Introduction

The notion of reflexivity has emerged as an arena of intense sociological debate not least because, in the context of globalization, institutions and individuals alike are forced to negotiate a slew of rapid and unpredictable social, economic and political changes. Individuals become particularly reflexive under these conditions, it is claimed (Adams 2006), because they can no longer rely on institutional solidities or because they experience a sense of cognitive dissonance created by such changes. There is of course no uniformity in response, as the ability of individuals to respond reflectively is differentiated by complex conglomerations of gender, class, ethnicity and status, among other factors (Brooks 2008; Beck 1992; Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1996; Skeggs 1997, 2005). Adams (2006) in fact maintains that reflexivity is now characterized by hybridity and there is no consistency in its application.

In this chapter, we illustrate the sociological significance of reflexivity with reference to three themes: cosmopolitanism, citizenship and consumption, highlighted not only because they recur prominently in ongoing scholarship, but also because they are relevant to the study of how states attempt to transform themselves or the cities within them into global cities. However, we also show that, despite its significance, sociological interventions into reflexivity have tended to focus primarily on the reflexivity of individuals, giving relatively limited attention to institutional reflexivity, such as that of the state.