The concept of culture has two major definitions.

On the one hand, culture is an

integrated set of values, norms and behaviors acquired by human beings as
members of a society. As such, culture constitutes an element of identification
within a given group of individuals and an element of differentiation vis-à-vis
other groups from an anthropological standpoint. On the other hand, from a
sociological stance, culture refers to artistic and symbolic creations, heritage and
cultural products. In relation to globalization, these two aspects have important
implications with respect to how individuals express their cultural identities, in
terms of the future of cultural traditions, and with cultural industries.

A worthwhile observation is the fact that culture is not rigid. It is a process that
gradually builds up through interaction. Culture allows individuals to create
human societies by defining the conditions of how people live among each other
and together, as well as, by abiding to social and cultural codes that distinguish
them from other cultures.
While the concept of ‘culture’ can be applied to any human collectivity, it is often
used in the case of societies which refer to nations, ethnic entities or regional
groups within or across nation. As such, culture is concerned with a distinct
environment of a community about which members share meaning and values.

According to David Held: Globalisation is about the stretching of connections,

relations and networks between human communities, an increase in the intensity
of these and a general speeding up of all these phenomena.
Cultural Globalization refers to cross border flows of national and transnational
cultures. It involves a rapid movement of ideas, attitudes, meanings, values and
cultural products across national borders. Thus according to M Castells cultural
globalisation leads to the emergence of a specific set of values and beliefs that are
largely shared around the planet.

Interactions between globalization and culture consist of three perspectives:

Homogenizatio, Heterogenization and Hybridization

Homogenization
The homogenization perspective claims that the international exchanges and
flows of goods, services, capitals, technology transfer and human movements is
creating a more standardized and universal world culture. The increased
interconnection between countries and cultures contributes to forming a more
homogenous world adopting the Western Euro-American model of social
organization and life style.
In the homogenization view, barriers that prevent flows that would contribute to
making cultures look alike are weak and global flows are strong. In its extreme
form, homogenization, also known as convergence, claims the possibility that
local cultures can be shaped by other more powerful cultures or even a global
culture. This perspective is reflected in several concepts and models such as the
Global Culture, Americanization and more importantly the Cocacolization
McDonaldization theory.
All over the world, more and more people seem to watch the same entertainment
programs, listen to the same music, consume common global brand products and
services, and wear the same or similar clothes. These comparable developments
in cultural practices suggests the emergence of a “global culture” or “world
culture”.
Thus globalization contributes in creating a new and identifiable class of
individuals who belong to an emergent global culture. According to this concept,
globalization weakens the connections between geographical places and cultural
experiences and erodes the feeling of spatial distance which is about national
separateness.
Globalization is a replication of the American and/or Western cultural tradition
and therefore it is considered a destructive force and an assault on local,
regional,and national distinctiveness. Globalisation destroys the uniqueness of
national culture and establishes a homogenized world culture.

Americanization refers to the global spread of America’s influential dominance

and culture through drastic growth of mass communication and penetration of
American companies in other countries. American hegemony is reflected by a
domination of the Internet as 85% of web pages originate from the United States
and American companies control 75% of the world’s packaged software market.
There is an American monopoly of the media as seen with popular films, music,
and satellite and television stations around the globe.
The McDonaldization model refers to the principles that the McDonald’s franchise
system has been able to successfully spread across borders and into the global
marketplace. These principles of the system are efficiency, calculability,
predictability, and control.
Both Cocacolization and Mcdonaldization represent worldwide homogenization of
cultures through the effects of multinational corporations.
The McDonalization model has transformed the nature of consumer consumption
by encouraging and compelling individuals to consume infinite amounts of goods
and services. Coca cola and Mcdonalds has imposed themselves on local markets
in other societies and have transformed economies and cultures.
However there are scholars like A Appadurai and J Pietrese who have argued that
cultural homogenization is too simplistic as several local cultures have
demonstrated their ability to domesticate or resist foreign cultural influences. For
instance, McDonaldized systems have had to adapt in order to succeed overseas.
Organizations once imported, serve different social, economic and cultural
functions that all need to be custom-tailored to local conditions.
Global localization or glocalisation is a term coined by Sony chairman Akio
Morita to indicate the necessity for companies to look into both local and global
directions when working in diverse business settings.
Similarly the notion of global culture has also been criticised that it is not
cohesive in nature and refers to a set of cultural practices that only bear surface
resemblance. Some scholars assert that globalization makes individuals aware of
the diverse national cultures in the world which are multiple in numbers and
distinct in nature. Hence, globalization strengthens national cultures rather than
undermine them.

Heterogenization

While some scholars agree that globalization originates from Western cultures,
they however reject the idea that this phenomenon produces a homogenization of
world cultures. They have argued that globalization generates a state of
heterogeneity.

Heterogenous process involves flow of cultural forces and since culture is a fluid
construct it absorbs and adapts to the global factors. Local cultures experience
continuous transformation and reinvention due to the influence of global factors
and forces However, these forces do not eradicate local cultures, they only change
some of their traits and reinforce others. Different cultural groups develop into
heterogonous entities due to differences in demands necessitated by environmental
circumstances and pressures. In some instances foreign cultural practices remain in
the margins of local and national cultures resulting in a side-by-side coexistence of
distinct and disparate global and local cultures. Cultural differentiation remains
strong despite globalization forces.

Thus according to this perspective, cultures do not remain unaffected by global

flows and globalization in general, but the actual crux of the culture remains intact
and unaffected with only peripheral surfaces directly impacted.

Hybridization
With the advent of international workforce mobility, cross-cultural
communications, migration, international trade, tourism, and global investments,
awareness of cultural differences is inevitable. In this regard, M Featherstone has
said that globalization defines the space in which the world’s cultures merge
together.
Cultural mixing or hybridization is another model that describes the interactions
between globalization and culture. According to the hybridization view, external
and internal flows interact to create a unique cultural hybrid that encompasses
components of the two. Although barriers exist to protect local cultures from
being overwhelmed by external exchanges but they are not powerful enough to
completely block external flows.
According to G Ritzer, the continuous process of mixing or blending of cultures of
both the global and local, new, distinctive and hybrid cultures are created which
are neither global nor local at their core. Thus R Robertson has described
globalization as a complex blend or mixture of homogenization and
heterogenization as opposed to a wide-ranging process of homogenization.
Glocalization is at the heart of hybridization since it refers to the interpretation of
the global and local producing unique outcomes in different geographic regions.
For R Robertson Glocalization is reflected by the fact that the world is growing
pluralistic with individuals and communities becoming innovative agents that
have a tremendous power to adapt and innovate within their newly glocalized
world.
Another scholar, A Appudarai argues that globalization represents a process of
both differentiation and interconnection. Therefore, the world should not be
labeled as a monolithic network spreading worldwide but, rather, as a collection
of partially overlapping socio-techno-cultural landscapes.
These landscapes can be global and regional in nature:
Mediascapes are about the flows of image and communication
Ethnoscapes refer to flows of individuals around the world.
Ideoscapes refer to exchanges of ideas and ideologies.
Technocscapes refer to technology and skills to create linkages between
organizations around the world.
Financescapes refer to the interactions associated with money and capital.
These landscapes are independent of any given nation-state and differently
affect various territories.
The hybridization perspective stands for cultural convergence and assimilation.
The theory advances cultural mixing and integration without the need to give up
one’s identity.
.

In Hybridization there is no loss of original culture, but instead traditional

elements are mixed with modern global practices. Hybridization leads to
blending of multiple cultures, which finally leads to creation of a new cultural
identity.
The threat of losing cultural identity does not arise because cultural
hybridization continues to carry forward local cultures and traditions. Most
nations have formed their own defense mechanisms against globalization by
upholding their national cultures. For example, in China and Southeast Asia,
the governments have created their own business structures and media
houses to prevent westernization. The Malaysian government has also
incorporated broadcasting services that promote local culture. However, the
recent phenomena of K-pop music from South Korea is an example of cultural
hybridization where traditional forms of Korean music have assimilated with
pop music from the western world. However, this does not lead to loss of
national culture as it is a form of expression of national culture which has now
helped Korean music and culture to become relevant to the entire world. This
is clearly one of the best examples of the positive impact of globalization.
Strategic hybridization is the buzz word. Today, MNCs are focusing on local
cultures to lead to better practices. In international human resource
management practices, as well as corporate cultures, local cultures are gaining
in prominence. Companies such as Netflix and Amazon are now gearing their
local presence in multiple nations based on local culture and media
consumption. Today, Netflix and Amazon are bringing out local productions of
web series that are in the local language to ensure that they cater to the local
population. Further, business practices are also incorporating local flavours to
ensure that they remain relevant in the local industry. This showcases that
global hybridization is important for proliferation of businesses. There is no
impending threat to local cultures from globalization and cultural hybridization
ensures that the best practices and traditions are safeguarded against all forms
of outside influences.

In the cultural discourse over homogenization and cultural

imperialism, there has been the emergence of a cultural
backlash in the form of ethnic nationalism and religious
fundamentalism.
Samuel P. Huntington argues that religion is defining
characteristic of civilization and different civilizations become
caught up in conflict along their fault lines and among their
leading states because the value they contain matters much to
their adherents. In his thinking what is universalism to West is
imperialism to the rest.

In recent years Europe has witnessed far right, nationalist and neo fascist parties
making significant electoral gains and even controlling the government. After
triumphs of Donald trump over `America first` and Brexit, anti-immigration and
closing of borders have resonated in policy debates. The increasing economic
inequality and perceived statu loss among native white population vis-a-vis
immigrants on account of free market globalization seems to have fuelled
uncertainty that has been harnessed by ethno nationalist. This shift from
outward looking and multiculturalism to inward and ethno cultural nationalism
is interpreted as viewing culture in static and essential framework without
dynamics of internal and external pulls and pressures on culture.