Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:12:22.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - A Network Approach to Collective Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2015

Jennifer Hadden
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access

Summary

It was clear by November 2009 that Copenhagen was going to be a very different kind of climate conference. In The Guardian's words:

Never mind the boring old delegates at next month's climate talks in Copenhagen … at events and actions around the city, the largest ever gathering of climate activists will take place which aims to create a global network that will take the environment movement forward for the next year and beyond … It's going to be the sort of fortnight where everywhere you look people are chained to railings with slogans written on their faces.

(Van der Zee 2009a)

Copenhagen was a turning point in terms of the number of organizations that were willing to sponsor contentious collective action. As scholars have noted, before Copenhagen, “few groups ha[d] actively mobilized against the UN” (Smith 2008, 98; but see also Fisher 2004, 179). According to the data I use in this chapter, only 16 percent of organizations used contentious actions more than half of the time in 2008, whereas 58 percent did so in 2009. Sponsoring a contentious action can sour relations with authorities, members, and funders and can incur repressive reactions, making it potentially a costly choice for an organization. So why did so many organizations choose to adopt contentious tactics in this time period? Why did some organizations adopt these tactics while others did not? How did they make these decisions?

The argument I advance here is that organizational decision making is fundamentally relational: it depends on the actions of other organizations working in the same field. Drawing on social network analysis, I show that the ties that an organization has – where it is embedded in the overall network – are consequential for its tactical choices.

Type
Chapter
Information
Networks in Contention
The Divisive Politics of Climate Change
, pp. 63 - 88
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×