| Part of a series on |
| Sociology |
|---|
 |
Social movement impact theory (otherwise known as outcome theory) is a subcategory of social movement theory, and focuses on assessing the impacts that social movements have on society, as well as what factors might have led to those effects.
Social movement impact theory has been studied far less than most other subcategories of social movement theory, mostly due to methodological issues. It is relatively new, and was only introduced in 1975 with William Gamson's book "The Strategy of Social Protest", followed by Piven and Cloward's book Poor People's Movements . [1] [2] In his groundbreaking study, Gamson studied 53 social movement organizations from between 1800 and 1945, and collected data regarding their success. Among Gamson's most important findings were that organizations which attempt to displace a specific person in power are almost never successful; that movement violence is a symptom of success (not a cause of it); that bureaucratic organizations are more likely to be successful, but also more likely to be co-opted by elites; and that organizations that are allowed to emerge in times of political calm are more successful during times of turbulence. These findings catalyzed some of the major debates in impact theory.
Two years later, Piven and Cloward published Poor People's Movements, which argued that power structures are threatened by disorganized and disruptive people. This provoked a major backlash among Social Movement Theorists, and the idea that organization in social movements is harmful has been largely discredited. [3] [4] [5] They also argue that social movement organizations will be most successful when there is a divide among the elites, and some elites are forced to side with the poor. This was received more favorably, and was a catalytic idea in the political mediation model. [6]
The publishing of these two books sparked debate between scholars, many of whom began to focus on impacts more specifically. [7] [8] [9] [10]
Finding appropriate methods to use for studying the impacts of social movements is problematic in many ways, and is generally a large deterrent to scholars to study in the field. The first problem scholars ran into was defining "success" for social movements. [11] Scholars and activists often have disagreements of what a movement's goals are, and thus come to different conclusions about whether a movement has "succeeded." Many times there are positive impacts, but they are not what were anticipated by anyone. For this reason scholars have tended to use the Collective Goods Criterion (see below) after Gamson originally published his work and garnered criticism.
Other issues arise when one attempts to locate a movement's impact in all arenas. Impacts are most often studied at the political level, [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] and yet it has been proven that they have individual, [17] [18] cultural, [19] [20] institutional, [21] and international [22] [23] effects as well. Lastly, and most importantly, there is the issue of causality. It is very difficult to prove that a social movement caused a certain outcome, rather than other social phenomena, and scholars have used that argument to discredit studies of movement impacts. [24] [25] [26] [27]
In the study that popularized impact theory, William Gamson studied 53 social movement organizations that were active between 1800 and 1945, and coded each one for attributes of success and certain other organizational characteristics. Gamson's criterion for success included "New Advantages," or the attainment of organizational goals, and "Acceptance," or being included in national discourse and political circles.
The Collective Goods Criterion is a methodology critical of Gamson's specific definition of success. [28] Rather than limiting movement success to attainment of goals, it looks at any advancement in the general category of goods that the agitators demand as success. This has proven to be a more inclusive method, because many movements will increase the well-being of their constituents, only indirectly or in a different form. [29] [30]
In "How Social Movements Matter", [31] Giugni recommends that in order to combat problems of causality, scholars should conduct studies with large sample sizes, that address a diversity of time periods and places, that examine with equal rigor movement successes and failures, and which control for other societal factors which affect the change being studied.
This extremely controversial debate is centered around the efficacy of more radical and disruptive tactics (including targeted violence, riots, or general disorder) as opposed to more mainstream tactics (such as marches, rallies, and political lobbying).
This issue is extremely complex because it seems to be extremely context-dependent. Gamson's original study [32] found that disruption did usually lead to movement success; however, it was with certain qualifications. First, the results have to face the striking counterexample of labor unions, which were greatly weakened by violent strikes most of the time. [33] [34] Furthermore, Gamson found that movements that had already achieved some viability were more likely to use violence. Thus, Gamson concluded that violence in movements is more of a result of strength than a cause of it. This is confirmed by other historical events, which show that violence generally give an advantage to the side that is already ahead, whether it is used by the movement, [35] [36] [37] or by the state. [38] [39] Nevertheless, the subject remains controversial, and continues to be denied by pluralists. [40]
Scholars have also debated whether social movement organizations ultimately play a significant role in their victories, or whether success is more determined by outside factors. In Gamson's original study, he found that organizational factors play a crucial role. [41] This has been confirmed by other studies; [42] however, certain qualifications have been made. External support has been shown to have some influence, particularly when elite allies are combined with strong organization. [43] This contradiction has inspired scholars to create political mediation theory. [44] [45] Ultimately, it is hard to avoid a context-dependent answer to this controversy, and scholars are now encouraging an approach which synthesizes organizational influence with others. [46]
Social movements affect society in many ways. Below are the four most important.
The psychology of the individuals who participate in movements are profoundly affected. Activists connect with others affiliated with their cause, causing new networks to form and shared values to be accentuated. [47] They also undergo a process of empowerment, in which they become more apt for further activism. [48] [49]
Non-state institutions can also be targeted and changed by social movements, as is the case for any boycott or divestment campaign. [50] Other movements can take place within the workplace itself, as with labor organizing or cooperative movements. [51] Scholars have begun analysis of institution-specific campaigns, and have theorized that there are four institutional characteristics which make it vulnerable to change: 1) Rapid growth in terms of money or members, 2) diffuseness or decentralization of organization, 3) strength of links between clients and professionals, and 4) ties to the state. [52]
Culture often becomes a target of social movements when their demands have to do with personal action. Such was the case with the feminist movement, in which organizations put a large amount of resources to books, magazines, art, and other channels of culture; this has been shown to contribute to the shift in family dynamics and institutional structures. [53]
Political change is the most studied aspect of social movement impacts, and possibly the most hotly contested. [54] Some have argued that because democratic governments are completely permeable to the public, social movements can only create inequality in representation; [55] however, this view has been discredited. [56] [57]
A political movement is a collective attempt by a group of people to change government policy or social values. Political movements are usually in opposition to an element of the status quo and are often associated with a certain ideology. Some theories of political movements are the political opportunity theory which states that political movements stem from mere circumstances and the resource mobilization theory which states that political movements result from strategic organization and relevant resources. Political movements are also related to political parties in the sense that they both aim to make an impact on the government and that several political parties have emerged from initial political movements. While political parties are engaged with a multitude of issues, political movements tend to focus on only one major issue.
A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or political one. This may be to carry out, resist or undo a social change. It is a type of group action and may involve individuals, organizations or both. Definitions of the term are slightly varied. Social movements have been described as "organizational structures and strategies that may empower oppressed populations to mount effective challenges and resist the more powerful and advantaged elites". They represent a method of social change from the bottom within nations.
Contentious politics is the use of disruptive techniques to make a political point, or to change government policy. Examples of such techniques are actions that disturb the normal activities of society such as demonstrations, general strike action, riot, terrorism, civil disobedience, and even revolution or insurrection. Social movements often engage in contentious politics. The concept distinguishes these forms of contention from the everyday acts of resistance explored by James C. Scott, interstate warfare, and forms of contention employed entirely within institutional settings, such as elections or sports. Historical sociologist Charles Tilly defines contentious politics as "interactions in which actors make claims bearing on someone else's interest, in which governments appear either as targets, initiators of claims, or third parties."
Social movement theory is an interdisciplinary study within the social sciences that generally seeks to explain why social mobilization occurs, the forms under which it manifests, as well as potential social, cultural, and political consequences, such as the creation and functioning of social movements.
Resource mobilization is the process of getting resources from the resource provider, using different mechanisms, to implement an organization's predetermined goals. It is a theory that is used in the study of social movements and argues that the success of social movements depends on resources and the ability to use them.
Richard Andrew Cloward was an American sociologist and an activist. He influenced the Strain theory of criminal behavior and the concept of anomie, and was a primary motivator for the passage of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 known as "Motor Voter". He taught at Columbia University for 47 years.
Frances Fox Piven is an American professor of political science and sociology at The Graduate Center, City University of New York, where she has taught since 1982.
William Anthony Gamson was a professor of Sociology at Boston College, where he was also the co-director of the Media Research and Action Project (MRAP). He is the author of numerous books and articles on political discourse, the mass-media and social movements from as early as the 1960s. His influential works include Power and Discontent (1968), The Strategy of Social Protest (1975), Encounters with Unjust Authority (1982) and Talking Politics (2002), as well as numerous editions of SIMSOC.
Doug McAdam is Professor of Sociology at Stanford University. He is the author or co-author of over a dozen books and over fifty articles, and is widely credited as one of the pioneers of the political process model in social movement analysis. He wrote one of the first books on the theory in 1982 when analyzing the U.S. Civil Rights Movement: Political Process and the Development of the Black Insurgency 1930-1970. His other book Freedom Summer won the C. Wright Mills Award in 1990. He served as the director of the prestigious Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences between 2001 and 2005. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2003.
Political opportunity theory, also known as the political process theory or political opportunity structure, is an approach of social movements that is heavily influenced by political sociology. It argues that success or failure of social movements is affected primarily by political opportunities. Social theorists Peter Eisinger, Sidney Tarrow, David S. Meyer and Doug McAdam are considered among the most prominent supporters of the theory.
James Macdonald Jasper is a writer and sociologist who has taught Ph.D. students at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York since 2007. He is best known for his research and theories about culture and politics, especially the cultural and emotional dimensions of protest movements.
In sociology, moral shock is a cognitive and emotional process that encourages participation. James M. Jasper, who originally coined the term, used it to help explain why people might join a social movement in the absence of pre-existing social ties with members. It denotes a kind of visceral unease, triggered by personal or public events, that captures people’s attention. Moral shocks often force people to articulate their moral intuitions. It is an appealing concept because it brings together emotional, moral, and cognitive dynamics. According to David A. Snow and Sarah A. Soule, authors of “A Primer on Social Movements”, the moral shock argument says that some events may be so emotionally moving or morally reprehensible that individuals will feel that they must join the cause regardless of their connection or ties to members of that organization. Moral shock is similar in many ways to shock advertising which uses analogous techniques to help increase brand success and awareness. Moral shocks have been shown to help recruit people to the animal rights movement, the movement for peace in Central America, anti-abortion campaigns and anti-racist movements.
David A. Snow is a Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Irvine.
Repertoire of contention refers, in social movement theory, to the set of various protest-related tools and actions available to a movement or related organization in a given time frame.
John David McCarthy is an American sociologist. He earned his Ph.D degree in Sociology at University of Oregon in 1968. He is currently a Professor of Sociology at Pennsylvania State University.
Drew Halfmann is an American sociologist best known for his research on social policy in the United States.
Edwin Amenta is an American sociologist best known for his study of social policy, social movements, and the New Deal.
The radical flank effect refers to the positive or negative effects that radical activists for a cause have on more moderate activists for the same cause.
Ruud Koopmans is a Dutch sociologist and professor at the Humboldt University of Berlin. His research focuses on migration, social integration and transnationalization.
Poor People's Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail is a book about social movements by the American academics and political activists Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward. The book advanced Piven and Cloward's theories about the possibilities and limits of social change through protest. The book uses four case studies: the Unemployed Workers' Movement of the Great Depression, the Industrial Workers' Movement, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Welfare Rights Movement, particularly the activity of the National Welfare Rights Organization.
