What is global citizenship?

The concept of global citizenship has its historical roots in the aftermath of the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 and the ratification of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. The UDHR was designed to ensure that the atrocities witnessed during World War II were not repeated. The Charter of the United Nations and the preamble of the UDHR acknowledged for the first time the ‘inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family’. These principles now serve as fundamental legal, moral and ethical standards in the international arena and provide the foundation for contemporary understandings of global citizenship. Where people have rights, it’s the responsibility of all of us to uphold those rights.

Defining global citizenship

The connection between rights and collective responsibility can be seen in many definitions of global citizenship. For example, UNICEF defines global citizens as people who are committed to working towards a fair and just world where everybody can realise their basic human rights. The Cambridge dictionary defines global citizenship as solidarity with all people around the world rather than loyalty towards a particular nation or community. And Oxfam states that global citizens recognise interconnectedness and engage in meaningful actions in the pursuit of social, environmental and economic equality. The link between global citizenship and social justice is clear.

More recently we have seen the advancement of global initiatives to tackle the world’s problems such as the adoption of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement in 2015, and so it’s not surprising that the concept of global citizenship has gained traction. Intergovernmental organisations, multinational businesses, and liberal political parties, particularly in western countries, draw on the founding principles of global citizenship to demonstrate their commitment to fairness, equality and respect for all people. One area where global citizenship has been increasing in popularity is in higher education. The inclusion of Global Citizenship Education (GCE) in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Target 4.7) has meant that interest in the study and practice of GCE has grown. Many universities now explicitly refer to global citizenship in their education strategy and their curriculum framework; for example, the University of Reading.

Sustainable Development Goals ©UN. Click to expand diagram. (The content of this publication has not been approved by the United Nations and does not reflect the views of the United Nations or its officials or Member States.)

The opportunities and challenges

However, this course is about the opportunities and challenges of living in a connected world and the concept of global citizenship is not without its problems. While being a global citizen is presented as something universal which everyone can aspire to, neoliberal approaches to global citizenship, where attributes such as intercultural awareness and opportunities to experience different languages and cultures are packaged and sold, tend to obscure important structural inequalities. The interconnectedness espoused in global citizenship discourse doesn’t take account of uneven power relations globally. For example, the G7 countries largely dictate global affairs but they are in fact, a narrow and localised representation of the world which doesn’t include Africa and South America. Even in the G20, African nations other than South Africa are only represented through the African Union. Only certain countries are seen as ‘globalising’, while the rest are ‘globalised’. Consequently, universities tend to market their global citizenship education towards an aspiring ‘global entrepreneurial citizen’, someone who is either already a member of the mobile elite, or wants to become one by entering the international job market as a ‘global graduate’.

If care isn’t taken over approaches to global citizenship, it can perpetuate perceived differences between ‘the west’ and ‘the rest’ because upholding the rights of citizens, striving for better social, economic and environmental conditions might be assumed to be something which needs to happen ‘over there’. As a result, well intended actions often repeat harmful, colonial patterns of relationships and inadvertently perpetuate ‘white saviourism’. Furthermore, global citizenship must be discussed in relation to shifting contexts. Today’s global society is facing multiple problems, including the climate crisis, a global pandemic, wars, and shifts in global power relations. The extent to which these problems impact us varies depending on where we live in the world as well as our position in society. It’s crucial to examine the underlying assumptions of global citizenship to avoid repeating existing power dynamics.

So, when we talk about global citizenship there’s a lot to consider. But we can start by examining our own place and positioning in the world. This means thinking about our own identity and culture, our role in society, and our relationship to others, both locally and globally. Whenever we want to make an intervention which we hope will make a meaningful difference in the pursuit of social justice, we need to ask who benefits and where the potential for harm lies, intentional or not. We also need to consider the limitations of global citizenship – what it can and what it can’t do. The goal is to develop an understanding of ‘critical global citizenship’, which aims ‘to empower individuals to reflect critically on the legacies and processes of their cultures, to imagine different futures and to take responsibility for decisions and actions’.¹ That’s what this course aims to achieve.

Reference

1. Vanessa Andreotti: Soft vs critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review Issue 3. 2006.