Importance of Becoming a Global Citizen

additional_source_2.pdf

Home >Government homework help >Importance of Becoming a Global Citizen

Navigating the boundaries of active global citizenship

Benjamin J Lough1 and Amanda Moore McBride2

This paper informs the active global citizenship debate by assessing whether returned international volunteers with a strong belief in the need for global governance also believe that participation in national political and civic spaces can drive global change. Regression models use survey responses from 245 returned international volunteers at three points in time. Findings indicate no significant difference in volunteers’ conceptions of global citizenship before and after international service. However, volunteers who hold cosmopolitan views about the need for global governance have a higher sense of efficacy that participation in national spaces may affect global change. In addition, they are more likely to engage internationally but not locally. Findings suggest that global citizens may maintain an active civic identity rooted in overlapping locations. In addition, heightened notions of global citizenship appear to have a significant effect on returned volunteers’ interest in international affairs and active engagement across national borders.

Key words International service; volunteering; global citizenship; nationalism; quantitative

1School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA Email: [email protected] 2George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St Louis, Gephardt Institute for Public Service, Center for Social Development, St Louis, MO 63130, USA

Revised manuscript received 18 April 2013

Introduction

Many geographers have expressed concern that young adults in the Global North are unprepared to meet the demands of an increasingly globalised society (Drake 1987; Haigh 2002; Wade 2001). In a 2010 multinational study measuring world-mindedness and global citizen- ship among university students, more than 40 per cent of students in the UK were categorised as nationalistic or ethnocentric (Meyer et al. 2011). Although the UK’s rankingwasslightlylowerinnationalismthanin theother English-speaking countries, many young people believed the needs of their own country should remain the highest priority, and agreed that conflict, inequality and exclu- sion are inevitable prices to pay (Meyer et al. 2011).

Exposure to international ‘others’ is viewed as one pathway to lessen nationalistic and ethnocentric atti- tudes while increasing global citizenship and percep- tions of responsibility to people in other nations. Study abroad, international internships, gap-years, interna- tional volunteerism and other forms of travel and tourism are all promoted as methods to promote global citizenship (Abdi and Shultz 2008; Battistoni et al. 2009; Oxfam 2006). Although empirical studies con- necting international experiences to global citizenship are rare, a 2002 report measuring geographic literacy found that young adults in the highest-scoring

European countries (Sweden, Germany and Italy) were also those who were the most travelled in the three years prior to data collection (Trivedi 2002).

Over the past ten years, there has been a significant increase in international travel from countries in the Global North, with a specific interest in international volunteering to countries in the Global South (Tiessen and Heron 2012; Tourism Research and Marketing 2008). It is expected that the market for volunteering, service-learning and other forms of international expe- riential learning will continue to expand (IEE 2011; Lewin 2009). International Volunteer Cooperation Organisations (IVCOs) often tap this market by promoting international service as a way to educate participants about global issues and to raise their perceptions of global responsibilities and obligations (Bellamy and Weinberg 2006; Davies 2006; Diprose 2012; Lewin 2009). This objective has been supported anecdotally by many returned volunteers who describe their experiences as ‘transformative’ learning moments (Abram et al. 2005; Grusky 2000; Hunter 2008), or educational ‘turning points’ in their lives (Machin 2008; Starr 1994). With the exception of a few studies touching on the subject, little empirical work has investigated the assertion that international service is associated with heightened levels of global citizenship (ITAD 2011; Tiessen and Heron 2012).

The information, practices and views in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG). ISSN 0020-2754 Citation: 2014 39 457–469 doi: 10.1111/tran.12035

This paper first explores debates surrounding the concept of global citizenship and its utility as a useful framework for global learning (Davies 2006). It then examines empirically whether international volunteers from the Global North change their perceptions of global citizenship following a service placement in the Global South. It further investigates potential avenues for active global citizenship – assessing whether returned volunteers with a strong belief in global governance also believe that engagement in national spaces can drive global change. Lastly it examines whether volunteers act in accordance with these beliefs by engaging in domestic and international civic activ- ities.

Conceptualising global citizenship

Attention to the impacts of globalisation on the emergence of a discernible global citizenship is increas- ing in academic literature, in national and international policy circles, and in the practices of NGOs, corporate actors, and secondary schools and universities (Oxfam 2006; Schattle 2008). The notion of global citizenship is a contested and widely deliberated concept. Citizenship has historically been defined as the rights and respon- sibilities between individuals and the governing states where they reside (Machon and Walkington 2000). From this socio-political perspective, many have argued that citizenship is theoretically grounded to place because of the boundaries used to exclude ‘outsiders’ of a particular political state (Davies 2006).

On the other hand, social, economic and political changes at the global level have eroded dependencies and obligations between citizenship and the state. Many scholars contend that a definition of citizenship tied strictly to spatial boundaries of a nation is limiting and fails to recognise people’s perception of belonging to, and engaging with, an emerging global community (Davies et al. 2005; Schattle 2008). With this conten- tion in mind, one reason for the tenacious use of the term global citizenship may be to intentionally highlight the paradox between cosmopolitan notions of inclusion and parochial notions of exclusion that have tradition- ally been associated with national citizenship and identity.

This paper will focus on a more circumscribed view of citizenship as a socio-political construct that is operationalised as a diminished sense of allegiance to a particular nation, along with a moral solidarity and expanded universe of obligation to those in other countries (Habermas 1992; Held 1995). On the other hand, it also challenges whether active citizenship must be limited to participation within national boundaries.

As a socio-political construct, some argue that ‘the notion of “global citizenship” is simply a metaphor … We cannot be citizens of the world in the way that we

are of a country’ (Davies 2006, 5). By this logic, although a person’s identity may become more multi- cultural or pluralistic through engagement with diverse populations, ‘it is not possible to speak of a true global citizenship in the absence of a global state’ (McIlwaine 2007, 1266). According to this view, in order to construct a true global citizenship, there must be an evolution beyond the nation-state towards a one-world government (Brodie 2004; Hettne 2000; O’Byme 2005; Muetzelfeldt and Smith 2002).

Staeheli (2010) provides a counter-perspective, asserting that citizenship is defined by multiple exclu- sionary borders, and can operate at many different ‘sites’ confined by both physical and metaphorical boundaries. According to this ‘new spatiality of citi- zenship’ (Staeheli 1999, 61), democratic structures are a blend of many different institutions, only some of which are affiliated with the state (Held 1995; Staeheli 1999). Others agree that changes wrought by globali- sation have altered relationship between states, trans- formed multicultural identities, and expanded opportunities for individual association and action beyond nation-states (Dower and Williams 2002; Mitchell 2003; Muetzelfeldt and Smith 2002; Vanden- berg 2000; Wagner 2004).

With the spike in global communication fuelled by electronic mass media, Habermas projected 20 years ago that the idea of global citizenship may finally ‘become a reality for the first time’ in the coming decades (1992, 19). However, he argues that this reality would depend on the presence of functional global mechanisms for geopolitical engagement and demo- cratic accountability. According to this perspective, identity based on both state and global citizenship depend heavily on one’s ability to legitimately influence global policies in the ‘world public sphere’ (Habermas 1996, 514).

Global citizens may have no direct democratic capacity to vote or to formally negotiate legal terms on a global scale in the absence of a global governance body. However, advocacy and action with transnational NGOs and multilateral institutions may influence human rights issues directly and indirectly through engagement and political pressure – allowing individ- uals to engage indirectly in democratic action. Because of the theoretical connection between engagement and citizenship, notions of a global civil society and active citizenship feature prominently in contemporary dis- cussions and definitions of global citizenship.

Active global citizenship

Literature on active citizenship often uses a wide lens of global citizenship – referring to citizenship as the application of one’s ‘moral responsibility’ to meet the needs and welfare of others in one’s global community

458 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

(Kearn 1992). At the global level, people who identify as active global citizens develop a cosmopolitan mind- set or a feeling of being at home in the world, with a willingness to take upon themselves obligations and responsibilities that transcend national boundaries (Schattle 2008). Active cosmopolitanism recognises that as people feel greater solidarity with citizens of other nations, they may exhibit less provincial attitudes or interests and may be more willing to engage and work for the common good of all people (Lewin 2009; Nussbaum 2008). As a point of clarification, cosmo- politanism as used in this paper refers to one’s belief in the need for open political governance to meet global needs (Held 1995). As such, it is more limiting than wider conceptions of cosmopolitanism often referenced in the literature (Brennan 1997; Mitchell 2007).

With a cosmopolitan approach to governance, active global citizenship would theoretically require a global democratic body or some form of organised political actors in international civil society with the ability to implement change toward the common good (Held 1995). As McIlwaine argues, it is theoretically inap- propriate to apply concepts such as ‘citizen’ or ‘civil society’ at the global level unless there is space and place for global civic engagement or the ‘potential for global citizens to operate through a virtual, democratic, global civic space where they could challenge global power bases’ (2007, 1265). Consistent with this argu- ment, there may be many democratic structures and civic spaces outside of the state for fulfilling one’s moral obligation towards a global community.

Globalisation and internationalisation are creating new structures, tools and spaces for active global citizenship. For instance, international non-governmen- tal organisations (INGOs) may offer meaningful spaces for expression of cosmopolitan values and the applica- tion of active citizenship that transcends national boundaries (Desforges 2004). Transnational social or- ganisations also have the potential to tangibly influence the domestic policies of nations. While these institu- tions may not provide any real-world governance or enforcement (see Frey 2012), advocacy and involve- ment with these structures is creating an ‘emerging international civil society’ that may have a genuine impact on global policies (Otto 1996, 112).

In addition, nation-states that have the power and legitimacy to influence global policies may provide space for active global citizenship. While many people see a paradox between utilising the political structures of a soverign state and the concept of global citizenship (Lizhi 1993), the relationship need not be contradic- tory. Although xenophobic and aggressive expressions of patriotism and nationalism are certainly at odds with the spirit of global citizenship and cosmopolitanism (Carter 2001), active global citizenship founded on the principles of universal obligation may recognise the

advantages of national political structures for promot- ing global change (Habermas 1992; Nussbaum 2008). Perhaps the most effective active global citizens hold a ‘dual citizenship’ – utilising both national political structures and international civic spaces to promote change.

This paper informs the active global citizenship debate by assessing whether individuals who believe in the need for a global governance body also believe that engagement in national spaces can drive global change. Second, it assesses whether individuals who identify as global citizens participate more frequently in interna- tional activities. To the degree that people believe engagement in national spaces may promote global change, they may maintain a civic identity situated in multiple locations. This would provide support for Staeheli’s assertion that active citizenship can operate in overlapping spaces that form a ‘continuum of citizenship’, beginning with tribal and local identity and ending with global affiliations (2010, 397). Because territorial and cultural boundaries are highly permeable in transnational society (Heins 2000), this logic may help determine whether active global citizens believe they can engage in different layers of political space to drive global change (Mitchell 1997).

Although the paper has no solid measure for active global citizenship, individuals with a strong cosmopol- itan mentality may arguably have a keener interest in international issues and affairs, as well as higher international engagement. To further understand how these perceptions affect their geographic locus of engagement (i.e. domestic or international), we further examine whether those who rank highly on cosmopol- itan perceptions of global citizenship are also more likely to engage in local civic behaviours. To first consider how global citizenship can be fostered, the following section discusses why international service is believed to be a practical context for strengthening identities of global citizenship.

International volunteer service for global citizenship

International volunteer service involves participants in formal civic service opportunities – defined as ‘an organised period of engagement and contribution to society by volunteers who work across an international border, in another country, or countries’ (Sherraden et al. 2008, 397). With this formal definition in place, there are a broad range of international service models that select and combine multiple goals – only some of which include global citizenship as an intended out- come (Sherraden et al. 2006; Simpson 2004). IVCOs that facilitate international service span sectors including non-profit, faith-based, public and corporate organisations. Placements range from short-term ‘vol-

Active global citizenship 459

unteer tourism’ to much more immersive and long-term development service (Sherraden et al. 2006). Most international service programmes send volunteers from North America and Western Europe to provide service to preferred countries in the Global South (Keese 2011; McBride et al. 2003).

Across the diverse models of international service, volunteering is often perceived as one avenue for promoting cosmopolitan attitudes and identities con- sistent with the concept of global citizenship (Baillie Smith and Laurie 2011; Lorimer 2010). It is worth noting that much of the literature theorising volun- teering and global citizenship references a less political perspective of cosmopolitan citizenship, focusing rather on the development of intercultural skills, inclusive perspectives and how ‘elite’ or ‘stra- tegic’ cosmopolitanism intersect with volunteer ser- vice (Baillie Smith and Laurie 2011; Jones 2011; Mitchell 2007). In reality, relatively few IVCOs intentionally focus on global citizenship, and even fewer explicitly regard global citizenship from a Habermasian political perspective. While a handful of advocacy-oriented IVCOs may aim to challenge human rights policies in some spaces, the majority tend to focus on larger social and cultural changes in volunteers’ perspectives.

Recognising that not all IVCOs intentionally focus on active global citizenship, well-structured interna- tional service programmes may serve as sites for the development of, and engagement with, global citizen- ship (Rovisco 2009; Staeheli 2010). As volunteers embedded in new cultures are frequently challenged to rebuild their previously held beliefs (Mezirow 1991), they are often faced with reevaluating exclusionary notions of citizenship, belonging and affiliation. In connection with these changes, they may gain a more inclusive ‘universe of obligation’ along with expanded responsibilities to participate in social and political actions that promote global change (Messinger and Dorfman 2008, 2).

On the other hand, proximity and interaction with international ‘others’ do not automatically lead to a heightened sense of global identity and affiliation. The structure of volunteer programmes, volunteers’ moti- vations and other external factors may significantly affect outcomes. For instance, returned volunteers in a previous study reported that their national identity is actually reinforced as they live in another country; as one volunteer noted, ‘It totally changed my identity as an American. It made me feel more American and more positive about my own culture and identity’ (Lough et al. 2009, 28). By strict definition (and by the indicator used in this paper), this comment indicates a likely decrease in global citizenship. On the other hand, if employing a less political definition of global citizenship, heightened national identity could well be

compatible with an increase in a universal moral obligation (Brubaker 2004).

From a perspective of active global citizenship, how volunteers understand their position in relation to global others may affect how they engage to promote change. Superficial changes constructed on naïve con- clusions may fail to produce the kinds of engagement that lead to meaningful change. Previous research suggests that lack of clarity about IVCOs’ intent and ability to promote global citizenship may result from contradictions such as a focus on commonality con- trasted with a respect for difference; a privileging of the self in relation to the other – despite assertions of one- ness and solidarity; and a celebration of common humanity combined with an intent to maintain charity- oriented relationships with underprivileged others (Baillie Smith et al. 2013).

In addition, compared with longer-term service programmes that aim to promote sustainable develop- ment, programmes designed to promote global citizen- ship often recruit younger people who have relatively low skills and education (Devereux 2008; Jones 2004; Lyons et al. 2012). As one dimension of the debate surrounding volunteer tourism, a number of scholars question whether volunteers living for a short time across borders can sufficiently comprehend the inequality and power relations inherent in North– South relations (Baillie Smith and Laurie 2011; Mitch- ell 2007; Palacios 2010; Raymond and Hall 2008; Simpson 2004).

In this paper, a few of these questions are examined empirically, aiming to determine whether international volunteers change their perceptions of global citizen- ship following a service placement, and whether returned volunteers with a diminished sense of national allegiance believe that there are, nonetheless, viable opportunities within national boundaries to engage in actions that promote global change. To control for the potential influence of service duration on global citizenship, empirical models also examine whether time spent participating in international service alters the importance volunteers place on global citizenship.

Methods

Description of study sample The sampling frame included volunteers from countries in the Global North who served in the Global South with one of two IVCOs. The first is a non-profit civil society organisation that currently places over 3000 volunteers each year in one of 19 countries in the Global South. Placements range from 1 to 12 weeks, with an average duration of four weeks. The majority of volunteers are from the United States (82%), while the remaining volunteers have origins in other English- speaking countries. Although the age range of partic-

460 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

ipants varies widely (from 16 to 83 years), about 70 per cent of volunteers are age 25 or younger. Volunteers are mostly female (80%), and greater than 40 per cent are students. During their placement, volunteers typi- cally live in urban settings and cohabit with other volunteers. Opportunities for cultural learning and exposure, and structured reflection, are minor but explicit components of the programme. Generally, this includes cultural outings, evening guest speakers and approximately one hour a day for scheduled reflection and dialogue with staff members and other volunteers.

The second organisation is a non-profit organisation that provides volunteer opportunities for short- and long-term placements. It currently places about 300 year-long volunteers and 125 summer-long volun- teers in one of 12 countries in the Global South. The long-term programmes are 10–12 months in length, and the summer programmes are about two months in length. Seventy per cent of volunteers serve in the year- long programmes. The Ministry of Education in the host country generally requests and supports volun- teers, who teach in a variety of educational settings and work as full-time teachers. The majority of volunteers are from the United States (92%), are young (l = 24 years) and female (73%). Volunteers live in both rural and urban settings and most volunteers live with a host family or in teacher housing on the school campus. Once volunteers are placed in the host site, structured time for reflection is not an explicit feature of the programme.

Across these volunteer placements, there is signifi- cant variation in the duration of service, ranging from one week to 12 months. Because previous research indicates that even short-term experiences across bor- ders can have a significant effect on volunteers’ mind- sets and attitudes (Lough 2011; Repair the World 2010), the analysis includes volunteers that served for any length of time but controls for the duration of service.

Survey administration Researchers used items from the International Volun- teering Impacts Survey (IVIS), a primarily close-ended, quantitative survey that assesses volunteer impacts on volunteers over time (Lough et al. 2012). The survey was administered to volunteers in three separate time waves including: (I) an initial baseline in 2008 before commencement of service, (II) a post-test survey one to two weeks after they returned from service and (III) a longitudinal follow-up survey in 2011, two to three years after commencement of service. At Wave III, invitations to take the follow-up survey were emailed to 598 returned volunteers across the two programmes. The survey was posted on the Internet and all responses were submitted online. In total, 245 completed the survey at Wave III, for a response rate of 41 per cent. A non-response analysis revealed no

significant differences between respondents and non- respondents by age, sex, income or years worked professionally. However, those who responded to the Wave III survey were slightly more likely to be higher educated than those who completed the baseline (t = 3.46, df = 595, p < 0.01).

Concept measurement Principal factor analysis (PFA) was used to determine appropriate indicators for three of the concepts used in one of the regression analyses, including: global citizenship, international engagement and community engagement. All items included in the PFA used a seven-point Likert scale and sufficiently met the assumptions of normal distribution. Factor loadings were transformed using quartimax rotation with Kaiser Normalisation. All factor loadings exceeded the min- imum factor loading threshold value of Λ = 0.40 (Jolliffe 2002), and three distinct factors were deter- mined to account for the common variance in the set. The internal consistency of all factors exceeded a minimum reliability coefficient of a = 0.70. Compos- ite variables were then created by averaging the score of each item in the factor. Table I summarises the qualities of each composite variable.

Global citizenship: Variations in scholarly conceptuali- sation of global citizenship have been addressed earlier. The survey items in this study represent the notion that a global governance body is needed in addition to a universal moral obligation. It includes a belief in open borders between countries as well as a willingness to pay income taxes to a global governance body. Table I includes a full list of items included in the composite variables. To test for differences in perceived global citizenship before and after international service, only a single item from the composite scale ‘It would be better to be a citizen of the world than of any particular nation’ could be used as the only consistent indicator across all three waves.

International engagement refers to expressions of inter- est in international issues through self-education, reflection and dialogue on international themes. It also refers to awareness and involvement with internation- ally-oriented groups or projects. It is important to note, however, that measures of international engagement in this paper do not indicate whether the direction of engagement is always towards constructive goals. Ide- ally, research would assess the association between identity as a global citizen and ‘active global citizen- ship’, or active commitment and political participation with one’s community – whether globally or locally for international causes (Dower 2000). For global citizens, geographical dimensions of active citizenship would include engagement with policies that affect popula-

Active global citizenship 461

tions beyond one’s national borders. The composite measure of ‘international engagement’ is not analogous to active global citizenship as the political dimension is underemphasised. However, it does provide an initial indication of engagement with international issues.

Community engagement refers to people’s interest in local community participation, along with their inten- tion to make a positive difference in their community. Although the composite variable does not specify how one defines ‘community’, all items are highly correlated with ‘interest in joining local groups, projects or clubs’. In addition, because items loading on this factor failed to load on the factor of international engagement, we assume that community is viewed by the majority of respondents as local or national.

Interest in national problems: The expected influence of nationalism or patriotism on global citizenship is not

entirely clear. Some suggest that patriotism is funda- mentally at odds with cosmopolitanism, while others argue that a cosmopolitan sense of justice can accom- modate nationalist and patriotic commitments (Bru- baker 2004; Carter 1997; Tan 2004; Turner 2002). Although the IVIS does not include a good measure of nationalism or patriotism to assess the association between global citizenship and one’s interest in national problems and affairs, a single item is included that asks respondents how much they agree with the statement ‘I think a lot about the problems of my nation and how they might be solved’.

Belief in national engagement for global change: As mentioned earlier, globalisation is creating new spaces for active global citizenship, not only through transna- tional organisations but also through national political structures and civic spaces. Global citizens who believe that personal actions within the boundaries of their nation can have global consequences provide support for the Heldian notion that, even in the absence of one world governance structures, global citizens can drive change through engagement in a variety of national institutions, spaces and sites (Held 1995). To assess this relationship, respondents rate how much they agree with the statement ‘I believe I can affect global poverty by changing attitudes and behaviours in my home country’. A second survey item measures respondents’ scepticism of national engagement for global change by rating their agreement with the statement ‘I believe citizens of one country can do very little to affect poverty in other countries’. Because a single factor with only two items would be underdetermined, these items are included separately in the regression model.

Analytic methods Three separate methods were used to inform the research questions. A linear mixed model was used to assess whether volunteers’ perceptions of global citi- zenship changed following an international service experience. A separate OLS linear regression was then used to assess perceived pathways to active global citizenship. Finally, open-ended comments from the survey helped to explain potential reasons for relation- ships between variables.

Linear mixed model: To understand the longstanding effects of international service on volunteers’ concep- tions of global citizenships, a linear mixed regression model for dependent measures was used to compare participants’ perceptions of global citizenship one month before a service placement (Wave I), one month after the service placement (Wave II), and two to three years after service (Wave III). Because follow-up times were not uniform across all respondents (due to differing durations of service), linear mixed modelling

Table I Factor matrix of composite measures (n = 245)

Global citizenship (a = 0.79) It would be better to be a citizen of the world than of any particular nation

0.04 �0.08 0.71

Our responsibility to people of other nations should be as great as our responsibility to people of our own nation

0.15 0.07 0.62

In addition to paying taxes in my country, I would be willing to pay income taxes to a global agency so that income can be more equitably distributed across the people of the world

�0.07 0.39 0.47

As a citizen of the world, I believe that there should be a global governance body

�0.09 0.34 0.42

I believe that there should be totally open borders between countries

0.04 0.32 0.47

Community engagement (a = 0.89) I am very interested in joining local groups, projects or clubs

0.86 0.10 0.02

I am very interested in being a part of my community

0.81 0.18 0.12

I try to find the time to make a positive difference in my community

0.73 0.20 �0.01

I feel I have the ability to make a difference in my community

0.76 0.07 0.06

International engagement (a = 0.82) I discuss international issues and affairs with my friends or colleagues on a daily basis

0.27 0.86 �0.07

I read about international issues through a variety of media on a daily basis

0.07 0.66 0.00

I often help raise awareness of global issues

0.23 0.44 0.10

I am involved with an internationally- oriented group, project or club

0.24 0.43 �0.01

462 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

with a diagonal covariance structure was considered the most appropriate procedure to estimate treatment effects (Hedeker 2004). Of the five items that make up the global citizenship composite variable, three items were added at Wave III and the wording on one item was changed, thereby invalidating its comparability across time. Therefore the test for differences only used a single item from the scale: ‘It would be better to be a citizen of the world than of any particular nation’. As with most other items on the IVIS, responses to this item used a seven-point scale to approximate a normal distribution. Because volunteers served for varying lengths of time, weeks of the volunteer placement was also included in the model, as was an interaction term between global citizenship and the length of service.

OLS linear regression: An OLS regression examined whether those with higher perceptions of global citizenship believed engagement in national spaces can be used to drive global change. It also controls for, and assesses, whether global citizens are more likely to engage with international and local affairs. Because all items constituting the global citizenship composite variable were only available at Wave III, an OLS regression was used to analyse these cross-sectional data. Prior to entering variables in the regression model, univariate analyses were completed to verify that assumptions of regression were met. In cases where a violation of assumptions was found, variables were transformed or otherwise corrected. Only two variables required transformation including: (1) the base ten log of age due to overall positive skew, and (2) the base ten log of years overseas after age 18 due to high kurtosis and skew. The model also controls for respondents’ sex and country of birth, with males coded as one and those born in the USA coded as one. All respondents stating that they were born outside the USA were residing in the UK or Canada at the time of the baseline study. Finally, the model controls for educational status, where Bachelor’s degree or higher is coded as one. Although the duration of service and the volunteer programme were originally included as control variables, neither were significant predictors of global citizenship, and both were removed to produce a more parsimonious model. Table II provides a breakdown of demographic variables used in the regression model.

Open-ended comment analysis: In order to flesh out quantitative findings, respondents were given the opportunity to ‘describe the influence of your interna- tional volunteer experience on your life, if any’. At the conclusion of the survey, respondents were also asked if they had any additional reflections or comments. Two researchers read through these open-ended comments, pulling out any remarks that reflected changes in global

identity or that provided examples of active global citizenship. No formal qualitative software or analysis was used. However, respondents’ comments were cross- referenced with their scores on measures of global citizenship and engagement. These comments are used in the discussion section to help elucidate findings.

Findings

International service and global citizenship Contrary to our hypothesis, there was no significant difference before service and after service in volun- teers’ perceptions that ‘it would be better to be a citizen of the world than of any particular nation’ at Wave II (t = 1.43, df = 371, p = 0.15) or at Wave III (t = 0.19, df = 215, p = 0.51). In fact, the respondents’ mean score on this item remained virtually unchanged from baseline to post-test, and three years after service (x̅ = 5.24, 5.26 and 5.28 respectively). Duration of service also had no significant effect on perceptions of global citizenship (t = 0.01, df = 199, p = 0.92). Based on these results we retain a null hypothesis of no signif- icant difference in volunteers’ perceptions of global citizenship on this item before and after service, and parameter estimates are not interpreted (see Table III).

Active global citizenship Findings from the cross-sectional regression model challenge the assumption that a notion of active global citizenship has little utility in the absence of a global governance body or global civic space. Individuals who believe they can affect global poverty by changing attitudes and behaviours in their home country have significantly higher perceptions of global citizenship (t = 2.47, df = 10, 133, p < 0.05). The regression model indicates that a one-point increase in a volunteer’s belief in national engagement for global change is

Table II Select demographic characteristics of cases in the OLS regression (n = 143)

Continuous variables Mean sd

Age 28.6 11.9 Weeks spent overseas after age 18 115.2 174.4

Categorical variables a Frequency %

Sex Female 105 77.2 Male 31 22.8

Place of birth Born outside the USA 23 16.9 Born in the USA 113 83.1

Education Less than a Bachelor’s degree 7 6.0 Bachelor’s degree or higher 110 94.0

aThe frequency count of variables does not always equal 143 due to missing values.

Active global citizenship 463

associated with a 0.23-point increase in global citizen- ship (as measured on a seven-point scale). In addition, a one-point increase in a volunteer’s belief that citizens of one country can do little to affect poverty in other countries is significantly associated with a 0.24-point decrease in global citizenship (t = �2.95, df = 10, 133, p < 0.01). Findings from the regression are presented in Table IV.

Respondents’ behaviours also seem to be consistent with their perceptions of global citizenship. A one- point increase in international engagement is signifi- cantly associated with a 0.20-point increase in percep- tions of global citizenship (t = 2.63, df = 10, 133, p < 0.05). While engagement with local communities is slightly lower for perceived global citizens, this rela- tionship is not statistically significant (t = �0.92, df = 10, 133, p = 0.36). Likewise, although interest in national problems (a weak proxy for nationalism) is negatively associated with views of global citizenship, this relationship is not statistically significant (t = �1.31, df = 10, 133, p = 0.19). In summary, although international engagement seems to be higher among perceived global citizens, it is unclear how this affects nationalistic mind-sets or local engagement.

Additional control variables included in the model such as gender, age, country of birth and education did not have significant effects. However, given the low number of respondents born outside the USA, greater statistical power may indicate that individuals born in the UK or Canada rate significantly higher on global citizenship (p = 0.08). Future studies that include a higher number of respondents born outside the USA may help to clarify this relationship. On the whole, current research on this topic it not sufficiently developed to corroborate lack of differences in demo- graphic categories.

Discussion and implications

This is one of the first studies to empirically investigate the relationship between international volunteerism

and global citizenship – particularly using longitudinal data. Although many case studies suggest that interna- tional volunteering increases one’s sense of global responsibility and collective commonality across national boundaries, few studies have investigated these claims quantitatively. Longitudinal findings from this study should only be considered a beginning to this investigation, however, given a number of data limita- tions.

Because only two IVCOs were sampled, findings from this study are limited. Both of the IVCOs included in the sample were secular non-profit organ- isations based in the USA. However, international service programmes differ widely in their aims and goals, their methods of administration and facilitation, their service activities and their country of deployment. Public and corporate programmes are increasingly common, as are educational institutions that facilitate international service-learning. Arguably, organisations that lack an explicit programmatic focus to develop global citizenship in volunteers would show a weaker impact in this area.

In addition, the fact that nearly nine out of ten respondents were US citizens also limits the generalis- ability of these findings. Respondents’ beliefs that they can change attitudes in their home country are highly contingent on social and political systems of place. It is plausible, for instance, that individuals from the UK may have a different level of efficacy in national political institutions or local civic spaces. Outcomes could be even more diverse for nations with low democratic or political accountability or with a weak civil society.

This study also surveys a sample of international volunteers who are already internationally engaged. Thus, findings from this study may not be representa- tive of young people generally. In consideration of

Table III Linear mixed model for repeated measure of global citizenship (n = 245)a

Parameter Estimate SE t p

Intercept 5.16 0.06 91.35 0.00 Wave II 0.30 0.21 1.43 0.15 Wave III 0.19 0.29 0.67 0.51 Weeks volunteered (ln) 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.92 Wave II * Weeks (ln)b �0.14 0.13 �1.05 0.29 aThe dependent variable is a single item from the composite variable: It would be better to be a citizen of the world than of any particular nation. bWave I is the reference group (weeks volunteered at baseline = 0); the interaction term with Wave III is excluded because this parameter is redundant.

Table IV Regression of global citizenship on key independent variables

Independent variables b t p

(Constant) 4.91 3.85 0.00 International engagement *0.20 2.63 0.01 Community engagement �0.08 �0.92 0.36 Interest in national problems �0.12 �1.31 0.19 Belief in national engagement for global change

*0.23 2.47 0.01

Scepticism of national engagement for global change

*�0.24 �2.95 0.00

Sex (male) 0.07 0.30 0.76 Age (log) �0.06 �0.08 0.94 Born in US �0.46 �1.78 0.08 Weeks overseas after age 18 (log) 0.18 1.25 0.21 Education (Bachelor’s degree or higher) �0.13 �1.36 0.18

N = 143; F = 4.74 [10, 133]; R2 = 0.26, adjusted R2 = 0.21; *p < 0.01.

464 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

potentially higher initial international engagement, the effects sizes presented in this study are likely smaller than if a survey would be administered to a represen- tative sample of young people in the general popula- tion.

Developing a global citizenship identity While this study found no differences in perceptions of global citizenship before and after volunteer service, only a single item measuring global citizenship was available for longitudinal analysis. This item has been used in a number of previous studies to measure related concepts of ‘global-mindedness’ and ‘world- mindness’ (Hammer et al. 2003; Shah et al. 2004); however, these concepts are somewhat different from global citizenship and do not necessarily include belief in the need for global governance as a key feature. In addition, using only a single item from a composite scale limits the ability to validly detect statistical differences. In addition, people with cosmopolitan mindsets may believe that it is equally important to be a citizen of the world and a particular nation, rather than believing it is better to be a citizen of the world than of a particular nation (Habermas 1992; Nussbaum 2008). Still others may accept the universal obligation elements of global citizenship but may reject a politi- cised perspective; believing that it is best to belong to a particular nation in order to promote a ‘decent society’ through engagement with the democratic institutions of a nation-state (see Gidwani 2006; Nussbaum 2008, 80).

While the single item measuring global citizenship has its limitations, it is possible that these findings do represent the influence of international service on people’s perceptions of global citizenship. As men- tioned previously, some returned volunteers assert that their identification with a particular nation-state is actually reinforced as they live in foreign countries. A few open-ended comments would support these con- clusions. As one volunteer in this study remarked, ‘I became very attached to my home country and will probably not travel outside the US again’. Rather than developing a cosmopolitan mindset, some returned volunteers internalised their appreciation for ‘all the things that we have in America: the opportunities, the freedoms, the transportation, the food, the water, etc.’ without a parallel sense of obligation to extend these privileges to others. For instance, one volunteer declared, ‘I am more appreciative of the opportunities in my country and the education I can give the children of my country’.

Because the measure of global citizenship used in this paper is tied to an interest in global governance, it is also possible that returned volunteers feel a greater compassion for, and obligation towards, global human- ity, while maintaining patriotic attachments. Although patriotism can be divisive, as is often witnessed through

xenophobic attitudes towards immigrants and other non-nationals, a ‘purified patriotism’ acknowledges that people can maintain national attachments while also feeling an enlarged responsibility to humankind (Nuss- baum 2008, 83). Some volunteers expressed an increased appreciation for their home country in conjunction with a greater obligation to extend their privileges to others. As one volunteer noted, ‘I am more grateful for the things I have in my own country and it has made me want to work in an international field to further develop programs to aid developing countries’. In other cases, volunteers may not believe in the virtue of global governance but may extend the boundaries of their allegiance to the country where they served. For instance, one volunteer remarked, ‘I have already been back to visit twice … I cannot keep away from what now feels like “home” to me’. Indeed, stronger identification with those in other nations is one likely pathway leading to global citizenship. As expressed by another returned volunteer:

[International volunteering] enhanced my understanding of world issues, and I can now identify with problems even though I have never come across them myself. Now I see through the eyes of the people I met from those countries. For example, Korea is not just a country on the map. It is a country where I now have friends and those who are coping with problems.

Other volunteers expressed similar reflections that they are part of one unified human race. As described by four volunteers who expressed this idea in different words: ‘My experience gave me a greater realisation … that the world we live in is part of one human family’; ‘I now see every nation worldwide as part of a unity, whereas before I tended to think we were all inimita- ble’; ‘The main and most important way [volunteering] affected me was the internal realisation that we are all one’; and ‘My view of Africa was flipped upside down. I recognised that human nature is the same worldwide despite country, culture, and religion’. One volunteer who was born in Bolivia, served in Zambia and lives in Canada described how international service affected her viewpoints, despite her already multinational background:

It helped me to appreciate more in my life, my family, friends, my country, the world; to know the differences and similarities of other communities, to learn of them, and to see how many cultures and customs we have in the world, but in the end we are the same, human beings.

While these statements seem to reflect a shared humanity and an obligation to promote change in broader context, we also recognise they may be prob- lematic to the degree that they represent a naïve glossing over of differences, including disparities in power and privilege between the nations and peoples in the Global North and South (Baillie Smith et al. 2013).

Active global citizenship 465

Comments suggest potential differences in volun- teers’ stage of intercultural development. Scholars have long understood that intercultural learning takes time to develop into a mature ‘ethnorelative’ understanding (Bennet 1993; Lysgaard 1955; Ogberg 1960). It is likely that identification as a global citizen may also develop in stages, in which case it may be difficult to capture the complexities of changes wrought by an international volunteer experience using a single survey item in linear analysis. For instance, one returned volunteer remarked, ‘I always thought of myself as a global citizen, but I actually felt like one after the volunteer experience’. The survey item in this study does not adequately capture the nuanced but significant differ- ence between thinking and feeling like a global citizen. Various scholars have explored ways to measure the differences between cognitive and affective dimensions of intercultural learning that could also be applied to future research on global citizenship (Bennet 1993; Deardorff 2009; Hammer et al. 2003). As a mutable concept, if global citizenship does occur in stages representing different levels of maturity, it may also affect the ways that volunteers engage to promote change.

While the two IVCOs investigated in this study send volunteers across borders, they do not have strong programmatic or curricular components to promote global citizenship. On the other hand, programmes such as the International Citizen Service (ICS) scheme, funded by the UK Department for International Development, are specifically structured to facilitate learning geared toward global citizenship and develop- ment education – as are many other new international youth volunteer programmes emerging worldwide (Al- lum 2012; ITAD 2011). To the degree that global citizenship is an intended programmatic outcome, IVCOs can design programmes to prepare volunteers, to support them while in the field, to encourage reflection about the causes and consequences of global inequality, and to facilitate de-briefing and reintegra- tion on returning (Simpson 2004). Future research on effective practices can help determine the types of interventions and curricular supports that are most likely to achieve these outcomes. For instance, post- service debriefing may be particularly helpful to bridge volunteers’ experiences with the context of their everyday life, to help support the narrative of the experience and to help them continue to engage locally on return (Machin 2008).

Active global citizenship Findings from the cross-sectional regression model challenge the assertion that ‘it is not possible to speak of a true global citizenship in the absence of a global state’ (McIlwaine 2007, 1266). Although the findings are not able to empirically determine whether engage-

ment in national political and civic spaces can truly alter global outcomes, they do challenge the perception that global citizenship is limited to engagement in global space and with international institutions. Due to the nature of the data, these findings are based on subjective opinions and are only suggestive; however, they indicate that people who hold viewpoints about the need for global governance may maintain a civic identity situated in overlapping locations – including national spaces. They are, in fact, more likely than their more nationalistic peers to believe that engagement in national spaces may affect global change.

Findings also suggest that heightened notions of global citizenship and universal obligation have a significant effect on interest in international affairs and active engagement across national borders. Those who view that ‘our responsibility to people of other nations should be as great as our responsibility to people of our own nation’ are more likely to learn about, to raise awareness of, and to become more involved with international groups and projects. Because the regression is based on cross-sectional data, it is unknown whether global citizenship among volunteers influences discussions and involvement with international affairs, or vice versa. However, it reveals that a diminished sense of exclusive affiliation to a nation-state is associated with greater global awareness and engagement.

We also recognise that measures of engagement do not have the capacity to capture the direction or intent of engagement. While the volunteers may report helping to raise awareness of global issues through involvement with international initiatives, it is unknown what type of actions they are engaged in. Although we might assume that volunteers are contributing to humanitarian aid and relief, they could also be promoting military interventions, paternalistic foreign policies or other less constructive initiatives. Future research will want to be more specific about the types of, and intentionality towards, global engagement.

Those rating highly on perceptions of global citizen- ship were no more likely to show interest in, or make time for, engagement in their local community. Thus, engagement at the domestic level may not be influ- enced by global citizenship in the aggregate – partic- ularly when the concept is tied to a global governance framework. However, most individual items in the composite measure of community engagement do not specify whether the respondents’ ‘community’ is a locality-based construct. While strong correlations among factored survey items suggest that respondents perceive of their community as locally or domestically embedded, we cannot accept this assumption as fact. With this caveat, findings indicate that higher notions of global citizenship may not have a significant impact on local community engagement. On the other hand,

466 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

some open-ended responses suggest that there may be a connection at the individual level, if not in the aggregate, that connects community engagement to international engagement. For instance, one respon- dent illustrates what may be a virtuous circle between international service and more localised community engagement, which is not yet well understood or articulated in this paper:

[Through volunteering], I developed a greater love and commitment to my local community, and to local and international education efforts. Upon returning to my home country, I … have been working locally, with plans to return to my volunteer country in the future to again offer assistance.

More empirical research is needed to understand the relationship between patriotic attitudes, manifest as the heightened appreciation for one’s community and country, and global action (Nussbaum 2011). Under- standing this relationship is particularly important considering the many public dollars invested in inter- national volunteer programmes that aim to promote volunteers’ local or national engagement on return to their home country (Diprose 2012; ITAD 2011; Machin 2008). Without evidence linking policies to outcomes, stakeholders may make

the odd assumption that an international volunteering experience awakens latent capacity for participation in one’s local community, with no attempt to link the two through discussions of domestic development challenges or local manifestations of global issues. (Diprose 2012, 191)

Future studies may want to more carefully articulate the relationship between global citizenship and locally- based community engagement, recognising that per- ceived global citizens seem to believe that global impact is possible through actions in both local and interna- tional spaces.

It might also be worth bringing in greater analyses of subaltern cosmopolitanism to better understand how local engagement with non-elite or ‘ordinary’ cosmo- politans might affect global action and engagement (David 2000; Gidwani 2006; Kothari 2008; Mitchell 2007). Relatedly, with a few exceptions, research that documents perspectives from host communities in the Global South is largely missing in the literature (see Lough 2012; Perold et al. 2011; Sin 2010). Conse- quently, the current state of research in this area could be more critical in its examination of the concept of global citizenship and international service. While recently published literature on this topic does provide a critical lens (Baillie Smith and Laurie 2011; Gidwani 2006; Jones 2008; Lyons et al. 2012; Perold et al. 2011; Simpson 2004), it is likely that many of the dominant assumptions, definitions and practices surrounding these concepts remain unchallenged.

A conscious recognition of disparities in social status and life chances may also affect northern volunteers and their hosts in southern countries in drastically different ways, and we cannot assume that hosts in receiving communities benefit equally from interna- tional service in most cases. Although the perceptions of host community members are not a focus of this study, we recognise this as an important area of inquiry that should not be overlooked. Future research that seeks to understand the impact of international service on the global perspectives of host community members would help to clarify whether global citizenship can be reciprocally achieved or whether it primarily benefits more privileged volunteers.

Acknowledgements

The authors express thanks to the Ford Foundation for providing support for this research. They also wish to thank four anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions on earlier versions of this paper.

References

Abdi A A and Shultz L 2008 Educating for human rights and global citizenship State University of New York Press, Albany NY

Abram F Y, Slosar J A and Walls R 2005 Reverse mission: a model for international social work education and transfor- mative intra-national practice International Social Work 48 161–76

Allum C 2012 Youth international volunteering and development: an opportunity for development, international understanding or social inclusion? International Forum on Development Service, Ottawa

Baillie Smith M and Laurie N 2011 International volunteering and development: global citizenship and neoliberal profes- sionalisation today Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 36 545–59

Baillie Smith M, Laurie N, Hopkins P and Olson E 2013 International volunteering, faith and subjectivity: negotiating cosmopolitanism, citizenship and development Geoforum 45 126–35

Battistoni R M, Longo N V and Jayanandhan S R 2009 Acting locally in a flat world: global citizenship and the democratic practice of service-learning Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement 13 89–108

Bellamy C and Weinberg A 2006 Creating global citizens through study abroad Connection: The Journal of the New England Board of Higher Education 21 20–1

Bennet M J 1993 Towards ethnorelativism: a developmental model of intercultural sensitivity in Paige R M ed Education for the intercultural experience Intercultural Press, Yarmouth ME 21–71

Brennan T 1997 At home in the world: cosmopolitanism now Harvard University Press, Boston MA

Brodie J 2004 Introduction: globalization and citizenship beyond the national state Citizenship Studies 8 323–32

Active global citizenship 467

Brubaker R 2004 In the name of the nation: reflections on nationalism and patriotism Citizenship Studies 8 115–27

Carter A 1997 Nationalism and global citizenship Australian Journal of Politics and History 43 67–81

Carter A 2001 The political theory of global citizenship Routl- edge, London

David H 2000 Cosmopolitanism and the banality of geograph- ical evils Public Culture 12 529–64

Davies I, Evans M and Reid A 2005 Globalising citizenship education? A critique of global education and citizenship education British Journal of Educational Studies 53 66–89

Davies L 2006 Global citizenship: abstraction of framework for action? Educational Review 58 5–25

Deardorff D K 2009 Understanding the challenges of assessing global citizenship in R Lewin ed Handbook of practice and research in study abroad Routledge, New York 346–64

Desforges L 2004 The formation of global citizenship: inter- national non-governmental organisations in Britain Political Geography 23 549–69

Devereux P 2008 International volunteering for development and sustainability: outdated paternalism or a radical response to globalisation Development in Practice 18 357–70

Diprose K 2012 Critical distance: doing development education through international volunteering Area 44 186–92

Dower N 2000 The idea of global citizenship: a sympathetic assessment Global Society 14 553–67

Dower N and Williams J eds 2002 Global citizenship: a critical introduction Routledge, New York

Drake C 1987 Educating for responsible global citizenship Journal of Geography 86 300–6

Frey B S 2012 Flexible government for a globalized world in Archibugi D, Koenig-Archibugi M and Marchetti R eds Global democracy: normative and empirical perspectives Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 150–9

Gidwani V K 2006 Subaltern cosmopolitanism as politics Antipode 38 7–21

Grusky S 2000 International service learning: a critical guide from an impassioned advocate The American Behavioral Scientist 43 858–67

Habermas J 1992 Citizenship and national identity: some reflections on the future of Europe Praxis International 12 1– 19

Habermas J 1996 Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy MIT Press, Cambridge MA

Haigh M J 2002 Internationalisation of the curriculum: designing inclusive education for a small world Journal of Geography in Higher Education 26 49–66

Hammer M R, Bennet M J and Wiseman R 2003 Measuring intercultural sensitivity: the Intercultural Development Inventory International Journal of Intercultural Relations 27 421–43

Hedeker D 2004 An introduction to growth modeling in Kaplan D ed The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences Sage, New York 215–35

Heins V 2000 From new political organizations to changing moral geographics: unpacking global civil society Geojournal 52 37–44

Held D 1995 Democracy and the global order: from the modern state to cosmopolitan governance Polity Press, Cambridge

Hettne B 2000 The fate of citizenship in post-Westphalia Citizenship Studies 4 35–46

Hunter A 2008 Transformative learning in international education in Savicki Ved Developing intercultural competence and transformation: theory, research, and application in international education, Stylus, Sterling VA 92–108

IEE 2011 Open doors: report on international educational exchange Institute of International Education, Leetsdale PA

ITAD 2011 Evaluation of DFID’s International Citizen Service (ICS) Pilot Stage ITAD, UK Department for International Development, London

Jolliffe I 2002 Principal component analysis Springer, New York Jones A 2004 Review of gap year provision Department for Education and Skills: School of Geography, Birkbeck College, University of London, London

Jones A 2008 The rise of global work Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 33 12–26

Jones A 2011 Theorising international youth volunteering: training for global (corporate) work? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 36 530–44

Kearn A J 1992 Active citizenship and urban governance Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 17 20–34

Keese J R 2011 The geography of volunteer tourism: place matters Tourism Geographies 13 257–79

Kothari U 2008 Global peddlers and local networks: migrant cosmopolitanisms Environment and Planning Development: Society and Space 26 500–16

Lewin R 2009 Introduction: the quest for global citizenship through study abroad in Lewin R ed The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: higher education and the quest for global citizenship Routledge, New York xiii–xxii

Lizhi F 1993 Patriotism and global citizenship in Brecher J, Childs J B and Cutler J eds Global visions: beyond the new world order Black Rose Books, Montreal 279–82

Lorimer J 2010 International conservation ‘volunteering’ and the geographies of global environmental citizenship Political Geography 29 311–22

Lough B J 2011 International volunteers’ perceptions of intercultural competence International Journal of Intercul- tural Relations 35 452–64

Lough B J 2012 Participatory research on the contributions of international volunteerism in Kenya: provisional results International Forum on Development Service, Fitzroy, Australia

Lough B J, McBride A M and Sherraden M S 2009 Perceived effects of international volunteering: reports from alumni Center for Social Development, Washington University, St Louis MO

Lough B J, McBride A M and Sherraden M S 2012 Measuring international service outcomes: implications for interna- tional social work field placements Journal of Social Work Education 48 479–99

Lyons K D, Hanley J, Wearing S and Neil J 2012 Gap year volunteer tourism: myths of global citizenship? Annals of Tourism Research 39 361–78

Lysgaard S 1955 Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fullbright grantees visiting the United States International Social Sciences Bulletin 7 45–51

Machin J 2008 The impact of returned international volunteers on the UK: a scoping review Institute for Volunteering Research, London

468 Benjamin J Lough and Amanda Moore McBride

Machon P and Walkington H 2000 Citizenship: the role of geography? in Kent A ed Reflective practice in geography teaching Paul Chapman, London 179–91

McBride A M, Ben�õtez C and Sherraden M 2003 The forms and nature of civic service: a global assessment Center for Social Development, Washington University, St Louis MO

McIlwaine C 2007 From local to global to transnational civil society: re-framing development perspectives on the non-- state sector Geography Compass 1 1252–81

Messinger R and Dorfman A 2008 Am I my brother’s keeper if my brother lives halfway around the World? in Rose O N, Kaiser J E G and Klein M eds Righteous indignation: a Jewish call for justice Jewish Lights Publishing, Woodstock VT

Meyer L H, Sleeter C E, Zeichner K, Park H-S, Hoban G and Sorensen P 2011 An international survey of higher educa- tion students’ perceptions of world-mindedness and global citizenship in Lindsay B and Blanchett W J eds Universities and global diversity: preparing educators for tomorrow Routl- edge, Abingdon 179–92

Mezirow J 1991 Transformative dimensions of adult learning Jossey-Bass, San Francisco CA

Mitchell K 1997 Transnational discourse: bringing geography back in Antipode 29 101–14

Mitchell K 2003 Educating the national citizen in neoliberal times: from the multicultural self to the strategic cosmopol- itan Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 28 387–403

Mitchell K 2007 Geographies of identity: the intimate cosmo- politan Progress in Human Geography 31 706–20

Muetzelfeldt M and Smith G 2002 Civil society and global governance: the possibilities for global citizenship Citizen- ship Studies 6 55–75

Nussbaum M C 2008 Towards a globally sensitive patriotism Daedalus 137 78–85

Nussbaum M C 2011 Patriotism and cosmopolitanism in Held D and Brown G W eds The cosmopolitanism reader Polity Press, Cambridge MA 155–62

O’Byme D J 2005 The dimensions of global citizenship: political identity beyond the nation-state Taylor and Francis, Portland OR

Ogberg K 1960 Cultural shock: adjustment to new cultural environments Practical Anthropology 7 177–82

Otto D 1996 Nongovernmental organizations in the United Nations system: the emerging role of international civil society Human Rights Quarterly 18 107–41

Oxfam 2006 Education for global citizenship: a guide for schools Oxfam Development Education, Oxford

Palacios C M 2010 Volunteer tourism, development and education in a postcolonial world: conceiving global connec- tions beyond aid Journal of Sustainable Tourism 18 861–78

Perold H, Mavungu E M, Cronin K, Graham L, Muchemwa L and Lough B J 2011 International voluntary service in Southern African Development Community (SADC): Host organisation perspectives from Mozambique and Tanzania Volunteer and Service Enquiry Southern Africa (VOSESA), Johannesburg

Raymond E M and Hall C M 2008 The development of cross-cultural (mis)understanding through volunteer tourism Journal of Sustainable Tourism 16 530–43

Repair the World 2010 The worth of what they do: the impact of short-term immersive Jewish service-learning on host commu- nities BTW Consultants, Berkeley CA

Rovisco M 2009 Religion and the challenges of cosmopolitan- ism: young Portugese volunteers in Africa in Nowicka M and Rovisco M eds Cosmopolitanism in practice Aldershot, Ashgate 181–99

Schattle H 2008 The practices of global citizenship Rowman and Littlefield, Toronto

Shah M B, King S and Patel A S 2004 Intercultural disposition and communication competence of future pharmacists American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 68 1–11

Sherraden M S, Stringham J, Costanzo S and McBride A M 2006 The forms and structure of international voluntary service Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 17 163–80

Sherraden M S, Lough B J and McBride A M 2008 Effects of international volunteering and service: individual and institutional predictors Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 19 395–421

Simpson K 2004 ‘Doing development’: the gap year, volun- teer-tourists and a popular practice of development Journal of International Development 16 681–92

Sin H L 2010 Who are we responsible to? Locals’ tales of volunteer tourism Geoforum 41 983–92

Staeheli L A 1999 Globalization and the scale of citizenship Geography Research Forum 19 60–77

Staeheli L A 2010 Political geography: where’s citizenship? Progress in Human Geography 35 393–400

Starr J M 1994 Peace Corps service as a turning point International Journal of Aging and Human Development 39 137–61

Tan K-C 2004 Justice without borders: cosmopolitanism, nationalism, and patriotism Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Tiessen R and Heron B 2012 Volunteering in the developing world: the perceived impacts of Canandian youth Develop- ment in Practice 22 44–56

Tourism Research and Marketing 2008 Volunteer tourism: a global analysis ATLAS, Barcelona

Trivedi B P 2002 Survey reveals geographic illiteracy National Geographic News 20 November (http://news.nationalgeo- graphic.com/news/2002/11/1120_021120_GeoRoperSurvey. html) Accessed 4 February 2013

Turner B S 2002 Cosmopolitan virtue, globalization and patriotism Theory, Culture and Society 19 45–63

Vandenberg A 2000 Citizenship and democracy in a global era St Martin’s Press, New York

Wade R 2001 Global citizenship: choices and change in Lambert D and Machon P eds Citizenship through secondary geography RoutledgeFalmer, London 161–81

Wagner A 2004 Redefining citizenship for the 21st century: from the National Welfare State to the UN Global Compact International Journal of Social Welfare 13 278–86

Active global citizenship 469

Copyright of Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers is the property of Wiley- Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.