What is polarization and why it matters

This year’s World Economic Forum Global Risks Report identified societal polarization as the third biggest short-term global risk. Societal polarization, a complex issue with interconnected causes and effects, refers to ideological and cultural divides that lead to declining social stability, constant gridlock in public decision-making, economic disruptions, and increasing political polarization. It is also closely linked to other societal risks, such as misinformation, internal violence, and the erosion of human rights. Additionally, divided societies are less equipped to tackle other global challenges, such as ecological transitions, economic, demographic, or digital transformations, and the spread of infectious diseases—as we saw during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Societal polarization arises from two interconnected but separate social processes. The first occurs in the political sphere and involves the division and radicalization of political elites and their supporters. Since the beginning of the century, ideological disparities among individuals aligned with different political parties have consistently increased in Spain.

According to the recent NORPOL study by the Institute of Public Goods and Policies (CSIC), the most divisive topics among Spaniards are gender equality measures and national identity.

Furthermore, the political issues that generate consensus between people who identify with left- and right-wing parties are very different. The left largely agrees on matters such as the right of same-sex couples to adopt, access to abortion, or rent price regulation. On the right, there is more agreement on feelings of national pride and the belief that immigrants should integrate into Spanish culture. These political positions are rooted in evolving values, a phenomenon observed in other societies as well. According to studies by the Center for Sociological Research, over the past 15 years, a significant gap has emerged in religious sentiment and economic and social values between citizens of differing ideologies.

The second process originates within the social sphere itself. It refers to the increasing fragmentation into different ideological communities and social groups.

Divided societies are less equipped to tackle other global challenges like the ecological transition or economic, demographic, and digital transformations.

Over the last two decades, social, demographic, and geographic differentiation among voters of various parties has intensified. We’re all living in our own bubbles, surrounded by people like us who share similar thoughts. The divide between individuals and groups with different political affinities extends beyond ideology or emotions and into areas like lifestyle, tastes, and residential choices.

In Spain, as in many neighboring countries, urban lifestyles, organic food consumption, and cycling are associated with progressive ideology, while traditional activities such as hunting or living in new suburbs around major cities are linked to conservative ideologies.

The growing ideological divides and increasing homogeneity of our social environments have intensified feelings of rejection toward those who think or live differently from us. For example, individuals with progressive beliefs strongly oppose climate change deniers, while feminism has generated negative sentiment among conservatives.

As we can see, societal polarization goes far beyond political polarization. The primary risk we face is that societal divisions may reach a tipping point where even common threats cannot foster shared interests among different groups. This would devastate policy development related to climate change or migration.

The problem in most modern democracies is that the combination of political polarization and social fragmentation increases the risk of democratic societies disintegrating or collapsing as we know them. The impact of political and social polarization on our everyday lives is significant, even without a complete breakdown. Extreme political views can affect our professional lives, such as when choosing teammates, and our personal lives, influencing who we socialize with outside of work. Additionally, a lack of ideological diversity threatens worker well-being and productivity and undermines company decisionmaking processes.

The concept of polarization is widely debated politically and socially despite its widespread prevalence. The term “asymmetric polarization” has been used to suggest that divisive attitudes and tension are produced only by one side of the political spectrum, mainly, the right.

The main risk is that social division could reach a tipping point, where even activating shared interests will not be enough to unite different groups.

What should indeed concern us is not political polarization, which can sometimes be healthy, but the kind that seeps into every aspect of society, fracturing shared spaces and creating communities divided by beliefs, values, and lifestyles.