Movement–Countermovement Dynamics in a Land Use Controversy

Adams, Alison E.; Shriver, Thomas E.; Messer, Chris M.

doi:10.22459/her.21.01.2015.01

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Defined as opposing movements that make ‘contrary claims simultaneously to those of the original movement’, countermovements often arise to oppose social movements that have achieved some success while threatening group interests (Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). Countermovements often develop tactics and repertoires similar to those of the targeted social movements (Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996; Zald and Useem, 1987), but they sometimes use innovative means to put target movements at a tactical disadvantage (Adams et al, 2015). Countermovements are often linked to state authorities in the form of elite leadership, alliance, sponsorship or support (Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996), although they strive to appear as citizen-based grassroots movements (Earl, 2003; Pichardo, 1995).…”

Section: Mobilising Anti-occupy Dissentersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neither Repression Nor Concession? A Regime’s Attrition against Mass Protests

Yuen

Cheng

2017

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protest activists employ various strategies to challenge regimes, and regimes deploy multifaceted tactics to respond to such challenges. Existing studies on regime protest responses focus on repression and concession, but little attention is devoted to toleration, which is often regarded as government inaction. Drawing on primary sources and interviews, this article analyses regime responses to Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement to expand the conceptualisation of toleration. First, it demonstrates that regimes adapt multiple strategies to protesters’ reactions rather than adhering to a single response. Second, it shows that toleration, other than ignoring protests, entails proactive tactics that we summarise as attrition. While ‘tolerating’ street occupation, the regime sought to eliminate political opportunities by maintaining elite cohesion, increase participation costs by mobilising countermovements and bolster legitimacy by leveraging the court as a revered institution. This new conceptual distinction thus captures regime innovation in counteracting protests and broadens the typology of regime responses.

show abstract

Section: Mobilising Anti-occupy Dissentersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neither Repression Nor Concession? A Regime’s Attrition against Mass Protests

Yuen

Cheng

2017

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Important distinctions between tactical approaches have been made based on level of confrontation to the target of the movement (Soule et al 1999; Taylor and Van Dyke 2004; Van Dyke, Soule, and Taylor 2004). Scholars have used a variety of terms to capture this spectrum of tactics and strategies, including insider and outsider (Soule et al 1999; Wang and Soule 2012) and institutional and extrainstitutional (e.g., Adams and Shriver 2016; Adams, Shriver, and Messer 2015). Insider or institutional tactics tend to be less confrontational, and often operate within institutional rules and expectations for challenges, including letter writing, lobbying, petitioning, and interacting with various institutional elites in approved ways.…”

Section: Tactics Targets and Grassroots Movementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tactics and Targets: Explaining Shifts in Grassroots Environmental Resistance

Adams

Shriver

2016

Social Currents

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate misconduct is often associated with environmental, political, and social problems, and the effects are often felt at the local level where disenfranchised residents may have less access to political power. We know that grassroots movements can take various tactical paths as they challenge elites, yet we aim to map the specific pathways that lead to shifts in tactical repertoires, especially as groups transition to increasingly confrontational tactics. Drawing from social movement theory on tactics and targets, along with environmental sociology literature on grassroots environmental organizing, we examine how the interplay with institutional movement targets affects local environmental resistance. The data for this research come from numerous sources, including in-depth interviews, archival materials, and news coverage of petrochemical contamination. Our findings show that grassroots shifts from insider to outsider tactics stem from a loss of trust in elite institutions and citizens’ understanding of the organization of power in society. We conclude by discussing how our research informs future social movement research by adding an important dimension to analyses of movement tactics—namely, the perceived relationship between activists and their institutional targets.

show abstract