Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Ethnic Compositions and Their Effects on National Prosperity - Coursework Example

College: Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Ethnic Compositions and their effects on national prosperity Coined from the Greekword, ethnos, ethnic group refers to a social group of people with a common ancestry and who share cultural, social or national characteristics. The binding term of an ethnic group is the commonality between a set of life-defining elements, which manifest themselves in the life of an ethnic group. Ethnicity thus refers to the attribute of belonging to a certain social group of people by the sheer characteristic of sharing common life aspects. However, this aspect can be argued out of the favor in the current world due to the consistent and recurring nature of assimilation, cultural mixing and intermarriages that have biased the original meaning of ethnicity. In one way or the other, ethnic groups can be defined not only on the aspect of sharing origin, culture or social aspects of life, but may also be defined using geographical categories. Current global mass movement of people from one region to the other or from one country to the other has rendered the initial meaning of ethnic group ambiguous. Homogenous ethnic compositions can be narrowly defined as a composition or clustering of people with the same socio- cultural aspects of life. On the other hand, heterogeneous ethnic compositions are made up of different ethnic groups operating in one geographical location. Heterogeneity is one of the characteristic of the growing world in the 21st century. This has been aided by the ever-growing migration of people from one region to the other, particularly from developing countries to developed countries like Canada and the US. These migrations have created new groups of people (ethnic groups) amongst the existing ones in the affected countries. This in turn has affected the existing social, cultural, political and economic fabric. In most cases, the ripple effects created by multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and diverse heterogeneous society, to say the least is negative. Thus, is can be argued that heterogeneous ethnic compositions have a negative effect on a nation’s prosperity, while homogenous ethnic compositions help a nations prosper. Although, many studies have not given a conclusive argument or given explanation as to why some countries with heterogeneous ethnic compositions prosper, there is a general consensus that countries with this type of ethnic composition are negatively affected. A study by Easterly and Levine (1997) showed that ethnic groups affected the economic growth of a country. The study indicated that per capita GDP growth in inversely related to ethnic fractionalization. The authors argued that ethnic diversity was solely to blame for the poor economic growth and prosperity of African countries. It points out that, ethnic heterogeneity is a prerequisite to some factors that hinder economic growth. Ethnic conflicts are very rife in countries with polarized ethnic compositions. Conflicts directly affect the political climate of many nations, which in turn weighs down on other societal and economic parallels negatively affecting national prosperity. Montalvo and Reynal-Querol (294) argue that ethnic conflicts have a far reaching effect on national prosperity especially by affecting the economic development. It is plausible to say that, the economic development of a country largely determines the prosperity of a nation. Ethnic conflicts, which are largely due to heterogeneity in ethnic compositions increases armed conflicts, which reduce economic investments and increases the cost incurred by nations to support the populations. Throughout the world, nations plagued by ethnic conflicts have experienced little if any national prosperity, for example, countries like Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Democratic Republic of Congo. Blimes (536) argues that there is high likelihood of civil war in nations with heterogeneous ethnic compositions. Blimes further argues that theorists in civil war have highlighted the various reasons that stir civil wars including ethnic hatred, which grows as populations continue to expand. Many scholars have argued that heterogeneous ethnic compositions have no common goals or entities, which further explains the reasons as to why rifts occur. On the other hand, homogenous ethnic compositions have no differing entities that may drive rifts between them and thus social, economic and political cohesion is all times high. This reduces the chances of ethnic conflicts, catapulting such nations to greater heights of growth and national prosperity. It has been argued that ethnic differences between groups have created areas of mistrust and hatred, which forces some groups to rebel (Graff 1-2). Heterogeneous ethnic compositions have many derailing factors to national prosperity. Ethnic diversity has been linked to high political destabilization. Scholars agree with the fact that political destabilization is likely to occur in nations with higher ethnic diversity. It is argued that ethnic groups tend to coalesce around a given political alignment. Politics play a great role in the prosperity of a nation due to their effect on national policies. As seen in many countries, political realignments occur around ethnic lines. Thus, the higher the number of ethnic groups in one political area, the higher the political tension. In many countries where ethnic rivalries and conflicts occur, rival groups tend to be based along ethnic lines. For example, in Sierra Leone, various ethnic groups battle for political control of different parts of the country. On the other hand, homogenous ethnic nations have less or no chance of having political tensions. For example, Japan, Denmark and Australia are some of the world nations with very few or no ethnic diversity. These countries have citizens who share a great deal of social, political, and economic entities, which leaves no room for disagreements or mistrust (Fearon 1). Nations with growing ethnic diversity have high chances of experiencing political turmoil in the future. In North America, for example, growing Muslim population is causing stirs where they are demanding sharia laws to be put in place. This is in contrasts to the existing constitutional rights of freedom of religion and equality. Although, current ethnic divergent nations look stable, internal political wrangles over control of resources, power, and divergent beliefs may be a time bomb for conflicts. According to Alesina et.al (155-157) political stability plays a major role in the prosperity of a nation. Ethnic fractionalization is thought to affect government activities and undermining how government delivers services to the people. Alesina et.al (157) argues that ethnic fragmentation undermines government activities, quality of services to the people and largely leads to poor policies. Studies conducted in 1999 by La Porta et.al showed that ethnic fractionalization has grave effects on national prosperity through undermining things like participation of people in activities of national growth, creating mistrust, economic growth and efficiency of government services. Largely, scholars also believe that ethnic diversity has negative effect on GDP growth. In the 21st century, economic growth determines a nation’s prosperity and thus, nations with heterogeneous ethnic compositions have less prosperity than those with homogenous ethnic compositions (Fearon 4). Another disadvantage of ethnic heterogeneity that affects national prosperity is social disintegration. According to Stacey (1971) social systems can bond together to form a cohesive social system. The social system exists on the premises that the people in the system share common entities that create the bond. However, if the people do not share common social systems, the bonds are likely to be weaker and thus disintegrate to smaller social systems. These small social systems make up ethnic groups. In the 21st century, many heterogeneous nations exist primordially on existing bureaucratic governing systems as social systems cannot develop common bonds. Stacey (1971) argues that lack of common bonds to create social systems gives rise to unstable self-regulating units, which have different behavioral systems. One of the striking differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous ethnically composed nations is the ability of the two to regulate social entities like religion, culture and ethnic aspects of life. Many a times, heterogeneous ethnically composed nations find it difficult to use existing political, social and law-enforcing bureaucratic systems to control cultural, religious and ethnic clashes. Although, heterogeneity can be masked by the fact that assimilation and inter-ethnic mixing has blurred the strong demarcations between the ethnic groups, clear faults are still visible. It is feasible but vague to say that globalization has created a big society, where each ethnic group can fit. One of the major deterrents to this assumption is the deep-rooted and traditional social systems that persist in ethnic groups. This indicates that no matter the rate of inter-ethnic mixing, ethnic groups still continue to be distinct. Ethnic groups are premised on the fact that they share a lot of life entities that makes them inseparable. The homogeneity of life aspects in a group gives it a cutting edge in terms of regulating the social, political, religious, and economic conflicts. This is due to the fact that they share the same conflict-resolving mechanisms, as opposed to different ethnic groups, which have different and conflicting conflict-resolving mechanisms. It is important to note that nations with homogenous ethnic compositions have an edge on solving social conflicts due to the shared social systems. Thus, homogenous ethnically composed nations have little chances if any of experiencing social disintegration. Canada has experienced a lot of social problems due to its ethnically diverse populace. In 2003, violent rallies rocked Canada as different ethnic groups used different social means to address their grievances. For example, the ethnic divisions between Palestinian and Israel student activists in Montreal University have created a lot of social tensions. The ethnic divisions have created religious and ethnic conflicts that have undermined meaningful development in Canada. In future, increasing tensions and conflicts may boil to deadly crisis. Another problem of heterogeneous ethnic compositions and social disintegration is formation of gangs. In US, for example, gangs operate along ethnic lines. Often, gangs are territorial and mostly serve to guard or provide a sense of ownership to a certain ethnic group. Pyrooz et.al (2) argues that gangs are related to economic deprivation and social problems. Pyrooz et.al study on gangs in major US cities found out that ethnic heterogeneity was a major factor causing gang-related activities like crime. Although, the study concluded that not all disadvantaged areas have gangs, there was high likelihood of gangs in neighborhoods with high number of ethnic groups. Gangs are also a product of economic deprivation in various neighborhoods. In US, black-occupied neighborhoods are economically deprived, which shows the extent to which ethnic heterogeneity affects government services provisions and equality in distribution of public resources (Fernandes et.al 4239). Gangs sprout from social disorganization as the need to address existing disparities find new ways that are out of the socially-spelt ways of addressing societal problems (Fernandes et.al 4238). Pyrooz et.al (3) found out that social, economic, and political anomalies and strains experienced by some ethnic groups led to breakdown of the existing social organization. Gang membership is also strictly based along ethnic lines. Gangs draw membership from people who share common life aspects like ethnicity, language, territory or economically-prescribed characteristics (Thrasher 133 and Freng 4261). In contrast, homogenous ethnically composed nations do not experience gang-related activities. This is due to lack of social disorganization and extensive equality in sharing of national resources. Gangs and gang-related activities affect national prosperity on a great deal. Nations are defined by the geographical regions that they occupy. Natural resources have over the years driven the prosperity of nations across the globe. In fact, natural resources form the mainstay of many nations’ prosperity and also from the major source of conflicts. Ethnic groups resemble nations, albeit on a small-scale due to their occupation of a certain territory. Therefore, the larger the number of ethnic groups in a nation, the higher the number of territories that make up the nation. In contrast, homogeneous nations are like one big ethnic group that exists in one territory. In many cases, ethnic groups claim a stake to a certain territory which must be safeguarded. While ethnic heterogeneous nations must put into place mechanisms of governing the ‘smaller territories’ occupied by different ethnic groups, ethnic homogeneous nations do not. The world has experienced a lot of territorial conflicts which have led to territorial fragmentation as different ethnic groups seek autonomy from others. Territorial fragmentation is a major disadvantage which negatively affects a nation’s prosperity. Territorial fragmentation is likely to occur in ethnic diverse nations as opposed to ethnic homogeneous nations (Goemans and Schultz 1 and 6-7). History has shown that territorial fragmentation in ethnic diverse nations or regimes is inevitable. Colonization and struggle for independence provided the impetus for many ethnic groups to fight for their autonomy and self-regulation. Over-time, the world has experienced conflicts and wars as different ethnic groups fight nations so as to gain self-independence and rights to their territories. In Russia, the Chechnya conflict raged for a long time as the Chechnya ethnic group fought for independence from the large nation. Further, other established nations like UK, Canada and US have faced similar struggles as various ethnic groups fight to gain control of territories. In Canada, the Quebec province has provided a separatist threat as it struggles to gain autonomy from the larger Canadian nation. In Africa, countries like Eritrea, South Sudan have successfully fought for self-independence. These territorial fragmentations have taken with them vital natural resources, increased government spending in case of wars, loss of man power and important infrastructures and installations, and loss of time that greatly affects national prosperity. It is important to point out that nations with homogenous ethnic compositions have experienced few or no territorial fragmentations. For example, Japan has remained intact over the years, which has greatly helped its prosperity (Goemans and Schultz 1-2). It is clear that a nation’s prosperity lies on its ability to remain politically, socially, culturally and economically stable over a given period of time. Stability of a nation is greatly aided by its people’s cohesiveness. Ethnicity is a major factor that determines the cohesion of the people. Ethnicity is associated with the aspect of sharing common cultural and social systems, which creates a tight bond. It’s therefore plausible to argue that ethnic differences are a recipe for different cultural and social systems, which created differences. These differences are manifested in the cultural, social, political, and economic life of a nation. Thus heterogeneous ethnic nations have weaker systems than homogeneous ones. Over time, ethnic differences result to ethnic tensions and conflicts, which affect a nation’s economy, politics, social and cultural life. These in turn reverberate to the national prosperity affecting it negatively. Thus, it is true to say that homogeneous ethnically composed nations are more prosperous than heterogeneous ethnically composed nations. Works cited Blimes Randall. The Indirect Effect of Ethnic Heterogeneity on the Likelihood of Civil War Onset. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50.4(2010): 536-547. Alesina Alberto, Devleeschauwer Arnaud, Easterly William, et.al. Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2003): 155-194. Montalvo Jose and Reynal-Querol, Marta. Ethnic Diversity and Economic Development. Journal of Development Economics, 76(2005): 293-323. Stacey, Tom. Can Britain Survive? London. Sphere Books, 1971. Print. Pyrooz David, Fox Andrew, and Decker, Scott. Racial and Ethnic Heterogeneity, Economic Disadvantage, and Gangs: A Macro-Level Study of Gang Membership in Urban America. Justice Quarterly, ( 2010): 1-26. Thrasher M. The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1927. Easterly, William and Levine, Ross. Africa’s Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(1997): 1203-1250. Fearon, James. Ethnic Structure and Cultural Diversity around the World: A Cross-National Data Set on Ethnic Groups. Stanford. Stanford University Press. 2002. Print. Fernandes April, Ramirez Suzanna, and Crutchfield Robert. Race and Ethnicity in Social Disorganization Theory in Bruinsma, G. and Weisburd, D. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York. Springer. 2014. Print. Freng, Adrienne. Race, Ethnicity, and Youth Gangs in Bruinsma, G. and Weisburd, D. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York. Springer. 2014. Print. Graff, Hugo. In a State of Fragmentation: Ethnic Heterogeneity and Civil War. Oslo. University of Oslo. 2010. Print. Goemans Hein and Schultz Kenneth. The Politics of Territorial Disputes: A Geospatial Approach Applied to Africa. Web. 27 October, 2014. Read More