Suchergebnisse

This book is available as open access through the Bloomsbury Open Access programme and is available on www.bloomsburycollections.com. Clare Saunders' book is an important contribution to the literature on social movements and environmentalism. Using the concept of 'environmental networks', it explores the extent to which social movement theory helps us understand how a broad range of environmental organizations interact. It considers the practicalities of social movement theories and it goes on to relate them to the practices of environmental networks. Theoretically and empirically rich, the book draws on extensive survey material with 144 UK environmental organizations, as diverse as not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) groups, reformists, conservationists and radicals; interviews with more than 40 key campaigners and extensive participant-observation, particularly in London. Focussing particularly on the crucial question of networking dynamics, the book reveals that there are broad ranging network links across the movements' spatial and ideological dimensions. Combined with inevitable ideological clashes and a degree of sectarian rivalry, these links helps produce vibrant environmental networks that together work to protect and/or preserve the environment. This book is an invaluable resource for anyone concerned with environmental issues, politics and movements.

There are good reasons to test more refined measures of protest to better understand protesters' disaffection with and disconnection from politics. This article assesses whether disaffection and disconnection predict each of: protest participation (aggregated), participation in demonstrations, and differential participation in demonstrations. Failure to vote does not predict participation in demonstrations but positively predicts participation in "protest" (aggregated). Those who demonstrate more frequently are more likely to participate in electoral politics than less frequent demonstrators. Most protesters are at least moderately engaged with formal politics, despite lacking trust in political institutions. Protest is not, therefore, a straightforward expression of anti-politics.

Since the new millennium, scholars have acclaimed a vigorous global justice movement (GJM). Many accounts have stressed the tolerant identities of those involved in this movement, and/or the movement's horizontal decision-making structure. Consequently, formal organizations are often excluded from analysis, precluding the chance to assess systematically whether they are involved in social movement modes of coordination. The article uses deductive block modelling and inferential statistics on survey data of a broad sample of 208 western European global justice organizations to uncover their modes of coordination. I find that many organizations commonly considered integral to the GJM demonstrate organizational and coalitional modes of coordination, while formal organizations often engage in coalitional work. Organizations most densely networked, including some formal organizations,dohave social movement modes of coordination: they identify with the GJM, display continuity in attendance at international protests/events, and have contentious relations with political institutions. In addition, I raise methodological considerations for future studies of social movement modes of coordination.

Key studies of social movement networks use block modelling to uncover movement network structures. While it is promising to see mathematical sociology techniques applied here, there are grounds for engendering an even closer connection between these two fields of study. The mathematical sociology literature recommends, for example, that analyzed networks should be complete and relatively dense, that some degree of deduction should be applied to select the "best" model, that levels of equivalence and/or error scores should be specified, and that reliable and appropriate algorithms and levels of equivalence should be carefully selected. Some dilemmas involved in block modelling analysis are demonstrated through block modelling analysis of interorganizational networking in Friends of the Earth International (FoEI). This illustrates that, in the absence of the robust analytical procedures recommended by mathematical sociologists, block models are unable to uncover the structure of social movement networks.

Key studies of social movement networks use block modelling to uncover movement network structures. While it is promising to see mathematical sociology techniques applied here, there are grounds for engendering an even closer connection between these two fields of study. The mathematical sociology literature recommends, for example, that analyzed networks should be complete and relatively dense, that some degree of deduction should be applied to select the "best" model, that levels of equivalence and/or error scores should be specified, and that reliable and appropriate algorithms and levels of equivalence should be carefully selected. Some dilemmas involved in block modelling analysis are demonstrated through block modelling analysis of interorganizational networking in Friends of the Earth International (FoEI). This illustrates that, in the absence of the robust analytical procedures recommended by mathematical sociologists, block models are unable to uncover the structure of social movement networks. Adapted from the source document.