You can tell a lot about a nation’s culture or the state of its society from what it values. Utilizing years of data from the OECD Better Life Index, which surveys 60,000 people across the world, U.K.-based global moving company Movehub has put together a colorful infographic showing what people around the world care about the most. Here it is courtesy of Business Insider. Continue reading
If you are a lover of languages like me, then you will enjoy the following insightful graphs and charts courtesy of The Washington Post’s WordViews column.
For thousands of years, cities have been at the center of human experience, social organization, and innovation. Even though the vast majority of humanity throughout history has, until very recently, lived in rural areas, it was the cities from where rulers governed, goods and services were traded, and ideas were born and disseminated.
Given that precedent, it is no surprise that today’s cities — bigger and more sophisticated than ever — have begun to rival whole nations, including the very ones in which they are located, as centers of culture, economic activity, scientific research, and political influence.
Writing in Quartz, Parag Khanna discusses the emergence and future of “megacities” — metropolises numbering tens of millions of citizens and accounting for anywhere from a third to even half of a nation’s economic output. Spanning every continent, but most especially Asia and Africa, these massive urban conurbations will reshape our species’ development in every sphere, from economy to culture.
For a larger version of the above map, click here.
As can plainly be seen, the developing world — once largely rural — will lead the way in the formation of megacities, albeit not by design; most megacities have formed organically, driven by heady economic growth and the influx of migrants from rural areas and smaller cities. The process has often been as rapid and haphazard as the political, social, and economic forces of the cities’ nations.
Within many emerging markets such as Brazil, Turkey, Russia, and Indonesia, the leading commercial hub or financial center accounts for at least one-third or more of national GDP. In the U.K., London accounts for almost half Britain’s GDP. And in America, the Boston-New York-Washington corridor and greater Los Angeles together combine for about one-third of America’s GDP.
By 2025, there will be at least 40 such megacities. The population of the greater Mexico City region is larger than that of Australia, as is that of Chongqing, a collection of connected urban enclaves in China spanning an area the size of Austria. Cities that were once hundreds of kilometers apart have now effectively fused into massive urban archipelagos, the largest of which is Japan’s Taiheiyo Belt that encompasses two-thirds of Japan’s population in the Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka megalopolis.
China’s Pearl River delta, Greater São Paulo, and Mumbai-Pune are also becoming more integrated through infrastructure. At least a dozen such megacity corridors have emerged already. China is in the process of reorganizing itself around two dozen giant megacity clusters of up to 100 million citizens each. And yet by 2030, the second-largest city in the world behind Tokyo is expected not to be in China, but Manila in the Philippines.
For its part, the United States, which is the world’s third most populous nation, and which is expected to grow steadily over the next century, is seeing the rise of several megacities thus far: the Northeast Megalopolis, which runs from Washington, D.C. through New York City to Boston; the Southern California Megaregion, which runs from San Francisco to San Jose; and the Texas Triangle, which includes Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio. Though not as large as their counterparts in the developing world, they will be formidable economic and cultural centers in their own right, and are already economically larger than some medium-sized countries.
Khanna goes on to note that the sheer size and influence of these megacities, in conjunction with the rapid pace of globalization, will make them as much a part of the world as of the nations in which they are located.
Great and connected cities, Saskia Sassen argues, belong as much to global networks as to the country of their political geography. Today the world’s top 20 richest cities have forged a super-circuit driven by capital, talent, and services: they are home to more than 75% of the largest companies, which in turn invest in expanding across those cities and adding more to expand the intercity network. Indeed, global cities have forged a league of their own, in many ways as denationalized as Formula One racing teams, drawing talent from around the world and amassing capital to spend on themselves while they compete on the same circuit.
Megacities will also redefine the relationship between the developed and developing worlds, and as well as between themselves and the rest of their countries. They will be polities of tremendous influence to reckon with in their own right.
The rise of emerging market megacities as magnets for regional wealth and talent has been the most significant contributor to shifting the world’s focal point of economic activity. McKinsey Global Institute research suggests that from now until 2025, one-third of world growth will come from the key Western capitals and emerging market megacities, one-third from the heavily populous middle-weight cities of emerging markets, and one-third from small cities and rural areas in developing countries.
There are far more functional cities in the world today than there are viable states. Indeed, cities are often the islands of governance and order in far weaker states where they extract whatever rents they can from the surrounding country while also being indifferent to it. This is how Lagos views Nigeria, Karachi views Pakistan, and Mumbai views India: the less interference from the capital, the better.
Needless to say, megacities will pose as many challenges as they do opportunities: urban planning, social organization, resource management, law and order, and infrastructure will need to be subject to considerable investment and re-imagining. Political challenges will no doubt emerge between certain megacities and their smaller peers, as well as their national governments.
Khanna concludes that these issues, along with the sheer potential and influence of megacities, should change the way we map the world — metropolitan areas should be given as much attention as the 200 or so countries that make up the world. It is an interesting argument, and one that I think bears some consideration. I look forward to exploring the topic further in Khanna’s new book Connectography.
What are your thoughts?
What does it say about the nature of human political life that analyses and advice dating from the first century B.C.E. is still applicable today? Stripped of its cultural and historical context, the Commentariolum Petitionis, or “Little Handbook on Electioneering”, which was ostensibly written to the great Roman orator and statesman Cicero by his younger brother, Quintus, can just as well describe contemporary American politics.
For example, it starts by outlining the importance of connections and patronage networks — especially among the wealthy and elites of society — for political advancement. Continue reading
As humanity rapidly continues its assent into a truly global community, it is imperative that we make sense of the many cultures and societies that will inevitably interact, engage with one another, and even clash.
One interesting approach to making sense of our multicultural world is the Lewis Model, devised by British linguist, polyglot, and world traveler Richard D. Lewis. Presented in his 1996 book, “When Cultures Collide“, it offers a roadmap of the world based on the general “national characteristics” of particular countries — their beliefs, values, behaviors, mannerisms, and prejudices.
Explicitly cautious about avoiding stereotypes and neglecting to acknowledge individual and sub-national exceptions, the Lewis Model organizes countries based on their relationship to three categories:
Linear-actives — those who plan, schedule, organize, pursue action chains, do one thing at a time. Germans and Swiss are in this group.
Multi-actives — those lively, loquacious peoples who do many things at once, planning their priorities not according to a time schedule, but according to the relative thrill or importance that each appointment brings with it. Italians, Latin Americans and Arabs are members of this group.
Reactives — those cultures that prioritize courtesy and respect, listening quietly and calmly to their interlocutors and reacting carefully to the other side’s proposals. Chinese, Japanese and Finns are in this group.
Here is a full breakdown of each category:
With these details in mind, here is the world according to the Lewis Model:
Moreover, Lewis argues, perhaps provocatively, that these attributes are largely immutable, even when material conditions or ideological paradigms change:
The behavior of people of different cultures is not something willy-nilly. There exist clear trends, sequences and traditions. Reactions of Americans, Europeans, and Asians alike can be forecasted, usually justified and in the majority of cases managed. Even in countries where political and economic change is currently rapid or sweeping (Russia, China, Hungary, Poland, Korea, Malaysia, etc.) deeply rooted attitudes and beliefs will resist a sudden transformation of values when pressured by reformists, governments or multinational conglomerates.
This is in contrast to another culture map I shared in a previous post, that of Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel, which argues that cultures emerge from the interaction of several dynamic and changing factors, both material and ideological — for example, high socioeconomic development combined with historic Protestant Christian norms creates societies that value secularism, reason, and individual self-expression.
Granted, both maps are very different in structure and categorization, but it is interesting to try and compare their interpretation of certain countries and regions.
What are your thoughts about these two guides to the world’s cultures?
Utilizing the results of the World Values Survey (WVS), one of the world’s leading sources on human beliefs and values, political scientists Ronald Inglehart of the University of Michigan and Christian Welzel of Germany’s Luephana University created the following “culture map”, a unique attempt to categorize and understand the world’s many unique cultures and societies.
In addition to categorizing countries by shared religious, linguistic, or cultural attributes, the map takes into account four sets of values: Continue reading
Love them or hate them, selfies have become something of an icon of the 21st century. Considered the ultimate expression of narcissism and irreverence — especially among the already much-criticized Millennial generation most likely to take them — selfies instead reflect something much deeper and more fascinating about the state of humanity.
I know, it might be hard to believe given how vacuous selfiest seem, but Nicholas Mirzoeff of The Guardian makes a pretty compelling case about the sociological and cultural impact of selfiest and digital media in general. Continue reading
The title doesn’t just refer to the tens of millions of faceless laborers who, over the centuries, quite literally built, maintained, and fought for everything that makes up modern civilization. I am talking about ritual and religious human sacrifice, wherein individuals — and sometimes masses of people at a time — are killed to serve or petition some sort of higher divine source.
While this once near-universal practice has thankfully been left behind (for the most part), a recent study makes the provocative suggestion that religiously sanctioned killings helped lay the sociopolitical groundwork of modern society. As The Washington Post reported: Continue reading
Though it has been documented since ancient times, clinical depression is viewed as an increasingly problematic affliction of the modern world — as of 2010, close to 300 million people, or 4 percent of all humans, were diagnosed with clinical depression, including 17 percent of Americans. (As this number obviously does not include undiagnosed, this already sizeable sum of sufferers is likely much larger.) Needless to say, this is a major public health problem warranting more understanding and treatment.
But who would guess that Tromsø, a small Norwegian town of around 70,000 located 200 miles north of the Arctic Circle, might hold the key to deciphering the causes of depression and its solution?
As year-long resident of Tromsø, Kari Leibowitz, observes in The Atlantic, the town hardly seems like the sort of place that would accommodate a stress-free life, for while it is well governed and features all the modern amenities of a developed-world community, its location makes it subject to extreme variations in light. Continue reading
According to the latest Bloomberg Best (and Worst), which ranks countries in all sorts of metrics and areas, the following the healthiest (and least healthiest) nations in the world.
This health index takes into account several factors, including rates of mortality, smoking, immunization, healthcare access, satisfaction with the medical system, and life expectancy, among others. A country’s score reflects both the political factors at work — public health policies, the healthcare system, insurance regulations, etc. — as well as sociocultural influences, such as diet, lifestyle, and attitudes towards risky activities like smoking or heavy drinking.
Thus, the countries that performed the best tended to share similar characteristics: first and foremost, social, political, and economic stability (e.g., no war, mass unemployment, famine conditions, etc.); an efficient, cost-effective, and well managed universal healthcare system; good public infrastructure that promotes daily activity (parks, bicycle paths, walkable city plans, etc.); and a health-conscious culture values things like small food portions, outdoor recreation, or free time from work.
As per Jared Diamond’s work, geography and environment might play some role as well; most of the top performers were located in areas with generally stable and temperate climates, and thus far fewer diseases, erratic weather patterns, natural disasters, infectious diseases, and other detriments to individual and public health. (Singapore, which is located in a tropical region, is somewhat of an exception, but as an extremely well governed city-state, it has had an easier time minimizing or addressing the challenges poised by its climate.)