Through Theoretical Perspective

Introduction

Global governance (GG) has emerged as one of the salient concerns at the international landscape. While defining GG, the works of Zürn (2010) refer to the efforts directed towards sustain corporation for the purposes of addressing the emerging problems and concerns at the international platform. If the recent reports are anything to go by, nations around the globe have no option other than coming up with solutions for security threats and financial breakdown, in addition to deteriorating environmental conditions, among others. While trying to understand global governance, culture is one aspect that is worth mentioning; with the religious part of it taking a center stage. Just as Weiss (2016) puts it, religious culture is the core or rather the most significant part when it comes to the structure of the human culture. When it comes to economic globalization, individuals from various religious and cultural backgrounds tend to differ in their behavioral orientations. This extends to differential action logics, contributing to other cultural aspects that have been influential in shaping global governance. On that note, this paper seeks to explore the significance of culture in global governance, integrating such theories like Marxism, constructivism, and neoliberalism while understanding or rather developing meaningful thoughts on the same.

Religious Culture and Global Governance

Practitioners in this field have raised concerns as to why previous scholarly works have put a lot of emphasis on religious cultural factors while trying to understand global governance. The perfect response to the above concern is simply the fact that the religious belief held by players at the global stage forms the core aspect of human culture. With global governance in play, there has always been an international flow of economic factors, among them including resources, funds, and technology. Other factors that come with the same include labor, products, and markets, all which have facilitated trade between citizens from different nations and regions. Furthermore, the above-mentioned factors have ended up triggering dynamisms in the way people practice and behave. However, an individual’s behavioral culture is significantly influenced by a number of cultural systems, with the various institutional cultures emerging from a mix-up of spiritual cultures.

One theory that is important in understanding the significance of culture in GG is the civilization school of thought. Unger (2016) argues that at the global landscape, civilizations have been subjected to a series of conflict. The conflicts are basically the antagonisms arising from the various religion-based civilizations, among them including Christianity and Islam, and Christianity and Buddhism. Under normal circumstances, the roles played by civilization in enhancing the development of human society are quite significant and worth mentioning.

The works of Whang, Yong and Ko (2016) have confirmed that both cultural conflict and civilized communion have emerged as the leading trends when it comes on matters to do with global development. The Chinese case study paves way for a detailed understanding of the same. According to the scholars in the Chinese world, their Confucian civilization is at peace with the rest of the civilizations around the globe, however, it's quite inclusive. The Confucian civilization has emphasized the need to embrace “harmony and difference”, in addition to harmonious development.

The above assertions are confirmed by the experiences that other religions have had with the Confucian civilization. A case study for the introduction of Buddhism in China explains the same. Later after the introduction of Buddhism into China, it ended up merging or rather harmoniously working with Confucianism and Taoism. This was evident during the times of the Chinese Northern Dynasties when the three emerged as clues of the religions. Later on, they formed a significant part in the Chinese traditional culture.

Cultural Exchange and Globalization Governance

According to Weiss (2016), economic globalization has led to the international allocation of capital and other useful resources used in the production of goods and services. However, the international mobility of labor, which in this case is the big population from various nations, has led to the difficulty in comprehending and communicating the respective cultures. The difficulty has extended to an inhibited GG. The implication, therefore, is that cultural variation of the global players inhibited the smooth operation of GG.

Looking at the Chinese Case, the above argument sounds more valid. In the current century, the Chinese have been traveling more widely to other nations. However, quite a number of nations hosting the Chinese are reported to embracing a “two-sided” attitude whenever this race of tourist land in the country. One of the sides is directed by the neo-liberal school of thought. This is the side where they expect that Chinese tourists to drive the local economic development through the tour, travel and hospitality industry. That is, by spending in that nations they tour, the locals expect their incomes and gross domestic product (GDP) as a whole to improve.

Studies by Chiu, Zeng and Cheng (2016) have put it that the Chinese world is considered as the “state of etiquette.” This implies that the Chinese traditional culture comes with a lot of etiquettes. However, if the recent findings are anything to go by, scarcity of their resources is taking a higher notch, largely thanks to the rapid population growth in China. This has led to changes in their culture, leading to overcrowding and paralysis as the day-to-day life. This has emerged as the norm. Nearly all the Chinese tourists lack the knowledge of the host nations’ culture, thus embracing their normal culture when visiting these nations.

The above argument does not justify the “unwanted” behavior of Chinese whenever they make foreign trips. However, it is an illustration that tourism is a sword that comes with both edges, with the same reflected during GG. Basing on the fact that the governments expect tourists to pay them to visit and stimulate the GDP growth, then they should be ready to meet the negative costs that come with the same. Looking at the short-term tourism that takes place across nations, then there are a lot of complications with the cultural comprehension and communication arising from global migration. The immigrants are from different nations and regions. They come with various cultures, where they, in turn, transplant them to the host nations.

According to Samovar, Porter, McDaniel and Roy (2015), the immigrants do all their can in order to adapt and fit into the mainstream culture as seen in public places. However, they tend to retain “larger portion” of their original culture whenever they operate in private entities like family life as well as religious beliefs. Just as Pieterse (2015), puts it, the above argument has been reported in those considered as the first generation of immigrants. The major concern arising from the same is the fact that in some European nations that depend on imported labor, a thorny issue has been the process of adapting and integrating the cultural values of those nations importing and exporting the workforce.

Religious culture has proved that it is among the most relevant internal components of human civilization. To a greater extent, religious belief plays a relevant role in ratifying metaphorical self-comprehension. There are those scholars arguing that religious identity is quite problematic, largely thanks to the highly dynamic cultural and religious landscape. However, culture is one aspect that has seen religion to be quite interesting. Whenever the deep religious beliefs are subjected to intertwining with the prevailing economic interests, GG is impacted upon; as revealed in the conflicts that arise between various religions.

In the current era of globalization, the geopolitical conflict is both a political and economic concern. Its definition extends to being a cultural issue which comes with deep routes that are values and feelings that are historically established. To a greater extent, this has enhanced the difficulty of GG whenever sovereign states come into play at the international landscape. Perhaps, this confirms the need for religious dialogue alongside reconciliation as a way of eliminating such disputes that have political and economic interests beneath them.

Multicultural Coexistence and Global Governance

Borrowing from anthropological experiences, human social cultures are characterized by high levels as nature. Furthermore, cultural diversity can is subjected to self-repair and other related elements of cultural ecosystems. The above sentiments are echoed by Mundy and Verger (2015), putting it clear that during GG, it is important to take note of the fact that different cultures are relevant elements of socio-economic development in various nations. It is for this reason that individuals should go for their inherent rationality and orderliness. Similarly, they should consider reaching on such aspects like commonality in the cultural variations while engaging at the global landscape. Indeed, developing a better understanding of the cultures that come into play will facilitate communication and coordination in GG. This will create room for the realization of a cross-cultural GG while looking for the common ground, and reserving differences at the same time.

The works of May (2015) have come up with instructive arguments for the cross-cultural GG. They argue that each tends to never look down upon their beauty and appreciate what other offers in the market or bring on the table, thus harmoniously coexisting in a society that is considered and proven beautiful. With these as the principles of GG, the world will not only be different, but harmonious as well. The above postulates provide a better approach towards understanding human culture, which also paves the way towards a more functional GG.

The idea of “harmony but different” takes care of the fact that players at the international stage have diverse origins. It considers the rationality of human culture and further paves the way for realizing harmonious multiculturalism. One can, therefore, say that going this way will lead to the liberation of the professionals engaged in GG. However, realizing the dream of the liberation and “salvation” greatly depends on mutual respect and the highly anticipated cultural consultation.

Makinda, Okumu and Mickler (2015) define the process of GG as an initiative towards cultural consultation which is aimed at realizing a common ground. This forms one of the anthropologist’s cultural way of comprehending GG. With the disciplinary characteristics of the field, this particular understanding not only becomes deep but insightful as well. This is largely based on the fact that it goes past the complex global political and economic appearances. Furthermore, it gets hold of the cultural dimension of the GG, in addition to the action logic. It is, therefore, important that scholars and players at the international market cherish this kind of cultural understanding. This should be followed by creating room for good governance in the international public affairs by consulting culturally.

Culture and Corporate Governance at the Global Stage

One way of understanding the significance of culture in GG is addressing the same through corporate governance (CG). This is based on the fact that at the global landscape, CG is part and parcel of the GG. If the findings by Knox, Marston and Imort (2016) are anything to by, CG plays a more crucial role when it comes to establishing a sound relationship between the players and other stakeholders. Developing a detailed understanding of the cultural variation that exists among different nations helps in finding a solution to their problems. Furthermore, this helps in crafting the way out through which the different players can interact with each other in a professional and harmonious manner and manage their enterprises differently.

The quality and standard of corporate governance is a function on effective integration as well as a negotiation that takes place among the concerned parties. Just as Falk (2016) puts it, cultures play a crucial role when it comes to the establishment of a negotiation that is quite productive, among the players at the global stage. A number of scholarly works have been directed toward exploring the relationship that does exist between national culture and CG. They have revealed that culture impacts on the organizational policies and management principles, through the values that are held by the key decision makers. To a greater extent, culture defines the intercultural relationship embraced by individuals. This extends to institutions relations, thereby influencing the choice embraced in CG structure.

The works of Inglehart and Norris (2016) have looked at the effects of culture on the social norm of CG. They further looked into the relationship that does exist between culture and CG. They establish a number of factors that do contribute to the variation in CG at the global landscape, among them including the objective held by the investors and ownership structure. They further believed that this should be attributed to corporate boards and the reported cases of hostile takeovers.

Continue your journey with our comprehensive guide to Through The Myers Briggs Type Indicator.

Conclusion

A lot of scholars and businessmen have been increasingly attracted to GG. The current paper has looked at the significant roles played by culture in realizing an efficient or rather the dream of a smooth GG. However, the current paper has established that cultural variations among the players at the global landscape tend to inhibit the realization of the GG goals and objectives. This is based on the fact that the existing cultural variation has always been a barrier towards the implementation of effective GG among the nations taking part in the same. Nearly the entire case studies and previous scholarly works have confirmed that cultural variation of the players at the international platform has inhibited the effective implementation of the GG.

References

• Chiu, W., Zeng, S., & Cheng, P. S. T. (2016). The influence of destination image and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty: a case study of Chinese tourists in Korea. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10(2), 223-234.
• Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2016). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash.
• Knox, P. L., Marston, S. A., & Imort, M. (2016). Human geography: Places and regions in global context. Pearson.
• Makinda, S. M., Okumu, F. W., & Mickler, D. (2015). The African Union: Addressing the challenges of peace, security, and governance. Routledge.
• Makinda, S. M., Okumu, F. W., & Mickler, D. (2015). The African Union: Addressing the challenges of peace, security, and governance. Routledge.
• May, C. (2015). The global political economy of intellectual property rights: The new enclosures. Routledge.
• Mundy, K., & Verger, A. (2015). The World Bank and the global governance of education in a changing world order. International Journal of Educational Development, 40, 9-18.
• Pieterse, J. N. (2015). Globalization and culture: Global mélange. Rowman & Littlefield. Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., McDaniel, E. R., & Roy, C. S. (2015). Communication between cultures. Nelson Education. Weiss, T. G. (2016). Global governance: Why? what? whither? John Wiley & Sons. Whang, H., Yong, S., & Ko, E. (2016). Pop culture, destination images, and visit intentions: Theory and research on travel motivations of Chinese and Russian tourists. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 631-641. Unger, J. (2016). Chinese nationalism. Routledge. Zürn, M. (2010). Global governance as multi-level governance. In The Oxford handbook of governan