ArsTechnica: A happy history makes for a relaxed nation

Kate Shaw in an article in ArsTechnica today summarises the findings of a recent report into what we might describe as "civilisational differences"—basically, how history affects a nation's or a region's culture:

Why is it against the law to sell chewing gum or to not flush a toilet in Singapore, but completely legal to smoke pot in the Netherlands? Anthropologists have developed a spectrum, called the tightness-looseness scale, to explain this kind of cultural variation. "Tight" countries have strong social norms, don’t tolerate much deviant behavior, and enforce strict rules and conventions. Meanwhile, "loose" nations have weaker social norms and are more permissive.

But what actually determines the type of culture that nations have? A study published in Science last week finds that where a nation falls on the tightness-looseness spectrum has much to do with its ecological, historical, and societal threats.

The authors surveyed nearly 7000 people from 33 counties to determine the tightness or looseness of each nation. Respondents were asked to respond numerically to several questions, such as "In this country, if someone acts in an inappropriate way, others will strongly disapprove."  They were also asked to rate how appropriate certain behaviors (such as kissing, crying, and singing) are in various situations (like in a park, at a party, and in the workplace) in their country. The answers were used to determine how strong social norms and social constraints are in each country.

All the answers were then combined into a single tightness score for each country; the higher the score, the tighter the country. The highest-scoring countries included Pakistan, Singapore, and Malaysia, while some of the loosest nations were Brazil, Ukraine, and the Netherlands.

The researchers then compared these scores with various aspects of the nations' ecology and history. Tighter nations tend to have higher population densities—along with faster-growing populations—than loose nations do. They also have fewer natural resources, smaller food supplies, less access to safe water, and poorer air quality. They tend to be hit with more natural disasters such as floods and droughts, and have higher incidences of pathogens and communicable diseases. Territorial challenges are also more common in tight nations than loose ones.

It seems that these historical and ecological factors may play a large role in determining how tight or loose a nation is. The social norms, practices, and institutions that develop over time in each country are most likely a result of this greater context, allowing the country to function in its own particular set of circumstances.

Ukraine and some other former Soviet nations were found to be among the loosest countries.  The authors suggest that this may be a type of "pendulum" effect: since emerging from the communist era, these nations have made an about-face and now have relatively few rules and very loose social norms.

In this era of globalization, it makes sense to understand how countries develop and how cultures evolve. To some people, Singapore’s ban on gum may seem a bit over the top, but in an extremely densely populated country where waste is a huge concern, strict laws may make a bit more sense. While other nations' societal norms may seem bizarre, immoral, or dysfunctional to us, it’s worth looking at the bigger picture to understand what might have brought those norms about.