Advertisement

Diversifying Networks: Webbing Heterogeneous Actors and Their Plural Campaigns

  • Laurence L. Delina
Chapter

Abstract

In mobilization, participant and campaign diversity is as important as webbing multiple, yet fragmented, actions. A networked approach to mobilization, however, does not mean centralizing actions through top-down institutional arrangements; rather, it means creating healthy, sustaining ecosystem of polycentric structures where power emanates from multiple centers of influence. Under an overarching vision of a common good, climate actions and their actors would interact, interconnect, and cohere with each other in this ecosystem-while acknowledging that this will be messy and contested processes. As many climate action participants and their respective campaigns interconnect their diverse sources of power, capacities and practices—while remaining respectful of each other’s contributions, expertise, and experience—the climate action movement projects itself as a Movement of all Movements.

Keywords

Networks Webbing Diversity Heterogeneity Institutional arrangement Polycentricity Pluralism Cosmopolitanism 

References

  1. Andrews, K. T., Ganz, M., Baggetta, M., Han, H., & Lim, C. (2010). Leadership, membership, and voice: Civic association that work. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1191–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beveridge, R., & Kern, K. (2013). Energiewende in Germany: Background, developments and future challenges. Renewable Energy Law Policy Review, 4, 3.Google Scholar
  3. Boudreau, V. (2004). Resisting Dictatorship: Repression and Protest in Southeast Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carroll, W. K. (2006). Hegemony, counter-hegemony, anti-hegemony. Socialist Studies, 2, 30–32.Google Scholar
  5. Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2011). Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Darling, M. (2009). Early pioneers. In M. Ezra & P. Macall (Eds.), Civil Rights Movement: People and Perspectives. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, J. (Ed.). (2001). The Civil Rights Movement. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Delina, L. (2018a). Webbing. In Climate Actions: Transformative Mechanisms for Social Mobilisation. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Delina, L. (2018b). Climate mobilizations and democracy: The promise of scaling community energy transitions in a deliberative system. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908x.2018.1525287.
  10. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2006). Social Movements: An Introduction (2nd ed.). Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Du Bois, W. E. B. (1996 [1899]). The Philadelphia Negro: A Study. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Google Scholar
  12. Foderaro, L. W. (2014, September 21). Taking a call for climate change to the streets. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  13. Gandhi, M. K. (1930). Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (Vol. 43). New Delhi: Digital Library of India.Google Scholar
  14. Hakelberg, L. (2014). Governance by diffusion: Transnational municipal networks and the spread of local climate strategies in Europe. Global Environmental Politics, 14, 107–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hess, D. (2018). Energy democracy and social movements: A multi-coalition perspective on the politics of sustainability transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 40, 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jordan, A. J., Huitema, D., Hilden, M., van Asselt, H., Rayner, T. J., Schoenefeld, J. J., et al. (2015). Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nature Climate Change, 5, 977–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kern, K., & Bulkeley, H. (2009). Cities, Europeanization and multi-level governance: Governing climate change through transnational municipal networks. Journal of Common Market Studies, 47, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klein, N. (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  19. Komisar, L. (1987). Corazon Aquino: The Story of a Revolution. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  20. Lipsky, M. (1965). Protest and City Politics. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co.Google Scholar
  21. Malm, A. (2016). Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  22. Mark, J. (2013). Conversation: Naomi Klein. Earth Island Journal, 28 (Autumn), 45–47.Google Scholar
  23. McKibben, B. (2013, January 14). Beyond baby steps: Analysing the cap-and-trade flop. Grist.Google Scholar
  24. Murphy, G. (2005). Coalitions and the development of the global environmental movement: A double-edged sword. Mobilization, 10, 235–250.Google Scholar
  25. Nunes, R. (2014). Organisation of the Organisationless: Collective Action After Networks. London: Mute.Google Scholar
  26. Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20, 550–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Parag, Y., Hamilton, J., White, V., & Hogan, B. (2013). Network approach for local and community governance of energy: The case of Oxfordshire. Energy Policy, 62, 1064–1077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Parag, Y., & Janda, K. B. (2014). More than filler: Middle actors and socio-technical change in the energy system from the “middle-out”. Energy Research & Social Science, 3, 102–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First. Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ross, C. (2011). The Leaderless Revolution: How Ordinary People Will Take Power and Change Politics in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Blue Rider Press.Google Scholar
  32. Saunders, C. (2008). Double-edged swords? Collective identity and solidarity in the environmental movement. The British Journal of Sociology, 59, 227–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schock, K. (2005). Unarmed Insurrections: People Power Movement in Nondemocracies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  34. Skocpol, T. (2013, February 14). Naming the Problem. In Harvard University Symposium on the Politics of America’s Fight Against Global Warming. Harvard University.Google Scholar
  35. Sovacool, B. K. (2011). An international comparison of four polycentric approaches to climate and energy governance. Energy Policy, 39, 3832–3844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Van der Schoor, T., van Lente, H., Scholtens, B., & Peine, A. (2016). Challenging obduracy: How local communities transform the energy system. Energy Research & Social Science, 13, 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Dyke, N., & McCammon, H. J. (2010). Strategic Alliances: Coalition Building and Social Movements. St. Paul: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  38. Zin, M. (2010). Opposition movements in Burma the question of relevancy. In S. L. Levenstein (Ed.), Finding Dollars, Sense, and Legitimacy in Burma. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.Google Scholar
  39. Zunes, S. (1999). The origins of people power in the Philippines. In S. Zunes, S. B. Asher, & L. L. Kurtz (Eds.), Non-violent Social Movements: A Geographical Perspective (pp. 129–157). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurence L. Delina
    • 1
  1. 1.Boston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations