Urry begins his analysis by illustrating the intertwined relationship between globalisation and

citizenship with the example of the Iran’s ban on satellite television. The ban is considered as an
infringement of the rights of the citizens, cutting them off from the global world.

Urry raises pertinent questions such as: With globalisation, have nation-states lost their status as the
fundamental basis for citizenship? Do states have the right to interfere with the global flows and
Does globalisation necessarily bring about universal human rights?

He regards that the current model of citizenship as post-modern. With the impact of globalisation
there has been a transcendence of the modern rational-legal state structure in some regions while in
other the states become regulators of the global flows. Large-scale brands, non-governmental
organizations, multinational states have become stronger than nation-states. Thus, this
interrelationship between citizenship and globalisations has complicated issues such as the: rights
and duties of citizens who are constantly on the move, what should be the criterion for providing
citizenship etc.

Citizenship Debates:

Urry traces the various debates on citizenship. Marshall defines citizenship as a claim to lead a
civilized life where one is accepted as a full member of the society. In the case of England, citizenship
was achieved over the course of many years; civil rights in the 18th century, political rights in the 19th
centure and social rights in the 20th century. He also notes that the formal equalities guaranteed by
citizenship can co-exist along with the substantive inequalities due to factors such as social class.

Urry criticizes this conceptualisation of citizenship for not addressing the inequalities arising out of
gender, disability, ethnicity and sexuality. Such a framework of citizenship only takes into the
account white men.

Marshall situates citizenship within the capitalist social relations. He argues that in the 20th century,
citizenship and social class were at loggerheads. When the citizenship rights were acquired, the class
inequalities and differentiation reduced considerably.

Urry notes that with globalisation, there is shift towards the post-national or universal citizenship
where citizenship is not limited territorially and intersects with different kinds of citizenship and
takes into account the movement of individuals and goods across borders. Human rights become an
important aspect in the post-national citizenship. Such mobilities are hindered by social, political and
civil elements according to Urry. With the advent of globalisation and the coming of the
humanitarian regime (United Nations, European Court of Human rights, International Court of
Justice, the limitations of the nation-state framework is taken seriously.

Citizenship and Environment

Urry notes that many of the global units continue to be organised within the framework of nation-
states despite its limitations. Due to this, the issues and problems that are not territorially tied (such
as environment) are ignored. Powerful blocks and regions such as the EU, Silicon Valley are ignored,
as well as organisations such as Greenpeace. Newby hints at the idea of a ‘green Leviathan’ that will
fight against the nation-states in order to protect the global commoners to save the environment
from further exploitation and degradation.
Ecological citizenship entails rights such as right to clean water and air along with duties (which
control pollution). Urry notes that ecological citizenship problematises the separation of civil,
political and social rights as discrete ones. In everyday lives: civil, political and social experiences and
rights are fused and not very distinct.

On the issue of biological and health hazards created by present day economies and societies, Urry
urges that nation-states have little scope of controlling them. Here, he notes that citizenship should
also be associated with empowering citizens with knowledge to prevents such risks and hazards
from affecting human beings, ecosystem and the environment.

Global Citizens

Urry locates various global citizens whose actions pose a threat to or secure the rights and duties of
other citizens.

Such global citizens include global capitalists, who have a de-territorialised presence. They use
international science and pose a threat to causing hazards. Global reformers such as WHO, UNESCO
etc help in securing the rights and duties of citizens. Urry describes the roles of global
cosmopolitans, earth citizens and global celebrities and their role in increasing awareness about the
environment.

Urry goes on to list out the various forms of global hazards that have arisen: environmental hazards,
epidemics, loss of indigenous cultures due to homogenisation, recession, global meltdown of
financial markets etc.

Global citizens also have certain rights such; as to be able to migrate to other societies, not to be
stripped to the condition of stateless, participate with the other societies culturally, participate
economically with other states. At the same time global citizens have duties: to extend and preserve
a cosmopolitan environment, to live sustainably, amongst diverse citizens who are differentiated by
their nation, gender, ethnicity, class, region etc. Also, every unit of the globe should work for the
larger interest and not for their own local interests.

He notes that some scientists have called for a model of global citizenship, rejecting the nation-state
framework and instead based on their shared humanity. The interdependence between people,
across the globe should become the basis of such a form of citizenship. Mass medium
communication and the public sphere (as described by Habermas) play an important role in
discussion and debates and create a critical public. These lead to the creation of a cosmopolitan and
shared network of humanity.