Skip to main content

Studying Social Movements: Some Conceptual Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in the History of Social Movements ((PSHSM))

Abstract

In acknowledging, though not stressing, my disciplinary identity as a sociologist, I will present and reflect on several challenges that we are confronted with when analysing social movements. Among the many more challenges that exist, five of these will be identified, discussed and partly illustrated in what follows: defining the subject of research, asking relevant questions, theorizing social movements, choosing adequate methods and sources, and interpreting and contextualizing findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Sidney Tarrow, ‘Understanding Political Change in Eastern Europe. “Aiming at a Moving Target”: Social Science and the Recent Rebellions in Eastern Europe’, PS: Political Science & Politics 24 (1991), pp. 12–19.

  2. 2.

    The French term mouvement social was used in the eighteenth century to denote major changes in society, whatever their cause may be. Soon after, it diffused to other languages, including German and English. Roughly since the 1830s, the term also referred to groups, especially socialist groups, which deliberately sought to bring about societal changes. This dual meaning of the concept as process and a collective actor can be found, for example, in the writings of Karl Marx. Since the late nineteenth century, the second meaning took over and, still today, is no longer restricted to groups from a particular ideological strand. On the history of the concept, see Otthein Rammstedt, Soziale Bewegung (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1978); Eckart Pankoke, Sociale Bewegung—Sociale Frage—Sociale Politik. Grundfragen der deutschen ‘Socialwissenschaft’ im 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart: Klett, 1970).

  3. 3.

    John McCarthy and Mayer N. Zald, ‘Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory’, American Journal of Sociology 82 (1977), pp. 1212–1241, here pp. 1217–1218.

  4. 4.

    Theodor W. Adorno, ‘Bemerkungen über Statik und Dynamik in der Gesellschaft’, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 8 (1956), pp. 321–328; Werner Hofmann, Ideengeschichte der sozialen Bewegung des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1970).

  5. 5.

    Instead, he preferred terms such as ‘popular collective action’ and ‘contentious action’. In his early work, he offered only a vague definition of social movements as a unit in the study of collective action at the intersection between populations, groups, events, beliefs and actions. See Charles Tilly, From Mobilization to Revolution (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978), p. 9f.

  6. 6.

    Charles Tilly, ‘Social Movements and National Politics’, in Charles Bright and Susan Harding (eds), Statemaking and Social Movements (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1984), pp. 297–317, here p. 306.

  7. 7.

    Tilly defines a social movement as ‘a series of contentious performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others’ (Charles Tilly, Social Movements, 1768–2004 [Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2004], p. 3). He argues that social movements include three basic elements: campaigns, a repertoire of contention and WUNC: participants’ concerted public representation of worthiness, unity, numbers and commitments on the part of themselves and/or their constituencies.

  8. 8.

    See, for example, Mario Diani, ‘The Concept of Social Movement’, The Sociological Review 40 (1992), pp. 1–25; Donatella della Porta and Mario Diani, Social Movements: An Introduction, 2nd rev. edn (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 2006); Joachim Raschke, Soziale Bewegungen. Ein historisch-systematischer Grundriß (Frankfurt/New York: Campus, 1985); Dieter Rucht, Modernisierung und neue soziale Bewegungen. Deutschland, Frankreich und USA im Vergleich (Frankfurt/Main: Campus Verlag, 1994).

  9. 9.

    Tarrow, for example, defines social movements as ‘socially mobilized groups engaged in sustained contentious interaction with powerholders in which at least one actor is either a target or a participant’. Sidney Tarrow, ‘Transnational Politics: Contention and Institutions in International Politics’, Annual Review of Political Science 4 (2011), pp. 1–20, here p. 11.

  10. 10.

    Craig Jenkins, ‘Sociopolitical Movements’, in Samuel L. Long (ed.), Handbook of Political Behavior, Vol. 4 (New York and London: Plenum Press, 1981), pp. 81–153.

  11. 11.

    Dieter Rucht, ‘Neue soziale Bewegungen—Anwälte oder Irrläufer des Projekts der Moderne?’ Frankfurter Hefte 11/12 (FH-extra 6) (1984), pp. 144–149.

  12. 12.

    Eric J. Hobsbawm, ‘Peasants and Politics’, Journal of Peasant Studies 1 (1973), pp. 1–22; Winfried Schulze, Europäische Bauernrevolten der frühen Neuzeit (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1982); Norbert Schindler, Widerspenstige Leute. Studien zur Volkskultur in der frühen Neuzeit (Frankfurt/Main: Fischer, 1992); Peter Blickle, Der Bauernkrieg. Die Revolution des Gemeinen Mannes, 4th rev. edn (Munich: Beck, 2012); Samuel K. Cohn, Jr., Lust for Liberty: The Politics of Social Revolt in Medieval Europe, 1200–1425 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006).

  13. 13.

    Friedhelm Neidhardt, ‘Einige Ideen zu einer allgemeinen Theorie sozialer Bewegungen’, in Stefan Hradil (ed.), Sozialstruktur im Umbruch. Karl Martin Bolte zum 60. Geburtstag (Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 1985), pp. 193–204, here p. 195.

  14. 14.

    Alberto Melucci, ‘Getting Involved. Identity and Mobilization in Social Movements’, in Bert Klandermans, Hanspeter Kriesi and Sidney Tarrow (eds), From Structure to Action: Comparing Social Movement Research Across Cultures (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1988), pp. 329–348; Dieter Rucht, ‘Kollektive Identität: Konzeptionelle Überlegungen zu einem Desiderat der Bewegungsforschung’, Forschungsjournal Neue Soziale Bewegungen 8 (1995), pp. 9–23; Francesca Polletta and James M. Jasper, ‘Collective Identity and Social Movements’, Annual Review of Sociology 27 (2001), pp. 283–303.

  15. 15.

    Ralph H. Turner, ‘The Public Perception of Protest’, American Sociological Review 34 (1969), pp. 815–831.

  16. 16.

    Touraine was among the first to use the concept new social movement (in singular). See Alain Touraine, Le mouvement de Mai ou le communisme utopique (Paris: Seuil, 1968). He was politically disappointed by the course of the labour movement. See Alain Touraine, Production de la société (Paris: Seuil, 1973). He was hoping that another movement would become the key player in the new ‘postindustrial era’. After his disenchantment with the short-lived student movement, Touraine continued his search for the new historical agent from the anti-nuclear movement to the women’s movement to the Polish Solidarność, ending with disillusion again.

  17. 17.

    Craig Calhoun, ‘“New Social Movements” of the Early Nineteenth Century’, Social Science History 17 (1993), pp. 385–427.

  18. 18.

    See Bert Klandermans and Conny Roggeband (eds), Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines (New York: Springer, 2007).

  19. 19.

    Marco Giugni, ‘Was it Worth the Effort? The Outcomes and Consequences of Social Movements’, Annual Review of Sociology 98 (1998), pp. 371–393; Felix Kolb, Protest and Opportunities: The Political Outcomes of Social Movements (Frankfurt/Main: Campus, 2007).

  20. 20.

    See Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, ‘Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory’, Sociological Forum 14 (1999), pp. 27–54; Francesca Polletta, ‘Culture and Movements’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 619 (2008), pp. 78–96.

  21. 21.

    These are ‘theories that lie between the minor but necessary day-to-day hypotheses that evolve in abundance during day-to-day research and the all-inclusive systematic efforts to develop a unified theory that will explain all the observed uniformities of social behaviour, social organization and social change’. Robert K. Merton, ‘On Sociological Theories of the Middle Range’, in Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (London: The Free Press, 1968), pp. 39–72, here p. 39.

  22. 22.

    Kai-Uwe Hellmann, ‘Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Forschungs- und Erklärungsansätze—ein Überblick’, in Kai-Uwe Hellmann and Ruud Koopmans (eds), Paradigmen der Bewegungsforschung. Entstehung und Entwicklung von Neuen Sozialen Bewegungen und Rechtsextremismus (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1998), pp. 9–30.

  23. 23.

    Dieter Rucht and Friedhelm Neidhardt, ‘Towards a “Movement Society”? On the Possibilities of Institutionalizing Social Movements’ (orig. in German 1993), Social Movement Studies 1 (2002), pp. 7–30.

  24. 24.

    The authors ‘want to move from a strong assumption about the centrality of deprivation and grievances to a weak one, which makes them a component, indeed, sometimes a secondary component in the generation of social movements’. See McCarthy and Zald, footnote 3, p. 1215.

  25. 25.

    See John D. McCarthy and Mayer N. Zald, ‘The Enduring Vitality of the Resource Mobilization Theory of Social Movements’, in Jonathan H. Turner (ed.), Handbook of Sociological Theory (New York: Springer, 2001), pp. 533–565.

  26. 26.

    Hanspeter Kriesi, ‘The Organizational Structure of New Social Movements in a Political Context’, in Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy and Mayer N. Zald (eds), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 152–184, here p. 153.

  27. 27.

    Theodor W. Adorno, ‘Zur Logik der Sozialwissenschaften’, in Theodor W. Adorno et al., Der Positivismusstreit in der deutschen Soziologie (Neuwied and Berlin: Luchterhand, 1969 [1957]), pp. 125–143, here p. 130.

  28. 28.

    Christoph Haug, Dieter Rucht and Simon Teune, ‘A Methodology for Studying Democracy and Power in Group Meetings’, in Donatella della Porta and Dieter Rucht (eds), Meeting Democracy: Power and Deliberation in Global Justice Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 23–46.

  29. 29.

    See, for example, Clark McPhail and David L. Miller, ‘The Assembling Process: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation’, American Sociological Review 38 (1973), pp. 721–735.

  30. 30.

    Ruud Koopmans and Dieter Rucht, ‘Protest Event Analysis’, in Bert Klandermans and Suzanne Staggenborg (eds), Methods in Social Movement Research (Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press, 2002), pp. 231–259.

  31. 31.

    On this aspect, see, for example, William Hoynes and Charlotte Ryan (eds), Rhyming Hope and History: Activism, Academics, and Social Movement Scholarship (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005).

  32. 32.

    See, for example, Bertell Ollman, ‘A Model of Activist Research: How to Study Class Consciousness … and Why We Should’. See http://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/class_consciousness.php (last visited 10 April 2013).

  33. 33.

    Maria Mies, ‘Methodische Postulate zur Frauenforschung—dargestellt am Beispiel der Gewalt gegen Frauen’, Beiträge zur feministischen Theorie und Praxis 1 (1978), pp. 47–52.

  34. 34.

    Norbert Elias, Engagement und Distanzierung (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1983), pp. 7–71 (Chapter I).

  35. 35.

    See Wolfgang Bonß, Die Einübung des Tatsachenblicks: zur Struktur und Veränderung empirischer Sozialforschung (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1982).

  36. 36.

    The debate on the possibility of an ‘objective’ stance in scientific work is still unsettled. For many, Max Weber continues to serve as a guide. See Max Weber, ‘Die “Objektivität” sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis’ (orig. 1904), in Max Weber, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1988 [1922]), pp. 146–214. Other scholars question the possibility of strict neutrality. See, for example, Pam Scott, Evelleen Richards and Brian Martin, ‘Captives of Controversy: The Myth of the Neutral Social Researcher in Contemporary Scientific Controversies’, Science, Technology & Human Values 15 (1990), pp. 474–494.

  37. 37.

    Alain Touraine, The Voice and the Eye. An Analysis of Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).

  38. 38.

    Dieter Rucht, ‘Sociological Theory as Theory of Social Movements? A Critique of Alain Touraine’, in Dieter Rucht (ed.), Research on Social Movements: The State of the Art in Western Europe and the USA (Frankfurt/Boulder: Campus/Westview Press 1991), pp. 355–384; Alberto Melucci, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society (London: Hutchinson Radius, 1989).

  39. 39.

    See Alain Touraine, ‘L’historicité’, in Edgar Morin et al., Une nouvelle civilisation? Hommage à Georges Friedmann (Paris: Gallimard, 1973), pp. 3–44.

  40. 40.

    Stein Rokkan, ‘Cross-Cultural, Cross-Societal and Cross-National Research’, Historical Social Research 18 (1993), pp. 6–54; Erwin Scheuch, ‘Society as a Context in Cross-National Comparison’, Social Science Information 5 (1967), pp. 13–24; Joachim Matthes, ‘The Operation Called “Vergleichen”’, in Joachim Matthes (ed.), Zwischen den Kulturen? Die Sozialwissenschaften vor dem Problem des Kulturvergleichs (Göttingen: Schwartz, 1992), pp. 75–102.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Further Readings

Further Readings

Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy and Mayer N. Zald (eds), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

This collective volume is structured along the three concepts mentioned in the subtitle. It marks the state of the art, at least of the mainstream, in social movement studies by the mid-1990s. In the meantime, the three concepts have become more refined. Moreover, other approaches, representing the cultural turn in social movement studies, have gained importance. Apart from its conceptual focus, additional strengths of this volume are chapters in a comparative perspective, chapters on Eastern Europe and two chapters on historical movements.

Doug McAdam, Sidney Tarrow and Charles Tilly, Dynamics of Contention (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

The authors aim at broadening the field of social movements by proposing the notion of contentious politics (already earlier suggested by Tilly). They advocate a process-oriented, dynamic perspective in which ‘robust, widely applicable causal mechanisms’ play a key role. Each of these mechanisms, whose theoretical basis remains somewhat unclear, is exemplified by of a paired comparison of cases that vary considerably in terms of their historical and geographic background.

Donatella della Porta and Mario Diani, Social Movements. Issues and Problems. Second revised edition (Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1999).

A broad and systematic overview on social movement studies that provides a useful introduction for newcomers to the field but also can serve as a guide and resource for more advanced students. The authors have recently edited a comprehensive volume, The Oxford Handbook on Social Movements (Oxford University Press 2015) that, in 53 chapters and more than 800 pages, goes more into detail.

Mario Diani, ‘The Concept of Social Movement’. The Sociological Review 1 (1992), pp. 1–25.

This is a relatively early attempt to come to grips with the concept of social movements. The author compares definitions by some of the most influential authors in the field and offers his own ‘synthetic definition’ of a social movement as ‘a network of informal interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups and/or organizations, engaged in a political or cultural conflict, on the basis of a shared collective identity’.

James M. Jasper, Protest: A Cultural Introduction to Social Movements (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2015).

A well-written, engaged and intriguing introduction into key dimensions and practices of social movements. Without simplifying complex phenomena, this book is especially useful for undergraduate and graduate students. As the subtitle suggests, the book highlights the role of cultural aspects of movements. It provides an exemplary case of the cultural turn in social movement studies, thereby representing a challenge to structural analyses that prevailed from the 1970s to the early 2000s.

Hank Johnston, What is a Social Movement? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2014).

This is an excellent and concise up-to-date introduction to the field of social movement studies, including an attempt to clarify the concept of social movement and to elaborate its social, political and cultural aspects. In a condensed form, the author emphasises the role of culture, discourse, identity, frames and emotions without ignoring the structural and organizational dimensions of social movements. Additional sections are devoted to political, cultural and religious movements that, seemingly, are considered as variants of social movements.

Karl-Dieter Opp, Theories of Political Protest and Social Movements. A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Critique and Synthesis (London: Routledge, 2009).

An attempt to integrate contemporary key approaches in social movement studies (resource mobilization, political opportunity structures, collective identity and the framing perspective) into an extended rational choice perspective. The focus is on the question why individuals engage in social movement activities. One may wonder whether the rational choice perspective is overstretched by this synthetic enterprise on the basis of a ‘general theory of action’.

Otthein Rammstedt, Soziale Bewegung (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1978).

Even in the German scholarly community, this is a largely ignored but extremely valuable book. It covers the historical semantics of the term social movement as well as the evolution of the concept and theories from the early century to the 1970s. Moreover, the author offers a sophisticated ideal-type of the evolutionary stages of a social movement. Unfortunately, this book was never published in English and therefore remained largely unknown to the Anglo-Saxon scholarly community.

Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Revised and Updated Third Edition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011).

This is one of the best known and most often cited books on social movements in the last two decades. It covers a wide range of aspects with a focus on structural patterns on the meso- and macro-levels. The third edition includes more recent developments of transnational mobilization and new material on civil wars, terrorism and guerrilla movements. Compared to the two earlier editions, the third edition strongly reflects Charles Tilly’s influence on Tarrow.

Jacquelien van Stekelenburg, Conny Roggeband and Bert Klandermans (eds), The Future of Social Movement Research: Dynamics, Mechanisms, and Processes (Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2013).

Conceptual and theoretical aspects are at the fore of this volume structured around: (1) grievances and identities; (2) organizations and networks; (3) the dynamics of mobilization; and (4) the changing context of contention. Each of these four parts is closed by a single-authored ‘discussion’ chapter. This volume represents the cutting-edge of mainstream social movement research but neglects more marginal and radical approaches. It is attractive for specialists and researchers but too demanding for newcomers to this field.

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rucht, D. (2017). Studying Social Movements: Some Conceptual Challenges. In: Berger, S., Nehring, H. (eds) The History of Social Movements in Global Perspective. Palgrave Studies in the History of Social Movements. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-30427-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-30427-8_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-30425-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-30427-8

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics