The authors assess the extent to which particular characteristics of economic globalization at the national level influence the likelihood of individuals expressing concern for the natural environment. The globalization characteristics of interest include relative levels of exports, measured as exports as percent total gross domestic product (GDP), and the vertical flow of exports, measured as the percent of total exports sent to high-income countries (HICs). Results of multilevel logistic regression analyses of more than 48,000 individuals within 37 nations indicate that the two characteristics have opposite effects on environmental concern, net of various country-level and individual-level factors. In particular, exports as percent of total GDP lessens the likelihood of environmental concern, whereas percent exports to HICs increases the likelihood of individuals expressing concern for the environment. The results highlight the need for the development of theorization that considers the complex interrelationships between environmental concern and economic globalization characteristics.
BrechinS. (1999). Objective problems, subjective values, and global environmentalism: Evaluating the postmaterialist argument and challenging a new explanation. Social Science Quarterly, 80, 793-809.
3.
BrechinS. (2010). Public opinion: A cross-national view. In Lever-TracyC. (Ed.), Routledge handbook of climate change and society (pp. 231-245). New York, NY: Routledge.
4.
BunkerS. (1984). Modes of extraction, unequal exchange, and the progressive underdevelopment of an extreme periphery: The Brazilian Amazon, 1600-1980. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 1017-1064.
5.
BunkerS.CiccantellP. (2005). Globalization and the race for resources. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
6.
Chase-DunnC.JorgensonA. K. (2003). Globalization as structural integration in historical context. Society in Transition, 34, 206-220.
7.
Chase-DunnC.JorgensonA. K. (2007). Trajectories of trade and investment globalization. In RossiI. (Ed.), Frontiers of globalization research (pp. 165-184). New York, NY: Springer.
8.
Chase-DunnC.KawanoY.BrewerB. (2000). Trade globalization since 1795: Waves of integration in the world-system. American Sociological Review, 65, 77-95.
9.
ColeM. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis, and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48, 71-81.
10.
ColeM. A. (2006). Does trade liberalization increase national energy use?. Economics Letters, 92, 108-112.
11.
DeereC.EstyD. (Eds.). (2002). Greening the Americas: NAFTA’s lessons for hemispheric trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
DickC. (2010). Do environmental characteristics influence foreign direct investment growth? A cross national study, 1990-2000. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 51, 192-210.
13.
DietzT.KalofL.SternP. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 353-364.
14.
DunlapR. E. (2012). Environmental concern. In RitzerG. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of globalization (pp. 522-525). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
15.
DunlapR. E.MertigA. (1997). Global environmental concern: An anomaly for postmaterialism. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 24-29.
16.
DunlapR. E.YorkR. (2008). The globalization of environmental concern and the limits of the postmaterialist values explanation: Evidence from four multinational surveys. Sociological Quarterly, 49, 529-563.
17.
DuPuisE. M. (Ed.). (2004). Smoke and mirrors: The politics and culture of air pollution. New York: New York University Press.
18.
FaberD. (2008). Capitalizing on environmental justice: The polluter-industrial complex in the age of globalization. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
19.
FrankD. J.HironakaA.SchoferE. (2000). The nation-state and the natural environment over the twentieth century. American Sociological Review, 65, 96-116.
20.
FrankD. J.RobinsonK.OlesenJ. (2011). The global expansion of environmental education in universities. Comparative Education Review, 55, 546-573.
21.
FranzenA.MeyerR. (2010). Environmental attitudes in cross-national perspective: A multilevel analysis of the ISSP 1993 and 2000. European Sociological Review, 26, 219-234.
22.
FranzenA.VoglD. (2012). Acquiescence and the willingness to pay for environmental protection: A comparison of the ISSP, WVS, and EVS. Social Science Quarterly. Advance online publication.
23.
GelissenJ. (2007). Explaining popular support for environmental protection: A multilevel analysis of 50 nations. Environment and Behavior, 39, 392-415.
24.
GilpinR. (2001). Global political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25.
GivensJ. E.JorgensonA. K. (2011). The effects of affluence, economic development, and environmental degradation on environmental concern: A multilevel analysis. Organization & Environment, 24, 74-91.
26.
GivensJ. E.JorgensonA. K. (2013). Individual environmental concern in the world polity: A multilevel analysis. Social Science Research, 42, 418-431.
27.
GuillenM. F. (2001). Is globalization civilizing, destructive, or feeble? A critique of five key debates in the social science literature. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 235-260.
28.
HadlerM.HallerM. (2011). Global activism and nationally driven recycling: The influence of world society and national contexts on public and private environmental behavior. International Sociology, 26, 315-345.
29.
HallerM.HadlerM. (2008). Dispositions to act in favor of the environment: Fatalism and readiness to make sacrifices in a cross-national perspective. Sociological Forum, 23, 281-311.
30.
HayesB. C. (2001). Gender, scientific knowledge, and attitudes toward the environment: A cross-national analysis. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 657-671.
31.
HunterL. M.HatchA.JohnsonA. (2004). Cross-national gender variation in environmental behaviors. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 677-694.
32.
InglehartR. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
33.
InglehartR. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34.
JorgensonA. K. (2006). Unequal ecological exchange and environmental degradation: A theoretical proposition and cross-national study of deforestation, 1990-2000. Rural Sociology, 71, 685-712.
35.
JorgensonA. K. (2009). Foreign direct investment and the environment, the mitigating influence of institutional and civil society factors, and relationships between industrial pollution and human health: A panel study of less-developed countries. Organization & Environment, 22, 135-157.
36.
JorgensonA. K. (2011). Carbon dioxide emissions in Central and Eastern European nations, 1992-2005: A test of ecologically unequal exchange theory. Human Ecology Review, 18, 105-114.
37.
JorgensonA. K. (2012). The sociology of ecologically unequal exchange and carbon dioxide emissions, 1960-2005. Social Science Research, 41, 242-252.
38.
JorgensonA. K.ClarkB. (2009). The economy, military, and ecologically unequal relationships in comparative perspective, 1975-2000. Social Problems, 56, 621-646.
39.
JorgensonA. K.DickC.MahutgaM. (2007). Foreign investment dependence and the environment: An ecostructural approach. Social Problems, 54, 371-394.
40.
JorgensonA. K.DickC.ShandraJ. M. (2011). World economy, world society, and environmental harms in less-developed countries. Sociological Inquiry, 81, 53-87.
41.
KayaY.KarakocE. (2012). Civilizing vs destructive globalization? A multi-level analysis. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 53, 23-44.
42.
KemmelmeierM.KrólG.KimY. H. (2002). Values, economics, and proenvironmental attitudes in 22 societies. Cross-Cultural Research, 36, 256-285.
43.
KentorJ.BoswellT. (2003). Foreign capital dependence and development: A new direction. American Sociological Review, 68, 301-313.
44.
KentorJ.JorgensonA. K. (2010). Foreign investment and development: An organizational perspective. International Sociology, 25, 419-441.
45.
KnightK. W.MesserB. L. (2012). Environmental concern in cross-national perspective: The effects of affluence, environmental degradation, and world society. Social Science Quarterly, 93, 521-537.
46.
KolbertE. (2006). Field notes from a catastrophe: Man, nature, and climate change. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.
47.
Marquart-PyattS. T. (2007). Concern for the environment among general publics: A cross-national study. Society & Natural Resources, 20, 883-898.
48.
Marquart-PyattS. T. (2008). Are there similar sources of environmental concern? Comparing industrialized countries. Social Science Quarterly, 89, 1312-1335.
49.
Marquart-PyattS. T. (2012). Environmental concerns in cross-national context: How do mass publics in Central and Eastern Europe compare with other regions of the world. Czech Sociological Review, 48, 441-466.
50.
McMichaelP. (2008). Development and social change: A global perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
51.
McMichaelP. (2009). Contemporary contradictions of the global development project: Geopolitics, global ecology and the development climate. Third World Quarterly, 30, 247-262.
52.
MeyerJ. W.FrankD. J.HironakaA.SchoferE.TumaN. B. (1997). The structuring of a world environmental regime, 1870-1990. International Organization, 51, 623-651.
53.
MolA. (2003). Globalization and environmental reform. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54.
MolA.SpaargarenG.SonnenfeldD. (Eds.). (2009). The ecological modernisation reader. London, England: Routledge.
55.
PellowD. (2007). Resisting global toxins: Transnational movements for environmental justice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S.CheongY. F.CongdonR.du ToitM. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
58.
RiceJ. (2007). Ecological unequal exchange: International trade and uneven utilization of environmental space in the world system. Social Forces, 85, 1369-1392.
59.
RobertsJ. T.ParksB. C. (2007). A climate of injustice: Global inequality, north-south politics, and climate policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60.
SchoferE.HironakaA. (2005). The effects of world society on environmental protection outcomes. Social Forces, 84, 25-47.
61.
ShandraJ. M. (2007). International nongovernmental organizations and deforestation: Good, bad, or irrelevant. Social Science Quarterly, 88, 665-689.
62.
ShandraJ. MLeckbandC.LondonB. (2009). Ecologically unequal exchange and deforestation: A cross-national analysis of forestry export flows. Organization & Environment, 22, 293-310.
63.
SmithJ.KaridesM.BeckerM.BrunelleD.Chase-DunnC.della PortaD.VazquezR. (2007). Global democracy and the world social forums. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
64.
SmithJ.WiestD. (2005). The uneven geography of global civil society: National and global influences on transnational associations. Social Forces, 84, 621-652.
65.
SnijdersT.BoskerR. (2012). Multilevel analysis (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
66.
SnowD. B.WordenR. S.BenfordR. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51, 464-481.
67.
TorglerB.Garcia-ValiñasM. A. (2007). The determinants of individuals’ attitudes towards preventing environmental damage. Ecological Economics, 63, 536-552.
68.
World Bank. (2010). World development indicators (CD ROM). Washington, DC: Author.
69.
Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy/Yale University, Center for International Earth Science Information Network /Columbia University, and World Economic Forum, and Joint Research Centre /European Commission. (2005). 2005 environmental sustainability index (ESI). Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). Retrieved from http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/esi-environmental-sustainability-index-2005
70.
YorkR.RosaE. (2012). Choking on modernity: A human ecology of air pollution. Social Problems, 59, 282-300.
