Upload
gerson-godoy-riquelme
View
250
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
1/22
This article was downloaded by: [190.44.167.163]On: 03 September 2013, At: 10:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Journal of International
CommunicationPublication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rico20
Globalisation or glocalisation?ROLAND ROBERTSON
Published online: 04 Apr 2012.
To cite this article:ROLAND ROBERTSON (1994) Globalisation or
glocalisation?, Journal of International Communication, 1:1, 33-52, DOI:10.1080/13216597.1994.9751780
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.1994.9751780
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rico20http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13216597.1994.9751780http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13216597.1994.9751780http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rico208/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
2/22
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloadedby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
3/22
'lobolisotion or alo(ftlisotion
ROLAND ROBERTSON
This paper deals with the idea of glocalisation as a refmement of the concept of globali
sation. Globalisation
is
apparently widely thought of as involving cultural homogeni
sation; even more specifically, as a process involving the increasing domination of one
societal or regional culture over all others. However, by no means all of those who
have directly theorised
the
concept of globalisation h ve seen
it
is as inherently
homogenising. In order to make very explicit the heterogenising aspects of globalisa
tion the idea of glocalisation is introduced. The idea of glocalisation seems to have
originated, in the specific context of talk about globalisation, in Japanese business
methods in the late 19 80s; although by now it has become quite a common marketing
perspective. Regardless, however, of both its apparent national origin and ofits signifi
cance in contemporary marketing procedures, it
is
argued
th t
glocalisation has some
defmite conceptual advantages in the general theorisation of globalisation. It also
facilitates the thorough discussion of various problems th t attend a simple distinction
between the global and the local. In this paper some of these are examined, in particu
lar the ways in which localities are produced on a globe-wide basis. The bearing of
such considerations on the idea of cultural imperialism is briefly addressed, as is the
problem of confming the discussion of communication on
n
extensive, potentially
world-wide, basis to n international perspective.
It
is argued
th t
world communi
cation
is
best referred to as global communication. The problem of global communica
tion is related directly in this paper to the theme of glocalisation.
GLOB US TION S N ISSUE
s the general topic of globalisation grows in importance in a number of academic
fields
it becomes increasingly necessary to attend to some very basic analytical nd
interpretive matters. One such issue, probably the most central one, is discussed here:
the general and basic meaning
th t
is
to
be
attributed to the very idea of globalisation.
In addressing this theme I write primarily as a cultural sociologist. I do, however,
connect my social-theoretical considerations to issues in
the
area of international
communication at certain points, most explicitly in the fmal phase of my discussion.
1
There is a strong tendency to think of globalisation in a loose sense as referring to
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
4/22
ROBERTSON
essentially very large-scale phenomena, as being the preoccupation of sociologists
who are interested
in
big macro-sociological problems,
in
contrast to those who have
micro-sociological - indeed, local - perspectives. s far as the general
thrust
of
the debate about globalisation
is
concerned, I believe this to be extremely misleading.
There is
indeed a mythology about globalisation which sees
that
concept as referring
to developments which involve the triumph of culturally homogenising forces over
all others. That view of globalisation- which is well represented by Ferguson (1992)
- may involve even more extensive attributions, such as the view
that
bigger
is
bet
ter,
that
locality- even
history- is
being obliterated, and
so
on. There are numer
ous dangers that such conceptions of globalisation will
in
fact become part of discipli
nary wisdom - that, for example, when sociology, as well as other disciplinary, text
books come fully to reflect the current concern with globalisation they
will
convey the
impression
that
globalisation indicates a special
or
sub-disciplinary field of interest
that it
is but
one sort of interest
that
sociologists may have, and that interest involves
lack of concern with micro-sociological
or
local issues.
In all of this there is already
an
issue of considerable confusion, which arises
in
part from the quite numerous attempts to internationalise - to extend culturally
and anti-ethnocentrically - the curriculum of sociology and other disciplines. Such
attempts sometimes involve, for example, an argument in favour of a global sociology,
conceived of as a universal sociology
which
makes the practice of the discipline
increasingly viable on a global scale. Some of these ventures in the direction of global
sociology make the incorporation of indigenous sociologies into a global sociology
an
imperative. The problem
of
global sociology as a discipline
which
confirms and
includes native sociologies parallels a more directly analytical issue.
This is
the prob
lem of the relationship between homogenising and heterogenising thrusts
in
globalisa
tion theory. Many sociologists are apparently happy to agree
that
sociology should be
internationalised and/or de-ethnocentrised,
but
they seem
to be
much less inclined
to engage
in
direct and serious study of the empirical, historically formed, global field
p r
s
(Robertson 1992b).2
There is, in any case, an important difference between international and global
perspectives. The first is less inclusive than the second. International suggests rela
tions between nations
or
nationalities. Global - at least as it
is
used
in
the present
context -
is
the more inclusive concept. t does
not
involve the assumption
that
international relations
or
communications cover all
that is
to be known about the
world as a whole (Robertson, 1992b). I will intermittently deal with this issue.
The need to introduce the concept of glocalisation firmly into sociological - as
well as communication - theory arises from the following considerations. Much
of
the talk about globalisation has, almost casually, tended to assume
that
it
is
a process
which overrides locality, including large-scale locality such as
is
exhibited
in
the vari
ous ethnic nationalisms which have arisen in various parts of the world
in
recent
years. This tendency neglects two things. First, it neglects the extent to which
what is
called local
is
in large degree constructed
on
a global, or least a pan-or super-local,
J4 THE JOURNAL OF INTERN TION L COMMUNIC TION 1994), 1 1)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
5/22
GLOBAUSATION OR GLOCALISATION
basis.
In
other words, much of the promotion of locality is in fact done 'from above.'
Much of what appears at first experience to be local is the local expressed in terms of a
generalised recipe of locality. Even in cases where there is
no
concrete recipe- as
in
the
case of some forms of contemporary nationalism - there
is
still,
or
so I would
claim, a translocal factor
at
work; the basic idea here being
that
the assertion of eth
nicity and/or nationality
is at
least made within contemporary glob l terms of identity
and particularity (cf. Alter 19 8 9, 24-40 .
Second, while there has indeed been increasing interest in spatial considerations in
sociological theory and in the intimate links between temporal and spatial dimensions
of human life, these have made relatively little impact as yet on the discussion of glob
alisation and related matters. In particular, there has been little attempt to connect the
discussion of time-and-space to
the
thorny issue of universalism-and-particularism
(Robertson 1992b, 97-114). The recent interest in the theme of postmodernity has
involved much attention to the supposed weaknesses of dominant concern with 'uni
versal time' and the claim that 'particularistic space' be given much greater attention.
But,
in
spite of a
few
serious efforts to resist the tendency, universalism has been per
sistently counterposed to particularism, perhaps most thoroughly in the theorisation
of societal modernisation in the 1950s and 1960s;
3
while the emphasis on space has
frequently been expressed as a diminution of temporal considerations.
To be sure, 'time-space' has been given quite a lot of attention by Giddens and in
debates about his structuration theory, but for
the
most part such discussion has been
conducted
in
abstract terms, with relatively little
attention
to concrete issues.
Nonetheless
an
important aspect of the problematic which is under consideration here
has been delineated by Giddens. Giddens argues that:
... in a general way. the concept of globalisation
is
best understood as expressing funda
mental aspects of time-space distanciation. Globalisation concerns
the
intersection of
presence and absence. the interlacing of social events and social relations at distance'
with local contextualities (Giddens 1991. 21).
He goes on to say
that
globalisation has to be understood as a dialectical phenom
enon, in which events at one pole of a distanciated relation often produce divergent or
even contrary occurrences
at
another (Giddens 1991, 22). While the idea that glob
alisation involves in a very general sense the intersection of presence and absence is
entirely acceptable, my view is
that
Giddens remains captive of old ways of thinking
when he speaks of the production of divergent or even contrary occurrences.'' The
first part of his statement suggests simply
the
connecting of localities, whereas the sec
ond implies an 'action-reaction' relationship.
Some of the ambiguity here
may
arise from the tendency to use the term 'globali
sation' instead of the term
globality -
as in
the
idea of globalisation as a 'conse
quence of modernity' (Giddens 1990). The conjunction modernity-globalisation
in
itself suggests a process, and a temporal outcome of a social and psychological circum-
THE JOURNAL OF
INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNICATION
1994 ,
I
I)
3
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
6/22
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
7/22
GLOBALISA
TION OR GLOCALISATION
world of capitalistic production for increasingly global markets the adaptation to local
and other particular conditions is not simply a case of business responses to pre-exist
ing global variety - to civilisational, regional, societal, ethnic, gendered and still
other sets of consumers, as if such variety or heterogeneity existed simply in itself.
To a considerable extent, micro-marketing - or, in the more comprehensive phrase,
glocalisation - involves
the construction
of increasingly differentiated consumers, the
'invention' of 'consumer traditions' (of which tourism, arguably the biggest 'industry'
of the contemporary world, is undoubtedly the most clear-cut example).
To
put it very
simply, diversity sells. On the other hand, from the consumer's point of view it is an
important basis of cultural capital formation (Bourdieu 1984 . That, it should be
emphasised, is not its only function. The proliferation of
for
example, 'ethnic super
markets', in California and elsewhere caters not so much to difference for its own sake,
but to the desire
for
the familiar and/or to nostalgic wishes. But the latter tendencies
may nonetheless
be
bases of cultural capital formation.
It
is
not my purpose here to delve into the comparative history of capitalistic busi
ness practices.
4
Thus the accuracy of the etymology concerning glocalisation provided
by
The Oxford ictionary
o
New Words
(1991) is not a significant issue.
5
Rather, I want
to use the general idea of glocalisation to make a number of points about the global
local problematic. There is a widespread tendency to
regard that problematic as
straightforwardly indicating a polarity, which assumes its most acute form in
the
claim
that
we live in a world of local assertions
against
globalising trends, a world in
which the very idea of locality is sometimes cast as a form of resistance to the hege
monically global or one in which the assertion of 'locality' or
Gemeinschaft
('communi
ty')
is seen as the pitting of subaltern 'universals' against the 'particular universal' of
dominant cultures and/or classes.
An
interesting variant of this general view
is
to
be
found in the replication of the German culture-civilisation distinction
at
the global
level; where the old notion of ('good') culture is pitted against the ('bad') notion of
civilisation.
In
this replication local culture 'becomes' national culture, while civilisa
tion
is
given a distinctively global, world-wide flavour.
We
have, in my judgment, to be much more subtle about the dynamics of the pro
duction and reproduction of difference and, in the broadest sense, locality. Speaking in
reference to the local-cosmopolitan distinction, Hannerz has remarked
that for
locals
diversity happens to be the principle which allows all locals to stick to their respective
cultures . At the same time, cosmopolitans largely depend
on
'other people' carving
out
'special niches'
for
their cultures. Thus there can
be
no cosmopolitans without
locals (Hannerz 1990, 250). This point has some bearing on the particular nature of
the intellectual interest in and the approach to the local-global issue. In relation to
Hannerz's general argument, however, we should note that in the contemporary
world, or at least in the West, the
current
counter-urbanisation trend (Champion
1989) (much of which in the USA is producing fortress communities ) proceeds in
terms of the
standardisation
of locality, rather
than
straightforwardly in terms of the
principle of difference.
In
contemporary 'international communication' the standard-
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I)
J
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
8/22
ROBERTSON
isation of locality
is
crucial. A 'lifted'
locality-
a sense of locality
that is
communicat
ed
from above - has to
be
a standardised
form
of the local (whether it be a neigh
bourhood, a city, a country, or even a world region).
An
'international'
TV
enterprise
like
CNN
produces and reproduces a particular pattern of relations between localities,
a pattern which depends on a kind of recipe of locality. This standardisation renders
meaningful the very ide of locality, but at the same time diminishes the notion that
localities are things in themselves.
In
any case, we should become much more historically conscious of the various
ways in which the deceptively modern, or postmodern, problem of the relationship
between the global and the local, the universal and the particular and so on,
is
not by
any means as unique to the second half of the twentieth century as many would have
us believe. This is clearly shown in Greenfield's (1992) recent study of the origins of
nationalism in England, France, Germany, Russia and America. With the exception of
English nationalism, she argues that the emergence of national identities- such con
stituting the most common and salient form of particularism in the modern world
(Greenfield 1992,
8
developed as a part of an essentially international process
(Greenfield 1992, 14).
The more extreme claim concerning the contemporary uniqueness of these alleged
opposites is a refraction of what some have called the nostalgic paradigm in Western
social science (Robertson 1990;
cf
Phillips 1993). It is a manifestation of the not
always implicit world view that suggests
that
we - the global we - once lived in
and were distributed not so long ago across a multitude of ontically secure, 'communi
ties'. Now, according to this
narrative-
actually a 'grand' narrative- our sense of
communal home is rapidly being destroyed by waves of (Western?) 'globalisation'. In
contrast I attempt - although I present here only part of my overall argument- to
show
that
globalisation has involved the reconstruction, in a sense the production, of
'home', 'community' and 'locality'.
To that
extent the local
is
not best seen,
at
least as
an analytic premise, as a counterpoint to the global. Indeed it can
be
regarded, subject
to some qualifications, as
n
spect of globalisation. One part of my argument which
must remain underdeveloped in the immediate context
is that
we are being led into
the polar-opposite way of thinking
by
the thesis
that
globalisation
is
a direct conse
quence
of modernity (Giddens
1990;
cf. Robertson
1992a . In
this perspective
Weber's iron cage (Weber 1958, 181)
is
globalised. Moreover, in this perspective
there could never have been any kind of globalisation without the instrumental ratio
nality often taken to be the hallmark of modernity (a rationality which, it
is
readily
conceded, Giddens sees as carrying both disabling nd reflexive enabling possibilities).
Thus. as far
as
I am concerned, the notion of glocalisation actually conveys
much
of what I have in fact been writing in recent years about globalisation. From my stand
point the concept of globalisation has involved the simultaneity and the inter-penetra
tion of what are conventionally called the global and the local, or - in more general
vein - the universal and the particular. Talking strictly of my own position in the cur
rent debate about and the discourse of globalisation, it may even become necessary for
3
B
THE
JOURNAL
OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
9/22
GLOBALISAT ON
OR
GLOCAUSAT ON
me (and others) to substitute occasionally the term glocalisation for the contested
term globalisation, in order to make my, or our, argument more precise. Of course I
certainly do not wish to fall
victim. cognitive or otherwise, to a particular brand of cur
rent marketing terminology. Insofar as we regard the idea of glocalisation as simply a
business term (of apparent Japanese origin) then I would of course reject it as not hav
ing sufficient analytic-interpretive leverage. On the other hand, we are surely coming
to recognise that seemingly autonomous economic terms almost invariably have
deep cultural groundings (Sahlins 1976; cf. Wallerstein 1992). In the Japanese
and
many other societal cases the cognitive and moral struggle even to recognise the
economic domain as relatively autonomous has never really been won. We now live
in a world which increasingly acknowledges the quotidian conflation of the economic
and the
cultural. But we inherited from classical social theory, particularly
in
its
German version of the decades from about 1880 to about 1920, a view that talk of
'culture' and 'cultivation' is distinctly
at
odds with the rhetoric of economics and
instrumental rationality. In any case, much of 'international' communication in the
late-twentieth century world is 'capitalistic' and the most striking recent develop
ments in this sphere, notably CNN, (more recently, and so far much less ambitiously,
BBC
World Service Television
and
the projected Sky International) have involved
great attention to the theme of what is here called glocalisation.
My reflections in this paper on the local-global problematic hinge upon the view
that contemporary locality is largely produced in something like global terms, but that
certainly does not mean that all forms of locality are thus substantively homogenised.
One of the ways of considering the idea of global culture is in terms of its being consti
tuted by the increasing interconnectedness of
many
local cultures both large and
small (Hannerz 1990), although I certainly do not myself think that global culture is
entirely constituted by such interconnectedness (Robertson 1992b, 61-84
and
108-
14). For example, we should not equate the communicative
and
interactive connecting o
such cultures
with the notion o
homogenisation
o all cultures We should not, in other
words, conflate discussion of the culture of interaction between two or more socio-cul
tural collectivities with the issue of whether a generalised process of homogenisation
of all cultures
is
occurring.
We
should also be interested in the conditions for the pro
duction of cultural pluralism (Moore
1989
as well as geographical pluralism.
Moreover, we should recognise that the idea oflocality, indeed of globality, is very rel
ative.
In
spatial terms a village community is, of course, local relative to a region of a
society, while a society is local relative to an area of civilisation, and so on. Relativity
also arises in temporal terms. Contrasting the well-known pair consisting of locals
and
cosmopolitans, Hannerz (1990, 236) has written that what was cosmopolitan in the
early 1940s may
be
counted as a moderate form of localism by now. I do not in the
present context get explicitly involved in the complexities of
this
problem of relativity.
But sensitivity to the problem does inform much of what I say.
There are certain conditions
that are currently promoting the production of con
cern with the local-global problematic within the academy. King (1990,
420
has
THE JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994), 1 1)
J
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
10/22
ROBERTSON
addressed
an
important aspect of this. In talking specifically of the spatial-compression
dimension of globalisation
he
remarks on the increasing numbers of proto-profes
sionals from so-called 'Third World' societies who are travelling to the core for pro
fessional education. The educational sector of core countries depends increasingly
on
this
input
of students from
the
global periphery.
I t is the
experience of flying
round the world and needing schemata to make sense of
what
they see, on the one
hand,
and
encountering students from all over
the
world
in the
classroom,
on the
other, which forms an important experiential basis for academics of
what
King
(1990,
401-2) calls totalising and global theories. I would maintain, however,
that
it
is
inter-
est
in
the
local
as
much
as the totally global which
is
promoted in this way.
THE LOCAL N THE GLOBALl THE
GLOBAL
IN THE LOCAL
In one way or another the issue of the relationship between the 'local' and the 'global'
has become increasingly salient in a wide variety of intellectual and practical contexts.
In some respects this development hinges upon the increasing recognition of the signifi
cance of space, as opposed to time,
in
many
fields
of academic and practical endeavour.
The general interest in the idea of postmodernity, whatever its limitations,
is
probably
the most intellectually tangible manifestation of this. The most well known maxim -
virtually a cliche - proclaimed in the diagnosis of the postmodern condition
is
of
course
that
grand narratives have come to
an
end, and
that
we are now in a circum
stance of proliferating and sharply competing narratives (Lyotard 1984).
In this
per
spective there are no longer any stable accounts of dominant change in the world. This
view itself has developed, on the other hand, at precisely the same time that there has
crystallised
an
increasing interest in the world as a whole as a 'single place'.
As the sense of temporal uni-directionality has faded so, on the other hand, has the
sense of 'representational' space within which all kinds of 'narratives'
may
be placed,
expanded. This, of course, has increasingly raised in recent years the vital question as
to
whether the apparent
collapse of
the
heretofore
dominant
social-evolutionist
accounts of implicit or explicit world history are leading rapidly to a situation of chaos
or
one in which, to quote Giddens
an
infinite number of purely idiosyncratic 'histo
ries' can be
written.
He
claims, in fact,
that
we
can
made generalisations about defi
nite episodes of historical transition (Giddens 1990, 6). However, since he also main
tains
that
modernity on a global scale has amounted to a rupture with virtually all
prior forms of
life
he
is
seemingly unable to provide any guidance as to how history
or
histories might now actually
be
done.
As
I have said, in numerous contemporary accounts globalising trends are regarded
as in tension with 'local' assertions of identity and culture. Thus ideas such as the glob
al
versus
the local, the global versus the 'tribal', the international
versus
the national,
and the universal versus the particular are widely promoted. For some, these alleged
oppositions are simply puzzles, while for others the second part of each opposition
is
seen as a reaction against the first. For still others they are contradictions.
In
the per-
4
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
1994 ,
I
I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
11/22
GLOBALISATION OR
GLOCALISA
TION
spective of contradiction the tension between,
for
example, the universal and the partic
ular may
be seen either in the dynamic sense of being a relatively fruitful source of over
all change
or
as a modality which preserves an existing global system in its present
state. We
fmd
the latter view in Wallerstein's argument
that
the
relation between the
universal and the particular
is
basically a product of rapidly expanding world-systemic
capitalism and that,
at
least in the short run, it greatly assists in the preservation of
the
latter (Wallerstein 19 91 ). Only what Wallerstein calls anti-systemic movements- and
then
only those which effectively challenge its metaphysical presuppositions - can
move the world beyond the presuppositions of its present (capitalist) condition. In that
light
we
may regard the contemporary
proliferation of
minority
discourses
GanMohamed and
Lloyd
1990) as being encouraged by the presentation of a world
system. Indeed there
is
much to suggest
that
some adherents to minority discourses
have, somewhat paradoxically, a special liking
for
Wallersteinian or other totalistic
forms of world-systems theory; in the sense that the promotion of minority discourse
may
carry the intention or hope that hegemonic metaphysical presuppositions will
be
overthrown, or at least destabilised. But it must also
be
noted that many of the enthusi
astic participants in the discourse of minorities describe their practices in terms of the
singular minority discourse GanMohamed and Lloyd 1990). That suggests
that
there
is
indeed a potentially
global
mode of writing and talking on behalf
of,
or at least about,
minorities. Cf. McGrane 1989.)
Barber argues that tribalism and globalism have become what he specifies as
the
two axial principles of our time. Barber himself, like numerous others, sees these
two principles as inevitably in tension- a McWorld ofhomogenising globalisation
versus
a Jihad worid ofparticularising Lebanonisation (Barber 1992). He would
now almost certainly add Balkanisation. ) Barber is primarily interested
in
the bear
ing
which
each of these supposedly clashing principles
have
on the prospects for
democracy. That is certainly
an
extremely important matter, but my reasons for
selecting his argument is that he has
put
as succinctly as any writer with whose work
I
am
familiar the argument
that
I
am
in fact opposing in the global-local debate.
Like
many others Barber defmes globalisation as the opposite of localisation. He argues that
four imperatives make
up
the dynamic of McWorld: a market imperative, a resource
imperative,
an
information-technology imperative, and
an
ecological imperative
(Barber 1992, 54). Each of these contributes to shrinking the world and diminishing
the salience of national borders and together they have achieved a considerable vic
tory over factiousness and particularism, and not least over their most virulent tradi
tional orm nationalism (Barber 1992, 54). Remarking
that
the Enlightenment
dream of a universal rational society has to a remarkable degree been realised , Barber
emphasises that its achievement has been realised in commercialised, bureaucratised,
homogenised and what he calls depoliticised form. Moreover, he argues that it is a
very incomplete achievement because it is in competition with forces of global break
down, national dissolution, and centrifugal corruption (Barber 1992, 59). While
notions of localism, locality and locale do not figure explicitly in Barber's essay they
THE
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994), I I) 4
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
12/22
RO ERTSON
certainly inform it cf. Barber 1993).
However, there
is
no good reason, other than recently established convention in
certain quarters, to define globalisation largely in terms of homogenisation. Of course
anyone
is
at
liberty to so defme globalisation, but I think
that
there
is
a great deal to be
said against such a procedure. Indeed while each of the imperatives of Barber's
McWorld appear superficially to suggest homogenisation, when one considers them
more closely, they each have a local, diversifying aspect. I maintain also that it makes
no good sense to defme the global as if the global excludes the local.
In
somewhat tech
nical terms, defming the global in such a way suggests that the global lies beyond all
localities, as having systemic properties over and beyond the attributes of units within
a global system. This way of talking flows
along the lines suggested by the macro
micro distinction, which has held much sway in the discipline of economics and has
recently become a particularly popular theme in sociology and other social sciences.
Without denying that the world-as-a-whole has some systemic properties beyond
those of the units within it, it must be emphasised, on the other hand, that such
units themselves are to a large degree constructed in extra unit processes and actions and
in terms
of increasingly
global
dynamics. For example, nationally organised
societies-
and the 'local' aspirations for establishing yet more nationally organised societies (in
spite of some, often exaggerated, West European tendencies in the opposite direction)
- are not simply units within a global context or texts within a context. Both their
existence and, particularly, the form of their existence is largely the result of extra-soci
e t l
more
generally, extra local processes and actions. f we grant with
Wallerstein (1991, 92) and Greenfield (1992)
that
'the national'
is
a 'prototype of the
particular' we must, on the other hand, also recognise that the nation-state - more
generally, the national society is in a crucial respect a cultural idea (as Greenfield
seems to acknowledge). Much of the
apparatus
of contemporary nations, of
the
national-state organisation of societies, including the form of their particularities -
the construction of their unique identities -
is
very similar across the entire world
(Meyer 1980; Robertson 1991), in spite of much variation in levels of 'development'.
This feature of the world situation is what I have elsewhere addressed in terms of the
relationship between the universalisation of particularism and the particularisation of
universalism; a matter to which I will return.
Before coming directly to the contemporary circumstance it
is,
however, advisable
to say a few words about what many now call globalisation in a longer, historical per
spective. One
can
undoubtedly trace far back into
human
history developments
involving the expansion of chains of connectedness across wide expanses of the earth.
In
that
sense 'world formation' has been proceeding for many hundreds, indeed thou
sands, of years; even though such formative processes did not necessarily involve the
entire world as we presently and differentially know it. At the same time, we
can
undoubtedly trace through human history periods during which the consciousness of
the potential for world 'unity' was in one way or another particularly acute. One of the
major tasks of students of globalisation is to comprehend
the
form in which the pre-
42 THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
1994),
I I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
13/22
GLOBALISATION
OR GLOCALISA
TION
sent, seemingly rapid shifts towards a highly interdependent world was structured. I
have specifically argued
that
this form has been centred upon four main elements of
the global-human condition: societies, individuals. the international system of soci
eties,
and
humankind (Robertson 1992b).
It
is
around the changing relationships
between. different emphases upon
and
often conflicting interpretations of these
aspects of human life that the contemporary world as a whole has crystallised.
So
in
my perspective the issue of what is to
be
included under the notion of the global is
treated very comprehensively. The global
is
not in and of itself counterposed to the
local. Rather. what is often referred to as the local is essentially included within a flexi
ble conception of the global. In that sense globalisation, defmed in its most general
sense as the compression of the world as a whole, involves the linking of locales. At the
same time it involves the 'invention' of locality, in broadly the same sense as the idea
of the invention of tradition (Hobsbawm and Ranger 1983).
There is, indeed, currently something like an ideology of 'home' or 'community'
(Phillips 1993) which has in fact come into being partly in response to the constant
repetition and global diffusion of the claim
that
we now live in a general condition of
rootlessness; as if in prior periods of history the vast majority of people lived in 'secure'
and homogenised locales. Two things, among others. must
be
said in objection to such
ideas. First. the form of globalisation has involved considerable emphasis, at least until
quite recently. on the cultural homogenisation of nationally constituted societies; but.
on
the other hand, prior to
that
emphasis, which began to develop rapidly at the end of
the eighteenth century. what O'Neill (1985) calls polyethnicity was the norm. Second,
the phenomenological diagnosis of the generalised homelessness of modern man and
woman has been developed as if the same people are behaving and interpreting
at
the
same time in the same broad social process (Meyer 19 9 2.11
);
whereas there
is much
to suggest
that
increasingly global
expectations
concerning the relationship between
individual and society have produced both routinised and existential selves. On top
of
that
the very ability to identify home, directly or indirectly.
is
contingent upon the
(contested) construction and organisation of interlaced categories of space and time.
It is
not my purpose here to
go
over this ground again
cf.
Robertson 1992b) but
rather to emphasise the significance of certain periods prior to the second half of the
twentieth century when the possibilities for a single world seemed
at
the time to be
considerable. but also problematic. Emerging research along such lines will undoubt
edly pinpoint a variety of areas of the world and different periods. But as far as relative
ly recent times are concerned, I would invoke two arguments, both of which draw
attention to rapid extension of communication across the world as a whole and the
matise the crucial issues of changing conceptions of time-and-space.
On
the one hand.
Johnson has in his book.
The irth o the Modem
argued
that
'world
society -
or. in
his
own
words, international society in its totality Oohnson
1991, xviii)-
was
largely crystallised in the period 1815-30. Here the emphasis
is
upon the crucial sig
nificance of the Congress of Vienna which was assembled following Bonaparte's first
abdication in 1814. According to Johnson. the peace settlement in Vienna. following
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I) 41
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
14/22
ROBERTSON
what was in effect the
frrst world
war (Fregosi 1990), was reinforced by the powerful
currents of romanticism sweeping through the world .. Thus was established
an
international order which, in most respects, endured for a century Uohnson 1992,
xix).
Regardless of its particular ideological bent, Johnson's book
is
important because
he does attempt not merely to cover all continents of the world but also to range freely
over many aspects of everyday life
not just 'world politics' or 'international relations'.
He raises significant issues concerning the development of consciousness of the world
as a whole, which was largely made possible by the industrial
and
communicative
'revolutions', on the one hand, and the Enlightenment, on the other.
Second - and, regardless of
the
issue of the periodisation of globalisation
(Robertson 1992b,57-60),
much
more
important-
Kern (1983)
has
drawn atten
tion to the crucial period of 1880-1918, in a way
that
is
particularly relevant to the
present set of issues. In his study,
The Culture
o Time and
Space
Kern's most basic point
is
that
in the last two decades of the nineteenth century
and
the frrst twenty years or
so of the twentieth century very consequential shifts took place with respect to the
global patterning of
our
sense of both time and space.
In
both cases there was both
universal, public standardisation and privatisation. Homogenisation went
hand
in
hand
with heterogenisation, universalisation with particularisation. They made each
other possible. It was in this period that the world became locked into a particular
form
of a strong shift to unicity.
It
was during this time
that
the four major compo
nents of globalisation which I have previously specified were given formidable con
creteness. Moreover, it was in the late-nineteenth century
that
there occurred a big
spurt in the development of organised attempts
to
link localities
on
an international
or
ecumenical basis. An immediate precursor of such was the beginning of international
exhibitions in the mid-nineteenth century, involving the international display of par
ticular national glories and achievements.
The last two decades of the century witnessed many more such international or
cross-cultural ventures, among them the beginnings of the modern religious ecumeni
cal movement, which at one and the same time celebrated difference and searched for
commonality within the framework of an emergent culture for doing the relation
ship between the particular and the, certainly not uncontested, universal. Another
interesting example of this from the same period is the International Youth Hostel
movement. which spread quite rapidly and not only in the Northern Hemisphere. This
movement attempted
on an
organised international, or global, basis to promote the
cultivation of communal, 'back to nature' values. Thus at one and the same time 'tra
ditional' particularity was valorised, but this was done
on
an increasingly globe-wide,
pan-local basis. Generally, these kinds of developments formed the global context of
the patterning of modern mass, and more particularly, 'international' communica
tion; although, clearly, new media of electronic communication facilitated
much
of
the intensive globalisation (or glocalisation) of the late-nineteenth century
and
early
twentieth century period.
The present century has seen a remarkable proliferation with respect to the 'inter-
44
THE
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994 , I
I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
15/22
GLOBALISATION OR
GLOCALISA
TION
national' organisation and promotion oflocality. A very pertinent example is provided
by the current attempts to organise globally the promotion of the values and identities
of native peoples (Chartrand 1991). This was a strong feature of the Global Forum
in Brazil in
1992
which, so to say, surrounded the 'official' United Nations 'Earth
Summit'. Another example is the attempt by the World Health Organisation to pro
mote 'world health' by the reactivation and,
if
needs be, the invention of 'indigenous'
local medicine.
GLOC LIC TION ND THE THESIS OF CULTUR L IMPERI LISM
Some of the issues which I
have
raised are considered from a different angle in
Appiah's book
on
the viability ofPan-Africanism. Appiah's primary theme
is:
... the question of how we are to think about Africa's contemporary cultures in the light
of the two main external determinants of her recent history- European and Afro-New
World conceptions ofAfrica- and of her own endogenous cultural traditions (Appiah
1992, ix-x).
His contention is that the ideological decolonisation which he seeks to effect can
only be made possible by fmding a negotiable middle way between endogenous tra
dition and Western ideas, both of the latter designations being placed within quota
tion marks by Appiah himself (Appiah 1992,
x .
Appiah objects strongly to what he
sees us the racial and racist thrusts of much of the Pan-African idea, pointing out that
insofar as Pan-Africanism makes assumptions about the racial unity of all Africans,
this derives in large part from the experience and memory of non-African ideas about
Africa and Africans which were prevalent in Europe and the
USA
during the later part
of the nineteenth century. Speaking specifically of the idea of the decolonisation of
African literature, Appiah insists, I think correctly, that in much of the talk about
decolonisation we fmd what Appiah himself calls (again within quotation marks) a
reverse discourse :
The pose of repudiation actually presupposes the cultural institutions of the West and
the ideological matrix in which they,ln turn, are imbricated. Railing against the cultural
hegemony of the West, the nativists are of its party without knowing it .. (D)efiance is
determined less by 'indigenous' notions of resistance than by the dictates of the West's
own Herderian legacy -
Its
highly elaborated ideologies of national autonomy, of lan
guage and literature as their cultural substrate. Native nostalgia, in short
Is
largely
fuelled by that Western sentimentalism so familiar after Rousseau; few things, then. are
less native than nativism in its current form (Appiah 1992, 60).
Appiah's statement helps to demonstrate that
much
of the conception of contem
porary locality and indigeneity is itself historically
contingent
upon
en ounters
THE JOURNAL OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
1994 ,
I
I) 5
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
16/22
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
17/22
GLOBAUSATION OR GLOCALISATION
world-as-a-whole is inserted (Balibar 1991
).
The idea of world-space suggests that we
should consider the local as a 'micro' manifestation of global variety - in opposition,
int r
alia to the implication that the local indicates cultural, ethnic, or racial homo
geneity. Balibar's
analysis
which
is
empirically centred on contemporary
Europe-
suggests
that
in the present situation of global complexity, the idea of home has to be
divorced analytically from the idea oflocality. There may well be some who equate the
two, but that doesn't entitle them or their representatives to project their perspective
onto humanity as a whole. In fact there is much to suggest that the senses of home
and locality are contingent upon alienation from home and/or locale. How else could
one have (reflexive) consciousness of such? We talk of the mixing of cultures, of poly
ethnicity, but we also often underestimate the significance of what Lila Abu-Lughod
(1991) calls halfies : individuals who are of mixed cultural or ethnic inheritance. As
Geertz (1986, 114) has said, like nostalgia, diversity is not
what it
used to be
cf.
Gupta and Ferguson 1992). One of the most significant aspects of contemporary diver
sity is indeed the complication it raises
for
conventional notions of culture (Robertson
1992b). We must be careful not to remain in thrall to the old and rather well estab
lished view that cultures are organically binding and sharply bounded. In fact, Lila
Abu-Lughod opposes the very idea of culture because it seems to her to deny the signif
icance of those who combine in themselves as individuals a number of cultural, ethnic
and general features.
MEDI S TION ND GLOB LIS TION
While I have been concerned in this discussion with general problems in the theorisa
tion of globalisation, it is appropriate
at
this point to say something more specific
about the role and function of media of mass communication in the process of globali
sation. Undoubtedly, inanimately mediated communication has, over the centuries,
been of increasing importance. But it is the mid- to late-nineteenth century that seems
to
have been crucial with respect
to
the beginnings of international communication.
t
was during that period that the initial technologies of international communication
(Fortner 1993,
11
such as the electronic telegraph, the telephone, the submarine
cable and the wireless - emerged. In this period and the first thirty years or so of the
twentieth century these and other such innovations were increasingly institution
alised on
an
expanding international basis. From a different angle we can say that the
period since the 1830s has been one of extensive 'mediasation.' Thompson (1990, 11)
defmes the mediasation of modern culture as the rapid proliferation of institutions
of mass communication and the growth of networks of transmission through which
commodified symbolic forms [have been] made available to
an
ever-expanding
domain of recipients.
Even though mediasation has played a crucial role in the formation of the modern
world as a whole, not least during the phase that I have termed the take-off phase of
recent globalisation which lasted from the 1870s until the mid-1920s (Robertson
THE JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I) 7
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
18/22
ROBERTSON
1992b, 5 9 it has actually, at the
same
time, occurred in terms of a certain form
(Robertson
1992b,
25-31). One of the central
components
of globalisation has,
indeed, been the nation-state. Inter-societal, or international,
relations
have constitut
ed
another
central component. I
have
suggested
that
the
remaining
central
compo
nents have been individual selves, on the one hand, and
humankind, on
the
other
(Robertson
1992b,
25-31). Even
though
I
maintain
that extensive mediasation
has
occurred
in
terms of a
form
of globalisation (or glocalisation),
there
can be little doubt
that mediasation on a world-wide basis has increasingly,
during the
twentieth centu
ry, become implicated in the reproduction of the shifting form of globalisation, most sig
nificantly
in
recent and prospective developments concerning world
TV
(as well as
other contemporary types of electronic communication)
As I
have
maintained, the national society
has
been a central component of
modern
globalisation. This claim renders problematic the quite common argument
that
'inter
national communication
is now
severely undermining the nation-state
(e.g.
Thompson
1990;
Keane
1992;
Miyoshi 1993). How, in
other
words, can we reconcile
the argument, on the one hand, that globalisation has involved in the twentieth centu
ry the consolidation
of the nation-state with
the
thesis,
on
the
other
hand,
that
extensive
mediasation (as well as
other
contemporary trends) promotes an increasingly border
less world (Miyoshi 1993)? This is, needless to say, a complex problem, one
which
needs extensive discussion in its own right. Suffice it to say here that these two views
together constitute a 'contradiction' or a 'paradox' of contemporary globalisation
and
mass communication.
I t
seems that 'international' communication both undermines
the
autonomy
of the national society and, at the same time, consolidates
it
in the glocal
ising tendencies of
the
newer types of world,
or
global,
TV
notably CNN
It
should also be said
that
CNN - and, perhaps, more recent developments
in that
genre- conform to and, in fact, (re )produce the form of globalisation
that
I have outlined.
While, in a simple sense, we are now in a phase of rapid and extensive internationalisation
of communication, some developments are more genuinely global
than
others.
At the
same time, it should be emphasised
that any
particular glocalising endeavour
will,
in
varying degrees,
bear
traces
of
ts
own national origins at
least for the foreseeable future.
ON LUSION
My emphasis
upon
the significance of the concept of glocalisation
has
arisen mainly
from
what
I perceive to be major weaknesses
in the current
employment of
the
term
globalisation. In particular, I have tried to transcend the tendency to cast the idea of
globalisation as inevitably
in
tension with the idea of localisation. I
have
instead
main
tained that globalisation - in the broadest sense, the compression of the world-
has
involved and increasingly involves the creation and the incorporation of locality, a
process which itself largely shapes,
in turn, the
compression of the world as a whole.
Even
though
we will probably continue to use
the
concept of globalisation, it
might
well be preferable to replace it for
certain
purposes with glocalisation. Glocalisation
8 THE
JOURNAL
OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1994 , I I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
19/22
GLOBALISATION
OR GLOCALISA
TION
has the definite advantage of making the concern with "space" as important as the
focus upon temporal and historical issues. At the same time emphasis upon the global
condition -
that is,
upon globality - further constrains us to make
our
analysis
and
interpretation of the contemporary world both spatial and temporal. geographical as
well as historical (Soja 1989).
NOT S
1 An early form of this paper was presented at the Second International Conference
on
Global
History. Technical University. Darmstadt, Germany, July, 1992. A revised and longer ver
sion was presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Miami
Beach. Florida
in
August.
199
3. The present paper
is
an
edited
and
modified version
ofthe
latter. I
am
grateful to two anonymous reviewers for The
Journal o
International
Commwlication for their helpful written comments. I am particularly grateful to Ingrid
Volkmer of Bielefeld University for
her
suggestions. Another version
is
to be published
in
Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash and Roland Robertson (eds). Modernity
and
Difference (provi
sional title), Sage, London.
2.
My
comments are equally applicable to a number of other disciplines, not least to the
"metadiscipline" of cultural studies. I have argued elsewhere (e.g. Robertson 1992b) that, in
any case, the thematisation of globality and globalisation is likely to become a, perhaps
the
major site of the reconstitution of disciplines
and
disciplinarity.
3 Much of this was centered on the sociological theory of Talcott Parsons (e.g. Parsons
19
51),
whose contrast between the universalism supposedly governing interaction in modem soci
eties with
the
particularismof social relationships in pre-modem societies was extremely
influential among practitioners
of
modernisation theory cf. Nett and Robertson 1968).
While Parsons was certainly
an
inspiration for much of this
thrust
of modernisation theory
in the
1950s
and
1960s. the way in which he developed his
own
views on
the
relationship
between particularism and universalism, as part of his scheme of 'pattern variables' of role
orientation, showed considerable sensitivity to
the
ways
in
which universalism
and
particu
larism were empirically interpenetrative. For early discussion of this issue in Parsons's work,
see Parsons 1937. 686-74). The general theme of the relationship between the universal
and
the
particular-
and
between universalism and
particularism-
has,
in
fact, been a
major theme in German social theory. particularly since Hegel. Parsons's early concern with
this kind of issue was centered upon his critical assessment ofToennies 's influential distinc
tion between
Gemelnschaft
(roughly. community) and Gesellschaft (roughly, society) which
was first published in Germany in
1887
(Toennies 1957).
4 For some provocative
thoughts
on the
connection between multiculturalism
in the
universi
ty curriculum, consumer culture and current trends in commodification and product diversi
fication in contemporary capitalism, see Rieff(1993).
5 Akiko Hashimoto (University of Pittsburgh) informs me that in 'non-business' Japanese
dochakuka
conveys the idea of making something indigenous'. I
am
grateful to her for this
information and for
her
general encouragement in my writing of the present paper.
THE JOURNAL OF
INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNICATION
1994 ,
I
I)
~
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
20/22
ROBERTSON
BIBLIOGR PHY
Abu-Lughod, J.
1991.
Going Beyond Global Babble. In Culture, Globalisation and the World
System. A.D. King (ed). (London: Macmillan).
Abu-Lughod, L.
1991.
Writing Against Culture.
In
Recapturing Anthropology. R.G. Fox (ed).
(Sante Fe, NM: School of America Research Press).
Alter, P.
1989.
Nationalism. (London: Edward Arnold).
Appiah. K.A. 1992. rz My Father s
House:
Africa in tlze Plzilosophy ofCulture. (New York: Oxford
University Press).
Amason. J.P.
1990.
Nationalism. Globalisation
and
Modernity.
In Global
Culture. M.
Featherstone (ed). (London: Sage).
Balibar. E. Es Gibt keinan staat in Europa: Racism and Politics in Europe Today. New Left Review
186
(March/April1991).
Barber. B.R. Jihad Vs. McWorld. The Atlantic 269, 3 1992).
Barber, B.R. Global Multiculturalism and
the
American Experiment. World
Policy Journal X.
1
(1993).
Billington, M. The Reinvention of William Shakespeare. World Press
Review
(July 1992).
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distirzctiorz: A Social Critique oftlze Judgement ofTaste (Cambridge,MA: Harvard
University Press).
Champion. A.G. (ed). 1989. Courzterurbanisatiorz: The
Clzanging
Pace and Nature ofPopulation
Decorzcerztratiorz.
(London: Edward Arnold).
Chartrand, L. A New Solidarity Among Native Peoples. World
Press
Review (August
1991).
Featherstone,
M.
S. Lash and R. Robertson (eds). Forthcoming. Modernity and Difference (provi-
sional title). (London: Sage).
Ferguson, M. The Mythology about Globalisation. EuropearzJournalofCommunication 7 1992).
Fortner, R. S. 1993.
Irzterrzational Commurzication.
(Belmont, CA: Wadsworth).
Fregosi, P. 1990. Dreams ofEmpire: Napoleorz and the First World War. (New York: Brick Lane
Press).
Geertz. C. The Uses ofDiversity.
Michigarz
Quarterly5 1 (1986).
Giddens,
A.
1990. The Consequences ofModernity. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
Giddens. A. 1991. Modernity arzd Se/f-Iderztity. (Oxford: Polity
Greenfield, L.
1992. Nationalism: Five Roads
to Modernity. (Cambridge,MA: Harvard University
Press).
Gupta. A. and J. Ferguson. Beyond 'Culture': Space, Identity and the Politics ofDifference.
Cultural
Anthropology 7. 1 (1992).
Hall. S.
1991a.
The Local and the Global: Globalisation and Ethnicity. In Culture. Globalisation and
the World-System.
A.D.
King (ed) (London: Macmillan).
Hall.
S.
1991
b. Old
and
New Identities. Old
and
New Ethnicities.
In
Culture,
Globalisation and the
World-System.
A.D.
King (ed) (London: Macmillan).
Hannerz. U. 1990. Cosmopolitans and Locals in World Culture. In M. Featherstone (ed) Global
Culture.
(London: Sage).
Hannerz. U. 1991. Scenarios
for
Peripheral Cultures. In Culture, Globalisation and
the
World
System. A.D. King (ed) (London: Macmillan).
S
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
1994 ,
I
I)
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
21/22
GLOBALISATION
OR
GLOCALISATION
Hobsbawm, E.
and T.
Ranger (eds).
1983. Tile
Invention of
Tradition.
(Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press).
JanMohamed, A.R. and T. Lloyd. (eds). 1990. Tile Nature and Context ofMinority
Discourse.
(Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Johnson, P. 1991. Tile Birth of
tile
Modem: World Society 1815 30. (New York: Harper Collins).
Lyotard, J. 1984.
Tile
Postmodem
Condition:
A
Report
on
Knowledge.
(Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press
Keane, J. 1992. The Crisis of the Sovereign State. In Media, Crisis and Democracy. M. Raboy and B.
Dagenais (eds). (London: Sage).
Kern,
S. 1983.
Tile
Culture
of
Time
and Space, 1880 1918. (Cambridge,
MA:
Harvard University
Press).
King, A.D.
1991.
Introduction: Spaces of Culture, Spaces of Knowledge.
In
Culture, Globalisation
and tile World
System.
A.D. King (ed). (London: Macmillan 1991).
McGrane, B. 1989. Beyond Anthropology: Society and
tlte Other.
(New York: Columbia University
Press).
Meyer, W.J. 1980. The World Polity and the Authority of the Nation State. In Studies of tile
Modern
World
System. A.
Bergesen (ed). (New York: Academic Press).
Meyer, W.J. From Constructionism to Neo-Institutionalism: Reflections
on
Berger
and
Luckmann.
Perspectives (ASA
Theory Section) 15, 2 (1992) .
Miyoshi,
M.
A Borderless World: From Colonialism to Transnational ism and the Decline of the
Nation-State." Critical
Inquiry
19,4 (1993).
Miyoshi.
M. and H. D.
Haratoonian (eds.)
1989.
Postmodernism and Japan. (Durham: Duke
University Press).
Moore, S.F.
The
Production of Cultural Pluralism as a Process.
Public Culture
1, 2 (
1989).
Nett , J.P.
and R.
Robertson. 19 68. International Systems and
tile
Modernisation of
Societies.
(New
York: Basic Books).
O NeUI,
W .H.
198
5. Polyetlmicity and
National Unity
in World History. (Toronto: University of
Toronto Press).
Parsons,
T. 19
3 7. Tlte
Structure ofSocial
Action. (New York: McGraw-Hill).
Parsons,
T.
1951. Tile Social System. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
Phillips, D. L.
1993.
Looking Backward: A
Critical Appraisal
ofCommunitarian
Thought.
(Princeton,
NJ
Princeton University Press).
Reiff.
D. Multiculturalism's Silent Partner : It's the Newly Globalised Economy, Stupid. Harper s
287.
1719
(1993).
Robertson,
R.
1990. After Nostalgia? Wilful Nostalgia
and the
Phases of Globalisation.
In Theories
of
Modernity
and Postmodernity.
B.S. Turner
(ed). (London: Sage).
Robertson,
R.
1991.
Social Theory, Cultural Relativity
and
the
Problem of Globality.
In
Culture,
Globalisation
and
the
World-System. A.D. King (ed). (London: Macmillan).
Robertson,
R.
Globality
and
Modernity. Theory, Culture Society 9, 2 1992a)
Robertson,
R. 199
2b
Globalisation: Social
Theory
and Global Culture.
(London: Sage).
Robertson,
R. 199
3. Globalisation
and
Nationalism. Paper presented
at the
annual meetings of
the
American Sociological Association, Miami Beach.
THE
JOURNAL
OF
INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNICATION
1994),
1 1)
l
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013
8/10/2019 Robertson Roland - Globalisatio or Glocalisation
22/22
ROBERTSON
Sahlins. M 19 76. Culture
and
Practical
Reason.
Chicago: Chicago University Press).
Soja, E.W. 1989. Postmodern Geographies:
The Reassertiorz ofSpace
in Critical
Social
Theory.
London: Verso).
Therborn,
G
Forthcoming. Routes To/Through Modernity.
In
M
Featherstone,
S
Lash,
and
R
Robertson, Forthcoming. Modernity and Difference provisional title). London: Sage).
The Oxford Dictionary
of
New Words.
1991.
Compiled by Sara Tulloch. Oxford: Oxford University
Press).
Thompson. J
B
1990. Ideology
and Modern Culture.
Stanford: Stanford University Press).
Toennies,
F
19 57[188 7]
Community
and Society New York: Harper
and
Row).
Tomlinson. J 1991.
Cultural Imperialism.
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press).
Wallerstein, I.
1991.
The National and the Universal: Can There be Such a Thing as World
Culture? In
Culture
Globalisation
and
the
World System.
A.D. King ed) London: Macmillan).
Wallerstein, I. The West, Capitalism
and the
Modern World System.
Review XV
Fall1992).
Weber, M The
Protestant
Etllic and the
Spirit
of
Capitalism. New York: Scribners 19 58 [1920/1].).
Download
edby[190.4
4.1
67.1
63]at
10:4903September2013