Rally the People: Building Local‐Environmental Justice Grassroots Coalitions and Enhancing Social Capital*

Abstract

Focusing on environmental justice (EJ) activists’ experiences with local‐level coalition building as a purposive organizational form, data sources for this manuscript include focus groups, face‐to‐face, and telephone interviews with a sample of activists across the United States representing community‐based, grassroots EJ organizations. From the perspective of EJ activists, what forms do local‐EJ coalitions take? What are the costs of coalition building and what strategies do EJ organizations use to promote local‐level coalitions as an organizational form? What are the benefits of coalition building and how may coalitions enhance movement success and community social capital? Findings indicate that activists view coalitions positively and that coalitions exist in three primary forms. Costs of coalition building are associated with a labor‐intensive education and outreach framework entailing significant personal communication, networking, and trust building. Benefits of coalition building include an enhanced understanding of local and community experiences, an opportunity to share resources, and a stronger voice to hold power accountable. Local‐EJ coalition efforts maintain attributes useful in building community social capital.

Social movement coalitions: Formation, longevity, and success

“…McCammon and Moon (2015) identify three coalition outcomes in addition to survival: organizational change, movement mobilization, and political outcomes. Entering into coalition can help organizations by building their networks, increasing resource availability (Lee, 2011;Mix, 2011), expanding tactical repertoires (Meyer & Whittier, 1994;Wang & Soule, 2012), and altering group frames (Croteau & Hicks, 2003;Luna, 2010). Paradoxically, coalitions can harm SMOs by taxing available resources and increasing organizational competition (Barkan, 1986;Hathaway & Meyer, 1993).…”

“…Thus, it is no wonder scholars increasingly study movement coalitions. Beamish & Luebbers, 2009;Di Gregorio, 2012;Ellingson, Woodley, & Paik, 2012;Grossman, 2001;Haydu, 2012;Khagram, 2004;Lichterman, 1995;Mix, 2011;Murphy, 2005;Park, 2008;Shaffer, 2000;Stearns & Almeida, 2004 Just as a full understanding of social movement activity requires that we study individual participation in collective action and the role of organizations in mobilization, so too do we need to study the origins and dynamics of organizational collaboration. For example, because frames are often developed through interchanges between coalition partners, failing to examine organizational interaction, including cooperation and conflict, could result in a misspecified explanation of the frame's origin (Croteau & Hicks, 2003;Luna, 2010).…”

Evolution of the environmental justice movement: activism, formalization and differentiation

“…Kurtz (2005, pp 79-88) asserts that: 'the term environmental injustice refers to both distributive and procedural bias against politically disadvantaged groups in society; the concept of environmental justice, is intended to be inclusive of a variety of site specific grievances'. More formal organizational structures have grown in the environmental justice movement in large part because community groups have turned to network building as a strategy to share strategic knowledge (Mix 2011). Minkoff (1994 theorizes that, once a few organizations have found success with a more formal structure others follow their example and 'over time, new organizations tend to be constructed with reference to a dominant structural form'.…”

Conditions for successful environmental justice mobilizations: an analysis of 50 cases

“…This previous research points to the importance of building coalitions that are anchored in local communities but that involve support from other actors including those in the local and state governments, the federal government, and national civil society organizations. In general, researchers have indicated the importance of building broad coalitions (Mix 2011), gaining support from local and nonlocal political parties (Kousis 2007), and gaining the attention of national or even international actors in the government and civil society (Walsh et al 1997, Keck and Sikkink 1998, Rootes 1999. However, the capacity to gain support from actors at a larger spatial scale, including from national political parties, varies significantly across issues (Rootes 2013).…”