In their recent review article, Bhugra & Mastrogianni (Reference Bhugra and Mastrogianni2004) describe the cultural and mental health aspects of what is now called globalisation, and its present and future impact upon mental disorders, with a special reference to depression. Among the many unknowns in that matter, the authors point towards the issue of whether cultures will homogenise, which seems improbable, or whether the tendency for communities to reassert their distinctive ethnic identities will prevail. Eventually, it seems reasonable to believe that different forms of equilibrium will develop between these apparently opposed forces, including what anthropologists call ‘creolisation of cultures’. In that perspective, the issue of biculturalism deserves further elaboration.

Until recently, biculturalism was considered mainly in the perspective of partnership for ethnic minorities in a mainstream cultural environment. Different models of second-culture acquisition have been recognised and studied. In their classical work, LaFromboise et al (Reference LaFromboise, Coleman and Gerton1993) reviewed typical patterns of biculturalism: the assimilation, acculturation, alternation, multicultural and fusion models. In that acceptance of biculturalism, the ideal goal for an individual is seen as becoming a socially competent person in a second culture without losing the same competence in his or her culture of origin. However, new concepts of biculturalism and bicultural identity are emerging that are relevant to globalisation. Traditional definitions imply migration processes, either voluntary or forced, as in the case of refugees. Migrant individuals then form ethnic minorities, while different pathways towards biculturalism take place among specific communities. However, if globalisation can be conceptualised as ‘a compression of time and space’, biculturalism should be considered in the absence of peoples’ geographical displacement.

Some authors argue that most people around the world will develop a different form of bicultural identity, combining their local identity with an identity linked to the global culture. This phenomenon is particularly relevant in adolescents, as contemporary urban teenagers worldwide tend to follow similar consumption patterns and do not have memories of times when their ancestral culture was preserved from globalisation (Reference ArnettArnett, 2002). This new form of biculturalism could be both an opportunity for personal fulfilment and a source of identity confusion. Factors influencing these possible outcomes one way or the other should be integrated in cultural psychiatry research agendas.