The organizational consequences of competing ideologies: Conservationists and weekenders in the Sierra Club
Article
- 22 Downloads
Abstract
The present paper traces the history of the Sierra Club as a Social Movement Organization, giving particular attention to the rise and change of goals and ideologies. The Grand Canyon chapter in Phoenix, Arizona, is selected for a detailed analysis. A theoretical framework for the analysis of institutionalized social movements is derived from the literature on voluntary associations and organizations. The organization is classified in terms of existing sociological theories at different times throughout its history and projections are made about the future behavior of the club.
Keywords
Detailed Analysis Environmental Economic Social Movement Future Behavior Sociological Theory
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Blau, Peter.Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley, 1967.Google Scholar
- 2.Cressey, Donald. “Limitations on organization of treatment on the modern person,” in Richard Claward,et. al., Theoretical Studies in Social Organization of the Person, New York: Social Science Research Council, 1960.Google Scholar
- 3.Dawson, Carl and Warner Gettys.Introduction to Sociology. New York: Ronald Press, 1948.Google Scholar
- 4.Demerath, N. J., and Victor Theissen. “On Spitting against the wind: organizational precariousness and American religion.”American Journal of Sociology (May): 674–687, 1966.Google Scholar
- 5.Donald, David.Lincoln Reconsidered, Essays on the Civil War Era, New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
- 6.Gusfield, Joseph. “Symbolic Crusade: Status Politics and the American Temperance Movement,” Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
- 7.Hardin, Garrett. “Stalking the Wild Taboo” (Los Angeles, California: Kauffman, 1973.Google Scholar
- 8.Killian, Lewis. “Social Movements” in R. F. L. Faris,Handbook of Modern Sociology, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964.Google Scholar
- 9.Lipset, Seymour, Martin Trow, and James Coleman.Union Democracy. Glencoe: Free Press, 1956.Google Scholar
- 10.Lotz, Ray, and David F. Gillespie. “Isomorphic Attraction: ana priori approach to social movement participation.”Western Sociological Review, 3: 14–26, 1972.Google Scholar
- 11.Messinger, Sheldon. “Organizational transformation: case study of a declining social movement,”American Sociological Review, 20: 3–10, 1955.Google Scholar
- 12.Rose, Arnold.The Power Structure, New York: Oxford Press, 1967.Google Scholar
- 13.Selznick, Philip. “TVA and the Grass Roots,” Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1949.Google Scholar
- 14.Sierra Club Handbook, 1970.Google Scholar
- 15.Turner, Ralph. “Collective Behavior and Conflict,” in Barry McLaulinStudies in Social Movements, New York: Free Press, 1969.Google Scholar
- 16.Turner, Ralph and Lewis Killian, Collective Behavior, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1957.Google Scholar
- 17.Weber, Max. “Characteristics of Bureaucracy,” in Coser and RosenbergSociological Theory, London: MacMillan, 1969.Google Scholar
- 18.Zald, Mayer and Roberta Ash. “Social Movement Organizations,”Social Forces, Volume 44: 327–348, 1966.Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Annals of Regional Science 1975