Transnationalism, Cosmopolitanism and Glocalization

Victor Roudometof

Current Sociology · 2004 · 442 citations · 60 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Transnationalism, originally tied to immigrant cohorts, has broadened to encompass diverse groups and cross‑border activities, and is frequently conflated with cosmopolitanism—an ideal that blurs prescriptive and descriptive meanings—leading scholars to assume a linear positive link between the two concepts. The essay aims to clarify this confusion by conceptualizing transnational social spaces as outcomes of internal globalization (glocalization) and by favoring a second interpretation of cosmopolitanism that emphasizes detachment from local ties. It operationalizes a cosmopolitan‑local continuum, outlining specific dimensions along which attitudes diverge between cosmopolitans and locals.

Abstract

Transnationalism was originally connected to recent immigrant cohorts, but the concept has been expanded to include other groups of people, as well as a whole array of activities across borders. Cosmopolitanism is invoked both as a moral and ethical ideal, as well as a lived experience, thereby facilitating confusion between a theorist’s prescriptive and descriptive statements. In contemporary scholarship, the presence of transnationalism is often used as an indication of cosmopolitanism, and a linear positive correlation between the two is often implied. To rectify this confusion, it is more salient to conceive of transnational social spaces, social fields and communities as the end result of internal globalization (or glocalization). Glocalization allows for a twofold conception of cosmopolitanism: first, as situational ‘openness’ within local contexts and, second, as detachment from local ties. The essay explores these two conceptualizations and argues in favour of the second interpretation. Accordingly, cosmopolitans and locals form a continuum where individuals’ attitudes might range in strength depending upon specific dimensions. The essay develops an operationalization of the cosmopolitan-local continuum and discusses the specific dimensions where it is expected that each group’s attitudes would diverge.

References

60