|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Tolerance, collaboration, and economic growth
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-11-33-49
Abstract
Institutional (in particular, political) pluralism is a fundamental feature of modern developed societies. Its cultural basis is the tolerance of citizens. The paper proposes to distinguish between legal, evaluative and interactive tolerance. This distinction makes it possible to explain the contradictory results obtained in econometric studies of tolerance and its links with the economic growth. Legal tolerance is the basis of competitive pluralism, and interactive one is the prerequisite for the formation of consensus pluralism, based on the collaboration of various social forces. Struggle for resources, intra- and intercountry inequality, “history wars” and prejudices prevent the strengthening of tolerance. Attention is drawn to the “paradox of political correctness”: dogmatic tolerance generates intolerant behavior. It is noted that interactive tolerance in developing countries is significantly correlated with technological progress and the level of well-being. The existence of this relationship, which is realized through collaboration mechanisms, gives the ground for supposition that, despite the contradictory dynamics of the tolerance level in the past 25 years, tolerance will be strengthening in the long run.
About the Author
V. Polterovich
Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, RAS; Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Asmolov A. G. (ed.) (2003). Тhe age of tolerance. Moscow: Gratis; Media Center of Lomonosov Moscow State University. (In Russian).
2. Welzel C. (2017). Freedom rising. Moscow: VCIOM. (In Russian).
3. Polterovich V. M. (2015). From social liberalism towards the philosophy of collaboration. Obshchestvennye Nauki i Sovremennost, No. 4, pp. 41—64. (In Russian).
4. Polterovich V. (2016). Positive collaboration: Factors and mechanisms of evolution. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 5—23. (In Russian).
5. UNESCO (2001). Universal declaration on cultural diversity. Paris. (In Russian).]
6. Berggren N., Elinder M. (2012). Is tolerance good or bad for growth? Public Choice, Vol. 150, No. 1-2, pp. 283-308
7. Cardoso J. L., Mendonça P. (2012). Corporatism and beyond: An assessment of recent literature. ICS Working Papers, No. 1.
8. Chang H.-J. (2002). Kicking away the ladder: Development strategy in historical perspective. London: Anthem Press.
9. Cooley A., Nexon D. H. (2013). “The empire will compensate you”: The structural dynamics of the U.S. overseas basing network. Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 1034-1050.
10. Corneo G., Neher F. (2012). Income inequality and self-reported values. GESI Discussion Paper, No. 382.
11. Coscia M., Hausmann R., Hidalgo C. A. (2013). The structure and dynamics of international development assistance. Journal of Globalization and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 1-42.
12. Das J., DiRienzo C., Tiemann Th. (2008). A global tolerance index. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 192-205.
13. Florida R., Mellander C., Stolarick K. (2010). Talent, technology and tolerance in Canadian regional development. The Canadian Geographer, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 277-304.
14. Foa R. (2015). Creating an inclusive society: Evidence from social indicators and trends. Expert Group on Social Development and Agenda 2030. New York: United Nations.
15. Gibson J. L. (1992). The political consequences of intolerance: Cultural conformity and political freedom. American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 2, pp. 338-356.
16. Goncalo J. A., Chatman J. A., Duguid M. M., Kennedy J. A. (2015). Creativity from constraint? How the political correctness influences creativity in mixed-sex work groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 1-30.
17. Gould E. D., Hijzen A. (2016). Growing apart, losing trust? The impact of inequality on social capital. IMF Working Paper, No. WP/16/176.
18. Halpern D. F. (2012). Sex differences in cognitive abilities: New York: Psychology Press.
19. Hemel D. J. (2005). Summers’ comments on women and science draw ire: Remarks at private conference stir criticism, media frenzy. The Harvard Crimson, January 14.
20. Hughes G. (2010). Political correctness: A history of semantics and culture. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
21. Inglehart R., Welzel C. (2009). How development leads to democracy. What we know about modernization. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 88, No. 2, pp. 33-41.
22. Kraus S. J. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A metaanalysis of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 58-75.
23. Liakos A. (2008). History wars: Questioning tolerance. In: G. Hálfdanarson (ed.). Tolerance and discriminations in historical perspective. Pisa: Edizioni Plus, pp. 77-92.
24. Lijphart A. (2012). Patterns of democracy. Government forms and performance in thirtysix countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
25. Lorenz E., Schmutzler J. (2015). Tolerance, agglomeration and enterprise innovation performance: A multilevel analysis of Latin American regions. Gredeg Working Papers, No. 2015-43.
26. Lutz С. (2006). Empire is in the details. American Ethnologist, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 593-611.
27. Miller D. I., Halpern D. F. (2014). The new science of cognitive sex differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 37-45.
28. OECD (2015). Geographical distribution of financial flows to developing countries. Disbursements, commitments, country indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.
29. OECD (2016). Development cooperation report 2016. The sustainable development goals as business opportunities. Paris: OECD Publishing.
30. Parts E. (2013). The dynamics and determinants of social capital in the European Union and neighbouring countries. Search Working Paper, No. WP5/01.
31. Paul M. C. (2001). Western negative perceptions of Russia: ‘The cold war mentality’ over five hundred years. International Social Science Review, Vol. 76, No. 3/4, pp. 103-122.
32. Pew Research Center (2012). The American Western European values gap. Washington, DC, November 17.
33. Qian H. (2013). Diversity versus tolerance: The social drivers of innovation and entrepreneurship in US cities. Urban Studies, Vol. 50, No. 13, pp. 2718-2735.
34. Seitz N., Audretsch D. B., Rouch K. M. (2017). Tolerance and innovation: The role of institutional and social trust. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2958215
35. Seebruck R. (2013). Technology and tolerance in Japan: Internet use and positive attitudes and behaviors toward foreigners. Social Science Japan Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 279-300.
36. Steinmetz G. (2005). Return to empire: The new U.S. imperialism in comparative historical perspective. Sociological Theory, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 339-367.
37. Twenge J. M., Campbell W. K., Carter N. T. (2014). Declines in trust in others and confidence in institutions among American adults and late adolescents, 1972-2012. Psychological Science, Vol. 25, No. 10, pp. 1914-1923.
38. Twenge J. M., Carter N. T., Campbell W. K. (2015). Time period, generational, and age differences in tolerance for controversial beliefs and lifestyles in the United States, 1972-2012. Social Forces, Vol. 94, No. 1, pp. 379-399.
39. UNESCO (1995). Declaration of principles of tolerance. Proclaimed and signed by the Member States of UNESCO on 16 November 1995.
40. ЮНЕСКО (1995). Декларация принципов терпимости. Принята резолюцией 5.61 Генеральной конференции ЮНЕСКО от 16 ноября 1995 года.
41. Zanakis S. H., Newburry W., Taras V. (2016). Global Social Tolerance Index and multi-method country rankings sensitivity. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 480-497.
Review
For citations:
Polterovich V. Tolerance, collaboration, and economic growth. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2017;(11):33-49. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-11-33-49
Views:
1054
Email this article 
