Suchergebnisse

This paper builds on recent research on polycentric governance and the Ecology of Games to understand climate politics in the USA. Complementing previous work from 2005 to 2009, we map out the ideological networks of political actors engaged in the climate policy network using data from the US Congress as an arena of symbolic interaction. Our analysis identifies polycentric sites of ideological congruence and conflict in the discourse network on climate change. Political actors from different levels and including several actor types formed multiple centers that became bipolarized between the 112th and 114th sessions of the US Congress. This process took place in tandem with the increased participation of subnational actors in the polycentric system. By the 114th session of the Congress—during which the 2016 election took place—subnational policy actors, along with a diversity of other actors, contributed to an extremely polarized discussion of one of the central policies in the Obama Administration's Climate Action Plan: the Clean Power Plan. This finding is remarkable as the concept of polycentricity tends to be normatively associated with policy innovation, rather than stagnation. Our longitudinal analysis demonstrates, using Discourse Network Analysis, how increased multi-level participation can be associated with policy blockage of progressive climate policies rather than enabling policy innovation.

In an environment that is high in racial justice saliency, how do identities inform motivation for supporting specific issues in the crowd? This study examines the role that intersectionality played in mobilizing participants to join the mass demonstrations sparked by the murder of George Floyd. Building on recent studies that show how protest participants connect issue-based concerns with their identities to boost support for movements, we analyze data collected through surveys with a random sample of activists participating in the protests after George Floyd's death in Washington, DC, in 2020. We find that intersectional motivations played a significant role in mobilizing protest participants. Analysis of these factors helps explain the diversity of the crowd and provides insights into how the movement may contribute to greater success for racial justice and the degree to which the movement has staying power.

How do we understand national climate change politics in the United States? Using a methodological innovation in network analysis, this paper analyzes discussions about the issue within the US Congress. Through this analysis, the ideological relationships among speakers providing Congressional testimony on the issue of climate change are mapped. For the first time, issue stances of actors are systematically aggregated in order to measure coalitions and consensus among political actors in American climate politics in a relational way. Our findings show how consensus formed around the economic implications of regulating greenhouse gases and the policy instrument that should do the regulating. The paper is separated into three sections. First, we review the ways scholars have looked at climate change policymaking in the United States, paying particular attention to those who have looked at the issue within the US Congress. Next, we present analysis of statements made during Congressional hearings on climate change over a four-year period. Our analysis demonstrates how a polarized ideological actor space in the 109th Congress transforms into a more consensual actor landscape in the 110th Congress, which is significantly less guided by partisan differences. This paper concludes by discussing how these findings help us understand shifting positions within American climate politics and the implications of these findings.

We've known for decades that climate change is an existential crisis. For just as long, we've seen the complete failure of our institutions to rise to the challenge. Governments have struggled to meet even modest goals. Fossil fuel interests maintain a stranglehold on political and economic power. Even though we have seen growing concern from everyday people, civil society has succeeded only in pressuring decision makers to adopt watered-down policies. All the while, the climate crisis worsens. Is there any hope of achieving the systemic change we need?Dana R. Fisher argues that there is a realistic path forward for climate action—but only through mass mobilization that responds to the growing severity and frequency of disastrous events. She assesses the current state of affairs and shows why public policy and private-sector efforts have been ineffective. Spurred by this lack of progress, climate activism has become increasingly confrontational. Fisher examines the radical flank of the climate movement: its emergence and growth, its use of direct action, and how it might evolve as the climate crisis worsens. She considers when and how activism is most successful, identifying the importance of creating community, capitalizing on shocking moments, and cultivating resilience. Clear-eyed yet optimistic, Saving Ourselves offers timely insights on how social movements can take power back from deeply entrenched interests and open windows of opportunity for transformative climate action

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Preface -- 1 The Man, the Message, and the Members -- 2 Institutionalizing Activism -- 3 Making a Difference as a Canvasser -- 4 Outsourcing Activism -- 5 Laying Sod versus Cultivating the Grass -- 6 Where Do We Go from Here? -- Appendix -- Notes -- References -- Index

Who are the millions of people marching against the Trump administration? American Resistance traces activists from the streets back to the communities and congressional districts around the country where they live, work, and vote. Using innovative data, Dana R. Fisher analyzes how resistance groups have channeled outrage into activism.

AbstractThis article is derived from my 2024 ESS presidential address. I discuss my new book and how a sociological lens helps us to understand the process through which we can save ourselves from the climate crisis. After explaining why the state and the market have struggled to implement sufficient policies to address the climate crisis, I present the AnthroShift as a theory that explains how social actors reorient after risk pivots to open windows of opportunity for social change. I discuss why civil society is most likely to mobilize after there is a generalized sense of climate risk and summarize how climate activists are currently engaging in non‐violent civil disobedience as a first step in an expanded civil society sector that is likely to put pressure on the state and the market to help us save ourselves. I conclude by presenting three steps that can be taken to help us save ourselves from the climate crisis.

In this paper, I look at how subnational policies in the United States are interacting with policy making at the federal level to address the issue of global climate change. I focus on a coordinated attempt to get the national government to fund local efforts to address climate change. Although local climate initiatives in the US were successfully translated into a national policy to support these local efforts, their implementation through hybrid arrangements that are being formed between business and local governmental actors will potentially create additional challenges to federal policy making. I introduce the notion of boomerang federalism, which builds on the extant research on federalism and vertical policy integration, to explain the process through which local efforts mobilize initiatives at the national level that, in turn, provide support for the local initiatives themselves. Reviewing the implementation process of this effort, I discuss the ways that businesses are working alongside local governments to address climate change.

What is the relationship between social movements and electoral politics? Although the empirical reality of American politics has increasingly blurred the lines between activism and electoral politics, sociology has yet to explore these changes and provide theoretical and methodological tools to understand them. Focusing on the experience of young Americans, this review explores this relationship and outlines opportunities for future research. It is broken down into three sections. First, I review the main themes in the study of youth political participation in America. Second, using examples from the 2008 election, the article examines recent increases in youth participation. Third and finally, this article discusses the case of the Obama campaign, its transition into the Democratic National Committee's Organizing for America, and aspects of the 2012 election to highlight the complex relationship between movements and electoral politics in America today. The paper concludes by highlighting opportunities for sociologists to bridge the connections between activism and electoral politics in new and meaningful ways.