute, No. 58, next to Fire Brigade, Modarress St., 5136986961 Tabriz, Iran
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 1 January 2010 Received in revised form 22 October 2011 Accepted 7 November 2011 Keywords: Globalization Global identity Local identity
a b s t r a c t The process of globalization is both a disputable and an ambiguous issue and it has been approached through various and sometimes contradictory views. One of the major topics related to the process is the survival or persistence of local identities during the process of globalization in which at least two fundamental yet contradictory approaches can be identified. The first approach is promising decrease in local and ethnic arguments in globalization process and as a matter of fact, it points out that by worldwide cultural assimilation, local identities will decrease. On the other hand, there is another approach which forecasts augmentation of ethnic crisis and increase of local identity in the process. Which one of these approaches applies to our three ethnic groups in our research then? This is the topic under investigation in this paper. This survey method research, the subjects of which are Azeri Turk, Fars and Kurd students of Tabriz University, indicates that as the global identity among the students increase, their local identities decrease. In other words, with the augmentation of globalization process, local identities begin to decrease and it means that the theories of latter approach in the research are rejected and the theories of the former approach are confirmed. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Nowadays, in addition to the problems and difficulties governments have with their local cultures, expansion of globalization and emergence of new players such as multi-national companies, international organizations and media such as Internet and satellite are new threats for national states. It is to the extent that some critics believe that in the process of globalization some of developed countries, utilizing modern technologies can, in a way, expand a global culture in favor of themselves and cause transmutation and elimination of territorial characteristics of other cultures (Karimi Maleh, 2000a, 2000b). Globalization process is a disputable as well as an ambiguous subject and at least two different and sometimes contradictory perspectives have approached it. From the first perspective, the globalization is an issue which has emerged from history and is rooted in the long past that causes time-space compression in the world and consequently increases mutual understanding among people. Globalization, encompassing all dimensions of life changes subjectivities and objectivities and through organic cohesion of the world, promises cultures to tend to exchange from each others; and as a result it leads to global understanding even though there is cultural variation and multiculturalism (Arenson, 1997; Berry, 2008; Dehshiri, 2000; Rosenau & Czempiel, 1989). However, according to the second perspective, globalization is not considered a process, it is rather regarded as an aimed project which results in cultural assimilation rather than cultural multiplicity .From this perspective, globalization is considered a globalism ideology in which reflects supremacy of powerful countries to the world. Moreover, it reflects oppressive approach
夽 The paper was reviewed and accepted by the prior Editor-in-Chief, Dan Landis. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 411 5264601; fax: +98 411 5264602. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (B. Mahammadbakhsh), [email protected] (E. Fathiazar), [email protected] (A. Hobbi), [email protected] (M. Ghodratpour). 0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.11.005
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
15
of powerful industrial countries to distribute the west culture and folklore and impose it to other countries (Amin, 1996; Dehshiri, 2000; Huntingtion, 1992, 1995; Wiseman, 1998). In consequences of the mentioned views, it is plausible to have different approaches regarding outcomes of local and ethnic identities in the process of the globalization. It is in a way that one of these approaches claims growth of local identities in the globalization process, while the other reports about the decline of ethnical and local identities in this process. Thus the purpose of this research is to explore the relationship between local and global identities of students and consequently to examine the validity of the mentioned approaches. 1.1. Globalization Being a new subject for discussion in social sciences, globalization has been discussed widely in recent decades. Marshall Mc Luhan’s work helped to popularize this concept. McLuhan, one of the first thinkers of globalization to analyze the social impact of media technology, introduced the concept of the “global village.” In this concept, McLuhan encapsulated the increased time-space compression in human affairs. McLuhan foresaw, then, the impact of the new communication and information technologies. Many manifestations of such impact have been diagnosed and forecasted by Alvin Toffler in Future Shock (1970) and The Third Wave (1980). Levitt’s (1983) article “the globalization of markets” popularized the term “globalization” in the business and economic sphere and later this term was used widely in other fields too (Kim & Bhawuk, 2008). Presenting a comprehensive definition for the globalization that would satisfy all people appears to be a difficult task because there are disagreements on the essence and origin of it among researchers. One of the main issues related to the globalization is the disagreement on the origin and start point of this event; in other words, it is disputed whether it is a modern event or an old one. While some researchers such as Giddens (1991), Kim and Bhawuk (2008), Wallerstein (1979) and Sklair (1994, 1999) believe that it is a modern event and that modernity is in essence tends toward globalization; others like Robertson (1992), Waters (2000) and particularly Held (1999) believes that globalization dates before modernity. Even they sometimes search for its origin and the time of emergence of the globalization in the ancient times. In addition to the arguments on the origin and commencement of globalization, there are some other discrepant ideas which do not allow us to present a comprehensive definition; an example is the existence of various theories and approaches in this field. The followings are some main approaches (Ahmadi, 2002): World system approach, world culture approach, world society approach and world capitalism approach. Although there are various works on globalization, there is not a single definition for this concept. Therefore, in order to do applied researches some common features of definitions should be cleared. When we skim several views on the globalization such as economical and cultural views (Friedman, 2000; Giddens, 1991) and various approaches which have been discussed in this matter, the main agreement that we find is the increase of communication in globalization. In other words some researchers such as McGrew (1992), Baylis, Smith, and Owens (2005) and Legrain (2002) call globalization as affiliation process and the ever increasing interactions (Nonejad, 2005). Therefore, by using these definitions, it could be expressed that in the light of globalization of communication, identity subjects also have been expanded. The causes and effects of these identity subjects are discussed worldly, and it reaches to composition of a global identity (Ghoreishi, 2002). 1.2. Global and local identities Regarding that global and local identities are considered as parts of social identity, it is necessary to have a brief indication on social identity. Investigations in this field lead us toward emphasizing two main elements of forming social identity which are commitment feeling and emotional belonging. We can express that social identity is a combination of feelings, attitudes and emotional belongings in a public society which leads to unity and social cohesion and overall becomes a part of individual’s identity (for example see, Branch, Tayal, & Triplett, 2000; Hajiani, 2000; Tajik, 2000; Tavassoli & Ghasemi, 2002; Ting-Toomey et al., 2000; Yousefi, 2000). Likewise, in defining global identity, regarding social identity, it can be said that it is a combination of the individual’s tendencies, feelings and affiliation to global traits and values which leads to unity and global cohesion and overall forms a part of individual’s identity. In addition, local identity is also taken into consideration in this paper, which as a combination of tendencies, feelings and individual affiliation to local and ethnical traits and values leads to local unity and cohesion and overall forms a part of individual’s identity. 1.3. Local identities in the globalization process Survival and continuity of local identity in the great cultural and economical trend of the globe is one of significant discussions in the globalization. It is evident that different views in this respect have been presented; however, summing up the views in respect of ethnical and local crisis, two fundamental yet opposite approaches can be identified: First approach promises decrease in local and ethnical disputes in the process of the globalization and in fact, it refers to the point that worldwide cultural assimilation will lead to decline in local identities. Hobsbawm (1990), Doutsche (1966), Fukuyama (1992) and Ohmae (1998) are considered some of thinkers of this approach. Appreciating communication and cultural development in globalization process, they promise diminishing local and ethnical disputes. In other words, they
16
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
oppose globalization and localization, calling the present world the time of globalizing culture (Breton, 1988; Dehshiar, 2000; Gharagozlou, 2002; Maghsoudi, 2000; Sajjadpour, 2002). On the other hand, there is another approach which anticipates the increase in ethnic crisis and local identity claiming. The second approach believes that development and increase of communication and global identity leads to development of local awareness and finally causes ethnical unrests. Thinkers of this approach, such as Robertson (2004), Rosenau (2003), Guibernau (1999), Turner (2000), Bhawuk (2008) and Berry (2008), have remarked on the globalization event and inability of technologies in diminishing local ties and believe that the communication revolution has caused cultural-ethnic awareness arise (Bashirieh, 2000; Mowlana & Robinsons, 1979; Seyed Emami, 1997). There have been numerous empirical researches in this subject conducted in various countries; such as Yoshino’s (1992) research in Japan society, Liber and Weisberg (2002) and his colleague in various areas of the world, Blum (2003) search in transcaspian region and others. Inspecting Japan society, Yoshino (1992) concluded that globalization has reinforced ethnic distinctions and identities. He states that paying attention to the culture has risen particularly among several industrial, commercial and productive companies. For instance, Mitsubishi, in its advertisements and mottos emphasizing Japanese culture and identity, tries to reinforce a better international communication. Liber and Weisberg (2002), in their research with the title of “globalization, culture and identities in crisis”, believe that nowadays culture in its various forms acts as the main conveyor of globalization and modern values, creating an important competitive field for local, national and religious identities. They proclaim that from mass and local cultures there are some reaction against globalization and American’s cultural superiority in the world. The reaction varies in different societies and countries. In another research done by Castles (1992) it is stated that history of the world has witnessed dual opposition in recent decades; in other words, the increase of world convergence has caused simultaneous homogenization and fragmentation of culture. Blum (2003), another researcher, doing research on transcaspian countries concludes that while there is very much attraction toward the progress of the west in economics, science and technology, simultaneously, there is a strong detest in uncontrollable disobedient trends of western government. He finally declares that the development of hybrid culture in the cities under investigation proves a model of hybrid culture in a bigger world. There have been researches in Iran too, which often have discussed effective factors on identities and the hierarchy of these identities. However, they have not examined the existing theories in this topic that is one of main purposes of this paper. As a matter of fact, most of results of those researches demonstrate that the local identity stands as the first priority and the global identity as the second place for the respondents. The amount of these identities also varies from individual to individual depending on their ethnicity, gender, age, religion and socio-economic status (Abbasi, 2004; Aghazadeh, 1995; Armi, 2004; Hajiani, 2000). Concluding the mentioned researches it should be stated that the results in the researches in different areas of the world have approved the theories of the second approach. Since these approaches have not been examined in Iran, the question here is that in a country like Iran which is multi-ethnical and multi-cultural and consist of a special political governing system, how do local and global identities reside? Do globalization and augmentation of global identity have a positive effect on local identities of individuals? Or in a smaller scale and in a case study if we want to discuss, the question is that what relationship is there between local and global identities of Kurd, Fars and Azeri Turk students of Tabriz University? 2. Method 2.1. Participants This research has been done in 2008 among three ethnical groups of the students of Tabriz University: Azeri Turk, Kurd and Fars. It has employed a survey method and a questionnaire containing 21 questions to gather data. The final sample size is 370 subjects. The sample design developed corresponds to random stratifed sampling with proportional affixation. In the sample the proportions observed correspond to departments and Gender. The final sample consists of 48.9% males and 51.1% females. Besides, 59.2% of the sample is Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars and 20% is Kurd. 2.2. Procedure Respondents have filled the questionnaire in their classes. In this research, because of the sensitivity of the subject and in order to avoid probable ethnical problems, not only the views of the three groups in the research have been assessed but also views of all students have been evaluated. Therefore, the respondents who didn’t belong to any one of the three ethnical groups have been excluded from the analyses. 2.3. Instruments This research consists of two dependant variables, local identity and global identity, and several independent variables (gender, ethnicity, religion and socio-economic status). There are questions in questionnaire which solicit self report of respondents such as information about demographic variables, global identity variable and local identity variable. Demographic variables include gender, ethnicity and religion. Socio-economic status of the respondents has also been measured
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
17
Table 1 Factor analysis of the items related to local identity scale and global identity scale. Items
1. In listening to music which one of the following songs is often your preferred choice? 2. Which one of the following person’s tombs do you prefer to visit? 3. When you choose a spouse for one of your kinsmen, which one of the following religions is your priority? 4. In which of the following cities do you prefer to live? 5. Listening to which of the following poems make you enjoy the most? 6. In which one of the following languages do you prefer to read and write? 7. Who do you prefer to be your roommate from the following people? 8. If one of your kinsmen decides to marry, a citizen of which of the following cities do you prefer him/her to be? *
Local identity
Global identity
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 1
.72* .56* .05
.03 .39 .62*
.61* .58* .01
.00 .37 .66*
.39 .72* .71* .16 .15
.63* .16 .05 .71* .67*
.27 .55* .66* .20 .26
.57* .26 −.14 .71* .66*
Factor 2
p < .05.
by means of available previous resources and researches in this subject (Rafipoor, 2002); there are questions to indicate it such as occupation of parents, education of parents, the kind of vehicle they use, the type of house and their furniture. In preparing the questionnaire the followings have been used: Phinney’s (1992) Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM), Ting-Toomey et al. (2000) ethnic/cultural identity salience questionnaire, Armi’s (2004) local and global identity and some others have been utilized. It is noteworthy that instead of Likert scale answering, respondents were asked to indicate their priority of responses for rank list questions. In other words, from eight choices of each question, the respondents could choose up to six prioritized choices. Placement of each of local identity and global identity in the first position or priority shows a stronger local or global identity. As an example, for the question of “in which one of the following languages do you prefer to read and write?” the following choices have been presented: (a) Arabic, (b) English, (c) Balouchi, (d) Gilaki, (e) Azeri Turki, (f) Persian, (g) Lori, (h) Kurdi. The reason for the number of alternatives given in questions is due to ethnical combination of the population under investigation. On the basis that the questionnaire has been distributed among all of ethnics of the society under investigation, therefore, to avoid sensitivities and in order to take into account the traits and values of all ethnics of the society, the alternatives represents the number of all ethnics in the country. Thus, considering the research society, seven main ethnics were used as choices plus one additional choice that is global trait. In order to discover global and local identity dimensions, a factor analysis with varimax rotation has been used. Outcome of factor analysis of local identity is two factors that each consist of four items. The items of the first factor which will be mentioned as cultural factor, in fact, measures individual’s attitudes and belongings in his/her cultural behavior and the second factor items are applied in individual’s attitudes and belongings in his/her social behavior which we refer to it as social factor. It should be mentioned that alpha of Cronbach of scale of local identity in this research for different ethnical samples is 72% (˛ = 72%). Similarly, outcome of factor analysis of global identity is two factors that each factor consists of four items. Accordingly the first and items of the second factor are the same as items of scale of local identity. Thus, initial factor of global identity like counterpart of its local identity is called cultural factor and the second factor like its counterpart is called social factor. Also alpha of Cronbach gained from this scale for different ethnical samples of the research is 62% (˛ = 62%). Factor analysis of items related to local and global identity is shown in Table 1. 3. Results 3.1. Description of local and global identity according to ethnicity, religion and gender Descriptive results show that from the total sample size (370 subjects) 48.9% are males and 51.1% are females. Besides, the final sample consists of 59.5% Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars and 20% Kurd. Finally, contribution of religions in the sample is 80.5% Shiite, 16.8% Sunnite and the rest 1.35% other religions. For mean difference test of local identity and global identity among different ethnical groups, religious groups and genders T-test, ANOVA and Tukey Hsd have been used and the results are given in Table 2. As shown in Table 2, respondents’ ethnicity, religion and gender have no effect on the amount of their local identities. In this case the result is not consistent with the results of research of Abbasi (2004) and Hajiani (2000). Probably this difference is because of the methodological limitations of the research which has been explained. However, in the amount of global identity the case is different; it is in a way that among all groups of the participants there is a significant difference regarding their global identity scores. For instance a significant difference between different ethnical groups means (F[2, 367] = 5.41, p < .05) that Tukey HSD paired comparisons show this difference between Azeri Turk and Fars students (p < .05) and between Azeri Turk and Kurd students (p < .05). This result is consistent with results of Armi’s research (2004) and it seems to have
18
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
Table 2 Description of local identity and global identity according to different groups. Variable
Ethnicity Azeri Turk Kurd Fars Religion Shiite Sunnite Others Gender Male Female
Local identity
Global identity
Mean
Standard deviation
Statistic
Mean
Standard deviation
Statistic
4.50 4.38 4.58
1.31 1.38 1.12
F(2, 367) = .46 p = .62
2.03 2.38 2.43
1.08 1.11 .99
F(2, 367) = 5.41 p < .05
4.51 4.58 3.75
1.26 1.19 1.73
F(2, 362) = 1.01 p = .36
2.10 2.45 2.45
1.05 1.10 .87
F(2, 362) = 2.95 p < .05
1.33 1.24
4.53 4.45
t = .63 p = .52
2.03 2.31
1.13 1.03
t = 2.33 p < .05
Mean is computed on the basis of the ranks from zero to six.
relationship between different cultural, social and economical facilities of each ethnic. It means that we believe that the increase of global identity depends on the familiarity and encounter of the individual with the surrounding world and the globalization process accelerates the width and speed of this familiarity. Furthermore, the perception and going along with the process of globalization requires some essential facilities and amenities. Regarding the better socio-economical conditions of the dominant Fars ethnic, these facilities are prepared for Fars residential areas rather than Kurd and Azeri Turk residential areas. Therefore, it is predictable that Fars ethnic respondents would have a higher global identity than the other two ethnics and the results of this paper proves it. Moreover, Table 2 demonstrates that the mean of the global identity also differs among respondents of various religious groups (F[2, 362] = 2.95, p < .05). Tukey HSD paired comparisons show this difference between Shiite and Sunnite respondents (p < .05). It means that global identity of Sunnite respondents is higher than Shiite respondents. This result contradicts with the explanation of the preceding paragraph. There, we said that global identity of individuals has a direct relationship with economical and social facilities, so we accepted that Sunnite respondents, having lower degree of facilities than Shiite respondents who are Fars and Azeri Turks, have lower global identities. However, in this section, Sunnite respondents who are all Kurds, have a higher global identity than Shiite respondents who are Fars and Azeri Turks. It seems this is because the unequal number of the three ethnical groups in the final sample of the research. The final sample consists of 59.2% Azeri Turk, 20.8% Fars, and 20% Kurd. Since Azeri Turk Shiite respondents have a lower global identity than Fars Shiite respondents and are large in their number when they mix with Fars respondents as a common religious group, they bring Fars global identity mean so low to a point lower than global identities of Sunnite Kurds. In addition to it, with a quick survey in the Table 2 we find out that there is a significant difference between the scores of global identity within gender groups too (t = −2.33, p < .05). That is to say, females have gained a higher global identity score than males. Results of this part are consistent with the results of previous researches (for example see Abbasi, 2004; Aghazadeh, 1995; Armi, 2004; Hajiani, 2000). This result probably is because women are more flexible in accepting various cultures and ideas than men. Furthermore, descriptive results of this paper are consistent with many of previous studies in Iran that different ethnical groups of students own higher local identities than global identity. This result could show that globalization have not influenced tendency and ideas of the youth so much, or it is a little early to speak about globalization and its wide effects in Iran.
3.2. The relationship between local identity, global identity and socio-economic status Pearson correlations show that in the whole sample of the research, socio-economic status scores of the respondents have a negative relationship with their local identity scores (r = −.12, p < .05) and have a positive relationship with their global identity scores (r = .14, p < .01). The result of this part approves the mentioned issues and is consistent with many of previous studies in this field. In our idea, this could mean that high socio-economic status which leads to the increase in materialistic and non materialistic facilities can play a gigantic role in the way of a person’s global communications so that it can provide more opportunity in gaining experience and comparison of cultures and so the person can easily discover his/her assets as well as shortages and go beyond local imaginations and thoughts to think more globalized. Also, responding the main question of the research (RQ) with paying attention to Table 3 it should be stated that there is a negative relationship between students’ local identities and their global identities (r = −.48, p < .001). This relationship is applicable among dimensions of these identities, too. Table 4 shows the relationship between local and global identities among different ethnicities, religions and genders. This table indicates that among different ethnical and religious groups and also between genders, the relationship between local identity and global identity is negative.
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
19
Table 3 Correlation between dimensions of global and local identities. 1. Global identity 1.1. Cultural dimension 1.2. Social dimension 2. Local identity 2.1. Cultural dimension 2.2. Social dimension ** ***
– .77*** .82*** −.48*** −.35*** −.45***
– .28*** −.31*** −.36*** −.18**
– −.44*** −.21*** −.53***
– −.83*** −.85***
– .43***
–
p < .01. p < .001.
Table 4 Correlation between global identity and local identity according to individual’s ethnicity, religion and gender. Correlation
Azeri Turk
Kurd
Fars
Local identity and global identity
−.50***
−.46***
−.23*
Correlation
Shiite
Sunnite
Others
Local identity and global identity
−.50***
−.44***
−.13a
Correlation
Male
Female
Local identity and global identity
−.49***
−.46***
a
Not statistically significant *p < .05; ***p < .001.
4. Discussion and conclusion Regarding the purpose of the research which looks for the amount and the type of relationship between local and global identities of students, we have discussed the existing views in literature review within two basic yet contradictory approaches. That is to say, the thinkers of the first approach believe that the globalization is against localization and state that there is a negative relationship between localization and the globalization. On the other hand, thinkers of the second approach believe that these two have a positive relationship and promise a growing trend of the local identities. Numerous empirical researches in different areas of the world other than Iran often approve the second approach. Although there have not been researches in this issue in Iran, it is anticipated that regarding ethnical unrests and riots in recent years and also the increase of some meetings about local identities and the rights of nations which are held in unofficial gatherings and in the Internet, the globalization process and consequently the increase of global identity would cause the increase of local identities of individuals. However, the results of this paper show vice versa: while local identities of the respondents are higher than their global identities, the relationship between these two identities is reverse. In other words, the increase of global identities of respondents causes decrease of their local identities. Thus contrary to previous studies, the theories of the second approach in this research are rejected and the theories of the first approach are confirmed. Therefore, it should be stated that contrary findings like this confirm Schaeffer’s (2003) remarks that the globalization process could have diverse consequences for people. Thus it may be simultaneously good for some people and bad for some others. In explaining the findings of this research and the discrepancies, if we ignore the methodological limitations of this research that we will deal with in the last part, we can remark the effects of other variables like the different political, social, economical and cultural atmosphere of societies in which these researches have been done. The importance of these variables could be observed in some researches like Vedder and Virta (2005). They came to know in their research that Swedish Turks and Turks of Netherlands behave differently in their choices of the kind of their acculturation strategies. Thus, they investigated other variables to conclude that this difference is related to the difference of lingual and ethnical policies of these two countries. Likewise, in this research regarding Iran’s different social and political atmosphere comparing countries like Japan, Russia, Azerbaijan and Australia which have done researches in this topic, the different outcome of these researches is a matter of discussion (for example see Blum, 2003; Castles, 1992; Yoshino, 1992). one of the basic differences that lead to contrary results in this research is the existence of an ideological government in Iran contrary to the other societies. Iran is a country that its government owns a religious ideology and is somewhat in contrast with western culture and always competes with it (Bashirieh, 2000). This is a specification that seldom exists in the mentioned countries, or if it exist it is not so obvious. In other words, the government of Islamic Republic of Iran has been in contrast with non-Islamic cultures, particularly with western cultures and does not believe in cultural exchanges between Iran and the west and often calls it cultural invasion rather than cultural exchange. This opposition is practically seen in some cases such as prohibition of using of media by means of satellite, specific restrictions for Internet users and filtering some websites. Therefore, we believe that these restrictions not only have not led to carrying out an ideal society, but also have been disliked by many people. In other words, individuals feel inferiority with the increase of the globalization process, when they encounter western culture, and find themselves absolute surrenders of that culture. It is a matter that is seen in the results of this research. Nevertheless, with understanding and accompanying the globalization process by the government and redefinition of some
20
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
of native cultural concepts and their representation by means of modern instruments for individuals, this would probably not have led to this problem. Regarding Iran’s recent ethnical riots which are apparently in contradiction with the results of this paper, we may have some explanation. Investigating the research results, we observe that although there is a reverse relationship between local identities and global identities, local identities of respondents are far higher than their global identities. It means that the globalization has not yet been able to decrease individuals’ local identities. Therefore, local identity claiming is a possibility and it can have other reasons than the globalization. Historical investigation of the demand for local identities in contemporary history shows that many of these ethnical and local unrests and riots against central state in the 20th century have been originated from a kind of emptiness in the public atmosphere of the country. All ethnics except Fars have some pain in common. It could be stated that this common pain is the lack of equal economical, social and political rights for other ethnics compared to the Fars one. Therefore, in investigations it is observed that almost in all ethnical unrests, riots and crisis, ethnical policies and actions of the central state have been a main factor (Blue, 2000; Kohnepoushi, 2004; Maghsoudi, 2001; Naderpour, 2001); these policies are those which mysteriously have exploited the three main models of cultural assimilation, unequal pluralism and equalitarian pluralism. The effects of these policies can be even detected in the investigations of the recent ethnical riots. Some of these riots are: wide unrests in Ahvaz city in 2005 in reaction to the letter of presidential office forcing replacements of population in Arab residential areas (Khozestan Provicne); outbreak of a series of demonstrations and coordinated protests in 2005 in reaction to murdering of a young Kurd by government militia (Bayat, 2005) and wide unrests of residents of Azerbaijan of Iran in 2006 in reaction to insolence to Azeri Turk ethnic by printing a humiliating caricature in one of the state newspapers of Iran. Therefore, as we observe, it is the central state factor that provokes the recent riots rather than the globalization factor. However, there is a probability that it is the globalization which has increased the rate of the reactions of the ethnics to such actions. We hope that we could indicate some of the methodological limitations of the research in this part and make the way for the subsequent researches easier. First of all, in this research, unlike all previous researches, the prioritization method has been used for responding the questionnaire instead of Likert scale; it is a feature that probably is not ineffective in contradictive results of the previous researches out of Iran. Then, because all samples have been chosen from one university, the result cannot be generalized for all of Iran society or even all of academic society of Iran. Another limitation is that since the sample of this research consists of only young people, we should consider that the research does not represent older age groups. Probably it is because of this limitation that we have not been able to find a relationship between local identity of the individuals and their gender, ethnicity and religion unlike Hajiani (2000) and Abbasi (2004) who have used different ages for their researches. Furthermore, since the number of Fars, Kurd and Sunnite respondents in the sample is few, there is a possibility that the results would not be representative for Fars and Kurd ethnics and Sunnite religion. Therefore, subsequent empirical researches, considering these limitations, in order to have a more reliable results, can use from other Iranian ethnics too. Acknowledgments This is a great opportunity to thank Dr. Mohammad Hariri Akbari for his guidance in theoretical section and Dr. Ali Bandeh Hagh for his kind help in statistics section of the paper. References Abbasi, K. (2004). Social identity and its effective factors. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tabriz University, Iran, unpublished results. Aghazadeh, H. (1995). Collective identity: Sociological investigation of dimensions of identity among students of Allameh Tabatabaie University. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Allameh Tabatabaie University, Iran, unpublished results. Ahmadi, H. (2002). Globalization: Ethnic identity or national identity? National Studies, 11, 13–36. Amin, S. (1996). The challenge of globalization. Review of International Political Economy, 3(2), 216–219. Arenson, J. P. (1997). Nationalism, globalization and modernity. In Soroush book, paper collections (2), medias and culture (M. Kashi, Trans). Armi, A. (2004). Comparative study of local and global identities among Tabriz University’s students. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tabriz University, Iran, unpublished results. Bashirieh, H. (2000). Political development and national identity crisis. National Studies, 5, 287–315. Bayat, K. (2005). The just and unjust features of ethnic issues in contemporary Iran. Goft-o-gu, 43, 7–21. Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owens, P. (2005). The globalization of world politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Berry, J. W. (2008). Globalization and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 328–336. Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2008). Globalization and indigenous cultures: Homogenization or differentiation? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 305–317. Blue, Zh. (2000). Kurd question (historical and sociological investigation) (P. Amin, Trans.). Kurdistan: University of Kurdistan. Blum, D. (2003). Globalization and identity in the transcaspian region. Washington, DC: Center for Stratrgic and International Studies. Branch, C. W., Tayal, P., & Triplett, C. (2000). The relationship of ethnic identity and ego identity status among adolescents and young adults. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 777–790. Breton, R. (1988). From ethnic to civic nationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 11(1), 85–102. Castles, S. (1992). Mistaken identity. Sydney: Pluto Press. Dehshiar, H. (2000). Globalization, the evolution of sending overseas western values and institutions. Political-Economical Information, 143-144, 165–166. Dehshiri, M. R. (2000). Globalization and national identity. National Studies, 5, 71–100. Doutsche, K. W. (1966). Nationalism and social communication (second ed.). Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press. Friedman, T. L. (2000). The lexus and the olive tree. New York: Farrar. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. New York: Avon Books. Guibernau, M. (1999). Nationalism schools and nation-state in twentieth century (A. M. Ejtehadi, Trans.). Tehran: Foreign Ministry Press.
B. Mahammadbakhsh et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 14–21
21
Gharagozlou, M. (2002). Globalization. Political-Economical Information, 177–178, 80–99. Ghoreishi, F. (2002). Globalization and the change of our ego image. National Studies, 11, 37–59. Giddens, A. (1991). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hajiani, E. (2000). Sociological analysis of national identity in Iran and presenting some hypotheses. National Studies, 5, 193–228. Held, D. (1999). Global transformation. London/New York: The Open University Routledge Press. Hobsbawm, E. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huntingtion, S. (1992). The clash of civilization. Foreign Affairs, 32(3), 22–79. Huntingtion, S. (1995). In M. Amiri (Ed.), Clash of civilization theory: Huntington and his critics. Tehran: Tehran University Press. Karimi Maleh, A. (2000a). Editorial. National Studies, 5, 7–8. Karimi Maleh, A. (2000b). Editorial. National Studies, 4, 7–8. Kim, Y. Y., & Bhawuk, D. (2008). Globalization and diversity: Contributions from intercultural research. International Journal of Intercultural Rlations, 32, 301–304. Kohnepoushi, S. (2004). Ethnical discrimination in Kurdistan. Master of Arts Thesis (M.A.), Tehran University, Iran. Legrain, P. (2002). Open World: The truth about globalization. London: Abacus. Levitt, T. (1983). The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 92–102. Liber, J. R., & Weisberg, E. R. (2002). Globalization, culture and identities in crisis. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 16(2), 273–296. Maghsoudi, M. (2000). Culture, communication and ethnical changes. National Studies, 6, 171–196. Maghsoudi, M. (2001). Ethnical changes in Iran. Tehran: Research Institute of National Studies. McGrew, A. (1992). A global society. In S. Hall, D. Held, & T. McGrew (Eds.), Modernity and its futures. Cambridge: Polity Press. Mowlana, H., & Robinsons, A. E. (1979). Ethnic mobilization and communication theory. In Ethnicity in an international context. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Naderpour, B. (2001). Subcultures, modern government of Pahlavi and the political development. National Studies, 9, 104–127. Nonejad, M. (2005). Globalization and its cultural effects globalization and its cultural impacts. Islamic Azad University’s Special Periodical on Political Science, 2, 189–211. Ohmae, K. (1998). The end of the nation state; the rise of regional economies. New York: Diane Publishing Company. Phinney, J. S. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 156–176. Rafipoor, F. (2002). Researchs and supposes. Tehran: Enteshar Company. Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage Publication. Robertson, R. (2004). Glocalization: Time–space and homogeneity–heterogeneity. (M. Farhadpoor, Trans.), Arghanun, 24, 211–238. Rosenau, J. N. (2003). Distant proximities: Dynamics beyond globalization. Princeton University Press. Rosenau, J. N., & Czempiel, E. O. (Eds.). (1989). Global change and theoretical challenge. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Sajjadpour, M. K. (2002). Globalization, withdraws from and consequences. Tehran: Foreign Ministry Press, Political and International Studies Office. Schaeffer, R. K. (2003). Understanding globalization: The social consequences of political, economic and environmental change. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Seyed Emami, K. (1997). Ethnical nationalism, exploration for a better understanding. Middle East Studies, 10, 252–260. Sklair, L. (1994). Capitalism and development in global perspective. London: Routledge. Sklair, L. (1999). Competing conception of globalization. Journal of World System Research, V(2), 143–163. Tajik, M. R. (2000). enlightened Iranians and the riddle of national identity. National Studies, 5, 159–176. Tavassoli, G. A., & Ghasemi, Y. (2002). Ethnical decorums and its relationship with transformation of collective identity. Sociology Magazine of Iran, 4, 3–25. Ting-Toomey, S., Yee-Jung, K. K., Shapiro, R. B., Garcia, W., Wright, T. J., & Oetzel, J. G. (2000). Ethnic/cultural identity salience and conflict styles in four us ethnic groups. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 47–81. Turner, B. S. (2000). Globalization and the post modernization of culture, globalization the reader. London: Athlone Press. Vedder, P., & Virta, E. (2005). Language, ethnic identity, and the adaptation of Turkish immigrant youth in the Netherlands and Sweden. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 317–337. Wallerstein, I. (1979). The capitalist world econamy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Waters, M. (2000). Globalization (I. M. Givi & Moridi, Trans.). Tehran: Sazman Press. Wiseman, J. (1998). Global nation? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yoshino, K. (1992). Culture nationalism in contemporary: A sociological enquiry. London: Routledge. Yousefi, A. (2000). Special session: Culture of Iranian Identity. National Studies, 4, 11–60.