Vol. 15 No. 29 (2024): Continuities and Transformations in Forms of Collective Action
Articles

Convention, Protest, or Violence? Estimating the Influence of Repertoires of Contention over Tactical Choice

PDF
  • Takeshi Wada,
  • Yoojin Koo,
  • Yoshiyuki Aoki
Takeshi Wada
The University of Tokyo
Yoojin Koo
International Christian University of Tokyo
Yoshiyuki Aoki
Dokkyo University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/smp-15495

Published 2024-07-23

Keywords

  • repertoires of contention,
  • protest,
  • violence,
  • contentious politics,
  • event analysis

How to Cite

Wada, T., Koo, Y., & Aoki, Y. (2024). Convention, Protest, or Violence? Estimating the Influence of Repertoires of Contention over Tactical Choice. SocietàMutamentoPolitica, 15(29), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.36253/smp-15495

Copyright (c) 2024 Takeshi Wada, Yoojin Koo, Yoshiyuki Aoki

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Why do people opt for different forms of collective action, like lobbying, marching, or rioting, to voice contentious claims? The patterns of these collective action forms, or “tactics” exhibit variations among groups, regions, and nations, evolving over time. Current explanations for such tactical patterns are unsatisfactory due to limited theoretical and empirical exploration of the concept of repertoires of contention. This paper presents a comprehensive theoretical model drawing on social practice and learning theories, centered around the notion of tactical familiarity. The central idea posits that people in diverse societies have learned distinct ways of doing politics, gaining varying familiarity and proficiency with different tactics, developed through three mechanisms: feedback, diffusion, and memory. These mechanisms contribute to the formation of notably distinct repertoires of contention. Based on this theoretical model, this study develops an empirical measure of tactical familiarity. The novel measure allows comparing the impact of tactical familiarity with other factors, like political regime characteristics. Previous research has not conducted such comparisons, as it often focuses on particular tactics, like protests or violence, without delving into the full array of potential tactical choices, including conventional-institutional ones. Using quantitative event analysis and a dataset of 10 Million International Dyadic Events, the paper examines 17,575 global political events from 2000 to 2004. Multilevel multinomial logistic regression highlights repertoires of contention’s significant influence on tactical choices, potentially outweighing political regime characteristics.

PDF

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Alimi E. Y. (2014), «Repertoires of Contention», in D. Della Porta, M. Diani (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Social Movem, (ents, Oxford University Press (Oxford Handbooks Online), Oxford.
  2. Andrews K. T. and Biggs M. (2006), «The Dynamics of Protest Diffusion: Movement Organizations, Social Networks, and News Media in the 1960 Sit-Ins», in American Sociological Review, 71(5): 752-777.
  3. Armstrong E. A. and Crage S. M. (2006), «Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall» Myth, in American Sociological Review, 71(5): 724-751.
  4. Bandura A. (1973), Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Oxford, England.
  5. Bandura A. (1977), Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
  6. Barbosa L., Portilho, F., Wilkinson, J. and Dubeux, V. (2014), «Trust, Participation and Political Consumerism among Brazilian Youth», in Journal of Cleaner Production, 63: 93-101.
  7. Barranco J. and Wisler D. (1999), «Validity and Systematicity of Newspaper Data in Event Analysis», in European Sociological Review, 15(3): 301-322.
  8. Baumgarten B. (2017), «The Children of the Carnation Revolution? Connections between Portugal’s Anti-Austerity Movement and the Revolutionary Period 1974/1975», in Social Movement Studies, 16(1): 51-63.
  9. Bond D., Bond J., Oh C., Jenkins J. C. and Taylor C. L. (2003), «Integrated Data for Events Analysis (IDEA): an event typology for automated events data development», in Journal of Peace Research, 40(6): 733-745.
  10. Bosi L. and Zamponi L. (2020), «Paths toward the Same Form of Collective Action: Direct Social Action in Times of Crisis in Italy1,2», in Social Forces, 99(2): 847-869.
  11. Burt R. S. (1987), «Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence», in American Journal of Sociology, 92(6): 1287-1335.
  12. Chabot S. (2010), «Dialogue Matters: Beyond the Transmission Model of Transnational Diffusion between Social Movements», in Givan R. K., Roberts K. M., Soule S. A. (eds.), The Diffusion of Social Movements: Actors, Mechanisms, and Political Effects, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 99-124.
  13. Cheng E. W. and Yuen S. (2019), «Memory in Movement: Collective Identity and Memory Contestation in Hong Kong’s Tinanmen Vigils», in Mobilization, 24(4): 419-437.
  14. Chenoweth E. and Stephan M. (2011), Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, Columbia University Press, New York.
  15. Cingolani L. (2018), «The Role of State Capacity in Development Studies», in Journal of Development Perspectives, 2(1-2): 88-114.
  16. Coe A. B. and Sandberg L. (2019), «Gender Beliefs as a Dimension of Tactical Choice): the ‘Take Back the Night’ March in Sweden», in Social Movement Studies, 18(5): 622-638.
  17. Coppedge M., Gerring J., Knutsen C. H., Lindberg S. I., Teorell J., Altman D., Bernhard M., Fish M. S., Glynn A., Hicken A., Luhrmann A., Marquardt K. L., McMann K., Paxton P., Pemstein D., Seim B., Sigman R., Skaaning S.-E., Staton J., Wilson S., Cornell A., Alizada N., Gastaldi L., Gjerløw H., Hindle G., Ilchenko N., Maxwell L., Mechkova V., Medzihorsky J., Römer J. von, Sundström A., Tzelgov E., Wang Y., Wig T. and Ziblatt D. (2020), V-Dem [Country–Year/Country–Date] Dataset v10.
  18. Crossley N. (2002), «Repertoires of Contention and Tactical Diversity in the UK Psychiatric Survivors Movement): The Question of Appropriation», in Social Movement Studies, 1(1): 47-71.
  19. Della Porta D. (2013), «Repertoires of Contention», in D. A. Snow, D. Della Porta, B. Klandermans, D. McAdam (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, Wiley, Malden, MA, pp. 1081–1083.
  20. Della Porta D. (2018), «Radicalization): A Relational Perspective», in Annual Review of Political Science, 21(1): 461-474.
  21. Della Porta D. and Diani M. (2006), Social Movements): An Introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA.
  22. Echegaray F. (2015), «Voting at the marketplace): Consumerism in Latin America», in Latin American Research Review, 50(2): 176-199.
  23. Edelman M. and León A. (2013), «Cycles of Land Grabbing in Central America): an argument for history and a case study in the Bajo Aguan, Honduras», in Third World Quarterly, 34(9): 1697-1722.
  24. Eisinger P. K. (1973), «The Conditions of Protest Behavior in American Cities», in American Political Science Review, 67(1): 11-28.
  25. Franklin J. C. (2013), «Repertoires of Contention and Tactical Choice in Latin America, 1981–1995», in Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 35)): 175-208.
  26. Gade T. (2019), «Together All the Way? Abeyance and Co-optation of Sunni Networks in Lebanon», in Social Movement Studies, 18(1): 56-77.
  27. Galli A. M. (2016), «How Glitter Bombing Lost Its Sparkle): The Emergence and Decline of a Novel Social Movement Tactic», in Mobilization, 21(3): 259-281.
  28. Gamson W. A. and Meyer D. S. (1996), «Framing Political Opportunity», in D. McAdam, J.D. McCarthy, M. N. Zald (eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements): Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 275–290.
  29. Givan R. K., Roberts K. M. and Soule S. A. (2010), «Introduction: The Dimensions of Diffusion», in Ead. (eds.), The Diffusion of Social Movements): Actors, Mechanisms, and Political Effects, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 1–15.
  30. Goldstein J. S. (1992), «A Conflict-cooperation Scale for WEIS Events Data», in Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(2): 369-385.
  31. Hendrix C. S. (2010), «Measuring State Capacity): Theoretical and Empirical Implications for the Study of Civil Conflict», in Journal of Peace Research, 47(3): 273-285.
  32. Hocke P. (1998), «Determining the Selection Bias in Local and National Newspaper Reports on Protest Events», in D. Rucht, R. Koopmans, F. Neidhardt (eds.), Acts of Dissent): New Developments in The Study of Protest, Edition Sigma, Berlin, pp. 131-163.
  33. Hwang I. and Willis C. N. (2020), «Protest by Candlelight): A Comparative Analysis of Candlelight Vigils in South Korea», in Journal of Civil Society, 16(3): 260-272.
  34. Itzigsohn J. and Rebón J. (2015), «The Recuperation of Enterprises Defending Workers’ Lifeworld, Creating New Tools of Contention», in Latin American Research Review, 50(4): 178-196.
  35. Jansen G., Sluiter R. and Akkerman A. (2016), «The Diffusion of Strikes): A Dyadic Analysis of Economic Sectors in the Netherlands, 1995–2007», in American Journal of Sociology, 121(6): 1885-1918.
  36. Jasper J. M. (1997), The Art of Moral Protest): Culture, Biography, and Creativity in Social Movements, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  37. Johnston H. (2012), «State Violence and Oppositional Protest in High-Capacity Authoritarian Regimes», in International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 6(1): 55-74.
  38. Katsanidou A. and Eder C. (2018), «Vote, Party, or Protest): The Influence of Confidence in Political Institutions on Various Modes of Political Participation in Europe», in Comparative European Politics, 16(2): 290-309.
  39. Kerrissey J. and Schofer E. (2018), «Labor Unions and Political Participation in Comparative Perspective», in Social Forces, 97(1): 427-463.
  40. King B. G. and Cornwall M. (2005), «Specialists and Generalists): Learning Strategies in the Women Suffrage Movement, 1866-1918», in Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 26)): 3-34.
  41. King G. and Lowe W. (2008), 10 Million International Dyadic Events. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BTMQA0, Harvard Dataverse, V5, UNF:3:dSE0bsQK2o6xXlxeaDEhcg== [fileUNF]. Accessed 14.06.2011.
  42. Kitschelt H. P. (1986), «Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest – Antinuclear Movements in 4 Democracies», in British Journal of Political Science, 16)): 57-85.
  43. Kriesi H. (1995), «The Political Opportunity Structure of New Social Movements): Its Impact on Their Mobilization», in J. C Jenkins, B. Klandermans (eds.), The Politics of Social Protest): Comparative Perspectives on States and Social Movements, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 167-198.
  44. Lee J. C. H., Wong Chin H., Wong M. and Yeoh Seng G. (2010), «Elections, Repertoires of Contention and Habitus in Four Civil Society Engagements in Malaysia’s 2008 General Elections», in Social Movement Studies, 9(3): 293-309.
  45. Maher T. V. and Peterson L. (2008), «Time and Country Variation in Contentious Politics», in International Journal of Sociology, 38(3): 52-81.
  46. McAdam D. and Rucht D. (1993), «The Cross-National Diffusion of Movement Ideas», in The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528(1): 56-74.
  47. Meyer D. S. and Minkoff D. C. (2004), «Conceptualizing Political Opportunity», in Social Forces, 82(4): 1457-1492.
  48. Moore K. and Shepard B. (2013), «Direct Action», in D. A. Snow, D. della Porta, B. Klandermans, D. McAdam (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, Wiley, Malden, MA, pp. 353–357.
  49. Muller E. N. and Seligson M. A. (1987), «Inequality and Insurgency», in American Political Science Review, 81(2): 425-451.
  50. Muller E. N. and Weede E. (1990), «Cross-National Variation in Political Violence): A Rational Actor Approach», in Journal of Conflict Resolution, 34)): 624-651.
  51. Myers D. J. (2010), «Violent Protest and Heterogeneous Diffusion Processes): The Spread of U.S. Racial Rioting from 1964 to 1971», in Mobilization, 15(3): 289-321.
  52. Oliver P. E. and Myers D. J. (2003), «Networks, Diffusion, and Cycles of Collective Action», in M. Diani, D. McAdam (eds.), Social Movements and Networks): Relational Approaches to Collective Action, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 173–203.
  53. Olzak S. (2006), The Global Dynamics of Racial and Ethnic Mobilization, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  54. Polletta F. (2012), «Three Mechanisms by Which Culture Shapes Movement Strategy): Repertoires, Institutional Norms, and Metonymy», in G. M. Maney, R. V. Kutz-Flamenbaum, D. A. Rohlinger, J. Goodwin (eds.), Strategies for Social Change, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 43-58.
  55. Quaranta M. (2018), «Repertoires of Political Participation): Macroeconomic Conditions, Socioeconomic Resources, and Participation Gaps in Europe», in International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 59(4): 319-342.
  56. Ring-Ramirez M., Reynolds-Stenson H. and Earl J. (2014), «Culturally constrained contention): Mapping the meaning structure of the repertoire of contention», in Mobilization, 19(4): 405-419.
  57. Rolfe B. (2005), «Building an Electronic Repertoire of Contention», in Social Movement Studies, 4(1): 65-74.
  58. Rossi F. M. (2015), «Conceptualizing Strategy Making in a Historical and Collective Perspective», in F. M. Rossi, M. von Bülow (eds.), Social Movement Dynamics): New Perspectives on Theory and Research from Latin America, Ashgate, Surrey, pp. 15-41.
  59. Rossi F. M. (2017), The Poor’s Struggle for Political Incorporation): The Piquetero Movement in Argentina, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
  60. Sánchez-Cuenca I. and La Calle L. de (2009), «Domestic Terrorism): The Hidden Side of Political Violence», in Annual Review of Political Science, 12(1): 31-49.
  61. Schneider Marques T. C. (2017), «O Exílio e as Transformações de Repertórios de Ação Coletiva): A Esquerda Brasileira no Chile e na França (1968-1978)», in Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais, 60(1): 239-279.
  62. Shove E., Pantzar M. and Watson M. (2012), The Dynamics of Social Practice): Everyday Life and How It Changes, SAGE Publications Ltd, London.
  63. Skocpol T. (1979), States and Social Revolutions): A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
  64. Skrede Gleditsch K. and Ruggeri A. (2010), «Political opportunity structures, democracy, and civil war», in Journal of Peace Research, 47(3): 299-310.
  65. Somma N. M. and Medel R. M. (2019), «What Makes a Big Demonstration? Exploring the Impact of Mobilization Strategies on the Size of Demonstrations», in Social Movement Studies, 18(2): 233-251.
  66. Soule S. A. (1997), «The Student Divestment Movement in the United States and Tactical Diffusion): The Shantytown Protest», in Social Forces, 75(3): 855-882.
  67. Strang D. and Meyer J. W. (1993), «Institutional Conditions for Diffusion», in Theory & Society, 22(4): 487511.
  68. Swidler A. (1986), «Culture in Action): Symbols and Strategies», in American Sociological Review, 51(2): 273-286.
  69. Tarrow S. (2011), Power in Movement): Social Movements and Contentious Politics, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  70. Taylor V. and van Dyke N. (2004), «‘Get up, Stand up’): Tactical Repertoires of Social Movements», in D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, H. Kriesi (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp. 262–293.
  71. Tilly C. (1995a), «Contentious Repertoires in Great Britain, 1758-1834», in M. Traugott (ed.), Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action, Duke University Press, Durham, pp. 15-42.
  72. Tilly C. (1995b), Popular Contention in Great Britain, 1758-1834, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  73. Tilly C. (2006), Regimes and Repertoires, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  74. Tilly C. (2008), Contentious Performances, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  75. Tilly C., Tarrow S. (2015), Contentious Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  76. Wada T. (2016), «Rigidity and Flexibility of Repertoires of Contention», in Mobilization, 21(4): 449-468.
  77. Wang D. J. and Soule S. A. (2012), «Social Movement Organizational Collaboration): Networks of Learning and the Diffusion of Protest Tactics, 1960-1995», in American Journal of Sociology, 117(6): 1674-1722.
  78. Zamponi L. (2018), Social Movements, Memory and Media): Narrative in Action in the Italian and Spanish Student Movements, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, Switzerland.