The global crisis is characterized by economic instability, food insecurity, climate change and major supply-chain disruptions. Its effects are exacerbated by rising inflation, policy uncertainties and unsustainable debt in least developed countries. In addition, the world faces a shortage of water, rising unemployment, inequality and social discontent, especially among young people.
These issues are interconnected and rooted in profoundly unequal distributions of wealth, power, and opportunity. They also are driven by the disproportionate impact of global crises on certain countries and populations (e.g., Greece during the pandemic).
Our study aims to understand how people respond to and perceive the causes of global crisis. We use sociopolitical theory to predict that people’s reactions depend on fundamental views about globalization’s desirability. Conservatives view national and international institutions as competitive trust referents, transfer blame for crisis grievances from national to international institutions, and place greater trust in local institutions to guide them out of hardship. Globalists, by contrast, view national and international institutions as collaborative trust referents, refrain from blaming international institutions for global crises, and promote adherence to both local and global crisis-prevention guidance.
To mitigate the negative consequences of global crises, national and international institutions should actively seek to strengthen their relationships with local citizens. This could be done through crisis-management strategies such as collaborating with local governments to address idiosyncratic, local manifestations of the crisis and providing country-specific guidance after consultation with domestic authorities. This could be supplemented with measures such as transferring knowledge of successful crisis management from one country to another and sharing expertise through international networks.
About the Author
