Latest news with #politicalpolarisation
Irish Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on young people and democracy: increasing disenchantment
The increased polarisation of European politics appears to be marching in step with an alarming growth in disillusionment among young people with democracy itself, and fears for its survival. A new 10-country survey of 16-to-26-year-olds in Europe has found only six per cent believe their country's political system functions well and does not need reform. Some 57 per cent of young people still prefer democracy to any other form of government – support is highest in Germany at 71 per cent, lowest in Poland at 48 per cent – but, ominously, 21 per cent say they would favour authoritarianism under some circumstances. Only half of young people in France and Spain believe that democracy is the best form of government, the study found. And among those who see themselves as politically to the right of centre and feel economically disadvantaged, support for democracy sinks to just one in three. Forty-eight per cent – and 61 per cent in Germany – worry that the democratic system in their own country is endangered. The survey of 6,700 young people by YouGov was carried out for the German TUI Foundation. It did not include Ireland. READ MORE Political polarisation is deepening, manifested most clearly in the rise of populist parties: 19 per cent now identify with the right, up a quarter since 2021, 33 per cent with the centre, and an unchanged 32 per cent with the left. Sixteen per cent claim no label. The survey also found a widening gender divide, with women, in particular in Germany, France and Italy reporting increasing support for progressive views while young men, notably in Poland and Greece, have swung to the right. The poll also found 73 per cent of British young people want the UK to rejoin the EU. The growing alienation from politics and political institutions reflects the sense among young people that the system has failed them and that their parents' generation has abanoned them. The survey is a timely, important warning that doing things in the old way will not be enough.
Associated Press
25-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Political polarisation is rising globally and posing new challenges for businesses, according to Willis latest report
LONDON, June 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Rising political polarisation is associated with increased political violence and unpredictable oscillations in government policies, according to the latest Political Risk Index by Willis (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company. This edition of the Index focusses on political polarisation in countries worldwide and its main drivers and consequences. Findings from the index reveal affective polarisation* is at a historic high, on a global average basis. This suggests that people are increasingly likely to perceive supporters of opposing political parties as hostile. Countries enduring violent political conflicts tend to be the most polarised, but on average, affective polarisation is rising fastest in democracies like the US, Germany, India, Brazil and Bulgaria. The index also covers ideological polarisation** (the degree to which people agree on core policy issues) and elite polarisation*** (the degree to which political rivals consider each other as legitimate). The US is the only country globally where affective, ideological and elite polarisation have all increased at a rapid pace over the past 15 years. After reviewing over a century's worth of data from more than 200 countries, Willis found that in democracies, surges in polarisation tended to follow economic crises or corruption scandals, which appeared to discredit traditional political leaders. These surges were often accompanied by the growth of populist political movements and an increased frequency of political violence events. Other key findings include: The research also identifies some hopeful trends. Truth and reconciliation processes, cross-party coalitions, and open and transparent investigations in cases of corruption or other crises have been accompanied by rapid reductions in political polarisation in the past. There is reason to believe that lessons from these examples could be applied to current challenges. Sam Wilkin, director of political risk analytics at Willis, said: 'There is a well-established correlation between polarisation and political violence. But polarisation is also being felt on a more personal basis, such as how we perceive our friends and colleagues. Businesses face growing challenges from operating in increasingly polarised societies.' The complete report can be downloaded here. *Affective polarisation refers to the phenomenon of individuals developing strong positive feelings toward members of their own group (in-group) and negative feelings towards members of opposing groups (out-groups), particularly in a political context. It involves a difference between how people feel about their own party or group and how they feel about those who support opposing parties or groups. This can lead to increased hostility, reduced willingness to compromise, and a lack of empathy for those with different political views. **Ideological polarisation refers to the extent to which political attitudes become more divided and extreme, often along partisan lines. This can manifest as individuals and groups holding increasingly divergent views on issues, and a greater emphasis on partisan identity over shared values or common ground. ***Elite polarisation refers to the ideological divide and political disagreement among elites—such as elected officials, party leaders, policymakers, and influential media figures—typically along partisan lines. About WTW At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance. Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at Media contact Lauren David: [email protected] / +44 7385947619 Candela Farroni: [email protected] / +44 7795 155654
Yahoo
25-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Political polarisation is rising globally and posing new challenges for businesses, according to Willis latest report
LONDON, June 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Rising political polarisation is associated with increased political violence and unpredictable oscillations in government policies, according to the latest Political Risk Index by Willis (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company. This edition of the Index focusses on political polarisation in countries worldwide and its main drivers and consequences. Findings from the index reveal affective polarisation* is at a historic high, on a global average basis. This suggests that people are increasingly likely to perceive supporters of opposing political parties as hostile. Countries enduring violent political conflicts tend to be the most polarised, but on average, affective polarisation is rising fastest in democracies like the US, Germany, India, Brazil and Bulgaria. The index also covers ideological polarisation** (the degree to which people agree on core policy issues) and elite polarisation*** (the degree to which political rivals consider each other as legitimate). The US is the only country globally where affective, ideological and elite polarisation have all increased at a rapid pace over the past 15 years. After reviewing over a century's worth of data from more than 200 countries, Willis found that in democracies, surges in polarisation tended to follow economic crises or corruption scandals, which appeared to discredit traditional political leaders. These surges were often accompanied by the growth of populist political movements and an increased frequency of political violence events. Other key findings include: The highest levels of affective polarisation globally are in countries where political competition happens along ethnic or religious lines. Long-serving political leaders and controversial populists are a polarising force in several countries. Geopolitical and foreign policy divides can also lead to polarisation of societies. Polarisation and populism are rising both in the US and Europe and in the emerging world. The research also identifies some hopeful trends. Truth and reconciliation processes, cross-party coalitions, and open and transparent investigations in cases of corruption or other crises have been accompanied by rapid reductions in political polarisation in the past. There is reason to believe that lessons from these examples could be applied to current challenges. Sam Wilkin, director of political risk analytics at Willis, said: 'There is a well-established correlation between polarisation and political violence. But polarisation is also being felt on a more personal basis, such as how we perceive our friends and colleagues. Businesses face growing challenges from operating in increasingly polarised societies.' The complete report can be downloaded here. *Affective polarisation refers to the phenomenon of individuals developing strong positive feelings toward members of their own group (in-group) and negative feelings towards members of opposing groups (out-groups), particularly in a political context. It involves a difference between how people feel about their own party or group and how they feel about those who support opposing parties or groups. This can lead to increased hostility, reduced willingness to compromise, and a lack of empathy for those with different political views. **Ideological polarisation refers to the extent to which political attitudes become more divided and extreme, often along partisan lines. This can manifest as individuals and groups holding increasingly divergent views on issues, and a greater emphasis on partisan identity over shared values or common ground. ***Elite polarisation refers to the ideological divide and political disagreement among elites—such as elected officials, party leaders, policymakers, and influential media figures—typically along partisan lines. About WTW At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance. Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at Media contact Lauren David: / +44 7385947619 Candela Farroni: / +44 7795 155654Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Mail & Guardian
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Rebuilding trust is key to social cohesion
We can learn how to build trust by looking at global trends and South Africa's reality Trust is the invisible glue that holds societies and economies together. Without it, social cohesion unravels, governance falters and the very fabric of communities begins to fray. A recent working paper by the United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-Wider) considers global perspectives on Trust in a Changing World, and the localised lens of South Africa's Social Cohesion Index published by the Inclusive Society Institute paint a sobering yet illuminating picture of where we stand and what we urgently need to do. On a global scale, UNU-Wider's analysis reveals a worrying decline in social trust across many countries. In the 58 countries sampled, evidence offered by the report regarding changes in interpersonal trust is mixed, with the least decline in interpersonal trust in immediate social circles. By contrast, there has been a global decline in trust in government institutions since 2005, particularly among the youth and developing economies. The report concludes that the erosion of institutional trust coupled with 'strong levels of in-group trust' may be fuelling 'political polarisation, partisanship and nationalism, as forms of expression of in-group favouritism and parochialism'. This is no trivial matter. Trust is what underpins economic cooperation both in and among countries and regions, political stability and citizens' and governments' willingness to participate in collective action. When trust erodes, societies become vulnerable to socio-political polarisation, disengagement, protests and political and economic instability. The global picture is one of systemic issues fuelled by increasing inequality, governance deficits and rapidly changing social, political and technological dynamics. The UNU-Wider report finds that reduced institutional trust is associated with higher levels of corruption and political violence, whereas institutional trust is positively correlated with economic redistribution. Zoom in on South Africa and the picture is equally concerning, albeit more nuanced. The Social Cohesion Index, for example, mirrors global trends in institutional trust and respect for social rules, both of which are declining. But they are also shaped by the country's unique national dynamics, such as deep-rooted inequality and historical racial, spatial, economic, gender and political divisions. What stands out most is how both the global and local findings converge on the crucial role of trust and the findings are clear: without rebuilding trust, efforts to foster social cohesion and improve well-being will fall short. Moreover, rebuilding the trust can't be generic, nor can it be one-size-fits-all. Structural inequalities, economic hardship and social fragmentation require tailored, inclusive approaches aimed at addressing the root causes rather than symptoms. Moreover, the nuanced subgroup insights from South Africa tell a vital story and that is that different communities experience social cohesion in vastly different ways. Therefore, policy responses must be equally nuanced, requiring policymakers to listen closely to those most marginalised and connections need to be fostered across historical and social divides. Because social cohesion is not a monolith, it is a mosaic shaped by lived realities. We must also recognise the powerful interplay between economic inequality and social trust. Both studies point to inequality and economic vulnerability as a central factor corroding trust. In South Africa, given that it is one of the world's most unequal societies, this dynamic is particularly stark. The economic disparities reinforce social and spatial divisions and fuel resentment, which makes collective action and social solidarity far more difficult to achieve. Globally, rising inequalities similarly threaten the social contract and therefore, addressing these disparities through inclusive economic policies is not just a moral imperative, but a practical one if social cohesion is to be restored. In addition to the economic factors, governance and political leadership play a crucial role in shaping societal trust. The UNU-Wider report highlights governance quality as a determinant of trust levels, while the South African data points to the declining trust in institutions, because citizens lose faith when their governments fail to deliver services transparently or when they do not act in their interests. This erosion can lead to apathy or unrest, both dangerous for social stability. Rebuilding trust requires governments to demonstrate accountability, fairness and responsiveness consistently. In a government of national unity scenario, political leadership's ability to build institutional trust through a stable effective coalition serving the national long term interest — rather than short term party political and elite group interests — can either promote or detract from these governance outcomes. The slight improvement in South Africa's Social Cohesion Index last year offers a valuable lesson, namely that trust can be rebuilt, but it takes time and sustained effort. Community initiatives, dialogue platforms, effective coalition building and efforts to promote inclusivity, economic participation and reconciliation contribute to this process. Such initiatives must be scaled and supported by policies that create equal opportunities and respect diversity, fulfilling the promise of our Constitution, and the oft-quoted but seldom implemented National Development Plan. Beyond the practical, there is a deeper, almost spiritual dimension to trust, ubuntu and social cohesion in that they represent a collective belief in a shared future, and willingness to see beyond individual and group differences toward common goals. This collective vision is fragile and must be nurtured through education, open communication and a culture that values empathy, dignity and mutual respect. Add to the mix the convergence of disruptive digital technologies such as artificial intelligence, where misinformation and political polarisation pose multifaceted and often unprecedented challenges to trust. Social media, for instance, can both connect and divide and it spreads misinformation that undermines trust in institutions and fellow citizens alike. Tackling this requires not only regulation, but also digital literacy and community-building efforts that reinforce social bonds and ensure that the inequalities in the physical world are not perpetuated and amplified in the virtual world. Yet trust is not merely an abstract ideal. It has real-world consequences, because where trust is high, societies tend to exhibit lower crime rates, stronger public health outcomes and greater resilience in the face of crises. During the Covid-19 pandemic, countries with high levels of institutional and interpersonal trust fared better in terms of compliance with public health measures and community solidarity. In contrast, in countries where trust was low, misinformation thrived, conspiracy theories proliferated and social fragmentation deepened. South Africa's Covid response, which drew on virtually all sectors of society as well as public and private sector collaboration, demonstrated its ability for large-scale collaboration, social mobilisation and trust building in times of crisis. The South African context is particularly instructive. The legacy of apartheid and ongoing socio-economic exclusion have left deep wounds and rebuilding trust in this environment is no easy task. Yet the fact that segments of the population still demonstrate high levels of resilience, cooperation and optimism suggests that all is not lost. Civic organisations, faith-based groups, youth movements and local community leaders continue to be the lifeblood of trust in many parts of the country. Their role must be acknowledged, respected and supported by state institutions. Building a more cohesive and trusting society should begin in the classroom. It should not only be about teaching facts. It should also be about cultivating empathy, promoting tolerance and instilling a sense of shared citizenship and history education, in particular, should be handled with care, neither whitewashing the past nor perpetuating division, but fostering understanding and healing. Public institutions, too, have a duty to lead by example. Police services, courts and local municipalities are often the front line of the state in people's daily lives. When these institutions behave with fairness, transparency and respect, they sow the seeds of trust. But when they abuse power, deliver uneven services or act with impunity, they send a message that the social contract is broken. The UNU-Wider's global perspective report and the South African lived reality converge into one urgent message, namely that rebuilding trust is not just desirable, it is essential and it demands bold leadership and sustained commitment. And above all, a belief in the power of social solidarity to overcome division, both domestically and internationally. The UNU-Wider report concludes that global collaboration will be required to respond to challenges like climate change, wars, pandemics, economic globalisation and rapid digital transformation which transcend national boundaries, and exacerbate the global 'trust crisis'. This resonates with South Africa's G20 presidency themes of solidarity, equality and sustainability, in grappling with the reconfiguration of post-War Bretton Woods institutions that are no longer fit for purpose. The path forward will not be easy, but it is necessary. Societies that fail to rebuild trust risk fragmentation, conflict and stagnation. Those that succeed will unlock the potential for inclusive growth, resilient governance and vibrant communities. Trust, once broken, can be mended, but only through deliberate, inclusive and sustained efforts that recognise the complexity of social cohesion and place people's lived experiences at the centre of policy and practice. In the end, social cohesion is not just about how we live together, it is about whether we choose to build together. Professor Tania Ajam is attached to Stellenbosch University's School for Public Leadership. Daryl Swanepoel is a research fellow at the same institution and the chief executive of the Inclusive Society Institute.
