The concept of collective identity has been used extensively by social movement scholars seeking to explain how social movements generate and sustain commitment and cohesion between actors over time. Despite its wide application, collective identity is a notoriously abstract concept. This article focuses on the use of the concept in the literature on contemporary social movements and offers a comprehensive theoretical overview. The central elements of collective identity in the social movement literature are developed, and some key differences in interpretations are highlighted. Finally, some contemporary debates around the continuing usefulness and limitations of the concept of collective identity are explored, with a special emphasis on the challenges of applying the concept to movements that define themselves in terms of heterogeneity, diversity and inclusiveness.
Definitions and central conceptsWhat is it that allows actors to identify themselves and each other as members of a social movement? How does a set of individuals become a collective entity we can identify and name as a social movement? How is cohesion and commitment to a movement or movement group sustained over time? One important line of inquiry for scholars seeking to understand how a sense of cohesion that leads to collective action is developed in social movements has centred on the concept of collective identity (Hunt and Benford 2004;Polletta and Jasper 2001;Snow 2001). The concept has been explored especially by scholars who felt that more structural, rationalistic and goal-driven explanations for the emergence and persistence of movements, such as resource mobilization theory (Gamson 1975;McCarthy and Zald 1973), political process models, (McAdam 1982;Tarrow 1989), rational choice models (cost-benefit analysis) and ideologically based explanations left out crucial social-psychological, emotional and cultural factors.The concept of collective identity is not unique to social movement studies. The concept is also used in studies on nationalism, religion, management, political culture, electoral behaviour, organizational theory and psychology, among others. Within sociology, earlier formulations or influences include the work of Marx, Durkheim, Weber, Goffman, Blumer (see Hetherington 1998;Benford 2004), andGeorg Simmel (1955) who explored the dynamics of group formation and highlighted elements that are very applicable to the study of social movements, such as the need to understand that group cohesion develops in tension with conflict in specific historic contexts. My focus here is on the use of the concept in the literature on contemporary social movements. I will first offer some of the different definitions and develop the central elements of collective identity in the social movement literature. Then, I will highlight some key differences in interpretations of the concept. Finally, I will explore some contemporary Sociology Compass 4/6 (2010):
